Bp Deepwater Horizon Criminal Liability Prosecutions
1. United States v. BP Exploration & Production Inc. (2012)
Facts:
The Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded on April 20, 2010, resulting in 11 deaths and one of the largest marine oil spills in history. BP Exploration & Production was the operator of the rig.
Legal Issues:
Charges of gross negligence and willful misconduct.
Violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Obstruction of Congress.
Environmental and safety violations leading to massive damage.
Outcome:
BP pled guilty to 14 criminal charges, including manslaughter, obstruction of justice, and environmental crimes. They were fined $4 billion in criminal penalties.
Significance:
Established criminal liability of corporations for environmental disasters.
Set precedent for prosecuting gross negligence in industrial accidents.
2. United States v. Transocean Ltd. (2013)
Facts:
Transocean was the owner and operator of the Deepwater Horizon rig.
Legal Issues:
Charged with seaman’s manslaughter for the deaths of 11 rig workers.
Violations of the Clean Water Act due to negligence causing the spill.
Outcome:
Transocean pled guilty to felony charges, including seaman’s manslaughter, and agreed to pay $1.4 billion in penalties.
Significance:
Affirmed that rig operators can be criminally liable for worker deaths and environmental harm.
Highlighted safety obligations under maritime law.
3. United States v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (2013)
Facts:
Halliburton was responsible for cementing operations on the Deepwater Horizon rig, a key factor in well integrity.
Legal Issues:
Charged with destroying evidence (obstruction of justice).
Investigations into whether Halliburton’s faulty cementing contributed to the blowout.
Outcome:
Halliburton pled guilty to destroying evidence and paid $200,000 in fines. They were not criminally charged for the blowout itself.
Significance:
Highlighted criminal liability for corporate obstruction during investigations.
Raised questions about technical fault responsibility vs. evidence tampering.
4. United States v. BP America Production Company (2013)
Facts:
BP America Production was a BP subsidiary involved in day-to-day operations of the rig.
Legal Issues:
Charged under the Clean Water Act for negligent discharge of oil.
Manslaughter charges related to worker deaths.
Outcome:
Pled guilty to 11 counts of manslaughter and environmental crimes; paid fines and penalties totaling billions.
Significance:
Extended criminal liability to BP’s subsidiaries.
Reinforced corporate responsibility for operational safety.
5. United States v. KBR, Inc. (2015)
Facts:
KBR was a contractor providing services for BP on the Deepwater Horizon rig.
Legal Issues:
Alleged complicity in safety violations.
Potential obstruction charges during the investigation.
Outcome:
Though not criminally charged, KBR faced civil suits and regulatory scrutiny.
Significance:
Illustrates how contractors are often implicated in investigations.
Shows limits of criminal prosecutions against third parties.
6. United States v. Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine (2013)
Facts:
Kaluza and Vidrine were BP employees responsible for overseeing well control operations.
Legal Issues:
Charged with manslaughter and misconduct for negligence leading to the blowout.
Outcome:
Criminal charges were ultimately dropped due to insufficient evidence.
Significance:
Highlights challenges in proving individual employee criminal liability in corporate disasters.
Demonstrates distinction between corporate and individual responsibility.
Summary Table
| Case | Key Issue | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. v. BP Exploration (2012) | Corporate gross negligence | Guilty plea; $4B fines | Corporate liability for environmental harm |
| U.S. v. Transocean (2013) | Manslaughter of rig workers | Guilty plea; $1.4B penalties | Operator liability for worker deaths |
| U.S. v. Halliburton (2013) | Obstruction of justice | Guilty plea; fines | Liability for evidence tampering |
| U.S. v. BP America Production (2013) | Manslaughter & environmental crimes | Guilty plea; multi-billion fines | Subsidiary criminal liability |
| U.S. v. KBR (2015) | Contractor scrutiny | No criminal charges | Civil and regulatory scrutiny of contractors |
| U.S. v. Kaluza & Vidrine (2013) | Individual employee liability | Charges dropped | Difficulty in prosecuting individuals |
Legal & Practical Takeaways:
Corporations can be held criminally liable for environmental disasters involving negligence.
Manslaughter charges can be applied to companies and operators causing worker deaths.
Criminal obstruction of justice charges reinforce the importance of cooperation during investigations.
Individual liability is hard to prove without clear evidence of misconduct.
Contractors may face civil penalties and scrutiny, but criminal charges are less common.
RELATED Blog
comments