FLORIDA'S POLLUTANT DISCHARGE NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT COMPENSATION SCHEDULE—A RATIONAL APPROACH TO THE RECOVERY OF NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES1

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 717-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J. Plante ◽  
Ernest L. Barnett ◽  
Debra J. Preble ◽  
Lanette M. Price

ABSTRACT Quantifying natural resource damages resulting from pollutant discharges has historically been difficult. The Florida legislature recognized this and developed a simplified compensation schedule using liquidated damage principles. The application of such an approach to natural resource damage assessment greatly simplifies the determination of monetary damages to natural resources resulting from pollutant discharges. The foundations for developing the multipliers for the factors used in the compensation schedule are restoration cost and loss of use. After a number of natural resource damage recoveries have taken place, the compensation schedule should be reevaluated to determine if the liquidated damages test of reasonableness remains adequate.

1987 ◽  
Vol 1987 (1) ◽  
pp. 533-540
Author(s):  
Gary L. Ott

ABSTRACT Federal guidelines that outline a process for natural resource damage assessment have recently been published. The guidelines provide two types of assessment procedures that are referred to as Type A assessments and Type B assessments. The Type A procedures are for simplified assessments and use a computer model to measure in monetary terms compensation for injury to marine and coastal natural resources through the use of average values and approximations. The proposed Type A computer model was used to analyze a major oil spill that occurred in Island Park, New York, where the federal on-scene coordinator had attempted to evaluate the magnitude and severity of the spill. In this one instance, both field observations and the proposed Type A computer model characterized this major oil spill as having a limited impact on the environment. Oil and chemical spills are generally characterized only by the size of the release. Conceivably, the proposed Type A model could be used as a tool for characterizing a spill by its potential to injure natural resources. The ability to focus on the environmental impacts of a spill may help analyze response actions that reduce natural resource damages.


2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 1153-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Lehto

ABSTRACT During oil spill incidents, NRDA and response activities may co-occur. This paper discusses those occurrences, focusing on ephemeral data collection and emergency restoration. Current laws provide some guidance for how these activities may be coordinated. The Field Operations Guide (FOG) and the National Contingency Plan (NCP) state that it is the responsibility of the Incident Commander (IC) to notify natural resource trustees of the incident and to coordinate NRDA representative's activities through the Liaison Officer. The FOG and NCP also state that it is the responsibility of the trustees to conduct their NRDA preassessment activities without hindering the response. The overlap between NRDA and response may be further complicated because many trustees may work within the environmental unit or the wildlife recovery unit for the response and also have the responsibility to work on NRDA. They may work in the Incident Command System advising the IC on response issues while also trying to initiate a damage assessment. Data collection during a response is critical for managing the incident as well as performing a thorough damage assessment. Although the types of data collected to aid the response may be similar to those used in damage assessment, often the scale and level of detail may be quite different. Even with these differences, synergies in ephemeral data collection may exist. Emergency restoration activities do sometimes occur before the response has concluded. The Oil Pollution Act regulations state that emergency restoration may occur if the action is needed to avoid the loss of natural resources, or to prevent any continuing danger to natural resources. If the trustees determine that emergency restoration is needed, they are required to consult with the IC prior to taking any such action. As an example, this paper will discuss emergency restoration actions undertaken during the Whatcom creek, WA gasoline spill to reduce the impact to migrating salmon.


1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 727-731
Author(s):  
Randall B. Luthi ◽  
Linda B. Burlington ◽  
Eli Reinharz ◽  
Sharon K. Shutler

ABSTRACT The Damage Assessment Regulations Team (DART), under the Office of General Counsel of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has centered its efforts on developing natural resource damage assessment regulations for oil pollution in navigable waters. These procedures will likely lower the costs associated with damage assessments, encourage joint cooperative assessments and simplify most assessments. The DART team of NOAA is developing new regulations for the assessment of damages due to injuries related to oil spills under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. These regulations will involve coordination, restoration, and economic valuation. Various methods are currently being developed to assess damages for injuries to natural resources. The proposed means include: compensation tables for spills under 50,000 gallons, Type A model, expedited damage assessment (EDA) procedures, and comprehensive procedures. They are being developed to provide trustees with a choice for assessing natural resource damages for each oil spill.


2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 661-665
Author(s):  
Deborah P. French McCay ◽  
Carol-Ann Manen ◽  
Mark Gibson ◽  
John Catena

ABSTRACT The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) seeks to make the environment and public whole for injury to or loss of natural resources and services as a result of a discharge of oil. This means that restoration projects implemented as part of a natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) must be of a sufficient scale to produce resources and services of the same type and quality and of comparable value to those that were lost. Services, for an NRDA, include both the ecological and human uses of the resources. Also, the loss must be quantified from the time of impact until the resource returns to baseline conditions—the level in the absence of the impact. This paper details a series of methods that may be used for scaling NRDA restoration projects and describes how these methods were used in the restoring the injuries incurred as a result of the North Cape oil spill.


2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (2) ◽  
pp. 1143-1146
Author(s):  
Don A. Kane ◽  
Francis J. Gonynor

ABSTRACT A primary goal of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) is to make the environment and public whole for injuries to natural resources that result from the discharge of oil. OPA 90 authorizes state and federal natural resource agencies to serve as trustees for natural resources and provides them with the responsibility, through a natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) process, to ensure that injured natural resources are restored. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) promulgated damage assessment regulations, and in an attempt to correct deficiencies and meet OPA 90 mandates, developed a framework intended to promote expeditious restoration. To lessen the common litigious nature of the NRDA process, the regulations encourage active participation by a responsible party in a cooperative assessment of damages. Natural resource trustee agencies also have authority to enforce criminal aspects of other statutes for impacts resulting from an oil spill. However, when agencies initiate a criminal investigation under these statutes for an oil spill, the goals mandated in OPA 90 and set forth in the NOAA regulations can be substantially undermined. There are potential solutions that could, at least partially, resolve this dilemma for the responsible party to a point where participation in the NRDA process would not unduly prejudice its position in a criminal investigation. Such solutions might include written agreements as to communications and transactional use of immunity agreements, stay of proceedings, and protective orders, which singly, or in combination, could prove invaluable in preserving a progressive NRDA process, fully inclusive of the responsible party.


2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-43
Author(s):  
K. Patytska

The paper determines the natural assets of territorial communities and reveals their components in the context of domestic legislation. Scientific approaches to the specified problem in domestic and western scientific thought are developed. The essence of the concept «natural assets» is revealed and their main features – the presence of the identified owner, active manager and user; cost; Legal Status; economic return are defined. The relationship between the categories «natural assets», «natural resources» and «natural resource potential» are established. The main difference between natural resources as the asset of territorial community and other types of assets – the need for dual approach to their management: to generate income, ensure community development and in the interests of all stakeholder groups; in order to preserve the natural environment is revealed. The scientific approach to natural resource management with the participation of local communities, which is based on the principles of subsidiarity, sustainability, fairness, accountability, efficiency, activity, adaptability, environmental responsibility, inclusiveness is analyzed. This approach has the following common features: decentralization of powers to manage natural assets; reconciling the interests of stakeholders and opportunities for efficient of natural resources use; combination of environmental and socio-economic goals in the process of natural asset management; development of institutions for increasing decision-making efficiency in the field of natural asset management at the community level; stakeholders education and notification. Scientific approaches to the systematization of natural assets of territorial communities in terms of stakeholders groups (by ownership of the asset, the possibility of access to the asset and competition in their use) are studied. The expediency of classifying stakeholders as natural assets of territorial communities by their interests is substantiated. The peculiarities of the use/utilization and possession of natural resources in accordance with the legislative acts regulating natural resource relations in Ukraine are revealed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-231
Author(s):  
Eugene Beaulieu ◽  
Denise Prévost

AbstractThis paper presents a legal-economic analysis of key aspects of the WTO Panel Report involving a challenge by Indonesia against the anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the US on certain coated paper from Indonesia. We focus on the findings in this case relevant to the determination of a ‘benefit’ to the recipient, a core requirement to establish the existence and extent of a subsidy. We examine benchmarking for determining benefit in cases of predominant government ownership of a natural resource and the use of ‘adverse facts available’ against a non-cooperative respondent to infer the existence of a benefit. The benefit analysis in this case may have broader implications. First, it may limit the scope for governments to determine their own policies regarding the ownership and management of natural resources. Second, it may create a loophole allowing investigating authorities to fill gaps in the factual record by intentionally using the ‘facts available’ to the disadvantage of a respondent. In both cases, the panel's findings may open the door to potential misuse of these flexibilities to find a benefit where none exists, or to inflate the margin of benefit to allow for higher countervailing duties.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document