3

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION 

Claim Number: 916025-0001 

Claimant: City of Charlotte 

Type of Claimant: Local Government 

Type of Claim: Removal Cost 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: $4,078.29 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On June 15, 2015, flash flooding occurred in Charlotte, Iowa which deposited 

a 55 gallon oil drum near the confluence of Deep Creek and Honey Creek, which are navigable 

waterways of the United States.1

 The drum was found at an RV park in Charlotte , IA and to 

date, a Responsible Party (RP) has not been determined. 

City of Charlotte personnel responded and coordinated with the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (USEPA) in its capacity as the Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to 

ensure that the cleanup was determined to be consistent with the National Contingency Plan.2

Bodine Environmental Services was contracted by the City to remove, test, and dispose of the 

drum. 

Description of Removal Activities for this Claimant: Bodine Environmental Services (Bodine) 

arrived on scene with service trucks, personnel, a 55-gallon drum, and a poly over-pack drum.3 

Contractors removed the drum and the contaminated soil around the drum. The oil was disposed 

of at Advanced Waste in Cedar Rapids, IA4 and the petroleum contaminated soil from the 

cleanup was disposed of at Scott County Landfill.5 A lab analysis was provided by Test 

America. Claimant submitted the analytical report with its claim submission.6

The Claim: On February 09, 2016, City of Charlotte submitted a removal costs claim to the 

National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their uncompensated removal 

costs for personnel and equipment costs in the total amount of $4,078.29. This claim was 

submitted to the Fund after the Claimant’s insurance company denied its claim for 

reimbursement of their removal costs that it incurred.7

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”. 

 

1 Deep Creek flows to the Maquoketa River, near Spragueville, IA and Maquoketa flows to Mississippi River near 

Green Island, IA - Mr. U.S. EPA, FOSC 2016 01 22 Email to Mr. 2 2016 01 22 U.S. EPA Coordination email to Claimant.

3 See Bodine Invoice # C12510 4 Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest – C9853-15 5 See Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest tracking number O15. 6 See Test America Analytical Report, Job # 310-58304-1 7 See 2015 12 16 EMC Insurance denial letter to Claimant.
4

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]. 
5

DETERMINATION OF LOSS: 

A. Overview:

1. U.S. EPA Region 7 provided FOSC coordination 33 U.S.C. § 2702(b)(1)(B) and 

2712(a)(4);

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 within the six year statute of limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 

2712(h)(1);

5. The NPFC Claims Manager thoroughly reviewed all documentation submitted with the 

claim and determined which of the costs claimed were associated with OPA compensable 

removal actions in accordance with the NCP and that the costs for these actions were 

reasonable and allowable under OPA and 33 CFR § 136.205.

B. Analysis:

The NPFC CA Division reviewed the actual cost invoice 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 136.203 (1) the 

actions taken were 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 National Contingency Plan or directed by the FOSC, and (4) 

whether the costs were adequately documented and reasonable. 

The NPFC reviewed Bodine’s rate schedule that was in place at the time the services were 

provided; the NPFC based its adjudication of these costs on the rate schedule, the Bodine 

invoice, disposal manifests, and third party invoicing8

.

The Claimant did not provide the disposal company’s invoices nor did it provide proof of 

payment in its claim submission. Therefore, the NPFC called Bodine directly to confirm that full 

payment of Bodine invoice # C12510 had been made. On February 12, 2016, Bodine confirmed 

that the invoice had been paid in full on December 03, 2015 via check # 6627.9 Bodine stated 

that it credited $6.84 back to the Claimant, which is the amount of the tax.

Upon review of the information provided by the Claimant, the NPFC has determined that the 

payable costs were billed in accordance with the rate schedule in place at the time the services 

were rendered, unless otherwise indicated below, and were determined by the FOSC to be 

consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

The NPFC denied a total of $11.84 in requested costs. Descriptions of the denied costs are as 

follows:

 8 See Test America Invoice and Disposal invoice. 9 See Phone Log in CPSII.