-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
by Adam Freedman
Today’s topic: The Gulf1 oil spill--who pays?
And now, your daily dose of legalese: This article does not create an attorney-client relationship with any reader. In other words, although I am a lawyer, I’m not your lawyer. In fact, we barely know each other. If you need personalized legal advice, contact an attorney in your community.
The podcast edition of this article was sponsored by Go to Meeting. With this meeting service, you can hold your meetings over the Internet and give presentations, product demos and training sessions right from your PC. For a free, 45 day trial, visit GoToMeeting.com/podcast.
Who Pays for the BP Oil Spill?
The April 20th explosion of an off-shore oil rig operated by BP (the company formerly2 known as “British Petroleum”) in the Gulf of Mexico has turned out to be a massive tragedy for the entire region. As you know, when tragedy strikes, the lawyers are never far behind. That’s certainly the case here, as the legal questions have been gushing3 to the surface almost as quickly as the oil: Who’s liable for the damage caused by the spill? How much will they have to pay? Can Congress change the liability limits retroactively? Can the federal government ban deepwater drilling in the Gulf?
The quick and dirty answer is that BP is primarily liable, but other companies may be on the hook for portions of the damage. In some cases there are legal limits on the companies’ liability, but Congress may be able to lift those limits. And finally, the federal government can ban deepwater drilling but it has to convince the courts that such an action is necessary.
Liability for Deaths and Injury May be Limited by an 1851 Law…
When the Deepwater Horizon rig blew up on April 20th, eleven workers were killed and many of the remaining 115 workers sustained injuries. Although the rig was leased by BP, it is owned by a Swiss company called Transocean. Transocean has already asserted that its liability for any personal injury or wrongful death claims arising from the explosion is limited to $26.7 million under a law known as the Limitation of Liability Act.
Oddly enough, that law was passed by Congress in 1851--at a time when there was no oil drilling--in fact, at a time when whale oil was the nation’s primary fuel. Nonetheless the law is still on the books and it applies to all oceangoing “vessels” and an offshore5 oil rig counts as a vessel4.
… Or by a 1920 Law
As for BP, its liability for the workers’ deaths is even more severely6 capped under a 1920 law known as the “Death on the High Seas Act”--and yes, the Deepwater rig qualifies as “the High Seas” because it was more than three nautical7 miles from shore. Under this law, BP’s liability would be limited to the workers’ funeral costs and a portion of their wages--according to one estimate that would work out to about $1,000 per worker.
The House of Representatives recently passed legislation to repeal8 these two laws--the Limitation of Liability Act and the Death on the High Seas Act--retroactively to April 20. Now, if a little voice inside you is asking: Wait, isn’t that unconstitutional?, then you get an “A” for effort. The Constitution does prohibit retroactive laws, known as ex post facto laws, but that prohibition9 only applies to criminal laws. It does not apply to laws that deal only with civil liability.
Economic Damages Are Legally Capped
Many people have also been economically hurt by the disaster: Think of all the idle shrimp10 boats and the empty beach hotels around the Gulf. Under the 1989 Oil Pollution Act, liability for economic damages arising from a spill is capped at $75 million. Beyond that amount, people who have been hurt by the spill can submit a claim for reimbursement11 to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, a $1 billion dollar fund administered by the government. That Trust Fund, incidentally, is funded by civil fines that are imposed on oil spillers under the Clean Water Act. It is certainly possible that the Department of Justice will go after BP to collect those fines.
BP has already announced that it will not rely on the $75 million limit in the Oil Pollution Act, and according to news reports, it has agreed to set up its own $20 billion reimbursement fund. Perhaps that deal will stop the Department of Justice from trying to collect Clean Water Act fines, but there’s no guarantee. And even if it turns out to be irrelevant12 in this case, some members of Congress are pushing to lift the $75 million cap.
Who Pays to Clean Up the Mess?
When it comes to the environmental damage caused by the spill, there are many companies that might end up paying some part of the price tag. However, because BP is the federally-licensed operator of the oil well that has been leaking, so as far as US federal law goes, BP is 100% responsible for clean-up costs.
“Clean Up” for these purposes, means removing the oil. It doesn’t necessarily mean returning the Gulf to a pristine13 state. But even removing the oil will prove to be a very expensive proposition. Although BP is primarily on the hook, it can seek partial reimbursement from other players, including its co-investors in the oil well, and its contractors14 such as Transocean and Halliburton.
Can the Government Halt All Drilling in the Gulf?
On May 28, the Department of the Interior imposed a six-month moratorium15 on all offshore drilling operations at all deepwater oil wells. The government does have the authority to do this under the Outer Continental16 Shelf Lands Act-- however, that authority can only be used to prevent a threat of “serious, irreparable, or immediate17 harm” to life, property, minerals, or the environment.
On June 22, 2010, a federal court held that the Department of the Interior had failed to demonstrate that such a threat exists. According to the judge, the moratorium was “arbitrary and capricious”--he compared it to banning all air travel because of one crash. An appeals court refused to reinstate the ban while the Obama administration appeals the ruling, so in the meantime, the Interior Department has implemented18 restrictions19 on any new deepwater drilling in the Gulf. Stay tuned20!
Thank you for reading Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful21 Life.
You can send questions and comments to.........Please note that doing so will not create an attorney-client relationship and will be used for the purposes of this article only.
收听单词发音 |
1
gulf
|
|
| n.海湾；深渊，鸿沟；分歧，隔阂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
gushing
|
|
| adj.迸出的；涌出的；喷出的；过分热情的v.喷，涌( gush的现在分词 )；滔滔不绝地说话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
vessel
|
|
| n.船舶；容器，器皿；管，导管，血管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
offshore
|
|
| adj.海面的，吹向海面的；adv.向海面 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
severely
|
|
| adv.严格地；严厉地；非常恶劣地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
nautical
|
|
| adj.海上的，航海的，船员的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
repeal
|
|
| n.废止，撤消；v.废止，撤消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
prohibition
|
|
| n.禁止；禁令，禁律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
shrimp
|
|
| n.虾，小虾；矮小的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
reimbursement
|
|
| n.偿还，退还 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
irrelevant
|
|
| adj.不恰当的，无关系的，不相干的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
pristine
|
|
| adj.原来的，古时的，原始的，纯净的，无垢的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
contractors
|
|
| n.（建筑、监造中的）承包人( contractor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
moratorium
|
|
| n.(行动、活动的)暂停(期)，延期偿付 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
continental
|
|
| adj.大陆的，大陆性的，欧洲大陆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
implemented
|
|
| v.实现( implement的过去式和过去分词 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
restrictions
|
|
| 约束( restriction的名词复数 )； 管制； 制约因素； 带限制性的条件（或规则） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
tuned
|
|
| adj.调谐的，已调谐的v.调音( tune的过去式和过去分词 )；调整；（给收音机、电视等）调谐；使协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
lawful
|
|
| adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
购买
在百度中搜索