3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: N19050-0003 

Claimant: Texas General Land Office 

Type of Claimant: State

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $17.08 

Action Taken: Offer in the amount of $17.08

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On May 13, 2019 at approximately 2:00 pm local time, United States Coast Guard (USCG) 

Sector Corpus Christi notified the National Response Center (NRC) via report # 1245538 that 

they found tar balls that washed ashore on the beaches of Mustang Island and Padre Island in the 

Gulf of Mexico, a navigable waterway of the United States. USCG Sector Corpus Christi, in its 

capacity as the Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC), arrived on scene and conducted an 

assessment of the affected areas and decided to open a Federal Project Number # N19050 in the 

amount of $10,000 to cover the costs of removal and disposal activities performed by Miller 

Environmental Services (Miller), as the contracted Oil Spill Response Organization (OSRO).1

 

Texas General Land Office (TGLO or claimant), in its capacity as the State On Scene 

Coordinator (SOSC), assisted and jointly monitored the activities of the response contractor.2

The FOSC determined there was no responsible party for the incident.3 Miller Environmental 

disposed of a combined total of 602 gallons of tar balls recovered from the beaches from May 

13, 2019 to November 5, 2019.4

The Texas General Land Office (TGLO or claimant) presented its uncompensated removal 

cost claim to the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for $17.08 on March 4, 2020.5 The 

NPFC has thoroughly reviewed all documentation submitted with the claim, analyzed the 

applicable law and regulations, and after careful consideration has determined that $17.08 is 

compensable and offers this amount as full and final compensation of this claim.6

I. INCIDENT, RESPONSIBLE PARTY AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

Incident

On May 13, 2019, United States Coast Guard Sector Corpus Christi, in its capacity as the 

FOSC reported to NRC that tar balls washed ashore on the beaches of Mustang Island and Padre 

Island in the Gulf of Mexico. The FOSC arrived on scene and conducted an assessment of the 

 

1 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019. 2 USCG SITREP-Pol Two dated June 21, 2019. 3 USCG SITREPS-Pol One through Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 4 USCG SITREP-Pol Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 5 Texas General Land Office claim submission letter dated February 14, 2020.

6 33 CFR 136.115.

(b) (6)
4

affected areas and decided to open a Federal Project Number # N19050 in the amount of 

$10,000 to cover the costs of removal and disposal activities performed by Miller Environmental 

Services (Miller), as the contracted Oil Spill Response Organization (OSRO).7

 TGLO, in its 

capacity as the SOSC, performed joint assessment with the FOSC and assisted in the response by 

patrolling the area.8 

Recovery Operations

After being notified by NRC, TGLO Response Officer, , SOSC, arrived on 

scene coordinated with the FOSC Petty Officer for the recovery of tar balls throughout 

tar ball season. All recovered tar balls are to be placed in a roll off box that Miller Environmental 

had staged at their facility at the request of the FOSC.9 On May 21, 2019 SOSC 

responded and recovered 34 gallons of oil in the form of two tar patties and placed in the Miller 

roll off box for disposal.10

II. CLAIMANT AND NPFC:

 On March 4, 2020, the NPFC received a claim for uncompensated removal costs from Texas 

General Land Office dated March 3, 2020 in the amount of $17.08. 

III. DETERMINATION PROCESS:

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

Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF).11 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.12 The NPFC may rely upon, is not bound by the findings of fact, opinions, 

or conclusions reached by other entities.13 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: 

 

7 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019. 8 USCG SITREP-Pol One dated May 19, 2019. 9 USCG SITREP-Pol Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 10 TGLO Oil Spill Prevention & Response Program Incident Report for Spill Number 2019-2310. 11 33 CFR Part 136. 12 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)). 13 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).

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
5

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

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

regulations governing the presentment, filing, processing, settling, and adjudicating such claims. 

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. 

 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.14

(d) That the removal costs were uncompensated and reasonable.15

The NPFC analyzed each of these factors and determined that all costs incurred and submitted 

by TGLO herein are compensable removal costs based on the supporting documentation 

provided.1617 All costs approved for payment were verified as being invoiced at the appropriate 

state published rates and all approved costs were supported by adequate documentation and 

outlined as a joint assessment and response by TGLO with the FOSC.18

V. CONCLUSION:

 Based on a comprehensive review of the record, the applicable law and regulations, and for 

the reasons outlined above, Texas General Land Office request for uncompensated removal costs 

is approved in the amount of $17.08.

 This determination is a settlement offer,19 the claimant has 60 days in which to accept this 

offer. Failure to do so automatically voids the offer.20 The NPFC reserves the right to revoke a 

settlement offer at any time prior to acceptance.21 Moreover, this settlement offer is based upon 

the unique facts giving rise to this claim and is not precedential.

 14 USCG SITREP-Pol One through Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 15 33 CFR 136.203; 33 CFR 136.205. 16 USCG SITREP-Pol One through Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 17 Texas General Land Office claim submission letter dated February 14, 2020. 18 USCG SITREP-Pol One through Five and Final dated November 5, 2019. 19 Payment in full, or acceptance by the claimant of an offer of settlement by the Fund, is final and conclusive for all 

purposes and, upon payment, constitutes a release of the Fund for the claim. In addition, acceptance of any 

compensation from the Fund precludes the claimant from filing any subsequent action against any person to recover 

costs or damages which are the subject of the uncompensated claim. Acceptance of any compensation also 

constitutes an agreement by the claimant to assign to the Fund any rights, claims, and causes of action the claimant 

has against any person for the costs and damages which are the subject of the compensated claims and to cooperate 

reasonably with the Fund in any claim or action by the Fund against any person to recover the amounts paid by the 

Fund. The cooperation shall include, but is not limited to, immediately reimbursing the Fund for any compensation 

received from any other source for the same costs and damages and providing any documentation, evidence, 

testimony, and other support, as may be necessary for the Fund to recover from any person. 33 CFR § 136.115(a).

20 33 CFR § 136.115(b). 21 33 CFR § 136.115(b).