CLAIM SUMMARY/DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number N10036-1464

Claimant Lindsey Lee

Type of Claimant Private (US)

Type of Claim Loss of Profits and Impairment of Earnings Capacity

Amount Requested $14,000.00

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 claims 

for certain individual and business claims on behalf of BP.

CLAIM AND CLAIMANT

On 04 October 2011, Lindsey Lee (the Claimant) presented a claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust 

Fund (OSLTF) for $14,000.00 for loss of profits and impairment of earnings capacity resulting 

from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

The Claimant stated he worked for Berg Pipe Mill at its plant in Mobile, Alabama, from October 

2009 to June 2010.1

 Berg Pipe manufacturers steel pipes. The Claimant worked in the coating 

department.2

 The Claimant was paid by Multi Staffing Services (now Elwood Staffing 

Company3

), a temporary staffing company.

4

 The Claimant stated that the steel pipes were 

shipped out on barges.5

 The Claimant stated the Coast Guard closed the waterways to shipping 

due to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and Berg Pipe could not ship its pipes.

6

 The Claimant 

stated that because of the restrictions to shipping, Berg Pipe’s production declined and it let go of 

some employees including the Claimant.

7

After being terminated by Berg Pipe, the Claimant underwent HAZMAT training to work as an 

oil response worker for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.8

 However, the Claimant never got a job 

1 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim

2 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 3 Based on telephone conversion between Multi Staffing Service (now Elwood Staffing Company) and 

NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011. Elwood Staffing Company acquired Multi Staffing Services 

January 2011

4 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim

5 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim

6 OSLTF Claim Form signed by Claimant 02 July 2011

7 Letter from Heath Stevens at Berg Spiral Pipe Corporation dated 20 June 2010 concerning Claimant’s 

employment

8 Letter from the Claimant explaining his claim. The letter is undated.

2

 
working on the oil spill response.9

 In July 2010, the Claimant began collecting Alabama 

unemployment compensation.10 

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 Section 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 

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.

9 Letter from the Claimant explaining his claim. The letter is undated. 10 Alabama Unemployment Compensation showing activity for Claimant from 20 July 2010 to 29 

September 2010. Also telephone conversation between the Claimant and NPFC Claims Adjuster 25 

October 2011

3

 
DETERMINATION OF LOSS 

Claimant’s Submission to the OSLTF

To support this claim, Claimant submitted the following documentation:

• OSLTF Claim Form signed by Claimant 02 July 2011;

• GCCF Letter dated 18 November 2010 denying Emergency Advance Payment;

• Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim;

• GCCF Denial Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claim dated 16 April 2011;

• Form 1040 US Individual Income Tax Return for 2009;

• IRS 1040 US Individual Income Tax Return Transcript for 2008 and 2009;

• Copies of Claimant’s Alabama Drivers License and his Social Security Card;

• Claimant’s Pay Stubs from Multi Staffing Services in Mobile for 2010;

• Letter from Claimant explaining his claim. The letter is undated;

• Letter from Heath Stevens at Berg Spiral Pipe Corporation dated 20 June 2010 

concerning Claimant’s employment;

• Alabama Unemployment Compensation showing activity for Claimant from 20 July 2010 

to 29 September 2010;

• Claimant’s Regions Bank statement for August 2010 and September 2010;

• GCCF Deficiency Letter on Interim Payment/Final Payment Claimed dated 02 April 

2011;

• Letter from Claimant dated 18 October 2010 explaining the amount of his claim.

On 04 October 2011, the NPFC sent the Claimant a letter requesting additional information in 

order to further evaluate the claim. USPS Tracking showed the Claimant received the letter on 12 

October 2011.11 On 25 October 2011, the Claimant responded to the request.12

Before presenting this claim to the NPFC, the Claimant filed an Emergency Advance Payment 

(EAP) with the GCCF. The claim was assigned Claimant ID #3210379 and claim #265936.

13

The EAP claim was denied on 18 November 2010.

14 Additionally, Claimant filed an Interim 

Payment claim (ICQ12011) with the GCCF on 08 February 2011.

15 The claim was assigned 

claim #9290329.

16 The Interim Payment claim was denied on 16 April 2011.17

Based upon the evidence provided by the Claimant, it appears that the subject matter of the 

GCCF claims is the same as the subject matter of the claim before the NPFC, i.e., Claimant lost 

earnings as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The NPFC has not been able to confirm 

the amount of either the EAP or ICQ12011 claims as of the date of this determination. The NPFC 

deems the GCCF claims to be properly presented to the Responsible Party. To the extent the 

amount of the claims presented to the Responsible Party are equal to or greater than the amount 

currently presented to the NPFC, the subject claim is properly presented to the NPFC. 

11 USPS Tracking Receipt 7011 1150 0000 4636 2991 12 Telephone conversation between Claimant and NPFC Claims Adjuster 25 October 2011 13 GCCF On-Line Claim Status dated 27 October 2011 14 GCCF Denial Letter dated 18 November 2010 15 GCCF On-Line Claim Status dated 27 October 2011. Filing date based OSLTF Claim Form signed by 

Claimant 02 July 2011

16 GCCF On-Line Claim Status dated 27 October 2011 17 GCCF Denial Letter dated 16 April 2011

4

 
Accordingly, this Claim Summary Determination for NPFC Claim N10036-1464 considers and 

addresses the loss of earnings up to the amount of $14,000.00 for all claims presented to the 

Responsible Party, specifically: GCCF Claim #265936 EAP and #9290329 ICQ12011.

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 or destruction or loss of real or personal property or 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 the claim. 

There are discrepancies between the documentation the Claimant provided and the statements he 

made and statements made by Berg Pipe and Multi Staffing Services (now Elwood Staffing 

Company). These discrepancies are as follows:

1. The Claimant stated that shipments of steel pipe were disrupted and production declined. 

Berg Pipe had to let some employees go.

18 Berg Pipe stated that its business was not 

affected by the oil spill. It shut down no production.19

2. Claimant stated that Berg Pipe ships its steel pipes on barges.20 Berg Pipe stated it ships 

its pipes by rail, not on barges. The railroad track is 20 feet away, along the front of the 

plant building.21 

3. The Claimant provided a letter signed by a Heath Stevens.

22 Mr. Stevens stated he was 

the outbound and shift supervisor at Berg Pipe and the Claimant worked under him. The 

letter concerned the Claimant’s employment at Berg Pipe. Berg Pipe stated that no one 

named Heath Stevens has ever worked for Berg Pipe.23 Elwood Staffing Company stated 

Heath Stevens did not work for them either.

24

4. Berg Pipe stated that the letterhead on the Heath Stevens letter is not its official 

letterhead. For one, the Berg Pipe icon of four interlocking circles appears on the top left 

side of Berg Pipe’s official letterhead.

25 The icon on the Heath Stevens letter appears on 

the right side of the letter.

26 

5. Berg Pipe stated the street address shown on the Heath Stevens letter, 2324 Paper Mill 

Road, is not its street address.27 Also, the telephone number shown on the letter, (251) 

343-3259, is the telephone number of Elwood Staffing Company and not Berg Pipe’s 

number.

28 

18 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim and telephone conversation between 

the Claimant and NPFC Claims Adjuster 25 October 2011

19 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 20 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim and telephone conversation between 

the Claimant and NPFC Claims Adjuster 25 October 2011

21 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 22 Letter from Heath Stevens at Berg Spiral Pipe Corporation dated 20 June 2010 concerning Claimant’s 

employment

23 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 24 Based on telephone conversion between Multi Staffing Service (now Elwood Staff) and NPFC Claim 

Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 25 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 26 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 27 Based on telephone conversion between Berg Pipe HR and NPFC Claim Adjuster 25-26 October 2011 28 Based on telephone conversion between Multi Staffing Service (now Elwood Staff) and NPFC Claim

Adjuster 25-26 October 2011

5

 
6. The Claimant stated that he worked for Berg Pipe from October 2009 through June 2010 

through Multi Staffing Services.29 Elwood Staffing Company stated the Claimant 

worked for Ershigs, Inc. from October 2009 through early April 2010. Ershigs 

manufactures smoke stacks used at chemical plants.

30

Under 33 C.F.R. 136.9, persons submitting false claims or making false statements in connection

with claims under this part may be subject to prosecution under Federal law, including but not 

limited to 18 U.S.C. 287 and 1001. In addition, persons submitting written documentation in 

support of claims under this part which they know, or should know, is false or omits a material 

fact may be subject to a civil penalty for each claim. 

Claimant’s request for $14,000.00 is hereby denied because the evidence presented in the 

submission by the Claimant versus the detailed information provided by the employers as 

outlined above clearly demonstrates evidence of material misrepresentations of fact in order for 

the Claimant to falsely obtain funds from the Federal Government under false pretenses.

Claim Supervisor: Claims Adjudication Division

Date of Supervisor’s Review: 31 October 2011

Supervisor’s Action: Denial approved

Supervisor’s Comments: 

29 Letter from Claimant dated 01 September 2011 explaining his claim and telephone conversation between 

the Claimant and NPFC Claims Adjuster 25 October 2011

30 Based on telephone conversion between Multi Staffing Service (now Elwood Staff) and NPFC Claim 

Adjuster 25-26 October 2011

6