PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 17, 2014
Urban Flooding Awareness Act of 2014 - Directs the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council to conduct a study on urban flooding.
Defines "urban flooding" as the inundation of property in a built environment, particularly in more densely populated areas, caused by rain falling on increased amounts of impervious surface and overwhelming the capacity of drainage systems.
Directs the Council to evaluate the latest research, laws, regulations, policies, best practices, procedures, and institutional knowledge regarding urban flooding. Requires the Council's study to include an examination of:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the prevalence of and costs associated with urban flooding events across the United States, with a focus on the largest metropolitan areas and trends in frequency and severity over the past two decades;
the adequacy of federally provided flood risk information and the most cost-effective methods and products to characterize the risk of property damage from urban flooding on a property-by-property basis;
the potential for training and certifying local experts in flood risk characterization as a service to property purchasers and owners;
the causes of urban flooding and its apparent increase over the past 20 years;
the most cost-effective strategies, practices, and technologies used to reduce the impacts of urban flooding;
the role of the federal government and state governments in spurring market innovations based on public-private-nonprofit partnerships;
the most sustainable and effective methods for funding flood risk and flood damage reduction at all levels of government;
the relevance of the National Flood Insurance Program and Community Rating System to urban flooding areas outside traditional flood plains and strategies for broadening coverage and increasing participation under the Program; and
strategies for protecting downstream communities from the flooding impacts of development in upstream communities.
People & committees
Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.5521 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.5521 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.5521 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.5521 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.