This concept was discussed in the preamble to 51 FR 27674, 27680 (August 1, 1986):

The rule takes into consideration existing common law rules for developing a theory of natural resource damages. A fundamental principle of the theory developed in the rule is that natural resource damages are compensatory, not punitive. CERCLA itself calls for compensatory rather than punitive damages. This principle is consistent with the common law, which disfavors punitive damages, and is basic to the theory underlying the common law of damages, which is that money can be used to provide substitutionary relief.

The money awarded as compensation using common law principles represents a rough measure that approximately represents the value of the thing that is lost. Rules have been developed by the courts for the measurement of damages so that cases can be resolved, and perhaps more importantly, settled in accordance with common law principles. Settlements become possible because the range of outcomes given a particular set of facts is predictable.

The mandate to establish regulations for the assessment of damages to natural resources included a mandate to develop methodologies that are based upon the best available procedures. This directive implies that compensatory damages were intended. The expensive and complex process of studying existing injury measurement and economic compensation techniques would have been unnecessary if punitive damages were intended. The procedures for determining punitive damages could have involved the simple publication of penalty fee tables.

Finally, it should be noted that a variety of criminal or other punitive statutes may apply to actions for which natural resource damages may be sought. Through those statutes, penalties may be sought where appropriate.