Oil Pollution Act of 1990

1
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(OPA)
By Ryan Friedman
(OPA) was passed by the United States Congress to
prevent further oil spills from occurring in the
United States. It was made after the Exxon Valdez
oil spill. It stated that "A company cannot ship
oil into the United States until it presents a
plan to prevent spills that may occur. It must
also have a detailed containment and cleanup plan
in case of an oil spill emergency." The bill
enjoyed widespread support, passing the House 375
- 5 and the Senate by voice vote before
conference, and unanimously in both chambers
after conference.
2
HOMELAND SECURITY (National Act)

• On March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez spilled over
  11 million gallons of Alaskan crude into the
  water of Prince William Sound. There were many
  lessons learned the aftermath of the Valdez oil
  spill. Two of the most obvious were
• The United States lacked adequate resources,
  particularly Federal funds, to respond to spills,
  and
• The scope of damages compensable under federal
  law to those impacted by a spill was fairly
  narrow.
• Although the environmental damage and massive
  cleanup efforts were the most visible effects of
  this casualty, one of the most important outcomes
  was the enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of
  1990 (OPA), which addressed both these
  deficiencies.

3
OPA OVERVIEW

• The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
  2701-2761) amended the Clean Water Act and
  addressed the wide range of problems associated
  with preventing, responding to, and paying for
  oil pollution incidents in navigable waters of
  the United States. It created a comprehensive
  prevention, response, liability, and compensation
  regime to deal with vessel- and facility-caused
  oil pollution to U.S. navigable waters. OPA
  greatly increased federal oversight of maritime
  oil transportation, while providing greater
  environmental safeguards by
• Setting new requirements for vessel construction
  and crew licensing and manning,
• Mandating contingency planning,
• Enhancing federal response capability,
• Broadening enforcement authority,
• Increasing penalties,
• Creating new research and development programs,
• Increasing potential liabilities, and
• Significantly broadening financial responsibility
  requirements.