2

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: N15034-0001 

Claimant: Texas General Land Office 

Type of Claimant: State Government 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $232.15 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On May 30, 2015, United States Coast Guard, MSU Texas City, Texas, 

received a report of a 36 foot fishing vessel, actively sinking in the Intracoastal Waterway, in the 

vicinity of the Colorado Locks, a navigable waterway in the United States. After further 

investigation, it was estimated that there was approximately 450 gallons of diesel fuel on board. 

The Federal-on-Scene Coordinator Representative (FOSCR)1 determined that the vessel posed a 

substantial threat to the public and the environment.2 3 

The Texas General Land Office (TGLO, Claimant), State-on-Scene Coordinator, (SOSC) 

responded and coordinated with the FOSCR. TGLO response officer4 assisted and monitored 

the cleanup efforts of the contractor, TNT Marine, to ensure that that the cleanup was consistent 

with the National Contingency Plan.5

MSU Texas City issued a notice of Federal assumption to the Responsible Party, (RP), Mr. 

, Rockport, TX. The RP notified the FOSCR that he was financially incapable of 

conducting pollution assumption. At this point the FOSCR determined there was a substantial 

threat to the public and environment and requested to open the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, 

(OSLTF), to remove the pollution threat. Federal Project Number (FPN) N15034 was obtained. 

Description of Removal Activities for this Claimant: On May 30, 2015, MSU Texas City 

accessed the OSLTF and opened FPN # N15034 to respond to the discharge of oil from the F/V 

MISFIT. 

T and T Marine Salvage Inc., arrived on scene with a 3,000 gallon capacity vac truck, five, 

personnel, and three trucks. Contractors applied pads and pumped diesel from the open tote on 

the deck of the F/V MISFIT. Sorbent boom was placed around the vessel to help contain and 

absorb the diesel and oil water mix. T and T Divers entered the water with an attempt to raise 

the vessel using airbags and were unsuccessful. A cofferdam was constructed around the vessel 

to adequately pump the oily water mixture from within and around the M/V MISFIT. 

Approximately 10 barrels of diesel and oily water was pumped from the tanks and bilges of the 

vessel, operations were secured. 

 

1 MST2 Lilly

2 POLREP One and Final.

3 Coast Guard and TGLO responders discovered 200 gallons of diesel fuel on board an open 300 gallon tote on the 

deck of the vessel with approximately 250 gallons of diesel fuel inside.

4

5 TGLO letter to NPFC, dated August 11, 2015
3

The Claim: On August 12, 2015, TGLO submitted a removal costs claim to the National 

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

State personnel and equipment costs in the amount of $232.15.6

APPLICABLE LAW: 

Under OPA 90, at 33 USC § 2702(a), responsible parties are liable for removal costs and 

damages resulting from the discharge of oil into navigable waters and adjoining shorelines, as 

described in Section 2702(b) of OPA 90. A responsible party’s liability will include “removal 

costs incurred by any person for acts taken by the person which are consistent with the National 

Contingency Plan”. 33 USC § 2702(b)(1)(B).

"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 

 6 TGLO Invoice Spill # 20151972
4

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 MSU Texas City provided FOSC coordination 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. 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.

Based on the Federal on Scene Coordinator’s direction and oversight, the response has been 

determined to be reasonable, necessary, and performed in accordance with the NCP and as such 

is approved.
5

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $232.15 as full compensation for the 

reimbursable removal costs incurred by the claimant and submitted to the NPFC under claim # 

N15034-0001. 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: $232.1

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 8/12/2015 

Supervisor Action: Approved