Appeal Summary | Appeal Letter | Appeal Analysis | Back
Second Appeal Summary
PA ID# 037-90752; Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles
DSR ID# 16170 ; Israel Levin Adult Senior Center
Citation: FEMA-1008-DR-CA; Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles; DSR 16170; Israel Levin Adult Senior Center
Cross Insurance; A&E evaluation; Grant Acceleration Program; code upgrades; hazard
Reference: mitigation; Improved project; NEPA
Summary: The Northridge Earthquake damaged the Israel Levin Senior Adult Center (Center). FEMA approved Damage Survey Report (DSR) 63654 for $235,473 to repair the earthquake damages. Upon project closeout, DSR 16170 was approved to de-obligate $210,473 of funding in excess of the $25,000 insurance deductible for the Center. The applicant's first appeal disagreed with the de-obligation stating that the applicant never agreed to allocate any of the settlement funds to the repair of the Center. The applicant also asserted that the Grant Acceleration Program (GAP) agreement with FEMA was an overall settlement of all of the applicant's DSRs. As such, the settlement barred FEMA from de-obligating any funds. The Regional Director denied the first appeal on the basis that the repair of the Center was covered by the applicant's insurance policy. Therefore, FEMA could not duplicate the available insurance benefits. The Regional Director also determined that only the eligible uninsured costs (deductible, A&E evaluation, hazard mitigation, and code required upgrades) were eligible for funding. Furthermore, the applicant entered into a GAP agreement for a different facility and the Center was not part of that agreement. In its second appeal, the applicant reiterates the arguments of the first appeal. In addition, the applicant contends that FEMA incorrectly determined that damages to the Center were included in the insurance settlements. Upon receipt of the second appeal, FEMA requested information regarding the potentially eligible uninsured costs cited in the first appeal response. The information submitted by the applicant shows that the applicant exceeded the FEMA approved scope of repair work.
Issues: 1. Was repair of the facility covered by the insurance policy?
2. Is the repair project an improved project?
3. Are any of the uninsured costs eligible for reimbursement?
Findings: 1. Yes. Therefore, FEMA cannot duplicate the funding available through the applicant's insurance policy.
2. Yes. The applicant exceeded the approved scope of work in DSR 63654. Therefore, funding is limited to the Federal share of the Federal estimate of the uninsured eligible costs related to the repair of the facility.
3. Yes. The insurance deductible and $3,125 in A&E related costs are eligible for reimbursement. However, the hazard mitigation and code upgrades identified by the applicant do not relate to the scope of work in DSR 63654 and are not eligible for funding.
Rationale: Section 312 of the Stafford Act; 44 CFR 206.203(d)