More

HuffPost Social Reading

BP Oil Spill Trial Nears, Company Faces Billions In Fines

AP    
First Posted: 02/25/2012 9:14 am Updated: 02/25/2012 2:07 pm

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — On the cusp of a trial over the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, phalanxes of lawyers, executives and public officials have spent the waning days in settlement talks. Holed up in small groups inside law offices, war rooms and hotel suites in New Orleans and Washington, they are trying to put a number on what BP and its partners in the doomed Macondo well project should pay to make up for the worst offshore spill in U.S. history.

It is a complex equation, and the answer is proving elusive.

The federal government, Gulf states, plaintiffs' attorneys, BP PLC, rig owner Transocean Ltd. and cementer Halliburton Energy Services Inc. have been in simultaneous and separate negotiations in New Orleans, according to a person with direct knowledge of the talks and others who had been briefed on them.

Trial is set for Monday, and by Friday, no deal had been reached, several people familiar with the negotiations told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. The biggest stumbling block appeared to be the sheer size and sprawling uncertainty over the unprecedented dollar amounts at stake.

Financial analysts estimate BP's potential settlement payout at $15 billion to roughly $30 billion. The company itself estimated it would cost about $41 billion in the weeks after the explosion to account for all of its costs, including cleanup, compensating businesses, and paying fines and ecological damage.

"This one is off the charts in terms of size and significance," said Eric Schaeffer, the director of the Environmental Integrity Project in Washington and former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Regulatory Enforcement.

BP has to weigh its chances of getting off cheaper by piecing together a sweeping settlement or put its fate in the hands of one man, a federal judge who will hear testimony in lieu of a jury. If the judge sides with plaintiffs on the amount of oil spilled and determines BP was grossly negligent, the company conceivably could face up to $52 billion in environmental fines and compensation alone, according to an AP analysis.

While such a scenario is unlikely, it illustrates the broad range and staggering sums at play.

No matter what, the case is all but guaranteed to set records as the most expensive environmental disaster in history, far surpassing the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaskas in 1989. Exxon ultimately settled with the U.S. government for $1 billion, which would be about $1.8 billion today.

If BP settles, it's almost certain to dwarf previous deals the U.S. has reached with corporate offenders in any industry. That record now stands at $2.3 billion against Pfizer Inc. in 2009 to settle claims over the painkiller Bextra, according to the Justice Department.

And once the civil case is resolved, depending on the scope of any settlement, BP still could face criminal fines; penalties for violations of oil pollution, clean water and wildlife protection laws; and still-pending economic losses due to the partial shutdown of the Gulf. Morgan Stanley analysts estimated criminal fines would come in between $5 billion and $15 billion in any eventual settlement.

Robert Wiygul, an environmental lawyer in New Orleans who represents spill plaintiffs but is not involved in the settlement talks, said putting a dollar figure on what is the right sum for BP to pay is extremely difficult.

"There is going to be a lot of voodoo there," he said.

The bill will be commensurate to the magnitude of the disaster: An epic engineering failure that highlighted the dangers of drilling in extreme conditions miles (kilometers) from shore and miles (kilometers) under water.

The April 20, 2010, blowout of BP's deepwater Macondo well killed 11 workers and injured 17. The burning drilling rig Deepwater Horizon toppled and sank to the Gulf floor, where it sits today.

It took engineers 85 days to permanently cap the well. By then, more than 200 million gallons (757 million liters) of oil had leaked from the well and covered much of the northern half of the Gulf of Mexico — endangering fisheries, killing marine life and shutting down offshore oil drilling operations.

About 900 miles (1,450 kilometers) of shoreline were fouled and beaches were closed for months. The spill forced President Barack Obama in June 2010 to make his first Oval Office speech, in which he called the BP spill "the worst environmental disaster the nation has ever faced."

Under the Clean Water Act, which is designed to punish companies and prevent future spills, a polluter pays a minimum of $1,100 per barrel of spilled oil; the fines nearly quadruple for companies found guilty of grossly negligent behavior. Under this statute, BP could owe $5 billion to $21 billion. Transocean and Anadarko Petroleum Corp., a minority owner of the Macondo well, also face paying hefty fines.

One of the biggest questions facing U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier, a maritime law expert presiding over the trial, will be to determine if BP was guilty of gross negligence.

Under the Oil Pollution Act, companies must pay to restore what they fouled. Based on criteria from what Exxon paid after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, BP could pay about $31 billion, or $148 per gallon, to cover the ecosystem damage to the Gulf. Exxon paid $900 million for 11 million gallons (41.6 million liters) of spilled oil, or about $81 per gallon. Adjusted for inflation, that's $148 per gallon.

Experts said Barbier will weigh a number of factors in determining what BP should pay to restore damaged natural resources, and BP's liability under the Oil Pollution Act could be much higher or much lower than what Exxon paid per gallon.

BP likely will argue that it should be much lower because it has spent billions on cleanup already and provided $1 billion for early ecosystem restoration. It's also likely the company will argue the spill's effects were minimized by the Gulf's warm waters, oil-eating bacteria and other factors.

The company also likely will argue that the Gulf has been soiled by past spills and natural oil seeps, making it hard to pinpoint what is BP damage and what isn't, said Mark Davis, a Tulane University law professor who specializes in water resources.

State and federal lawyers are likely to argue that the damage was extensive and that the Gulf's marine environment is more varied and rich than even that of Prince William Sound, where the Exxon Valdez went aground.

Beyond that, there are more than 110,000 people and businesses — among them large fishing and hotel operations — who have not settled with BP and have outstanding claims against the company. Technically, people have until April 20, 2013, to file claims against BP, which committed to pay $20 billion to cover damage claims and so far has spent about $7 billion.

What makes this trial so good for plaintiffs — and a nightmare for BP, Halliburton and Transocean — is that the spill was a chronicle of corporate failures. Federal investigators have concluded cost-cutting by BP and shoddy work by all three companies caused the blowout.

"It's the perfect case for plaintiffs' lawyers," said Blaine LeCesne, a tort law specialist at Loyola University New Orleans who's analyzed the case. "They have everything to gain by going to trial."

While the settlement haggling stretches through the weekend, the hundreds of lawyers who have come to New Orleans are primed for battle.

Garret Graves, an aide to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and a member of a federal and state council assessing damage from the spill, was adamant that any last-minute settlement in the price range of $20 billion would let BP off too easily.

"We're not going to sell short the citizens and we're not going to let BP walk away," Graves said.

Mike Brock, a BP trial lawyer, said BP was ready to prove "that no single action, person or party was the sole cause of the blowout."

At trial, BP will try to spread blame to the other companies and try to convince the judge that what happened at the Macondo well was an accident, not an act of gross negligence or willful misconduct.

"How culpable was BP? How bad were they? How bad was the violation and how sloppy was their conduct?" said Schaeffer, the former EPA official. "There are risks for both sides, but they are significantly greater for BP. They don't want this potential of billions of dollars hanging over them."

___

Associated Press writers Michael Kunzelman in New Orleans and Harry R. Weber in Atlanta contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — On the cusp of trial over the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, phalanxes of lawyers, executives and public officials have spent the waning days in settlement tal...
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — On the cusp of trial over the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, phalanxes of lawyers, executives and public officials have spent the waning days in settlement tal...
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — On the cusp of trial over the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, phalanxes of lawyers, executives and public officials have spent the waning days in settlement tal...
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — On the cusp of trial over the catastrophic 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, phalanxes of lawyers, executives and public officials have spent the waning days in settlement tal...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 42
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l monroe
I question authority.
12:25 PM on 02/27/2012
The frightening thing is they are culpable and will get out of it. they failed to purchase the correct internal lubricants and then pushed the rig on anyway. Deep water sands are 10X more expensive than land based sands. They were hoping the newer metals were enough to protect the rig.
12:47 AM on 02/27/2012
A frightening realization is the oil companies will drill everywhere they want and natural gas is following in their footsteps. In fact, natural gas leases have existed for what I know to be 70 years and the companies have not raised the annual lease payment amount one red cent. Not one penny in 70 years with the right to expand wells on your property, blow off well salt water accumulation on your crops , ditch to run more lines, build pumping stations, roads to them and enter your property whenever they choose. What a shame a massive campaign isn't launched to inform the general public of the total lack of conscience and responsibility of these oil and gas companies and their false add campaigns to brainwash people into believing they are trying and will be stewards of the land and wildlife. Greed and gluttony will be the only rule the follow.
12:37 PM on 02/27/2012
Depends on if the people that owned your land sold the rights to what is under the land. Many people did because they got paid and why worry about somebody you might not even know. If you look at your deed you will find out if you have the Mineral rights or not. If some company owns the Mineral rights, they will only pay you for the damage they do to your land in getting their minerals out. Some Oil and Gas rights were sold over a hundred years ago. That is why you should look to see if you are getting the Mineral rights or not when you buy a piece of property.
FaceReality2
Democracy in the U.S. is an illusion
07:44 PM on 02/26/2012
The biggest crime was allowing BP, a company with the worst safety record in the industry, to operate in the Gulf at all. Apparently there is no way to keep them from operating wells or buying leases on federal lands.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Juan Carlos Mescalero
Free clues, no charge. You're welcome.
07:13 PM on 02/26/2012
How culpable? In one word. Very.
04:24 PM on 02/26/2012
Sure BP skimmed and cut corners to maximise profits for shareholders and should pay for their criminal negligence.

But remember the spill was also caused by lax regulation seldom enforced by regulators enjoying cozy relationships with the oil industry - all to satisfy America's insatiable need for loil which environmentalists have been warning for decades is dirty and dangerous, for which there have been technological alternatives to for years.

Make BP pay, but also realise this will happen again if America continues business as usual and also allows Republicans and big business to usurp sensible discussions on regulation, the environment and energy.
06:05 PM on 02/26/2012
Also, once the spill occurred there was no, zero technical expertise in the federal government for dealing with this issue because we refuse to fund any research under the absurd idea that "the industry is making so much money it should pay for research itself." This was drilling on federal land and the feds had no capability and had to rely on the industry, a very bad place to be. Chu had to call on one of our defense labs to help but it only had engineering, not deepwater expertise. We need to wake up and stop being punitive in our approach to research and realize there is a huge public interest in these activities. Hating the oil companies so much we don't develop adequate response capabilities is cutting off our noses to spite our faces. Really stupid and devoid of smart policy.
12:40 PM on 02/27/2012
Correct.
12:53 PM on 02/27/2012
Why would the government spend money on research that would never be used in most cases? Each drilling is different from any other. How would you decide when to spend the money for research from the 'safe' operations. This drilling had state of the art safeguards, but they were bypassed by the pressure of the oil flow, or by the shortcuts taken to save money. Anybody that has the technical expertise can make much more working for the Oil companies than for the government.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeanMartin
Everything in moderation.
04:09 PM on 02/26/2012
Even though they should share the blame, Halliburton and TransOcean were suppliers, with BP ultimately in charge. As such, this is BP's mess to clean up and no one else's. If it wants to go after Halliburton and TransOcean after the fact, that's its choice. But this was its rig and its oil. I doubt that it shares oil profits with these two, so why should it demand they pay part of the compensation?
06:01 PM on 02/26/2012
Not if there is joint and several liability, which would not absolve those in the supply chain. Those companies make a great deal of profit on their services, don't kid yourself. I think as much fault lies with Transocean as with BP.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeanMartin
Everything in moderation.
06:26 PM on 02/26/2012
I'm not saying anyone's absolved here. But BP should be looking at this alone, then slapping down TO and H in its own suits.
12:48 PM on 02/27/2012
Depends on the contracts that they all signed. I am sure that BP would not take all the risk on a drilling rig that they did not have people on. They may inspect the operation, but the risks would be by TransOcean since they owned the rig and paid the people running it. The main costs should be bourn by the company that made the cut-off valve that did not work. Also would depend on if the valve was actually designed for the conditions it was used for. BP is the company that has the deeper pockets so they will pay the most, since they can and it will not distroy the company. Otherwise you distroy the company and get no money.
03:19 PM on 02/26/2012
Interesting article & posts. In another, today, President Obama has been blaemd by some for being responsible for the rising gas prices "because of too much regulation" and demanding that the oil companies be allowed to drill for oil regardless of environmental issues etc. I wonder what some of them will say to this article. It's a very small thin line between success and expensive lawsuits........
08:53 PM on 02/26/2012
Sh$# Happens.
02:51 PM on 02/26/2012
So BP faces 15-30 billion in fines and the banks that tanked the economy settle for 25 billion??? Something isn't right
08:54 PM on 02/26/2012
Yhe banks got rewarded
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Max Load
Bailouts subvert survival of the fittest.
12:42 PM on 02/27/2012
25 billion was the "estimated" cost of TARP to AIG alone. Total costs exceeded $300B.

See this from the CBO: http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/new/12-16-11-TARP_infographic.png
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:26 AM on 02/26/2012
Apparently fisherman have been reporting finding fresh oil in the gulf, and this has been also confirmed by scientists. Apparently, the well that was supposedly capped, was one that was never actually hit pay-dirt, therefore wasn't actually in operation. There is speculation that there was a third well which BP hasn't disclosed (and I think drilled illegally) in which they cannot stop the leak. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this needs to be looked into.

Matt Simmons (worlds top energy investor) was crying foul about this and wound up dead from a heart attack.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
11:30 AM on 02/26/2012
The well that was capped was definitely capped and had been previously pouring out oil: unless the video of the flow of oil stopping was actually filmed in a tank in Burbank.

Two potential interception wells drilled, one as a back-up. Only one was used.

There is little reason to return to that reservoir - a large fraction of its contents likely escaped into the sea, probably 20-30 billions dollars worth of oil, and the rest of the reservoir is likely to be reduced in lifetime by water penetrating the oil during the un-controlled release.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:17 PM on 02/26/2012
According to experts, the amount of oil that had spilled was so high that there was no plausible way that it could've come from where BP was claiming. It simply wasn't physically possible. I literally just came across this yesterday and need to do much research.
10:25 AM on 02/26/2012
I'm disappointed that there is no jail time being considered for the criminal charges.  People died in the explosion of the rig.  Whoever was responsible needs to face jail time.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
11:34 AM on 02/26/2012
Criminal charges must await full and complete investigation. The US Chemical Safety Board investigation is still ongoing.

I wouldn't hold your breathe though - the mix of parties involved is probably too complicated to be able to convict beyond reasonable doubt.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeanMartin
Everything in moderation.
04:11 PM on 02/26/2012
Ever read Dickens' "Bleak House"?

That's how this will play out.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thegreenhornet
civil rights lawyer
07:22 AM on 02/26/2012
Over the past 45 years of practicing law as a civil rights attorney I have watched as our curt systemn has fallen prey to the insurance industry and its ally in the destruction of the principle that all people are entitled to access to the courts, the Federalist Society. These regressive forces of nature have quietly assited in the "colonization" of the courts by federalist judges (those who are anti-individual and anti-government imposed regulations) who have slowly but surely eroded the protections afforded to individuals by civil rights legislation and tort law. They do so while all the while proclaiming their distatste for activits judges. Ironic, eh? Now the BP disaster. We have a system in place that unlike last century will protect BY and its insurance carrier from "attacks" by individuals. That is how the plaintiffs will be viewed. The plaintiff's lawyers will be viewed as gold diggers even though the defense lawyers have made millions defending these claims. Its was always ironic to me that when the time came for a plaintiff's lawyer who had won such a case to be awarded attorney fees, the defense would always scream it was unfair if the lawyers asked that they be paid the same amount eh defense was paid for losing the case. There was a wonderful line i teh movie 'Parenthood" uttered by Keanu Reaves about needing to get a license from the government to drive a car but anyone could have a child. The same holds true for
06:24 AM on 02/26/2012
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Americans With Disabilities Act, and prior Supreme Court cases, require that the new fund set up to compensate Plaintiff Steering Committee attorneys, that withhold 6% of settlements, as ordered by Judge Barbier, http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/OilSpill/OilSpill.htm BE JUSTIFICATION for these attorneys to provide extended representation to disabled claimants! Please bring this to the attention of others.
05:01 AM on 02/26/2012
The culpable ones are those who insist on cheap gas. Take a look at the Canada tar sands too.
Mochilero
Have backpack, will travel
01:23 AM on 02/26/2012
Do not forget. The Republican Party is implacably opposed to the regulation of private businesses and to environmental standards. They preach that the free market will protect us.
11:43 PM on 02/25/2012
Was it a BP well? If it was, they are responsible. Others might also be culpable for their role(s) in the disaster. Ultimately, the buck stops with whomever owns the well. And to the extent they tried to cover up, minimize, obfuscate or mislead the public, the US government, any agencies with oversight, their culpability multiplies.
02:09 AM on 02/26/2012
The "owner" of any well operation is a bit misleading. In general, operations have three main players. The client "BP", the owners of the rig "Transocean", and third party contract work"Haliburton and many many other companies." The client runs the well and the other parties serve them. For operations as technically challenging as te gulf, the client has the final say but also listens to what they are being told by others involved in the drilling operation.

Saying the above in the BP disaster, it is kind of like having your kid steal something without the parent's knowledge. The parent is responsible but had no control of their direct actions of their kid. A very simplified analogy I know but it came to mind so I wrote it. Matter of fact, I have to get back drilling now.
02:32 PM on 02/26/2012
I think in a court of law, the parent is ultimately held accountable financially if there are damages. In this case, there was plenty of damage, and plenty of culpable parties. They also conspired (in my opinion) to mislead the public and the government as to the extent of damage and the future effects of both the spill and their "remedies." BP, and its collaborators, ought to be held accountable, be made to pay the true cost of the damages, and be criminally prosecuted to the extent they violated laws. I do not expect any of the above to take place. Too many bribes and "incentives" have been paid and accepted.