N002308
Tuesday, January 22, 2002 5:04 PM
Comments on Interim Final Rules 9-11 Victims Compensation Fund
Hello
My name is and I'm the sister of two of the murdered Victims of
the Sept 11th terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. I currently live
in Boca Raton. I lost my brother
and on Sept 11th. Both and worked at on the floor of Tower 2. was 28 years old , unmarried
(engaged) with no children. was married with 2 children.
My concerns regarding the interim final rules are basically two:
1. Knowing what the final award will be prior to official acceptance. If
claimant is required to waive their right to pursue legal action it would
seem only reasonable that the exact settlement to claimant is verified and
agreed to prior to acceptance. This would eliminate the possibility of any
misunderstandings.
2. Private insurance premiums paid by the Victims were paid to protect their
loved ones financially in the event of death. Their responsible behavior
should in no way be offset by this horrific terrorist act. If the concern of
the Federal Government is minimizing the use of American dollars then freeze
the assets of the 60 countries engaged in or supporting terrorist activities
and use those monies to compensate the impact to the treasury. Wrongful
death, i.e.. murder, should have no beneficial financial offset flowing to
anyone culpable on the back of the murdered victims.
Finally, by way of an editorial comment; I sincerely hope that no additional
weight is given to the numerous mass e-mailings going to this site on the
part of those groups with an obvious political agenda. In fact it is my hope
that they be discounted.
Specific Objections to the arbitrary interim final rule construction:
I am writing to express my serious concerns and objections to the Department
of Justice's (DOJ) "Interim Final Regulations Governing Payments Under the
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund."
The airline bailout act gave the airlines $15 billion in cash and loan
guarantees and capped the airlines' liability for the September 11 crashes
at the limits of their insurance coverage. Because of this cap, the damage
caused by the crashes greatly exceeds the private fund available to
compensate victims and their families. Thus for the vast majority of victims
and families, the cap has the effect of eliminating the right that they
would otherwise have to sue the airlines. Congress set up the fund to ensure
that the airline bailout would not come at the expense of the victims'
families.
The act mandates full and fair compensation to victims and their families
for their actual economic and non-economic damages. DOJ has ignored this
mandate and instead has written arbitrary regulations that will result in
compensation levels far below the losses actual suffered by the victims and
their families. In fact, many families' total compensation from the fund and
all collateral sources combined will not even fully replace lost income. In
effect, these families will not receive any of the non-economic compensation
required by the statute. After collateral sources are deducted, as required
by the statute, some families would receive nothing from the fund under the
interim final regulations.
DOJ's formula allows for non-economic awards at only one-tenth the level
paid in comparable cases, even though Congress explicitly enumerated a
broader range of non-economic damages than could be recovered in any single
jurisdiction. DOJ's formula for non-economic damages is $250,000 for the
person killed and $50,000 for the spouse and each dependent. In a wide
variety of air crash and terrorism cases, however, judges, juries, and
mediators commonly have provided non-economic damage awards well into the
seven-figure range.
Independent economists have found serious flaws in DOJ's method of
calculating economic damages, including use of outdated and inapplicable
worklife and life-cycle earnings data. DOJ greatly underestimates promotions
and other increases in earnings for victims. It relies on civil service and
military retirement system actuarial data that track federal worker incomes
and pension requirements, not the higher-paying private sector career paths
followed by the vast majority of the victims.
The interim final regulations also arbitrarily cap a victim's income at
$231,000 a year. Combined with the faulty methodology described above, the
income cap would result in some families receiving compensation for less
than 25% of their actual economic losses.
Under DOJ's rules, a family's award may be increased above the "presumptive"
award only by a showing of "extraordinary circumstances" -- beyond those
suffered by other victims or victims' families. This high burden of proof
makes a charade of the right to a hearing provided by the statute.
DOJ should fulfill the act's intent by revising the rules to compensate
victims and their families for the types of damages specified by Congress,
at levels comparable to those provided in the tort system the fund was
designed to replace. While DOJ has shown flexibility on some aspects of the
rules, it is resisting the victims' and families' requests for significant
changes.
If the proposed regulations are not changed significantly, victims' widows
will have to sell their homes, deplete their children's college funds, and
give up their plans of being full-time parents while their children are
young. Many families, anticipating little relief from the fund, will decide
to sue the airlines and others, despite the handicap of the liability
limits. We do not believe these are the outcomes Congress intended.
Please contact Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and Special Master Kenneth
R. Feinberg and tell them of your concern that the interim final regulations
fail to conform to the language and intent of the act. With the regulations
soon to become final, I believe that only the swift and strong support of
Congress can avert unnecessary financial and emotional damage.
Thank you for your swift and focused attention to this injustice.
Thank you for giving this matter your immediate attention
Have a Great Day,
Individual Comment
Boca Raton, FL