CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 3/3/2010 

Claim Number : 910044-001

Claimant : HEPACO, Inc 

Type of Claimant : Corporate (US) 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $11,922.09

FACTS: 

1. Oil Spill Incident: On July 19, 2008, the National Response Center (NRC) received a 

report of a sheen from an unknown source on the Cooper River that had been discovered 

on July 18, 2008. The incident was reported to the NRC via report # 877802.1 On that 

same day, The United States Coast Guard Sector Charleston Pollution Investigators 

responded to a report of a sunken vessel in Moncks Corner, South Carolina. The vessel, 

Freeloader III, sank at the Strawberry Pier in the Cooper River in Moncks Corner, 

discharging three gallons of diesel fuel, which created a sheen. The Cooper River is a 

navigable waterway of the United States. 

Initially, after several failed attempts by the Coast Guard to contact the vessel owner, 

the Federal On-Scene Coordinator Representative (FOSCR), MSTC , then 

decided to federalize the clean up. HEPACO, the claimant, was called by the Coast 

Guard to do the clean up. However, upon his arrival to the incident site, the owner, 

, took responsibility for the clean up and signed a contract with the 

claimant for the clean up. Therefore, the federalized project was cancelled by the 

FOSCR. 

 

2. Description of removal actions: HEPACO provided immediate response and cleanup 

of the spill by placing boom around the vessel. Mr. S informed the FOSCR that he 

would lift the vessel from the water the next morning. Claimant removed the boom on 

July 22, 2008 after confirmation that the vessel was afloat and the discharge was secure. 

3. The Claim: On December 31, 2009, the Claimant submitted a removal cost claim in 

the amount of $11,922.09 to the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for 

reimbursement for their uncompensated response costs. The claim consists of the July 

19, 2008 signed Blanket Rapid Response Services Agreement, incident billing summary, 

dailies, photographs, invoices of work performed and supplies used during the clean up. 

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).

 

1

 See NRC Report #877802 dated July 19, 2008. 
"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 Federal On-Scene Coordination was provided by MSTC of Coast 

Guard Sector Charleston. 

2. The incident involved 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 on time. 

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 costs for these actions were indeed reasonable and allowable 

under OPA and 33 CFR § 136.205 as set forth below. 

B. Analysis: 

The NPFC Claims Manager has 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, and (4) whether the costs were adequately documented 

and reasonable. 

The claimant states that all costs claimed are for uncompensated removal costs incurred 

by the claimant for this incident on July 19, 2008. The Claimant represents that all costs 

paid by the Claimant are compensable removal costs, payable by the OSLTF as presented 

by Claimant. The NPFC confirmed the rates charged were in accordance with the rate 

schedule in place at the time the services were rendered and that the FOSCR has 

confirmed that the actions taken were reasonable, necessary and consistent with the NCP. 

 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC determines that the OSLTF will pay $11,922.09 as full compensation for the 

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

claim# 910044-001. 

AMOUNT: $11,922.09

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 

Supervisor Action: