Claim Number: 

Claimant: 

Type of Claimant: 

Type of Claim: 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: 

FACTS 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION FORM 

N13041-0001 

Texas General Land Office 

State 

Removal Costs 

$948.76 

On August 5, 2013, Sector Corpus Christi received notification from the Claimant, Texas General Land 

Office (TGLO), of a mystery spill in Packery Channel in Nueces County, Texas, which flows into the 

Gulf of Mexico, a navigable waterway of the US. 

A pollution response team deployed to the scene and found approximately 330 gallons of recoverable 

black oil in the form of tar balls and tar patches in the water, on the shores of Mustang Island near Port 

Aransas, and the shores ofPackery Channel near Corpus Christi. The pollution response team was unable 

to identify a source therefore the incident has been determined a mystery spill. The Coast Guard Federal 

On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) hired Miller Environmental to handle the cleanup. The incident was 

reported to the NRC via report# 1056179. 

Description of Removal Activities for this Claimant 

The Claimant in its capacity as the State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC) responded to the spill and 

coordinated with the Federal On Scene Coordinator's Representative (FOSCR) PO , who opened 

Federal Project Number (FPN) N13041 and Miller Environmental was contracted for the response. 1 

TGLO remained on scene and monitored the cleanup with the Coast Guard to determine compliance with 

the National Contingency Plan (NCP).2 

The Claim 

On December 11, 2013, the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) submitted a removal cost claim to the 

National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs in the 

amount of $948.76. 

TGLO is claiming response expenses in the amount of $388.76 in personnel costs and $560.00 in state 

vehicle costs for a total of$948.76 in uncompensated removal costs. 

The claim consists of the claim memorandum, TGLO response cost invoice, and photos of tar patties 

recovered. 

APPLICABLE LAW 

"Oil" is "oil of any kind or in any form, including petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed 

with wastes other than dredged spoil" 33 USC§ 2701(23). 

The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF), which is administered by the NPFC, is available, pursuant to 

33 USC§ 2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the OSLTF claims adjudication regulations at 33 CFR Part 136, to 

pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be consistent with the National 

1 See, Texas General Land Office Memorandum, dated November 20,2013. 

2 See, Texas General Land Office Memorandum, dated November 20,2013. 
Contingency Plan and uncompensated damages. Removal costs are defmed as the "costs of removal that 

are incurred after a discharge of oil has occurred or, in any case in which there is a substantial threat of a 

discharge of oil, the costs to prevent, minimize, or mitigate oil pollution from an incident." 

Pursuant to 33 USC§ 2713(b)(2) and 33 CFR 136.103(d) no claim against the OSLTF maybe approved 

or certified for payment during the pendency of an action by the claimant in court to recover the same 

costs that are the subject of the claim. See also, 33 USC§ 2713(c) and 33 CFR 136.103(c)(2) [claimant 

election]. 

Pursuant to 33 USC§ 2713(d), "if a claim is presented in accordance with this section, including a claim 

for interim, short-term damages representing less than the full amount of damages to which the claimant 

ultimately may be entitled, and full and adequate compensation is unavailable, a claim for the 

uncompensated damages and removal costs may be presented to the Fund." 

Pursuant to 33 CFR 136.105(a) and 136.105(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. 

Pursuant to 33 CFR 136.105(b), each claim must be in writing, for a sum certain for each category of 

uncompensated damages or removal costs resulting from an incident. In addition, under 33 CFR 136, the 

claimant bears the burden to prove the removal actions were reasonable in response to the scope of the oil 

spill incident, and the NPFC has the authority and responsibility to perform a reasonableness 

determination. 

Specifically, under 33 CFR 136.203, "a claimant must establish: 

(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 determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the National Contingency 

Plan or were directed by the FOSC." 

Pursuant to 33 CFR 136.205 "the amount of compensation allowable is the total of uncompensated 

reasonable removal costs of actions taken that were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the 

National Contingency Plan or were directed by the FOSC. Except in exceptional circumstances, removal 

activities for which costs are being claimed must have been coordinated with the FOSC." 

Determination of Loss 

Overview 

1. FOSC coordination was made by USCG Sector Corpus Christi, via MST3 as 

evidenced by Federal Project Number N13041; 

2. The incident involved a discharge of"oil" as defined in OPA 90, 33 USC § 2701 (23), that 

presented a substantial threat to navigable waters; 

3. In accordance with 33 CFR § 136.105(e)(12), the claimant has certified no suit has been filed in 

court for the claimed uncompensated removal costs; 

4. The claim was submitted within the six year statute oflimitations. 33 U.S.C. § 2712(h)(l); 

5. The NPFC Claims Manager has thoroughly reviewed all documentation submitted with the claim 

and determined that the removal costs presented were for actions in accordance with the NCP and 

that costs for these actions were indeed reasonable and allowable pursuant to OPA 90 and 33 

CFR § 136.025 as set forth below. 

2 
Analysis 

The review of the actual cost invoicing and dailies focused on: (1) whether the actions taken were 

compensable "removal actions" under OP A and the claims regulations at 33 CFR 136 (e.g., actions to 

prevent, minimize, mitigate the effects of the incident); (2) whether the costs were incurred as a result of 

these actions; (3) whether the actions taken were consistent with the NCP or directed by the FOSC, and 

(4) whether the costs were adequately documented. 

Upon review of the claim submission, the NPFC has determined that the removal costs presented and 

incurred were billed appropriately at the time services were rendered and confirmed the presence of the 

Claimant during response actions. 

On that basis, the Claims Manager hereby determines that the Claimant did in fact incur $948.76 of 

uncompensated removal costs and that that amount is payable by the OSLTF as full compensation for the 

reimbursable removal costs incurred by the Claimant and submitted to the NPFC under claim #N13041 

-0001. 

Determination 

The NPFC determines that the OSLTF will pay $948.76 as full compensation for the reimbursable 

removal costs incurred by the Claimant and submitted to NPFC under claim #Nl3041-000I. All costs 

presented to the OSLTF in this claim are for removal actions as defined in OPA 90 and 33 CFR 136, and 

are compensable removal costs. 

AMOUNT: $948.76 

Claim Supervis

Date of Supervisor's review: 12117113 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor's Comments: 

3