BP Oil Spill Trial Plan Could Change
For the first time Friday, parties to the Gulf oil spill lawsuit openly considered changing the trial plan to move up BP's largest liability, the U.S. government's civil penalty claims under the Clean Water Act. (Credit: The Times-Picayune archive)
Now that BP has a proposed settlement with a large class of plaintiffs in the federal oil spill case, the U.S. District Court in New Orleans is considering changing the way the case should move forward. For the first time Friday, parties to the lawsuit openly considered changing the trial plan to move up BP’s largest liability, the U.S. government’s civil penalty claims under the Clean Water Act.
(From Nola.com / by David Hammer) – U.S. Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan asked the attorneys general from the affected Gulf Coast states, led by Alabama and Louisiana, to propose schedules for discovery if the court were to keep the plan of taking testimony on what caused the April 2010 oil spill, or, alternatively, if it were to go directly to considering the government’s imposition of fines.
The proposed settlement with most private economic damage and medical claims plaintiffs, estimated by BP to cost about $7.8 billion, is not the biggest ticket item BP and its co-defendants are facing. The Clean Water Act fines could more than double that amount, if the responsible parties are found to be grossly negligent. Clean Water Act fines are based on the amount of oil spilled, pegged by the government at 4.9 million barrels, with 800,000 barrels collected at the wellhead. The resulting 4.1 million barrels discharged into the water would translate to about $17.6 billion in fines if gross negligence or willful misconduct is proven.
BP contests the size of the spill and has recently filed documents in court challenging the U.S. to disclose documents about the quantity of oil spilled.
Complicating matters, the second phase of the trial was supposed to be about “source control,” or the efforts to contain and cap the flow of oil. Lawyers for BP’s cementing contractor Halliburton, which is a co-defendant in the case, argued Friday that the government’s pollution fines can’t be addressed without first answering questions about source control.
The parties are scheduled to meet again with Shushan on April 13, just a few days before the final terms of the private-party settlement are supposed to be finalized. There is still no date set to begin the actual trial.
