CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number : N10036-1679

Claimant : Joel Arroyo

Type of Claimant : Private (US)

Type of Claim : Loss of Profits and Earning Capacity

Amount Requested : $25,000.00

FACTS

On or about 20 April 2010, the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Deepwater Horizon (Deepwater 

Horizon) exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico. As a result of the explosion and sinking, oil 

was discharged. The Coast Guard designated the source of the discharge and identified BP as a 

responsible party (RP). BP accepted the designation and advertised its OPA claims process. On 

23 August 2010, the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) began accepting and adjudicating 

certain individual and business claims on behalf of BP.

CLAIM AND CLAIMANT

On 8 February 2012, Joel Arroyo, (referred to as “the Claimant”) presented a claim to the Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) for $25,000.00 in loss of profits and impairment of earnings 

capacity resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 1 The Claimant has a computer 

installation and support business in Sarasota, Florida.

2

 Claimant asserts that because his clients 

were affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, he in turn was affected because his clients 

could no longer afford his services. 

APPLICABLE LAW 

Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), at 33 U.S.C. § 2702(a), responsible parties are liable 

for removal costs and damages resulting from the discharge of oil into or upon the navigable 

waters or adjoining shorelines or the exclusive economic zone, as described in § 2702(b) of 

OPA. 

The OSLTF which is administered by the NPFC, is available, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 2712(a)(4) 

and § 2713 and the OSLTF claims adjudication regulations at 33 C.F.R. Part 136, to pay claims 

for uncompensated damages. One type of damages available pursuant to 33 C.F.R. § 136.231 is 

a claim for loss of profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury to or destruction of 

natural resources.

Under 33 C.F.R. § 136.233 a claimant must establish the following:

(a) That real or personal property or natural resources have been injured, destroyed, or lost.

(b) That the claimant’s income was reduced as a consequence of injury to, destruction of, or 

loss of property or natural resources, and the amount of that reduction.

(c) The amount of the claimant’s profits or earnings in comparable periods and during the 

period when the claimed loss or impairment was suffered, as established by income tax 

1

 Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed on 18 January 2012 and received on 8 February 2012. 2

 Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed on 18 January 2012 and received on 8 February 2012 and Claimant’s letter 

to the GCCF dated 2 February 2012.

 
returns, financial statements, and similar documents. In addition, comparative figures for 

profits or earnings for the same or similar activities outside of the area affected by the 

incident also must be established.

(d) Whether alternative employment or business was available and undertaken and, if so, the 

amount of income received. All income that a claimant received as a result of the 

incident must be clearly indicated and any saved overhead and other normal expenses not 

incurred as a result of the incident must be established. 

Under 33 C.F.R. § 136.105(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. 

Under 33 C.F.R. § 136.235, the amount of compensation allowable for a claim involving loss of 

profits or impairment of earning capacity is limited to the actual net reduction or loss of earnings 

or profits suffered. Calculations for net reductions or losses must clearly reflect adjustments 

for —

(a) All income resulting from the incident;

(b) All income from alternative employment or business undertaken;

(c) Potential income from alternative employment or business not undertaken, but reasonably 

available;

(d) Any saved overhead or normal expenses not incurred as a result of the incident; and

(e) State, local, and Federal taxes.

DETERMINATION OF LOSS 

Claimant’s Submission to the OSLTF

To support this claim the Claimant presented a large amount of documentation, which is listed in 

Enclosure (2). 

On 8 February 2012, the Claimant presented a claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund 

(OSLTF) for $25,000.00 in loss of profits and impairment of earnings capacity resulting from the 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill. This loss is associated with the Claimant’s lost profits while 

operating a computer installation and support service in Sarasota, Florida. The Claimant 

indicated that he submitted a claim to the GCCF in August 2011 and that it has been denied. 3

The NPFC conducted an independent investigation of claim presentation and payments. The

NPFC confirmed the Claimant’s presentment of two Interim Payment Claims (IC) to the GCCF. 

The first, an interim 3 claim, (ICQ32011) was submitted on 2 August 2011 in the amount of 

$15,000.00 and the second, an interim 4 claim (ICQ42011) was presented on 4 November 2011 

in the amount of $25,000.00. The NPFC also confirmed that the GCCF assigned Claimant 

Identification No. 3534987 to both claims. Claim ID No. 9429062 was assigned to ICQ32011 

and Claim ID No. 9527571 was applied to ICQ42011: both claims have been denied. 4

Based upon the information provided, this claim can be adjudicated in the full amount of 

damages presented to the NPFC, $25,000.00. Further, because the subject matter of both of the 

Claimant’s GCCF claims and his claim before the NPFC appear to be based upon the same 

subject matter, i.e. that the Claimant lost income as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill’s 

3

 Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed on 18 January 2012 and received on 8 February 2012. 4

 GCCF – U.S. Coast Guard Report as of 17 April 2012.

 
effects on his IT/Computer business, the NPFC deems this Claim Summary Determination as 

being outcome determinative for both of the Claimant’s GCCF claim.

NPFC Determination

Under 33 C.F.R. § 136.105(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. The NPFC considered all documentation presented by the 

Claimant.

This claim is denied because the Claimant has failed to prove either (1) that he has lost profits or 

income in the amount of $25,000 related to his computer business or (2) that his alleged loss is 

the result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

(1) Failure to Prove Alleged Lost Profits or Earnings

The Claimant provided, among other things, a letter to the GCCF; income tax information for 

2008, 2009, & 2010; monthly profit & loss statement projections for 2008, 2009, & 2010; and 

four customer letters. Following an initial review of the claim, the NPFC requested additional 

information from the Claimant. The letter requested, among other things, additional financial 

documentation to support that the Claimant sustained lost profits & earnings, as well as other 

documentation supporting and explaining how the Deepwater Horizon oil spill caused the 

Claimant’s losses. 

On 16 April 2012, the Claimant responded by providing clarifications and explanations on a 

number of issues (such as that the monthly profit & loss statements were actual, not projected), 

2010 news articles about oil from the spill possibly hitting Sarasota, and additional 

correspondence with the GCCF. The Claimant did not provide, however, evidence to 

corroborate his monthly profit & loss statements. For example, no Schedule C was provided for 

2008. Further, Claimant’s 2009 and 2010 Schedule C’s are filed on two different forms and do 

not track the Profit & Loss statements provided by the Claimant. Accordingly, if the Claimant 

decides to return to the NPFC on reconsideration, he must submit detailed financial 

documentation to support/corroborate his alleged loss as detailed in his profit & loss statements. 

(2) Failure to Prove Causation

No evidence or documentation has been provided that would indicate that the damages alleged 

were caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has been presented. The NPFC will not presume 

causation or lack thereof based upon business type or location. Causation is an element of every 

claim that must be proven by the Claimant. Here, the Claimant has asserted that his loss of sales 

and profits were due to the decrease in tourism in the Sarasota Bay area and a loss of clients for 

his restaurant customers who had to close.5

 

The Claimant provided a list of 11 previous restaurant clients whose reasons for terminating 

services were variously, “low sales”, “no sales”, “insufficient sales” and “Closed 

September/October/November 2010” or “Closed in early 2011”, but none mentioned the oil spill. 

5

 Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed on 18 January 2012 and received on 8 February 2012.

 
The Claimant also provided letters from four businesses with whom he had worked, but those 

letters do not mention the oil spill as a cause for their cancelling services with the Claimant.6

 

Statements without supporting documentation are not satisfactory to prove that the alleged loss 

was caused by the oil spill. The Claimant asserted that his loss in income was due to a reduction 

in business in 2010, caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 7

 If the Claimant submits a 

request for Reconsideration to the NPFC, evidence linking the loss of profits and the loss of 

customers due to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill must be submitted in order for his claim to be 

successful. 

Accordingly, this claim is denied because the Claimant has failed to prove either (1) that he 

sustained a loss in the amount alleged or (2) that his alleged loss was due to the injury, 

destruction of, or loss of real or personal property or natural resources, i.e., the Deepwater 

Horizon oil spill.

Claim Supervisor: NPFC Claims Adjudication Division

Date of Supervisor’s Review: 5/2/12

Supervisor’s Action: Denial approved

Supervisor’s Comments:

6

 Letter from Doris & Douglas Godman of the Coco Grill Restaurant dated July 2011; letter from Tom Palomino of 

Palomino Motors, Inc. dated 15 September; letter from Sergio Razo of Peruvian Grill I & II dated 15 November 

201l; and letter from John Zakarian of Zak’s Steakhouse dated August 2010.

7

 Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed on 18 January 2012 and received on 8 February 2012.

 
Enclosure 2

Documentation Provided by the Claimant

N10036-1679

• Optional OSLTF Claim Form signed 18 January 2012 and received 8 February 2012.

• 2010 Form 1099-Misc from Palomino Motors, Inc.

• Letter from IRS dated 21 May 2009.

• 2008 Federal Tax Form 1040A with Schedule 2 and Form 2441.

• 2009 Federal Tax Form 1040 with Schedule C-EZ, and Schedule SE...

• Undated statement regarding Cash Contribution s for Haiti Relief on 2009 Tax Return.

• 2010 Federal Tax Form 1040 with Schedule C, Form 8812, Form 4562, Form 8829 and 

various worksheets.

• H&R Block Advantage letter dated 16 February 2011 with 2010 Tax Summary, Quick 

Reference document, Signature/Consent form, Filing Instructions

• Signed letter from Tom Palomino, Bradenton, FL, dated 15 September 2010. (Original in 

Spanish)

• Signed letter from Sergio Raso, Peruvian Grill I & II. (Original in Spanish)

• Unsigned letter from Doris & Douglas Godman, Coco Grill Restaurant, Sarasota, FL, 

dated July 2011.

• Unsigned, undated letter from John Zakarian, Zak’s Steak House, Sarasota, FL.

• Claimant’s unsigned letter to GCCF dated 2 February 2012 with list of affected clients. 

(Original in Spanish)

• Claimant’s unsigned letter to GCCF dated 17 October 2011. (Original in Spanish)

• Claimant’s unsigned letter to GCCF dated 17 October 2011 regarding W-2s and 1099s. 

(Original in Spanish)

• IRS letter dated 5-10-2005 on ITIN. (Original in Spanish)

• Monthly Profit & Loss Projections for 2008, 2009 and 2010.

• Claimant’s email to NPFC dated 16 April 2012 with attachments.

• Claimant’s letter dated 15 April 2012 responding to NPFC letter with links to three 

newspaper articles and with a brief summary of each—

− ‘Sarasota County declares emergency’, Herald Tribune.com, 5 May 2010.

− ‘Oil Spill: Sarasota prepares for possible oil spill to reach shoreline ...’ dated 4 May 

2010, Tampa-St. Petersburg Times.

− http://sarasotainjuryboard.com (NPFC was unable to access this article.)

− ‘Tourism industry will feel effects of oil spill for years’ (Steve Huettel), 07Jan2011 

(updated 10Jan2010).

• ‘BP pays $40 million locally over Gulf oil spill’, www.yourfloridahome.org, 20 August 

2011.

• ‘Sarasota Bracing for Economic Fallout from BP Oil Spill’ from InjuryBoard.com, dated 

29 May 2010.

• H&R Block Advantage 2011 (summary documents, 4 pages).

• 2011 Federal Tax Form 1040 with Schedule C, Form 8812, Form 8829, Form 4562, and 

various worksheets.

• Claimant’s letter to NPFC dated 15 April 2012 regarding his list of contacts.
• GCCF Deficiency Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim dated 15 August 

2011.

• GCCF Deficiency Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim dated 29 September 

2011.

• GCCF letter, Confirmation of Social Security Number, dated 3 October 2011.

• GCCF Denial Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim dated 10 November 2011.

• GCCF Denial Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim dated 13 January 2012.