Mostly frequently, Seneca’s engagements have arisen in the context of major federal environmental statutes, such as the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (solid waste); the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund); the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (pesticides);  and regulations related to other environmental concerns, such as management of underground storage tanks. Seneca has also worked on mobile source enforcement cases, as well as some major oil spills and explosions.

Robert H. Fuhrman has over 30 years of experience performing analytical studies, including assessments of:

• The economic benefit a corporation, municipality, or individual may have obtained due to alleged noncompliance with environmental requirements;
• Entities’ and individuals’ ability to pay civil penalties and to afford necessary pollution control expenditures, including the costs of injunctive relief;
• Valuation of mitigation projects that may qualify for reductions in monetary fines; and
• Application of published regulatory agency civil penalty policies to case facts.

Mr. Fuhrman has worked on over 250 economic benefit cases and has performed ability to pay calculations in over 30 cases.  As a result, he is very familiar with the financial methods, computer models, and decision matrices that U.S. EPA uses to calculate:

• The economic benefit of alleged noncompliance (EPA’s “BEN” model);
• A corporation’s ability to pay civil penalties (its “ABEL” model) and similar models dealing with the financial capability of municipal entities, including sewage treatment plants, (“MUNIPAY’) and individuals (“INDIPAY”);
• The value of “supplemental environmental projects” that might be used to offset a portion of monetary penalties (EPA’s “PROJECT” model); and
• The “gravity” or “environmental harm” resulting from alleged violations pursuant to EPA’s statute-specific civil penalty policies.

His background includes an MBA from Harvard Business School; undergraduate training in economics (24 semester hours) and political science (27 semester hours) at Columbia College, of Columbia University; seven years of experience as an economist at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; three years as chief financial officer of a major trade association; 14 years in economic and financial consulting firms based in major U.S. metropolitan areas; and 20 years of experience as Principal and CEO of Seneca Economics and Environment, LLC.  He testified in court settings nine times, provided over 30 depositions, and authored over 30 articles, primarily on subjects related to the use of economics and corporate finance in environmental enforcement cases. While employed by EPA in Washington, D.C. from 1977 to 1983, Mr. Fuhrman served as an economist on the Agency’s Energy Policy Staff, acting chief of the Industrial Analysis Branch of the Economic Analysis Division, acting director of that division, and as a special assistant to the EPA Deputy Administrator.

Depending on client needs, Mr. Fuhrman may be assisted in individual engagements by highly regarded consultants, including an engineer who has worked for many years on environmental issues, and a financial analyst who has in-depth training and experience in corporate finance.

Mr. Fuhrman has written many standalone expert reports and provided significant assistance to attorneys in settlement negotiations.

---

Seneca’s team can provide a unique ability to assist defendants in understanding and in appropriately responding to major aspects of plaintiffs’ claims in environmental enforcement cases.

Selected Publications

• “Perspectives on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Treatment of Ability-to-Pay Cases,” Environmental Liability, Enforcement and Penalties Reporter, April 2009.   Click here.
  
• “Will Massey Energy Company Suffer Severe Penalties in Clean Water Act Case?”, Daily Environment Report, September 26, 2007; and reprinted in Environment Reporter, September 28, 2007.  Click here.
• “EPA’s Recent ‘Final Action’ on the BEN Model,” published in the November/ December 2005 issue of Trends, a bimonthly publication of the American Bar Association’s Section on Environment, Energy, and Resources.  Click here.
  
• “Explanation of Recent Settlement in U.S. v. Allegheny Ludlum” (co-authored with John Downie), published in two different Bureau of National Affairs’ publications, Daily Environment Report and Environment Reporter, both on April 29, 2005.   Click here.
• “U.S.  v. The New Portland Meadows Deviates from ‘BEN’ Methodology,” Environment Reporter, December 19, 2003.  Click here.
• “EPA’s Penalty Calculation Model Must Be Fairly and Fully Reviewed,” Legal Backgrounder (a publication of the Washington Legal Foundation), May 18, 2001.  Click here.

For a complete list of Robert H. Fuhrman’s publications, click here.