3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: 917036-0001 

Claimant: Oil Mop, LLC 

Type of Claimant: OSRO 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $6,052.25 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On February 19, 2017, of Galveston Bay Energy

notified the National Response Center via report # 1171447 of a 20 gallon discharge of 

oil from a ruptured pipeline on their facility into Trinity Bay, a navigable waterway of the 

United States.1 Galveston Bay Energy hired Oil Mop, LLC to conduct removal actions.2

Description of Removal Activities for this claimant: Oil Mop, LLC personnel 

responded and conducted removal actions on February 19, 2017. The response 

concentrated on removing oil from the surface of the waterway using sorbent pads and 

sorbent sweep.

3

Responsible Party: The Responsible Party (RP) is Galveston Bay Energy, LLC. The 

Claimant has asserted that they submitted the invoice to the RP on April 10, 2017 and 

were told by the RP that they do not have the funds to pay for the invoice as they have 

filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.4 The NPFC issued an RP Notification Letter dated 

August 30, 2017. To date no response has been received as of yet.5

The Claim: On August 29, 2017, the NPFC received a removal cost claim from Oil 

Mop, LLC for reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs in the amount of 

$6,052.25.6 The claim is based on invoice #N1704-019 from Oil Mop, LLC in the 

amount of $6,052.25.7

 

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 Nation Response Center report # 1171447.

2 See Claimant’s OSLTF claim submission received by NPFC on August 29, 2017.

3 See Claimant’s OSLTF claim submission received by NPFC on August 29, 2017.

4 See Claimant’s OSLTF claim submission received by NPFC on August 29, 2017.

5 See NPFC RP Notification Letter dated 8/30/17. 6 See Claimant’s OSLTF claim submission received by NPFC on August 29, 2017.

7 See Oil Mop, LLC invoice N1704-019 as part of claim submission received on August 29, 2017.
4

"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 
5

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 NPFC has determined that the actions undertaken by the Claimant are deemed 

consistent with the NCP. This determination is made in accordance with the 

Delegation of Authority for Determination of Consistency with the NCP for the 

payment of uncompensated removal cost claims and is consistent with the provisions 

of sections 1002(b)(1)(B) and 1012(a)(4) of OPA, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2702(b)(1)(B) and 

2712(a)(4);

2. The incident involved the discharge of “oil” as defined in OPA 90, 33 U.S.C. § 

2701(23), to navigable waters;

3. In accordance with 33 CFR § 136.105(e)(12), the claimant has certified no suit has 

been filed in court for the claimed uncompensated removal costs;

4. The claim was submitted to the Fund within the six year period of limitations for 

removal costs claims. 33 U.S.C. §2712(h)(1);

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

with the claim and determined which 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. 

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. 

In reviewing the claim, the NPFC considered the Claimant’s evidence which consisted of Oil 

Mop, LLC invoice N1704-019, rate schedule of prices for Oil Mop, LLC, and disposal 

manifests. The NPFC obtained a copy of the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) claim files 

which demonstrates the Response Officer was on scene, monitored the actions of the 

Claimant and updated the estimated spill size from 20 to approximately 40 gallons of crude 

oil.8

 

Based on its review, the NPFC has determined that the costs incurred by Claimant are 

compensable under the OPA. The costs were reasonable and necessary to mitigate the effects 

of the incident and were determined by the NPFC to be consistent with the NCP. The NPFC 

confirmed that OMI rates were billed in accordance with the rate schedule in place with 

 8 See, TGLO Spill Case file # 2017-0526.
6

Galveston Bay along with email confirmation from of Galveston Bay 

approving the charges billed by OMI.9 

Upon review of the information provided by the Claimant, the NPFC has determined that the 

payable costs were billed in accordance with the cost of materials used at the time the 

services were rendered and were determined by the NPFC to be consistent with the NCP. 

Disposal of spoiled materials was conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and 

regulations. 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $6,052.255 as full compensation for 

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

claim # 917036-0001. All costs claimed are for charges incurred 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: $6,052.25

 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 9/6/17 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

 

9 See OMI Claim submission documents for claim 917036-0001.