Oil Pollution Act Liability Limits 

in 2013 

Report to Congress 

November 20, 2013 

U. S. Coast Guard 
This page was intentionally left blank 
i 

Foreword 

I am pleased to present the following report, “Oil Pollution Act Liability 

Limits in 2013,” which has been prepared by the United States Coast 

Guard. 

Section 603(c) of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 

2006 (Pub. L. 109-241) directs the Commandant to provide an analysis 

of the extent to which oil discharges from vessels and non-vessel sources 

have or are likely to result in removal costs and damages for which no 

defense to liability exists and that exceed the established liability limits. 

Pursuant to congressional requirements, this report is being provided to 

the following Members of Congress: 

The Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV 

Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

The Honorable John Thune 

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

The Honorable Bill Shuster 

Chairman, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

The Honorable Nick J. Rahall II 

Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 

I am happy to answer any further questions you may have, or your staff may contact my Senate 

Liaison Office at (202) 224-2913 or House Liaison Office at (202) 225-4775. 

Sincerely, 
ii 

Table of Contents 

I. Legislative Language ...............................................................................................................1 

II. Background ...............................................................................................................................2 

II. Analysis of Discharges ..............................................................................................................3 

III. Impacts on the Fund ..................................................................................................................7 

IV. Findings with Respect to Further Liability Limit Adjustments ..............................................10 

Attachment A: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits by Vessel Type ..........................................14 

Attachment B: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits by Incident Date...............................17 

Attachment C: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits with Limits to Achieve 50% Cost Share ....21 
1

I. Legislative Language 

This report responds to the language set forth in section 603(c) of the Coast Guard and Maritime 

Transportation Act of 2006, (Pub. L. 109-241), which states: 

 

SEC. 603. LIMITS ON LIABILITY. 

(c) REPORT.— 

1. Initial Report. – Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall submit a 

report on liability limits described in paragraph (2) to the Committee on 

Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. 

2. Contents. – The report shall include, at a minimum, the following: 

1. An analysis of the extent to which oil discharges from vessels and 

nonvessel sources have or are likely to result in removal costs and 

damages (as defined in section 1001 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 

U.S.C. 2701)) for which no defense to liability exists under section 1003 

of such Act and that exceed the liability limits established in section 1004 

of such Act, as amended by this section. 

2. An analysis of the impacts that claims against the Oil Spill Liability Trust 

Fund for amounts exceeding such liability limits will have on the Fund. 

3. Based on analyses under this paragraph and taking into account other 

factors impacting the Fund, recommendations on whether the liability 

limits need to be adjusted in order to prevent the principal of the Fund 

from declining to levels that are likely to be insufficient to cover expected 

claims. 

4. Annual Updates. - The Secretary shall provide an update of the report to 

the Committees referred to in paragraph (1) on an annual basis. 
2

II. Background 

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) was enacted in the wake of the T/V EXXON VALDEZ oil 

spill to promote measures for the prevention of oil spills on navigable waters, the adjoining 

shorelines, and the exclusive economic zone. It provided a more robust Federal response to spills, 

increased the liability of polluters (Responsible Parties (RPs)) for such spills, and provided for 

compensation to those that incur removal costs and damages as a result of these spills. 

OPA provides that RPs are strictly liable for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge 

up to statutory liability limits. In general, RPs are liable without limit only if the discharge results 

from gross negligence or willful misconduct or a violation of operation, safety, or construction 

regulations (OPA § 1004 (33 U.S.C. § 2704)). 

The Fund plays a critical role in the OPA regime. It pays Federal costs for oil removal when a 

discharge occurs and reimburses third-party claims for uncompensated removal costs and damages 

when a responsible party does not pay or is not identified. The types of damages compensable under 

OPA include damages to natural resources, loss of subsistence use of natural resources, damages to 

real or personal property, loss of profits or earning capacity, loss of government revenues, and 

increased cost of public services. In addition, the Fund is an important source of annual 

appropriations to various Federal agencies responsible for administering and enforcing a wide range 

of oil pollution prevention and response programs addressed in OPA (OPA § 1012 (33 U.S.C. § 

2712)). 

Specific to this report, the Fund is available, as provided by OPA, to pay claims for removal costs 

and damages resulting from an oil discharge that exceed the responsible party’s liability limits. This 

includes payment of claims from RPs who pay or incur removal costs or damages in excess of their 

liability limits and can establish their entitlement to the limits under the circumstances of the 

discharge (OPA § 1008 (33 U.S.C. § 2708)). 

Claims to the Fund are payable only from the Fund, and payments are limited by the available 

balance. For any single discharge incident, the Fund is authorized to pay no more than $1 billion, of 

which no more than $500 million may be paid for natural resource damages (OPA § 9001(c) (26 

U.S. Code § 9509)). 

Pursuant to section 603 of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006, liability limits 

for vessel discharges were substantially increased. In that same section, Congress requested this 

analysis and report. 

 
3

III. Analysis of Discharges 

This section provides an analysis of the extent to which oil discharges from non-vessel and vessel 

sources have resulted, or are likely to result in removal costs and damages, as defined in OPA, that 

exceed liability limits established in OPA, as amended by the Coast Guard and Maritime 

Transportation Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-241). 

A. Non-vessel Sources 

The incident involving the DEEPWATER HORIZON and Macondo Well is the only incident known 

to have resulted in costs and/or damages exceeding the statutory liability limit for a facility.1

 RPs for 

an offshore facility are liable for all removal costs plus $75 million for damages absent an action that 

disqualifies the RP from the liability cap. The full extent of the damages from the DEEPWATER 

HORIZON incident cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty. While BP has reportedly paid 

billions to settle damages and other claims, other damages, including Federal, State and Indian Tribe 

trustee natural resource damages, remain to be determined and paid.On May 12, 2010, the 

Administration proposed raising the limitation on liability for all RPs, including RPs for offshore 

facilities. As the background data for all offshore incidents since the enactment of OPA show, 

DEEPWATER HORIZON constitutes a single data point for determining what amended liability for 

damages is needed. There have been no other offshore facility incidents that approach the “all 

removal costs plus $75 million” limit under existing law. 

With respect to offshore facility incidents (other than the incident involving the DEEPWATER 

HORIZON), best available data indicate there have been 51 incidents since the enactment of OPA 

that have resulted in removal costs and damages (4 Mobile Offshore Drilling Units and 47 Offshore 

Platforms). Figure 1 shows the frequency of these incidents by year and facility type. 

 

 

1 The 2010 Enbridge Pipeline spill in Michigan may well be the first onshore facility discharge resulting in removal 

costs and damages that exceed the liability limit of $350,000,000 for onshore facilities absent an action that 

disqualifies the RP from the liability cap., but reliable supporting estimates of OPA removal costs and damages are 

not currently available. Accordingly, this report does not further address onshore facility-source spills or onshore 

facility-related limits of liability.
4

Figure 1: Number of Offshore Facility Incidents by Year and Facility Type 

(Excludes 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill)

Figure 2 shows the total incident cost for each of these incidents. As depicted, the highest cost 

incident, at approximately $17.9 million (in 2013 dollars), does not meet the statutory limit of 

liability of all removal costs (plus $75 million for damages). 

Figure 2: Total Incident Cost of Offshore Facility 

Incidents by Facility Type (2013 Dollars / Excludes 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill) 

 
5

B. Vessel Sources 

Best available data indicate 62 oil discharges from vessels have resulted in removal costs and 

damages that exceed the amended liability limits. Data have been updated to incorporate new 

incidents, and reflect revised estimates of costs and damages associated with previously reported 

incidents.2 Discharge incidents are listed by vessel type in Attachment A and by incident date in 

Attachment B. 

Figure 3 depicts the number of such discharges per year. The higher total for 1999 is the result of a 

typhoon in American Samoa, which resulted in oil discharges involving eight fishing vessel wrecks. 

The figure illustrates the variance in numbers of incidents from year to year. 

 

Figure 3: Number of Incidents Exceeding Limits of Liability 

Figure 4 shows a breakdown of these 62 incidents by vessel type. Fishing vessels account for 35.5 

percent of the historical incidents that result in damages in excess of the liability limits, while cargo 

and other self-propelled non-tank vessels represent 46.8 percent of the incidents. Single hull and 

double hull tank barges represent 11.3 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively. Single hull tank ships 

account for only 3.2 percent of such discharges. There are no double hull tank ship incidents among 

the 62 incidents. 

 

2

 References throughout this report to data for the year 2013 are partial year data ending on May 1, 2013. 
6

Figure 4: Number of Incidents Exceeding Limits of Liability by Vessel Type 

Figure 5, total removal costs and damages from these incidents by vessel type, portrays a similar 

picture. Total costs in excess of liability limits for cargo/other self-propelled vessel discharges have 

been the highest. Total costs for single hull tank ship and tank barge discharges that exceed liability 

limits have also been significant. Per discharge costs from single hull tank ship incidents are the 

highest (approximately $193.9 million) in light of the quantities of oil these vessels carry. Per 

discharge costs for all tank barges are also substantial (approximately $71.7 million). Larger cargo 

vessels also carry enough fuel to result in costly discharges (approximately $23.7 million per 

incident). The small size and limited quantities of oil characteristic of most fishing vessel incidents 

accounts generally for the lower total costs of such discharges (approximately $2.6 million), shown 

here and in more detail in Attachment A. 

Total removal costs and damages for these discharges since enactment of OPA is approximately 

$1.8 billion. 

Figure 5: Total Incident Costs by Vessel Type 
7

IV Impacts on the Fund 

This section provides an analysis of the impacts on the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (hereafter 

referred to as “the Fund”) resulting from claims against the Fund for vessel incidents in which costs 

and damages exceed liability limits.3

 

A. Historical Impact 

As indicated in Figure 6, the Fund’s financial obligation in cases where removal costs and damages 

exceed liability limits (listed in Attachment A) is substantial despite recent liability limit 

amendments. The top portion of the bar for each vessel type represents the Fund’s share of the risk 

(in excess of applicable liability limit). The bottom portion of the bar for each vessel type represents 

RP risk (RP liability limit based on gross tonnage or minimum limit as applicable for each 

discharge). 

Figure 6: RP vs. Fund Share of Total Incident Costs under Current Limits by Vessel Type 

Of the approximately $1.8 billion in estimated removal costs and damages from these incidents over 

the last 22 years, the Fund’s share of risk totals approximately $1.2 billion (66%). This amount 

represents a maximum potential impact on Fund risk resulting solely from the application of the 

liability limit levels. While the rate of such incidents is difficult to predict and may vary widely 

from year-to-year (as indicated by Figure 3), the risk to the Fund can be expressed broadly as an 

annual cost of approximately $53.1 million (total costs of $1.2 billion over 22 years) in excess of 

amended limits in 2013 dollars. 

 

3

 As discussed above, historically, with the exception of the single DEEPWATER HORIZON data point, and 

possibly the Enbridge Pipeline spill in 2010, only vessel incidents had total incident costs that exceeded limits of 

liability. Therefore, facilities are not included in the discussion of RP and Fund risk cost sharing. 
8

B. Impact from Claims 

Over the past 22 years, the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) has paid $675 million to 

claimants in connection with OPA incidents. Of this total, $408 million (or 60.4 percent) was 

paid in respect to circumstances where removal costs and damages exceeded the applicable 

liability limit amount (Figure 7). These "limit of liability" payments include payments made 

directly to the RPs for the removal costs and damages they paid or incurred in excess of liability 

limits, as well as third-party claims paid by the Fund because the RP had spent up to its limit of 

liability. 

Figure 8 shows that of the $289 million in claims under adjudication as of May 1, 2013, $153 

million (or 52.3 percent of the total dollars) are pending claims by RPs who have incurred incident 

costs exceeding their liability limits or claims by third parties where incident costs exceeded the 

liability limits. 

 Figure 7: Total Claims Paid Figure 8: Total Pending Claims 

C. Recent Trends 

The potential impact to the Fund resulting from payments to RPs, third parties for claims, and 

response costs where vessel incident costs exceeded the RPs’ limits of liability varies substantially 

from year to year, but has averaged approximately $53.1 million per year over the past 22 years. 

While the potential impact is significant, it is also useful to note the available data show a continued 

trend toward more Fund risk in recent years. 

As illustrated in Figure 9 and Attachment B, the Fund risk for discharges that result in estimated 

removal costs and claims that exceed liability limits in the most recent 13-year period 

(approximately $734 million) is greater than the Fund risk for the discharges in the preceding 10 

years (approximately $434 million). This would indicate, despite the uncertainties as to the actual 

impact over time, the risk to the Fund resulting from the liability limits applicable to individual 

vessel incidents has increased in recent years. This increased risk is largely the result of the greater 

cost of such incidents in recent years. 
9

Figure 9: RP vs. Fund Share of Total Incident Costs 

The Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-343) extended the barrel tax 

through December 31, 2017, and increased the tax from five cents to eight cents for 2009-2016, and 

to nine cents for 2017. Tax revenues are deposited into the Fund, which should provide additional 

income to the Fund over the next several years. Based on current revenue and expenditure 

projections, the NPFC forecasts that the Fund should maintain liquidity through 2019 (See Figure 

10). 

However, as noted earlier, the impact on the Fund from the DEEPWATER HORIZON catastrophe 

remains uncertain. If the Fund were to bear substantial removal costs and damages from the 

catastrophe without recovery, additional revenue may be needed to continue to carry out Fundfinanced programs. 
10

V. Findings with Respect to Further Liability Limit 

Adjustments 

This section discusses findings, based on historical trends and analyses, and taking into account 

other factors impacting the Fund, on whether the liability limits need to be adjusted in order to 

prevent the principal of the Fund from declining to levels that are likely to be insufficient to cover 

expected claims. 

A. Future Year Fund Outlook 

The NPFC anticipates the Fund will be able to cover its projected non-catastrophic liabilities, 

including claims, without further increases to liability limits except as the DEEPWATER HORIZON 

impacts may develop. However, increases to liability limits for certain vessel types would result in a 

more equitable division of risk between the Fund and RPs and have a positive impact on the balance 

of the Fund. 

Figure 10 projects the end of year balance of the Fund through 2019 based on estimated revenues 

and expenditures (no adjustment for inflation or potential DEEPWATER HORIZON impacts): 

Figure 10: Fund Forecast Balance (Millions of Dollars) 

Notably, several classes of Fund expenditures are independent of revisions to the limits of liability, 

such as Federal removal costs and annual appropriations. The Fund provides resources to the 

Federal government to respond to oil discharges (Federal removal costs) and to compensate 

claimants for their removal costs and damages when a RP cannot be identified, does not respond, or 

does not compensate claimants. See OPA § 1012(a)(1), (4) (33 U.S.C § 2712(a)(1), (4)). The Fund 

also pays when recourse against RPs is not available, such as when a RP declares bankruptcy or 

cannot be identified. Thus, the Fund is the ultimate insurer with respect to oil removal costs and 

damages when there is a discharge or substantial threat of discharge to navigable waters, adjoining 

shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone. 
11

The Fund also pays various agencies responsible for administering and enforcing OPA and 

provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. See OPA § 1012(a)(5) (33 U.S.C. § 

2712(a)(5)). Administrative and enforcement costs that are not allocable to a specific oil discharge 

are not recoverable from liable RPs. 

Figure 11 shows total Fund expenses in recent years for agency appropriations, Federal removal 

costs, and claims for removal costs and damages, of which claims resulting from incident-related 

costs exceeding the limits of liability is a subset. 

Figure 11: Total Fund Expenditures (Thousands of Dollars) 

Figure 11 illustrates that, with the exception of the DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill costs in 2010 

through 2012, the Federal removal costs and claims payments for which RPs may be liable have 

represented only a portion, often well less than half, of the annual expenditures from the Fund. This 

graph displays all costs for vessel or facility discharges. 

The DEEPWATER HORIZON experience has demonstrated that the $75 million limit on damages 

for a catastrophic offshore facility incident could be inadequate and the Administration has proposed 

raising that limit on damages. With the exception of DEEPWATER HORIZON, roughly half of the 

removal costs in Figure 11 are for onshore and offshore facility discharges. Historical data indicates 

that the $350 million liability limit for onshore facilities is adequate for non-catastrophic spills.4

 

With respect to the Fund expenses for removal costs and claims allocable to vessel spills, the Fund 

frequently pays when an RP is unknown. In these cases, liability limits have no impact on Fund risk. 

Vessel and facility liability limits will affect the Fund only to the extent RPs are available and have 

the ability to pay. 

 

4

 As discussed in Coast Guard’s rulemaking titled “Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution Act of 1990 

Limits of Liability - Vessels and Deepwater Ports,” a future rulemaking will adjust the limit of liability for onshore 

facilities by regulation to reflect significant increases in the consumer price index as required by OPA section 

1004(d)(4). [See 73 FR 54997 (Notice of proposed rulemaking), 74 FR 31357 (Interim Rule), and 75 FR 750 (Final 

Rule)], 
12

B. Further Liability Limit Adjustments 

Adjustments to liability limits help more equitably divide liabilities between the Fund and RPs. OPA 

is founded on the “polluter pays” principle. At the same time, OPA also places limits on the 

polluter’s liability to pay for clean-up of spills except in certain circumstances, and the Fund is the 

ultimate insurer for removal costs and damages. As previously noted, on May 12, 2010, the 

Administration proposed raising the limitation on liability for all RPs, including RPs for activities 

other than offshore drilling activities (such as shipping). 

Analysis indicates establishing different liability limits for non-tank vessels, which include fishing, 

cargo, and other self-propelled vessels, by tonnage (i.e., greater than 300 gross tons and less than or 

equal to 300 gross tons) would provide more equitable limits on smaller vessels. 

