2

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: N19050-0011

Claimant: Texas General Land Office

Type of Claimant: State

Type of Claim: Removal Costs

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $172.63

Action Taken: Offer in the amount of $172.63

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On May 13, 2019 at approximately 2:00 pm local time, United States Coast Guard (USCG) Sector 

Corpus Christi notified the National Response Center (NRC) via report # 1245538 that they found tar 

balls that washed ashore on the beaches of Mustang Island and Padre Island in the Gulf of Mexico, a 

navigable waterway of the United States. USCG Sector Corpus Christi, in its capacity as the Federal On 

Scene Coordinator (FOSC), arrived on scene and conducted an assessment of the affected areas and 

decided to open a Federal Project Number # N19050 in the amount of $10,000 to cover the costs of 

removal and disposal activities performed by Miller Environmental Services (Miller), as the contracted 

Oil Spill Response Organization (OSRO).1

Texas General Land Office (TGLO or claimant), in its capacity as the State On Scene Coordinator 

(SOSC), assisted and jointly monitored the activities of the response contractor.2 The FOSC determined 

there was no responsible party for the incident.3 Miller Environmental disposed of a combined total of 

602 gallons of tar balls recovered from the beaches from May 13, 2019 to November 5, 2019.4

The Texas General Land Office (TGLO or claimant) presented its uncompensated removal cost claim 

to the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for $172.63 on March 4, 2020.5 The NPFC has thoroughly 

reviewed all documentation submitted with the claim, analyzed the applicable law and regulations, and 

after careful consideration has determined that $172.63 is compensable and offers this amount as full and 

final compensation of this claim.6

I. INCIDENT, RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

Incident

On May 13, 2019, United States Coast Guard Sector Corpus Christi, in its capacity as the FOSC 

reported to NRC that tar balls washed ashore on the beaches of Mustang Island and Padre Island in the 

Gulf of Mexico. The FOSC arrived on scene and conducted an assessment of the affected areas and 

decided to open a Federal Project Number # N19050 in the amount of $10,000 to cover the costs of 

removal and disposal activities performed by Miller Environmental Services (Miller), as the contracted 

 

1 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019.

2 USCG SITREP-Pol Two dated June 21, 2019.

3 USCG SITREPS-Pol One through Five and Final dated November 5, 2019.

4 USCG SITREP-Pol Five and Final dated November 5, 2019.

5 Texas General Land Office claim submission letter dated February 14, 2020.

6 33 CFR 136.115.

(b) (6)
3

Oil Spill Response Organization (OSRO).7 TGLO, in its capacity as the SOSC, performed joint 

assessment with the FOSC and assisted in the response by patrolling the area.8

Recovery Operations

After being notified by NRC, TGLO Response Officer, , SOSC, arrived on scene 

coordinated with the FOSC Petty Officer for the recovery of tar balls throughout tar ball season. 

1.05 gallons of oil was collected. All recovered tar balls are to be placed in a roll off box that Miller 

Environmental had staged at their facility at the request of the FOSC.9

II. CLAIMANT AND NPFC:

On March 4, 2020, the NPFC received a claim for uncompensated removal costs from Texas General 

Land Office dated March 3, 2020 in the amount of $172.63.

III. DETERMINATION PROCESS:

 The NPFC utilizes an informal process when adjudicating claims against the Oil Spill Liability Trust 

Fund (OSLTF).10 As a result, 5 U.S.C. § 555(e) requires the NPFC to provide a brief statement explaining 

its decision. This determination is issued to satisfy that requirement.

 When adjudicating claims against the OSLTF, the NPFC acts as the finder of fact. In this role, the 

NPFC considers all relevant evidence, including evidence provided by claimants and evidence obtained 

independently by the NPFC, and weighs its probative value when determining the facts of the claim.11

The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, or conclusions reached by other 

entities.12 If there is conflicting evidence in the record, the NPFC makes a determination as to what 

evidence is more credible or deserves greater weight, and makes its determination based on the 

preponderance of the credible evidence.

IV. DISCUSSION: 

 The NPFC is authorized to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are consistent with the 

National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NPFC has promulgated a comprehensive set of regulations 

governing the presentment, filing, processing, settling, and adjudicating such claims. The claimant bears 

the burden of providing all evidence, information, and documentation deemed relevant and necessary by 

the Director of the NPFC, to support and properly process the claim. 

 Before reimbursement can be authorized for uncompensated removal costs, the claimant must 

demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence:

(a) That the actions taken were necessary to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the effects of the incident;

 

7 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019.

8 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019.

9 USCG SITREP-Pol Five and Final dated November 5, 2019.

10 33 CFR Part 136.

11 See, e.g., Boquet Oyster House, Inc. v. United States, 74 ERC 2004, 2011 WL 5187292, (E.D. La. 2011), “[T]he 

Fifth Circuit specifically recognized that an agency has discretion to credit one expert's report over another when 

experts express conflicting views.” (Citing, Medina County v. Surface Transp. Bd., 602 F.3d 687, 699 (5th Cir. 

2010)).

12 See, e.g., Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds Center, 71 Fed. Reg. 

60553 (October 13, 2006) and Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds 

Center 72 Fed. Reg. 17574 (concluding that NPFC may consider marine casualty reports but is not bound by them).

(b) (6) (b) (6)