[House Report 115-820]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


115th Congress     }                                {         Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session        }                                {         115-820

======================================================================



 
                  PROMOTING FLOOD RISK MITIGATION ACT

                                _______
                                

 July 16, 2018.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 5846]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 5846) to require the Comptroller 
General of the United States to conduct a study regarding the 
buyout practices of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill 
as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose of Legislation...........................................     3
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     4
Hearings.........................................................     4
Legislative History and Consideration............................     5
Committee Votes..................................................     5
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     5
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     5
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     5
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     6
Advisory of Earmarks.............................................     6
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     6
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................     7
Federal Mandate Statement........................................     7
Preemption Clarification.........................................     7
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     7
Applicability of Legislative Branch..............................     7
Section-by-Section Analysis of Legislation.......................     7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     7

    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Flood Risk Mitigation Act''.

SEC. 2. GAO STUDY REGARDING BUYOUT PRACTICES.

  (a) Definitions.--In this section--
          (1) the term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of the 
        Federal Emergency Management Agency;
          (2) the term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
                  (A) the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
                Affairs of the Senate;
                  (B) the Committee on Homeland Security and 
                Governmental Affairs of the Senate;
                  (C) the Committee on Financial Services of the House 
                of Representatives; and
                  (D) the Committee on Transportation and 
                Infrastructure of the House of Representatives;
          (3) the terms ``buyout practice'' and ``buyout program'' mean 
        a practice or program, as applicable, under which the 
        Administrator provides assistance to State and local 
        governments so that those entities may acquire flood-damaged 
        properties committed to open space use in perpetuity in 
        accordance with section 404(b)(2) of the Robert T. Stafford 
        Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
        5170c(b)(2));
          (4) the term ``eligible property owner'' means a policyholder 
        under the National Flood Insurance Program with a household 
        income that is not more than 120 percent of the mean household 
        income for the community in which the primary residence of the 
        policyholder is located;
          (5) the term ``National Flood Insurance Program'' means the 
        program established under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
        1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.);
          (6) the term ``repetitive loss structure'' has the meaning 
        given the term in section 1370(a) of the National Flood 
        Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4121(a)); and
          (7) the term ``severe repetitive loss structure'' has the 
        meaning given the term in section 1366(h) of the National Flood 
        Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c(h)).
  (b) Study Required.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
shall conduct a study to assess--
          (1) the efficacy of buyout practices, as in effect on the 
        date on which the study is conducted; and
          (2) ways to streamline the buyout practices described in 
        paragraph (1) in order to provide more timely assistance to a 
        larger number of State and local governments.
  (c) Considerations and Analysis.--The study conducted under 
subsection (b) shall consider and analyze the following:
          (1) To the extent possible, current (as of the date on which 
        the study is conducted) and future trends with respect to 
        repetitive loss structures and severe repetitive loss 
        structures that are insured under the National Flood Insurance 
        Program, including, with respect to both inland and coastal 
        areas--
                  (A) changes in flood risk, flood frequency, and flood 
                magnitude since the inception of the National Flood 
                Insurance Program; and
                  (B) projections for changes in flood risk, flood 
                frequency, and flood magnitude by 2025, 2050, and 2075.
          (2) To the extent possible, buyout practices (as of the date 
        on which the study is conducted), including--
                  (A) the availability of funding sources for buyout 
                programs through various grant programs;
                  (B) the total number of properties acquired though 
                buyout programs;
                  (C) the average length of time for a State or local 
                government to acquire a flood-damaged property under a 
                buyout program, with that period beginning on the date 
                on which the State or local government, as applicable, 
                begins participating in the buyout program;
                  (D) an estimate of the number of flood-damaged 
                properties that could be acquired from willing property 
                owners under buyout programs with the full cooperation 
                of State and local governments;
                  (E) the socioeconomic status of recipients of buyouts 
                under buyout programs; and
                  (F) examples of successful buyout programs, including 
                best practices employed.
          (3) Administrative, financial, or temporal constraints that 
        may impede the timely acquisition of properties under a buyout 
        program, including--
                  (A) a lack of communication or cooperation between 
                the Administrator and the State and local governments 
                that purchase properties under a buyout program;
                  (B) pressures to redevelop a property after acquiring 
                a property through a buyout program; and
                  (C) a lack of adequate funding.
          (4) Potential options, methods, and strategies to address the 
        constraints identified under paragraph (3), including 
        evaluating the feasibility of--
                  (A) a pilot program under which--
                          (i) an eligible property owner may agree, 
                        before a flood event occurs, to have the 
                        primary single-family residence of the eligible 
                        property owner purchased after the residence 
                        has been substantially damaged by a flood;
                          (ii) the Administrator may provide--
                                  (I) financial assistance to State and 
                                local governments that are willing to 
                                participate in the program to purchase 
                                and acquire the properties of owners 
                                that have incurred substantial damage 
                                from a flood event; and
                                  (II) a premium credit as an incentive 
                                to eligible property owners to agree to 
                                participate in the program;
                          (iii) properties that are acquired--
                                  (I) shall be maintained as open space 
                                in accordance with section 404(b)(2) of 
                                the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
                                and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
                                5170c(b)(2)); and
                                  (II) may be used for non-structural 
                                mitigation, conservation, and 
                                recreational purposes; and
                          (iv) not fewer than 5 and not more than 10 
                        State and local governments shall participate; 
                        and
                  (B) the role that nonprofit organizations could play 
                in making buyouts more readily available or more 
                efficient, similar to the role that those organizations 
                play in the acquisition of properties for conservation 
                purposes.
          (5) The ecological, financial, and flood risk reduction 
        benefits that buyout practices, as in effect on the date on 
        which the study is conducted, provide, which shall--
                  (A) take into account the differences between inland 
                and coastal areas; and
                  (B) include--
                          (i) examples in which ecosystem restoration 
                        and other nature-based approaches have enhanced 
                        the reduction of flood risk; and
                          (ii) recommendations for best practices.
          (6) To the extent possible, an assessment of how the 
        Administrator may use buyout programs to reduce future flood 
        disaster recovery costs that are attributable to future 
        projections of flood risk as a result of sea level rise, 
        population changes, subsidence, and other factors.
          (7) A cost-benefit analysis of mitigation and buy-out 
        projects and programs, including an assessment of opportunities 
        and challenges for leveraging different Federal resources and 
        funding to maximize the value of Federal investment in disaster 
        mitigation.
  (d) Report.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
        States shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress 
        and the Administrator a report that sets forth the analysis, 
        conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the study 
        conducted under subsection (b).
          (2) Contents.--The report submitted under paragraph (1) shall 
        detail the feasibility of the Administrator establishing, and 
        the processes required for the Administrator to establish, an 
        alternative buyout program, such as the pilot program described 
        in subsection (c)(4)(A).

                         PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION

    H.R. 5846, as amended, would require the Comptroller 
General of the United States to conduct a study regarding the 
buyout practices of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA).

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    According to numerous studies, disaster losses and federal 
disaster spending have increased significantly over the last 50 
years. According to a 2012 report published by Munich Re, the 
world's largest reinsurance company, North America suffered 
$1.06 trillion in total disaster-related losses between 1980 
and 2011. This amount included $510 billion in insured losses. 
This report also showed that there was an increase in weather-
related events five-fold over the previous three decades.\1\ A 
2005 report published by Princeton University, indicated that 
since 1952 the cost of natural disasters to the federal 
government more than tripled as a function of gross domestic 
product.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Munich Re (2012). Severe weather in North America--Perils Risk 
Insurance. Munich, Germany: Muchener Ruckversicherungs-Gesellschaft.
    \2\The Princeton University Geoscience 499 Class, The Increasing 
Costs of U.S. Natural Disasters. Geotimes, November 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Disaster mitigation includes actions taken to reduce loss 
of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. 
Effective mitigation acts to minimize the potential loss from a 
disaster based on identifying and understanding the risks in a 
given area or community. Mitigation can encompass a wide 
variety of activities, including preparation and planning, 
elevating or moving structures prone to flooding, hardening 
structures to mitigate effects of hurricanes or earthquakes, 
and establishing building codes and zoning ordinances.
    Mitigation not only saves lives but has been shown to also 
reduce disaster costs by minimizing damage from a disaster. For 
example, pursuant to a requirement of the Disaster Mitigation 
Act of 2000, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) completed an 
analysis on the reduction in federal disaster assistance as a 
result of mitigation efforts. That study examined mitigation 
projects funded from 2004 to mid-2007 and found that of the 
nearly $500 million invested through Pre-Disaster Mitigation 
grants future losses were reduced by $1.6 billion for an 
overall ratio of three to one. In essence, for every dollar 
invested in mitigation, $3 were saved. CBO's analysis 
reaffirmed a prior study commissioned by FEMA and conducted by 
the Multihazard Mitigation Council of the National Institute of 
Building Sciences that concluded that funding spent on 
mitigation reduces future disaster costs. More recent studies 
conducted by the Wharton School\3\ and the National Institute 
of Building Sciences\4\ show potential savings of four to eight 
dollars for every one dollar invested in mitigation. 
Specifically, moving structures out of harm's way as intended 
by FEMA's buyout program has been shown to be very effective in 
mitigating against future losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School Risk Center, 
``Economic Effectiveness of Implementing a Statewide Building Code: The 
Case of Florida''. May 2016.
    \4\National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), ``Natural Hazard 
Mitigation Saves: 2017 Interim Report Summary of Findings''. Available 
here: https://www.nibs.org/page/ms2_dwnload.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                HEARINGS

    No hearings were held on H.R. 5846, as amended.

                 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND CONSIDERATION

    On May 16, 2018, Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) 
introduced H.R. 5846. The bill was referred solely to the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    On June 27, 2018, the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure met in open session. An amendment was offered by 
Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and adopted by the Committee 
by voice vote. A second amendment was offered by Congressman 
Garret Graves (R-LA) and adopted by the Committee by voice 
vote. The Committee ordered the bill, as amended, reported 
favorably to the House by voice vote with a quorum present.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires each committee report to include the 
total number of votes cast for and against on each record vote 
on a motion to report and on any amendment offered to the 
measure or matter, and the names of those members voting for 
and against. There were no recorded votes taken in connection 
with consideration of H.R. 5846 as amended.

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in this report.

               NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the 
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is 
included in this report.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 
received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5846 as amended 
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, July 12, 2018.
Hon. Bill Shuster,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5846, the 
Promoting Flood Risk Mitigation Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Robert Reese.
            Sincerely,
                                             Mark P. Hadley
                                        (For Keith Hall, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 5846--Promoting Flood Risk Mitigation Act

    H.R. 5846 would direct the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) to complete and submit to the Congress a study on the 
efficacy of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's current 
practices related to the federal acquisition of private 
properties following major flood disasters. GAO would be 
required to examine the available funding for such federal 
acquisition through current grant programs, evaluate any 
constraints that may impede the timely acquisition of damaged 
or destroyed properties, consider potential options to address 
any constraints identified, and assess how an acquisition 
program could be used to reduce future flood recovery costs.
    Using information on the costs of similar studies, CBO 
estimates that implementing the bill would not have significant 
cost.
    Enacting H.R. 5846 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 5846 would not increase 
net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029.
    H.R. 5846 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Robert Reese. 
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
performance goal and objective of this legislation is to 
require the Comptroller General of the United State to conduct 
a study regarding the buyout practices of the FEMA.

                          ADVISORY OF EARMARKS

    Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the Committee is required to include a list 
of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited 
tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of 
rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. No 
provision in the bill includes an earmark, limited tax benefit, 
or limited tariff benefit under clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of 
rule XXI.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the Committee finds that no provision of 
H.R. 5846, as amended, establishes or reauthorizes a program of 
the federal government known to be duplicative of another 
federal program, a program that was included in any report from 
the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to 
section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a 
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance.

                  DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS

    Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5, 115th Cong. (2017), 
the Committee finds that enacting H.R. 5846, as amended, does 
not direct the completion of a specific rule making within the 
meaning of section 551 of title 5, United States Code.

                       FEDERAL MANDATE STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (Public Law 104-4).

                        PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint 
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the 
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local, 
or tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 5846 as amended 
does not preempt any state, local, or tribal law.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY OF LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

               SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 designates the act be known as the `Promoting 
Flood Risk Mitigation Act'.

Section 2. References

    Section 2 defines and designates the study requirements for 
the Comptroller General of the United States.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H.R. 5846, as amended, makes no changes in existing law.

                                  [all]