Figure 6 demonstrates that for vessel discharges where removal costs and damages exceed current 

liability limits, the Fund bears a majority of the cost even if every RP is available and pays to its 

limit. Figure 12 illustrates how further adjustments to limits of liability per gross ton might achieve 

an equal sharing of that risk between RPs and the Fund. The bottom portion of the bar represents the 

RP risk at the current limits of liability based on gross tonnage or minimum limits as applicable for 

each discharge. The middle portion represents the additional cost the RP would pay if the additional 

limits were applied, which would leave the Fund covering 50 percent of the total incident costs (the 

top portion of each bar). 

Figure 12: Gross Tonnage Limits of Liability for 50 percent Cost Share 
13

For example, to split the estimated clean-up costs evenly between the Fund and the vessel operators, 

liability limits for single hull tank ships would increase to $3,400 per gross ton, single hull tank 

barges to $7,500 per gross ton, double hull tank barges to $8,400 per gross ton, non-tank vessels 

greater than 300 gross tons to $1,300 per gross ton, and non-tank vessels less than or equal to 300 

gross tons to $5,000 per gross ton. 

Figure 13 indicates the minimum amount a RP would be expected to pay for an incident (based on 

average historical costs of incidents by vessel type in 2013 dollars), if the limits of liability were 

adjusted so that costs were shared evenly between the RP and the Fund. 

Figure 13: Minimum Liability Limits for 50 percent Cost Share 

Figure 14 summarizes the 50 percent cost share limits and minimums and compares them to the 

current limits. Attachment C illustrates how these limits would protect the Fund from paying the 

majority of the total incident cost when applied to the 62 incidents discussed earlier. The current 

limits distinguish between single hull tank vessels, double hull tank vessels and non-tank (other) 

vessels. As discussed in Section II, however, analysis has shown these categories might best be 

subdivided as follows: categories of Tank Ship and Tank Barge are addressed separately as subsets 

of single and double hull Tank Vessel, and the Non-Tank Vessel category is divided between vessels 

greater than 300 gross tons and vessels less than or equal to 300 gross tons.5

 

5

 The comparative results for single and double hull tank barges may appear incongruous at first glance. While 

double hull vessels may be safer, and be less likely to spill oil, the data shows that a catastrophic discharge from a 

double hull tank barge can be just as expensive as one from a single hull tank barge. 
13

Figure 14: Limits of Liability under OPA 

If the vessel is a. . . The current limits of liability are the ‘greater of:’ But to achieve an 

of liability would 

Tank Ship 

With a single hull, double sides only, or double bottom only 

Greater than 3,000 gross tons: $3,200 per gross ton or $23,496,000 Less than or equal to 3,000 gross tons: $3,200 per gross ton or $6,408,000 

$3,400 per gross to

With a double hull 

Greater than 3,000 gross tons: $2,000 per gross ton or $17,088,000 Less than or equal to 3,000 gross tons: $2,000 per gross ton or $4,272,000 

No data 

Tank Barge With a single hull, double sides only, or double bottom only 

Greater than 3,000 gross tons: $3,200 per gross ton or $23,496,000 Less than or equal to 3,000 gross tons: $3,200 per gross ton or $6,408,000 

$7,500 per gross to

With a double hull 

Greater than 3,000 gross tons: $2,000 per gross ton or $17,088,000 Less than or equal to 3,000 gross tons: $2,000 per gross ton or $4,272,000 

$8,400 per gross to

Non-Tank Vessel Greater than 300 gross tons $1,000 per gross ton or $854,400. $1,300 per gross to

Less than or equal to 300 gross tons $1,000 per gross ton or $854,400. $5,000 per gross to
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

14 

Attachment A: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits by Vessel Ty

Vessel Type: Tank Ship (Single Hull) 

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

T/V JULIE N 1996 ME 18,500 $52,601,200 1.48 $77,850,000 $59,126,000 T/V ATHOS I 2004 NJ 37,900 $252,010,800 1.23 $309,973,000 $121,264,000  TOTAL $387,823,000 $180,390,000 

Vessel Type: Tank Barge (Single Hull) 

T/B VISTABELLA 1991 PR 1,100 $6,105,500 1.71 $10,440,000 $6,408,000 T/B (TAMPA BAY COLLISION) 1993 FL 9,300 $68,900,000 1.61 $110,929,000 $29,638,000 T/B MORRIS J. BERMAN 1994 PR 5,400 $95,488,300 1.57 $149,917,000 $23,496,000 M/V SCANDIA & T/B NORTH CAPE 1996 RI 5,500 $49,000,000 1.48 $72,520,000 $23,496,000 T/B BUFFALO #292 1996 TX 1,500 $21,517,000 1.48 $31,845,000 $6,408,000 T/B B NO. 120 2003 MA 6,900 $61,237,500 1.26 $77,159,000 $23,496,000 T/B EMC 423 2005 IL 1,400 $12,778,500 1.19 $15,206,000 $6,408,000  TOTAL $468,016,000 $119,350,000 

Vessel Type: Tank Barge (Double Hull) 

T/B DBL 152 2005 LA 9,700 $55,445,400 1.19 $65,980,000 $19,482,000 T/B DM932 2008 LA 800 $102,980,700 1.08 $111,219,000 $4,272,000  TOTAL $177,199,000 $23,754,000 

Vessel Type: Cargo/Other Self-Propelled Vessel 

M/V KUROSHIMA 1997 AK 4,200 $19,702,600 1.45 $28,569,000 $4,160,000 M/V KURE 1997 CA 36,000 $47,218,900 1.45 $68,467,000 $36,009,000 M/V NEW CARISSA 1999 OR 36,600 $50,501,400 1.40 $70,702,000 $36,571,000 M/V STUYVESANT 1999 CA 7,100 $11,700,000 1.40 $16,380,000 $7,111,000 M/V SERGO ZAKARIADZE 1999 PR 16,500 $15,966,700 1.40 $22,353,000 $16,502,000 SS J LUCKENBACH 2001 CA 7,900 $40,910,300 1.31 $53,593,000 $7,869,000 M/V KIMTON 2001 PR 200 $713,700 1.31 $935,000 $854,000 VICTORIA ROSE HUNT 2003 MA 100 $1,085,700 1.26 $1,368,000 $854,000 M/V RED DIAMOND 2003 FL 200 $2,595,200 1.26 $3,270,000 $854,000 
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

15 

Vessel Type: Cargo/Other Self-Propelled Vessel (Cont.) 

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

CRANE BARGE MONARCH 2003 CA 200 $2,481,700 1.26 $3,127,000 $854,000 M/V BOWSTRING 2003 FL 300 $1,606,500 1.26 $2,024,000 $854,000 M/V SELENDANG AYU 2004 AK 39,800 $153,430,100 1.23 $188,719,000 $39,755,000 M/V ORIENTAL I 2004 FL 200 $727,400 1.23 $895,000 $854,000 ALBION 2005 CA 200 $1,207,100 1.19 $1,436,000 $854,000 M/V CASITAS 2005 HI 300 $1,710,700 1.19 $2,036,000 $854,000 MAMA LERE 2006 TX 400 $1,217,300 1.15 $1,400,000 $854,000 M/V COSCO BUSAN 2007 CA 65,100 $110,557,900 1.12 $123,825,000 $65,131,000 M/V SENECA 2007 MI 200 $1,211,000 1.12 $1,356,000 $854,000 LST-1166 2007 OR 2,400 $5,151,000 1.12 $5,769,000 $2,418,000 CATALA 2007 WA 5,700 $6,138,500 1.12 $6,875,000 $5,700,000 C/V SEA WITCH 2008 MD 17,900 $20,629,900 1.08 $22,280,000 $17,902,000 BIG BOY & SCOOBY DOO 2008 PA 200 $1,010,800 1.08 $1,092,000 $854,000 WENONAH 2009 CA 300 $947,800 1.08 $1,024,000 $854,000 SOUND DEVELOPER 2009 AK 200 $1,657,100 1.08 $1,790,000 $854,000 MONARCH 2009 AK 300 $2,698,200 1.08 $2,914,000 $854,000 M/V PRINCESS KATHLEEN 2010 AK 5,900 $14,185,900 1.07 $15,179,000 $5,875,000 DAVY CROCKETT 2011 WA 4,600 $22,454,700 1.03 $23,128,000 $4,643,000 TUG TIGER 2011 CA 200 $2,981,500 1.03 $3,071,000 $854,000 JIREH 2012 PR 1,000 $13,809,500 1.01 $13,948,000 $979,000  TOTAL $687,525,000 $263,435,000 

Vessel Type: Fishing Vessel 

F/V TENYO MARU 1991 WA 4,200 $6,062,900 1.71 $10,368,000 $4,167,000 F/V JIN SHIANG FA 1993 AS 400 $2,013,000 1.61 $3,241,000 $854,000 F/V YU TE NO. 1 1999 AS 200 $1,164,600 1.40 $1,630,000 $854,000 F/V AMIGA NO. 5 1999 AS 200 $3,355,700 1.40 $4,698,000 $854,000 F/V KWANG MYONG 1999 AS 200 $1,554,800 1.40 $2,177,000 $854,000 F/V KORAM NO. 3 1999 AS 200 $1,403,100 1.40 $1,964,000 $854,000 F/V KWANG MYONG NO 72 1999 AS 200 $2,182,900 1.40 $3,056,000 $854,000 F/V KWANG MYONG NO 58 1999 AS 200 $1,557,600 1.40 $2,181,000 $854,000 F/V KORAM NO 1 1999 AS 200 $1,378,400 1.40 $1,930,000 $854,000 F/V KWANG MYONG NO 51 1999 AS 200 $1,249,200 1.40 $1,749,000 $854,000 
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

16 

Vessel Type: Fishing Vessel (Cont.) 

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

F/V JESSICA ANN 2000 ME 200 $947,000 1.35 $1,278,000 $854,000 F/V SWORDMAN I 2000 HI 100 $1,528,600 1.35 $2,064,000 $854,000 F/V WINDY BAY 2001 AK 400 $3,396,400 1.31 $4,449,000 $854,000 F/V VANGUARD 2001 AK 200 $699,800 1.31 $917,000 $854,000 F/V GENEI MARU #7 2002 AK 100 $869,800 1.29 $1,122,000 $854,000 F/V TERESA LYNN 2002 FL 200 $690,800 1.29 $891,000 $854,000 F/V NEW HORIZON 2004 CA 100 $805,300 1.23 $990,000 $854,000 F/V MWALIL SAAT 2004 GU 200 $3,413,500 1.23 $4,199,000 $854,000 F/V THE BOSS 2004 OR 200 $926,100 1.23 $1,139,000 $854,000 F/V MILKY WAY 2005 WA 200 $1,039,600 1.19 $1,237,000 $854,000 F/V CAPT MIKE 2009 LA 100 $2,413,400 1.08 $2,606,000 $854,000 F/V DEEP SEA 2012 WA 200 $2,231,000 1.01 $2,253,000 $854,000  TOTAL $56,139,000 $22,101,000  GRAND TOTAL $1,776,702,000 $609,045,000 
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

17 

Attachment B: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits by Incident D

Incident Year: 1991

Vessel Type Project Name Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

 Fishing Vessel F/V TENYO MARU WA 4,200 $6,062,900 1.71 $10,368,000 $4,167,000  Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B VISTABELLA PR 1,100 $6,105,500 1.71 $10,440,000 $6,408,000 TOTAL $20,808,000 $10,575,00

Incident Year: 1993

 Fishing Vessel F/V JIN SHIANG FA AS 400 $2,013,000 1.61 $3,241,000 $854,000  Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B (TAMPA BAY COLLISION) FL 9,300 $68,900,000 1.61 $110,929,000 $29,638,00TOTAL $114,170,000 $30,492,00

Incident Year: 1994

 Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B MORRIS J. BERMAN PR 5,400 $95,488,300 1.57 $149,917,000 $23,496,00TOTAL $149,917,000 $23,496,00

