Claim Number: 

Claimant: 

Type of Claimant: 

Type of Claim: 

Claim Manager: 

Amount Requested: 

FACTS: 

CLAIM SUMMARY I DETERMINATION 

Nl 7003-0001 

Texas General Land Office (SOSC) 

State 

Removal Costs 

$279.11 

Oil Spill Incident: On October 30, 2016, the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) was notified of 

~five (5) gallon oil spill at a boat ramp in Port Bolivar, Galveston County, Texas. The oil spill 

impacted a tributary of the Gulf lnracoastal Waterway, a navigable waterway of the United 

States. TGLO personnel responded with USCG MSU Texas City personnel to evaluate the oil 

spill and conduct an investigation. The investigation conducted did not reveal the source of the 

oil spill.1 

Description of Removal Activities for this claimant: USCG accessed the Oil Spill Liability 

Trust Fund and obtained FPN Nl 7003 to conduct a cleanup of the discharged oil. Garner 

Environmental Services (Garner) was hired to conduct the cleanup. Garner personnel contained 

the oil with the use of containment boom and recovered the oil with the use of sorbent material. 

Garner personnel also properly disposed of the oiled sorbent material and all visible recoverable 

oil was removed. 2 

The Cla.im: On February 15, 2017, TGLO submitted an expedited small claim to the National 

Pollution Fund Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their uncompensated removal costs of State 

personnel and equipment costs in the amount of $279.11.3 

APPUCABLE 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". 

1 See TGLO Expedited Small Claim Package dated February 15, 2017. 

2 See MSU Texas City POLREP I dated January 30, 2017. 

3 See TGLO Expedited Small Claim Package dated February 15, 2017. 

2 
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]. 

DETERMINATION OF LOSS: 

A. Overview: 

1. MST2 of USCG MSU Texas City provided FOSC coordination 33 U.S.C. § 

2702(b)(l)(B) and 2712 (a)(4)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. l 05(e)( 12), the claimant has certified no suit has been filed 

in court for the claimed uncompensated removal costs; 

4. The claim was submitted on time; 

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 

4 See Email documenting conversation between Claim Manager and MST2 , 

dated February 16, 2017. 

3 
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 "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 actions taken were determined to be consistent with the NCP in accordance with the 

NPFC delegation of authority for determination of consistency, and (4) whether the costs were 

adequately documented and reasonable. 

The NPFC has determined that all of the costs incurred by the Claimant in this determination 

were reasonable and necessary to mitigate the effects of the incident. 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 and/or contractual agreements in place at the time 

the services were rendered and were determined by the FOSC to be consistent with the NCP. 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $279.11 as full compensation for the 

reimbW'Sable removal costs incurred by the Claimant and submitted to the NPFC under claim # 

Nl 7003-0001. 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 presented by 

the Claimant. 

AMOUNT: $279.11 

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor's review: February 16, 2017 

Supervisor Action: 

Supervisor's Comments: 

4