THE 55 dBA NOISE LEVEL USED BY FERC AS “STANDARD” WAS NEVER INTENDED BY THE EPA TO BE USED AS SUCH

THE 55 dBA NOISE LEVEL USED BY FERC AS “STANDARD” WAS NEVER INTENDED BY THE EPA TO BE USED AS SUCH

Noise Quality

The unit of noise measurement is the decibel (dB), which measures the energy of the noise. Because the human ear is not uniformly sensitive to all noise frequencies the "A" weighting frequency scale (dBA) was devised to correspond with the ear’s sensitivity.  The A-weighted frequency scale uses specific weighting of a sound pressure level for the purpose of determining the human response to sound and the resulting unit of measure is the dBA. Because noise levels can vary over a given time period, they are further quantified using the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) and Day-Night Level (Ldn).  The Leq is an average of the time-varying sound energy for a specified time period. The Ldn is an average of the time- varying sound energy for one 24-hour period, with a 10 dB addition to the sound energy for the time period of 22:00 to 07:00 hours. If the sound energy does not vary with time, the Ldn level will be equal to the Leq level plus 6.4 dB.

The EPA has identified an Ldn of 55 dBA as being the maximum sound level that will not adversely affect public health and welfare by interfering with speech or other activities in outdoor areas, with an adequate margin of safety (EPA, 1971). Commission regulations (18 CFR § 157.206(b)(5)(i)) require that the noise attributable to any new compressor engine or modification not exceed an Ldn of 55 dBA at the nearest noise sensitive area (NSA) (i.e., schools, hospitals, or residences) unless such NSAs are established after facility construction. In addition, the Commission typically requires that the noise attributable to the full load operation of a compressor station, including the compressor unit addition, should not exceed the previously existing noise levels produced by the compressor station at any nearby NSA that are above an Ldn of 55 dBA.

The 55 dBA level was never meant by EPA to be used as standard

People who live near gas compressor sites have been complaining for years about the compressor and other noises coming from these gas compressor stations.  In a series of blogs, we will try to explain to the public how the noise studies done by the gas pipeline owners are biased, performed by entities that are either owned by the owners of the pipelines or are doing a lot of business with the pipeline owners (conflict of interest).  Furthermore, we will show that none of these “studies” are peered reviewed, the calibrations of the instruments are never checked by third parties and these “studies” are basically one-day or so noise measurements that are very frequently manipulated by the people who do these studies so that the pipeline owner is found to be in compliance with the noise “standard”.  In many cases, one company called Hoover & Keith, has reported the insect noises as a nuisance; they basically compared the high frequency noises of the compressors that are very annoying to the pleasant “noise” of the insects.  This tells you something about these people.

In all of their submittals to the FERC, these great scientists make the assertions that the 55 dBA sound pressure is a standard that was developed by EPA in the 1974 document referenced below.  This cannot be further from the truth, as the EPA wrote that the 55 dBA level is not a standard.  Here are some quotes from the EPA document:

“It should be born in mind that this Document is published to present information required by the Noise Control Act, Section 5(a)(2), and that its contents do not constitute Agency regulations or standards.  Its statistical generalizations should not be applied to a particular individual.  Moreover, States and localities will approach this information according to their individual needs and situations.”

“Undue interference with activity and annoyance will not occur if outdoor levels are maintained at an energy equivalent of 55 dB and indoor levels at 45 dB.”

“An Leq(24) of 70 dB is therefore identified for intermittent noise in order to prevent hearing damage”.  

This basically means that in general, the noise pressure must be maintained at less than 70 dB over a period of 24 hours to prevent hearing loss.  Now, if someone is exposed to great noise over an 8-hr period during his/her work, then the rest of his noise exposure must be lowered so that he does not lose his hearing.  This situation was also addressed in the EPA document as follows:

“As in the industrial situation, eight hours is generally the amount of time spent in educational facilities.  Therefore an Leq(8) of 75 dB is considered appropriate to protect against hearing loss, so long as the exposure over the remaining 16 hours is low enough to result in a negligible contribution to the 24-hour average.”

SOURCE: “Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect  Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety”, March 1974, US EPA, Office of Noise Abatement and Control

18 CFR § 157.206(b)(5)(i))

(5)

(i) The noise attributable to any new compressor station, compression added to an existing station, or any modification, upgrade or update of an existing station, must not exceed a day-night level (Ldn) of 55 dBA at any pre-existing noise-sensitive area (such as schools, hospitals, or residences).

(ii) A compressor facility installed under this section must be designed to meet the following noise emissions criteria. For each new compressor station facility, and for each addition or modification to an existing compression station, the blanket certificate holder must file a noise survey with the Secretary within 60 days of placing the facility in service.

(A) If noise emitted from a new compressor facility operating at full load exceeds an Ldn of 55 dBA at any noise-sensitive area (NSA), or if an addition or modification to an existing compressor station operating at full load at or below an Ldn of 55 dBA at NSAs causes overall noise attributable to the station to exceed an Ldn of 55 dBA at an NSA, the blanket certificate holder must come into compliance with an Ldn of 55 dBA at NSAs within 1 year of placing the facility in service.

(B) If an addition or modification to an existing compressor station operating at full load above an Ldn of 55 dBA at NSAs causes overall noise attributable to the station to increase at an NSA, the blanket certificate holder must act within 1 year of placing the added or modified facility in service to reduce noise at NSAs to the level that existed prior to the addition or modification.

(C) If the initial noise survey demonstrates a need to take action to mitigate noise, within 60 days of completing such action, the blanket certificate holder must file a subsequent noise survey with the Secretary demonstrating that each new compressor station facility, and each addition or modification to an existing compressor station, complies with the noise level limits.

(iii) Any horizontal directional drilling or drilling of wells which will occur between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. local time must be conducted with the goal of keeping the perceived noise from the drilling at any pre-existing noise-sensitive area (such as schools, hospitals, or residences) at or below a night level (Ln) of 55 dBA.

DEFINITIONS

dBA   denotes an “A” -weighted sound level. The ear has differing sensitivities to different frequencies of sound, and the “A”-weighting scale was developed to correspond to the relative frequency response of the human ear. The ear is relatively insensitive to low frequency sounds compared to mid-and high frequencies as is refl ected in the “A”-weighting corrections shown below. The “A” -weighted sound level has proven to be a good indicator of community annoyance to noise and is therefore often used in design criteria and community noise standards.

Leq   is the energy sound level. It is the sound level of a steady-state sound that has the same (”equivalent”) total energy as the time-varying sound measured over a specifi c period of time. Leq is a single-valued level that expresses the time-averaged total energy of a varying or fl uctuating sound level and is an “A”- weighted level.

Ldn   is the day-night sound level, which is calculated from the following equation:

Ldn = 10 Log 1/24 [15x10^(Ld/10) +9x10^((Ln+10)/10) ]

Where       Ld is the Leq for the 15 daytime hours between 7 A.M. and 10 P.M. and Ln is the Leq for the 9 nighttime hours between 10 P.M. and 7 A.M. This equation adds a 10 dB penalty to the nighttime Leq to account for the fact that noise is more disturbing at residential locations during the typically quieter nighttime hours. Most federal agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency, Housing and Urban Development and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission use the Ldn measure for their criteria; in general, an Ldn of 55 dBA is considered acceptable for residential areas.

Acoustic Efficiency or Conversion Efficiency: The ratio of acoustic power to mechanical input power, expressed as an efficiency of conversion of mechanical to acoustical power.

A-Weighting Scale: The frequency weighting scale for noise measurements which weights the frequencies near the human hearing response frequency range most heavily.

Cutoff Frequency: The lowest frequency (first acoustic mode) for sound wave propagation across the diameter of the pipe within the fluid. Cross modes cannot propagate below the fundamental first mode of the cutoff frequency. The cutoff frequency is defined as the speed of sound in the gas/fluid within the pipe divided by the product of 2*pipe diameter, f = SOS / (2D).  Compressible gas flows tend to have much “louder” piping systems, due to the high potential for broadband noise and the relatively good conversion of mechanical to acoustic energy.  This relationship between the cutoff frequency and the ring frequency effectively defines a frequency band of high noise transmission, where the transmission loss through the pipe will be relatively low.

Decibel: A measure of the amount of energy in an acoustic signal, expressed as a ratio compared to a certain baseline reference measurement depending on the use of the A, B, C, or D decibel scale. The mathematical formulation of the dB is as the common logarithm of the ratio of the measured sound pressure to that of a signal that is barely audible.

Pure Tone: A sound for which a waveform can be represented by a sine wave at a single frequency.

Radiation Ratio: The amount of energy radiated in the form of pressure fluctuations based on the amount of pipe wall acceleration for a given pipe

Ring Frequency: The frequency for which the longitudinal wavelength is equal to the pipe circumference, to define the upper limit for noise transmission within the pipe material. This is the upper limit for transmission of sound through the pipe wall, beyond which transmission is minimal. The ring frequency is defined as the speed of sound in the pipe wall material divided by the product of *pipe diameter, , fr = cL / (D).

Sound Intensity: The continuous flow of power carried by a sound wave through an area in space, commonly expressed in Watts per square meter. Sound intensity is directional associated with the direction of the sound wave compared to the plane in space.

Sound Power: The amount of power radiated by a sound source or the energy radiated per unit time by a sound source, typically defined by a spherical boundary surrounding the sound source.

Sound Power Level (Lw, dB): A decibel expression of the sound power. The reference sound power is 10-12 watts.

Sound Pressure: The variation in pressure above and below atmospheric pressure, normally expressed as root-mean-square (rms) value of the time averaged fluctuations. This is a direct measure of the pressure variation.

Sound Pressure Level (Lp, dB): A decibel expression of the sound pressure. The reference sound pressure is 2 x10-5 Pa, which is the threshold of human hearing at 1,000 Hz.

Transmission Loss: The difference between the incident and transmitted sound power levels for the candidate noise control option. Similar to Insertion Loss, but in some cases introduction of the noise control option actually increases the sound power incident on itself.

PIPELINE RUPTURE DURING MAINTENANCE IN ISRAEL CAUSES MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE AND INJURES DOZENS OF PEOPLE ON DECEMBER 4, 2014

PIPELINE RUPTURE DURING MAINTENANCE IN ISRAEL CAUSES MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE AND INJURES DOZENS OF PEOPLE ON DECEMBER 4, 2014

Southern oil spill one of Israel’s worst eco disasters

Over 80 people on both sides of Israel-Jordan border treated for respiratory problems after maintenance workers damage pipeline.  Our gut feeling tell us that this was a sabotage, but we will wait for the investigation results.

By Avi Lewis December 4, 2014, 11:36 am 2

Major oil spill north of Eilat leads to "extensive contamination" as a result of a damage to the Trans-Israel pipeline December 4, 2014. (photo credit: Courtesy Eilat Fire Department)

Over 80 people were treated for respiratory problems on both sides of the Israel-Jordan border on Thursday morning, amid warnings of an ecological disaster following a major oil spill overnight that flooded the highway leading into Eilat. The vast majority of those affected were in Jordan.

Traffic heading to the southern resort city was restarted Thursday morning after several hours of highway closure. The leak, near the village of Be’er Ora, was caused due to damage to the Trans-Israel pipeline, a major oil conduit between the Mediterranean and Red seas that runs from Eilat to Ashkelon.

In Jordan more than 80 people were hospitalized, including 30 workers at Aqaba’s King Hussein International Airport. The city’s residents were ordered to remain indoors, Jordanian media reported.

On the Israeli side, at least three people were treated by paramedics after they inhaled poisonous gases.

A preliminary investigation indicated that the spill was caused after the pipeline was struck accidentally during maintenance work.

Firefighters and environmental groups scrambled to the scene in an attempt to seal the puncture in the pipeline and prevent further contamination, which was described as “considerable” by Guy Samet, the director of the southern region in the Environmental Protection Ministry.

“This is one of the largest [environmental] events in the history of the country,” Samet told Channel 10.

Major oil spill north of Eilat leads to “extensive contamination” as a result of a damage to the Trans-Israel pipeline December 4, 2014. (photo credit: Courtesy Eilat Fire Department)

“We’re talking about thousands of gallons of crude oil, which will endanger local wildlife and the surrounding nature reserve,” he said, adding that rehabilitation could take “years.”

The spill was “a couple of kilometers long”, according to an Environmental Protection Ministry spokeswoman who was unable to give more specific information.

Be’er Ora sits in the sparsely populated Arava region, 20 kilometers north of Eilat, beside multiple nature reserves that are home to indigenous flora and fauna, including rare acacia trees and over 280 deer, said Doron Nissim, director of the Nature and Parks Authority’s Eilat chapter.

“From what we currently know, there is extensive pollution. Tomorrow we will perform an analysis of the damage and then we’ll have a clearer picture,” he told the news site Ynet on Wednesday night.

Route 90, Israel’s longest road and the main route of access into the resort town, was affected in both directions between Ketura and Eilat, roughly 50 kilometers (30 miles) apart.

Police rerouted traffic overnight to route 12, which skirts along the Egyptian border.

Published on

Thursday, December 04, 2014

by

Common Dreams

'Worst' Ecological Disaster in Israel's History as Pipeline Spews Oil

Near the Jordanian border, massive oil spill near nature reserve has forced dozens of people to area hospitals

by

Jon Queally, staff writer

Oil spill at Evrona Nature Reserve in eastern Isreal near the border with Jordan. (Photo: Environmental Protection Ministry)

Black rivers of crude oil could be seen flowing across the desert sands in the eastern part of Israel Thursday morning and people on both sides of the border with neighboring Jordan were rushed to hospitals after inhaling toxic fumes from the massive spill that occurred after a major pipeline ruptured, possibly by a maintenace crew.

Some outlets are reporting this as potentially "the worst" environmental disaster in the nation's history as millions of gallons have gushed from the broken pipeline directly into one of the nation's prized nature reserves.

“Crude oil flowed throughout the reserve, causing serious damage ... to flora and fauna,” Guy Samet, a spokesperson for Israel's Environmental Protection Ministry, told local news outlets on Thursday. Samet estimated the amount of oil to be in the "millions of litres," though complete and accurate estimates have not been verified by independent sources.

“Rehabilitation will take months, if not years," Samet continued. "This is one of the State of Israel’s gravest pollution events. We are still having trouble gauging the full extent of the contamination.”

Haaretz reports:

Millions of liters of crude oil gushed out of a breached pipeline in southern Israel early Thursday, causing heavy damage to one of the area's important nature reserves.

Firefighters, police, Environmental Protection Ministry officials and oil pipeline maintenance teams were dispatched to the site of the spill, and managed to curtail the flow after about two hours.

The breach occurred during work on the pipeline that was part of preparations for the planned international airport under construction in Timna, in southern Israel. Once the leak was located, pipeline company officials shut the valves – but not in time to prevent the spillage of millions of liters of oil.

The pipeline, which links Eilat to the port city of Ashkelon, opened in the 1960s to facilitate the movement of Iranian oil from the Persian Gulf to European markets but since the rupture in Israeli-Iranian relations in 1979 has mostly been used to move oil and oil products from Eilat to different parts of Israel.

The Times of Israel adds:

The leak, near the village of Be’er Ora, was caused due to damage to the Trans-Israel pipeline, a major oil conduit between the Mediterranean and Red seas that runs from Eilat to Ashkelon.

In Jordan more than 80 people were hospitalized, including 30 workers at Aqaba’s King Hussein International Airport. The city’s residents were ordered to remain indoors, Jordanian media reported.

On the Israeli side, at least three people were treated by paramedics after they inhaled poisonous gases.

A preliminary investigation indicated that the spill was caused after the pipeline was struck accidentally during maintenance work.

___________________________________________________________________

December 5, 2014

Chemical Spill Causes Evacuation In Yonkers

A chemical spill shut down 1 Odell Plaza in Yonkers Friday morning causing tenants have to evacuate the office building. Photo Credit: Dina Grace Zoe Sciortino

This story has been updated

YONKERS, N.Y. – The Yonkers Fire and Police Departments worked together to evacuate and mitigate a chemical spill at 1 Odell Plaza in Yonkers on Friday morning.

An employee at the business park, located off of Executive Boulevard, reported that he inadvertently mixed two chemicals that caused some noxious fumes, police said.

Emergency personnel arrived on the scene around 9:30 a.m. and determined that the fumes may have entered the ventilations system. 

Businesses at 1 Odell Plaza, including Equinox Fitness and North American Wireless, as well as those in the adjacent building were evacuated as a precautionary measure. A day care center was also evacuated though no children were in the building at the time of the incident. 

Deputy Fire Chief Thomas Fitzpatrick said as of noon the Yonkers Fire Department has the spill “contained, neutralized and collected in a prescribed drum.”

One person brought themself to the hospital, but didn't have symptoms at the time, officials said.

The Yonkers Fire Department is currently checking the air quality in the HVAC systems before they let anyone else back in the building. A cleanup company from is arriving from Long Island shortly to cleansed the building.

Those with concerns or questions about the incident can contact the Yonkers Police Department at (914) 377-7900.

http://yonkers.dailyvoice.com/police-fire/chemical-spill-causes-evacuation-yonkers

HOMEOWNERS ACCUSE HARTFORD OF RACKETEERING FOR ALTERING ENGINEERING REPORTS TO UNDERPAY FLOOD DAMAGE CLAIMS DURING SS SANDY

HOMEOWNERS ACCUSE Hartford OF Racketeering FOR ALTERING ENGINEERING REPORTS TO UNDERPAY FLOOD DAMAGE CLAIMS DURING SS SANDY

We have reported in this blog several times about the allegations of altering engineering reports by insurers and/or insurers’ engineering contractors to underpay or deny flood damage claims.  We do concur with these allegations, as the WYO insurers always tend to underpay the claims, unless the homeowner or policyholder can substantiate every single item and provide every single receipt.  When the homeowners cannot provide receipts, then all the expenses are denied.  The inspection company US Forensic has been caught red-handed in altering reports to suit their clients, i.e., the insurers.  Federal judges have recently issued stern warnings regarding such practices and ordered the disclosure of all draft of reports.  Here is the recent blog:

NEW YORK JUDGE ORDERS THE DISCLOSURE OF ALL DRAFTS, REDLINES, ETC REPORTS IN RE SUPER STORM SANDY LITIGATION

http://metroforensics.blogspot.com/2014/11/new-york-judge-orders-disclosure-of-all.html

Now, a class action lawsuit has been filed against one insurer, its engineering contractor and the lawfirm that have been handling the defense of the flood damage lawsuit.

A couple claiming damage from Hurricane Sandy sued a Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. (HIG) unit, an engineering firm and a law firm, accusing the group of engaging in racketeering by scheming to use fraudulent accident reports to deny claims.

Homeowners Stephen and Sarise Dweck, who had claimed the Hartford Insurance Co. of the Midwest had breached its flood insurance contract with them, said in a fresh complaint yesterday in Brooklyn federal court that the unit's conduct also constituted racketeering because denial of coverage was based on a version of an engineering report that had been altered to remove a description of widespread flood damage.

HiRise Engineering PC altered the report, and Nielsen Carter & Treas LLC, a law firm that represents flood insurance providers, either directed or participated in the scheme, while Hartford “knew or should have known” about the fraud and “used the falsified report as an excuse” to deny benefits, the Dwecks alleged in the new complaint in their November lawsuit. Others who participated in the claims process are also named as defendants.

The Hartford unit is the second insurer that provides coverage on behalf of the government’s National Flood Insurance Program to be accused of relying on fraudulently altered engineering reports to reject or underpay claims after the storm. 

Long Beach

Earlier, owners of a storm-battered home in Long Beach, New York, filed a racketeering suit against Wright National Flood Insurance Co. alleging that it, too, denied claims based on doctored reports.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown, who discussed the discrepancy between reports for the home in a Nov. 7 ruling, said he feared the practice was “widespread” and ordered that all reports be disclosed to policyholders.

Sandy, the largest Atlantic hurricane on record, caused about $60 billion in damage in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut when it struck in October 2012. It killed more than 100 people in the U.S. and triggered the worst flooding in the more than 100-year history of the New York City subway system.

The Dwecks are among about 1,000 policyholders whose disputes with insurers over Sandy claims are pending in federal court in Brooklyn and Central Islip, New York. 

Coney Island

In a letter this week to the judge, lawyer J. Steve Mostyn described the experience of the Dwecks after their home in the Manhattan Beach area of Brooklyn near Coney Island was devastated by the storm. He filed letters by another attorney for the Dwecks, Mitchell Shpelfogel, and exhibits to support the argument that a damage report was changed to eliminate flooding as the cause.

After the Dwecks notified Hartford about the changed report, a third was submitted by another company that also reported lack of flood damage from the storm, according to the complaint.

Thomas Hambrick, a spokesman for Connecticut-based Hartford, said the company denies the allegations in the suit and expects to seek its dismissal. He said Hartford asked for a new report by an independent engineer when it was notified of the problem.

Sandy “was a devastating storm for many individuals and small businesses, and our focus as a company is on helping customers recover following a loss,” he said in a statement. 

Other Defendant

A HiRise representative in Uniondale, New York, didn’t respond to a message left at the company’s office. William T. Treas, of Metairie, Louisiana-based Nielsen Carter, who is also named as a defendant, didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment on the case.

The Hartford unit and Wright participate in a program run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through which private insurers are allowed to provide flood coverage underwritten by the government. The government, which is ultimately responsible for paying for damage, also shoulders expenses for litigating against policyholders, according to the complaint.

Because of the way incentives are structured under the program, insurers can profit by incurring additional expenses through claims-handling, the Dwecks alleged. The law firm and engineering firm benefited from additional business, the couple said. 

‘Took Advantage’

The firms “took advantage of the incentives of the reimbursement program to prolong litigation in order to charge and collect unnecessary claims handling expenses and attorney’s fees,” the Dwecks said in the complaint.

The Hartford unit also participated in the scheme in order to curb generous payouts that might trigger an audit by FEMA, according to the complaint. If audited and found to have overpaid, the insurer may have face financial penalties, according to the complaint.

Lawmakers including U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer of New York and U.S. Senators Robert Menendez and Cory Booker of New Jersey have been pushing FEMA to address potential manipulation in flood insurance claims handling. Gillibrand and Schumer have also asked the U.S. Government Accountability Office to audit FEMA’s litigation expenses.

A spokesman for FEMA, Rafael Lemaitre, said in an e-mail that the agency “will be taking steps to address the Senate delegation’s concerns” and “will do whatever it can within its authorities to have peer reviews made available to policyholders,” referring to versions of engineering reports.

Earlier, the agency asked the New York federal magistrate judge to reconsider his demand that reports be disclosed, saying it was burdensome and “unjustly applies to the conduct of one engineering firm to suggest systemic misconduct by all engineering firms.”

The case is Dweck v. Hartford Insurance Co. of the Midwest, 1:14-cv-06920, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).

CRAIG FUGATE (FEMA ADMINISTRATOR) URGES PRIVATE INSURERS TO RELEASE THE DRAFT ENGINEERING REPORTS TO INVESTIGATE UNDERPAYMENT OF FLOOD DAMAGE CLAIMS

CRAIG FUGATE (FEMA ADMINISTRATOR) URGES PRIVATE INSURERS TO RELEASE THE DRAFT ENGINEERING REPORTS TO INVESTIGATE UNDERPAYMENT OF FLOOD DAMAGE CLAIMS

N.J. Sen. Menendez Urges FEMA to Reform NFIP’s Claims Process

Following up on issues that were raised at the July 30 hearing on post-Sandy flood insurance claims, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) sent a letter on Wednesday, Sept. 10, to Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Administrator Craig Fugate, urging him to implement reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP) claims process.

“We have, in my view, a process and a standard that is stacked against policyholders,” Menendez told Fugate at the July 30 hearing before the U.S. Senate Banking Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation and Community Development.

“I don’t want anybody getting a dime they shouldn’t get; at the same token, I don’t want a policyholder who’s done the right thing for 10, 20, 30 years, in some cases, getting low-balled because the process is stacked against them,” Menendez said at the July hearing.

In his follow-up letter Wednesday, Menendez urged Fugate to implement reforms to address what the senator described as “serious shortcomings” in the NFIP claims process revealed during the July hearing.

Menendez laid out three specific reforms in the letter that he said FEMA should implement immediately:

• Raise penalties for insurance companies that lowball homeowners to level the playing field and bring fairness to the system;
• Reopen the 270 Sandy claims that FEMA dismissed solely because the policyholder missed an arbitrary FEMA deadline; and
• Create an independent and robust flood insurance advocate to help homeowners navigate the claims and appeals process.
“Taken together, these three reforms will go a long way towards making the claims process and the NFIP in general stronger, fairer and more effective,” Menendez wrote to Fugate. “I was encouraged by your commitment to address these issues administratively and stand ready to introduce legislation if you determine these actions are beyond your administrative capacity.”
Menendez said the July hearing exposed several “glaring problems,” which tilt the federal flood insurance claims process against the homeowner. According to Menendez:
• The system does not create meaningful penalties for insurance servicing companies that lowball homeowners, while imposing strong, tangible penalties for overpayments
• A double-standard exists in the appeals process in which homeowners are forced to adhere to strict arbitrary deadlines imposed by FEMA while FEMA admittedly failed to follow their own guidelines
• The failure to establish a homeowner flood insurance advocate that was authorized in the Menendez “Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act” has left homeowners in the dark, with no entity to help them through the claim or appeal process at a time when they are under extreme personal distress
• FEMA lacks the capabilities to provide proper oversight and performance checks on the system in order to identify and address potential problems.
“We have the ultimate hypocrisy and double-standard here,” the senator told Fugate at the hearing. “You don’t have to live under the deadline and there’s no consequence to the agency for not meeting the deadline, but there is a consequence for the policyholder for not meeting the deadline. That’s when people think poorly of their government.”
In response, Fugate announced at the July hearing that he had asked the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General to investigate issues with the claims process and said he would explore administrative remedies.

