Resolving Conflict in Applying the Washington State Natural Resource Damage Assessment Compensation Schedule-Spill Volume Determination in the Absence of Volumetric Methods

Abstract

ABSTRACT Many jurisdictions rely upon compensation formulae for environmental damages caused by oil spills in lieu of protracted in situ studies. Formulae often rely on quantity and physical properties of the oil. The State of Washington Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) compensation schedule is primarily based on quantity spilled. The quantity spilled is multiplied by relative values or scaling factors related to general environmental effect and habitat vulnerability indices. Using the formula, a range of $l–$50 dollars per gallon is possible. Spill volume estimation is therefore an important and sometimes controversial issue, especially when spilled volumes are not quantifiable by conventional volumetric methods. While methods of estimating spilled oil from recovery equipment, on the water, and along the shoreline are available, quantifying oil that may be bound to items in the waste stream presents many challenges and must address difficulties such as evaporative oil loss, water bound to recovered materials, varied types of absorbent materials and oiled debris among others. Attempts to quantify recovered oil from the M/V Nosac Forest (1993), Tosco Ferndale (1997), and M/V Anadyr (1998) oil spills yielded reasonable but uncertain results. Questions remain with respect to the accuracy of oil recovery estimates and the cost-effectiveness of the approach. Utilizing assumptions is necessary in any oil volume estimation technique and can be the basis for contention. However, utilizing a collaborative investigative process, where both state and responsible party investigators participate, can alleviate many potential concerns. While uncertainty remains, a collaborative process can lead to consensus and a cost-effective approach to spilled-oil estimation techniques in the absence of conventional volumetric methods.