PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2015
Fairness in Flood Insurance Act of 2015
This bill amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to declare that, in any appeal to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or any judicial review of a final administrative determination, regarding the designation of flood elevation determinations or the identification of special flood hazard areas, FEMA shall have the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that the elevations proposed or the designation of an identified special flood hazard area is scientifically and technically correct.
FEMA shall:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
reimburse the reasonable legal and related expenses of any individual or community that succeeds on such an appeal; and
revise and update any floodplain areas and flood-risk zones upon the request from any owner or lessee of real property located in a floodplain area or flood-risk zone (currently, only upon the request of FEMA or of a state or local government), if sufficient technical data justifying the request is submitted.
A state or local government, or the owner or lessee of real property, who has formally requested FEMA to update a flood map that FEMA has denied may at any time appeal the denial according to a specified procedure. The basis for appeal shall be possession of knowledge or information that:
the base flood elevation level or designation of any aspect of a flood map is scientifically or technically inaccurate; or
specified factors exist, including natural or manmade topographical features, that mitigate the risk of flooding.
These flood mitigation factors shall also be considered in the establishment and updating of areas with special flood hazards.
When estimating risk premium rates for flood insurance, and prescribing chargeable premium rates, FEMA shall take into consideration the differences between properties located in coastal areas and properties located inland.
FEMA shall consult with the Technical Mapping Advisory Council about methods of making or actions to make the Council's flood map processes more efficient and achieve other specified goals.
The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014 is amended to require FEMA to ensure that the Flood Insurance Advocate has sufficient staff to carry out all of the Advocate's duties and responsibilities, which shall include providing direction as necessary, including by direct conversations with insurance agents.
The Government Accountability Office shall study:
the scientific and technical adequacy of the flood maps FEMA proposes and establishes, and
the effects on the National Flood Insurance Program and otherwise of changing the standard for designating special flood hazard areas from having a 1% or greater to having a 10% or greater chance of experiencing flooding in any given year.
People & committees
Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3297 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3297 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3297 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3297 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.