Claim Number: 

Claimant: 

Type of Claimant: 

Type of Claim: 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: 

FACTS: 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION 

913009-0001 

State of California 

State 

Removal Costs 

$4,976.82 

On June l 0, 20 l 0, the vessel HEADWAY, Official Number 5 18806, was reported to have sunk at a pier 

located at 307 Fulton Street Shipyard, Antioch, California. Responders found the vessel partially 

submerged and leaking a combination of hydraulic fluid and diesel mixture creating a visible sludge and 

sheen on the San Joaquin River, a navigable waterway of the US. 

The Responsible Party (RP) contracted National Response Corporation (NRC) to deploy boom around the 

barge, remove and dispose of all product within the cargo tanks of the vessel. 1 The RP also contracted 

24-7 MER LLC to dive and plug all vents on the vessel. 

On June 15, 2010, after the vessel was refloated and cargo removed, the FOSC and OSPR declared the 

vessel to be clean and that no additional FOSC action is required.2 

CLAIM AND CLAIMANT: 

On July 12, 2012, State of California Department of Fish and Game, Office of Spill Prevention and 

Response (DFG OSPR), presented a claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) for $5,894.99 

seeking reimbursement of their alleged uncompensated removal costs. The costs are for OSPR personnel 

costs, vehicle costs and administrative costs. 

The NPFC made an initial offer on the original claim submission in the amount of $4,579 .11 on 

November 27, 2012. The remaining costs were denied because: 

• Claimant fa iled to provide the additional information that was requested by NPFC, or 

• Costs were not reasonable response costs, or 

• Costs were unsubstantiated. 

REOUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION: 

On January 3, 2013, the Claimant sent an email request for reconsideration to the NPFC along with 

supplemental supporting documentation. The Claimant provided Daily Activity Reports to support the 

personnel cost associated with Mr. David Price who was involved in the response that were previously 

denied by NPFC. This documentation was not included in original submission. 

The Claimant asserts in their first submission they did not have access, within the specified time frame, to 

all the documentation requested by the NPFC. 

NP FC Determi11atio11 011 Reconsideration 

1 DFG Narrative/Supplemental Report (prepared by MURTHA #526) & USCG MISLE Case Report 504572 

2 DFG Narrative/Supplemental Report (prepared by MURTHA #526) & USCG MISLE Case Report 504572 

2 
Under 33 CFR § 136.1 OS( a) and 136. l 05( e)(6), the claimant bears the burden of providing to the NPFC all 

evidence, information, and documentation deemed necessary by the Director, NPFC, to support the claim. 

Under 33 CFR § 136.233, a claimant must establish loss of profits or impainnent of earning capacity and 

that the loss was due to the destruction or injury to real or personal property or natural resources. The 

NPFC considered all the documentation submitted by the Claimant. The request for reconsideration must 

be in writing and include the factual or legal grounds for the relief requested, providing any additional 

suppo11 for the claim. 33 CFR § 136.115( d). 

The NPFC performed a de 11 ovo review of the entire claim submission upon reconsideration. 

Upon consideration of all infom1ation and arguments made by the Claimant on reconsideration, the NPFC 

offers the following: 

• The Daily Activity Reports submitted to suppoti the personnel costs for Mr. Price adequately 

shows his involvement in the spill response. The NPFC has determined OPA compensable 

personnel costs for Mr. Price is approved in the amount of $397. 71. 

Based on the foregoing and in light of the new documentation provided, the NPFC has detennined that 

$4,976.82 is OPA compensable. The NPFC has denied $918. 17 for which the Claimant has not requested 

reconsideration or produced new information to overturn the original denial of said costs. 

DETERMINED Al\tlOUNT N RECONSIDERATION: $4,976.82 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor's Review: 1107113 

Supervisor Action: Approl'ed 011 reco11sideratio11 as stated abm•e 

Supervisor·s Comments: 

3