UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF …deepwaterhorizoneconomicsettlement.com/docs/Court_Status_Report_No... · UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

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.


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.


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.


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.


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%


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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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


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


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.


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.


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


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


%

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

medwards

Text Box

EXHIBIT A

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


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


Appeals Received

Resolved Appeals

Pending Appeals

Grand Total

Chart 1: Payments Made by Month

Page 3 of 4



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


Documents

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF …deepwaterhorizoneconomicsettlement.com/docs/Court_Status_Report_No... · UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA