Ship- ource Oil Pollution Fund

The Admini trator in inve tigating and assessing thi claim, reque tedinformation from VPAon February 13, 2001, to which the VPA responded on March 12, 2001. On March 30, 2001, the Admiilistrator requested additional information and documentation, to which a reply was receivedfrom VPA, their letter dated July 23, 2001.

Following an investigation, the Administrator made an a sessment ofthe claim and found, principally, that some ofthe handling charge forpayment of ubcontractors' invoices were notestablished. On this basis, on October4, 2001, he made a settlement offer to VPA of$17,953.31, plus the appropriate interest of $1,883.15 This offer was accepted by VPA on October 9, 2001. A Release and Subrogation document was signed on behalfofVPA on October 23, 2001, and a cheque for the total amount of$19,836.46 was sent by the Administrator to VPA on October 25, 2001.

In spite ofadetailed investigation into the oil spill, it proved impossibletodetermine its origin. It was therefore accepted as a mystery spill. TheAdministrator closed his file.

3.30 Un-named vessel - Fanny Bay, British Columbia (2000)

The SOPF was advised by the CCO Claim Status Reportdated December 31, 2000, that a claim would be submitted by the Crown to the Administrator seeking recovery ofthe ceo co t and expen es connected with this incident.

Thevessel, apparently un-registered, un-licensedandunnamed, is awoodenplanked pleasure craft made by Ouis-Craftofapproximately nine metre in length. On July 13, 2000, the ownerofan oy terfarm in Fanny Bay (just south ofComox,eastcoastofVancouver Island) telephoned DFOin Comox andadvisedthatthecraft, tied to amooring buoy, had unk and was leaking die el. TheCCO vessel Kestrel 1 andan ER crewre ponded. On July 14, 2000,absorbentbooms and pads were deployed as an initial measure. Commercial diver were used latertoclose offfuel valves and plug leakingoil pipesandvents. Afterpatching ahole in the hull, the craft was refloated. On aretum visit by ER personnel the day followingrefloating, the craft wa found to have disappeared.

The Crown submitted aclaim, an1ounting to 2,882.15, to theAdmiillst:ratorand received by him July 9, 2001. TheAdministratorfound $2,569.59 ofthe claim establishedandoffered to pay this amount, plus interest of$226.28. The settlement was accepted and arrangements made tot:ransferthe amount of$2,795.87 onAugust23, 2001.

After consideration ofthe circumstances ofthe ownership and the craft herself, the Administrator decided that it would not be reasonable (within the meaning ofsection 87 MIA (3) (d) ) to take recovery action, unless the situation changed.

The Administrator closed his file.

3.31 Radium 604 (2000)

This incident refer to the same tug and barge train (Radium Yellowknife and tow) referred to in incident number 3.17 above.

As indicated in 3.17 above, it wa reported that the tug and bargetrain were previou ly refu ed permission by TCMS to continue tran it ofthe Arctic, because It was too late in the sea on. The barge were beached until more favorable condition could be expected.

A CCO Sitrep ofJuly 17, 2000 advi ed that on July 15, 2000 thi 320 gro ton Canadian barge beached In Iqalult, unavut, wa found to be leaking die el fuel.

It was reported that the barge leakedane timated I0 litres ofdiesel fromacrack in the under ide ofthe hull. Then it was reported that the leak increased to approximately 100 litre per hour, onto thebeach.The leak was temporarily plugged. The CCO contracted to have the remaining 46,000 litres ofdie el in the Radium 604 tran ferred to econdary torage.

The CCO emergency re pon e officer (ER) were expected on ite on July 17, 2000, to as ume the role of Federal monitoringofficer. The Iqaluit beach master was on cene forCCO until ER per onnel arrived on ite.

Theownerofthebarge i tatedtohaveaccepted respon ibilityforthe pill andsentrepresentativ tothe ite.

The Admini tratorbelieve it unlikely that aclaim will now re ulttothe OPFa a re ult ofthi incident. The Admini t:ratorha clo ed hi file.

3.32 Hiawatha (2000)

The TSB reported that, on July 26, 2000, thi 46 gro ton Canadian ferry ank at the Parliament lip, Toronto harbour, cau ing minor die el oil pollution. It wa u pected that vandali m wa the cau e.

The Admiill tratorha received no further information on the incident and ha clo ed hi file.

3.33 Skaubryn (2000)

The SOPF received a report that there wa an oil pill at Seaboard Terminal, orth Vancouver, Briti h Columbia, the pill being found late e ening ugu t 3, 2000. Two ships were berthedatthe terminal, the Skaugran and the Skaub1yn

Early on Augu t4, 2000, the VPAre ponded to the pill and tasked local contractor forclean up. Laterthat forenoon the VPAdetermined the pill was sufficient} large to transferoverallre pon ibility forthe clean-upto the CCG TCMS, CCO and EC inve ligatedthe circumstancesofthe origin ofthe pill. Samplesfromthe spill and ships in the vicinityweretaken.

The CCO Claim Statu Report dated December 31, 2001, notes that the Crown pre ented a claim totalino $87,521.98 tothe shipowneronAugust 20, 2001. o

The Administrator awaits development.

Vancouver Harbour Incidents

Following the oil found offthe Seaboard Terminal, orth ancou er,August 3, 2000, the VPApre enteda claim to the SOPF for its response. Anumberof e el in the harbour also reported oil contamination. The cause ofthese incidents and theirconnection if any, with the SeaboardTerminal incident, is unde�· inve tigation by the Administrator. These incidents are reported as 3.34 to 3.42 inclusive, following.

3.34 Vancouver Port Authority (2000)

The VPA submitted a claim to the SOPF for its respon e to the above incident onAugust 4, 2000, which was received on March 14, 2001, amounting to $13,007.72.

OnJuly20,2001,VPAcoun elwrotetotheAdministrator: advi ing that the VPA was submitting its claim, together with that of the CCG, directly to the hipowner (Skaubryn); requesting that, in the meantime, the Administrator hold the VPA claim again t the SOPF for this incident, in abeyance.

On August 2, 2001, the Administrator replied to VPA, agreeing to hold the claim in abeyance but noting that he re erved all hi right . The Admini tratorawait development

3.35 Trophy 13K112086 (2000)

The 13K112086 i a 3 metre, open, fibergla plea ure craftofthe model name "Trophy". Acompany with the name ofOcean Fi herie ofVancouver, on October 5, 2000, wrote to the TC/CCG in Richmond, Briti h Columbia, enclo ing photograph ofthe boat oiled with oil, which oiling wa tatedto havetaken place in "July, 2000". Al o enclo ed were two original invoice datedAugu t 24 and September6, 2000, re pectively, totaling 331.22 for removal ofthe oil tain from the hull ofthecraft and forthe upplyof replacement mooring line· and fender . It wa tated that the boat i owned by an employee and moored at the company dock at Commi ioner treet, Vancouver, at the time ofthe oiling. The company advi ed that orne oftheir commercial boat were al o oiled but, being tee!, they were able to be cleaned by the company. Although not tated, the letterofOctober5, 2000, would appear to eek recompen e.

TheOcean Fi herie letterwas forwarded by the CCG to theAdmini tratorandreceivedby him on July 12, 2001. TheAdmini tratorwrotetoOcean Fi herie on July 30, 2001,reque tingthat, ifthe person whohad ufferedthe pollution damage wi hed the letterand invoice tobe a claimagainstthe SOPF,then toconfirm hi claim in writing. AtthesametimetheAdmini tratorenquired if the company hadany samplesofthe oil involved.

Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund

No wtitten reply wasreceivedfrom Ocean Fishe1ies but, onAugust 15, 2001, theAdministratorhad atelephone conversation with thepersonresponsible forFleet Operationsofthecompany. In theconversation it was statedthatacompany employee did have a sample ofthe offending oil and that itcould be provided. The Administratorreiteratedthathe awaitedaclaim and that he would then makearrangementsregarding theoil sample.

At the end ofthe fiscal yearno furthercommunication from OceanFisheries hadbeen received. In the meantime, theAdministratorsent a reminderto Ocean Fisheries Ltd., requesting that its employee confirm whetherornot he wishes to make a claim.

3.36 17' speedboat (2000)

An individual submitted a claim to the CCG, on August 29, 2000, amounting to $500.00, forcleaning his boat ofoil. The claim was passed to the Administrator and received on November 21, 2000. The Administratorwrote to the individual on November 24, 2000, requesting confirmation that he wished to make a claim againstthe SOPF The individual replied on December4, 2000, in effect, confirming his claim against the SOPF. The Administrator commenced his investigation and asses ment ofthe claim. On March 30, 2001, the Admini tratorwroteto the ownerrequesting substantiation forthe individual amounts making up the claim.

3.37 Leedon (2000)

Thi is a private, mall, motoryacht. The yacht was moored in a mcuina on the outh ide ofVancouver Harbour, in a downtown location when, on August 9, 2000, theownercontacted the CCG with respect to the craft having been found tobe oiled. Theexacttime and date ofthe oiling wasnot stated. On October 8, 2000, the owner ubmitted a claim to the CCG for$298.65, which claim covered hauling-out, powerwashingand repaintingthe affected part ofthe hull. Theclaim was pa ed totheAdmini tratorby CCG and received by him on ovember 21, 2000. TheAdministrator wrote to the owner on November 24, 2000. He provided the ownerwithinf01mationtoassistwiththepresentationofa formalclaimtotheSOPF.Theownersubmittedaformal claim totheSOPFwith upportingdocumentationand information. ItwasreceivedonJanuary 11,2001.

The Admini trator investigated and assessed the claim. Shortly afterthe fiscal yearendtheAdministratorpaid theclaim in full, together with interest of$16.01, but continues to as ess his recovery action options.

3.38 Burrard Clean #17 (2000)

This is a447 gross ton Canadian registered barge owned and used by the local response organization Western Canada Marine Response Organization (WCMRC). On August 15, 2000,the owner submitted an invoice to the CCG for $2,542.35 to recover their

Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund

tated co t due to the oiling ofthe off-duty, moored, barge in Vancouver Harbour. The CCG passed the invoice to theAdmini trator, which wa received by him on November 21, 2000. TheAdministrator sent an acknowledgement to the WCMRC on November 24, 2000, and information to assist in submitting a claim to the SOPF was sent by him on November 30, 2000. The claim was received from the WCMRC on December 27, 2000, and duly inve tigated and a sessed. Further information was obtained from WCMRC and third party sources re pecting aspects ofthe claim. The Administratorfound a number ofindividual items were not established within the meaning ofthe CSA and, on February 27, 2001, he offered $1,333.93, plus the appropriate interest, in settlement. WCMRC disputed some ofthe Administrator' assessments, but on March 20, 2001 they accepted theofferand provided a duly signed release and subrogation document. On March 22, 2001, theAdministratorarranged to pay the amount of$1,333.93, plu $70.27 interest, in full and final settlement.

TheAdministratornotes that in thi case the claim undersection 710 CSA was made by WCMRC qua shipowner and not a a respon e organization (RO) underthe CSA Generally, an RO asdefined in the CSA has no direct claim against the SOPF under section 710 but it can assert a claim for unsati fied costs and expenses afterexhausting its right ofrecovery again t the shipowner, pursuant to section 709.

TheAdministratorcontinues to asse his recove1y action option

3.39 Island Provider (2000)

Anotherclaim involvingoil pollution in Vancouver Harbourwas madebytheownerofthi 35 gro ton Canadianwoodenfi hing vessel.Theowner tatedthat the vessel wasdelivering almon toacompany located in downtown Vancouverwhen, during theearly how· of August 5, 2000,the hull, mooringrope andfloats becamecoated with oil. Theownerpre entedaclain1 to the CCG forthe amountof$4,415 89, on October6, 2000, to recover its stated, costs andexpense in the incident. In tum this was passed totheAdmini tratoron November 21, 2000. TheAdministratoracknowledged the correspondence on November 24, 2000 and provided informationtothe owneron ovember30, 2000, to assist in makingaclaimon the SOPF.Telephone discussions with theowners followed. TheAdmini trator investigatedthecircumstancesoftheclaimand the allegedoiling.Todate noclaimonthe SOPF hasbeen received from theowner.

3.40 Silver Bullit (2000)

This vessel isafanlliy owned and operated7 metre aluminum workboat engaged in boom repair, watertaxi engagementsandothertasks.Theboatwasworkingby the B.C. SugarCompanydockonthe southsideof VancouverHarbouronAugust4 and 5, 2000, whenthe hull andenginecooling system werestated tohave becomeoil contaminated. The ownerwrote the G on August I0, 2000, indicatingawi h"to register aclaim fordamage againstthedeep-seavessels"causingtheoil contamination,at that timee timatedat $8,500.00. This correspondencewaspassed bythe CG tothe Administratoron ovember21, 2000. TheAdministrator acknowledged receiving the corre pondence on November 24, 2000. TheAdmini tratorwrote again on November 30, 2000, asking theownerforwritten confirmation thathe wi hedtomake aclaimon the SOPFand, at the arne time, providing information as to how tomake uch aclaim. Theownertelephoned the Admini tratoron December6, 2000, indicating that he intendedto makeaclaim.

A follow-uptelephonecall wasmade by the OPFto the owneron February 7, 2001, but, to date, noclaim and supporting documentation ha been received by the Admini trator.

3.41 Georgie Girl (2000)

The Georgie Girl i a 8 metre fiberglas plea ure motor yacht and wa mooredat a marina on the outh ide of Vancouver Harbour, when the hull and fender became oil coated at adate and time, which i not exactly identified.Theownercontacted CCG on ugu t 9, 2000, regarding the incident. The ownerfiled a claim with the CCG on September 18, 2000, amounting to 217.86 to coverthe cleaning and replacement co t involved. The COITe pondence was pa ed to the Admini tratorby the CCG on o ember 21, 2000. The Admini trator acknowledged the corre pondence from the owneron ovember24, 2000. Information a to how to file a claim again t the OPF wa ent to the owneron ovember30, 2000. The wner ubmitted a claim to the Admini trator in the amount of 2I 7. 6, which wa received on January 9, 2001. At the fi cal year' endtheAdmini trator made arrangement to pay the claim in full, together with 12.20 intere t, thu clo ing thi claim file. Relea e and ubrogation Agreement in favourofthe dmini tratorwa executed and delivered by the owneron April 10, 2001.

TheAdmini tratorcontinue to a e hi reco ery options.

3.42 Prosperity (2000)

Thi is a 96 gro ton Canadian regi tered aluminum fi hing vessel. On September 13. 2000, the Administratorreceived a claim, amounting to $54,794.29,from the owner, tated to be the co t incuned by the vessel in dealing with the oil pollution encounteredduringthe morning ofAugust 4, 2000. At thetime ofthe incidentthe vessel wa at a dock in downtown Vancouverunloading ardines, when the hull became oil contaminated. The ownercautioned thatfurtherco t could be incurred in removincr the oil impregnated intothealuminum hull, which oil�ould not initiallybe removedby normal cleaning.

The dmini trator in e tigated and a ses ed the claim, in thepro e ofwhich he employed localcoun el. The claim rai ed a numberofconcerns with the dmini tratorincluding the charges stated to have been in uned b the hipyard, fi hing time lo t, crew wages, fuel co ts, owner charge and other, lesser, items. Anotheri ue wa the question ofthe owner's legal fee . The legal expenses claimed were rejected.

Following a number ofnegotiations with the owneron the contention item , on February 14, 2001, SOPF counsel confirmed to the ownera full and final ettlementofferby the Administratorof$27,172.88, plus 1,239.34 interest. On February 22, 2001, SOPF coun el advi edthat the ownerhad signed the release and ubrogation document. On the same day, February 22, 2001. a cheque in the amount of$26,924.22 was pas ed to the owner. On receiving the necessary evidence ofpayment to the crew, the final cheque of 1,488.00 wa made available to ownerafterthe end of the fi cal year. Thi payment completed the ettlement ofthi particularclaim and theAdrnini tratorclo ed his fileonthe claim a pect.

The hipownerhadpro ideda ample oftheoil that damagedthe e el. TheAdmini trator entthe ample foranaly i andcompari on with sample takenfromthe pill at SeaboardTerminal reportedat 3.33 above.The Admini tratorcontinue hi in e tigation intotheorigin ofthe oil, forthepurpo e ofpo ible recovery action.

3.43 Margie (2000)

The TSB reported that, on ugu t 22, 2000, thi mall Canadian gillnetter wa abandoned by her crew when in Porpoi e Harbour, off Port Edward, Prince Rupert, northem Briti h Columbia. The Margie ank and leaked die el ofwhich, it wa tated,there wa a mirumal amount aboard.

Hearing no more concerning thi incident, the Adrruni trator ha clo ed hi file.

3.44 Bivalve Harvester (2000)

Another rrunor pollution incident brought to the attention ofthe dmini tratorby theTSB, wa the inking on September 25, 2000, ofthi mall Canadian barge Bivalve Harveste1: It wa repo1ted that the barge cap ized while loading in Trevenen Bay. Thi i an area on the mainland ofthe we tcoa t ofBriti h Columbia which i reported to have many marinefarm facilitie .

It was reported that two people on the barge were able to tep a hore a it cap ized and a third fell into the water but wa quickly recovered. The barge leaked a mall amount offuel.

The Adrruni tratorha heard no more concerning thi incident and ha clo ed hi file.