Legal Responsibility
Appeal Brief
| Disaster | 4339 |
| Applicant | ICAR Diocesis de Caguas |
| Appeal Type | Second |
| PA ID# | 025-U47RS-00 |
| PW ID# | GMP 133735/PW 9450 |
| Date Signed | 2024-09-30T16:00:00 |
Summary Paragraph
From September 17 to November 15, 2017, Hurricane Maria caused damage throughout Puerto Rico. ICAR Diocesis de Caguas (Applicant), a Private Nonprofit organization, requested funding to repair eight buildings and associated grounds. FEMA prepared Grants Manager Project 133735 to document the project. The Applicant provided title certifications from Puerto Rico’s Department of Housing, and insurance documentation, to establish that it had legal responsibility to conduct repairs on the buildings. FEMA denied funding for three of the buildings and associated grounds (Facilities). FEMA found that the Applicant did not demonstrate it had legal responsibility to restore the Facilities because the title certifications identified an entity other than the Applicant as the owner of the Facilities. The Applicant appealed stating that its authority to act on behalf of the Catholic Church included administrating all assets and properties within its geographic boundaries, which it claimed included the Facilities. Additionally, the Applicant asserted that it provided non-standard documentation to verify legal responsibility. FEMA denied the appeal, finding that the Applicant did not demonstrate that it had legal responsibility for the restoration of the Facilities. FEMA stated that the title certifications indicated that an entity other than the Applicant owned the Facilities and that none of the documentation provided identified the Applicant as the owner or entity legally responsible for the Facilities. The Applicant submitted a second appeal reiterating first appeal arguments.
Authorities
- Stafford Act § 406(a)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 5172(a)(1)(B).
- 44 C.F.R. §§ 206.226(c), 206.223(a)(3).
- PAPPG, at 15, 19-21.
- Asociacion Frailes Capuchinos, Inc., FEMA-4339-DR-PR, at 2; Dresden Cumberland Presbyterian Church, FEMA-4637-DR-TN, at 1, 3.
Headnotes
- To determine legal responsibility for facility restoration, FEMA evaluates whether the Applicant claiming the costs had legal responsibility for disaster-related restoration of the facility at the time of the incident based on ownership and the terms of any written agreements.
- Here, the administrative record establishes that entities other than the Applicant owned the Facilities. Furthermore, the Applicant did not provide a specific agreement transferring responsibility.
Conclusion
The Applicant has not demonstrated it is legally responsible for disaster-related repairs or hazard mitigation measures to the Facilities. Therefore, this appeal is denied.
Appeal Letter
SENT VIA EMAIL
Manuel Laboy
Governor’s Authorized Representative
Government of Puerto Rico
PO Box 42001
San Juan, PR 00912-2001
Manuel A. Martinez
Disaster Recovery Project Coordinator
ICAR Diocesis de Caguas
Calle San Jorge #201,
Esq. Baldorioty de Castro
San Juan, PR 00912
Re: Second Appeal – ICAR Diocesis de Caguas, PA ID: 025-U47RS-00, FEMA-4339-DR-PR, Grants Manager Project 133735/Project Worksheet 9450, Legal Responsibility
Dear Manuel Laboy and Manuel A. Martinez:
This is in response to the Government of Puerto Rico Central Office for Recovery, Reconstruction, and Resiliency’s letter dated June 28, 2024, which transmitted the referenced second appeal on behalf of ICAR Diocesis de Caguas (Applicant). The Applicant is appealing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) denial of funding in the amount of $63,375.92 for the restoration of Capilla Nuestra Señora de la Providencia, Capilla San Judas Tadeo, and Capilla San Antonino de Padua (Facilities).
As explained in the enclosed analysis, I have determined that the Applicant has not demonstrated it is legally responsible for disaster-related repairs or hazard mitigation measures to the Facilities. Therefore, this appeal is denied.
This determination is the final decision on this matter pursuant to 44 C.F.R. § 206.206, Appeals.
Sincerely,
/S/
Robert M. Pesapane
Director, Public Assistance
Enclosure
cc: David Warrington
Regional Administrator
FEMA Region 2
Appeal Analysis
Background
From September 17 through November 15, 2017, Hurricane Maria impacted Puerto Rico.[1] ICAR Diocesis of Caguas (Applicant), a Private Nonprofit organization that owns and/or operates houses of worship, requested $198,092.91 in Public Assistance (PA) funding to restore eight buildings and associated grounds, including the facilities at issue on second appeal: Capilla Nuestra Señora de la Providencia; Capilla San Judas Tadeo; and Capilla San Antonino de Padua (Facilities).[2] FEMA prepared Grants Manager Project 133735/Project Worksheet 9450 to document the claimed repairs and hazard mitigation measures.[3] The Applicant provided title certifications issued by the Puerto Rico Department of Housing (PRDOH) for the Facilities that stated the following: Capilla Nuestra Señora de la Providencia was owned by Iglesia Católica Capilla Virgen de la Providencia; Capilla San Judas Tadeo was owned by Iglesia Católica San Judas Tadeo; and Capilla San Antonio de Padua was owned by Iglesia Católica San Antonio de Padua. The Applicant then provided insurance documentation for the Facilities that listed it as the insured. Due to concerns that the Facilities may be owned by entities other than the Applicant, FEMA advised the Applicant of the need for additional documentation showing that the Applicant was legally responsible for the Facilities.[4] There is no indication in the administrative record that the Applicant provided additional documentation in response to this communication.
On April 18, 2023, FEMA issued a Determination Memorandum denying funding for the requested repairs and mitigation measures associated with the Facilities.[5] FEMA found that the Applicant did not demonstrate it had legal responsibility to restore the Facilities at the time of the disaster. FEMA noted that the title certifications identified another entity as the owner of the Facilities, and that it did not provide any written agreement showing transfer of legal responsibility for disaster-related repairs of the Facilities.[6]
First Appeal
On May 15, 2023, the Applicant appealed FEMA’s determination. The Applicant stated that FEMA ignored previously provided documentation demonstrating its legal responsibility as well as the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church (Church) as it pertains to facility ownership. The Applicant stated that the Code of Canon Law, the Papal Bull, and the 2017 Official Catholic Directory (Directory), collectively define the geographic area over which it has authority to operate on behalf of the Church.[7] The Applicant asserted that the authority to act on behalf of the Church included administrating all assets and properties within its geographic boundaries which included the Facilities, as subordinate entities to the Applicant. The Applicant stated that parishes do not have authority to own property. Thus, regardless of the PRDOH named owner, the Applicant asserted it was the owner and thus, the legally responsible entity to restore the Facilities. The Applicant asserted that FEMA, on January 28, 2022, acknowledged the unique complexities regarding the legal responsibility documentation.[8] Additionally, the Applicant stated that FEMA has authority to accept non-standard documentation to verify legal responsibility consistent with FEMA’s Individuals and Household Program.[9] Accordingly, the Applicant stated that FEMA may rely on insurance and bankruptcy documentation to find that the Applicant had legal responsibility to restore the Facilities. Lastly, the Applicant stated that there was no other entity claiming legal responsibility to restore the Facilities. In support of its appeal, the Applicant submitted documentation, including extracts from the Papal Bull and the Code of Canon law, part of the Directory listing the Facilities within the Applicant’s district, and undated bankruptcy documentation listing the Facilities among the properties owned by the Applicant.
On July 21, 2023, the Government of Puerto Rico Central Office for Recovery, Reconstruction and Resiliency (Recipient) forwarded the Applicant’s appeal to FEMA with its support. The Recipient reiterated the Applicant’s arguments regarding the hierarchical structure of the Church and requested that FEMA exercise its discretionary authority as to what constitutes proof of legal responsibility.
On April 3, 2024, the FEMA Region 2 Regional Administrator denied the appeal. FEMA found that the Applicant did not demonstrate that it had legal responsibility for disaster-related restoration of the Facilities at the time of the incident. FEMA stated that the title certifications indicated that an entity other than the Applicant owned the Facilities, and that none of the documentation provided explicitly identified the Applicant as the owner or entity legally responsible for disaster-related restoration of the Facilities. FEMA explained that there are instances where it may consider alternative documentation to support eligibility. However, in this instance, ownership documentation was submitted, which fell under clearly defined FEMA policy.
Second Appeal
On May 2, 2024, the Applicant submitted its second appeal reiterating its previously raised arguments.[10] On June 28, 2024, the Recipient forwarded the Applicant’s second appeal to FEMA with its support reiterating the Applicant’s arguments.
Discussion
FEMA may provide funding for the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of eligible private nonprofit facilities damaged or destroyed by a disaster.[11]To be eligible for funding, work must be the legal responsibility of the applicant requesting assistance.[12] To determine legal responsibility for facility restoration, FEMA evaluates whether the applicant claiming the costs had legal responsibility for disaster-related restoration of the facility at the time of the incident based on ownership and the terms of any written agreements (such as for facilities under construction, leased facilities, and facilities owned by a Federal agency).[13] FEMA policy includes the following categories for evaluating legal responsibility of an applicant to complete facility restoration: (1) facility ownership; (2) facilities under construction; (3) leased facilities; and (4) federal facilities.[14] Ownership of a facility is generally sufficient to establish the applicant’s legal responsibility to restore the facility, provided it is not under construction by a contractor or leased to another entity at the time of the incident.[15] To determine ownership, FEMA may review deeds, title documents, or tax records.[16]
Here, the administrative record shows that entities, other than the Applicant, owned the Facilities at the time of the incident. Specifically, the Applicant-provided PRDOH title certification for each of the three Facilities names an entity other than the Applicant. The Applicant does not dispute the authenticity of the PRDOH title certifications, but argues that other documentation establishes it had legal responsibility for the Facilities at the time of the incident. First, the Applicant states that the Church’s authorities delegate the legal responsibility to maintain facilities to its dioceses. However, the Applicant did not cite where and how in these authorities there is a delegation of responsibility for the repairs of the Facilities from the Church to the Applicant. Similarly, the Applicant did not provide documentation demonstrating a written agreement transferred legal responsibility for disaster-related restoration of the Facilities from the third party owners to the Applicant. Second, the Applicant contends FEMA has discretionary authority to accept non-standard documentation to establish legal responsibility. However, the basis of the Applicant’s contention, FEMA’s Individuals and Household Program, does not apply here under the PA program. In addition, in this case, ownership documentation is available that falls within one of the categories outlined above (e.g., deed, title document).[17] Therefore, based on the ownership documents in the record, the Applicant has not demonstrated it is legally responsible for disaster-related repairs or hazard mitigation measures to the Facilities.
Conclusion
The Applicant has not demonstrated it is legally responsible for disaster-related repairs or hazard mitigation measures to the Facilities. Therefore, this appeal is denied.
[1] The President issued a major disaster declaration on September 20, 2017.
[2] ICAR Diocesis of Caguas is a diocese of the Roman Catholic Church in Puerto Rico (referred to as La Iglesia Católica Apostólica y Romana or ICAR).
[3] On December 23, 2021, FEMA obligated the project, approving all $198,092.91 in requested funding.
[4] See Grants Manager Project 133735, attachment DR4339PR - Legal Responsibility determination for previously Obligated DIs.pdf, at 6-7.
[5] FEMA deobligated $66,351.07 in estimated costs associated with the Facilities on July 7, 2023. FEMA also deobligated costs associated with one facility that is not at issue in this decision, so that they could be transferred to a project for a different applicant. FEMA approved those costs under GMP 707073 for the ICAR Diocesis de Ponce. The remaining costs previously found eligible to restore the other facilities were not in dispute, and therefore, remained eligible.
[6] For the buildings that FEMA approved funding, the documentation establishing legal responsibility consisted of deeds in some instances that named the Applicant as the owner, and insurance documentation in other instances for buildings that did not have any title certification or deed in the record showing any formal owner registered with the government. Therefore, unlike the Facilities at issue in this appeal, there was no conflicting documentation in the record indicating that the buildings for which FEMA approved funding were owned by an entity other than the Applicant.
[7] The copy of the Papal Bull is written in what appears to be Latin, and no translation or explanation of the text was included. The Catholic Directory listed the Facilities under the Diocese but does not include information related to the administration, ownership, or repair of the listed buildings. Similarly, the Canon law sections cited do not specifically transfer repair responsibility.
[8] In the January 28, 2022 communication cited by the Applicant, FEMA indicated that given the complexities of title documents, it could potentially consider a combination of documentation to demonstrate ownership or legal responsibility for a facility. However, FEMA clarified in the same communication that “[t]his approach will not be applicable if there is contrary legal documentation.” See Grants Manager, DR-4339-PR, Applicant Profile, ICAR Diocesis de Caguas, attachment Appendix 4 PAPPG provisions on Legal Responsibility.pdf, at 1.
[9] The Applicant referred to FEMA Advisory, FEMA Makes Changes to Individual Assistance Policies to Advance Equity for Disaster Survivors (Sept. 2, 2021) (advising that FEMA will accept additional forms of documentation to verify occupancy and ownership requirements). This FEMA Advisory refers to policy changes to the Individual Assistance Program and Policy Guide, Version 1.1. See: https://www.fema.gov/press-release/20210902/fema-makes-changes-individual-assistance-policies-advance-equity-disaster.
[10] In its second appeal letter, the Applicant requests $63,375.92, noting that its “estimates are preliminary and likely low since FEMA has not yet fully estimated eligible damages, methods of repair and costs due to legal responsibility.” Second Appeal Letter from Authorized Representative, Diocese of Caguas, to Executive Dir., Central Recovery, Reconstruction and Resilience Office of Puerto Rico, at 2 (May 2, 2024).
[11] Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act § 406(a)(1)(B), Title 42, United States Code § 5172(a)(1)(B) (2012); Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) § 206.226(c) (2016); Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide, FP 104-009-2, at 15 (Apr. 1, 2018) [hereinafter PAPPG].
[12] 44 C.F.R. § 206.223(a)(3); PAPPG, at 19-21.
[13] PAPPG, at 20.
[14] Id. at 20-21
[15] Id. at 20.
[16] Id.
[17] Cf. FEMA Second Appeal Analysis, Asociacion Frailes Capuchinos, Inc., FEMA-4339-DR-PR, at 2 (Sept. 29, 2023) (stating that FEMA evaluated the issue of legal responsibility based on a totality of the circumstances because the appeal did not fall within one of the clearly delineated categories outlined in FEMA policy (e.g., no deed, title document, or tax record that demonstrated formal ownership of the facility registered with the government at the time of the incident, and no lease agreement between the Applicant and another entity); FEMA Second Appeal Analysis, Dresden Cumberland Presbyterian Church, FEMA-4637-DR-TN, at 1, 3 (June 7, 2023) (only as a result of conflicting information in the record regarding the ownership of a facility, FEMA examined predisaster property insurance documentation for the facility that named the Applicant as the insured at the time of the disaster, a financial statement that showed predisaster Applicant-expenditures for repairs to the facility, and a statement from the parent church attesting to the Applicant’s legal responsibility for all facility repairs since 1889).