CLAIM SUMMARY/DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number N10036-1441

Claimant Johannes T. Rech III

Type of Claimant Private (US)

Type of Claim Loss of Profits and Impairment of Earnings Capacity

Amount Requested $8,500.00

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 23 September 2011, Johannes T. Rech III (the Claimant) presented a claim to the Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) for $8,500.00 for loss of profits and impairment of 

earnings capacity resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

The Claimant worked in the seafood department for Publix Super Markets Inc. at its store 

in Largo/Indian Rocks Beach, Florida.1

 After the oil spill, the Claimant stated the 

seafood sales in the store declined and he was moved to other departments.2

 As a result, 

he stated that due to the oil spill his work hours were reduced from 36-40 hours a week to 

15-20 hours and he lost earnings.3 

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.

1 E-Mail dated 11 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information 2 E-Mail dated 13 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information 3 E-Mail dated 11 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information

2

 
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.

DETERMINATION OF LOSS 

Claimant’s Submission to the OSLTF

To support this claim, Claimant submitted the following documentation:

• E-mail from Claimant 23 September 2011 submitting claim documents;

• W-2s for 2008, 2009 and 2010 from Publix Super Markets, Inc.;

• Pay Statement History for Claimant from 25 September 2008 to 18 August 2011;

• E-Mails dated 11 and 13 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter 

requesting added information.

3
On 26 September 2011, the NPFC sent the Claimant a letter requesting additional 

information in order to further evaluate the claim. On 11 and 13 October 2011, the 

Claimant responded by e-mail to the request.

Before presenting the claim to the NPFC, the Claimant filed an Interim Claim 

(ICQ42011) with the GCCF on 07 September 2011 in the amount of $10,000.00.

4

 The 

claim was assigned Claimant ID #3544257 and claim #9452303. Additionally, Claimant 

filed a Full Review Final Payment (FRF) claim with the GCCF on 06 September 2011 in 

the amount of $20,000.00.

5

 The claim was assigned claim #9451232. The ICQ4201 and 

FRF claims were denied on 17 September 2011.

6

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 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. Accordingly, this Claim Summary Determination for NPFC Claim N10036-1441

considers and addresses the loss of earnings up to the amount of $8,500.00 for all claims 

presented to the Responsible Party, specifically: GCCF Claim #9452303 for ICQ42011 

and #9451232 ICQ42011.

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. 

The Claimant’s W-2s showed his wages for 2010 at Publix Supermarkets actually 

increased over his wages for 2009.7

 He stated that the W-2 wages for 2010 included

bonuses between $5,000.00 and $5,400.00. He received no bonuses in 2009 because he 

was not eligible for bonuses in 2009.8 If the 2010 wages were reduced for the bonuses, 

the Claimant’s earnings for 2010 would be less than his earnings for 2009 but this 

difference in earnings has not been linked to the oil spill. 

The Claimant has therefore not provided sufficient documentation to show that any 

perceived loss of earnings was due to the oil spill. He stated his hours of work at Publix 

4 Report from the GCCF dated 06 October 2011

5 Report from the GCCF dated 06 October 2011 6 GCCF Denial Letter dated 17 September 2011

7 W-2s Wage and Tax Statements for 2009 show wages of $13,433.95 and for 2010 wages of $15,177.76 8 E-Mail dated 13 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information

4

 
Supermarket were reduced after the oil spill.9

 NPFC requested that the Claimant provide 

a person at Publix Supermarkets that NPFC could contact to corroborate his statement. 

The Claimant stated that all the managers that were working there who could corroborate 

that his loss of earnings was due to the oil spill have since transferred out and he cannot 

locate them.

10 

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

that there was an alleged loss in the amount claimed, 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: Claims Adjudication Division

Date of Supervisor’s Review: 18 October 2011

Supervisor’s Action: Denial approved

Supervisor’s Comments:

9 E-Mail dated 11 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information 10 E-Mail dated 13 October 2011 from Claimant in response NPFC’s letter requesting added information

5