Are there any guidelines for knowing how much insurance should be obtained on contents of a building that is in a flood zone? The building is insured for flood but not the contents, which by the way has been documented to have a value of 31,430. Should the coverage on the contents cover the estimated/appraised value of the equipment?

Content coverage is not required unless the contents are also securing the loan. Look at page 27 of the Mandatory Purchase of Flood Insurance Guidlines bookelt.

Under the Regular Program content coverage is $100k max for residential and $500k max for nonresidential. Page 22.

Thanks - I found the information on page 27 and know the maximum allowed. This is a commercial loan(Body Shop)and we do have the building and contents(equipment) as collateral. The loan balance is 44,000, insurance coverage is 48,000(building only)not sure how to calculate the content coverage amount.

I didn't see any guidelines in the book. I would suggest approaching the Flood Ins coverage on the contents on the same scale as the fire and other hazard insurance policy coverage is.

If the loan balance is $44,000, and the building insurance is $48,000, I think you should be covered. After all, the reg says the lesser of the loan balance, the value of the collateral, or the maximum coverage.

That's for the coverage of the structure. I didn't see any guidelines for the contents. As a lender, I would want my contents insured. It is very possible that the building could flood without major damage to the building but totally destroy it's contens.

I don't disagree. But the regulation and the literature don't seem to have contemplated that.

In the Q&A, there is a question regarding multiple properties in an SFHA. Both must be covered to some extent, but the amount of coverage for each building was up to the lender, so long as the coverage meets the statutory amounts.

Maybe this should be handled similarly - insure both the building and the contents separately, up to the total amount of the loan (since the amount of the loan is under the statutory limit). From the existing coverage on the building, it sounds as if its value alone exceeds the loan balance, so the value of the collateral doesn't seem to fit.

I was recently faced with the same question, which perplexed everyone I asked (including FEMA). They (FEMA) ultimately said that we should look at it the same way we look at hazard insurance.
One thing is for sure though, if flood insurance coverage is required on the building, then it is also required on any contents located in that building, if the contents also secure the loan.

My homeowners hazard insurance policy covers (to some extent) flood damage to contents. Could this be a hazard insurance issue rather than a flood insurance issue?

Is it flood coverage or rising water? I think for insurance these are different. One is flood, water from the outside, and the other is internal, such as pipes breaking in the home. (We won't even go into the water damage, mold possibility and no way you're getting renewed.)

I need to go back and look for sure - I understood it to be flood, but I could be mistaken. I was more than a little shell-shocked at the 100% increase in the premium when I was reading it. Those who live or do business in Texas will understand that. Those who don't - you've been blessed and you should be thankful!!