CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 12/06/2010 

Claim Number : 911013-0001

Claimant : Oil Recovery Co., Inc. 

Type of Claimant : Corporate 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager :

Amount Requested : $21,933.40 

FACTS: 

1. Oil Spill Incident: The United States Coast Guard Sector Mobile reports that on June 16, 

2010, a discharge of approximately 125 gallons of waste oil was discovered collecting in 

the main berth of the terminal located on the Mobile River, a navigable waterway of the 

US.1

 The incident was reported to the National Response Center (NRC) on June 16, 

2010 at approximately 1034 hours local time via report # 944256 by Mr. 

, terminal manager of the Mobile River Terminal Co.2 

The USCG Sector Mobile Incident Management Division took samples and determined 

this waste oil to be a mixture of heavy fuel oil and lubricating oil. While Oil Recovery 

Company, Inc. (ORC) was originally charged with the responsibility to clean up and 

dispose of the oil and contaminated waste,3

an investigation conducted by Sector Mobile 

later determined the responsible party to be unknown.4

1. Description of removal actions performed: The claimant, ORC, was hired by Mobile 

River Terminal to clean up and dispose of the oil and contaminated waste. Removal 

actions consisted of removing product from the surface of the water, as well as 

decontaminating vessels and bulkheads in the berth. USCG Sector Mobile was on-scene 

the entirety of the 3-day cleanup, monitoring operations and verifying that they were in 

accordance with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).5 

3. The Claim: On November 30, 2010, ORC submitted a removal cost claim to the National 

Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), for reimbursement of removal costs in the amount of 

$21,933.40 for the services provided from June 16 through June 18, 2010. This claim is 

for removal costs based on the rate schedule in place at the time services were provided. 

A copy of the vendor rate schedule is provided in the claim submission. 

This claim consists of copies of the invoicing, posted rate schedule, MISLE Case Report 

# 505508, NRC Report # 944256, letter written by MST1 , signed ORC work 

order, the Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest and internal email correspondence. 

 

1

 See letter written by MST1 , USCG, to the NPFC and submitted with the claim by the claimant on 

11/30/2010 

2

 See NRC Report # 944256, dated 6/16/2010 

3

 See USCG Sector Mobile Case Report # 505508 

4

 See letter written by MST1 , USCG, to the NPFC and submitted with the claim by the claimant on 

11/30/2010 

5

 See letter written by MST1 , USCG, to the NPFC and submitted with the claim by the claimant on 

11/30/2010 
The review of the actual cost invoicing and dailies 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 consistent with the NCP or directed by the FOSC, and (4) whether the costs were 

adequately documented. 

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]. 

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. The initial FOSC coordination has been established via USCG Sector Mobile Case Report # 

505508, and via a written statement from PO , USCG Sector Mobile.6

2. The incident involved the report of a 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 for removal costs. 

5. No Responsible Party could not be determined. 

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

claim and determined that all 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 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. 

The Claims Manager confirmed that the claimant did in fact perform a site assessment with 

USCG Sector Mobile on June 16, 2010. The Claims Manager validated the costs incurred 

and determined they were reasonable and necessary and performed in accordance with the 

National Contingency Plan (NCP). 

On that basis, the Claims Manager hereby determines that the claimant did in fact incur 

$21,933.40 of uncompensated removal costs and that that amount is properly payable by the 

OSLTF as full compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the claimant and 

submitted to the NPFC under claim #911013-0001. The claimant states that all costs claimed 

are for uncompensated removal costs incurred by the claimant for this incident from June 16 

through June 18, 2010. The claimant represents that all costs paid by the claimant are 

compensable removal costs, payable by the OSLTF as presented by the claimant. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $21,933.40 as full compensation for 

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

claim #911013-0001. All costs claimed are for charges paid for 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. 

AMOUNT: $21,933.40

 

6

 See USCG Sector Mobile Case Report # 505508, opened 6/16/2010 and letter written by MST1 , 

USCG, to the NPFC and submitted with the claim by the claimant on 11/30/2010 
Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 12/8/10

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor’s Comments: