BP could face massive fines under Clean Water Act

[w.t. jouwstra]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Hij voelt kennelijk al nattigheid, getuige het navolgende bericht uit de
AEX van vandaag:

>>Barack Obama eist dat BP een garantiefonds opzet waaruit alle schade die
voortvloeit uit de olieramp betaald zal worden. De administratie van het
fonds zou in handen moeten komen van een onafhankelijke partij. Obama ligt
onder vuur dat hij te weinig doet aan de ramp en probeert nu de leiding
meer naar zich toe te trekken. BP zou de totale schade schatten op 3 tot 6
mrd dollar, volgens analisten zal het veel hoger uitvallen. BP overweegt
een fonds op te zetten dat gebruikt wordt voor de schoonmaakkosten. Verder
wordt verwacht dat het zal afzien van uitbetaling van het kwartaaldividend.
(FD, p.1 - Tel, p.15)<<

Groet,

Tjerk



-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-d66 at nic.surfnet.nl [mailto:owner-d66 at nic.surfnet.nl] Namens Cees
Binkhorst
Verzonden: maandag 14 juni 2010 7:24
Aan: 'Discussielijst over D66'
Onderwerp: Re: BP could face massive fines under Clean Water Act

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Dan zal Obama wel met een eigen variant van Actio Pauliana komen? ;)

Groet / Cees

On 06/13/2010 08:30 PM, w.t. jouwstra wrote:
> Cees,
> 
> Ik ga er vanuit dat de BP allang een SPV heeft ingericht voor het geval de
> schadeclaims uit de hand gaan lopen.
> 
> Groet,
> 
> Tjerk
> 
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-d66 at nic.surfnet.nl [mailto:owner-d66 at nic.surfnet.nl] Namens
Cees
> Binkhorst
> Verzonden: vrijdag 11 juni 2010 21:55
> Aan: Discussielijst over D66
> Onderwerp: BP could face massive fines under Clean Water Act
> 
> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
> 
> Twee verhalen samenvatten:
> 50.000 barrels m.i.v. 3 juni tot pakweg eind september = 6 miljoen barrels
> 19.000 barrels period 20 april-2june = 817.000 barrels
> basic fine is $1,100 per barrel
> gross negligence fine is $4,300 a barrel
> Clean Water Act fine may total $29,3 miljard negligence or $7,5miljard
> basic fine.
> 
> BP zal niet staan juichen, maar gaat er toch niet bankroet door.
> 
> Groet / Cees
> 
> PS. Als dit soort zaken bij de rechter komt is het eind van het liedje
> toch vaak een substantiele vermindering.
> PPS. Wat zou zo'n houding van Obama&Co. betekenen voor de relatie met
> andere oliemaatschappijen? Die gaan toch waarschijnlijk liever ergens
> anders werken?
> 
> Coast Guard Adjusts After Spill Estimate Rises Sharply
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/12spill.html
> By LIZ ROBBINS
> Published: June 11, 2010
> 
> The Coast Guard moved on Friday to cope with new, much larger estimates
> of the rate that oil is gushing from the damaged well in the Gulf of
> Mexico, and to press BP, the oil company responsible for the well, to
> adapt its plans to process the oil while continuing to try to cap the
well.
> 
> “We’re still dealing with the flow estimate, and we’re trying to refine
> those numbers,” Adm. Thad W. Allen said in a news conference on Friday
> morning. Referring to BP’s proposals for handling the oil, Admiral Allen
> said, “We’re reconciling to see if the plan they have given us meets the
> requirements.”
> 
> A government panel of scientists released findings on Thursday saying
> that before the stricken well’s riser pipe was cut on June 3, a step
> needed to fit a containment cap over the leak, crude oil was being
> released at a rate of 25,000 to 30,000 barrels a day. That range was a
> substantial increase from the panel’s previous estimate of 12,000 to
> 19,000 barrels daily, which in turn far exceeded the early 5,000-barrel
> figure that BP and the Coast Guard used for weeks after the accident.
> 
> Admiral Allen said that BP’s latest assessment included a plan to handle
> between 40,000 and 50,000 barrels a day of recovered oil, taking account
> of the possibility that cutting the riser pipe increased the flow rate,
> as BP officials warned it could.
> 
> Admiral Allen said that the next step for the team of scientists would
> be to put sensors at the seabed to more accurately measure the pressure
> and verify the volume coming from the well.
> 
> For now, the Coast Guard has two vessels at the scene of the stricken
> well, about 50 miles off the Louisiana coast, to collect oil from the
> containment cap and process it. One, the Discoverer Enterprise, can
> handle up to 18,000 barrels a day, Admiral Allen said, while the other,
> the Q4000, will be able by next week to process up to 10,000 barrels
daily.
> 
> Between them, they could almost manage the top end of the new range of
> estimates, if the cap succeeds in capturing all the gushing oil, though
> some scientists think the true flow rate may be even higher.
> 
> The Coast Guard has asked BP to bring in another vessel that could
> process another 10,000 barrels of oil a day, so the capacity may reach
> 38,000 barrels a day by the end of June.
> 
> In July, BP plans to replace these three vessels and its current
> structure with a system that would both provide more capacity - up to
> 50,000 barrels a day - and be more easily disconnected in case of a
> hurricane or other severe weather.
> 
> So far, the government has spent $130 million to $140 million on the
> cleanup costs, drawn from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, Admiral
> Allen said on Friday; that figure excludes what BP has spent, he said.
> 
> BP has spent $1.4 billion thus far in cleanup and compensation, Raymond
> Dempsey, the Vice President of Strategy for BP America, told a Senate
> hearing on Thursday. The question of trust between the Obama
> administration and BP, and specifically its chief executive, Tony
> Hayward, was raised yet again in Friday’s news conference.
> 
> “We have to have a cooperative, productive relationship for this thing
> to work moving forward,” the admiral said. “When I talk to him and ask
> for answers, I get them. You could characterize that as trust,
> partnership, cooperation, collaboration, or whatever. But this has to be
> a unified effort moving forward if we’re going to get this thing
solved.”
> 
> For days, President Obama’s advisers have fended off questions about why
> he has not spoken directly with Mr. Hayward. Admiral Allen wrote on
> Thursday to the chairman of BP’s board, Carl-Henric Svanberg, requesting
> that he and “any appropriate officials from BP” meet with administration
> officials next Wednesday in Washington. Mr. Obama would participate in
> part of the meeting, he wrote.
> 
> On Friday, Admiral Allen said that BP had responded positively but had
> not said specifically whether Mr. Hayward himself would take part. “We
> want it to be a very focused meeting,” the admiral said. “We want to
> come out with some measurable outcomes related to advancing the issues
> both BP and the administration have.”
> 
> Administration officials suggested that they had no immediate plans to
> directly block BP from paying its quarterly dividend in July, even as
> the White House and its allies continued to press the company to make
> paying spill-related claims its top financial priority.
> 
> Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, told reporters that BP should not pay
> stockholders a dividend until the company had reimbursed small-business
> owners along the gulf for their loss claims. Representative Edward J.
> Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of one committee
> investigating the spill, suggested that the government would take action
> to block the payments if necessary.
> 
> “This company, I think, will stay solvent,” Mr. Markey said. “And
we’re
> going to make sure that the shareholders wait until the victims are paid
> first.”
> 
> A BP executive said the company could eventually decide to alter future
> dividends, either by halting or cutting them, deferring them, or paying
> them in shares, but no decision would need to be made until late July.
> The executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the
> company had not made a public announcement about the deliberations over
> the dividend, added that the situation was very fluid.
> =================================================
> BP could face massive fines under Clean Water Act
> http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/04/95376/bp-could-face-massive-fines-
> under.html
> Posted on Friday, June 4, 2010
> 
>    WASHINGTON - If the Obama administration is serious about holding BP
> and others responsible for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, it can start
> with the federal Clean Water Act, which could allow the federal
> government to collect as much as $4.7 billion in civil fines just for
> the oil that's spilled so far.
> 
> Even if the courts allow the fines, however, there are no guarantees
> that the money would go to the cleanup and economic recovery of the Gulf
> Coast, according to legal experts.
> 
> Though other laws could come into play, the Clean Water Act may provide
> the best avenue for legal action. After the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in
> Alaska, the law was beefed up to include harsh civil and criminal
> penalties for oil spills.
> 
> Since 1985, one general discharge permit has covered all offshore oil
> operations in the Gulf; individual site-by-site discharge permits aren't
> issued. A company that wants to operate in the Gulf applies for coverage
> under the general permit.
> 
> The permit covers everything from drilling fluids to bilge water, but
> there are only passing references to oil discharges such as those in a
> spill. The permit bars the discharge of "free oil," but its emphasis is
> on other pollutants.
> 
> Even so, the permit could become the underpinning for lawsuits because,
> among other things, it bars discharges of benzene, naphthalene, arsenic,
> mercury and other toxic chemicals that could be found in the crude oil.
> 
> In addition, the permit discourages the use of dispersants because they
> can "disperse and emulsify oil, thereby increasing the toxicity." BP
> already has used thousands of gallons of dispersants.
> 
> "Failure to comply with the permit is a violation of the Clean Water
> Act," said Tracy Hester, the director of the University of Houston's
> Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Center. "It would be the
> foundation of any enforcement action. There are tons of lawyers looking
> at this."
> 
> Attorney General Eric Holder visited the Gulf Coast last week and said
> the Obama administration was prepared to pursue legal action - civil and
> criminal - against those responsible for the spill.
> 
> Environmental groups want to keep the pressure on Holder to act. They've
> notified BP that they intend to file several lawsuits under the Clean
> Water Act, which allows citizen lawsuits and requires 60 days' notice of
> the intent to sue.
> 
> In a certified letter to Andrew Inglis, the chief executive of BP
> Exploration and Production, three environmental groups charged that the
> company violated the discharge permit.
> 
> "The general permit does not authorize the discharge of oil from this
> pipe or any other sources at the rig," Joel Waltzer, a New Orleans
> attorney for the Gulf Restoration Network, the Louisiana Environmental
> Action Network and Environment America, said in the letter to Inglis.
> 
> The groups also allege that BP violated the permit by failing to
> properly "operate and maintain" the rig at all times and failing to
> install flow measurement devices to track the flow of oil from the pipe.
> 
> "Obviously this has been a violation of the permit," Waltzer said in a
> phone interview.
> 
> Waltzer said he was surprised that a single blanket permit covered all
> oil drilling operations in the Gulf.
> 
> "If you stuck something the size of the Deepwater Horizon on land, it
> would definitely require its own permit," Waltzer said, adding that even
> though the permit was updated regularly it didn't envision ultra-deep
> wells such as the one the Deepwater Horizon was drilling or the
> possibility of a massive oil spill.
> 
> Waltzer said he still hoped that the Environmental Protection Agency,
> the Coast Guard and the Justice Department would take the lead in
> pursing legal action.
> 
> "This is a backstop," Waltzer said of the groups' notice to sue. "If
> they drop the ball, we will pick it up."
> 
> The Center for Biological Diversity also has notified BP and Transocean
> Ltd., which owned the Deepwater Horizon, of its plan to sue under the
> Clean Water Act. In its letter, the Tucson, Ariz.-based group alleged
> that BP had violated the oil spill provision in the law and provisions
> of the discharge permit.
> 
> "The government probe is a start, but it has taken far too long to get
> rolling," said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director for the Center for
> Biological Diversity.
> 
> EPA officials referred questions about possible legal action under the
> Clean Water Act to the Justice Department.
> 
> "We are looking for possible violations of the law," Andrew Ames, a
> Justice Department spokesman, said in an e-mail, adding that he couldn't
> discuss the timing of a possible case. "Each case is unique."
> 
> The Clean Water Act allows the U.S. to seek civil fines for every drop
> of oil that's spilled into the nation's navigable waters. Under the act,
> the basic fine is $1,100 per barrel spilled.
> 
> If a judge finds that the spill was a result of gross negligence, the
> fines can rise to $4,300 a barrel. Gross negligence has been defined as
> highly reckless disregard.
> 
> The civil fines would be on top of any criminal fines. BP also owes
> economic damages, which are capped at $75 million. The company has said
> it will pay all "legitimate" economic claims it receives even if they
> exceed the cap.
> 
> Some experts have estimated that BP could face up to $10 billion in
> liabilities.
> 
> "Who knows how this will play out?" said Oliver Houck, a Tulane
> University law professor who specializes in environmental law.
> 
> Houck said BP and others faced exposure from the families of the 11 oil
> rig workers who were killed and possible administrative, civil and
> criminal fines along with reimbursing the government for the cost of the
> response to the spill.
> 
> If the government does collect civil fines, Houck said, he's not sure
> where the money would go.
> 
> "I don't know if it goes in a compulsory fund or not," he said. "I doubt
> it."
> 
> The University of Houston's Hester agreed.
> 
> "The question is where do the penalties go?" Hester said. "Usually they
> go to the Treasury. There is nothing that says they have to go to
> cleanup costs."
> 
> Other laws that could come into play include the Oil Pollution Act, the
> Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the
> Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
> 
> MORE FROM MCCLATCHY
> 
> BP, feds could make millions from runaway well's oil
> 
> Obama orders firms to change drill plans that mimic BP's
> 
> What Congress was told Thursday about the oil spill
> 
> Complete coverage of the oil spill
> 
> Follow the latest politics news at McClatchy's Planet Washington
> McClatchy Newspapers 2010
> 
>       * email
>       * |
>       * print
>       * |
>       * rss
> 
> JOIN THE DISCUSSION
> 
> We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point.
> Obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat
> offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part - and abiding by these
> simple rules.
> 
> Comments are displayed newest first. If you would like to read a thread
> from beginning to end, select "Oldest first" from the drop down menu.
> You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
> 
> Comments: 12      Showing:
> 
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         johnpatcase wrote on 06/06/2010 11:51:22 PM:
> 
>         Congress took a 10-day break to take care of business. The
> business of Congress is to get elected, nothing else matters.
> 
>         The Dems ‘feel’ bad that they can not seem to help job creation.
> But look at what they have done, they have just stopped work on oil rigs
> in the Gulf. They have just killed tens of thousands of good jobs in LA
> &  TX.
> 
>         Voters will remember the Dems stupidity in November. The Dems do
> not have a clue.
>         Recommend (2) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         cindy_mccain wrote on 06/06/2010 02:22:38 PM:
> 
>         I love clean water just like a clean "Bud" in the afternoon.
>         Recommend (1) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         mehrenst wrote on 06/06/2010 02:14:28 PM:
> 
>         The opening 6 words of this story says it all, "If the Obama
> administration is serious".
> 
>         So far I see little to indicate that President Obama is serious
> about anything. It started when he let health care languish, followed by
> his lack of leadership on financial reform. And now we continue to see a
> wandering of purpose in dealing with BP. Let's face it, there is little
> that the Obama administration can do about stopping up the volcano of
> spewing oil coming from BP's disaster. However;
> 
>         #1. Why has it taken so long for the DOJ to get seriously
involved?
> 
>         #2. Where are the restraining orders to protect information
> contained in BP's file cabinets and data storage systems?
> 
>         #3. Where is the subpoena demanding that BP produce all documents
> relating to the operation of the Deepwater Horizon, including data files
> and/or video feeds form the cameras monitoring the rig.
> 
>         #4. Why is there no attempt to protect the assets of the United
> States by revoking the other leases help by BP until they can
> demonstrate they are capable and responsible?
> 
>         Deepwater Horizon, while technically a vessel on the high seas,
> was operating in the U.S. economic zone and should be subject to U.S.
laws.
> 
>         There is too much talk and not enough action. President Obama
> needs to understand that We The People need to see a decisiveness in our
> Chief Executive and less discussion in meetings about how much a
> particular action will upset "business" or contributors.
>         Recommend (2) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         allenabq wrote on 06/06/2010 10:13:15 AM:
> 
>         @johnpatcase
> 
>         Republican "First Responders":
> 
>         "Where's the oil? I don't see any."
> 
>         "The ocean will just absorb it."
> 
>         "Accidents happen."
> 
>         "Environmentalists probably sabotaged the rig to gain sympathy
> for their cause."
> 
>         "We need to expand oil drilling! Drill, baby, drill!"
> 
>         And last but not least...
> 
>         "I ♥ BP!"
>         Recommend (4) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         commercial wrote on 06/06/2010 05:44:50 AM:
> 
>         Massive fines?
>         What about jail? Our right wing Supreme court has ruled that
> corporations are persons; so they need to go to jail. In other words,
> some people at the top need to go to jail and the corporation liquidated
> for this country and the workers benefit.
> 
>         If it is still in business, then the system fails and
> corporations are not treated as persons by the courts. The Supreme court
> is a joke. It does not represent the people, it represents the
> corporations against the people.
>         Recommend (6) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         ssatmo wrote on 06/05/2010 09:11:10 AM:
> 
>         BP should withhold the 10 billion dollars planned dividend pay
> out and 50 million dollars public relation image repair and commit this
> funds for clean up effort and compensation to those fishermen who lost
> their livelihood ( if BP posses ethical sense) as well as the family of
> those workers who lost their lives for these profit.
>         Recommend (7) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         ypochris wrote on 06/04/2010 07:48:53 PM:
> 
>         CptSnark,
> 
>         Ten billion is the current shareholder dividend, not an amount
> that is going to drive BP into bankruptcy.
> 
>         Unfortunately.
>         Recommend (5) Report abuse
>       * [@Nyx.AdditionalAuthorInfo@]
>         viking51 wrote on 06/04/2010 07:41:30 PM:
> 
>         johnpatcase,
> 
>         Your comment is silly, not clever or funny. Yawn.
> 
> 
> Read more:
> http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/04/95376/bp-could-face-massive-fines-
> under.html#ixzz0qZefhBcw
> 
> **********
> Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst
> (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
> Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
> tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
> Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
tekstveld
> alleen: SIGNOFF D66
> Het on-line archief is te vinden op:
> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
> **********
> 
> 
> 

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst
(D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld
alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op:
http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********