Claim Number: 

Claimant: 

Type of Claim: 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: 

BACKGROUND 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION 

N12062-0001 

Douglas E. Renard 

Real or Personal Property 

$22,230.00 

On August 29, 2012, Hurricane Isaac made landfall over various states, including Louisiana, for 

over 60 hours causing substantial flooding and multiple waterway closures.· Sector New Orleans 

opened FPN N12062. Initial assessments discovered over 90 actual and potential pollution and 

hazardous material incidents. 

On September 2, 2012, Sector New Orleans stood up a Unified Command with EPA, LOSCO, 

and LDEQ, focusing on pollution and hazardous material incidents. In collaboration with Oil 

Spill Responders (OSROs) and partners from the Unified Command, the operations section 

responded and mitigated several incidents, while assessing potential and /or actual pollution 

incidents. Operations were conducted on a daily basis. 

The Unified Command with the assistance of the NOAA SSC continuously assessed the impact 

of pollution on the Louisiana shoreline. 1 

CLAIM 

On September 25, 2012, Mr. Douglas Renard (Claimant) submitted documentation to the NPFC 

for removal costs ($2,500.00), real or personal property ($19,480.00), and lost subsistence use of 

natural resources ($250.00) for a total sum certain of $22,230. All of these losses are claimed to 

have resulted from oil spilled during Hurricane Isaac. 

The Claimant, . During Hurricane Isaac the 

Claimant's property was damaged by the floodwaters. The claimant indicates that the facility 

responsible for the claimed damages was Edward Oil Company (Responsible Party or RP). The 

United States Coast Guard Marine Safety Laboratory Oil Sample Analysis Report, dated 

September 14, 2012, concludes that the samples taken from the scene "are not derived from 

[MC252 Deepwater Horizon] DWH" oil, and additionally they "do not contain enough 

petroleum oil for conclusive comparison to the source sample" obtained from Edward Oil 

Company. 2 

Claimant has not communicated with the RP nor has the Claimant submitted their claim to the 

RP.3 

1 FPN Nl2062, SITREP-POL ONE, ACTUAL, HURRICANE ISAAC RESPONSE 2 See, Oil Spill Analysis Report, Sector New Orleans, Case/Activity Number 4438391, Marine Safety Laboratory 

Case Number 12-237, dated September 14, 2012. 3 See, Optional OSLTF Claim Form, line item# 4-5. 

-------------- ---- -~-- ---- ----- -- ----------- --- - 2----- -- --- --- -- ------ ---- --- -- ----- -- -- ------ -- -- ----- - ------- --- - --- - -
Claimant's sum certain of $22,230.00 is based on the following alleged losses from Hurricane 

Isaac and the subsequent alleged contamination by Edward Oil Company. Claimant did not 

provide an outline of his costs. However, below is a summary of the Claimant's alleged 

damages4 •. 

Description Costs Comments 

Grass Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Trees Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Banana Trees Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Palm Trees Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Flowering Bushes Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Wood Storage Building Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Metal Out-Buildings Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Pool Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Hot Tub Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Concrete Driveway Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Tiled Patio Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Concrete Pool Area Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Privacy Fence Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Vegetable Garden Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Pond Claimant did not provide a breakdown of cost. 

Total Loss: 

Total Claimed: $22,230.00 

APPLICABLE LAW: 

General Claim Requirements 

"Oil" is defined in relevant part, at 33 USC § 2701(23), to mean "oil of any kind or in any form, 

including petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged 

spoil". 

Under 33 USC §2713(b)(2) and 33 CFR 136.103(d) no claim against the OSLTF may be 

approved or certified for payment during the pendency of an action by the claimant in court to 

recover the same costs that are the subject of the claim. See also, 33 USC §2713(c) and 33 CFR 

136.103(c)(2) [claimant election]. 

33 U.S.C. §2713(d) provides that "If a claim is presented in accordance with this section, 

including a claim for interim, short-term damages representing less than the full amount of 

damages to which the claimant ultimately may be entitled, and full and adequate compensation is 

unavailable, a claim for the uncompensated damages and removal costs may be presented to the 

Fund." 

4 See, Claimant's handwritten narrative on the back of the OSLTF Claim Form. 

--------------- -· ----- --- -- ------- -~-·- -----3- ------ ------------------- --- - --~·------- --- ---------------- --- - ---- --- --
Under 33 CFR 136.lOS(a) and 136.105(e)(6), the claimant bears the burden of providing to the 

NPFC, all evidence, information, and documentation deemed necessary by the Director, NPFC, 

to support the claim. 

Claims to the OSLTF for damages resulting from oil spills must be: (a) in writing for a sum 

certain (33C.F.R. § 136.lOS(b)), (b) submitted to the NPFC within three years after the date on 

which the injury and its connection with the incident were reasonably discoverable (33 C.F.R. § 

136.101 (a)), and (c) presented first to the RP or guarantor and that claim is denied or not settled 

after 90 days before submission to the NPFC for payment (except as noted in 33 C.F.R. § 

136.103(a)). In addition, under 33 CFR 136, the claimant bears the burden to prove the removal 

actions were reasonable in response to the scope of the oil spill incident, and the NPFC has the 

authority and responsibility to perform a reasonableness determination. 

Subsistence Use Loss Claim Requirements 

The claims regulations (33 C.F.R. §§136.219-223) provide additional requirements for claims for 

loss of natural resources relied upon for food (i.e., subsistence use claims). Specifically, each 

claim for loss of subsistence use of natural resources must: 

1) be for lost subsistence use and submitted by an eligible claimant; 

2) identify and describe the actual subsistence U:se of each specific natural resource for 

which compensation is being claimed; 

3) describe how and to what extent the claimant's subsistence use was affected by injury to 

or loss of each specific natural resource; 

4) describe efforts to mitigate the subsistence use loss; 

5) be based on the reasonable cost to replace the lost subsistence use of natural resources; 

and 

6) be reduced by the amount of all compensation made available to the claimant to 

compensate for the loss, all income which was derived by utilizing the time which 

otherwise would have been used to obtain the subsistence resources, and any avoided 

costs associated with the subsistence activity. 

Removal 

The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF), which is administered by the NPFC, is available, 

pursuant to 33 USC§§ 2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the OSLTF claims adjudication regulations at 

33 CFR Part 136, to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be 

consistent with the National Contingency Plan and uncompensated damages. Removal costs are 

defined as "the costs of removal that are incurred after a discharge of oil has occurred or, in any 

case in which there is a substantial threat of a discharge of oil, the costs to prevent, minimize, or 

mitigate oil pollution from an incident". 

Under 33 CFR 136.203, "a claimant must establish -

---- --- ---- ----- ---------~--- ---- --4-- --- -- ----- ---- --- -
(a) That the actions taken were necessary to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the effects of 

the incident; 

(b) That the removal costs were incurred as a result of these actions; 

( c) That the actions taken were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the 

National Contingency Plan or were directed by the FOSC." 

Under 33 CFR 136.205 "the amount of compensation allowable is the total of uncompensated 

reasonable removal costs of actions taken that were determined by the FOSC to be consistent 

with the National Contingency Plan or were directed by the FOSC. Except in exceptional 

circumstances, removal activities for which costs are being claimed must have been coordinated 

with the FOSC." [Emphasis added]. 

Real or Personal Property 

Under 33 CFR 136.213(a) a claim for injury to, or economic losses resulting from the destruction 

of, real or personal property may be presented only by a claimant either owning or leasing the 

property. 

Under 33 CFR 136.215(a) In addition to the requirements of Subparts A and B of this part, a 

claimant must establish- -

(1) An ownership or leasehold interest in the property; 

(2) That the property was injured or destroyed; 

· (3) The cost ofrepair or replacement; and 

(4) The value of the property both before and after injury occurred. 

Under 33 CFR 136.217(a) the amount of compensation allowable for damaged property is the 

lesser of- · 

(1) Actual or estimated net cost of repairs necessary to restore the property to substantially 

the same condition which existed immediately before the damage; 

(2) The difference between value of the property before and after the damage; or 

(3) The replacement value. 

DETERMINATION OF LOSS: 

Analysis 

The documentation that was provided by the Claimant failed to demonstrate Claimant's loss in 

respect to the alleged damages. The NPFC attempted to contact the Claimant several times by 

telephone however he did not answer. On March 27, 2013, the NPFC sent a letter, 

via certified mail. 5 The letter articulated that certain requirements had to be met in order to 

support his claim.6 Additionally, the letter provided the Claimant with the NPFC Claims 

Adjudication website. 

5 The NPFC has not received the signed certified mail receipt. The letter has not been returned either. 6 See, letter to Claimant from the NPFC, dated March 27, 2013. 

-- --5--- - ------ -- -- --- -- --------- - ·---- ---------- -- --~ ---- -------- -·- ---------
i 

I 

11 

i ~ . 

I 

As of April 29, 2013; the NPFC had not heard from the Claimant Therefore, the NPFC sent Mr. 

an email asking for the supporting documentation that was requested in the previous 

March 27, 2013 letter so that the Fund could move forward with the adjudication process. 

7 In 

the email, the NPFC asked if the Claimant had any questions or concerns. To date, the NPFC 

has not heard from . However, the NPFC Claims Manager did receive an automated 

"Read" receipt to the Claims Manager's electronic in box, indicating that has 

received and read the email.8 · · . · 

· After several attempts to acquire the necessary documentation the NPFC had no choice but to 

move forward with the adjudication of this claim .on its own merits. 

The administrative record provides no ·evidence that this claim has been proper~y presented to the 

RP (Edwards Oil Company). OP A provides that except ilnder certain circumstances, a claim for 

remova.J. costs or damages must be first presented to the responsible party or guarantor. 33 

. U.S.C. § 27l3(a). 

For a claim to be OPA compensable it must show that its damages are directly caused by the oil 

in the water. The documentation that was provided to the Fund lacks the evidence to prove that 

the alleged damages were caused solely by oil as defined by OPA. "Oil" is defined at 33 U.S.C. 

§ 2701(23), to mean "oil of any kind or in ~Y form, including but not limited to, petroleum, fuel 

oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil, but does not include 

petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof, which is specifically listed or designated 

as a hazardous substance under subparagraphs (.A) through (F) of section 101 (14) of the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601) and 

which is subject to the provisions of the Act." 

Removal 

This clalln. lacks substantial documentation to support the.removal portion of Mr. Renard's claim 

as required by OPA.

9 Claimant's docwnentation fails to provide the name of the contractors . 

used to remove the oii as well as invoices and proof of payment to support the $2,500.00 in 

removal costs. The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF), which is administered by the NPFC, 

is available, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. §§ 2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the claims regulations at 33 CFR. 

Part 136, to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be consistent 

with the National Contingency Plan. These costs are not supported or prpven to be 

uncompensated. In addition Claimant has not provided evidence that the removal actions 

allegedly conducted were consistent with the National Contingency Plan. · 

· Real or Personal Property 

. The claimant established that the property was damaged by providing pictures; however it is 

difficult for the NPFC to ascertain whether the damage to the property was caused by the flood 

7 See, Email From the NPFC, dated April 29, 2013 to c-innovati n.c m 

. ,_ 

/ 

8 Read receipt to CIV, fro c-innovation.com, dated April 29, 2013 . . 9 Per the National Contingency Plan, the claimant must evidence that the oil was removed by HAZWOPER trained 

technicians and then disposed of properly by providing the disposal facility's invoice and proof of payment. 

' . I . . _ .. ·-·-._ .. . -.-.. _, ___ .. - . . .... ---·--... -"""' -------.. ____ ., __ ·-................ ---·-----·- --·6-·- -·---.. ·-----------------.... ·~- --..... _ -----..... .. - ------_ .. --.... ---· . -------
waters, oil, or mixed substances. Additionally, the claimant has not established an ownership or 

leasehqld interest in the property, the cost of repair or replacement or the value of the property 

both before and after the injury: occurred. 10 · . . 

Subsistence Use 

has not met his burden of proving a subsistence use loss as defined by OPA (33 

U.S.C. et seq.) and OPA claims regulations (33 C.F.R. Part 136). Specifically, he has not 

provided: 

(1) An identification and description of the specific natural resource(s) for which 

compensation is being claimed. · 

· (2) Sufficient evidence of a loss suffered due to the spill. He has not documented a pattern of 

· subsistenee use prior to the spill for which he seeks compensation; that is, what, where, 

how often, and how much food he and his family regularly consumed for subsistence 

purposes . 

. (3) Any basis to support his claim that he suffered a $250 loss of subsistence use. For 

example, the NPFC cannot determine the period of claimed loss or the actual increased 

costs incurred to replace any food that rriay have been purchased if the spill had not 

occurred (i.e., insufficient receip~s or statements were provided to support damages 

incurred in the amount claimed). 

(4) A description of how and to what extent the claimant's subsi·stence use was affected by 

injury to or loss of each specific natural resource. 

For these reasons, claim for subsistence loss is denied. 

Conclusion 

Although claim meets the general claim requirements for the loss of subsistence 

use of natural resources portion, the claimant bears the burden of providing all evidence, 

information, and documentatiQn deemed necessary by the Director, NPFC, to support the claim. 

33 CFR 136.lOS(a) and 136.105(e)(6). Mr. Renard has failed to provide additional information 

required by the NPFC. 

Due to reasons annotated above, d's loss of subsistence use of natural resources 

portion is denied. Additionally, has failed to demonstrate bis alleged uncompensated 

removal costs and damages. Claimant also failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence 

' - ' ' • ' - ' ' -~• ' I • ~ 1, - that the damages were caused s efore this claim is denied. 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor's review: 5/28/2013 

Supervisor Action: Denial Approved 

l Supervisor's .Comments: I 

I .. 33 CFR 136§215 

I . r------·. --· -··- ·--------·-.... --·· ·--·· ----· --·-: -··----·- -·---· -··...,.. __ ..... -----·-·- -=r·-- ·- __ .. -· -------·- - ·--·--------· .... ____ ·- --· ··--- _:_ ___ -.. ·-·--- .- --·-

I . 

I