3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION1 

Claim Number: UCGP922003-URC001 

Claimant: Lewis Environmental, Inc. 

Type of Claimant: Corporate 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $9,125.75 

Action Taken: Offer in the amount of $8,895.25

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 

On April 10, 2021 at approximately 1:46pm local time, the Pennsylvania Turnpike 

Commission reported that a vehicle was leaking diesel fuel due to a broken drive axel on the 

Pennsylvania Turnpike highway in Lower Mifflin Township, PA.2

 The vehicle was reported as 

being registered to a trucking company named L&B Logistics, LLC3 and the operator of the 

vehicle was identified as Mr. (“Responsible Party” or “RP”).4

 Due to rain events in 

the area, an estimated five to ten gallons of fuel entered into several storm drains which lead to 

the Doubling Gap Creek5

, a tributary of the Susquehanna River, a navigable waterway of the 

United States.6

 The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission contacted Lewis Environmental, Inc. 

(“Claimant” or “Lewis”) to perform removal and disposal operations.7 

Lewis presented its removal costs to the RP.8 After ninety days, having not reached a 

settlement with the RP9, Lewis presented its uncompensated removal costs claim to the National 

 

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 Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Report, event number 2104001698, dated 

April 10, 2021.

3 Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Report, event number 2104001698, entry 

identified as 14:44:00 by dated April 10, 2021

4 Lewis Environmental Customer Work Authorization Agreement dated April 16, 2021; Attachment C to Lewis 

Environmental claim submission received December 7, 2021.

5 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 4 of 32 Description of work performed and 

dated April 10, 2021 on daily field log.

6 Lewis Environmental Original Claim submission received December 7, 2021, OSLTF Claim Form, Question 2, 

Desciption of the incident outlines the spill pathway.

7 Lewis Environmental Original Claim submission received December 7, 2021, OSLTF Claim Form, Question 2, 

Desciption of the incident states PA Turnpike Commission contacted Lewis Environmental.

8 Email from Lewis to NPFC with additional information dated January 7, 2022; see page 16 of 16, copy of certified 

mail receipt dated Janaury 5, 2022 showing evidence that the invoicing was sent to the RP.

9 33 CFR 136.103(c).

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

Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for $9,125.75 on December 7, 2021.10 The NPFC has 

thoroughly reviewed all documentation submitted with the claim, analyzed the applicable law 

and regulations, and after careful consideration has determined that $8,895.25 of the requested 

amount is compensable and offers this amount as full and final compensation of the claim. 

I. INCIDENT, RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

Incident

 On April 10, 2021, Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission received a report and responded 

to a disabled vehicle was leaking diesel fuel due to a broken drive axel on the Pennsylvania 

Turnpike highway in Lower Mifflin Township, PA that was leaking oil into a storm drain 

connected to the Susquehanna River, a navigable waterway of the United States.11 The fuel leak 

was dammed up, diverted from the storm drains, and approximately ten absorbent pads were laid 

on the ground while awaiting Lewis to come on scene for removal and disposal services.

12 

Lewis performed removal and disposal operations on April 10, 2021; April 12, 2021; and 

completed response actions on April 22, 2021.13

Responsible Party

In accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the owner/operator of the L&B Logistics 

vehicle, is the Responsible Party (RP) for the incident.14 On December 9, 2021, the NPFC 

issued a Responsible Party Notification Letter to L&B Logistics, LLC. via certified mail.15 A 

Responsible Party Notification letter notifies the RP that a claim was presented to the National 

Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) seeking reimbursement of uncompensated removal costs 

incurred as a result of response services performed that resulted from a vehicle that was 

identified as the source of substantial threat of a discharge of oil to navigable waters of the 

United States.

Recovery Operations

On April 10, 2021, Lewis arrived to the scene and located diesel fuel spilled on the shoulder 

of the road and in a few storm drains. The affected areas were cleaned with granular and nonslip absorbents. Oil boom was placed in the storm drains after the fuel was recovered from each

of the drains. Oil was found where the storm water discharges into the Doubling Gap Creek. 

Sections of oil boom and oil pads were deployed to contain the oil and recover the oil from the 

discharge area. As a result, no oil entered the creek.16 The absorbents were collected into a drum 

and transported to Lewis 10-day for disposal. Oil booms were left in the storm drains and 

 

10 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission dated December 7, 2021 11 Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Report, event number 2104001698, dated 

April 10, 2021.

12 Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Report dated April 10, 2021 13 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, pages 4 through 32, dated December 7, 2021. 14 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32). 15 NPFC RP Notification Letter sent to L&B Logistics, LLC dated December 9, 2021. 16 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, pages 11-12 received December 7, 2021
5

Doubling Gap Creek to inspect any possible oil leakage after the rain ceased.17 On April 12, 

2021, waste was transported to Lewis 10-day pending disposal.18 On April 22, 2021, Lewis 

returned to the site to inspect the booms around all storm drains and discharge areas. All booms 

were collected, placed in drums, and transported to Lewis 10-day for disposal.19

II. CLAIMANT AND RP: 

Absent limited circumstances, the Federal Regulations implementing the Oil Pollution Act of 

1990 (OPA)20 require all claims for removal costs or damages must be presented to the RP 

before seeking compensation from the NPFC.21 When an RP denies a claim or has not settled a 

claim after 90 days of receipt, a claimant may elect to present its claim to the NPFC.22 Lewis 

presented its claim to L&B Logistics via Lewis invoice # 52789 in the amount of $9,125.75 

dated May 21, 2021.23 The invoice was sent via certified mail to the RP on January 5, 2022. 24

To date, Lewis has received no payment for its services.25 The RP signed both work and waste 

authorization forms for Lewis Environmental.26

III. CLAIMANT AND NPFC:

When a RP has not settled a claim after ninety days of receipt or denies a claim, a claimant 

may elect to present its claim to the NPFC.27 The Claimant submitted all costs to the RP via 

certified mail on January 5, 2022.28 On December 7, 2021, the NPFC received a claim for 

uncompensated removal costs from Lewis Environmental.29

Lewis provided the NPFC with an invoice package, email documents attempting to obtain 

pay, and work and waste authorization forms signed by the RP.30 Additional information 

submitted to the NPFC included proper presentment and clarification on daily work schedule 

personnel hours.31

IV. DETERMINATION PROCESS:

 

17 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 4 received December 7, 2021 18 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 6 received December 7, 2021 19 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 8 received December 7, 2021 20 33 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. 21 33 CFR 136.103. 22 Id. 23 Lewis Invoice # 52789 dated May 21, 2021. 24 Email from Lewis to NPFC with additional information dated January 7, 2022; see page 16 of 16, copy of 

certified mail receipt dated Janaury 5, 2022 showing evidence that the invoicing was sent to the RP.

25 See, OSLTF Claim Form, question #6, received December 7, 2021. 26 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachments C & D, received December 7, 2021 27 33 CFR 136.103. 28 Email from Lewis to NPFC with additional information dated January 7, 2022; see page 16 of 16, copy of 

certified mail receipt dated Janaury 5, 2022 showing evidence that the invoicing was sent to the RP. 29 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission received December 7, 2021. 30 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission received December 7, 2021 31 Email from Lewis to NPFC with additional information dated January 7, 2022; see page 16 of 16, copy of 

certified mail receipt dated Janaury 5, 2022 showing evidence that the invoicing was sent to the RP.
6

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

Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF).32 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.33 The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, 

or conclusions reached by other entities.34 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.

V. DISCUSSION: 

 An RP is liable for all removal costs and damages resulting from either an oil discharge or a 

substantial threat of oil discharge into a navigable water of the United States.35 An RP’s liability 

is strict, joint, and several.36 When enacting OPA, Congress “explicitly recognized that the 

existing federal and states laws provided inadequate cleanup and damage remedies, required 

large taxpayer subsidies for costly cleanup activities and presented substantial burdens to 

victim’s recoveries such as legal defenses, corporate forms, and burdens of proof unfairly 

favoring those responsible for the spills.”37 OPA was intended to cure these deficiencies in the 

law. 

 OPA provides a mechanism for compensating parties who have incurred removal costs where 

the responsible party has failed to do so. 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.”38 The term “remove” or “removal” means “containment and removal of oil [...] from 

water and shorelines or the taking of other actions as may be necessary to minimize or mitigate 

damage to the public health or welfare, including, but not limited to fish, shellfish, wildlife, and 

public and private property, shorelines, and beaches.”39 

 

32 33 CFR Part 136. 33 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)). 34 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). 35 33 U.S.C. § 2702(a). 36 See, H.R. Rep. No 101-653, at 102 (1990), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 779, 780. 37 Apex Oil Co., Inc. v United States, 208 F. Supp. 2d 642, 651-52 (E.D. La. 2002) (citing S. Rep. No. 101-94 

(1989), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 722). 38 33 U.S.C. § 2701(31). 39 33 U.S.C. § 2701(30).
7

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

with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).40 The NPFC has promulgated a comprehensive set 

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

claims.41 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.42

 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.43

(d) That the removal costs were uncompensated and reasonable.44

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

Lewis and submitted herein are compensable removal costs based on the supporting 

documentation provided. All costs approved for payment were verified as being invoiced at the 

appropriate rate sheet pricing and all costs were supported by adequate documentation which 

included invoices and/or proof of payment where applicable. 

The amount of compensable costs is $8,895.25 while $230.50 was denied. As follows: 

1. Lewis submitted a request for costs described as Sweep in the amount of $215.00 

per bale.45 Lewis provided a copy of their rate schedule which shows the price for a bale 

of sweep as $130.00 per bale.46 Based on the credible evidence presented, the NPFC 

denies the price differential of amount requested and amount permitted via the rate 

schedule in the total amount of $85.00;47

2. Lewis submitted a request for costs described as Drum Labels in the total amount 

of $12.50.48 Lewis provided a copy of their rate schedule which does not have drum 

 

40 See generally, 33 U.S.C. § 2712 (a) (4); 33 U.S.C. § 2713; and 33 CFR Part 136. 41 33 CFR Part 136. 42 33 CFR 136.105. 43 US Environmental Protection Agency Region 3 was assigned to the region where this incident took place. To 

ensure that Lewis met its burden with respect to the cleanup activity, the NPFC coordinated with the regional 

office’s of EPA Region 3. After analyzing the spill and the actions taken by Lewis, EPA R3 opined that the actions 

taken were consistent with the National Contigency Plan and that Lewis was indeed present in response to the oil 

spill. We agree. Evidence provided by the Claimant as a justification of costs supports Lewis’s presence in response 

to the oil spill between April 10, 2021 and April 22, 2021. See, February 9, 2022 email from EPA FOSC providing 

FOSC coordination.

44 33 CFR 136.203; 33 CFR 136.205. 45 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 5 of 32 received December 7, 2021. 46 Email from Lewis to NPFC with additional information dated January 7, 2022; see page 14 of 16. 47 See, Enclosure (3) Summary of Costs spreadsheet, line 16. 48 Lewis Environmental Original Claim Submission, Attachment A, page 5 and 9 of 32 received December 7, 2021.