The bill amends the National Flood Insurance Act to make it easier for agricultural structures located in special flood hazard areas (SFHAs) to remain eligible for NFIP coverage by allowing state or local officials to grant variances from elevation or floodproofing requirements under specified conditions. It also directs FEMA to price such varianced structures as if they had been dry‑floodproofed (or at a comparable actuarial rate) and creates an optional umbrella policy option for insureds with multiple structures on the same property.
This matters because many farm buildings—barns, equipment storage, and other agricultural outbuildings—are expensive to elevate or floodproof and have been difficult to insure under current NFIP rules. The bill shifts judgment about practicability to local authorities, alters premium‑setting for those properties, and introduces a new policy form that could concentrate multiple structures under a single NFIP contract.
Those changes will affect local land‑use practices, NFIP actuarial work, and how lenders and producers manage flood risk on farms.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds an express authorization in NFIP statute for state or local officials to grant variances for agricultural structures in SFHAs when elevation or floodproofing is not practicable, subject to enumerated limits and safeguards; requires FEMA to charge a rate for varianced structures equal to the dry‑floodproofed rate or a comparable actuarial rate. It also authorizes optional umbrella policies for commercial, multifamily, residential and agricultural properties with multiple structures.
Who It Affects
Owners/operators of agricultural structures (barns, storage, animal housing) in mapped floodplains, local zoning and permitting authorities that must grant and document variances, FEMA/NFIP actuarial and underwriting staff, and insureds with multiple structures who may elect umbrella coverage.
Why It Matters
The bill decentralizes key practicability decisions to local governments, potentially increasing insured exposure in high‑risk areas while preserving access to federal flood insurance; it also changes pricing and creates a multi‑structure product that will require administrative and rate‑setting work at FEMA and attention from lenders and risk managers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts a new paragraph into the NFIP statutory land‑use requirements to allow local or state zoning authorities to grant a variance for an agricultural structure located in a special flood hazard area when elevation or floodproofing is not practicable. That variance must be granted by an authorized official, and the statute lists what that official must find: practicability of elevation or floodproofing, exclusion of certain high‑risk locations (designated regulatory floodways, areas riverward of levees, or zones subject to high‑velocity waves), and a determination the variance will not increase flood heights, public safety threats, or create nuisances.
For existing structures in a floodway, repairs and improvements that rely on a variance cannot increase base flood levels during the base flood discharge.
The bill adds a loss history condition before a variance can be issued: the structure must not have had more than one claim payment exceeding $1,000 within any ten‑year period prior to the variance. It also protects communities from automatic NFIP suspension or probation solely because they provide for such variances, while still allowing FEMA to enforce if a community fails to adopt adequate variance criteria or enforce them properly.On pricing, the bill requires FEMA to treat a varianced structure's premium as the same chargeable rate that would apply if the structure had been dry‑floodproofed, or a comparable actuarial rate based on zone risk.
That instructs FEMA to find parity between conditional variance coverage and preservative mitigation in pricing, rather than defaulting to subsidized or lower rates. Finally, the bill amends coverage authority to allow FEMA to offer an optional umbrella policy to insureds with multiple structures on the same property (including agricultural property) at renewal; purchase is discretionary and premiums must be chargeable at no less than the estimated premiums set under existing actuarial rules.
The statute also requires a report to Congress after five years evaluating how the umbrella option was implemented.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute allows local or state officials to grant a variance from elevation/floodproofing requirements for agricultural structures in SFHAs when elevation or floodproofing is not practicable, subject to specified location and safety limits.
A variance may not be granted if the structure has had more than one NFIP claim payment exceeding $1,000 within any 10‑year period prior to the variance.
FEMA must set the chargeable premium for a varianced structure equal to the rate that would apply if the structure had been dry‑floodproofed or a comparable actuarial rate reflecting zone risk.
The Administrator may offer an optional umbrella policy covering multiple structures on the same property (including agricultural properties) at renewal or to applicants with multiple buildings; buying it is optional but premiums must meet estimated chargeable rates.
FEMA must submit a report to Congress within five years evaluating implementation of the umbrella policy option.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Permitted local variances for agricultural structures
This provision adds an express statutory exception allowing local/state land‑use measures to authorize variances for agricultural structures in SFHAs. The mechanics require an authorized official to document why elevation or floodproofing is not practicable and to confirm the structure is not located in three named high‑risk subareas (regulatory floodway, riverward of levee, or high‑velocity wave areas). The provision also preserves FEMA's enforcement power where communities fail to set or apply adequate variance criteria, meaning communities must adopt and implement written procedures and find facts when granting variances.
Substantive findings, exclusions, and repair rules
The subparagraph enumerates the findings officials must make for both new construction and repairs to existing structures: practicability for new builds, and for repairs in floodways the repair must not raise base flood elevations. It also contains public‑safety and nuisance gates (variance cannot increase flood heights, threats to safety, extraordinary public expense, or conflict with local law) and a claims‑history cap tied to $1,000 payments—an operational filter communities will need to verify before issuing variances.
Premium parity for varianced agricultural structures
This amendment requires FEMA to charge the same premium for a varianced structure that would apply if the structure had been dry‑floodproofed, or otherwise to use a comparable actuarial rate. Practically, FEMA must translate the statutory instruction into rate filings or internal pricing guidance, deciding how to measure a ‘comparable actuarial rate’ for structures that remain below base flood elevations. That decision has implications for NFIP loss exposure and cross‑subsidization between policyholders.
Optional umbrella policy for multiple structures
The bill authorizes FEMA to offer an umbrella policy that can cover multiple structures on the same property—including commercial, multifamily, residential, and agricultural properties—at renewal or to applicants who have multiple buildings. The purchase is optional, and premiums must be chargeable at no less than estimated actuarial rates. Operationally, FEMA must design a multi‑structure form, set underwriting guidelines, and determine how limits, deductibles, and per‑structure exposures are treated under one policy.
Five‑year evaluation and reporting requirement
FEMA must deliver a report to Congress within five years assessing implementation of the umbrella policy option. The report will need to cover take‑up rates, underwriting performance, administrative burdens, any observed effect on risk concentration, and recommendations—creating an early accountability mechanism and a data source for future statutory adjustments.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Agriculture across all five countries.
Explore Agriculture in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Small and family farms with outbuildings in mapped floodplains — the bill preserves access to NFIP coverage when elevation or floodproofing is impractical, helping protect assets like barns and equipment storage that are costly to mitigate.
- Local zoning and permitting authorities — the bill formalizes their discretion to grant practical variances and shapes local land‑use negotiations by placing the ‘practicability’ call at the local level.
- Producers and agricultural supply chains — preserving insurance eligibility can stabilize collateral values and business continuity for operations that depend on uninsured structures to store feed, seed, or equipment.
Who Bears the Cost
- FEMA/NFIP — must develop pricing guidance for varianced structures, create and administer an umbrella policy form, and handle the data, underwriting, and reporting burdens tied to these changes, risking increased loss exposure if adverse selection occurs.
- Local governments — must draft, adopt, and enforce adequate variance criteria and maintain records to withstand FEMA oversight; smaller jurisdictions may lack staff or expertise to perform these functions well.
- NFIP policyholders generally — could face higher cross‑subsidization pressure if varianced structures carry greater unmitigated risk but are priced below true actuarial exposure, depending on FEMA’s pricing choices.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate goals that pull in opposite directions: expand access to federally backed flood insurance for essential agricultural buildings to protect farm viability, while maintaining actuarial soundness and discouraging increased development or retention of vulnerable structures in high‑risk flood zones; achieving both at once requires precise pricing, consistent local standards, and effective federal oversight—none of which are guaranteed by the statute alone.
The bill delegates the determinative question—whether elevation or floodproofing is practicable—to state and local officials without defining ‘practicable,’ creating variation in how jurisdictions apply the test. That delegation allows local discretion where site‑specific knowledge matters, but it also risks creating a patchwork of standards that FEMA will have to audit and, where inadequate, correct.
The statute partially shields communities from automatic NFIP suspension for granting variances, yet preserves FEMA’s enforcement for inadequate variance criteria; that creates a procedural burden on FEMA to distinguish legitimate local discretion from lax permitting that increases systemic risk.
On pricing and risk, the statute asks FEMA to equate premiums for varianced structures with dry‑floodproofed rates or a ‘comparable actuarial rate,’ a phrase that requires operational interpretation. If FEMA interprets this liberally, varianced properties could be underpriced relative to actual exposure; if it interprets conservatively, premiums could be so high that the variance becomes illusory.
The umbrella policy option bundles exposures across multiple structures on a single property, which can simplify administration for owners but concentrates risk in a single contract and complicates loss allocation and reinsurance or future risk transfer strategies. Finally, the $1,000‑claim cap and five‑year report are blunt instruments: the claim threshold is arbitrary and may not correlate neatly with actuarial risk, while the five‑year window for evaluation may be too short to reveal long‑term loss patterns or changes in local development behavior.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.