CLAIM SUMMARY / DETERMINATION FORM

Claim Number : 912056-0001 

Claimant : State of Florida

Type of Claimant : State

Type of Claim : Removal Costs

Claim Manager : 

Amount Requested : $201.19 

FACTS: 

Oil Spill Incident: On December 3, 2011, Manatee County and Bradenton Fire 

Departments reported a sunken boat at a private dock, releasing approximately one gallon 

of gasoline into the Gulf of Mexico, a navigable waterway of the U.S. FL Bureau of 

Environmental Response (FL BER) reported to the scene and witnessed

minimal rainbow/silvery sheen, immediately around the boat. USCG Sector St Petersburg 

was notified and FL BER followed up. The incident was reported to the NRC by Manatee 

County as well as the Bradenton Fire Department on December 3, 2011, via report # 

997073. Due to the small amount of fuel observed, the case was closed. 

Description of Removal Activities for this claimant: The Claimant only conducted an 

initial assessment and investigation into the incident. 

The Claim: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection submitted a removal 

cost claim to the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC) for reimbursement of their 

uncompensated removal costs of State personnel, equipment and transportation, and 

administrative costs in the amount of $201.19.

Florida DEP is claiming State personnel expenses of $113.46, State equipment expenses 

of $65.73, and State administrative documentation/photo expenses of $22.00. The claim 

consists of: FL DEP cover letter and invoice; RP certified letter; and a FL BER incident 

field report.

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]. 

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. The NPFC has determined that the actions undertaken by the Claimant are deemed 

consistent with the NCP. This determination is made in accordance with the 

Delegation of Authority for Determination of Consistency with the NCP for the 

payment of uncompensated removal cost claims and is consistent with the provisions 

of sections 1002(b)(1)(B) and 1012(a)(4) of OPA, 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. A Responsible Party was determined for this incident. 33 U.S.C. § 2701(32);
6. 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 “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. 

Upon adjudication of this claim, the NPFC confirmed that the services provided by 

FL BER were billed in accordance with the rate schedule in place at the time services 

were rendered. The NPFC has determined that the actions undertaken were 

reasonable, necessary and consistent with the NCP. 

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

incur $201.19 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 #912056-0001. 

C. Determined Amount: 

The NPFC hereby determines that the OSLTF will pay $201.19 as full compensation 

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

NPFC under claim # 912056-0001. 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 Claimants.

 

AMOUNT: $201.19

Claim Supervisor: 

Date of Supervisor’s review: 5/9/12 

Supervisor Action: Approved

Supervisor’s Comments: