How many bricks in a castle?
Although Congress` intent in enacting the Oil Prevention Act was close to the mark, the events surrounding the Exxon Valdez spill (and several others) drove legislators to construct a law which, itself, often runs aground, spilling quasi-regulatory language and requirements into an already complex sea of laws and regulations. This has caused more than minor difficulties among the Federal and state governments, industry, concerned citizens, and environmental groups. Areas of concern include: worst case discharge definitions; certificates of financial responsibility; natural resource damage assessments and non-use values; lack of Federal preemption; redundant regulatory requirements occasioned by overlapping areas of jurisdiction and turf concerns among the Federal and state spill response regulators; and lack of a mandate for regulators to use risk assessments and cost benefit analyses in developing economically feasible spill response regulations. Other problem areas exist, but it is not the intent of this paper to cast stones into the existing rainbow slick of regulations. What`s done is done, and now there is a second wave of bricks in the air that must be addressed; these relate to hazardous substances and hazardous materials emergency response (E/R).
- OSTI ID:
- 148123
- Report Number(s):
- CONF-950152-; TRN: 96:005835
- Resource Relation:
- Conference: Petro-Safe `95 conference and exhibition, Houston, TX (United States), 31 Jan - 2 Feb 1995; Other Information: PBD: 1995; Related Information: Is Part Of Petro-safe `95: 6. Annual environmental, safety and health conference and exhibition for the oil, gas and petrochemical industries. Book 1; PB: 590 p.
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Slick work: An analysis of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Oil spill prevention and response: How to comply with OPA and OSPRA