3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number : 917034-0001 

Claimant : State of Texas General Land Office

Type of Claimant : State

Type of Claim : Removal Costs

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $1,068.00 

FACTS: 

1. Oil Spill Incident: On April 26, 2017, Texas General Land Office (TGLO) was performing a 

vehicle patrol on Sea Rim State Park in Jefferson County, Texas. While patrolling the shoreline, 

TGLO Response Officer, , reports that he found a tar mat that measured 

approximately 2 foot by 3 foot by 6 inches in size.1 TGLO states that the tar mat posed a threat of 

discharge into the Gulf of Mexico, a navigable waterway of the US.2

TGLO states that after they received authorization from the Director of TGLO, 

to open their state spill fund and hire a response contractor, they called Donovan Industrial 

Services to handle cleanup and recovery of tar mat. TGLO then contacted Coast Guard Marine 

Safety Unit (MSU) Port Arthur and spoke with Chief Warrant Officer , Chief of the 

Incident Management Division (IMD) who authorized TGLO to take the lead to handle the 

response.3 4

U 

At this time, no Responsible Party (RP) has been identified and a source has not been 

determined.56

This incident was reported to the National Response Center via Report # 1176784.7

2. Description of removal actions performed: The Claimant, TGLO, was performing beach patrol 

on the morning of April 27, 2017 when Response Officer discovered a tar mat that 

measured approximately 2 foot by 3 foot by 6 inches in diameter. Upon discovery of the tar mat, 

TGLO took a sample of the tar mat and called TGLO Headquarters who then called Donovan 

Industrial Services to respond and cleanup and dispose of the tar mat. TGLO monitored the 

response of Donovan Industrial to ensure proper response and disposal. 

3. The Claim: On August 18, 2017, TGLO submitted a removal cost claim to the National Pollution 

Funds Center (NPFC), for reimbursement of its uncompensated removal costs in the amount of 

$1,068.00 for the response services provided by Donovan Industrial on April 27, 2017. 

 

1 See, NRC Report # 1176784 dated April 27, 2017. 2 See, TGLO Texas Oil or Hazardous Substances Discharge or Spill Report # 20171258 dated April 26, 2017. 3 See, TGLO Response Officer Daily Field Log for April 26, 2017. 4 See, Email from CWO of MSU Port Arthur to TGLO Response Officer dated April 28, 

2017 providing an after the fact FOSC coordination statement.

5 See, NRC Report # 1176784 dated April 27, 2017. 6 See, TGLO Texas Oil or Hazardous Substances Discharge or Spill Report # 20171258 dated April 26, 2017. 7 See, NRC Report # 1176784, opened 4/27/2017.
4

APPLICABLE LAW: 

"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. Chief Warrant Officer of Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur, as the Federal 

On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) for this incident, determined that the actions undertaken 
5

by TGLO and its contractor, Donovan Industrial Services were consistent with the NCP8

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 report of a discharge of “oil” as defined in OPA 90, 33 U.S.C. § 

2701(23), to navigable waters.

3. A Responsible Party could not be determined. 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32). 

4. The claim was submitted within the six year statute of limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 2712(h)(1) 

5. 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.

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

and determined what removal costs presented were for actions in accordance with the NCP, and if 

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. 

The Claims Manager validated that the costs were incurred by TGLO and also confirmed that the 

costs invoiced to TGLO were billed in accordance with the contractor rate schedule with TGLO at 

the time services were rendered. The FOSC has determined that the actions undertaken by Donovan 

Industrial as TGLO’s response contractor was reasonable, necessary and performed in accordance 

with the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The Claimant states that all costs claimed are for 

uncompensated removal costs incurred by the Claimant for this incident on April 27, 2017. The 

Claimant represents that the costs it paid are compensable removal costs, payable by the OSLTF as 

presented by the Claimant. 

After a review of the file, and reading the corresponding documents, the response by the State and 

cleanup by its contractor, Donovan Industrial Services, were reasonable and justified. On that basis, 

the Claims Manager hereby determines that the Claimant incurred $1,068.00 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 # 

917034-0001 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $1,068.00 as full compensation for the 

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

#917034-0001. 

 

8 See email from Mr. of MSU Port Arthur of TGLO dated April 28, 2017.
6

AMOUNT: $1,068.00

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 8/23/17 

Supervisor Action: Approved

Supervisor’s Comments: