CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM 

Date : 3/4/2009 

Claim Number : 909074-001

Claimant : Oil Mop, LLC 

Type of Claimant : OSRO 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $2,909.00

FACTS: 

 1. Oil Spill Incident: On November 27, 2007, the M/V Task Master, operated by Moss 

Oilfield Construction, discharged approximately 15-gallons of diesel into Double Bayou 

(a navigable waterway of the US) at the Moss Oilfield Construction facility. The 

discharge resulted from an automatic bilge pump that came on while the vessel was 

unmanned. The responsible party, Moss Oilfield Construction, hired Oil Mop, LLC to 

handle the cleanup. The incident was reported to the NRC by the responsible party, Moss 

Oilfield Construction, via report # 855574 on November 27, 2007. The State On Scene 

Coordinator (SOSC) was the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) and was present at the 

scene. TGLO obtained statements from two employees of the responsible party. TGLO 

issued the responsible party a Letter of State Interest which was accepted on the date of 

the incident. The USCG was notified of the incident. 

 2. Description of removal actions: Oil Mop deployed sorbent boom across from the 

boat ramp and washed diesel from the grass along the banks to the sorbent booms. They 

placed sweep at the barges and padded up small amounts of diesel. Contaminated 

sorbents were bagged and left at Moss for proper disposal. 

3. The Claim: On March 3, 2009, Oil Mop LLC submitted a removal cost claim to the 

National Pollution Fund Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their uncompensated 

removal costs in the amount of $2,909.00.

The claim consisted of invoices, daily field logs, published rate schedule and proof of 

presentment to the responsible party. The NPFC contacted the Texas General Land 

Office (TGLO) who was the SOSC for this incident and requested a copy of their case 

file. The NPFC received a copy of the NRC Report, photos, witness statements, 

Responding Officer’s Completion Report, a copy of the Letter of State Interest that was 

issued to the responsible party on the date of the incident. 

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. MST were on scene and provided FOSC coordination. 

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 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 $2,909.00 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 #909074-001. The 

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

by the claimant for this incident on November 27, 2007. 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 $2,909.00 as full 

compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the Claimant and 

submitted to the NPFC under claim # 909074-001. 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: $2,909.00

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 

Supervisor Action: 

Supervisor’s Comments: