2

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION1 

Claim Number: UCGP923024-URC001 

Claimant: Alaska Department of Conservation 

Type of Claimant: State 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $394.88 

Action Taken: Offer in the amount of $394.88

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 

 On January 3, 2018, at 9:39 local time, the National Response Center (NRC) received a 

report that the vessel Sea Quest sank in Aurora Harbor, located on the Gastineau Channel, a 

navigable waterway of the United States.2

 The Alaska Department of Conservation (“ADEC” or 

“Claimant”), was the State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC) for the incident and spoke with the 

Aurora Harbor Master who confirmed that the vessel had sunk and contained a limited amount of 

fuel.3 

 U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Sector Juneau, the Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC), arrived 

on scene at 11:20 local time, and verified that the vessel sank and released approximately 1 

gallon of diesel fuel into the water.4

 The County and Borough of Juneau (CBJ) had previously 

impounded the vessel and as such, the FOSC identified it as the RP.5 CBJ contracted with the 

Trucano Company (Trucano), to remove and dispose of the vessel.6 Site work was completed on 

January 4, 2018 and the vessel was disposed of by Trucano on January 5, 2018.

7

 

ADEC submitted its uncompensated removal cost claim to the National Pollution Funds 

Center (NPFC) in the amount of $394.88 on May 30, 2023. The NPFC has thoroughly reviewed 

all documentation submitted with the claim, analyzed the applicable laws and regulations, and 

after careful consideration has determined that $394.88 is compensable and offers this amount as 

full and final compensation of this claim.

1 This determination is written for the sole purpose of adjudicating a claim against the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund 

(OSLTF). This determination adjudicates whether the claimant is entitled to OSLTF reimbursement of claimed 

removal costs or damages under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. This determination does not adjudicate any rights or 

defenses any Responsible Party or Guarantor may have or may otherwise be able to raise in any future litigation or 

administrative actions, to include a lawsuit or other action initiated by the United States to recover the costs 

associated this incident. After a claim has been paid, the OSLTF becomes subrogated to all of the claimant’s rights 

under 33 U.S.C. § 2715. When seeking to recover from a Responsible Party or a Guarantor any amounts paid to 

reimburse a claim, the OSLTF relies on the claimant’s rights to establish liability. If a Responsible Party or 

Guarantor has any right to a defense to liability, those rights can be asserted against the OSLTF. Thus, this 

determination does not affect any rights held by a Responsible Party or a Guarantor.

2 National Response Center (NRC) Incident Report #1201009 dated January 3, 2018. 3 Original ADEC Claim Submission dated May 30, 2023.

4

 U.S. Coast Guard SITREP-Pol One dated February 27, 2022. 5 Id. See also, 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32). 6 Original ADEC Claim Submission dated May 30, 2023. 7 Id. 

(b) (6)
3

I. INCIDENT, RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

Incident and Recovery Operations

On January 3, 2018, at 9:39 local time, the National Response Center (NRC) received a 

report that the vessel Sea Quest sank in the Aurora Harbor, located on the Gastineau Channel, a 

navigable waterway of the United States.

8

 The United States Coast Guard (USCG) Sector 

Juneau was notified, as was the Alaska Department of Conservation (ADEC).

9 ADEC staff, in 

their capacity as the State On Scene Coordinator (SOSC), contacted the Aurora Harbor Office 

and spoke with the Harbor Master who gave the location of the vessel as Float H and verified 

that the vessel had minimal fuel on board since it was an impounded vessel.10

 At 11:20 local time, USCG Sector Juneau, as the Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC), 

arrived on scene and noted a 25’ rainbow sheen around the vessel and some escaping between 

the boat slips.11 CBJ boomed off the area and contracted with Trucano to respond to the incident. 

All work was completed by January 5, 2018. 

Responsible Party

The Oil Pollution Act identifies the owner or operator of a vessel resulting in an OPA 

incident to be the Responsible Party (RP) for that incident.12 In this case, the vessel had been

owned by Mr. before it was impounded by CBJ. According to the record, CBJ 

had impounded the vessel under a local ordinance. NPFC sought the official records 

documenting the impoundment but were unsuccessful.13 By all accounts, CBJ had taken 

ownership of the vessel well before the incident and could be found to be the RP, as the FOSC 

had done in this case. However, in order for a governmental entity who acquires ownership in the 

manner CBJ appears to have done, the entity must have “caused or contributed to” the 

discharge.14 There is simply not enough information in the record to conclude whether CBJ, by 

mooring the vessel and leaving it sit at the pier as it did “caused or contributed” to the discharge. 

Arguments could be made on either side. Coupled with the lack of the documentation regarding 

8 National Response Center (NRC) Incident Report #1201009 dated January 3, 2018. 9 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated February 27, 2022. 10 Original ADEC Claim Submission, dated May 30, 2023. 11 SITREP-Pol One dated February 27, 2022. 12 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32). 13 Email from CBJ Aurora Harbor Master to NPFC dated June 14, 2023. 14 [I]n the same manner and to the same extent, both procedurally and substantively, as any nongovernmental entity, 

including for purposes of liability under section 2702 of this title, any State or local government that has caused or 

contributed to a discharge or substantial threat of a discharge of oil from a vessel or facility ownership or control of 

which was acquired involuntarily through--

(I) seizure or otherwise in connection with law enforcement activity;

(II) bankruptcy;

(III) tax delinquency;

(IV) abandonment; or

(V) other circumstances in which the government involuntarily acquires title by virtue of its function as sovereign. 

33 U.S.C. § 2701(26)(A)(v). 

(b) (6)
4

the impoundment, NPFC is not in a position to dispositively identify an RP at this time, nor does 

it need to, for the purposes of this determination.15

II. CLAIMANT AND NPFC:

On May 30, 2023, the NPFC received a claim for $394.88 from ADEC.

16 ADEC provided 

the NPFC with an OSLTF claim form, ADEC Spill Summary Report #18119900302, ADEC 

Invoice # SPAR20181839.17

On June 12, 2023, the NPFC requested additional information from ADEC relative to the 

RP’s date of impoundment and any associated documents, and requested labor rate information 

for ADEC personnel.18 On June 13, 2023, ADEC responded to the NPFC’s request, providing 

the labor rate documentation but was unable to provide information about the impoundment. 

ADEC provided the CBJ’s website in which to request vessel documentation directly.

19 

III. DETERMINATION PROCESS:

 The NPFC utilizes an informal process when adjudicating claims against the Oil Spill 

Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF).20 As a result, 5 U.S.C. § 555(e) requires the NPFC to provide a 

brief statement explaining its decision. This determination is issued to satisfy that requirement.

 When adjudicating claims against the OSLTF, the NPFC acts as the finder of fact. In this 

role, the NPFC considers all relevant evidence, including evidence provided by claimants and 

evidence obtained independently by the NPFC, and weighs its probative value when determining 

the facts of the claim.21 The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, 

or conclusions reached by other entities.22 If there is conflicting evidence in the record, the 

NPFC makes a determination as to what evidence is more credible or deserves greater weight, 

and makes its determination based on the preponderance of the credible evidence.

IV. DISCUSSION: 

 An RP is liable for all removal costs and damages resulting from either an oil discharge or a 

substantial threat of oil discharge into a navigable water of the United States.23 An RP’s liability 

16 Original ADEC Claim Submission dated May 30, 2023. 17 Id. 18 Email from NPFC to Claimant dated June 12, 2023. 19 Email from ADEC to NPFC dated June 13, 2023, with attachments. Unfortunately, CBJ no longer held records on 

this impoundment. 

20 33 CFR Part 136. 21 See, e.g., Boquet Oyster House, Inc. v. United States, 74 ERC 2004, 2011 WL 5187292, (E.D. La. 2011), “[T]he 

Fifth Circuit specifically recognized that an agency has discretion to credit one expert's report over another when 

experts express conflicting views.” (Citing, Medina County v. Surface Transp. Bd., 602 F.3d 687, 699 (5th Cir. 

2010)). 22 See, e.g., Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds Center, 71 Fed. Reg. 

60553 (October 13, 2006) and Use of Reports of Marine Casualty in Claims Process by National Pollution Funds 

Center 72 Fed. Reg. 17574 (concluding that NPFC may consider marine casualty reports but is not bound by them). 23 33 U.S.C. § 2702(a).
5

is strict, joint, and several.24 When enacting OPA, Congress “explicitly recognized that the 

existing federal and states laws provided inadequate cleanup and damage remedies, required 

large taxpayer subsidies for costly cleanup activities and presented substantial burdens to 

victim’s recoveries such as legal defenses, corporate forms, and burdens of proof unfairly 

favoring those responsible for the spills.”25 OPA was intended to cure these deficiencies in the 

law. 

 OPA provides a mechanism for compensating parties who have incurred removal costs where 

the responsible party has failed to do so. 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.”26 The term “remove” or “removal” means “containment and removal of oil [...] from 

water and shorelines or the taking of other actions as may be necessary to minimize or mitigate 

damage to the public health or welfare, including, but not limited to fish, shellfish, wildlife, and 

public and private property, shorelines, and beaches.”27 

 The NPFC is authorized to pay claims for uncompensated removal costs that are consistent 

with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).28 The NPFC has promulgated a comprehensive set 

of regulations governing the presentment, filing, processing, settling, and adjudicating such 

claims.29 The claimant bears the burden of providing all evidence, information, and 

documentation deemed relevant and necessary by the Director of the NPFC, to support and 

properly process the claim.30

 Before reimbursement can be authorized for uncompensated removal costs, the claimant must 

demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence: 

(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 directed by the FOSC or determined by the FOSC to be 

consistent with the National Contingency Plan. 

(d) That the removal costs were uncompensated and reasonable.31

The claimant’s submission provided a detailed cost breakdown of claimed personnel expenses 

and a table providing employee payroll rates for the year associated with the claim. The 

claimant requested $394.88 for ADEC personnel labor costs for jointly coordinating cleanup and 

removal actions with the FOSC. The total amount requested of $394.88 is supported by the 

24 See, H.R. Rep. No 101-653, at 102 (1990), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 779, 780. 25 Apex Oil Co., Inc. v United States, 208 F. Supp. 2d 642, 651-52 (E.D. La. 2002) (citing S. Rep. No. 101-94 

(1989), reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 722). 26 33 U.S.C. § 2701(31). 27 33 U.S.C. § 2701(30). 28 See generally, 33 U.S.C. § 2712 (a)(4); 33 U.S.C. § 2713; and 33 CFR Part 136. 29 33 CFR Part 136. 30 33 CFR 136.105. 31 33 CFR 136.203; 33 CFR 136.205.