Tampa, Florida


Email Tom Young Tom Young on LinkedIn Tom Young on Twitter Tom Young on Facebook Tom Young on Avvo
Tom Young
Tom Young
Attorney • (813) 251-9706

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2015-1667: Moratoria review limited to offshore oil & gas, BP’s appeal “much ado about nothing”


The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision may be found here, as well as a glossary of BP Settlement terms.

This Claimant operates a single lugger type push boat. It derives all its revenue through a related party, which acts as a broker between the Claimant and its customers. [The related party broker] did not file a claim due to probable moratoria losses.

BP appeals the Administrator’s award pointing to the related party transactions and potential moratoria losses. BP makes much ado about Claimant not answering Question 10 on the BEL claim form which asks if the business did significant services, goods or services in the offshore oil and gas industry in 2009. A review of the records proves that Claimant did not answer that question. However, an in depth review of the records shows why. This Claimant does not operate in the Gulf of Mexico. It performs its services only on inland waterways consistent with NAICS code 483211; transport of cargo on lakes, rivers and intercoastal waterways and thus did not provide Question 10 type services in the Gulf. Section 38.93 of the Settlement Agreement requires a moratoria review only for losses related to “offshore oil industry activity”. The Claimant did not have to answer Question 10 due to its NAICS code not being listed in Exhibit 19. As for the related party issue, Accountant Note #8 shows the Accounting Review Team determined that while the revenue of the Claimant comes from a related party, it originates from a non related third party and is simply a pass thru. BP appeal issues created an appearance of being credible but a careful review of the documents prove to be “much ado about nothing“. The award is affirmed.

Leave a Comment

Have an opinion? Please leave a comment using the box below.

For information on acceptable commenting practices, please visit Lifehacker's guide to weblog comments. Comments containing spam or profanity will be filtered or deleted.