UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF...
Transcript of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF...
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
In Re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig MDL NO. 2179“Deepwater Horizon” in the Gulfof Mexico, on April 20, 2010 SECTION J
Applies to: All Cases JUDGE BARBIERMAGISTRATE JUDGE SHUSHAN
REPORT BY THE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE DEEPWATER
HORIZON ECONOMIC AND PROPERTY DAMAGES SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT ON THE STATUS OF CLAIMS REVIEW
STATUS REPORT NO. 46 DATE JUNE 30, 2016
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 1 of 16
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
In re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig MDL NO. 2179“Deepwater Horizon” in the Gulfof Mexico, on April 20, 2010 SECTION J
Applies to: All Cases JUDGE BARBIERMAGISTRATE JUDGE SHUSHAN
REPORT BY THE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE DEEPWATER HORIZONECONOMIC AND PROPERTY DAMAGES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON THE
STATUS OF CLAIMS REVIEW
STATUS REPORT NO. 46, DATED JUNE 30, 2016
The Claims Administrator of the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Settlement
Agreement (Settlement Agreement) submits this Report to inform the Court of the status of the
implementation of the Settlement Agreement as of May 31, 2016. The Claims Administrator will
provide any other information in addition to this Report as requested by the Court.
I. STATUS OF THE CLAIMS REVIEW PROCESSES AND CLAIM PAYMENTS
A. Claim Form Submissions.
The Claims Administrator opened the Settlement Program with needed functions staffed
and operating on June 4, 2012, just over 30 days after the Claims Administrator’s appointment. As
of May 31, 2016, the Claims Administrator’s Office and Vendors (CAO)1 have received 384,671
Claim Forms since the Settlement Program opened on June 4, 2012, as shown in the Public
Statistics for the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages Settlement (Public Report)
attached as Exhibit A.2
1 “Claims Administrator’s Office”, as used within this report, refers to the Claims Administrator and, where applicable,Court-Supervised Settlement Program vendors working with and under the Claims Administrator.2 The total claims received may continue to experience insignificant changes as the CAO continues to processoutstanding claims.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 2 of 16
3
Of the total Claim Forms submitted, 6.5% were filed within the Seafood Program, 15.8%
were filed within the Individual Economic Loss (IEL) framework, and 38.3% were filed within
the Business Economic Loss (BEL) framework (including Start-Up and Failed BEL Claims). See
Ex. A, Table 2.
On December 8, 2014, the United States Supreme Court declined the request for a review
of the Fifth Circuit’s rulings upholding the District Court’s Final Approval Order of the Settlement
Agreement. Accordingly, the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement was December 8, 2014,
and the final deadline for filing all new claims occurred on June 8, 2015. As such, the Claims
Administrator will close new claim submissions made after June 8, 2015.
B. Claims Review.
The CAO completed its first claim reviews and issued its first outcome notices on July 15,
2012, and its first payments on July 31, 2012. There are many steps involved in reviewing a claim
so that it is ready for a notice. In addition to reviewing the claims, substantial communication to
claimants or their representatives is performed via notices, emails, phone calls, interviews, and site
visits to obtain clarification and/or additional information or documentation necessary for the
Program to review claims.
1. Claim Type Review Details.
Table 1 provides information, by Claim Type, on the number of claims filed, the number
of claims that have been reviewed to Notice, the number of claims remaining to be reviewed to
Notice, and the number of claims reviewed to either a Notice or “Later Notice” to date. Table 1
divides the claims reviewed to a “Later Notice” into separate sections: (1) claims receiving a
Notice based on CAO review following the submission of additional materials by a claimant in
response to an Incompleteness Notice, and (2) claims receiving a Notice following a
Reconsideration review conducted by the CAO.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 3 of 16
4
Table 1. Throughput Analysis of Claims Filed and Notices Issued.
A. Claims Reviewed to First Notice
Claim Type
Status of All Claims Filed
Total Claims Filed ToDate3 Reviews Completed to Notice or Closed Claims Remaining to Review
1. Seafood 24,956 24,937 99.9% 19 0.1%
2. IEL 60,792 58,007 95.4% 2,785 4.6%
3. IPV/FV 389 389 100.0% 0 0.0%
4. BEL 133,840 124,124 92.7% 9,716 7.3%
5. Start-Up BEL 7,809 7,517 96.3% 292 3.7%
6. Failed BEL 5,703 5,455 95.7% 248 4.3%
7. Coastal RP 42,176 42,141 99.9% 35 0.1%
8. Wetlands RP 27,726 20,946 75.5% 6,780 24.5%
9. RPS 3,067 3,067 100.0% 0 0.0%
10. Subsistence 67,690 61,691 91.1% 5,999 8.9%
11. VoO 8,959 8,956 99.9% 3 0.0%
12. VPD 1,564 1,560 99.7% 4 0.3%
13. TOTAL 384,671 358,790 93.3% 25,881 6.7%
B. Claims Reviewed to Later Notice
Claim Type
Initial or PreliminaryIncompleteness Response
Follow-Up IncompletenessResponses
Requests forReconsideration
TotalResponses
ClaimswithLaterNotice
RemainingClaims Total
Responses
ClaimswithLaterNotice
RemainingClaims Total
Requests
Claimswith
LaterNotice
RemainingClaims
# % # % # %
1. Seafood 6,033 5,716 317 5.3% 2,941 2,830 111 3.8% 4,415 4,366 49 1.1%
2. IEL 19,445 16,855 2,590 13.3% 10,265 8,755 1,510 14.7% 7,377 6,892 485 6.6%
3. IPV/FV 116 112 4 3.4% 45 45 0 0.0% 56 51 5 8.9%
4. BEL 56,994 46,512 10,482 18.4% 30,960 24,147 6,813 22.0% 19,735 16,295 3,440 17.4%
5. Start-Up BEL 3,667 3,075 592 16.1% 2,439 1,986 453 18.6% 1,775 1,470 305 17.2%
6. Failed BEL 1,703 1,408 295 17.3% 1,195 947 248 20.8% 1,131 972 159 14.1%
7. Coastal RP 6,338 6,246 92 1.5% 1,888 1,857 31 1.6% 2,358 2,333 25 1.1%
8. Wetlands RP 1,117 666 451 40.4% 236 158 78 33.1% 1,382 1,273 109 7.9%
9. RPS 371 370 1 0.3% 139 139 0 0.0% 266 265 1 0.4%
10. Subsistence 20,794 12,308 8,486 40.8% 10,245 6,310 3,935 38.4% 7,032 5,007 2,025 28.8%
11. VoO 1,009 997 12 1.2% 447 435 12 2.7% 691 685 6 0.9%
12. VPD 818 786 32 3.9% 391 378 13 3.3% 313 303 10 3.2%
13. TOTAL 118,405 95,051 23,354 19.7% 61,191 47,987 13,204 21.6% 46,531 39,912 6,619 14.2%
3 The total claims received may continue to experience insignificant changes as the CAO continues to processoutstanding claims.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 4 of 16
5
2. Claimant Accounting Support Reviews.
A special team handles Claimant Accounting Support (CAS) reviews. CAS reimbursement
is available under the Settlement Agreement for IEL, BEL, and Seafood claims. After a claim has
been determined to be payable and the Compensation Amount has been calculated, the CAS team
reviews accounting invoices and CAS Sworn Written Statements submitted by the claimant. Table
2 includes information on the number of CAS reviews the CAO has completed to date, whether
the Accounting Support documentation was complete, and the dollar amounts reimbursed for each
Claim Type.
Table 2. Claimant Accounting Support.
ClaimType
CAS Review Results Total CASReview Results
CAS Dollar AmountReimbursedComplete Incomplete
SinceLast
Report
Totalto Date
SinceLast
Report4
Totalto Date
SinceLast
Report
Totalto Date
Since LastReport Total to Date
1. BEL 1,276 32,818 136 4,607 1,412 37,425 $1,537,288.54 $41,470,815.89
2. IEL 9 3,465 5 792 14 4,257 $3,634.97 $447,492.30
3. Seafood 0 3,982 2 878 2 4,860 $1,495.00 $1,642,099.90
4. TOTAL 1,285 40,265 143 6,277 1,428 46,542 $1,542,418.51 $43,560,408.09
C. Claim Notices and Payments.
Tables 3 and 4 of the Public Report attached in Exhibit A provide detail on the notices and
payments issued to date. As of May 31, 2016, the CAO has issued 135,087 Eligibility Notices to
unique claims with Payment Offers totaling $8.4 billion. As of that date, the CAO has made
payments on 127,310 claims totaling $7.6 billion.
4 Changes since the last report include the impact of claims previously deemed Incomplete during CAS Review thatare no longer considered Incomplete after a subsequent review. Negative values may occasionally appear in this table,which may occur when a claim has gone through multiple CAS Reviews resulting in a change in the CAS Reviewresult. For example, a claim’s CAS Review may change from incomplete to complete when the claimant supplementshis/her CAS Review with additional documentation to cure an incompleteness reason.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 5 of 16
6
D. Re-Reviews, Reconsiderations, and Appeals.
1. Re-Reviews and Outcomes.
To date, there have been 164,244 Eligibility or Denial Notices issued from which claimants
can or could seek Re-Review. Of those, the window to seek Re-Review has passed or Re-Review
has been requested for 158,786. Of those, claimants have requested Re-Review of 22,653 claims.
