The Washington Post (7/26, Mufson, 489K) reports that Federal prosecutors said on Thursday that Halliburton has agreed to plead guilty to destroying evidence during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster in 2010, “admitting to one count of criminal conduct and agreeing to pay the $200,000 maximum statutory fine.” In what the Post calls a “startling turn” in the three-year criminal probe, Halliburton “said that on two occasions during the oil spill, it directed employees to destroy or ‘get rid of’ simulations that would have helped clarify how to assign blame for the blowout – and possibly focused more attention on Halliburton’s role.”
The New York Times (7/26, Krauss, Subscription Publication, 1.68M) reports that Halliburton “will pay the maximum allowable fine and be subject to three years of probation.” It will also continue to cooperate with Federal investigators in the ongoing criminal probe, and has separately “made a voluntary contribution of $55 million to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.” Federal prosecutors “filed one criminal charge against” Halliburton, “which has suffered significant damage to its reputation since the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 workers and soiled hundreds of miles of beaches.”
Politico (7/26, Goode, 25K) reports that the Justice Department said the agreed-upon penalties are “subject to the court’s approval.” Politico notes that the news on Thursday “came eight months after BP agreed to pay $4.5 billion in fines – the largest such settlement in U.S. history – and plead guilty to a dozen felony counts in connection with the months-long spill, which fouled marshes and beaches across the northern Gulf Coast.” Politico notes, however, that the “thicket of legal feuding continues,” including BP’s efforts “to challenge the handling of the court-supervised fund that is supposed to pay damages to those who suffered losses from the spill.”
USA Today (7/25, Winter, 1.71M) reports that the Justice Department “said it would not pursue further criminal charges against Halliburton or its subsidiaries.” In a statement Thursday night, Halliburton “noted that the Justice Department ‘acknowledged the company’s significant and valuable cooperation during the course of its investigation, and the company has agreed to continue to cooperate … in any ongoing investigation related to or arising from the incident.’”
The New Orleans Times-Picayune (7/25, Schleifstein, 130K) reports that Halliburton officials “twice destroyed computer simulations of the effects of using six instead of 21 ‘centralizers,’ protruding metal collars placed around the casing inside the BP well to keep it centered in the drill hole while cement is poured, according to the bill, filed in U.S. District Court in New Orleans. ‘Prior to the blowout, defendant Halliburton had recommended to BP the use of 21 centralizers in the Macondo well,’ according to the bill of information. ‘BP opted to use six centralizers instead.’”
Bloomberg News (7/26, Feeley, Fisk) reports that US District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans “is trying to decide whether one or more of the companies were grossly negligent in their management of or work on the well. He heard weeks of testimony this year about alleged miscues at the site.” A finding of gross negligence would mean BP “might be liable to the U.S. for more than $17 billion in fines under the Clean Water Act, as well as unspecified punitive damages to claimants who didn’t take part in an $8.2 billion settlement the company reached with most private-party plaintiffs last year.”
The Wall Street Journal (7/26, Fowler, Subscription Publication, 2.29M) , the AP (7/26) and Reuters (7/25, Stempel, Reddall, Ingram, Finn) also report this story.
