A recent oil spill in Marin County, in Northern California, has drawn attention because the captain of the tug involved became personally liable for damages. The incident occurred in 2021, when the tug Hunter lost propulsion while towing American Challenger, a 90' decommissioned commercial fishing vessel. The fishing vessel ran aground in a remote area south of Estero de San Antonio, resulting in a $14 million clean-up action. Although the tug captain has since passed away, his estate was subsequently pursued for damages.
Experienced professional mariners might wonder how personal liability (going after the individual) could arise in such a scenario. Historically, the vessel owner or insurance carrier picks up the tab in an incident, whether it involves damages to a bridge or injuries to a passenger. Traditional maritime law does not call for deckhands and mates to pass around a hat and ask shipmates to kick in for bridge repairs or hospital bills for the passenger. So, what’s different here?
To understand how personal liability arose here, we need to look at another oil spill, the one involving Exxon Valdez in March 1989. In response, Congress enacted the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990, under which each “responsible party” is liable for removal costs and damages resulting from the discharge or the substantial threat of discharge of oil.
Attorneys for the captain’s estate raised the argument that the captain was not a “responsible party” here. However, a federal court held otherwise, concluding that the captain was an operator. The court referred to the OPA, where an “operator” is someone who directs or controls the movement of a vessel.
What exactly is the personal impact of being a “responsible party” in this grounding? It means being on the hook for cleanup costs in the recovery of about 14 cubic yards of oiled debris, 400 to 760 gals. of mixed oily water, and 50 gals. of hydraulic fluids. The U.S. estimates it incurred about $14,258,062 in costs related to its response.
Ordinarily, employees are not personally liable in most workplace settings. They can sometimes be personally liable if their conduct was egregious or they acted outside the scope of their employment. However, those principles are set aside here, where liability arises under the terms of a specific law.