Thus, the rate of Re-Review from all final determinations is 14.3%. The rate of Re-Review from
Eligibility Notices is 10.6%, while the rate of Re-Review from Denial Notices is 23.9%.
Table 3 summarizes the Re-Reviews the CAO has completed, the number of Post Re-
Review Notices the CAO has issued, and whether the outcome of the Re-Review resulted in an
award that was higher than (↑), lower than (↓),or the same as (↔) the outcome previously issued.
The table also includes information on whether an original Exclusion Denial was confirmed or
overturned on Re-Review.
Table 3. Re-Reviews.
A. Re-Review Requests and Reviews
Claim Type Requests Received To DateNotice Issued orClaims Closed
Claims Remaining to ReceiveNotice or Claims Closed
# %
1. Seafood 935 927 8 0.9%
2. IEL 1,086 1,024 62 5.7%
3. IPV/FV 14 14 0 0.0%
4. BEL 9,164 7,431 1,733 18.9%
5. Start-Up BEL 698 508 190 27.2%
6. Failed BEL 386 345 41 10.6%
7. Coastal RP 1,256 1,240 16 1.3%
8. Wetlands RP 3,660 2,810 850 23.2%
9. RPS 135 135 0 0.0%
10. Subsistence 5,197 4,908 289 5.6%
11. VoO 70 69 1 1.4%
12. VPD 52 51 1 1.9%
13. TOTAL 22,653 19,462 3,191 14.1%
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 6 of 16
7
B. Re-Review Notices Issued
Claim Type
Outcome of Re-Review Notice5
Compensation Amount for Eligible Claims Exclusions/Denials↑ ↓ ↔ Confirmed Overturned
# % # % # % # % # %
1. Seafood 475 51.2% 56 6.0% 257 27.7% 128 13.8% 11 1.2%
2. IEL 257 25.1% 93 9.1% 319 31.2% 347 33.9% 8 0.8%
3. IPV/FV 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 14 100.0% 0 0.0%
4. BEL 2,754 37.1% 267 3.6% 728 9.8% 3,592 48.3% 90 1.2%
5. Start-Up BEL 68 13.4% 11 2.2% 17 3.3% 405 79.7% 7 1.4%
6. Failed BEL 5 1.4% 5 1.4% 14 4.1% 320 92.8% 1 0.3%
7. Coastal RP 65 5.2% 4 0.3% 150 12.1% 978 78.9% 43 3.5%
8. Wetlands RP 38 1.4% 847 30.1% 76 2.7% 1,827 65.0% 22 0.8%
9. RPS 1 0.7% 0 0.0% 3 2.2% 118 87.4% 13 9.6%
10. Subsistence 3,455 70.4% 694 14.1% 576 11.7% 148 3.0% 35 0.7%
11. VoO 7 10.1% 5 7.2% 18 26.1% 37 53.6% 2 2.9%
12 VPD 20 39.2% 4 7.8% 13 25.5% 13 25.5% 1 2.0%
13. TOTAL 7,145 36.7% 1,986 10.2% 2,171 11.2% 7,927 40.7% 233 1.2%
2. Reconsideration Reviews and Outcomes.
To date, there have been 306,396 Eligibility, Denial, or Incompleteness Denial Notices
issued from which claimants can or could seek Reconsideration. Of those, the window to seek
Reconsideration has passed or Reconsideration has been requested for 295,566. Of those,
claimants have requested Reconsideration of 46,531 claims. Thus, the rate of Reconsideration
from all final determinations is 15.7%. The rate of Reconsideration from Eligibility Notices is
5.7%, while the rate of Reconsideration from Denial or Incompleteness Denial Notices is 25.6%.
Table 4 summarizes the Reconsiderations the CAO has completed, the number of Post-
Reconsideration Notices the CAO has issued, and whether the outcome of the Reconsideration
review resulted in an award that was higher than (↑), lower than (↓), or the same as (↔) the
5 Changes to the figures related to an outcome of a Re-Review Notice as compared to the previous outcome is a resultof claims receiving a new Notice, which caused the claims to move from the Decrease section to the Increase sectionof the Report.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 7 of 16
8
outcome previously issued. The table also includes information on whether an original Exclusion
Denial was confirmed or overturned on Reconsideration.
Table 4. Reconsideration.
A. Reconsideration Requests and Reviews
Claim Type Requests Received To Date
NoticeIssued orClaimsClosed
Claims Remaining to ReceiveNotice or Claims Closed
# %
1. Seafood 4,415 4,366 49 1.1%
2. IEL 7,377 6,892 485 6.6%
3. IPV/FV 56 51 5 8.9%
4. BEL 19,735 16,295 3,440 17.4%
5. Start-Up BEL 1,775 1,470 305 17.2%
6. Failed BEL 1,131 972 159 14.1%
7. Coastal RP 2,358 2,333 25 1.1%
8. Wetlands RP 1,382 1,273 109 7.9%
9. RPS 266 265 1 0.4%
10. Subsistence 7,032 5,007 2,025 28.8%
11. VoO 691 685 6 0.9%
12. VPD 313 303 10 3.2%
13. TOTAL 46,531 39,912 6,619 14.2%
B. Reconsideration Notices Issued
Claim Type
Outcome of Reconsideration Notice6
Compensation Amount for Eligible Claims Exclusions/Denials↑ ↓ ↔ Confirmed Overturned
# % # % # % # % # %
1. Seafood 810 18.6% 197 4.5% 540 12.4% 2,214 50.7% 605 13.9%
2. IEL 187 2.7% 135 2.0% 503 7.3% 4,201 61.0% 1,866 27.1%
3. IPV/FV 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 50 98.0% 1 2.0%
4. BEL 802 4.9% 298 1.8% 653 4.0% 7,521 46.2% 7,021 43.1%
5. Start-Up BEL 17 1.2% 13 0.9% 29 2.0% 951 64.7% 460 31.3%
6. Failed BEL 2 0.2% 7 0.7% 21 2.2% 786 80.9% 156 16.0%
7. Coastal RP 96 4.1% 24 1.0% 460 19.7% 1,436 61.6% 317 13.6%
8. Wetlands RP 46 3.6% 28 2.2% 91 7.1% 1,072 84.2% 36 2.8%
9. RPS 1 0.4% 0 0.0% 4 1.5% 233 87.9% 27 10.2%
10. Subsistence 1,012 20.2% 113 2.3% 204 4.1% 2,277 45.5% 1,401 28.0%
11. VoO 59 8.6% 4 0.6% 127 18.5% 424 61.9% 71 10.4%
12 VPD 49 16.2% 5 1.7% 16 5.3% 151 49.8% 82 27.1%
13. TOTAL 3,081 7.7% 824 2.1% 2,648 6.6% 21,316 53.4% 12,043 30.2%
6 Changes to the figures related to outcomes of Reconsideration Notices as compared to the previous outcomes are aresult of multiple claimants receiving new Notices and subsequently requesting further Reconsideration, whichresulted in the removal of the claims associated with these new Reconsideration requests from this Report.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 8 of 16
9
3. Appeals.
(a) BP Appeals.
To date, the CAO has issued 35,442 Eligibility Notices that meet or exceed the threshold
amount rendering them eligible for appeal by BP. Of those, BP has either filed an appeal or the
deadline for BP to file an appeal has passed for 35,121 Notices. Of those 35,121 Notices, BP has
filed 7,811 appeals, a 22.2% appeal rate. Table 5 provides summary information on the status of
BP appeals.
Table 5. Status of BP Appeals.
A. Appeal Filing/Resolution
Status As of Last Report Since Last Report Total
1. BP Appeals Filed 7,735 76 7,8112. Resolved Appeals 7,349 128 7,477(a). Resolved by Panel Decision 3,017 52 3,069(b). Resolved by Parties 1,410 25 1,435(c). Remand to Claims Administrator 281 15 296(d). Discretionary Court Review Granted7 0 23 23(e). Administratively Closed 427 0 427(f). Withdrawn 473 10 483
(g).Inactive Under Reconsideration/Re-Review
296 3 299
(h). Return for Review Under Policy 495 1,445 0 1,445
B. Pending Appeals1. In “Baseball” Process 129
2. Submitted to Panel 181
3. Under Discretionary Court Review 24
4. TOTAL PENDING 334
(b) Claimant Appeals.
Before a claimant may file an appeal, the claimant must request Reconsideration and
receive a Post-Reconsideration Eligibility or Denial Notice. To date, the CAO has issued 14,972
7 Since the last Court Status Report, we have added a new Row A.2(d) to Table 5 to identify claims with a“Discretionary Court Review Granted” status. Row A.2(d) identifies 23 Discretionary Review Requests which havebeen granted that previously had an appeal status of “Under Discretionary Court Review” and were counted in RowB.3.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 9 of 16
10
Post-Reconsideration Eligibility and Denial Notices. Of those, the claimant has either filed an
appeal or the deadline for the claimant to file an appeal has passed for 14,307 Notices. Of those
14,307 Notices, claimants have filed 3,315 appeals, a 23.1% appeal rate. Of the 3,315 claimant
appeals, 2,371 are appeals of Post-Reconsideration Denial Notices, while 944 are appeals of Post-
Reconsideration Eligibility Notices. Table 6 provides summary information on the status of
Claimant Appeals.
Table 6. Status of Claimant Appeals.
A. Appeal Filing/Resolution
Status As of Last Report Since Last Report Total
1. Claimant Appeals Filed 3,167 148 3,315
2. Resolved Appeals 2,464 365 2,829(a). Resolved by Panel Decision 1,903 79 1,982
(b). Resolved by Parties 103 8 111
(c). Remand to Claims Administrator 194 13 207
(d). Discretionary Court Review Granted8 0 263 263
(e). Administratively Closed 102 1 103
(f). Withdrawn 72 1 73
(g). Return for Review Under Policy 495 90 0 90
B. Pending Appeals1. In “Baseball” Process 85
2. In “Non-Baseball” Process 161
3. Submitted to Panel 111
4. Under Discretionary Court Review 129
5. TOTAL PENDING 486
8 Since the last Court Status Report, we have added a new Row A.2(d) to Table 6 to identify claims with a“Discretionary Court Review Granted” status. Row A.2(d) identifies 263 Discretionary Review Requests which havebeen granted that previously had an appeal status of “Under Discretionary Court Review” and were counted in RowB.4.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 10 of 16
11
(c) Resolved Appeals.
As reported in the table below, 10,306 appeals have been resolved. Table 7 provides a
summary of these resolved appeals by Claim Type. The comparison between the Post-Appeal
Award Amount and the Award Amount within the original notice does not take into consideration
the 5.0% increase in compensation that a claimant who prevails upon appeal receives.
Table 7. Outcome After Appeal.
Claim Type
Appeals Settled or Decided by Panel
DRGrant
With-drawn
Admin.
Closed
InactiveUnder
Recon./Re-Review
Returnfor
ReviewUnderPolicy
495
TotalCompensation Amount Following Appeal
Compared to That of Original Notice
Higher
Lower SameDenialUpheld
DenialOver-turned
Remand
1. Seafood 89 23 179 62 9 27 5 55 9 9 0 467
2. IEL 28 74 137 125 15 60 6 17 27 8 0 497
3. IPV/FV 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3
4. BEL 83 1,586 2,588 664 148 361 265 426 458 266 1,535 8,380
5. Coastal RP 45 1 33 187 9 5 5 8 10 0 0 303
6.WetlandsRP
3 10 6 85 3 4 1 6 13 16 0 147
7. RPS 0 8 27 44 0 1 4 5 2 0 0 91
8. Subsistence 6 1 31 11 1 26 0 3 6 0 0 85
9. VoO 17 32 50 68 21 7 0 28 4 0 0 227
10. VPD 2 29 33 22 0 12 0 8 0 0 0 106
11. TOTAL 273 1,764 3,084 1,269 207 503 286 556 530 299 1,535 10,306
(d) Incompleteness Appeals.
The Appeal for Insufficient Documentation (Incompleteness Appeal) allows Economic
Class Members to have their claims reviewed by a separate Documentation Reviewer when the
CAO denies their claims because of insufficient documentation. The Documentation Reviewer
reviews the claimant’s documentation to determine whether the Settlement Program correctly
denied the claim.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 11 of 16
12
Before sending the claim to the Documentation Reviewer, the CAO reviews the appeal
request along with any newly submitted documents. If the claimant has submitted the requested
documentation and cured the incompleteness, the CAO issues the appropriate Notice. If the
claimant still has not submitted the requested documentation, the CAO sends the claim to the
Documentation Reviewer for review.
Before a claimant may file an appeal of an Incompleteness Denial, the claimant must
request Reconsideration and receive a Post-Reconsideration Incompleteness Denial Notice. To
date, the CAO has issued 11,353 Post-Reconsideration Incompleteness Denial Notices. Of those,
the claimant’s appeal deadline has passed or an appeal has been filed for 10,933 Notices. Of the
10,933 Notices eligible for appeal, 6,081 (55.6%) appeal requests have been filed. Table 8
provides summary information on the status of Incompleteness Appeals.
Table 8. Incompleteness Appeals.
A. Incompleteness Appeal Filing/Resolution
Status As of Last Report Since Last Report Total
1. Incompleteness Appeals Filed 5,760 321 6,0812. Appeals Resolved 3,772 248 4,020
(a). Withdrawn/Closed Claims 73 14 87
(b). Cured 1,571 154 1,725
(c). Incompleteness Denial Affirmed 1,836 57 1,893
(d). Incompleteness Denial Overturned 292 23 315
B. Pending Incompleteness Appeals
3. In Pre-Documentation Reviewer Process 1,575
4. Currently Before Documentation Reviewer 486
5. TOTAL PENDING 2,061
(e) Fifth Circuit Appeals.
As a result of decisions handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit (the “Fifth Circuit”) on May 8, 2015, the Parties now have the right to notice further appeals
to the Fifth Circuit from rulings made by the District Court on discretionary review of individual
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 12 of 16
13
claims. The CAO has finalized procedures with the District Court to implement and facilitate the
Fifth Circuit’s rulings since changes were required with respect to the docketing of discretionary
review requests and rulings, and the creation of appeal records. Claimants primarily have taken
various appeals, which have been argued, are awaiting oral argument, and/or are pending decision
before the Fifth Circuit.
E. Seafood Supplemental Distribution.
The Settlement Agreement calls for BP to finance a $2.3 billion Seafood Compensation
Program Settlement Fund. The Settlement Agreement states that any balance available after the
first distribution will be distributed to each claimant in proportion to the claimant’s gross
compensation, unless the Court-Appointed Seafood Neutrals recommend a different formula. On
September 19, 2014, the Seafood Neutrals submitted to the Court their Recommendations for the
Seafood Compensation Program Supplemental Distribution (which can be located on the
Settlement Program’s Website). On November 18, 2014, the Court approved the Seafood
Supplemental Distribution formula established under the Court-Designated Neutrals’
Recommendations for Seafood Compensation Program Supplemental Distribution. The Court
approved a partial Supplemental Distribution targeted at $500 million of the remaining
undistributed portion of the aggregate $2.3 billion fund for the Seafood Compensation Program.
Payments will be disbursed in multiple phases.
As of May 31, 2016, the Settlement Program has issued 4,947 Seafood Supplemental
Distribution Round One Eligibility Notices for a total value of $484,460,897. The Seafood
Supplemental Distribution Round One Notices are included in the report where appropriate. As of
May 31, 2016, the Settlement Program has issued Supplemental Distribution Round One payments
of $478,078,175 to 4,327 claimants.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 13 of 16
14
On December 17, 2015, the Claims Administrator submitted a letter report and
recommendations to the Court providing for a subsequent distribution (“Supplemental Distribution
Round Two”), and thereafter a residual distribution (“Residual Distribution”). The Claims
Administrator recommended that Supplemental Distribution Round Two follow the Seafood
Neutrals’ pro rata approach and include: (1) claimants that were not included in the partial
distribution approved by the Court on November 18, 2014 (“Supplemental Distribution Round
One”) but now have eligible claims; and (2) claimants whose eligible claim populations or values
increased subsequent to their Supplemental Distribution Round One calculations. The Claims
Administrator also recommended that the Residual Distribution be administered after completion
of Supplemental Distribution Rounds One and Two to proportionally divide the remainder of the
$2.3 billion fund to all eligible claimants from those rounds. On January 7, 2016, the Court
approved the Claims Administrator’s report and recommendations in full, requiring that the Claims
Administrator consult with the Seafood Neutrals, Class Counsel, and BP regarding the timing and
amount of the Residual Distribution before disbursing it.
After the Court approved the Claims Administrator’s report and recommendations on
January 7, 2016, the Settlement Program began issuing Seafood Supplemental Round Two
Eligibility Notices. As of May 31, 2016, the Settlement Program has issued 500 Seafood
Supplemental Distribution Round Two Eligibility Notices for a total value of $29,640,637. The
Seafood Supplemental Distribution Round Two Notices are included in the report where
appropriate. As of May 31, 2016, the Settlement Program has issued Supplemental Distribution
Round Two payments of $21,511,559 to 330 claimants.
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 14 of 16
15
II. CONCLUSION
The Claims Administrator offers this Report to ensure that the Court is informed of the
status of the Settlement Program to date. If the Court would find additional information helpful,
the Claims Administrator stands ready to provide it at the Court’s convenience.
/s/ Patrick Juneau_______PATRICK A. JUNEAUCLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 15 of 16
16
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that the above and foregoing pleading has been served on All Counsel by
electronically uploading the same to LexisNexis File & Serve in accordance with Pretrial Order
No. 12, and that the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of Court of the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana by using the CM/ECF System, which will send
a notice of electronic filing in accordance with the procedures established in MDL 2179, on this
30th day of June, 2016.
/s/ Patrick Juneau_______PATRICK A. JUNEAUCLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764 Filed 06/30/16 Page 16 of 16
%
1. Alabama 16.5%
2. Florida 27.3%
3. Louisiana 31.0%
4. Mississippi 11.7%
5. Texas 5.1%
6. Other 8.4%
7. Total 100.0%
%
1. 6.5%
2. 15.8%
3. 0.1%
4. 34.8%
5. 2.0%
6. 1.5%
7. 11.0%
8. 7.2%
9. 0.8%
10. 17.6%
11. 2.3%
12. 0.4%
13. 100.0%
Public Statistics for the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages SettlementJune 1, 2016
Claims Administrator Patrick Juneau has announced that the Settlement Program began issuing payments on July 31, 2012, and has been issuing outcome Notices since July 15, 2012. The Program will issue Notices on a rolling basis as we complete reviews, and they will include Eligibility Notices, Incompleteness Notices, and Denial Notices. Each Notice will provide information explaining the outcome. We will post Notices on the secure DWH Portal for any law firm or unrepresented claimant who uses the DWH Portal. We will notify firms and unrepresented claimants by email at the end of each day if we have posted a Notice that day. Firms and unrepresented claimants may then log onto the DWH Portal to see a copy of the Notice(s). Law Firms or claimants who do not use the DWH Portal will receive Notices in the mail. Claimants who receive an Eligibility Notice and qualify for a payment will receive that payment after all appeal periods have passed, if applicable, and the claimant has submitted all necessary paperwork, including a fully executed Release and Covenant Not to Sue.
Filings by State of Residence
ClaimsTable 1State Form
Submitted63,331 46,929
105,098 76,645
Unique Claimants with Forms Submitted
32,407 15,138
384,671 261,358
Number of Claims by Claim Type
119,145 75,995
45,133 35,432
19,557 11,219
Form Submitted
Seafood Compensation Program 24,956 10,543
Claim TypeClaims
Individual Economic Loss 60,792 58,601
Individual Periodic Vendor or Festival Vendor Economic Loss 389 383
28,643
Business Economic Loss 133,840 93,555
Start-Up Business Economic Loss 7,809 6,215
Total 384,671 261,358
Subsistence 67,690 67,183
VoO Charter Payment 8,959 6,291
Table 2 Unique Claimants with Form Submitted
Vessel Physical Damage 1,564 1,309
Wetlands Real Property 27,726 4,494
Real Property Sales 3,067 1,609
Failed Business Economic Loss 5,703 4,794
Coastal Real Property 42,176
Page 1 of 4
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764-1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 1 of 4
Other Denials
Seafood Compensation Program
13,703 2,256 1,569 2,567 30,747
Individual Economic Loss 6,952 1,677 3,996 2,363 60,031
Individual Periodic Vendor or Festival Vendor Economic Loss
8 0 84 95 473
Business Economic Loss 40,869 1,588 4,795 6,039 124,578 Start-Up Business Economic Loss
1,053 45 963 310 7,586
Failed Business Economic Loss 69 92 1,369 181 5,503
Coastal Real Property 29,620 71 5,856 1,074 42,307
Wetlands Real Property 8,614 12 6,648 1,636 20,859
Real Property Sales 863 7 696 1,112 3,110
Subsistence 25,387 575 4,176 728 61,640
VoO Charter Payment 7,117 15 608 70 8,896
Vessel Physical Damage 832 27 182 54 1,556
Total 135,087 6,365 30,942 16,229 367,286
Table 4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Public Statistics for the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages Settlement
Notices Issued
Table 3
DenialTotal Claims
Issued Notice
1. 81 57 2,411 0 4,730 1,155 2,218
Exclusion Denials
Prior GCCFRelease
Causation Denials
Incomplete Denials
Claim TypeEligible - Payable
Eligible - No Payment
IncompleteOpt-Outs
Withdrawn Closed
783 3,445
3. 3 12 28 0 188 3 52
2. 5,568 3,581 2,488 100 29,078
953 11,376
5. 1,395 77 56 601 2,298 108 680
4. 25,339 1,575 884 7,946 23,214
112 616
7. 76 14 959 0 1,687 392 2,558
6. 706 85 143 448 1,682
94 2,967
9. 0 11 88 37 101 21 174
8. 546 63 95 0 184
277 2,397
11. 2 16 0 0 792 95 181
10. 14,764 38 2,321 0 10,977
19 144
13. 48,488 5,536 9,473 9,132 75,214 4,012 26,808
12. 8 7 0 0 283
Payment Information
Claim Type Eligibility Notices Issued with
Payment OfferAccepted Offers Payments Made
Number Amount Number Amount Number AmountUnique
Claimants Paid Seafood Compensation Program 13,703 $1,695,405,457 13,499 $1,683,905,818 13,355 $1,668,538,604 5,217
Individual Economic Loss 6,952 $85,857,292 6,651 $83,547,372 6,457 $80,408,029 6,457
$77,085 8
Business Economic Loss 40,869 $5,511,487,433 37,999 $5,176,486,319 34,881 $4,805,054,598 31,957
Individual Periodic Vendor or Festival Vendor Economic Loss
8 $77,085 8 $77,085 8
$144,570,771 923
Failed Business Economic Loss 69 $6,468,811 60 $5,683,270 55 $4,823,224 55
Start-Up Business Economic Loss 1,053 $154,449,109 1,003 $147,504,921 978
$158,683,590 22,603
Wetlands Real Property 8,614 $195,454,519 7,914 $193,704,465 7,680 $191,537,326 1,975
Coastal Real Property 29,620 $164,509,095 29,156 $161,025,518 28,833
$40,450,447 762
Subsistence 25,387 $238,828,076 22,242 $217,041,205 20,621 $197,290,008 20,621
Real Property Sales 863 $40,478,745 860 $40,450,447 860
$280,449,384 5,377
Vessel Physical Damage 832 $12,673,757 823 $12,551,936 809 $12,367,636 753
VoO Charter Payment 7,117 $283,151,872 7,093 $281,012,038 7,073
$7,584,250,701 91,222
40% Request 3,331 $56,873,404 3,331
Totals on DWH Releases 135,087 $8,388,841,249 127,308 $8,002,990,394 121,610
$6,750,555 2,014
Total Payments 127,310 $7,647,874,660 95,292
6% Refund 2,369
Page 2 of 4
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764-1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 2 of 4
Table 5
Appeal Status BP Appeals Claimant Appeals Total Appeals
1. Resolved by Panel Decision 3,069 1,982 5,051
2. Discretionary Court Review Granted 23 263 286
3. Resolved by Parties 1,435 111 1,546
4. Withdrawn 483 73 556
5. Administratively Closed 427 103 530
6. Inactive Under Reconsideration/Re-Review
299 299
7. Remand to Claims Administrator 296 207 503
8. Return for Review Under Policy 495 1,445 90 1,535
9. Total 7,477 2,829 10,306
10. In “Baseball” Process 129 85 214
11. In “Non-Baseball” Process 0 161 161
12. Submitted to Panel 181 111 292
13. Under Discretionary Court Review 24 129 153
14. Total 334 486 820
15. Total Appealed Claims 7,811 3,315 11,126
Chart 2: Appeal Resolutions by Month
Public Statistics for the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages SettlementJune 1, 2016
Appeals Received
Resolved Appeals
Pending Appeals
Grand Total
Chart 1: Payments Made by Month
Page 3 of 4
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764-1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 3 of 4
Public Statistics for the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages SettlementJune 1, 2016
Legend:
4. Payment Information - The timing of payment can be affected by a number of factors. Even after the DHECC receives a Release, delay in receipt of a W -9, or in receipt of the Attorney Fee Acknowledgment Form can delay payment. In addition, any alterations or omissions on the Release Form, or an assertion of a third-party lien against an award amount, can delay payment. As a result, this report will show a higher number of Accepted Offers than Amounts Paid. The Seafood Compensation Program row (row 1) of Table 4 includes Seafood Supplemental Distribution Claims (both Round One and Round Two).
5. Appeals Received - Excludes Appeals closed pursuant to 4/24/13 Court Order.
6. Note: The Claims Administrator continually monitors the status of all claim filings. Through this process, the Claims Administrator may find duplicate claims from the same claimant. In such cases, the Claims Administrator will close the duplicate claim and only process the remaining valid claim. This report excludes duplicate claims from all counts of claims filed.
7. Note: The Seafood Supplemental Distribution Notices (both Round One and Round Two) are included in the Exhibit A as appropriate.
8. Note: The final deadline for filing all claims other than those that fall into the Seafood Compensation Program was 6/8/15.
9. Note: The total claims received may continue to experience insignificant changes as the CAO continues to process outstanding claims.
10. As to Table 3, the Total Claims Issued Notice figure contains 3,502 Notices of Withdrawal, Closure, and Denial which have previously been issued to claimants prior to the finalization and submissions of their associated Claim Forms. The partially completed Claim Forms associated with these Notices are not included within the total population of Claim Forms Submitted in Table 1.
11. Since the last Court Status Report, we have added a new Row 2 to Table 5 to track claims with a “Discretionary Court Review Granted” status. Row 2 identifies the resolution of 286 Discretionary Review Requests this month for claims that previously had an appeal status of “Under Discretionary Court Review” and were counted in Row 13.
3. Notices Issued – The Seafood Compensation Program row (row 1) of Table 3 includes Seafood Supplemental Distribution Claims (both Round One and Round Two). The count of Notices Issued in Table counts each unique claim issued a Notice only once. For claims issued multiple Notices, this report uses the following hierarchy when counting the claim: (1) Eligibility Notice if the claim has been paid; (2) Most recent active Notice if the claim has not been paid; (3) If the claim has been closed it will not be counted as an Eligibility Notice unless the claim has been paid.
2. Unique Claimants with Form Submitted - Counts the unique number of claimants with at least one Claim Form Submitted for each Claim Type. Because claimants may file claims for more than one Claim Type, the sum of all Claim Types will not equal the count of total unique claimants.
1. Form Submitted - Includes electronically filed claim forms after the claimant or his attorney completes the electronic signature and clicks the Submit button. This definition also includes hard copy claim forms where the DWH Intake Team has completed both the linking of scanned images and the data entry on that form.
Page 4 of 4
Case 2:10-md-02179-CJB-SS Document 20764-1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 4 of 4