WHERE RESPONSE MEETS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT (NRDA)

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 1153-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Lehto
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Liaison Officer ◽  
Incident Command System ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
The Impact

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.

Quantifying the Scale of Restoration Required to Compensate for the Impacts of the North Cape Oil Spill on Fish and Invertebrates

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 661-665
Author(s):  
Deborah P. French McCay ◽  
Carol-Ann Manen ◽  
Mark Gibson ◽  
John Catena
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
The North ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Baseline Conditions ◽  
The Impact

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.

scholarly journals THE SECOND GENERATION OF NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS: LESSONS LEARNED?1

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 727-731
Author(s):  
Randall B. Luthi ◽  
Linda B. Burlington ◽  
Eli Reinharz ◽  
Sharon K. Shutler
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Economic Valuation ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
General Counsel ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment

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.

THE INTRUSION OF CRIMINAL LAW ON THE NRDA PROCESS

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (2) ◽  
pp. 1143-1146
Author(s):  
Don A. Kane ◽  
Francis J. Gonynor
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
The Common ◽  
Responsible Party

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.

INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM AND NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT: MULTIPLE ROLES FACING NATURAL RESOURCE TRUSTEE AGENCIES1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 345-350
Author(s):  
Pierre H. duVair
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Multiple Roles ◽  
Incident Command System ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Unified Command ◽  
And Training

ABSTRACT This paper discusses the continually evolving subjects of emergency response and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) from the perspective of a state natural resource trustee agency. Following the Exxon Valdez and American Trader spills, California enacted a law that gave the Department of Fish and Game primary responsibility for management of oil spills in marine waters of the state. There are considerable advantages to placing the lead responsibility for spill response and damage assessment on a single trustee agency which must carry out prespill planning and training, and participate in drills. Trustee agencies potentially face numerous roles in significant spill events; methods have been developed to facilitate the conduct of these activities. In particular, the unified command structure, incident command system, and the trustee NRDA team concept are useful.

COMPARISON OF FEDERAL GUIDELINES FOR NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF A MAJOR OIL SPILL, ISLAND PARK, NEW YORK1

1987 ◽  
Vol 1987 (1) ◽  
pp. 533-540
Author(s):  
Gary L. Ott
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Computer Model ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Type A ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Chemical Spills ◽  
Federal Guidelines

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.

The Cost of Certainty in Natural Resource Damage Assessment Under the Oil Pollution Act of 19901

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 231-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Robert Greene
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Hedonic Price ◽  
The Public ◽  
Hedonic Price Models ◽  
Habitat Equivalency Analysis ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Scaling Methods ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACT Pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90), natural resource trustees are empowered to seek recovery for damages to natural resources caused by discharges of oil and/or certain threats of discharges of oil. To determine the proper amount of damages, trustees undertake the process of “scaling,” which is an attempt to calculate the size of restoration actions that would be required to expedite recovery of injured natural resources to baseline and compensate the public for interim lost resources and services. Trustees utilize various scaling methods, including service-to-service methods, such as habitat equivalency analysis, and value-to-value methods, such as hedonic price models and contingent valuation. Regardless of the method chosen, however, the scaling is directly dependent on the level of injury caused by a spill. Disputes between trustees and those parties designated as responsible for the spill (responsible parties or RPs) often occur in determining the level of injury. In many cases, as a result of either these disputes or the trustees' desire to determine the precise level of injury, trustees undertake costly and time-consuming injury studies. These studies oftentimes are inefficient because the resulting gains in certainty often are achieved through disproportionately expensive studies relative to the resulting gains in restoration. In certain instances, attempts to achieve greater certainty can destroy an otherwise efficient and cooperative restoration effort and run contrary to the OPA 90 regulations. Such attempts also can lead to costly litigation for both the public and the RP involved. Lastly, attempts to achieve greater certainty during injury assessment can unnecessarily increase the scale of compensatory restoration because of delays in implementing restoration actions. Both trustees and RPs must recognize those instances in which achieving greater certainty leads to increased costs to both the public and the RP. In such situations, stipulating to certain injury assumptions can lead to overall net gains for both the public and the RP. These stipulations can be used to induce RPs to increase other aspects of the restoration, thereby increasing overall gains for the public at less cost to the RP.

A COOPERATIVE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT: LESSONS FROM THE GREENHILL SPILL1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 355-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Heather Warner Finley ◽  
James G. Hanifen ◽  
Pasquale F. Roscigno ◽  
Karolien Debusschere ◽  
Maura J. Newell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Success For All ◽  
Oil Well ◽  
Environmental Restoration ◽  
Environmental Response ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Early Success ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT Following a September 1992 natural gas and oil well blowout in Timbalier Bay, Louisiana, natural resource trustees took action under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) to restore the natural resources injured by the spill. Trustees appointed by the State of Louisiana and the U.S. Government worked cooperatively with the well owner, Greenhill Petroleum Corporation, in a natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). The resolution of the Greenhill NRDA marks an early success for all parties involved. The process was concluded in December 1993, only 14 months after the spill, when Greenhill and the trustees signed a natural resource restoration agreement. The cooperative assessment and innovative approaches used by the trustees and the well owner resulted in the rapid resolution of the case, rapid environmental restoration, and relatively low assessment costs.

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
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Rational Approach ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment ◽  
Liquidated Damages ◽  
Pollutant Discharge ◽  
Restoration Cost

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.

NORTH CAPE OIL SPILL NRDA PROCESS UNDER OPA 1990

1997 ◽  
Vol 1997 (1) ◽  
pp. 851-854
Author(s):  
Frank Csulak ◽  
Douglas Helton ◽  
Carol-Ann Manen ◽  
Norman Meade ◽  
Marguerite Matera
Keyword(s):  
Rhode Island ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Cooperative Approach ◽  
The North ◽  
Natural Resource Damage Assessment

ABSTRACT On January 19, 1996, the tank borge North Cape and the tug Scandia grounded on Moonstone Beach in southern Rhode Island, spilling 828,000 gallons of no. 2 heating oil into Block Island Sound. Just 2 weeks prior to the grounding, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had published the final natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) rule for the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA). The North Cape oil spill became the first opportunity to implement the new NRDA rules. One of the key provisions of the NRDA rule is the requirement that trustees must invite the responsible parties (RP) to participate in a cooperative assessment of damages. If the trustees and the RP can agree to perform the initial phases of an assessment cooperatively, the chances of achieving a fair settlement and avoiding protracted litigation are expected to be enhanced. The cooperative approach should also reduce overall transaction costs, facilitate settlement, and result in a more rapid implementation of restoration projects. This paper presents an overview of the cooperative natural resource damage assessment process being undertaken by the trustees and the RPs following the North Cape oil spill and highlights some of the lessons learned in conducting a cooperative assessment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document