Anadarko Petroleum said it was reviewing its appellate options in the wake of a $159.9 million penalty tied to the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
Anadarko held a 25-percent stake in the Macondo well that failed, triggering the cascading series of events that led to the fatal Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans charged the company a penalty of $159.9 million for its part in the consortium behind the spill.
Andadarko, in a statement, said it was pleased the ruling came in less than anticipated, adding it removed any uncertainties surrounding its legal liability in the case. The company said that, while it respects the decision, it was frustrated with being penalized for actions that, as a non-operator, were beyond its control.
"We are carefully evaluating our appellate options," it said in a statement.
Anadarko held a minority stake in the Macondo well beneath the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico. The district court in Louisiana ruled in September that it was BP's activities at the Macondo well that amounted to willful misconduct.
Barbier was cited by the Houston Chronicle as saying there was "seemingly" no reason to penalize Anadarko for the incident.
"On the other hand, a substantial penalty might make Anadarko and other non-operators more selective when choosing an operator with whom to invest," he wrote in his ruling.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear two separate cases filed by BP and Anadarko Petroleum challenging fines related to the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico early this year.
Columbia stands by team researching Exxon's climate record
New York (UPI) Dec 2, 2015 -The dean at the journalism school at Columbia University defended the integrity of reporters investigating what Exxon Mobil scientists knew about climate change.
Journalism graduate students at Columbia started their investigation into Exxon records in early 2014 and then coordinated with the Los Angeles Times. In October, the newspaper wrote Exxon "publicly cast doubt" on the existence of global warming after years of leading climate research.
The debate caught the attention of the New York Attorney General's office, which issued a subpoena to Exxon seeking clarity on the issue. In November, Exxon turned its attention to Columbia, however, questioning the effectiveness of the research.
Steve Coll, dean of the graduate school of journalism, said the project's director, Susanne Rust, is an "accomplished investigative journalist with a background in science and a strong record of environmental and public health work."
Exxon officials said they were concerned about the agenda surrounding the reporting. Ken Cohen, Exxon's vice president of public and government affairs, said the reporting was inaccurate, deliberately misleading and charged "activists" with exploiting the issue. The company said its research widely mirrored the global understanding of climate issues at the time.
Coll stressed the graduate team was tasked with vetting internal research about climate change carried out by energy companies, "including but hardly limited to Exxon Mobil."
"The Times has maintained full editorial control over everything it has published," he added. "The work will continue."
Cohen, meanwhile, said reporters took much of the company's track record on climate issues out of context and largely ignored its work with agencies like the federal Department of Energy and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Coll, in a six-page letter to Exxon, replied that charges of misrepresentation are serious matters for investigative journalists.
"Yet my review of this case has produced no evidence to support your allegation and much to contradict it."