Incident Year: 1996

 Tank Barge (Single Hull) 

M/V SCANDIA & T/B NORTH CAPE RI 5,500 $49,000,000 1.48 $72,520,000 $23,496,00

 Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B BUFFALO #292 TX 1,500 $21,517,000 1.48 $31,845,000 $6,408,000  Tank Ship (Single Hull) T/V JULIE N ME 18,500 $52,601,200 1.48 $77,850,000 $59,126,00TOTAL $182,215,000 $89,030,00

Incident Year: 1997

 Cargo/Other SPV M/V KUROSHIMA AK 4,200 $19,702,600 1.45 $28,569,000 $4,160,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V KURE CA 36,000 $47,218,900 1.45 $68,467,000 $36,009,00TOTAL $97,036,000 $40,169,00

Incident Year: 1999

 Cargo/Other SPV M/V NEW CARISSA OR 36,600 $50,501,400 1.40 $70,702,000 $36,571,00 Cargo/Other SPV M/V STUYVESANT CA 7,100 $11,700,000 1.40 $16,380,000 $7,111,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V SERGO ZAKARIADZE PR 16,500 $15,966,700 1.40 $22,353,000 $16,502,00 Fishing Vessel F/V YU TE NO. 1 AS 200 $1,164,600 1.40 $1,630,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V AMIGA NO. 5 AS 200 $3,355,700 1.40 $4,698,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V KWANG MYONG AS 200 $1,554,800 1.40 $2,177,000 $854,000 
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

18 

Incident Year: 1999 (Cont.)

Vessel Type Project Name Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

 Fishing Vessel F/V KORAM NO. 3 AS 200 $1,403,100 1.40 $1,964,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V KWANG MYONG NO 72 AS 200 $2,182,900 1.40 $3,056,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V KWANG MYONG NO 58 AS 200 $1,557,600 1.40 $2,181,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V KORAM NO 1 AS 200 $1,378,400 1.40 $1,930,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V KWANG MYONG NO 51 AS 200 $1,249,200 1.40 $1,749,000 $854,000 TOTAL $128,820,000 $67,016,00

Incident Year: 2000

 Fishing Vessel F/V JESSICA ANN ME 200 $947,000 1.35 $1,278,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V SWORDMAN I HI 100 $1,528,600 1.35 $2,064,000 $854,000 TOTAL $3,342,000 $1,708,000 

Incident Year: 2001

 Cargo/Other SPV SS J LUCKENBACH CA 7,900 $40,910,300 1.31 $53,593,000 $7,869,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V KIMTON PR 200 $713,700 1.31 $935,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V WINDY BAY AK 400 $3,396,400 1.31 $4,449,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V VANGUARD AK 200 $699,800 1.31 $917,000 $854,000 TOTAL $59,894,000 $10,431,00

Incident Year: 2002

 Fishing Vessel F/V GENEI MARU #7 AK 100 $869,800 1.29 $1,122,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V TERESA LYNN FL 200 $690,800 1.29 $891,000 $854,000 TOTAL $2,013,000 $1,708,000 

Incident Year: 2003

 Cargo/Other SPV VICTORIA ROSE HUNT MA 100 $1,085,700 1.26 $1,368,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V RED DIAMOND FL 200 $2,595,200 1.26 $3,270,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV CRANE BARGE MONARCH CA 200 $2,481,700 1.26 $3,127,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V BOWSTRING FL 300 $1,606,500 1.26 $2,024,000 $854,000  Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B B NO. 120 MA 6,900 $61,237,500 1.26 $77,159,000 $23,496,00TOTAL $86,948,000 $26,912,00
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

19 

Incident Year: 2004 

Vessel Type Project Name Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

 Fishing Vessel F/V NEW HORIZON CA 100 $805,300 1.23 $990,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V SELENDANG AYU AK 39,800 $153,430,100 1.23 $188,719,000 $39,755,000  Fishing Vessel F/V MWALIL SAAT GU 200 $3,413,500 1.23 $4,199,000 $854,000  Fishing Vessel F/V THE BOSS OR 200 $926,100 1.23 $1,139,000 $854,000  Tank Ship (Single Hull) T/V ATHOS I NJ 37,900 $252,010,800 1.23 $309,973,000 $121,264,00 Cargo/Other SPV M/V ORIENTAL I FL 200 $727,400 1.23 $895,000 $854,000 TOTAL $505,915,000 $164,435,00

Incident Year: 2005

 Tank Barge (Double Hull) T/B DBL 152 LA 9,700 $55,445,400 1.19 $65,980,000 $19,482,00 Cargo/Other SPV ALBION CA 200 $1,207,100 1.19 $1,436,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV M/V CASITAS HI 300 $1,710,700 1.19 $2,036,000 $854,000  Tank Barge (Single Hull) T/B EMC 423 IL 1,400 $12,778,500 1.19 $15,206,000 $6,408,000  Fishing Vessel F/V MILKY WAY WA 200 $1,039,600 1.19 $1,237,000 $854,000 TOTAL $85,895,000 $28,452,00

Incident Year: 2006

 Cargo/Other SPV MAMA LERE TX 400 $1,217,300 1.15 $1,400,000 $854,000 TOTAL $1,400,000 $854,000 

Incident Year: 2007

 Cargo/Other SPV M/V COSCO BUSAN CA 65,100 $110,557,900 1.12 $123,825,000 $65,131,00 Cargo/Other SPV M/V SENECA MI 200 $1,211,000 1.12 $1,356,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV LST-1166 OR 2,400 $5,151,000 1.12 $5,769,000 $2,418,000  Cargo/Other SPV CATALA WA 5,700 $6,138,500 1.12 $6,875,000 $5,700,000 TOTAL $137,825,000 $74,103,00

Incident Year: 2008

 Tank Barge (Double Hull) T/B DM932 LA 800 $102,980,700 1.08 $111,219,000 $4,272,000  Cargo/Other SPV C/V SEA WITCH MD 17,900 $20,629,900 1.08 $22,280,000 $17,902,000  Cargo/Other SPV BIG BOY & SCOOBY DOO PA 200 $1,010,800 1.08 $1,092,000 $854,000 TOTAL $134,591,000 $23,028,00
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

