Us Sues BP

[ItsZippy]

The US is suing BP and eight other firms for allegedly violating federal safety regulations in connection with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

The lawsuit asks that they be held liable without limitation for all clean-up and damage costs.

The Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion in April killed 11 workers and spilled millions of barrels of oil over several months.

The oil leak became the worst environmental disaster in US history.

The lawsuit charges the companies under the US Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act.

US Attorney General Eric Holder said the complaint alleges that "violations of safety and operational regulations" caused the 20 April explosion.

The companies targeted in the lawsuit are BP Exploration and Production Inc, Anadarko Exploration & Production LP, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC, Triton Asset Leasing GMBH, Transocean Holdings LLC, Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc, Transocean Deepwater Inc and QBE Underwriting Ltd/Lloyd's Syndicate 1036 - BP's insurer.

The key accusations are:

• Failing to take necessary precautions to keep the Macondo Well under control in the period leading up to the April 20th explosion
• Failing to use the best available and safest drilling technology to monitor the well's conditions
• Failing to maintain continuous surveillance
• Failing to use and maintain equipment and material that were available and necessary to ensure the safety and protection of personnel, equipment, natural resources, and the environment
• Halliburton, the company that cemented the Macondo Well, and Cameron International, which provided equipment for the well, were not targeted in the lawsuit.

But the Justice Department said on Wednesday that the investigation into the oil spill was ongoing and more defendants and charges could be added to the suit.

"We intend to prove that these defendants are responsible for government removal costs, economic losses and environmental damages without limitation," Mr Holder said.

"As investigations continue, we will not hesitate to take whatever steps necessary to hold accountable those responsible for this spill," Mr Holder added.

Mr Holder did not specify a timetable in the lawsuit, instead saying the US would move as quickly as possible in the matter.

Eleven workers on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig were killed by an explosion which followed, and hundreds of miles of coast were polluted before it was stemmed in July.

Full story - BBC News

---

 

[Joshua Farrell]

The US should sue themselves. BP Oil would have fixed the problem quicker if the US Government did not get involved.

 

[Deleted member 1609]

BP Oil would have fixed the problem quicker if the US Government did not get involved.

Are you serious? I doubt they ever would have completely resolved it. The whole thing happened because of their incompetence.

 

[Joshua Farrell]

Yeah, and the US Wanting to test, retest, rebuild and retest the thing that was supposed to cap off the spill. 😛

 

[David]

The US is suing BP and eight other firms for allegedly violating federal safety regulations in connection with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Alright, so they may not have proof even with this accusation. It could have been sabotage.

If this doesn't pull through, BP could sue the US government for making false claims against them, potentially causing intangible damage 🙂

"We intend to prove that these defendants are responsible for government removal costs, economic losses and environmental damages without limitation," Mr Holder said.

From this, it's clear that their primary intentions are not find the cause, rather find BP as the sole guilty party involved for whatever reason.

 

[Justin M]

Alright, so they may not have proof even with this accusation. It could have been sabotage.

If this doesn't pull through, BP could sue the US government for making false claims against them, potentially causing intangible damage 🙂

BP intentionally disabled alarms on the drilling rig, among other violations. And no, a BP counter lawsuit would never see the inside of a courtroom.

From this, it's clear that their primary intentions are not find the cause, rather find BP as the sole guilty party involved for whatever reason.

A dozen other companies are included in the lawsuit, BP isn't the only target.

 

[David]

Alright, so they may not have proof even with this accusation. It could have been sabotage.

If this doesn't pull through, BP could sue the US government for making false claims against them, potentially causing intangible damage 🙂

BP intentionally disabled alarms on the drilling rig, among other violations. And no, a BP counter lawsuit would never see the inside of a courtroom.

The use of "allegedly" means 'asserted to be true' therefore requiring proof, so none yet have been officially, publicly provided if the use of "allegedly" is used. With your statement of the alarms, was that officially made from the chief prosecutor with evidence?

The second part was never a serious comment 🙂

From this, it's clear that their primary intentions are not find the cause, rather find BP as the sole guilty party involved for whatever reason.

A dozen other companies are included in the lawsuit, BP isn't the only target.

Fair enough; skipped over the defendants paragraph. Nonetheless, it appears the intentions of the statement isn't really to find the issue rather to find the defendants guilty.

 

[Justin M]

My mistake, it wasn't the alarms that were disabled. However, here is a slide documenting 8 decisions that were unnecessarily made; http://www.eenews.net/assets/2010/11/23 ... _gw_01.pdf

And just because the proof isn't public, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is already enough evidence to likely convict BP of negligence, and I doubt they'll be able to win in court after the PR nightmare with Tony Hayward alone.

 

[David]

My mistake, it wasn't the alarms that were disabled. However, here is a slide documenting 8 decisions that were unnecessarily made; http://www.eenews.net/assets/2010/11/23 ... _gw_01.pdf

And just because the proof isn't public, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is already enough evidence to likely convict BP of negligence, and I doubt they'll be able to win in court after the PR nightmare with Tony Hayward alone.

To the jury, that document alone doesn't hold any real value; unless it can be backed up (officially), it serves no value in a court case. Also, looking at that document, it just mentions "risks" and if it is "riskier". They're not really arguments; something unnecessary does not mean something wrong. It's not necessary for me to make this post, yet is it wrong? Probably not.

I never said because the 'proof isn't public, it doesn't exist'. The proof needs to hold court value, and it needs to be recognized by the prosecutor. The media can always bend the truth one way or the other, so that doesn't provide a fair trial for the defendants.

 

[Geoffrey]

I don't think they should be suing BP over this, but I'd bet money that the US wins.

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Maybe if the United States didn't let corporations run the government, things like this wouldn't happen.

 

[avguste]

BP and the other companies should be sued for all they are worth.
it will teach those guys to follow safety procedures and not fall asleep on the job.

For once, I am in agreement that the Obama administration is not a cause in this mess, except that it took them forever to respond and figure things (in a way similar to the Bush administration and Hurricane Katrina)

 

[Gimgak]

Maybe if the United States didn't let corporations run the government, things like this wouldn't happen.

Too bad they encourage it

 

[ItsZippy]

Maybe if the United States didn't let corporations run the government, things like this wouldn't happen.

That's the problem with privatisation.

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Maybe if the United States didn't let corporations run the government, things like this wouldn't happen.

That's the problem with privatisation.

Let's privatize every government program like the conservatives want and see how long it takes the entire country to unravel.

 

[ItsZippy]

I'd give us a week or two.