Regulatory Assessment, Vessel and Facility Response Plans: 2003 Mechanical Response CAPS, and Dispersant and In Situ Burning Measures

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Technical Reference Center2001PDFTech ReportDyer, MichaelCasey, LeoCrawford, DavidJohn A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (U.S.)United States. Coast Guard. Marine Safety and Environmental ProtectionJohn A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (U.S.)United StatesRegulationsEvaluation and assessmentOil spill cleanupDispersersBenefit cost analysisAlternatives analysisOPA 90regulatory assessmentspill resonsespill response planmechanical recoveryin situ burningThe costs and benefits of five proposed regulatory alternatives developed by the U.S. Coast Guard for the OPA 90 2003 vessel and facility oil spil response plan rulemaking are assessed. The analysis is based upon the Volpe Center Programmatic Regulatory Assessment Accounting Model (PRAAM), originally developed for 11 selected core rules of OPA 90, and incorporates an industry cost survey, an expert panel for quantification of estimated benefits, and spill history and projection input data pre-processed to account for geographically specific requirements in the regulatory alternatives. PRAAM output for these purposes is dollars (cost) and volume of oil recovered or treated (benefit), both in total present value (TPV), year 1996, for consistency with earlier PRAAM results. Costs and benefit results are also expressed in total present value, year 2000, as are the results of the small business and paperwork burden analyses.119