people who live along the gulf coast to take advantage of this time where we traditionally have five days for additional questions for the record that mr. feinberg would respond to. i would like to get people who live in alabama chance to have met with me before and who were promised certain things and they didn't get those promises fulfilled, would you have any objection to letting us get those questions submitted to you? >> no, i would welcome it. >> thank you. a couple of questions. vice president biden said the $20 billion is a floor, not a ceiling. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> let's just rounded up, $6 billion. how much do you think before august the 2013, based on the trends you have seen thus far, how much you think you will exhaust? >> i would be reluctant congressman to take an estimate of that, but i remind you as you know, that $20 billion is used for purposes other than the gulf coast claims facility. local cleanup costs come out of the 20 billion, government claims that are being paid in alabama by bp comes out of the 20 billion. so i can't venture a guess as to how much the total amount will be that will be spent. i would like to think that the 20 billion would be adequate to compensate eligible claims, but bp has made it clear that if 20 billion is not enough, they will honor all additional financial obligations. >> you also indicated that you were independent of bp. your quote in july 2010, i work with the people of the gulf region. i am totally independent although the federal judge has now questioned that. i want to try to maximize as much compensation as i can fairly and consistently to the people i'm trying to serve down there. do you still stand by that statement? >> i do, and a. >> but does bp not have the final say of these large settlement claims? do they not have to approve or disallow? >> absolutely not. absolutely not. what bp can do under the protocol, if it so desires for claims that are over -- overpaid by the gccf and amounts of $500,000, they have the right to seek to appeal if they want to a three-judge panel that was set up not by me, but was set up to review the claim. bp to my knowledge has exercised that right in one single case. >> well, that is not the information we have received but we will take that up separately. u. of also indicated in an answer to an earlier question that there is basically 1% of the claims that are fraudulent. is that right? >> we have received i think i have got this. we have received what we think are 14,000 raw chile claims and we have sent 2800 to the department of justice. >> regardless, data we got from your own web site, the auditor and accounted in my district has collected every day to compare shows that 116,000 of the 331,560 claims processed have been refused payment which would mean 35% of the claims have been refused payment. according to your date are you stating that 35% of those that have been refused payment or because of fraud? >> no, not at all. if we have refuse claims, could be for a number of reasons, no documentation, insufficient documentation, ineligible. it might be a claim from idaho, i don't know. i am just throwing this out. government claims are ineligible. moratorium claims are of course ineligible. there are all sorts of reasons that we either denied claims or dean claims to be deficient. >> thank you mr. chair. .. we received more claims in a week than we received in the entire life of the 9/11 victim compensation fund. -year-old and a 2 of the claims will result in some inconsistency. it is inevitable. what we do when we find in consistency, either we find on our own or the claimant bring that to our attention or the client's account or lawyers bring it to our attention. we will look at it. if we made a mistake, if it is inconsistent we will pay the difference. we are not looking to promote inconsistency. it is a problem we don't want to have magnified. >> i yield the balance of my time. >> thank you. i have a few more questions. according to data collected from your web site everyday and analyzed individually by the medical doctor and city officials in alabama, 95% of the claims that have been processed and reviewed, 54% have been processed issued for final payment, 46% have not received final payment. 69% paid of the quick paid for a variety that require no additional documentation to process. 3% pay for the final payment. i throw those numbers out because basically you would lead us to believe that this has been a success because so many people apply. 2,000 we continue to apply and yet is it not true that the burden you have placed on many of these individuals and businesses for additional requests for information even when they submitted their claims with certified accountant and shown the documentation, that there has been great inconsistency in the payment process and more people were not paid and have been paid. >> i don't think there has been great inconsistency. that is why you are promoting the notion of the independent audit to get some answers to that question. i think the people that take a quick payment take a quick payment because they don't have any additional documentation to show or have already been adequately paid during the emergency payment period. i point with pride to the fact that overall almost $6 billion have gone out in one year. we are doing something right. when you say people are applying 2200 new claims a week because they are being tricked or deceive i don't think that is the case. they see their next-door neighbor getting paid and they file a claim and make the same argument and hope they get paid as well. >> you mentioned audit. i contacted you in the spring of last year and asked you to initiate an audit on your own and i don't believe the qaddafi agreed to do that. we had the appropriation bill demanding an audit requiring the justice department to do it because the assistant attorney general who came to our district realized this was not adding up as intended and even the attorney general when he was along the gulf coast earlier this year, then contacted mr. feinberg and said an audit is necessary. this has not begun yet. they are not even named to do the audit. >> that is correct. i just want to say i don't speak for the department. the department will choose the auditor and move your demand. i want to point out the independent audit it is my understanding. i mentioned this earlier. on the one hand there is a demand for department move forward with great speed to get this over do. on the other hand the department as i understand it from letters, copies of which i get, there are various public interest groups, lawyers, elected officials who want input into that process and some of them in the last few weeks got to the department with their suggestions so the tension between speed and inclusiveness is partly the reason there has been a delay in your view. thank you. >> we have less than ten minutes to vote. if you look at the number of people that haven't voted we have more time than that. i will recognize mr. whitman. this will be the last question and then we will recess. the time of getting back here is approximately 11:30. we only have a half-hour or so. for those of you that want to engage please get back here after last vote. you are recognized for five minutes. >> mr. feinberg, i want to follow up on dr. fleming's assertion about the worst industry in louisiana. as you know the united states this year be its shallow oysters and interconnected processors in one state rely on harvesters and dealers in other states to have their market needs met in those areas. the mid-atlantic is part of that. you heard this nonsense about west coast also. in that vein there are processors out there that have these relationships with producers that have contracts that have to deliver a certain number of wasters. in this realm of you considering claims, is it reasonable to consider a claim from somebody that processes wasters in virginia that relies on those oysters from the gulf as a legitimate claim under your process? >> absolutely. if there is a direct link between virginia oyster processing company that depends its livelihood on gulf coast shrimp by all means i can go back and see but i am sure we paid some of those claims. in maryland we are paid a couple of oyster restaurants that we paid that were dependent on gulf shrimp for their livelihood. we say that the seafood industry is interconnected with shrimp and oysters and in some instances even fish. to make sure you are keeping in mind the impact of secondary impact on states and producers is critical. i would like to yield the balance of my time. >> thank you for allowing me to sit in today. mr feinberg, i share the same frustration as other gulf state colleagues have expressed from bonner to congressman landry. we are frustrated. we are tired. many of us feel hopeless in the whole process. we also feel in salted. we have some very smart people. we have accountants and lawyers trying to help people along the gulf coast provide claims and support and documentation. as they do it they feel like they are given the best information, the claim center once and is still reject it or there are delays in processing so the comment congressman landry made is stonewalleding to drag it out or not pay out the $20 billion which was supposed to be the 4. not the ceiling on making sure those effected by the worst man-made disaster in our nation's history hold again. but people don't feel like they see inconsistency. they -- a perfect example is omega protein. a large company that got a $45 million pay out in their first year and when you have shrimpers and charter boat captains and others who have made a living for generations off of the gulf coast have yet to receive a first payment or payments being offered or insulting and embarrassing and leaves them with the option to take what they can, cut their losses or go to litigation. people in mississippi litigation is the last thing we really like to go to suppose some people will go to it. the main thing is i am expressing what south mississippi and my colleagues all along the gulf states, this is what we are seeing and feeling. going forward, you have $14 billion left. give these people -- you are going to send out a massive bailout. if you have your paperwork come in and keep communicating that to the public and letting people know they can receive reimbursements or they have the right to come in and do a claim. also listen to the people who have made living out of the gulf war made a living the fifth court six or 7 generations if your methodology for reimbursement is not acceptable to them try to come in and find common ground. find that place because these are the experts. i don't expect you to know how to reimburse. you probably have an idea but that is not what you are doing especially going to the cities and municipalities that is not in your range but you have been on ground zero for a long time. the methodology being offered cities and municipalities are in solving. the city was offered $79,000. may be $79 million would be acceptable. $1 per resident. i share the same concern as my colleagues. i appreciate the chairman allowing me to come in. please take that home and make it right. >> i thank the gentleman. for quick question. i am sympathetic to mr. landry on this shrimping question. the question of how we deal with these fishermen. this is a huge unprecedented science experiments that took place with bp dumping all the chemicals in with the oil and now we're seeing the worst shrimping in 40 years. if it continues past 2013 my understanding is after 2013 all the money goes back to bp. do you have a recommendation to us in terms of how to handle an issue like that given that the science might be pointing to longer-term economic catastrophe brought to shrimpers and that the funds in 2013 -- do you have any words of wisdom how we should handle it? >> i would say two things. one is what happens after august of 2013 is a subject that the congress should raise with bp and are suppose the administration which is part of that escrow agreement. as you pointed out, congressman, this is a rather unprecedented situation. bp in putting up as you pointed out this $20 billion is a rather unique contribution by a private corporation to try to create a system that is not required by existing law. i think bp deserve some credit. >> i am giving them credit. i did that in the opening statement. it is only what happens given the fact that there is a causal connection between what bp did and what could continue to be happening in the gulf in 2013-14-15 in terms of ensuring there is some capacity to compensate people of the hardest occurring in a significant way particularly for the fishermen. >> one option would be if bp ones to extend the deadline of the program past august of 2013 or the foreseeable future that is something congress might raise directly with bp. >> we are going to break and i will simply sarah reference this in my opening statement simply this is unprecedented and repeated several times but the fact this initiative did come from this administration without any semblance of oversight is somewhat problematic and this is maybe an experience of something in progress. we will have to see how it works. we are getting close to votes. mr. feinberg, we anticipate the votes will be done at 11:30 and we will reconvene at that time. please stand for recess. [silence] [silence] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> usually what we do is post it on the web site and invite comment. [inaudible conversations] >> everywhere i turn the shrimpers -- the elected officials are concerned particularly about the future of what shrimp harvesting in louisiana area, that is where we're hearing the most. it is rather unanimous. we have always said in the gulf coast facility that we will monitor events and reserve the right to modify our methodology as we learn more about what is going on in the gulf and this is an example of the committee. something to be said here about doing something about the shrimp industry. >> have they not been fairly compensated? >> i think they have been fairly compensated and a problem is we are hearing now in 2011 that what we have seen in the way of harvesting is problematic. >> in regards to the independent audit, you expressed support of doing that. does congress have to approve that? i am sorry if this is a question from someone who has not been following this closely but has this been started or is there any idea -- >> i am waiting for the top of the justice's decision as far as to how -- it is the department's call. >> are you expecting that? >> if you are a shrimper that except a final payment can reapply? >> you thought was the right thing to do you released it. >> the shrimpers -- >> that is one of the problems. i want more from prison the system. >> leftover money from 2013, this money left over to congress to deal with. >> leftover money in the congress is congress's. >> the administration and bp signed and escrow agreement. money that is not extended congress. >> i would have nothing to do with that. thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the chairman notes we have a quorum and will resume. we thank you, mr feinberg for hang in with us. we are back in session. i believe mr. sutherland, you are up for five minutes. >> thank you. mr. feinberg, thank you for coming up. i have some questions i called you several months ago and you were kind enough to discuss my concerns on the phone. some of -- some follow-up on the dialogue -- can you hear me ok? okay. i want to ask as far as determining how do you determine loss based on the documentation that you have required and should require in order to pay a fair claim to restore the damage small-businesses have incurred. talk to me for a moment about what your examiners look at as far as how far you go back and if someone asked you this question i apologize. addresses that for a moment for me. >> we will look, congressman, to income statement, wage statement free still. we will go back and look before the spill in 2009. will look at the beginning of 2010. inappropriate cases 2008. we will try to get a composite picture. what was this small business doing before the spill. what did the trend look like. how were they doing? what does it look like toast still? sometimes a business will say be careful. that was during katrina and that is a bad example and we will take that into account. we try to come up with a fair picture pre-post. >> if i may address that little deeper. are live in panama city, florida. one of the larger coastal communities along the gulf coast. we had a significant event that occurred in the history of not just our county but our region. we opened our brand new airport in bay county just a month or so prior to the oil spill. the reason i bring this up is that was done in 2010. the ten years preceding that as you can imagine, incredible effort to get this project done. there has not been an airport built from scratch since denver. it was a pretty big deal. we have bounced back and we have bounced back soundly. 2011, taxes were great, businesses were starting to recover and really had a wonderful year. i could make an argument that you have to factor in 2009 and 2011 if you are going to determine what 2010 would have been like with that significant event. what we have done in securing other airlines into that airport, delta and southwest, airlines we never enjoyed, i can make a pretty good argument that if you just look backwards and not forward then the small businesses that will file those claims will not have the benefit of the doubt of recovering a fair and equitable amount of money. >> these small businesses out to have you representing them. we welcome that type of dialogue to try and get before the gccf, to try and get a good, fair composite picture. let me just say it sounds to me that is probably if it is an airport damage claim it is probably a government claim. if the airport can show it lost revenue because of the spill because people didn't fly in because of fear of the spill that sound like a government claim that i wouldn't handle. >> we have been meeting with bp representatives regarding government claims and that is another effort for the office. i want to say that our small businesses can have especially around the geographical area of the airport, it's served multiple counties. i have walton -- i am pleased to hear you say that. >> if you want to convene that group or you want me to meet with a group that can explain the situation and make sure we do it the right way i will respond immediately to your suggestion. >> we will do our homework and try to gather those individuals that have that concern and reach out to your office. you will hear from me. i yield back. thank you. >> the gentleman yields back. you have one more question? >> mr. landry retains -- [inaudible] >> mr. landry, you are up for five minutes. >> i want to go back and clarify a couple things. i noticed directly your responsibility but going to the moratorium, that fund is being closed off. is that correct? you have -- >> until i heard this morning the representation that was closed off i didn't know it was closed off. i doubt that it is closed off but i don't know. i have enough problems of my own with the gccf. >> the problem i am having is to me it concerns me because i believe the oil and gas companies and fishermen and everyone else, the moratorium was a direct impact from the spill. so there are a lot of businesses directly tied to the oil and gas industry or indirectly tied to the oil and gas industry have been impacted that were impacted by the moratorium and i am concerned that they are not ge