PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2015
Fire-Damaged Home Rebuilding Act of 2015
Amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to allow local variances for certain residential structures substantially damaged by a fire or other disaster, not including a flood, in a covered area having special flood hazards.
Permits state or local authorities, upon making certain determinations, to grant a variance from compliance with certain mandatory adequate land use and control measures to allow repair and restoration of an eligible structure to its pre-damaged condition without elevation of the structure.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Includes among such determinations that: (1) the repaired and restored structure will be located on the same site as it was before being substantially damaged, and (2) the number of floors of the restored structure will not exceed the number of floors of the original structure.
Restricts the maximum number of such variances to 10 for a covered area during any calendar year. Prohibits the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from either: (1) finding that land use and control measures are inadequate or inconsistent with the comprehensive criteria for land management and use because they permit granting the variances identified under this Act; or (2) suspending an area or subdivision from participation in the national flood insurance program, or placing it on probation, because its land use and control measures provide for such variances. Prohibits the chargeable flood insurance premium rate for a residential structure granted a variance under this Act from being lower than the rate that otherwise would apply if such structure had not been substantially damaged by a fire or other disaster (except a flood) and repaired and restored pursuant to the variance.
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-6] · D–CA
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.
Source last updated: Dec 3, 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.947 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.947 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.947 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.947 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.