BP's Fine for Gulf of Mexico Spill Capped by Ruling

(Adds price reaction, analyst) HOUSTON/LONDON, Jan 16 (Reuters) - BP Plc will face a maximum fine of $13.7 billion under the Clean Water Act for its Gulf of Mexico oil spill, several billion dollars less than feared, after a judge ruled that it was smaller than the U.S.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

(Adds price reaction, analyst)

HOUSTON/LONDON, Jan 16 (Reuters) - BP Plc will face a maximum fine of $13.7 billion under the Clean Water Act for its Gulf of Mexico oil spill, several billion dollars less than feared, after a judge ruled that it was smaller than the U.S. government claimed.

The ruling by federal magistrate Carl Barbier put the size of the worst offshore spill in U.S. history in 2010 at 3.19 million barrels.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That was well below the government's estimate of 4.09 million barrels, which could have led to penalties of up to $17.6 billion.

BP's stock rose 2.4 percent in London by 0920 GMT on Friday, outperforming the broader energy index, as investors worried about the size of potential penalties breathed a sigh of relief.

"The ruling is a step in the right direction of what appears set to be a long and hard-fought legal battle," Barclays said in a research note.

Under a "gross negligence" ruling Barbier issued in September, BP could be fined a statutory limit of up to $4,300 for each barrel spilled, though he has authority to assign lower penalties.

A simple "negligence" ruling, which BP sought, caps the maximum fine at $1,100 per barrel.

The Clean Water Act penalties would come on top of more than $42 billion the oil major has set aside or spent for clean-up, compensation and fines. About 810,000 barrels were collected during clean-up.

In his ruling on Thursday, Barbier said BP's response to the disaster was not grossly negligent, but stuck to his earlier opinion that it had been grossly negligent leading up to the Macondo well blowout.

Penalties will be assigned after the third and final phase of the company's non-jury trial, which starts on Tuesday in New Orleans. BP lawyers are expected to argue for a small fine per barrel.

"BP believes that considering all the statutory penalty factors together weighs in favor of a penalty at the lower end of the statutory range," a BP spokesman said.

The first two phases of the trial, over the degree of negligence and the size of the spill, have concluded.

Even after the Clean Water Act fines are set, BP may face other bills from a lengthy Natural Resources Damage Assessment -- which could require BP to carry out or fund environmental restoration work in the Gulf -- as well as other claims. (Reporting By Jonathan Stempel, additional reporting by Dmitry Zhdannikov in London,; Writing by Terry Wade; Editing by Bernard Orr and Keith Weir)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe