Claim Number: 

Claimant: 

Type of Claimant: 

Type of Claim: 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: 

FACTS: 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION 

916026-0001 

Gollott's Oil Dock & Ice House, Inc. 

Corporate 

Removal Costs 

$1,738.06 

On January 5, 2016, spilled oil was observed near the dock owned by Gollott's Oil Dock & Ice 

House (Gollott's), which is also the Claimant. The Claimant's property and dock are located on 

the Back Bay of Biloxi, a navigable water of the United States located in Mississippi. Coast 

Guard Sector Mobile received the NRC notification that day, but due to darkness, did not 

respond until January 6. Two pockets of recoverable oil had pooled near the dock. The source 

of the discharge could not be determined. The Claimant offered to clean up the oil, which the 

CG personnel authorized. The CG Petty Officer witnessed the Claimant's employees clean up 

the oil. The CG personnel urged Gollott's to submit a claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund 

for the expense of cleaning up the oil. Therefore, the Claimant seeks the costs the business 

incurred for personnel time, materials and disposal of the oily material. 

THE CLAIMANT AND THE CLAIM: 

Claimant is Gollott's Oil Dock & Ice House, Inc. On February 9, 2016, Claimant submitted a 

removal cost claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF or the Fund); requesting 

reimbursement of their uncompensated oil pollution removal costs associated with the response 

in the amount of $1,738.06. 

APPUCABLE 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 (OSL TF), 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, 3 3 USC § 2713( c) and 3 3 CFR 

136.103(c)(2) [claimant election]. 

3 
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 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. Coast Guard Sector Mobile provided FOSC coordination. 

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)(l2), 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)(l). 

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

with the claim and determined which of 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. Analysis: 

NPFC CA reviewed the actual cost invoices and supporting documentation 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 

4 
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. 

The NPFC confirmed that the actions undertaken were reasonable and necessary and that 

the services were billed in accordance with the Claimant's records. The NPFC also 

verified the oversight of the response by the FOSC which was in fact determined to be 

consistent with the NCP. On that basis, the Claims Manager hereby determines that the 

Claimant did in fact incur $1,737.87 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 #916026-0001. The 

NPFC reduces the offer by and denies $0.19, which appears to be a calculation error on 

one employee's time (calculated by Claimant at $118.26 rather than $118.07). The 

Claimant states that all costs claimed are for uncompensated removal costs incurred by 

the Claimant for this incident. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $1,737.87 as full compensation 

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

under claim # 916026-0001. 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. 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor's review: 311116 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor's Comments: 

5