Delaware Reservoirs’ Drought Risk Assessment: A Paleo View

The Delaware River provides half of New York City's drinking water, is a habitat for wild trout, American shad and the federally endangered dwarf wedge mussel. It has suffered four 100‐year floods in the last seven years. A drought during the 1960s stands as a warning of the potential vulnerability of the New York City area to severe water shortages if a similar drought were to recur. The water releases from three New York City dams on the Delaware River's headwaters impact not only the reliability of the city’s water supply, but also the potential impact of floods, and the quality of the aquatic habitat in the upper river. The goal of this work is to influence the Delaware River water release policies (FFMP/OST) to further benefit river habitat and fisheries without increasing New York City's drought risk, or the flood risk to down basin residents. The Delaware water release policies are constrained by the dictates of two US Supreme Court Decrees (1931 and 1954) and the need for unanimity among four states: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware ‐‐ and New York City. Coordination of their activities and the operation under the existing decrees is provided by the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC). Questions such as the probability of the system approaching drought state based on the current FFMP plan and the severity of the 1960s drought are addressed using long record paleo‐reconstructions of flows. For this study, we developed reconstructed total annual flows (water year) for 3 reservoir inflows using regional tree rings going back upto 1754 (a total of 246 years). The reconstructed flows are used with a simple reservoir model to quantify droughts. We observe that the 1960s drought is by far the worst drought based on 246 years of simulations (since 1754).

Os efeitos Delaware e Groningen: um estudo quantitativo por elementos finitos

Os efeitos Delaware e Groningen são dois tipos de anomalia que afetam ferramentas de eletrodos para perfilagem de resistividade. Ambos os efeitos ocorrem quando há uma camada muito resistiva, como anidrita ou halita, acima do(s) reservatório(s), produzindo um gradiente de resistividade muito similar ao produzido por um contato óleo-água. Os erros de interpretação produzidos têm ocasionado prejuízos consideráveis à indústria de petróleo. A PETROBRÁS, em particular, tem enfrentado problemas ocasionados pelo efeito Groningen sobre perfis obtidos em bacias paleozóicas da região norte do Brasil. Neste trabalho adaptamos, com avanços, uma metodologia desenvolvida por LOVELL (1990), baseada na equação de Helmholtz para H_Φ, para modelagem dos efeitos Delaware e Groningen. Solucionamos esta equação por elementos finitos triangulares e retangulares. O sistema linear gerado pelo método de elementos finitos é resolvido por gradiente bi-conjugado pré-condicionado, sendo este pré-condicionador obtido por decomposição LU (Low Up) da matriz de stiffness. As voltagens são calculadas por um algoritmo, mais preciso, recentemente desenvolvido. Os perfis são gerados por um novo algoritmo envolvendo uma sucessiva troca de resistividade de subdomínios. Este procedimento permite obter cada nova matriz de stiffness a partir da anterior pelo cálculo, muito mais rápido, da variação dessa matriz. Este método permite ainda, acelerar a solução iterativa pelo uso da solução na posição anterior da ferramenta. Finalmente geramos perfis sintéticos afetados por cada um dos efeitos para um modelo da ferramenta Dual Laterolog.

The Future Direction of Delaware Law (Including a Brief Exegesis on Fee Shifting Bylaws)

Delaware sets the governance standards for most public companies. The ability to attract corporations could not be explained solely by the existence of a favorable statutory regime. Delaware was not invariably the first or the only state to implement management friendly provisions. Given the interpretive gaps in the statute and the critical importance of the common law in the governance process, courts played an outsized role in setting legal standards. The management friendly nature of the Delaware courts contributed significantly to the state’s attraction to public corporations. A current example of a management friendly trend in the case law had seen the recent decisions setting out the board’s authority to adopt bylaws under Section 109 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL), particularly those involving the shifting of fees in litigation against the corporation or its directors. The DGCL allows bylaws that address “the business of the corporation, the conduct of its affairs, and its rights or powers or the rights or powers of its stockholders, directors, officers or employees.” The broad parameters are, however, subject to limits. Bylaws cannot be inconsistent with the certificate of incorporation or “the law.” Law includes the common law. The Delaware courts have used the limitations imposed by “the law” to severely restrict the reach of shareholder inspired bylaws. The courts have not used the same principles to impose similar restraints on bylaws adopted by the board of directors. This can be seen with respect to bylaws that restrict or even eliminate the right of shareholders to bring actions against management and the corporation. In ATP Tour, Inc. v. Deutscher Tennis Bund the court approved a fee shifting bylaw that had littl relationship to the internal affairs of the corporation. The decision upheld the bylaw as facially valid.The decision ignored a number of obvious legal infirmities. Among other things, the decision did not adequately address the requirement in Section 109(b) that bylaws be consistent with “the law.” The decision obliquely acknowledged that the provisions would “by their nature, deter litigation” but otherwise made no effort to assess the impact of this deterrence on shareholders causes of action. The provision in fact had the practical effect of restricting, if not eliminating, litigation rights granted by the DGCL and the common law. Perhaps most significantly, however, the bylaws significantly limited common law rights of shareholders to bring actions against the corporation and the board. Given the high dismissal rates for these actions, fee shifting bylaws imposed a meaningful risk of liability on plaintiffs. Moreover, because judgments in derivative suits were paid to the corporation, shareholders serving as plaintiffs confronted the risk of liability without any offsetting direct benefit. By preventing suits in this area, the bylaw effectively insulated the behavior of boards from legal challenge. The ATP decision was poorly reasoned and overstepped acceptable boundaries. The management friendly decision threatened the preeminent role of Delaware in the development of corporate law. The decision raised the specter of federal intervention and the potential for meaningful competition from the states. Because the opinion examined the bylaw in the context of non-stock companies, the reasoning may remain applicable only to those entities and never make the leap to for-profit stock corporations. Nonetheless, the analysis reflects a management friendly approach that does not adequately take into account the impact of the provision on the rights of shareholders.

Staying in the Delaware Corporate Governance Lane: Fee Shifting Bylaws and a Legislative Reaffirmation of the Rules of the Road

The Delaware legislature has taken steps towards the adoption of amendments to the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) that would prohibit fee shifting provisions in the articles and bylaws. The language in the legislative proposal, however, addresses fee shifting provisions only in the context of "internal corporate claims." Some have raised concerns that this language would allow for fee shifting provisions that applied to other types of actions, including at least some cases brought under the securities laws. This piece suggests that in fact the Delaware General Corporation Law already prohibits the adoption of bylaws and certificate provisions that apply to causes of action unrelated to internal corporate claims. As a result, there was no reason for the Delaware legislature to expressly bar fee shifting provisions in these types of actions.

Notes of proceedings and cases determined in the high court of errors and appeals, the court of chancery, and the orphans court of the state of Delaware, 1792-1832

Contains summaries of cases heard by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Appeals Court in the counties of Sussex, Kent, and Newcastle covering a variety of legal topics. Supposedly based on Wilson's Red Book.