The Government has shown its support for BP in a legal dispute over a ban on the oil giant winning federal contracts in the US following the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
In a filing to a court considering BP’s attempt to lift the ban, the UK government said the decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban the firm from US government contracts “may have been excessive”.
Explaining the move, a Downing Street official said the firm was “vital to British jobs and pension funds”.
The blow-out of the Deepwater Horizon well off the Louisiana coast in 2010 claimed 11 lives and damaged fishing and tourism as well as marine and wildlife habitats, forcing the company to sign a multi-billion compensation deal in April 2012.
As well as costing the firm £25.9billion BP was hit by the ban on new US government work in November last year because of the way it handled the Gulf of Mexico rig disaster.
“This is a straightforward economic argument,” said a Government spokesman. “BP is vital to British jobs and pension funds: Britain’s businesses need certainty to operate and invest.”
The source said the Government recognised the seriousness of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, “but it is important that where companies take responsibility, as BP has, they are treated fairly under the law”.
In August BP sued the US government over the EPA’s move, calling on the US District Court for the southern district of Texas to declare the decision null, void and unenforceable.
The Government has reportedly filed an “amicus brief”, meaning it is not a party to the case but is showing support for BP, telling the court the EPA’s move “may have been excessive”, especially the decision to suspend multiple BP entities including some that were not implicated in the accident.
“By creating a process under which any corporate affiliate anywhere in the world can be suspended from transacting business with the government regardless of culpability, EPA risks creating a powerful disincentive to co-operation in times of crisis,” it said.
Meanwhile, the trial of a former BP engineer accused of destroyed evidence connected to the Deepwater Horizon spill has heard he deleted messages connected to the supermajor’s efforts to estimate the size of the spill.
Kurt Mix, a senior engineer involved in the project to cap the Macondo spill, had been told repeatedly not to erase messages connected to the disaster, prosecutors told the jury as the hearing began in New Orleans last night.
“This is a case about a BP engineer, Kurt Mix, who in the wake of the massive Macondo oil spill, was told over and over not to delete messages, and he made the choice to do it anyway,” said prosecutor Jennifer Saulino.
The court heard that Mix had been part of the top kill procedure to pump mud into the blowout preventer and cap the oil leak, and that he knew BP’s estimates for the flow rate were above the maximum limit for it to be successful.
Prosecutors claimed he did not disclose that information, deleting a text to his supervisor sent in May that the flow rate was too high. It subsequently took until July for the well to be capped.
Mix, who faces two charges of destrying evidence, has pleaded not guilty to obstructing justice. He was the first person indicted over the disaster. Each charge carries a six-figure fine and 20 year jail term if he is convicted.
The trial, before US District Judge Stanwood Duval Jr, continues.
Recommended for you