20 

Incident Year: 2009 

Vessel Type Project Name Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability 

 Fishing Vessel CAPT MIKE LA 100 $2,413,400 1.08 $2,606,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV WENONAH CA 300 $947,800 1.08 $1,024,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV SOUND DEVELOPER AK 200 $1,657,100 1.08 $1,790,000 $854,000  Cargo/Other SPV MONARCH AK 300 $2,698,200 1.08 $2,914,000 $854,000 TOTAL $8,334,000 $3,416,000 

Incident Year: 2010

 Cargo/Other SPV M/V PRINCESS KATHLEEN AK 5,900 $14,185,900 1.07 $15,179,000 $5,875,000 TOTAL $15,179,000 $5,875,000 

Incident Year: 2011

 Cargo/Other SPV DAVY CROCKETT WA 4,600 $22,454,700 1.03 $23,128,000 $4,643,000  Cargo/Other SPV TUG TIGER CA 200 $2,981,500 1.03 $3,071,000 $854,000 TOTAL $26,199,000 $5,497,000 

Incident Year: 2012

 Cargo/Other SPV JIREH PR 1,000 $13,809,500 1.01 $13,948,000 $979,000  Fishing Vessel DEEP SEA WA 200 $2,231,000 1.01 $2,253,000 $854,000 TOTAL $16,201,000 $1,833,000 TOTAL 1991-2000 $696,307,000 $262,491,000 TOTAL 2001-2013 $1,080,395,000 $346,554,000 GRAND TOTAL $1,776,702,000 $1,184,323,00

SPV - Self-Propelled Vessel 
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

21 

Attachment C: Incidents Exceeding Liability Limits With Limits to Achieve 50 percent Cost Share Vessel Type: Tank Ship (Single Hull) 

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability Fund Exposure Actua

OSLT

Costs Incurre

T/V JULIE N 1996 ME 18,500 $52,601,200 1.48 $77,850,000 $59,126,000 $18,723,000 $28,376,T/V ATHOS I 2004 NJ 37,900 $252,010,800 1.23 $309,973,000 $121,264,000 $188,709,000 $210,278 TOTAL $387,823,000 $180,390,000 $207,432,000 $238,654

Vessel Type: Tank Barge (Single Hull) 

T/B VISTABELLA 1991 PR 1,100 $6,105,500 1.71 $10,440,000 $6,408,000 $4,032,000 $4,782,0T/B (TAMPA BAY COLLISION) 1993 FL 9,300 $68,900,000 1.61 $110,929,000 $29,638,000 $81,291,000 $2,397,0T/B MORRIS J. BERMAN 1994 PR 5,400 $95,488,300 1.57 $149,917,000 $23,496,000 $126,421,000 $95,488,M/V SCANDIA & T/B NORTH CAPE 1996 RI 5,500 $49,000,000 1.48 $72,520,000 $23,496,000 $49,024,000 $9,046,0T/B BUFFALO #292 1996 TX 1,500 $21,517,000 1.48 $31,845,000 $6,408,000 $25,437,000 $16,810,T/B B NO. 120 2003 MA 6,900 $61,237,500 1.26 $77,159,000 $23,496,000 $53,663,000 $1,753,0T/B EMC 423 2005 IL 1,400 $12,778,500 1.19 $15,206,000 $6,408,000 $8,798,000 $5,839,0 TOTAL $468,016,000 $119,350,000 $348,666,000 $136,115

Vessel Type: Tank Barge (Double Hull) 

T/B DBL 152 2005 LA 9,700 $55,445,400 1.19 $65,980,000 $19,482,000 $46,498,000 $19,756,T/B DM932 2008 LA 800 $102,980,700 1.08 $111,219,000 $4,272,000 $106,947,000 $21,956, TOTAL $177,199,000 $23,754,000 $153,445,000 $41,712,

Vessel Type: NTV > 300 GT 

F/V TENYO MARU 1991 WA 4,200 $6,062,900 1.71 $10,368,000 $4,167,000 $6,201,000 $6,063,0F/V JIN SHIANG FA 1993 AS 400 $2,013,000 1.61 $3,241,000 $854,000 $2,387,000 $2,420,0F/V WINDY BAY 2001 AK 400 $3,396,400 1.31 $4,449,000 $854,000 $3,595,000 $3,396,0M/V KUROSHIMA 1997 AK 4,200 $19,702,600 1.45 $28,569,000 $4,160,000 $24,409,000 $17,540,M/V KURE 1997 CA 36,000 $47,218,900 1.45 $68,467,000 $36,009,000 $32,458,000 $29,00
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

22 

Vessel Type: NTV > 300 GT (Cont.) 

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability Fund Exposure Actua

OSLT

Costs Incurre

M/V NEW CARISSA 1999 OR 36,600 $50,501,400 1.40 $70,702,000 $36,571,000 $34,131,000 $32,914,M/V STUYVESANT 1999 CA 7,100 $11,700,000 1.40 $16,380,000 $7,111,000 $9,269,000 $379,00M/V SERGO ZAKARIADZE 1999 PR 16,500 $15,966,700 1.40 $22,353,000 $16,502,000 $5,851,000 $6,065,0SS J LUCKENBACH 2001 CA 7,900 $40,910,300 1.31 $53,593,000 $7,869,000 $45,724,000 $44,051,M/V SELENDANG AYU 2004 AK 39,800 $153,430,100 1.23 $188,719,000 $39,755,000 $148,964,000 $81,286,MAMA LERE 2006 TX 400 $1,217,300 1.15 $1,400,000 $854,000 $545,000 $1,217,0M/V COSCO BUSAN 2007 CA 65,100 $110,557,900 1.12 $123,825,000 $65,131,000 $58,694,000 $4,208,0LST-1166 2007 OR 2,400 $5,151,000 1.12 $5,769,000 $2,418,000 $3,351,000 $5,151,0CATALA 2007 WA 5,700 $6,138,500 1.12 $6,875,000 $5,700,000 $1,175,000 $6,138,0C/V SEA WITCH 2008 MD 17,900 $20,629,900 1.08 $22,280,000 $17,902,000 $4,378,000 $20,630,M/V PRINCESS KATHLEEN 2010 AK 5,900 $14,185,900 1.07 $15,179,000 $5,875,000 $9,304,000 $14,186,DAVY CROCKETT 2011 WA 4,600 $22,454,700 1.03 $23,128,000 $4,643,000 $18,485,000 $22,455,JIREH 2012 PR 1,000 $13,809,500 1.01 $13,948,000 $979,000 $12,969,000 $13,809, TOTAL $679,245,000 $257,354,000 $421,890,000 $281,937

Vessel Type: NTV < or = 300 GT 

F/V YU TE NO. 1 1999 AS 200 $1,164,600 1.40 $1,630,000 $854,000 $776,000 $5,296,0F/V AMIGA NO. 5 1999 AS 200 $3,355,700 1.40 $4,698,000 $854,000 $3,844,000 $2,766,0F/V KWANG MYONG 1999 AS 200 $1,554,800 1.40 $2,177,000 $854,000 $1,322,000 $965,00F/V KORAM NO. 3 1999 AS 200 $1,403,100 1.40 $1,964,000 $854,000 $1,110,000 $813,00F/V KWANG MYONG NO 72 1999 AS 200 $2,182,900 1.40 $3,056,000 $854,000 $2,202,000 $1,593,0F/V KWANG MYONG NO 58 1999 AS 200 $1,557,600 1.40 $2,181,000 $854,000 $1,326,000 $967,00F/V KORAM NO 1 1999 AS 200 $1,378,400 1.40 $1,930,000 $854,000 $1,075,000 $788,00F/V KWANG MYONG NO 51 1999 AS 200 $1,249,200 1.40 $1,749,000 $854,000 $894,000 $659,00F/V JESSICA ANN 2000 ME 200 $947,000 1.35 $1,278,000 $854,000 $424,000 $947,00F/V SWORDMAN I 2000 HI 100 $1,528,600 1.35 $2,064,000 $854,000 $1,209,000 $1,529,0F/V VANGUARD 2001 AK 200 $699,800 1.31 $917,000 $854,000 $62,000 $700,00F/V GENEI MARU #7 2002 AK 100 $869,800 1.29 $1,122,000 $854,000 $268,000 $870,00F/V TERESA LYNN 2002 FL 200 $690,800 1.29 $891,000 $854,000 $37,000 $691,00F/V NEW HORIZON 2004 CA 100 $805,300 1.23 $990,000 $854,000 $136,000 $305,00
This listing includes all incidents regardless of vessel size or type and regardless of whether a claim to the Fund by a responsible party for amounts in excess of liability limit

Costs include Federal removal costs and claims paid that have been verified. Other costs are estimated from best available information but cannot otherwise be verified. Fuand do not imply that the responsible parties will be able to limit their liability under the statute where the issue has not yet been determined. 

23 

Vessel Type: NTV < or = 300 GT (Cont.)

Project Name Incident Year Incident Location Gross Tonnage Total Incident Cost Inflation Factor Total Incident Cost (2013 Dollars) Limits of Liability Fund Exposure Actua

OSLT

Costs Incurre

F/V MWALIL SAAT 2004 GU 200 $3,413,500 1.23 $4,199,000 $854,000 $3,344,000 $3,414,0F/V THE BOSS 2004 OR 200 $926,100 1.23 $1,139,000 $854,000 $285,000 $926,00F/V MILKY WAY 2005 WA 200 $1,039,600 1.19 $1,237,000 $854,000 $383,000 $539,00CAPT MIKE 2009 LA 100 $2,413,400 1.08 $2,606,000 $854,000 $1,752,000 $2,413,0DEEP SEA 2012 WA 200 $2,231,000 1.01 $2,253,000 $854,000 $1,399,000 $2,231,0M/V KIMTON 2001 PR 200 $713,700 1.31 $935,000 $854,000 $81,000 $714,00VICTORIA ROSE HUNT 2003 MA 100 $1,085,700 1.26 $1,368,000 $854,000 $514,000 $94,00M/V RED DIAMOND 2003 FL 200 $2,595,200 1.26 $3,270,000 $854,000 $2,416,000 $2,595,0CRANE BARGE MONARCH 2003 CA 200 $2,481,700 1.26 $3,127,000 $854,000 $2,272,000 $2,482,0M/V BOWSTRING 2003 FL 300 $1,606,500 1.26 $2,024,000 $854,000 $1,170,000 $1,606,0M/V ORIENTAL I 2004 FL 200 $727,400 1.23 $895,000 $854,000 $40,000 $727,00ALBION 2005 CA 200 $1,207,100 1.19 $1,436,000 $854,000 $582,000 $1,207,0M/V CASITAS 2005 HI 300 $1,710,700 1.19 $2,036,000 $854,000 $1,181,000 $1,711,0M/V SENECA 2007 MI 200 $1,211,000 1.12 $1,356,000 $854,000 $502,000 $1,211,0BIG BOY & SCOOBY DOO 2008 PA 200 $1,010,800 1.08 $1,092,000 $854,000 $237,000 $1,011,0WENONAH 2009 CA 300 $947,800 1.08 $1,024,000 $854,000 $169,000 $948,00SOUND DEVELOPER 2009 AK 200 $1,657,100 1.08 $1,790,000 $854,000 $935,000 $1,657,0MONARCH 2009 AK 300 $2,698,200 1.08 $2,914,000 $854,000 $2,060,000 $24,00TUG TIGER 2011 CA 200 $2,981,500 1.03 $3,071,000 $854,000 $2,217,000 $2,981,0 TOTAL $64,419,000 $28,182,000 $36,224,000 $47,380, GRAND TOTAL $1,776,702,000 $609,045,000 $1,167,657,000 $745,799

NTV - Non-Tank Vessel