3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION1 

Claim Number: UCGPE20704-URC001 

Claimant: Missouri Department of Natural Resources Environmental Emergency 

Response (MDNR) 

Type of Claimant: State

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $1,208.12 

Action Taken: Denied

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On April 15, 2020 at approximately 3:00 p.m., Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

(“MDNR” or “Claimant”) reported to the National Response Center (NRC) that five 5-gallon 

buckets of an unknown oily substance were found dumped in Opossum Branch, a tributary of 

Elkhorn Creek, a navigable waterway of the United States.2

 

Based on the location of this incident, the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) is the 

United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 7, Mr. .

3

 The FOSC 

reported that MDNR dispatched a State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC) to conduct an assessment

of the incident. Upon completion of the preliminary assessment, no Responsible Party (RP) was 

identified, therefore the FOSC made the decision to open federal project number (FPN) 

UCGPE20704 and hired MDNR through a Pollution Removal Funding Authorization (PRFA) to 

remove the oil containers and the oil and oily waste from the scene.

4

 On April 28, 2021, the 

National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) Case Management Division closed the FPN because

MDNR never submitted their cost reimbursement package in a timely fashion5in order to receive 

compensation under the FPN leaving MDNR the only remaining option for reimbursement

which was to submit a removal cost claim to the Fund.

6

1

 This determination is written for the sole purpose of adjudicating a claim against the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund 

(OSLTF). This determination adjudicates whether the claimant is entitled to OSLTF reimbursement of claimed 

removal costs or damages under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. This determination does not adjudicate any rights or 

defenses any Responsible Party or Guarantor may have or may otherwise be able to raise in any future litigation or 

administrative actions, to include a lawsuit or other action initiated by the United States to recover the costs 

associated this incident. After a claim has been paid, the OSLTF becomes subrogated to all of the claimant’s rights 

under 33 U.S.C. § 2715. When seeking to recover from a Responsible Party or a Guarantor any amounts paid to 

reimburse a claim, the OSLTF relies on the claimant’s rights to establish liability. If a Responsible Party or 

Guarantor has any right to a defense to liability, those rights can be asserted against the OSLTF. Thus, this 

determination does not affect any rights held by a Responsible Party or a Guarantor. 2 National Response Center Report # 1275452 dated April 14, 2020.

3 USEPA Region7 Polrep First and Final dated April 27, 2020. 4 USEPA Region7 Polrep First and Final dated April 27, 2020, page 2 of 3, section 2.2 Planning Section. The FOSC

executed the PRFA with MDNR on April 16, 2020 however MDNR did not submit their cost recovery package 

under the FPN in a timely fashion in order to receive compensation for their response and remediation actions 

performed, so on April 28, 2021, the NPFC Case Management Division (who handles federal project cases), closed 

the FPN as no cost documentation was ever received.

5 See, PRFA Statement of work follow up timeframe and due date for cost documentation outlined as July 31, 2020, 

page 28 of 32 of MDNR claim submission package. 6 MDNR Optional Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) Claim Form received January 23, 2023. 

(b) (6) (b) (6)
4

MDNR presented its uncompensated removal cost claim to the National Pollution Funds 

Center (NPFC) for $1,208.12 on January 23, 2023.7 The NPFC has thoroughly reviewed all 

documentation submitted with the claim, analyzed the applicable law and regulations, and after 

careful consideration has determined that this claim must be denied. 

I. INCIDENT, RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

Incident

On April 15, 2020, MDNR reported five 5-gallon buckets of oil dumped into Opposum 

Branch at Route CC near Buell, Missouri. A sheen and oil slick was visible by MDR on the 

water’s surface. State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC) observed a sheen and oil slick 

in the Opposum Branch from Route CC upon arrival for about 90 feet in Oppossum Branch 

downstream of Route CC.8

 

Responsible Party

No Responsible Party (RP) for the incident has been identified by the either the SOSC or the 

FOSC following a preliminary assessment and response.9

Recovery Operations

On April 15, 2020, SOSC Cortvrient of MDNR performed a preliminary assessment and 

relayed the results to the USEPA FOSC, Mr. , advising oil had been spilled into 

Opposum Branch from five 5-gallon buckets. Oil was observed covering the surface waters and 

emulsified in Oppossum Branch waterway near Highway CC. At the time of the initial report, 

rain was in the forecast.

10

The FOSC opened federal project number (FPN) UCGPE20704 and hired MDNR to perform 

assessment, remediation and disposal of contaminated waste. The SOSC deployed sorbent pads 

and boom to recover the spilled oil from Opposum Branch. Oil was reported to persist along the 

waterway for approximately 100 feet downstream of the spill area. Oil impacted water was 

field-screened for chlorinated compounds. The results of the field screening were negative. Five 

5-gallon buckets were removed from the scene and transported for recycling at a used oil 

receiving center (Jefferson City Oil Company) in Jefferson City, Missouri. MDNR also 

generated and removed three 42-gallon trash bags containing spent oil sorbents.11

7 Optional Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF) Claim Form received January 23, 2023. 8 MDNR claim submission, page 9 of 32, Incident Summary dated June 4, 2020. 9 USEPA POLREP One and Final dated April 27, 2020. 10 USEPA POLREP One and Final dated April 27, 2020, section 2.1.2 Response Actions to Date. 11 Id.

(b) (6) (b) (6)
5

II. CLAIMANT AND NPFC:

On January 23, 2023, the claimant submitted its claim to the NPFC for $1,208,12.12 

On June 12, 2023, the NPFC requested additional information from MDNR and offered a tolling 

agreement to extend the timeframe to submit the necessary cost documentation.

13 On June 14, 

2023, Mr. responded to the request and provided four (4) attachments: (1) MDNR 

ICRP FY2021 documentation; (2) FY20 Fringes; (3) NJ20ERTW PS Amounts; and (4) Fuel 

receipts.14 Later the same day, Mr. sent another email with a timesheet attached for the 

SOSC.15

III. DETERMINATION PROCESS:

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

Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF).16 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.17 The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, 

or conclusions reached by other entities.18 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).19 The NPFC has promulgated a comprehensive set 

of regulations governing the presentment, filing, processing, settling, and adjudicating such 

claims.20 The claimant bears the burden of providing all evidence, information, and 

12 The claim included the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund Optional Claim Form received on January 23, 2023; USEPA 

Region 7 POLREP One and Final dated April 27, 2020; Photos; 2-page Pollution Funding Removal Authorization 

for MDNR dated April 16, 2020; and NRC report # 1275452 dated April 15, 2020. 13 Additional information email to MDNR dated June 12, 2023, again requesting supporting documentation for the 

costs claimed and offering a tolling agreement. 14 See, Email from Claimant to NPFC with four attachments to support amount claimed. 15 June 14, 2023 second email from claimant with SOSC timesheet attached. 16 33 CFR Part 136. 17 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)). 18 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). 19 See generally, 33 U.S.C. § 2712 (a)(4); 33 U.S.C. § 2713; and 33 CFR Part 136. 20 33 CFR Part 136.

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

documentation deemed relevant and necessary by the Director of the NPFC, to support and 

properly process the claim.21

 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;

(b) That the removal costs were incurred as a result of these actions;

(c) That the actions taken were directed by the FOSC or determined by the FOSC to be 

consistent with the National Contingency Plan.22

(d) That the removal costs were uncompensated and reasonable.23

The NPFC analyzed each of these factors and determined that the majority of the costs

incurred and submitted by MDNR would be compensable removal costs if MDNR had provided 

the following requested additional information: 

1. A copy of the current agency indirect cost rate calculation for the applicable Fiscal 

Year associated with this response. The Pollution Removal Funding Authorization 

(PRFA) cost documents indicate a 22.54% indirect rate calculation however the 

backup documentation provided does equate to the amount claimed in the claims 

documentation therefore the NPFC is unable to reach the requested percentage 

amount.

2. The claimant provided the daily SOSC field logs, including start and stop times, and 

the state payroll salary and fringe benefit calculation for the SOSC responding to the 

incident during the applicable Fiscal Year however the NPFC is unable to determine 

exactly what dates and hours make up the amount requested. Additionally, the hourly 

rate provided does not total to the amount claimed; and 

3. Other than a picture that was provided, the NPFC has not received any documentation 

as it pertains to the disposal claimed. 

Overall Denied Costs = $1,208.1224

 

21 33 CFR 136.105. 22 USEPA POLREP One and Final dated April 27, 2020. 23 33 CFR 136.203; 33 CFR 136.205. 24 Enclosure 3 to this determination provides a detailed analysis of the amounts approved and denied by the NPFC.