United States v. Nature's Way Marine, L.L.C.
904 F.3d 416 (2018)
Sections
Rule of Law:
Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, a tugboat company 'operates' a vessel if it exercises exclusive navigational control over that vessel, rendering it a responsible party for oil discharges resulting from collisions.
Facts:
- Nature's Way owned a tugboat that was navigating the Mississippi River while pushing two oil-carrying barges.
- The barges were owned by a separate company, Third Coast Towing.
- The barges were 'dumb' vessels, meaning they lacked independent propulsion or navigation systems and relied entirely on the tugboat for movement.
- While under the control of the Nature's Way tugboat, the barges collided with a bridge.
- The collision caused one of the barges to discharge over 7,000 gallons of oil into the river.
- Nature's Way expended approximately $2.99 million on clean-up efforts following the spill.
Procedural Posture:
- Nature's Way filed a reimbursement claim with the National Pollution Funds Center (NPFC), which was denied.
- The United States sued Nature's Way in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi to recover additional removal costs.
- Nature's Way counterclaimed against the government under the Administrative Procedure Act.
- The District Court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the United States.
- Nature's Way appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a tugboat owner considered to be 'operating' a non-self-propelled barge it is towing for purposes of liability under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 when the tugboat has exclusive navigational control over the barge?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod
Yes, a tugboat owner 'operates' a barge under the statute when it exercises exclusive navigational control, directing the movement and conduct of the vessel at the time of an accident. The court applied statutory interpretation to the undefined term 'operating' in the Oil Pollution Act (OPA). Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Bestfoods (which analyzed identical language in CERCLA), the court determined that 'operate' must be given its ordinary and natural meaning. In an organizational sense, this means to direct, manage, or conduct affairs. Since Nature's Way had total control over the navigation of the 'dumb' barge, and its direction caused the collision, it fits the definition of an operator. The court rejected the argument that towing is merely mechanical activation, noting that navigation requires significant judgment and discretion.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of 'responsible parties' under the Oil Pollution Act within the Fifth Circuit. By applying the Bestfoods 'ordinary and natural meaning' standard to the OPA, the court confirms that liability extends beyond legal owners to those exercising actual physical control over a vessel's navigation. This ruling prevents tugboat operators from avoiding liability limits associated with the barges they control during transport, ensuring that the entity actually directing the vessel's movement remains accountable for environmental damage.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: United States v. Nature's Way Marine, L.L.C. (2018)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"