CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 10/22/2008 

Claim Number : S05014-001

Claimant : ConocoPhillips Company 

Type of Claimant : Corporate (US) 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $112,551.45

FACTS: 

1. Oil Spill Incident: On Monday January 17, 2005 at approximately 2220, the tug boat 

NA HOKU approached the ConocoPhillips Refinery dock with the empty tank barge 

NOHO HELE under tow. The tug shortened tow, made up to the port side of the NOHO 

HELE and brought the starboard side of the barge to the pier at 2305. At 0045 on 

January 18, 2005, the barge began loading approximately 54,000 barrels of diesel. At 

approximately 0630, the cargo loading was stopped when diesel was discovered in the 

water. The diesel on the barge was then pumped back to the facility and inspection of the 

hull revealed a hole through which the diesel had leaked. The leak was stopped at 

approximately 0830. An investigation revealed that the tug’s fendering system had 

punched a hole in the barge when the tug made up to it prior to approaching the dock. 

(Note that all times stated above are in Pacific Standard Time). 

2. Description of actions performed as reported by the claimant: On January 18, 2005, 

the spill was reported at approximately 6:35am. The claimant notified the NRC via 

report # 747479. The claimant notified the USCG, the Washington Department of 

Ecology, and its respective response contractor, Clean Sound Cooperative. The leak 

from the NOHO HELE was stopped at approximately 9:15. Transfer of incident 

command to the Responsible Party, Sirius Maritime, was identified on the ICS 202 

Objectives sheet as of 1300 hrs on January 18, 2005. Until the transfer took place, the 

claimant states various personnel, as well as the Clean Sound Cooperative crews 

(ConocoPhillips’ contractor), worked diligently to contain and begin cleanup of the spill. 

The cleanup was handled by various Ferndale employees and contract personnel who 

were on site and available. 

The claimant contends that the first and primary concern they had was to minimize any 

hazard. Individuals were immediately mobilized in the area to deploy boom to contain 

the spill as quickly as possible, to begin cleaning up the fuel from the water, and to assess 

potential impacts to the local environment. Containment boom was used to prevent fuel 

from escaping; absorbent material was used to collect fuel from the water’s surface. 

Search for and tracking of the diesel was handled by helicopter and from the shore. 

In summary, the claimant reports that the efforts associated with this incident involved 

103 people, 2500 feet of boom, three oil skimmers, nine work boats and three 

helicopters.1

 The claimant has provided several ICS forms generated by different people 

who articulate details of the incident from the author of the ICS Form’s perspective 

therefore not every ICS form provides the same detail or fact set with respect to 

 

1

See, letter dated October 18, 2005 to & Associates, Inc. 
chronology. The NPFC has decided to provide the Chronology as written by 

 Claimant’s Public Information Officer (PIO).2

 It is as follows: 

0635: NOHO HELE notified dock of sheen in water 

0655: diesel spill at dock

0700: barge has deployed sausage boom; response team deployed (3 people on 3 boats 

with a total of a dozen responders 

0740: notified Clean Sound Cooperative (claimant contractor) 

0755: oil spill boat, Raider, on scene and encapsulating barge with boom; 

NOHO HELE has not officially taken responsibility; plan is to pump tank off and 

isolate barge

0820: Claimant contractor, Clean Sound, has 4 vessels enroute to scene – first boat to 

arrive by 0920 

0900: barge compartment #2 has been pumped below leak; estimated volume is 60-

gallons; estimated time of arrival of helicopter is 0915; security is on standby; 

barge owner, Sirius Maritime is enroute 

1105: no divers deployed; of Sirius Maritime announced he would be 

taking over with more help on the way; SOSC on scene; Clean Sound has 3 boats 

on site with 2 more enroute; WSMC helicopter is overhead (RP contractor’s 

helicopter) under direction of Clean Sound (claimant contractor); no shoreline 

impact per Clean Sound 

1355: there was a 12:45 overflight Lummie Bay – nothing south approaching shoreline; 

streamers headed toward Cherry Pt dock and near Pt. Whitehorn, not recoverable; 

there may be shoreline impacts 1⁄2 way to Pt. Whitehorn 

1400: Sirius Maritime, USCG, WSMC, attended UC meeting; 

 I. Form UC, identify positions, transition plan 

 a. of WSMC (RP contractor) assumes IC role 

 b. will hand over positions under WSMC’s control

 1. will support any open roles 

 2. has sent people home to prep for next shift 

c. would like to review current objectives & modify without updated 

field info 

 1. use 202 as guide to talk about tomorrow

 II. Review objectives by , pending SCAT update 

a. WSMC has its own helicopter – little need for others going forward 

except for tomorrow morning / 4am high tide) 

b. temporary repairs to be handled by Sirius in conjunction with USCG 

c. check to see is CANADA notified by USCG 

d. unable to confirm exactly what BP deployed 

e. discussion of deployment of GRPs 

 1. may not be necessary but resources are available if needed 

f. continue with visual assessments 

g. delete obj. OPS16 4500ft of boom 

h. no need for further open water skimmings 

i. need to work logistics of disposal plan 

j. post flyer north and south of as well s door to door 

k. working on shoreline assessment as well 

l. two lummie reps working shoreline assessment as well 

m. clean hull of Polar Endeavor 

n. claim # assigned; working with RP’s finance to transition

 

2

See, Exhibit B of claimant submission, ICS-214 forms 
o. get JIC’s communication plan, USCG agreed to talking points only – no 

press release 

 III. Where to go from here per 

 a. drop skimming 

 b. complete in-progress obj. and stand down 

 1. clean up is done 

 2. org. should not completely stand down yet, per 

 a. no more logistics support from needed 

3. NRC will handle remaining boom (2 boats) containment around 

dock and barge 

 c. WSMC has other off site assistance 

 d. maintain planning & ops 

 e. extend operational period under WSMC until noon tomorrow 

f. field ops continue until further notice – 1500 adjourn – note * barge to 

discharge at 1700 

3. Description of actions performed as reported by Sirius Maritime (RP): On January 

18, 2005 at approximately 0630 the oil spill occurred at the ConocoPhillips Ferndale 

Refinery. The Sirius Maritime tank barge, NOHO HELE, was loading cargo at the 

Ferndale Refinery. During the transfer, the person-in-charge from Sirius Maritime 

discovered the spill and immediately stopped all loading. Sirius made notifications to the 

NRC via report # 747487, the RP also notified the USCG who was the Federal On Scene 

Coordinator (FOSC), Washington Department of Ecology who was the State On Scene 

Coordinator (SOSC), and their contractor of record, Washington State Maritime 

Cooperative (WSMC). 

By 0700, Sirius Maritime (RP) and the crew of its attending tug, the NA HOKU, were 

well into the response effort. Sirius Maritime promptly notified ConocoPhillips that the 

response would be fully handled by them (including WSMC, Global Diving & Salvage 

and other contractors). Sirius Maritime states they informed Conoco that their 

participation was not necessary. The Sirius Maritime crew and contractors deployed 

boom and absorbent pads to contain and retrieve the spilled fuel. They inspected the 

barge and determined the source of the leak. Within two hours from onset, at 

approximately 0830, the source had been found and the leak stopped. By approximately 

1900, all recoverable amounts of oil had been retrieved by the Sirius Maritime crew and 

contractors. At 2030, response resources were demobilized and at 2250, the barge 

departed from the facility.

Sirius Maritime’s chronology of the incident is as follows3: 

1/18/05

0640: tankerman called out the Master and crew of the attending tug 

0648: the terminal shutdown loading ops; source of the oil could still not be determined 

0700: the tug master contacted Sirius Maritime’s QI and informed him of situation; the 

QI began notifications to WSMC, USCG as FOSC, and Washington Department of 

Ecology as SOSC 

0705: the tug crew began deploying sorbent boom in the vicinity of the #2P cargo tank 

where there appeared to be a concentration of oil 

 

3

See, Sirius Maritime’s Memorandum dated March 16, 2005
0712: the tug/barge crew began deploying the onboard containment boom and deployed 

the barge’s skiff. After deploying the skiff and making a thorough examination of 

the hull of the barge, a 3⁄4” crack was observed in the #2P tank just at or under the 

waterline 

0715: the containment boom was in place around the barge. At 0735 the barge 

commenced discharging product back to the refinery 

0725: Mr. of Sirius Maritime, dispatched and to 

F

0830: it appeared that no further oil was entering the water and the discharge of the barge 

continued 

0900: also of Sirius Maritime, departed from Fox Island enroute to 

1020: arrive on site. Conoco activated their Emergency Ops 

Center (EOC) with acting as IC 

1040: of WSMC (RP contractor) arrived at the EOC. Shortly after arriving, 

Mr. departed for a helo overflight of the scene. From 1215 to 1330, an 

initial Unified Command meeting was held at Conoco’s EOC. Mr. returned 

from the overflight, and arrived at the EOC at 1330. At that time, Mr. 

 reported that the overflight indicated small areas of sheen between 

Conoco’s dock and Cherry Pt which appeared to be breaking up quickly. Two of 

WSMC’s FRV’s and two of Clean Sound skimmer boats reported no recoverable 

amounts of oil in the area. Cleanup and recovery continued at the dock with 

tug/barge crew, WSMC/NRC personnel and Global Diving personnel contracted 

by Sirius, using sorbents to recover product from within the boomed area. Global 

Diving personnel applied a temporary epoxy patch to the hull of the barge. 

1410: Mr. WSMC, officially assumed the IC duties from at 

Conoco. Another Unified Command meeting was held and objectives modified to 

continue operations at the dock until complete and stand down the remainder of the 

response and IMT resources that had been mobilized by Conoco. 

1700: All Conoco IMT resources were de-mobilized 

1900: Cleanup of all recoverable amounts of oil was completed. State and USCG grant 

permission to pull containment boom. 

1925: the barge was released by USCG to depart when discharge was complete 

2030: All response resources are de-mobilized 

2110: the discharge is complete. The barge departed for Bellingham at 2250 

1/19/05

An overflight was conducted by the FOSC, SOSC, and RP contractor, WSMC; 

beach walks of the immediate area were conducted; no oil or sheen was observed 

in the area; Sirius Maritime’s President, Mr. meets with FOSC, SOSC, 

WSMC Incident Commander and Conoco personnel. Response is officially 

terminated. 

4. Description of actions performed as reported by USCG4(FOSC): MSTCS 

 arrived on site at the Ferndale Refinery at 1350 on January 18, 2005. The 

Unified Command was staffed until 1930. MSTCS Clingenpeel returned to the site on 

January 19, 2005 at approximately 0745 and the incident was secured at 1030. Inspection 

issues were not resolved until later (unrelated to response actions). 

MSTCS ’s timeline of events from his notes is as follows:

 

4

See, typed statement (undated) from MSTCS A.S. (NPFC) 
0635: leak reported in barge NOHO HELE 

0640-0730: Notifications were made 

0700-0730: Spill Response Team activated 

0747: Personnel in field, at the dock report a hole in #2 compartment and still leaking 

0915: leak stopped, cargo transferred back to facility 

1040: ConocoPhillips and Clean Sound Cooperative deploy boom 

1500: RP representation in the Unified Command shifts from Conoco to Sirius 

1930: Secure Command Post 

1/19/05

0730: Reopen Command Post 

1030: Secure Incident response activities 

In addition to the above provided Chronology from MSTCS to the NPFC is 

also the USCG’s Polrep 1 and Final which shows the following timeline5

: 

1/18/05

0715: MSO received report from NRC of a discharge of diesel at the ConocoPhillips 

Refinery in Ferndale, WA 

0745: Pollution Investigators depart MSO

0945: Pollution Investigators arrive on scene and are briefed. While taking on diesel, the 

person in charge of the NOHO HELE noticed a sheen in the water. 

ConocoPhillips conducted an initial response and placed boom around the barge 

and the Polar Endeavor. The barge immediately started transferring fuel back to 

the refinery. As the barge’s hull rose above the water line, the person in charge 

noticed a hole. Geographic Response Plans NPS-12 and NPS-13 implemented and 

being maintained. 

1000: Overflight conducted, observed minimal sheen and no shoreline impact. 

1030: Pollution Investigators board the barge. Observed the damage to the hull of the 

NOHO HELE and informed the RP that all of the fuel on the barge had to be off 

loaded and the clean up complete before the barge could depart. 

1200: USCG, WADOE, RP set up unified command. ConocoPhillips transferred 

responsibility of the clean up to Sirius Maritime. 

1230: Pollution Investigators conduct overflight and observe minimal sheen and no 

shoreline impact. 

1345: MSO Chief arrives on scene and takes over duties as FOSCR. 

1400: Overflight conducted no sheen outside boom or shoreline impact observed. 

1530: Pollution Investigators depart scene. 

1800: Pulled GRPS NPS-12 and NPS-13 due to lack of oil and worsening weather 

conditions. 

2200: T/B NOHO HELE departs ConocoPhillips Refinery enroute to Pier 3, Bellingham, 

WA. Unable to moor due to weather. 

1/19/05

0830: Overflight conducted, no sheen or shoreline impact visible. 

0945: SCAT teams deploy 

 

5

See, USCG Polrep 1 and Final 
1030: SCAT teams find no shoreline impact and secures.

1130: T/B NOHO HELE moors to Pier 3, Bellingham, WA for further repairs.

CASE CLOSED

5. Description of actions performed as reported by WADOE6(SOSC): WADOE

personnel arrived on site at the Ferndale Refinery on January 18, 2005 and filled 

positions within the ICS, and undertook initial investigative actions. 

WADOE’s chronology as referenced in their Investigative Findings report dated 8 June 

20057is as follows:

1/17/05

2220: The tug boat NA HOKU approached the ConocoPhillips refinery dock with the 

empty tank barge NOHO HELE under tow. The NA HOKU shortened up the tow 

and then made up to the NOHO HELE’s port side.

2305: The first line from the NOHO HELE was on the dock.

2320: The NOHO HELE was made all fast at the ConocoPhillips dock.

1/18/05

0010: The Declaration of Inspection (DOI) was completed and signed by barge Person in 

Charge (PIC) and terminal PIC.

0045: ConocoPhillips commenced loading 54,000 barrels of diesel to the barge. The 

cargo plan was to load the barge to the load marks and transport the diesel to 

Tacoma.

0045-0630: The cargo transfer procedures were going according to the tankerman’s plan.

0700: The tug master contacted Sirius Maritime QI and informed him of the situation. 

The Sirius Maritime QI began notifications to Washington State Maritime 

Cooperative (WSMC), the U.S.Coast Guard, their OSRO, and the Washington 

State Emergency Management Division.

0710: The tug crew began deploying sorbent boom in the vicinity of #2P cargo tank 

where there appeared to be a concentration of oil.

0712: The tug/barge crew began deploying the onboard containment boom with the 

barge’s response skiff. The skiff was used to inspect the barge hull to try to 

discover the source of the leak. A 3⁄4” crack was discovered in the hull at the 

waterline between frame 11 and 12, about 71/2 feet below the main deck on the 

port side in the #2P cargo tank.

0730: Additional boom was deployed in the water and absorbent pads used to retrieve 

spilled diesel.

0735: The barge began pumping diesel back to the facility.

0830: The leak was stopped.

1900: Cleanup of all amounts of oil determined recoverable was completed.

2110: The barge discharge was complete.

2250: The barge departed for Bellingham and repairs.

6. The Claim: On December 28, 2007 ConocoPhillips (COP) submitted a removal cost 

claim to the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), for reimbursement of their 

uncompensated removal costs in the amount of $112,551.45 for the services and 

 

6

See, Investigation Findings dated 8 June 2005 as reported by Washington Department of Ecology (WADOE)

7

id
materials they state they provided in response to the NOHO HELE oil spill at their 

refinery dock from January 18, 2005 through January 19, 2005. The invoices, which are 

the subject of this claim, were sent by the claimant to Sirius Maritime. Sirius Maritime 

has denied payment to the claimant as they state the services provided were excessive and 

unnecessary. This claim consists of proof of presentment, copies of the invoicing, 

disposal manifests, CG MISLE case information, NRC report, ICS Forms, and news 

articles, press releases and information statements. 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: 

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 generated Polrep 1 and Final regarding the incident highlights and the FOSCR has 

provided an undated written statement to the NPFC. See, Enclosures 4 & 5.

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 on time.

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

claim and determined that some of 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 and directed by the FOSC. 

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 

$35,878.24 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# S05014-001. The claimant states that all costs claimed 

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

period of, January 18, 2005 through January 19, 2005. The claimant represents that all costs 

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

the claimant.

During the adjudication process, the NPFC contacted the Washington State Department of 

Ecology (WADOE) who fulfilled the role of the State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC) for this 

incident. At the NPFC’s request, the SOSC provided a complete copy of their case file 

associated with this incident including but not limited to, photographs, investigations reports, 

and statements from interviews, RP Investigative Report, news articles, copies of the barge 

logbook, copy of Department’s Enforcement action, and copies of internal memorandum, just 

to name a few.

The NPFC also contacted the FOSCR, MSTC Clingenpeel and obtained a written statement 

regarding the incident and response actions as well as the NPFC notified the RP, Sirius 

Maritime, and received a response regarding the justification on why they denied paying the 

claimant’s costs. Based on the variances of information from all parties involved, the NPFC 

determined to pay the following costs based on validation by either the FOSC, the SOSC or 

both, who were monitoring the response:

Conoco Materials – The NPFC has determined that $6,086.25 for sorbent boom has been 

substantiated by the records of both the FOSC and SOSC and is therefore determined OPA 

compensable. All other costs billed under the heading of Conoco Materials have been 

determined to be either unsubstantiated or excessive in nature. (See, Enclosure 1 –

spreadsheet of costs for a line by line itemization of costs).

Clean Sound Cooperative – The NPFC has determined that $21,197.21 is OPA compensable. 

The FOSC, the SOSC, and the RP records have validated the presence of this contractor 

during response actions. All costs denied are denied as unsubstantiated or non-OPA 

compensable removal costs. (See, Enclosure 1 – spreadsheet of costs for a line by line 

itemization of costs).

Other Contract Labor – The NPFC has denied all costs under this category as 

unsubstantiated. Neither the FOSC nor the SOSC has validated the work billed by these 

vendors as reasonable, necessary or directed by the FOSC. It is important to note that costs 

associated with media relations are not OPA compensable removal costs and are therefore 

denied in their entirety. (See, Enclosure 1 – spreadsheet of costs for a line by line itemization 

of costs).

Puget Sound Security – The NPFC has determined the cost associated with security because 

of the presence of non-ConocoPhillips employees during spill response is a reasonable and 

necessary expense and therefore determined OPA compensable. (See, Enclosure 1 –

spreadsheet of costs for a line by line itemization of costs).

Misc. Equipment Rental – The NPFC has determined that light towers, tanks for disposal, 

and portable toilets are reasonable and necessary expenses associated with response. Based 

on the documentation provided, these costs do not appear on any other billing provided to the 

NPFC therefore these costs are not considered duplicative and are deemed OPA 
compensable. (See, Enclosure 1 – spreadsheet of costs for a line by line itemization of 

costs). 

ConocoPhillips Labor – The NPFC has determined that the claimant has failed to meet its 

burden in providing the following: (1) appropriate hourly rates for each employee; (2) a 

detailed description by name along with the work being performed hourly by each Conoco 

employee; (3) failure to provide justification for over 421 man hours billed. When the NPFC 

requested the hourly wage information by person, the claimant failed to produce sufficient 

information to substantiate rates paid, work performed, and no justification for the excessive 

number of billets charged on such a small response. It is important to note that while Sirius 

Maritime did not officially take control of the Incident Command until after 1pm on January 

18, 2005, the records and accounts by ALL parties demonstrate that the RP was proactive 

from the moment of notification until the response ended. (See, Enclosure 1 – spreadsheet of 

costs for a line by line itemization of costs). 

Puget Sound Pilots – The NPFC has determined that $6,196.24 is OPA compensable removal 

costs as determined by the FOSC. The downtime associated with the Polar Endeavor is not a 

removal cost and the claimant has failed to meet their burden for these costs as a loss of 

profits and earning capacity. (See, Enclosure 1 – spreadsheet of costs for a line by line 

itemization of costs). 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $35,878.24 as full compensation for the 

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

S05014-001. All costs determined compensable 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: $35,878.24

Claim Supervisor:

Date of Supervisor’s review: 

Supervisor Action: 

Supervisor’s Comments: