Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act 2012

[Clearwater Coalition]

July 2012
Congress passed and the President signed into law the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012. This law changes the way that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, manages the National Flood Insurance Program, NFIP. This act came about as a result of the flood damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. As a result of these storms, flood damage claims caused the NFIP to go insolvent. The Biggert-Waters Act intends to bring the NFIP solvent by taking away subsidies in phased out increments for property situated in flood prone areas.

January 2013
The subsidy phase-outs started January 2013 for owners of non-primary residences. These properties received a 25% increase in NFIP premiums and will continue in 25% premium increases until premiums are paying the full actuarial NFIP rates.


October 2013
In October 2013 certain business properties received 25% NFIP premium increases and will continue to do so annually in 25% increments until those properties are paying the full actuarial NFIP rates. Owners of up to 4 residences and where those properties have experienced extensive or repetitive flood damage claims received 25% NFIP premium increases and will continue to do so annually in 25% increments until those properties are paying the full actuarial NFIP rates. New flood insurance polices created on or after July 06, 2012 will not be subsidized effective and policyholders will pay full the full amount for NFIP premiums. Homes that had transferable subsidized MFIP policies will no longer be eligible to transfer those policies after July 06, 2012. Subsidized NFIP policies that lapsed no longer qualify for a subsidy after July 06, 2012.

Expected to Take Place in the Latter Part of 2014
Flood maps are expected to be revised and or updated and all NFIP policy holders will be on a five year plan to have premiums set at actuarial determined rates and no subsidies will be offered.

[Clearwater Coalition]

The Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition conducted an unscientific online survey about the Bigger-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012. The CNC used this survey to gain information and learn about ideas that could lessen the adverse financial impact it will bring to coastal communities. This survey was conducted between January and February of 2014.

Survey Link

[Ivan Smith]

Please help me understand why a home less than 11 feet in elevation on Island Estates, which falls within such obscure references to 100 year floods and potential storm surges from Hurricanes just because it is in close proximaty to the ocean, bay or inland waterway, is designated a major risk hazzard for insurance when no such event has occurred in many many years. My question eminates from contrasting this with areas in the United States not designated as hi risk for flooding yet are near inland rivers, lakes, or just low lying areas which have been devastated far more often than coastal areas. I get the impression that coastal properties are impacted by high flood insurance rates just because they are close to water. It is illogical that enormous bodies of water, like the Gulf or the Oceans will experience significient water level issues due to storms more frequently than inland areas where soil becomes saturated by significant rainfall and floods, or other freshwater bodies flood surrounding areas.

Bottom line is that I believe more inland flood damage has been recorded in the US over the past 100 years than along coastal areas relating to sea rise. We are unfairly being characterized as flood prone zones when in fact we are less likely to experience such a disaster than many inland areas. There needs to be some sensible qualification protocol rather than a presumption that if you are simply near the ocean you are more at risk than somewhere inland where rain can accumulate and produce flooding numerous times each year.