3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: J13014-0014 

Claimant: Resolve-Magone Marine Services (Alaska), Inc. 

Type of Claimant: OSRO 

Type of Claim: Removal Costs 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $1,528,642.55 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident

On June 30, 2013 at approximately 0700, Sector Anchorage received a report that the 78’ F/V 

LONE STAR had partially sank approximately 3.5 miles north of the mouth of the Igushik 

River, which flows southward from Amanka Lake into the Nushagak Bay arm of Bristol Bay. 

The entire River is located within Togiak National Wildlife Refuge and flows through the village 

of Manoktak, which is known for fishing. 

The Lone Star’s crew reported to the Coast Guard that the anchor line struck the vessel’s 

transducer while they were anchoring the vessel. While at anchor, the tides swung the vessel 

around and ripped the transducer and cooling lines out, creating a hole in the steel hull. The 

vessel took on water, turned onto its side and overturned in 18 feet of water.1 A Good Samaritan 

vessel, F/V TRADITION, safely recovered all four people on board.2

During an over flight during mid-morning on June 30, 2013, a sheen approximately 300 feet by 

20 feet in size was observed discharging from the vessel. At risk was an estimated 14,000 gallons 

of diesel fuel, 250 gallons of unleaded gasoline, 150 gallons of hydraulic oil, and 150 gallons of 

lubricating oils located on the vessel at the time of sinking. Sheen from the sunken vessel caused 

the Alaska Department of fish and Game (ADF&G) to close the local set-net fishery until the 

pollution threat was mitigated.3

Responsible Party

 own the F/V LONE STAR and are the responsible parties. The RPs’

Spill Management Team (SMT) is the Meredith Management Group, Inc.4 The RP’s legal 

Counsel is of Matthews and Zahare, P.C., in Anchorage, Alaska.5

 

1 See,OSLTF Claim Form page 1, item # 2. 2 See, ICS 209 – CG, Dated 7/17/2013 3 See, Incident Summary Report from NPFC Claim J13014-0001, page 71. 4 , Regional Response Manager, Captain , President, and Mr. , 

VP Operations.

5 See, Authorization to Represent letter to NPFC from Mr. dated January 16, 2014; found in NPFC Claim # 

J13014-0003.
4

Claim and Claimant

The Claimant, Resolve-Magone Marine Services (Alaska), Inc., made presentment to the RPs on 

September 13, 2013 via its invoices.6 These invoices were not paid in full by the RP or its 

insurers. The RP’s insurers made four payments towards invoices 27462-1 – 27462-5. A total of 

four payments were made by Great American Insurance Company (GAIC) and they were in the 

amount of $150,000 on July 25, 2013, $72,026.23 on August 07, 2013, $378,385.93 on August 

07, 2013, and $243,473.73 on August 23, 2013. On September 19, 2013, Shipowner’s Mutual 

Protection and Indemnity Club paid $250,000 on behalf of the RPs.7 Resolve – Magone seeks to 

recover the amounts due on the five invoices.8

On November 13, 2014, Resolve – Magone received a letter from , on behalf 

of the Lone Star’s P&I underwriters9 stating that Resolve/Magone has a balance due for 

pollution response and mitigation efforts in the amount of $1,528,642.55. The letter further states 

that the owners/operator/underwriters stipulate that OPA 90 policy limits were met.10 . 

s letter further advises that it would be in the best interest for Resolve/Magone to 

submit a claim to the Fund.11 

On March 17, 2016, Resolve-Magone submitted a removal cost claim to the National Pollution 

Funds Center (NPFC or Fund) for reimbursement of its uncompensated removal costs in the 

collective amount of $1,528,642.55. On March 18, 2016, the NPFC sent an RP Notification letter 

to via their attorney, .

12 

Asset Purchase Agreement by and among Resolve – Magone Marine Services (Alaska), Inc.

Effective, January 17, 2014, and sold Magone Marine Services, 

Inc. to Resolve Marine Group. On the effective date, Resolve Marine Group purchased certain 

property, assets and rights of Magone Marine Services related to the Magone Marine’s business 

upon the terms and conditions of the purchase agreement. This asset purchase included the 

invoices that are subject to this claim, Magone invoices 27462-1 – 27462-5.13 

Description of Removal Activities

On July 13, 2013, Magone Marine’s support vessels arrived on-site to commence operations to 

“hot-tap” the remaining fuel and other accessible hydrocarbons from the casualty into tanks on 

the surface. Magone Marine chartered the tank barge RIVERWAYS-14 to store the fuel/oil 

removed from the casualty.

 

6 Invoices 27462-1 – 27462-5 (As presented on the NPFC spreadsheet of costs) 7 See, Resolve Marine Executive Summary, page 2 of NPFC Claim Submission. 8 Invoices 27462-1 – 27462-5. 9 is the President /Marine Surveyor for Alaska Marine Surveyors, Inc. 10 The RP’s insurance policy limit of $1,000,000 was exhausted by the expenses associated with the incident. The 

insurer is Great American Insurance Group. 11 See letter to Resolve Marine Group, Inc., dtd November 13, 2014. 12 See RP notification letter in File Folder, dtd March 18, 2006. 13 See, Resolve-Magone Marine Purchase Documents. Asset Purchase Agreement, dated January 17, 2014, among 

Resolve – Magone Marine Services (Alaska), Inc., Magone Marine Services, Inc., and 

.
5

Divers installed hot-tap coupons at the highest point of each of the nine fuel tanks. Each tank 

was hot-tapped and affixed with a threaded connector for controlled oil/water discharge and 

subsequent tank closure. The tank vents or fills were opened on the low side of each tank to 

allow water ingress to displace the oil through discharge hoses to the tank barge RIVERWAYS14. When the crew observed only water flowing into a tank, this was the indication that oil had 

been completely removed from that tank.14

Fuel removal operations continued until August 09, 2013. All nine fuel tanks had been 

addressed and were confirmed to be free of hydrocarbons. Also, on August 09, 2013, the FOSCR 

on scene declared the threat of pollution had been mitigated and no further pollution response 

actions were needed.15

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. 

 14 See Claimant’s Executive Summary. 15 See POLREP 5 and FINAL
6

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. Findings of Facts

1. USCG Sector Anchorage, as the FOSC for this incident, determined that the actions 

undertaken by the Claimant are deemed consistent with the NCP. 33 U.S.C. §§ 

2702(b)(1)(B) and 2712(a)(4);

2. The incident involved a 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 within the six year period of limitations for claims. 33 U.S.C. 

§ 2712(h)(1);

5. Claimant properly presented the claim to the responsible party, who denied payment.

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

the claim and determined which removal costs presented were for actions in accordance 

with the NCP and that costs for these actions were indeed reasonable and allowable 

under OPA and 33 CFR § 136.205 as set forth below.

B. Analysis

The NPFC Claims Manager 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 costs were adequately documented and 

reasonable.
7

Limit on Liability Claim # J13014-0003 

On August 29, 2014, The RPs, and Burrece Fisheries, Inc. and their 

subrogated insurers, Great American Insurance Company of New York, Shipowner’s Mutual 

Protections and Indemnity Association (Luxembourg), along with other reinsurers presented a 

claim to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (OSLTF or the Fund). The RPs asserted that they 

demonstrated entitlement to their statutory limit on liability as set forth in 33 U.S.C. § 

2704(a)(2). At the time of the incident, the applicable limit per ton was $1000; the gross tonnage 

for the F/V LONE STAR was $146,000 or $854,400.00, whichever is greater. The Claims 

Adjudication Division conducted an analysis of evidence and facts and determined that 

 and Burrece Fisheries, Inc. et al was entitled to its limitation on liability on 

April 07, 2015 as the responsible parties for the F/V LONE STAR, whose gross tonnage was 

146,000 tons, would be limited to $854,400 in liability for removal costs and damages. 

Claimant also asserted that it incurred approximately $1,489,125.40 in removal costs and hired 

six vendors to conduct the removal actions. , through their legal 

representative, submitted five binders of documentation to the Fund that provided general 

incident documentation, vessel specific information, crew specific information, 

incident/circumstance/situational documentation, insurance policies and communications, 

removal cost documentation,16 and other forms of supporting documentation. 

The National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) Claims Manager reviewed the actual cost invoices 

and dailies to confirm that the Claimant had incurred all costs claimed and that all costs were 

supported by the record, were compensable “removal actions” under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) 

and the claims regulations at 33 CFR 136, whether the costs were incurred as a result of the 

actions, whether the actions taken were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the NCP 

or directed by the FOSC, and whether the costs were adequately documented and reasonable. 

Additionally, the NPFC Claims Manager reviewed the payment record against the claimed costs 

for each contractor/subcontractor. 

On July 01, 2015, the NPFC, in accordance with OPA, 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq., offered the 

, $170,815.90 as full compensation for OPA claim number J13014-0003. 

On August 26, 2015, the NPFC received the request for reconsideration of the claim,

via email. After careful review of the additional and new supporting documentation that was 

provided by the RP, on Reconsideration status of the claim, the NPFC offered the 

$186,912.11, as final agency action, on October 21, 2015. 

Although the RP’s sum certain for their claim was $1,489,125.40, the NPFC’s Determination 

dated July 01, 2015, approved $170,815.90. The RP’s limit of liability was $854,400, therefore 

the NPFC deducted its statutory limit from the amount determined to be OPA compensable, 

$1,025,215.90. The total amount exceeded the RP’s limit on liability $170,815.90 and thereby 

determined that $186,912.11 was compensable from the OSLTF. 

 

 

16 Magone Marine Service, Inc., Meredith Management Group, Inc., Global Risk Solutions, Inc., Natural Resources 

Consultants, Inc., Alaska Department of Fish & Game, and Alaska Marine Surveyors. 
8

Magone Marine Invoices Presented by the RP 

As mentioned above, the RPs hired six vendors to conduct the removal actions. Specifically, one 

of the vendors was Magone Marine Services, Inc. (Magone). The Magone invoices that are 

subject of this claim, were also subject of the RP’s Limit of Liability claim, Magone invoices 

#27462-1 through #27462-5. However, Magone invoices #27462-4 and #27462-5 were not 

supported by proofs of payment, therefore the RP received no compensation, from the Fund for 

invoices #2746-4 and #27462-5. Proofs of payment were presented by the RP for the remaining 

invoices.17 Overall, the NPFC determined that $912,617.93 was OPA compensable for Magone 

invoices #27462-1 - #27462-3 and #27462-B.18

Magone Marine Invoices Presented by Resolve-Magone on March 17, 2016

The NPFC adjudicated the Magone invoices (#27462-1 through #27462-5) in their entirety. 

However, the NPFC can not compensate Resolve-Magone (Claimant) for any line item that the 

NPFC has already compensated the RP for. The NPFC used the spreadsheet that was already 

created for the Limit on Liability claim (RP claim) and added separate columns that show the 

Resolve- Magone approved and denied columns with NPFC comments that explain the reasons 

that the Fund either approved or denied that particular line item.19

Invoice #27462-2 was not fully presented by the RP on the Limit on Liability claim. The RP 

only presented costs to the Fund for dates between July 19, 2013 through July 26, 2013. At the 

NPFC’s request, Resolve-Magone submitted Magone invoice #27462-2 in its entirety which 

included the dates July 13, 2013 through July 18, 2013. 

The NPFC determines that the “NPFC Approved” costs incurred by Resolve-Magone were 

reasonable and necessary in order to mitigate the affects of the incident. Upon review of the 

information provided by Resolve-Magone, the NPFC hereby determines that the approved costs 

were billed in accordance with the rate schedules and/or contracts/charter agreements that were 

in place at the time that the services were rendered, unless otherwise indicated below and were 

determined to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

Itemization of Denied Costs by Invoice

Invoice # 27462-1

• Not compensable because the Fund has already paid the line item to the RP.

• Claimant must provide supporting documentation.

Invoice # 27462-2

• Denied for no proof of payment.

• No contracts or receipts provided.

• Not compensable because the Fund has already paid the line item to the RP.

 17 RP submission, Vol 5 of 5, tabs 43 and 44. 18 Magone Invoice # 27462-B is not part of the Resolve-Magone claim that is presently before the Fund.

19 See NPFC spreadsheet of costs with Resolve-Magone line by line adjudication.
9

Invoice # 27462-3 

• Not compensable because the Fund has already paid the line item to the RP. 

• Claimant must provide supporting documentation. 

Invoice #27462-4 

• Line item was not on the Magone Marine rate schedule.

• Per diem was paid for on Invoice 27462-1 and 27462-2.

• Claimant would have to provide daily work log 

• FOSCR on scene declares threat of pollution has been mitigated and no further pollution 

response actions were needed. This cost has not been coordinated by the FOSC and is 

therefore denied. Please see POLREP 5 and Final. 

The NPFC hereby determines that the NPFC will offer and the OSLTF is available to pay 

$446,759.58 as full compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the Claimant 

and submitted to the NPFC under Claim #J13014-0014. All of the costs deemed compensable by 

the Fund have been paid for by the RP/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.

All costs determined payable included in this determination have been reviewed and determined 

to be compensable as presented and in accordance with 33 USC§§2712(a)(4) and 2713 and the 

OSLTF claims adjudication regulations at 33 CFR Part 136.205, to pay claims for 

uncompensated removal costs that are determined to be consistent with the National Contingency 

Plan. 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.”

AMOUNT: $446,759.58 

 

 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: June 2, 2016 

Supervisor Action: Approved