However, there are differences between the House and Senate reauthorization bills, according to Justin Roth, director of federal government affairs for the Alexandria, Va.-based Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America.

Unless the bills can be reconciled, or a temporary reauthorization approved, the flood insurance program will lapse again, just as happened last year, Mr. Roth said.

Because Congress allowed the flood insurance program to expire last year, many homeowners were concerned about whether their properties were covered. Congress had to pass a retroactive reauthorization in early 2003.

One of IIABA's biggest concerns, Mr. Roth said, is to make sure the program does not lapse this year.

The differences between the House and Senate reauthorization bills relate to certain reform provisions in the House bill, Mr. Roth said.

The House Financial Services Committee, he said, approved a bill aimed at targeted remediation requirements on repetitive loss properties.

However, Mr. Roth said, some members of Congress, particularly from Louisiana, are concerned about these provisions and have prevented the bill from getting to the House floor.

At the same time, he added, there seems to be little to no interest in the remediation provisions in the Senate.

IIABA, Mr. Roth said, has some problems with the remediation provisions, but the most important thing is that flood insurance coverage does not lapse.

Both the House and Senate bills, he said, would reauthorize the flood insurance program for five years, and IIABA supports a multiyear reauthorization.

But if the bills cannot be reconciled before adjournment, Mr. Roth said, IIABA will urge Congress to approve a one-year reauthorization. This will allow coverage to continue without a break, he said, and give Congress more time to consider the consumer protection provisions in the House bill.

"The one thing we don't want to see is a repeat of last year," Mr. Roth said.