On May 1, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability – the principal oversight committee of the House – sent a letter to FEMA Administrator Deanna Criswell.  This committee has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.

Led by Chair James Comer (R-KY) and Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), 51 Members of Congress from 15 states signed on to express that “both sides of the aisle are united in ensuring affordability of the NFIP and the sustainability of this program.”  The letter requests communications, documents, and information on Risk Rating 2.0 and staff-level for all offices, and demands delivery by May 29.

Requests cover:

1. All relevant documents and communications regarding calculating risk ratings under the Risk Rating 2.0 program;
2. All relevant documents and communications relating to Milliman, Inc.’s (“Milliman”) utilization of historical losses and exposures from January 1, 1992 to June 30, 2018;
3. All relevant documents and communications regarding the catastrophic modeling used by Milliman and its affiliates or vendors for inland flood and storm surge;
4. All relevant documents and communications regarding FEMA’s consultation with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to develop the definition of leveed areas, the probability of overtopping, and the probability of failure prior to overtopping that could inform the catastrophe modeling;
5. All relevant documents and communications regarding the consideration of unaccredited levees and levee quality data gaps in the National Levee Database;
6. All relevant documents and communications regarding calculations of state base rates;
7. All relevant documents and communications regarding Milliman’s modeling for New Orleans and Louisiana, Texas, Florida and New Jersey Storm Surge;
8. All relevant documents and communications regarding consideration of elevation of homes relative to Base Flood Elevations;
9. All relevant documents and communications regarding how many U.S. households’ rates increased under the Risk Rating 2.0 program;
10. Any relevant internal reports, authored by FEMA and/or its partners, consultants, vendors, or affiliates regarding changes to the premium calculation of NFIP policies and the changes’ effects on policyholders;
11. All relevant documents and communications regarding FEMA’s evaluation of the economic impacts of Risk Rating 2.0;
12. All relevant documents and communications regarding the decision to release state profiles that only accounted for year one implementation of Risk Rating 2.0; and
13. All relevant documents and research FEMA conducted or considered regarding the impacts of Risk Rating 2.0 would have or has had on low- and moderate-income Americans and minority communities.