The following is the full text of the letter to FEMA Administrator Fugate:
September 10, 2014
The Honorable Craig Fugate
Administrator
Federal Emergency Management Agency
500 C Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20410

Dear Administrator Fugate:

I am writing to urge you to immediately undertake reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP) claim process in order to address the serious shortcomings revealed at the July 30, 2014, Banking Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development hearing that I chaired and you testified before. I appreciated the opportunity to discuss ways to make the claims process fairer and simpler for policyholders, and I was encouraged by your willingness to address the issues facing thousands of New Jersey families.

One of the most common complaints New Jerseyans have had about the flood insurance claims process after Superstorm Sandy is that insurance payouts are far below the cost to rebuild damaged homes. The incentive and penalty structure for Write Your Own (WYO) insurance companies that service policies and process claims is at the root of these complaints. As I noted at the hearing, if FEMA determines in one of its audits that a WYO has made an overpayment, the WYO is financially responsible for every dollar they overpaid. In contrast, if a FEMA audit uncovers a WYO underpaying a claimant, the WYO is not financially penalized and only faces increased scrutiny if it exhibits a consistent pattern of improper payments. While in theory a WYO could be expelled from the program for repeated failures, in reality such a step has never been taken in the history of the NFIP and therefore lacks the teeth necessary to properly deter underpayments.
This unbalanced treatment of over and underpayments directly leads to WYOs “…err[ing] on the side of conservativism (sic)” when questions arise in the claims process, according to WYO Representative Don Griffin’s testimony. This violates both the spirit and letter of the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act [P.L. 111-204], which requires government agencies to treat both over and underpayments equally. In order to correct this imbalance, I am asking that you increase WYO penalties for underpayments so they are commensurate with penalties for overpayments. This will level the playing field and ensure that WYOs will have the incentive to take strong steps to avoid lowballing policyholders.

This current imbalanced penalty structure has led to a large number of underpayments, which in turn caused a high volume of appeals filed to FEMA. This high volume prevented FEMA from complying with the 2004 Flood Insurance Reform Act, which required the agency to adjudicate appeals within 90 days. With an 88-day median response time, FEMA barely responded to half of the appeals within the deadline. While this fact alone is unacceptable, even more egregious is the fact that FEMA has summarily dismissed 270 claims because the policyholder missed one of FEMA’s imposed deadlines. This seems to be a double standard and must be addressed. I urge you to reopen these 270 cases and give the policyholders fair consideration of their claim. If FEMA cannot comply with its own deadlines, it should not disenfranchise policyholders for failing to meet FEMA-imposed deadlines.

The common thread that ties together most NFIP complaints involves policyholders feeling overwhelmed during the claims process and having no place to seek independent advice and assistance. As you know, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act (HFIAA) [P.L. 113-89] establishes a “flood insurance advocate,” which would be responsible with educating and assisting policyholders in all aspects. I was very encouraged by your testimony at the July 30th hearing, specifically when you stated that you wanted the “office to be the voice of the consumers and be the focal point for consumers for all flood insurance issues and not limited to just maps.” I share your belief that the flood advocate must act independently and be a true advocate for the consumer. That was my intent when I drafted HFIAA and I look forward to working with you to ensure this intent is fully carried out.

Taken together, these three reforms will go a long way towards making the claims process and the NFIP in general stronger, fairer and more effective. I was encouraged by your commitment to address these issues administratively and stand ready to introduce legislation if you determine these actions are beyond your administrative capacity. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
ROBERT MENENDEZ
United States Senator