Claim Number 

Claimant 

Type of Claimant 

Type of Claim 

Claim Manager 

Amount Requested 

FACTS: 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION FORM 

E15522-0002 

Mercer County Local Emergency Planning Committee 

Corporate 

Removal Costs 

$3,310.94 

Oil Spill Incident: The United States Environmental Protection Agen~1 

reports that on July 24, 2015, an above ground storage tank located at- in 

Brookfield, Tmmbull County, Ohio, failed and caused a release of 1700 gallons of a brine/cmde 

oil mixture into Big Run Creek, a tributary to the Shenango River. Both Big Run Creek and the 

Shenango River are navigable wate1ways of the US. The release threatened a drinking water 

intake at a water treatment plant operated by Aqua Pennsylvania for the City of Sharon, 

Pennsylvania. The plant is located on the Shenango River, approximately three miles from the 

release location. 

The Responsible Paity (RP), Big Sky Energy, Inc., was issued a verbal Notice of Federal 

Interest and Notice of Federal Assumption by the US EPA Region V Federal In Scene 

Coordinator (FOSC) on July 24, 2015.

2 The notice was given verbally as the RP refused to sign 

a written notice issued by the FOSC. Presentmenet of costs were made to the RP by bothe the 

Claimant and this office but, to date, has not paid and/or responded. This incident was repo1ted 

to the National Response Center (NRC) via Repoli # 1123722. 

Description of removal actions performed: The Claimant, Mercer County Local Emergency 

Planning Committee (Mercer County), was notified of the petroleum release into the creek. The 

Hennitage Fire Depaitment requested its assistance in containing the spill. Both Mercer County 

and the City of Hennitage deployed personnel and equipment to assist with this incident. The 

Claimant along with the Hennitage Fire Depaitment utilized absorbent booms and pads in Big 

Run Creek to tiy and contain the spill in hopes of preventing it from reaching the water intake for 

Aqua Water, which supplies drinking water to the Shenango Valley, as well as paits of Lawrence 

County and Ohio. 

The USEPA Region V, the state of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and the 

Ohio Depai·tment of Natural Resources (ODNR) observed all response actions perfo1med. 

Containment boom was removed from the Shenango River; however, deflection boom and 

containment boom were left in place in front of the drinking water plant intake at the request of 

Aqua Pennsylvania and the state of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 

(PADEP). 

1 See US EPA Re .·on V POLREP 1, dated 7 /25/205, as well as the email from Mr.- , US EPA Region 

V FOSC, to NPFC, dated 1116/2016. 2 See email from Mr. , US EPA Region V FOSC, to , NPFC, dated 1116/2016. 

4 
5

The Claim: On January 21, 2016, Mercer County presented a removal cost claim to the National 

Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), seeking reimbursement of its uncompensated removal costs in 

the amount of $3,310.94 for the services provided on July 24, 2015. 

Mercer County is claiming for the cost of materials used on scene to contain the spill until a 

cleanup contractor (Myers Well Service, Inc.) arrived. Its original claim totaled $7,952.99; 

however, it backed out the costs that the City of Hermitage incurred, reducing the claim total

since they did not pay those costs and are not uncompensated costs for them. As such, the City 

of Hermitage has submitted a separate claim for its costs in the amount of $4,642.05 and 

identified as NPFC claim # E15522-0003.

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.” 
6

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 established via US EPA Region V.3 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. The claim was submitted within the six year statute of limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 2712(h)(1) 

4. A Responsible Party has been determined. 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32). 

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 

 

3 See US EPA Region V POLREP 1, dated 7/25/205, as well as the email sent by Mr. US EPA 

Region V FOSC, dated 1/16/2016.
incun ed as a result of these actions; (3) whether the actions taken were dete1m ined 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 the costs 

incun ed and detennined they were reasonable and necessary and perfo1med in accordance 

with the National Contingency Plan (NCP). 

The Claimant, Mercer County, provided a well-documented claim to demonstrate that the 

actions it perfo1med were for OP A-related response costs and that the work perfo1med 

mitigated the effects of the oil that was released into Big Run Creek, and thus potentially the 

Shenango River. The FOSC, USEP A Region V, confnmed that the actions perf01med by the 

Claimant for this incident were detennined to reasonable, necessaiy and consistent with the 

NCP. Upon adjudication of the claim, the NPFC confnmed that the rates chai·ged were billed 

in accordance with the published rate schedule that was in place at the time services were 

rendered and the NPFC confinned that the response actions perfonned were under the 

direction and oversight of the FOSC and as such, the NPFC has detennined that the ainount 

invoiced and paid was in fact reasonable and necessaiy. 

On that basis, the Claims Manager hereby dete1mines that the Claimant did in fact incur 

$3,310.94 of uncompensated removal costs and that that ainount is payable by the OSLTF as 

full compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incmTed by the Claimant and submitted 

to the NPFC under claim #E15522-0002. The Claimant states that all costs claimed ai·e for 

uncompensated removal costs incuned by the Claimant for this incident on July 24, 2015. 

C. Determined A mount: 

The NPFC hereby dete1mines that the OSLTF will pay $3,310.94 as full compensation for 

the reimbursable removal costs incmTed by the Claimant and submitted to the NPFC under 

claim E15522-0002. All costs claimed ai·e for chai·ges paid for by the Claimant for removal 

actions as that te1m is defined in OPA and, ai·e compensable removal costs, payable by the 

OSLTF as presented by the Claimant. 

AMOUNT: $3,310.94 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor's review: 211 7116 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor's Comments: 

7