CLAIM SUMMARY/DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number N10036-1545

Claimant Ms. Ceola Brown

Type of Claimant Private (US)

Type of Claim Loss of Profits and Impairment of Earning Capacity

Amount Requested $10,000.00

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 4 November 2011, Ms. Ceola Brown (the Claimant) presented a claim to the Oil Spill 

Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) seeking $10,000.00 in loss of profits damages resulting from the 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill.1

At the time of the oil spill, the Claimant was working at “Seafood City” in the Morial 

Convention Center in New Orleans, Louisiana.2

 The Claimant alleged that “after the spill, my 

hours decreased due to the lack of seafood.”3

The Claimant also included in her submission, a copy of a “Notice of Facility Closing,” noting 

the closure of the New Orleans Morial Convention Center and the layoff of all employees, 

including the Claimant, effective 14 July 2011.4

The Claimant seeks $10,000.00 from the NPFC, for losses allegedly incurred due to effects of 

the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.5

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:

1 Optional OSLTF Claim Form, dated 3 August 2011. 

2 Letter from the Claimant to the NPFC, 14 July 2011.

3 Letter from the Claimant to the NPFC, 14 July 2011. 4 Aramark, Notice of Facility Closing, 4 May 2011.

5 Cover Letter, Additional Information response, 2 December 2011, noting sum certain of $10,000.00.

 
(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 

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 undertake, 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 submitted the following documentation:

• Letter from the Claimant, noting sum certain of $10,000.00, undated;

• Optional OSLTF Claim Form, 29 August 2011;

• Letter from Aramark, c/o New Orleans Morial Convention Center, noting loss of 

Aramark contract, dated 4 May 2011;

• Letter from Aramark, confirming the Claimant’s employment, 20 June 2011;

• Letter from the Claimant, describing loss of hours at Seafood City, 14 July 2011;

• Letter from the Claimant to the GCCF, undated;

• 2010 W-2 Wage and Tax Statement, showing wages of $16,998.85;

• Letter from Aramark, confirming the Claimant’s employment, 27 October 2010;

• Pay Stub, 14 April 2010;

• Pay Stub, 17 February 2010;

• Pay Stub, 3 March 2010;

• Pay Stub, 17 March 2010;

• Pay Stub, 31 March 2010;

• Pay Stub, 8 June 2011;

• Pay Stub, 23 June 2010;
• Pay Stub, 2 February 2011;

• Pay Stub, 27 October 2010;

• Pay Stub, 29 September 2010;

• Pay Stub, 15 September 2010;

• Pay Stub, 22 December 2010;

• Pay Stub 8 December 2010.

• Cover Letter, Additional Information response, 2 December 2011, noting sum certain of 

$10,000.00;

• Pay stub, 24 February 2011;

• Pay stub, 24 March 2011;

• Pay stub, 7 April 2011;

• Pay stub, 2 June 2011;

• Pay stub, 30 June 2011;

• Pay stub, 21 April 2011;

• Letter from Aramark confirming the Claimant’s employment, 20 June 2011 (dup);

• Letter from the Claimant, describing loss of hours at Seafood City, 14 July 2011 (dup);

• Letter from the Claimant to the GCCF, undated (dup);

• 2010 W-2 Wage and Tax Statement, showing $16,998.85 (dup);

• Letter from Aramark, confirming the Claimant’s employment, 27 October 2011 (dup);

• Pay stub, 22 April 2010;

• Pay stub, 25 February 2010;

• Pay stub, 11 March 2010;

• Pay stub, 25 March 2010;

• Pay stub, 8 April 2010;

• Pay stub, 16 June 2011;

• Pay stub, 1 July 2010;

• Pay stub, 10 February 2011;

• Pay stub, 4 November 2010;

• Pay stub, 7 October 2010;

• Pay stub, 23 September 2010;

• Pay stub, 30 December 2010;

• Pay stub, 16 December 2010;

• GCCF Denial letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment claim, 16 August 2011;

• GCCF Denial Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment claim, 22 April 2011;

• Letter from GCCF to the Claimant, requesting financial documentation, 31 January 2011;

• GCCF Denial Letter on Emergency Advance Payment claim, 2 November 2010;

• Aramark, Notice of Facility Closing, 4 May 2011;

• Optional OSLTF Claim Form, 29 August 2011.

On 22 September 2010, the Claimant presented an Emergency Advance Payment claim (EAP) to 

the RP/GCCF, seeking $3,600.00 in loss of profits and wages damages.6

 The Claimant was 

assigned Claimant ID # 3029346 and the EAP was assigned Claim # 84247. This claim was 

denied by the RP/GCCF on 2 November 2010.7 

6 GCCF United States Coast Guard Report, 6 December 2011.

7 GCCF Denial Letter on Emergency Advance Payment Claim, 2 November 2010.

 
On 16 November 2010, the Claimant presented a Full Review Final (FRF) claim to the 

RP/GCCF, seeking loss of profits and wages damages in the amount of 50,000.00.8

 The FRF 

was assigned claim number 9023078 and was denied by the RP/GCCF on 16 August 2011.9

On 8 August 2011, the Claimant presented a Third Quarter Interim payment claim (ICQ32011) 

seeking loss of profits and wages damages in the amount of $10,000.00.10 This ICQ32011 was 

assigned claim number 9432913 and was denied by the RP/GCCF on 22 April 2011.

On 4 November 2011, the Claimant presented this claim to the NPFC, seeking loss of profits 

damages in the amount of 10,000.00.11 Because this claim has first been presented to and denied 

by the RP/GCCF, presentment requirements under OPA have been met, and the NPFC may 

adjudicate this claim in the full amount of $10,000.00 as now presented to the NPFC.12

NPFC Determination

Under 33 U.S.C. § 2702(b)(2)(E) and 33 C.F.R. Part 136, a claimant must prove that any loss of 

income was due to injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property or of a natural resource 

as a result of a discharge or substantial threat of a discharge of oil. 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 this claim.

In order to prove this claim for loss of profits damages based on the Claimant’s alleged reduction 

in hours, and eventual loss of her job at the Morial Convention Center, the Claimant must present 

evidence to demonstrate (1) that her earnings actually decreased following the Deepwater 

Horizon oil spill, and (2) that the decrease in her earnings was caused by the discharge of oil 

resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

In a letter dated 15 November 2011, the NPFC requested that the Claimant provide additional 

information to support her claim. The letter requested that the Claimant provide record of her 

earnings in 2008, 2009 and 2010, in order to allow the NPFC to determine whether or not the 

Claimant’s earnings in the months of 2010 following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, were in 

fact lower than her earnings in those months of the previous years.13 

The Claimant responded to the request by providing copies of various pay stubs from 2010 and 

2011, but failed to include requested financial documentation from previous years. Therefore, 

the NPFC does not have sufficient information to determine whether or not the Claimant’s 

earnings in 2010 following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill actually decreased, as compared to

her earnings in those months of previous years. 

Furthermore, the Claimant has not provided evidence to demonstrate that the closing of the 

Morial Convention Center in New Orleans, or the alleged loss of business at Seafood City, were 

caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 14 The NPFC requested that the Claimant provide 

evidence to demonstrate that her employer lost revenue as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil 

spill. The NPFC also requested that the Claimant provide contact information for the Claimant’s 

former employer. The Claimant also failed to respond to these requests. Because the NPFC 

8 GCCF United States Coast Guard Report, 6 December 2011.

9 GCCF Denial Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim, 16 August 2011.

10 GCCF United States Coast Guard Report, 6 December 2011. 11 Letter from the Claimant noting sum certain amount of $10,000.00, undated. 12 33 C.F.R. § 136.103(a). 13 NPFC Request for additional information, 15 November 2011. 14 NPFC Request for additional information, 15 November 2011.

 
does not have any information regarding losses allegedly incurred by the Claimant’s employer, 

the Claimant has not sufficiently demonstrated that any losses she may have sustained were 

caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

This claim is denied because the Claimant failed to meet her burden to demonstrate (1) that she 

sustained a loss in the amount of $10,000.00, and (2) that the alleged loss is due to the injury, 

destruction or loss of property or natural resources as a result of a discharge or substantial threat 

of a discharge of oil.

Claim Supervisor: NPFC Claims Adjudication Division

Date of Supervisor’s Review: 12/15/11

Supervisor’s Action: Denial approved

Supervisor’s Comments: