dojN002648.xml

dojN002648.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2002-01-17

January 17, 2002

Mr. Kenneth Zwick, Director
Office of Management of Programs
U.S. Department of Justice
Main Building, Room 3140
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Re: September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, Interim Final Rule with Request for Comments

Dear Sir:

My wife, daughter and I had the honor of having our son with us for almost thirty-four
years.
His wife shared that honor for the last six years. Now we all have the equal horror of
grieving for
a wonderful and respectful young man who was killed through no fault of his own, but because
he went
to work the morning of September 11 on the floor of the North Building of the World Trade
Center.

What we do not have is equal recognition under the law for the loss that we all equally have. My
wife,
gave birth to him. We both raised him by providing all the guidance, friendship,
substance and
mostly love that a child could possibly need and want. After he married, we continued to speak
to him
several times a week and see both our son and daughter-in-law frequently. His older sister,
, was
one of his best friends. In recent years they lived over one hundred miles apart, but were always
together in their hearts. They spoke to each other a few times a week.

We thank you for the opportunity to comment today on the Interim Final Rule. Our comments
are as
follows:

1 The Regulations and Guidance Should Clearly State that Parents Whose Children Were
Killed
on September 11th Are Presumed to be Eligible for Distribution of all Compensation Awards.
Our grief for our son is as great as that of anyone's and what we ask is that this fact be
recognized under the law. Our lives have turned into a living hell and we must receive equal
compensation for this insurmountable loss and unending pain and suffering that we are
struggling to endure.

New York State law recognizes that parents are to share in the distribution of any damages
awarded in a wrongful death action. Under EPTL Section 5-4.4, parents of children without
children of their own are specifically named distributes, even if they are not recognized
by the state as beneficiaries of the estate. The final regulations and guidance to be issued
under the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 should clearly state the same.
To do otherwise will create undo confusion and pain on the part of families who have
already lost far too much.

If the goal of the September 11th Fund is to prevent families from feeling that their only
option is to sue, The Fund should clearly provide that other options exist and that compensation
to all Family members, not just spouses will result. Ambiguity and vagueness is not helpful
in this case, but is instead counterproductive for both the families and the government.
To neglect to provided the clarity requested here will result in excessive pain and suffering
clearly not envisioned when Congress passed Title IV (Victim Compensation) of the Air
Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (the"Act").

Finally, the regulations wisely anticipate that disputes among family members may ensue. As
Special Master to the Fund, you have a unique opportunity to minimize the number of such disputes
by providing as much clarity as possible up front so there are as few disputes as possible within
the families over the law's intent. This is an incredibly difficult time for the thousand of
families effected by the horrific events of September 11th. We urge you not to add to this
difficulty by creating conflicting opinions over the intent of your own words and actions.

2 To Deduct Life Insurance and Pension Payments From the Compensation Awards is
Counter To Public Policy and is Grossly Unfair to Families Whose Loved Ones Took Responsible
Steps to Plan For Their Families' Futures

It is not equitable that insurance and pensions be deducted from the total compensation. Simply
because some of the victims had the foresight to provide for their families should not be held
against them. This is why in most civil litigation life insurance is not deducted from damage awards.
Nor should the fact that some had pensions be held against them. If you want to deduct the pensions
that they earned, then the total of the pensions should be included in the gross compensation as part
of their earning power over their expected term of employment. The liability for wrongful death should
be measure by total potential earnings and pain and suffering to both the victims and their families.

Should the regulations not be able to be modified due to the language of the Act itself requiring that
compensation must be reduced by collateral sources (Section 405 (b)(6), perhaps an alternative would be
to reduce the compensation by a percentage of the total amount of the collateral sources. Nothing
in the Act Specifies that the reduction must be dollar for dollar.


3 The Claim Form Should Include a Provision Requiring Disclosure of, and to, all Living Immediate
Family Members In Order to Ensure a Knowing and Effective Waiver of Suit is made.


We are all at a significant disadvantage in that no claim form was provided in the Interim Final Rule to
review. Thus, in the absence of such a draft form, one can only speculate what will be asked of the
personal representative when making a claim. At minimum, the form should require the personal
representative to disclose the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all living immediate family members.
For the purpose of this regulation, immediate family members should be defined to include spouses,
children, parents and siblings. In addition, the regulations should also require that effective notice
of the filing of a claim (within a reasonable period of time) be given to all such relatives giving them
the opportunity to opt in or out. To do otherwise would unfairly affect other relative's rights to sue by
risking an unknowing waiver of the right to sue. No one should be bound by the actions of others of which
they were not made aware.

4 A clear definition of "dependent" as used in the section "presumed non-economic loss" should be given.

At a recent meeting attended y Special Master Feinberg the definition of dependent was given to be not
limited to that used by the Internal Revenue Service, but intended to include the relatives to who support
was or was intended to be given by the victims. In our case this should include the support given to my
wife when she was ill with cancer and the support given to me when I had by-pass surgery. In both cases
our son was there with us constantly, being of both physical and emotional help to us. Our daughter recently
told us of a conversation that she had with our son, that if we would be in need of long-term care they
would both contribute to it. These are but a few cases of what should be included in the definition of
dependent.

The people of this great country have put in your hands the means that will help us begin to shape our future.
We urge you to write the regulations so that this may come about.

We appreciate your work on this project and hope you will take our thoughts into consideration. If we can be of
any further assistance, or provide any additional information, please feel free to call us at the following
phone number .

Thank you,

Individual Comment
Mourve Township, NJ

2002-01-17