Appeal Brief | Appeal Letter | Back
Second Appeal Brief
PA ID# 291-UTVUV-00; Hull-Daisetta Independent School District
PW ID# 08564; Anticipated Insurance Proceeds
Citation: FEMA-1791-DR-TX; Hull-Daisetta Independent School District (Applicant), PW 08564
Reference: Insurance, Documentation
Summary: FEMA prepared PW 08564 to fund eligible repairs to the Assistant Superintendent’s House that was damaged by high winds and debris during Hurricane Ike. FEMA deducted $7,530 from PW 08564 to account for anticipated insurance proceeds. PW 08564 was obligated on April 21, 2009, in the amount of $284 for direct administrative costs.
The Applicant submitted its first appeal on May 26, 2009, and provided a copy of its insurance policy, as well as a copy of a Replacement Cost Value/Building and Contents Schedule to support its appeal. Citing insurance policy section 6.G, the Applicant argued that the damaged facility is excluded from coverage because it is a framed structure. The State in support of the Applicant’s appeal stressed that section 6.G also excludes “All loss or damage caused to any building or auxiliary structure valued at less than $50,000.” On December 30, 2009, the Regional Administrator denied the appeal on the basis that the Assistant Superintendent’s House appears on the Replacement Cost Value/Building and Contents Schedule that identifies the damaged facility with having a replacement cost value of $80,000. However, a 2 percent Total Insured Value of the facility ($1,600) is eligible for Public Assistance Funding. Because PW 07801 absorbed $1,447 of the $1,600 deductible for fence repair costs at the Assistant Superintendent’s House, the Regional Administrator approved an additional $153 for the remaining portion of the eligible deductible.
The Applicant submitted its second appeal on February 8, 2010. The Applicant reiterates the same position it claimed in the first appeal and submitted copies of letters from its insurance claims adjuster that state that damage to the Assistant Superintendent’s House is not covered under the provisions of the policy.
Issues: 1. Does the Applicant’s insurance policy cover the damage?
2. Did the Applicant provide documentation to support its claim?
Findings: 1. No.
Rationale: Section 311(a), Duplication of Benefits; 44 CFR §206.250(c), General; 44 CFR §206.253(a), Insurance requirements for facilities damaged by disasters other than flood; 44 CFR §206.206(a), Appeals, Format and Content