CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 10/1/2010 

Claim Number : 910134-0001

Claimant : State of Florida 

Type of Claimant : State 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $186.62

FACTS: 

 

Oil Spill Incident: On October 28, 2009, Florida Department of Environmental 

Protection (DEP) received a call from the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) via 

the State Warning Point (SWP) to report a leaking 55 gallon drum had washed ashore at 

Geiger Key Marina in Key West, Florida. The Marina is located on the Atlantic Ocean, a 

navigable waterway of the United States. Upon her arrival, , BER On-Scene 

Coordinator (BER OSC), discovered that the drum had washed ashore at Boca Chica 

Beach. 

Description of Removal Activities for this claimant: The Florida DEP Park Police, 

MCSO and the United States Coast Guard (USCG) were at the incident site. The drum 

was about 20 feet from the shore and leaking an odorless, tan substance. The USCG 

deployed sorbent pads to collect oil that had accumulated on the shoreline. USCG also 

hired contractor, SWS Environmental First Response (SWS). SWS subcontracted the 

clean-up work to Coffin Marine Service, who recovered and over-packed the leaking 

drum. The drum was marked as light hydraulic oil. SWS was scheduled to arrive later to 

take the drum to their facility. The incident was reported to the National Response 

Center (NRC) (NRC #921911 and #921931). It was determined that one gallon of 

hydraulic oil was released. 

The Claim: On September 28, 2010 the Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

submitted a removal cost claim to the National Pollution Fund Center (NPFC) for 

reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs of State personnel, equipment and 

administrative costs in the amount of $186.62. 

Florida DEP is claiming $116.69 in State personnel expenses, $47.93 in State equipment 

(vehicle and clothing) expenses and $22.00 in State administrative documentation/photo 

fees. 

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. FOSC coordination has been provided by USCG Sector Key West on 11/17/09 by 

MST1 . 

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 within the six year statute of limitations.

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 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. 

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

$186.62 of uncompensated removal costs and that that amount is payable by the OSLTF 

as full compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the claimant and 

submitted to the NPFC under claim #910134-001 for assessment and investigation costs. 

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

by the claimant for this incident on October 28, 2009. The claimant represents that all 

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

presented by the claimant. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $186.62 as full compensation for 

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

under claim # 910134-001. All costs claimed are for charges paid for by the Claimant for 

removal actions as that term is defined in OPA and, are compensable removal costs, 

payable by the OSLTF as presented by the Claimant. 

AMOUNT: $186.62

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 10/4/10

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor’s Comments: