§ 25-21,254.Legislative intent.
Article 21: Special Proceedings and Actions · Last amended 1998 · Last verified July 22, 2026
Full Text of § 25-21,254
Source
Laws 1998, LB 395, § 1.
Plain-English Summary
Section 25-21,254 opens the group of sections that give Nebraska’s environmental self-audits a measure of protection, and it explains the thinking behind that protection before laying out any rule. The Legislature found that protecting the environment improves when the public voluntarily complies with environmental requirements, and that the public benefits when businesses and individuals have an incentive to identify and remedy environmental compliance problems on their own.
From that finding, the Legislature declared a public interest in encouraging voluntary compliance reviews. It planned to do that in two ways: by giving limited protection to what an environmental audit turns up, and by giving fair treatment to those who report audit findings to the agencies that regulate them. Those two commitments become the operative rules in the sections that follow — the evidentiary privilege in section 25-21,256 and its surrounding provisions, and the voluntary-disclosure protections in sections 25-21,260 and 25-21,261.
Like the equine liability intent section earlier in this chapter, this section does not itself create a privilege, an immunity, or a procedure. It supplies the policy rationale a court can draw on when interpreting the sections that do.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does this section create a legal protection by itself?
Why does Nebraska protect voluntary environmental audits?
The Legislature found that the public benefits when people voluntarily comply with environmental requirements and have an incentive to find and fix compliance problems on their own, rather than waiting for a regulator to find them first.
What does the Legislature mean by “fair treatment” of those who report audit findings?
Why would a business conduct a voluntary environmental audit if it is not legally required?
The sections that follow give a properly prepared, confidential audit a measure of protection from being used as evidence, and give a business that discloses and corrects what the audit finds a path to avoid civil penalties.
Does a court have to follow this stated intent when applying the later sections?
The stated findings and intent inform how a court reads the operative provisions, though the specific rules — including the privilege, its exceptions, and the disclosure requirements — are set out in the sections that follow.