2

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: N19051-0001 

Claimant: Texas General Land Office 

Type of Claimant: State 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $410.81 

Action Taken: Offer in the amount of $410.81 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident 

On May 28, 2019, a sheen from an unknown oil spill was reported off Redfish Bay, a 

navigable waterway of the US, in Ingleside, San Patricio County, Texas.1 Texas General Land 

Office (TGLO) Response Officer, , in his capacity as the State On-Scene 

Coordinator (SOSC), responded to the incident.2

 The SOSC found approximately 15-30 gallons 

of oil in the water at the East end of a dock and the intracoastal waterway next to a work-over 

rig.

34 The United States Coast Guard’s (USCG) National Response Center (NRC) was contacted 

and notified of the spill and NRC Report # 1247002 was assigned.

5

 TGLO coordinated with 

MST3 of the USCG who federalized the response and opened a federal project number 

(FPN) N19051.67 The TGLO response officer assisted and monitored the cleanup efforts of the 

response contractor, Miller Environmental.8

 Miller Environmental was hired by the USCG for 

cleanup and disposal activities.9

Responsible Party 

 The SOSC indicated that the resposnsible party (RP) was unidentified.10 The Coast Guard 

confirmed there was no spill source or responsible party determined.11

 

1

 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 1. Situation, A. Overview, dated May 30, 2019 by 

Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 

2

 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 1. 

3

 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 3, Page 1 of TGLO Oil Spill Prevention & Response Program Incident Report for 

Spill Number 20191826, dated May 28, 2019. 

4

 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 1. Situation, A. Overview, dated May 30, 2019 by 

Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 

5

 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, dated May 30, 2019 by Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 

6

 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 3. Additional, A., dated May 30, 2019 by Sector 

Corpus Christi, TX. 

7

 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 5, Page 3 of TGLO Oil Spill Prevention & Response Program Incident Report for 

Spill Number 20191826, dated May 28, 2019. 

8

 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 1, dated July 29, 2019. 

9

 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 1. Situation, A. Overview, dated May 30, 2019 by 

Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 

10 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 1, dated July 29, 2019. 11 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 1. Situation, A. Overview, dated May 30, 2019 by 

Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 
 

3

Description of Removal Activities for this Claimant: 

Miller Environmental arrived on scene and completed removal activities.12 TGLO monitored 

the daily response activities of the response contractor and recorded daily field logs detailing the 

response actions.13 

The Claim: 

On July 30, 2019, the NPFC received TGLO’s claim for reimbursement of its 

uncompensated removal costs in the total amount of $410.81 for State personnel and equipment 

costs. 

APPLICABLE LAW: 

"Oil" is defined in relevant part, at 33 USC § 2701(23), to mean “oil of any kind or in any form, 

including petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged 

spoil”. 

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 Contingency Plan and uncompensated damages. Removal costs are 

defined 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”. 

Under 33 USC §2713(b)(2) and 33 CFR 136.103(d) no claim against the OSLTF may be 

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]. 

33 U.S.C. §2713(d) provides that “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.” 

Under 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. 

 

12 USCG SitRep-POL ONE AND FINAL FPN N19051, Section - 2. Action Taken, D., dated May 30, 2019 by 

Sector Corpus Christi, TX. 

13 TGLO Claim Submission, Page 14, TGLO Daily Field Notes, dated May 28, 2019. 
 

4

Under 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.” 

Under 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.” [Emphasis added]. 

DETERMINATION OF LOSS: 

A. Overview:

1) MST3 , of USCG Sector Corpus Christi, as the FOSC for this incident, 

determined that the actions undertaken by the Claimant are deemed consistent with 

the NCP. 33 U.S.C. §§ 2702(b)(1)(B) and 2712(a)(4);

2) The incident involved the discharge of “oil” as defined in OPA 90, 33 U.S.C. § 

2701(23), 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 of limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 

2712(h)(1); 

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 the costs for these actions were indeed reasonable 

 and allowable under OPA and 33 CFR § 136.205 

B. NPFC Analysis: 

 NPFC CA reviewed the actual cost invoices and dailies to confirm that the claimant 

had incurred all costs claimed. The review focused on: (1) whether the actions taken 

were compensable “removal actions” under OPA 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 

determined by the FOSC, to be consistent with the NCP or directed by the FOSC, and (4) 

whether the costs were adequately documented and reasonable.