2

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: N17041-0001 

Claimant: Texas General Land Office

Type of Claimant: State

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $5,714.64 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On August 18, 2017, at approximately 12:30 pm local time, a private 

citizen reported to the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) that tar balls were washing up 

onto South Padre Island, TX from the Gulf of Mexico, a navigable water of the U.S. The 

tar balls amounted to approximately 15,780 gallons of oil and were located at Boca 

Chica and South Padre Island beaches in Cameron County, Texas1

. TGLO personnel and 

U.S. Coast Guard personnel from Marine Safety Detachment Brownsville responded on 

scene.

2

 

USCG MSD Brownsville provided Federal On-Scene Coordination (FOSC)3 and 

federalized the response utilizing FPN N17041-0001. 

Description of Removal Activities for this claimant: On August 18, 2017, a TGLO 

response officer assisted and monitored the cleanup efforts of the removal contractor, 

after the U.S. Coast Guard federalized the incident response and hired Chemical 

Response and Remediation Contractors (CRRC) to perform cleanup.4

Responsible Party: A Responsible Party was not identified.

The Claim: On October 20, 2017, TGLO submitted a claim to the National Pollution 

Funds Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs which 

consisted of TGLO personnel expenses in the amount of $3,767.99, TGLO equipment 

expenses in the amount of $1,946.65 for 4x4 Trucks/Response Vehicles, a 17’ Utility 

Trailer, a 4x4 ATV, and a 4x4 Kubota 5 which came to total amount of $5,714.64.6 

APPLICABLE LAW: 

 

1 See, Texas General Land Office Claim submission letter dated October 20, 2017, page 1. 2 See, Texas General Land Office claim submission letter dated May October 20, 2017, page 1; See also SITREPPOL ONE. 

3

See, SITREP-POL One. 4 See, SITREP-POL One through Four and Final. 5 See, Texas General Land Office claim submission letter dated October 20, 2017, page 3. 6 See, Incident Response Cost Invoice attached to the Texas General Land Office claim submission dated October 

20, 2017.
3

"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. 

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 
4

FOSC. Except in exceptional circumstances, removal activities for which costs are being 

claimed must have been coordinated with the FOSC.” 

DETERMINATION OF LOSS: 

A. Overview: 

1. PO of Coast Guard Marine Safety Detachment Brownsville provided 

FOSC coordination in accordance with the National Contingency Plan (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 C.F.R. § 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 National Contingency Plan (NCP) and that the costs for these 

actions were indeed reasonable and allowable under OPA and 33 C.F.R. § 136.205. 

B. Analysis:

The NPFC Claims Manager reviewed the documentation provided by the claimant. The 

review focused on: (1) whether the actions taken were compensable “removal actions” under 

OPA and the claims regulations at 33 C.F.R. § 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 were directed by the FOSC, and (4) whether the costs were adequately documented 

and reasonable. 

The NPFC has determined that the rates charged are in accordance with the State’s 

previously submitted rate table and that the services provided were appropriate as the 

Claimant performed the response actions in conjunction with the response contractor that was 

hired by the for this incident and also performed monitoring actions as identified in the 

USCG Pollution Reports. The FOSC determined that a response was necessary and has 

determined that the actions performed by TGLO were performed in accordance with the 

National Contingency Plan (NCP).

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $5,714.64 as full compensation for 

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

claim # N17041-0001. All costs claimed are for charges incurred by the Claimant for 

removal actions as that term is defined in OPA and, are compensable removal costs, payable 

by the OSLTF as presented by the Claimant.