Natural Resource Damages – What’s Interim Loss and What’s it Worth?
Natural
resource damages (NRD) can be a result of man’s industrial
intrusion into the natural environment. Injuries to natural habitats can result from activities, such
as oil spills and hazardous substance releases. Under federal and
state laws, responsible parties are required to “remediate” the
contamination. However,
in the meantime the services
provided by the habitat (e.g., supporting wildlife or recreational
fishing) are disrupted until the habitat has recovered to
predisturbance, or baseline, conditions. This article briefly describes one of the interesting and less
intuitive aspects of NRD claims and the unique methodology for
valuation being utilized by trustees.
Under federal and state laws,[i]
natural resource trustees, who
include federal and state agencies and Indian tribes, can
seek compensation for NRD, including both the cost of resource
restoration as well as compensation for lost services. While calculating a restoration cost is reasonably
straight-forward, determining the cost of interim losses is often
harder to define.
Concepts
Behind Interim Loss
So what exactly is an interim loss and
how do you place a dollar value on it? When
a habitat is injured, some amount of biological service is lost.
For example, imagine lead from decades of mining activity has
contaminated river sediments and reduced the number of worms and
insect larva the sediment can support by 80 percent. This in turn reduces the number of fish that feed off the
worms and larva, which reduces the number of fish that can be eaten
by other animals or caught by fishermen. Under statutory requirements,
interim loss is the service lost from the time of the injury until
restoration is complete.
Valuation
of Interim Loss
Regulations required that cost recoveries for interim losses be
spent on compensatory restoration (i.e., actions that provide
resources and services equivalent to those lost). In the mid-1990s, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, one of many natural
resource trustees,
began promoting the use of habitat equivalency analysis (HEA)[ii]
to calculate interim losses and determine the amount of restoration
required. In recent
years, HEA has grown in popularity and has come to be used by
trustees at a wide range of sites. However, for a lay person, HEA can be hard to understand
because it quantifies interim losses in terms of ecological
services rather than dollars.
In addition, a discount factor must be
applied to make past and future losses and/or gains comparable. The regulatory guidance recommends use of a 3 percent discount
factor and an HEA states the resulting ecological service (loss or
gain) in terms of discounted service acre-years (DSAYs). Thus, if a compensation project will provide services for a
long period of time (300 years) and the interim loss occurred over a
relatively short period of time (15 years), then the area required
for compensation will be smaller than the original injured area. Also, because the value of future benefits/costs is
discounted, restoration that occurs well after an injury is worth
less in present-value terms than restoration that occurred shortly
after impact.
Practical
Issues
The value of HEA is that it allows for multiple types of habitat
injury to be quantified in an equivalent manner.With DSAYs as the “currency,” multiple service losses can
be directly added and compared to potential gains in the enhancement
of another habitat.Still,
the question remains what is a DSAY worth in dollars?The quick answer is it depends because DSAY costs can often
vary from one restoration project to the next.
Consider our earlier example of contaminated river sediment and
assume that the natural resource trustees have used a HEA and determined that the
interim habitat losses equal 1000 DSAYs. Also, assume that liability for doing restoration projects to
offset these losses is divided equally between three potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) and one orphan share. The first two PRPs respond quickly and find restoration
projects that are easily implemented and provide enough DSAYs to
offset their liability at a cost of $5,000 per DSAY. However, the third PRP takes longer to identify an
appropriate project, which turns out to be harder to implement for
the same DSAY value and costs $10,000 per DSAY. Then, several years later one of the PRPs is assigned the
orphan share. Now, all
of the restoration projects in the immediate area have been
completed and the PRP is forced to look elsewhere. They identify a project whose value is substantially less per
acre that the original injured habitat and is also more difficult to
implement. As a result,
their cost per DSAY climbs to $50,000.
As the above example suggests, by using HEA to value interim
losses, natural resource trustees
have changed the NRD negotiation from one that is about money to one
that is about ecological services. While this approach helps trustees to move forward more
quickly with restoration, it has also resulted in a great deal of
uncertainty for PRPs as to what their potential future NRD costs
will be. Johnson Wright
works nationally with our client to guide them through the process
and resolve NRD claims. For a more
detailed discussion of this topic or other NRD issues, please
contact the author.
For more information, please contact
Alborz Wozniak at 925-403-6200.
[i] Federal laws that provide
for collection of natural resource damages include the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the
Oil
Pollution Act (OPA), and
the Clean Water Act (CWA). Many states have laws based on a public trust doctrine
that allows for natural resource recovery.
[ii]Habitat Equivalency
Analysis: An Overview, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Silver Spring, MD, 2000.