4

CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number : E15428-0001 

Claimant : Guilford County Department of Health and Human Services

Type of Claimant : Local Government 

Type of Claim : Removal Costs

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $27,852.73 

FACTS: 

1. Oil Spill Incident: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) Region 

IV1

 states that on April 16, 2015, the Guilford County Department of Health and Human 

Services (Guilford County) reported an illegal dumping incident of approximately 1,000 

gallons of oily petroleum waste into a storm drain that migrated into a private pond. This 

pond has an outfall into Bull Run Creek, which leads into the Deep River, a navigable 

waterway of the US. 

The incident was reported to the National Response Center (NRC) via report # 1113761. On 

April 17, 2015, a request was made by Guilford County for US EPA Region IV support and, 

after the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) was dispatched to the scene, a Federal 

Project was opened under FPN # E15428. 

At the time of this adjudication, a Responsible Party (RP) has not been identified. 

2. Description of removal actions performed: For approximately two and a half days prior to 

the FPN being opened, the Claimant, Guilford County, hired A&D Environmental Services, 

Inc. (A&D) to assess and clean up the spill site. A&D placed boom and sorbent pads to 

contain the spill, as well as to absorb the oily waste. Boom and pads were removed, disposed 

of and replaced as needed. Due to increasing costs and the large scope of the incident, the 

Claimant requested support from US EPA Region IV, which, upon dispatching an FOSC to 

the site, opened an FPN and activated its contractor for the remainder of the cleanup. 

3. The Claim: On August 10, 2015, Guilford County Department of Health and Human 

Services (GC HHS) presented a removal cost claim to the National Pollution Funds Center 

(NPFC), for reimbursement of its uncompensated removal costs in the amount of $27,852.73 

for the services provided April 16-17, 2015 ($26,914.50 in subcontractor invoicing and 

$938.23 in Guilford County Public Service Personnel Costs). 

The review of the actual cost invoicing and dailies 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 consistent with 

the NCP or directed by the FOSC, and (4) whether the costs were adequately documented. 

 

1 See POLREPS 1-3 for FPN # E15428.
5

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. 

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;
6

(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 IV.2In its capacity as 

the FOSC for this incident, US EPA 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 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 not 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 

incurred as a result of these actions; (3) whether the actions taken were determined 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 

incurred and determined they were reasonable and necessary and performed in accordance 

with the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

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

actions it performed were for OPA-related costs and that the work performed mitigated the 

effects of the oil that was released from the storm drain. Additionally, the US EPA Region IV 

confirmed the actions performed for this incident. Upon adjudication of the claim, the NPFC 

 2 See US EPA POLREPS 1-3 for FPN E15428.
7

confirmed that the rates charged were billed in accordance with the published rates for both 

the Claimant and the contractor and as such, the NPFC has determined that the amount 

invoiced and paid was reasonable.

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

$27,852.73 of uncompensated removal costs and that that 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 #E15428-0001. The Claimant states that all costs 

claimed are for uncompensated removal costs incurred by the Claimant for this incident from 

April 16-17, 2015. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $27,852.73 as full compensation for 

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

claim E15428-0001. 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: $27,852.73

 

Claim Supervisor:

Date of Supervisor’s review: 8/26/15 

Supervisor Action: Approved 

Supervisor’s Comments: