CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM

Date : 3/16/2011 

Claim Number : G10001-0001 

Claimant : U.P. Environmental Services 

Type of Claimant : OSRO

Type of Claim : Removal Costs 

Claim Manager :

Amount Requested : $31,642.50 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On April 30, 2010 at approximately 12:30 p.m., U. P. Environmental 

Services (UPES) received a call from the United States Coast Guard (USCG) unit in 

Duluth, MN and was informed that some oil had been reported under a dock in 

Keweenaw waterway, a navigable waterway of the US. The USCG advised that they 

needed a response cleanup team as soon as possible on site. Following the call, the 

Claimant mobilized to the site and met with USCG personnel. No responsible party has 

been identified for this incident.

Description of removal activities: The Claimant responded on April 30, 2010. They 

began placing boom as confirmed in the USCG Polreps. The Claimant continued cleanup 

from April 30 through May 6, 2010 with the USCG and on May 6, 2010, oversight for 

the response transitioned to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 

5.1

 From May 6, 2010 through May 24, 2010, the Claimant performed oil removal with 

absorbent materials, performed disposal of contaminated soils after being directed by the 

Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to remove contaminated soils from around the 

inside of the pier area.

The Claim: On March 9, 2011, UPES submitted a removal cost claim to the National 

Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), for reimbursement of the uncompensated removal costs 

in the total amount of $31,642.50 for the services provided on the Keweenaw Waterway 

spill identified under Federal Project Number G10001, from April 30, 2010 through May 

24, 2010. This claim is for removal costs based on the claimant’s emergency response 

rate schedule in place at the time services were provided. It is important to note that the 

FOSC signed off on the Claimant dailies.

The claim consists of invoicing, dailies, disposal manifests, contracted rate schedule, 

photographs, subcontractor invoices, USCG Pollution Reports, affirmation and proof of 

payment for subcontractors, and a letter from the FOSC stating the response was 

consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP). 

1 See, Letter dated May 6, 2010 between USCG and USEPA.

 
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”.

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]. 

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 provided by USEPA Region 5, Mr. via a 

letter dated March 8, 2011. 

2. The incident involved the discharge and continuing substantial threat of 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 for removal costs.

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 “removable 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 

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 

$31,642.50 of uncompensated removal costs and that the amount is payable by the 

OSLTF as full compensation for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the claimant 

and submitted to the NPFC under claim # G10001-0001. The claimant states that all 

costs claimed are for uncompensated removal costs incurred by the claimant for this 

incident for the time period of April 30, 2010, through May 24, 2010. 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 $31,642.50 as full compensation 

for the reimbursable removal costs incurred by the Claimant and submitted to the NPFC 

under claim # G10001-0001. 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 present by the Claimant.

AMOUNT: $31,642.50 

 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 3/16/11 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor’s Comments: