CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 2/4/2009 

Claim Number : 909059-001 

Claimant : State of New Jersey 

Type of Claimant : State 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $1,581.89 

FACTS: 

 1. Oil Spill Incident: In August 2007, Mr. purchased a 1967 wooden 

Chris Craft from , The vessel was 

located at Arnold’s Marina on Beaver Dam Road. The vessel was towed to the rear of Mr. 

s residence where it was moored. Additionally, a transient who had been living on the 

vessel prior to its purchase by Mr. also came to the new mooring location and continued 

living aboard the vessel. In the meantime, Mr. abandoned his residence and was wanted 

for failure to appear at the Neptune Municipal Court on a DWI charge. Mrs. who now 

resides at , was contacted at her place of work in the 

Middlesex County Personnel Department. 

 On November 13, 2007, Mr. who is a neighbor that lives at 

 contacted the NJSP Marine Bureau in Point Pleasant to report that the vessel was sinking. 

No action was taken by NJSP marine Bureau. On November 16, 2007 at approximately 1200, 

the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) received a report that the 37’ 

vessel sunk at the rear of the residence located at 58 Lenape Trail and was leaking gasoline. 

NJDEP was dispatched to the site from Cape May and arrived on scene at approximately 1530 

hrs. The vessel was tied off from the port side and was laying starboard side down in the water 

to the top of the cabin. Odors of gasoline were present and a visible oil sheen was on the surface 

of the water. 

 Numerous unsuccessful attempts were made by NJDEP to contact Mr. or Mrs. B 

Finally, NJDEP contacted the Middlesex County admin office and was able to speak with Mrs. 

. She gave NJDEP Mr contact number and they contacted him. After 

speaking with Mr , he stated that he worked for the “Government” and that it was secret 

line only to be used by authorized persons. NJDEP representative advised Mr that he 

too worked for the “Government” and was authorized to make the call. NJDEP explained to Mr. 

 the situation and he told NJDEP that he could not make any decision until he spoke with 

his lawyer. After the call ended, NJDEP contacted USCG MST3 and the 

NJSP Marine Bureau. 

The USCG contacted Mr. lawyer who was later discovered to be an alleged old 

girlfriend. NJDEP spoke with Trooper who told NJDEP that Mr was 

wanted on a felony warrant and that the Marine police would arrest him if he came to the site. 

Boat US out of Point Pleasant was contacted and arrived at the spill location with three bales of 

8” sorbent boom as well as one bale of sorbent sweep. The crew deployed the boom around the 

vessel to stop any further gasoline leak. MST3 took samples for the Coast Guard and 

they also requested NJDEP’s presence on scene the next day at 0900 hrs.
 At 0900 hrs on November 17, 2007, USCG rep MST3 arrived on scene. 

NJDEP went to the neighbors and requested statements from them with regards to the sunken 

vessel. NJDEP was able to get statements from Mr. & Mrs. and from 

Mr. & Mrs. . Both parties stated they had seen kids playing in 

the now abandoned house located at 58 Lenape Trail and that there were also vagrants possibly 

sleeping there. NJDEP contacted the Brick Township Police who sent two police officers to the 

scene. Boat US arrived on scene and adjusted the booms. Due to the position of the sunken 

vessel, motor oils and fuel continued to slowly leak out into the sorbent boom. 

At the time of NJDEP’s report of this incident, Mr. had been arrested, suffered 

convulsions, hit his head and was reported to be in grave condition. His wife, was 

reported to be in Rome on vacation for an unspecified period of time. The vessel was still tied to 

the dock although it remains in danger of breaking free and sliding into the channel and 

discharging additional oils and fuel. USCG Sector Philadelphia took the lead on the case and 

will handle who and when the vessel will be removed. 

The Claim: On January 14, 2009, the New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Emergency Response (NJDEP BER) submitted a removal cost claim to the 

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

costs in the amount of $1,581.89 for the services provided in response to the sunken 

vessel incident from November 16, 2007 through November 17, 2007. 

 This claim consists of copies of the invoicing, NJ BER Investigation Report, the NRC 

Report # 854763, the rate schedule for the State of NJDEP BER, and FOSC coordination from 

USCG Sector Delaware Bay dated December 4, 2008. The review of the actual cost invoicing 

and claim package 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: 

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 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 FOSC has provided FOSC coordination. A coordination statement has been provided via 

a written statement dated December 4, 2008 by ENS , ENS USCG Sector 

Delaware Bay. 

2. The incident involved the discharge and continuing substantial threat of 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 on time. 
5. The NPFC Claims Manager has thoroughly reviewed all documentation submitted with the 

claim and determined that the majority of the removal costs presented were for actions in 

accordance with the NCP and that costs for these actions were indeed reasonable and 

allowable under OPA and 33 CFR § 136.205 with the exception of the following: the State of 

New Jersey charges an administrative fee, which is actually their OMB A-87 agreed rate. 

Although we are allowing the 23% derived figure for the state’s labor category, we cannot 

approve unsubstantiated indirect cost per line item as charged in this claim, as this is 

considered an improper use of the OSLTF. See 33 CFR §136.105(e)(6). 

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. 

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

$1,166.79 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# 909059-001. The claimant states that all costs claimed are 

for uncompensated removal costs incurred by the claimant for this incident for the time period 

of, November 16, 2007 through November 17, 2007. The claimant represents that all costs paid 

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

claimant. 

The Claims Manager has determined the costs are reasonable in accordance with the 

contracted rate schedule that was in place at the time services were rendered and that 

determination of reasonableness is consistent with the current claims policy and procedures in 

place for determining reasonableness of costs. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $1,166.79as full compensation for 

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

# 909059-001. 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: $1,166.79

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 

Supervisor Action: 

Supervisor’s Comments: