Pin It

BP-Claim.Com

Help With Your BP Claims

Ex BP BOSS Tony HayWard’s Big Pay Off For Making People Sick With Corexit

How BP CEO Tony Hayward personally profited from ordering millions of gallons of Nalco Corexit to spray the gulf and hide the evidence.

Bp Claims

“Read Between The Lines America”

There is a very interesting backdrop on NALCO.  Does anyone know where the BP CEO Tony Hayward moved off to when he left our coast?   Most people don’t know and here is the story and how it ties back to NALCO. We have followed all this with interest and have other clients who made biodegradable detergents and remediation products and BP reneged on their product orders after the EPA did a 180 on the initial order that BP desist usage of NALCO due to toxicity concerns.

The guy who runs NALCO is a fella named Rodney Chase. He is the one who sold several million gallons of Corexit dispersant to BP for this spill. This product, as we all know now, emulsifies and hides the amount of oil from a well, particularly if injected at the opening a mile below the surface ( so then you can lie about how much is coming out and reduce your CWA violation penalties).   To no surprise,  Chase was the former Chairman of BP until a few years before the spill.  He and Tony were friends, and Tony was one of Lord Browne’s “turtles in training”.  So what does that all have to do with anything.  First, BP wanted Nalco, in spite of the known toxicity issues with Corexit, and the unknowns of heavy use of Corexit and its’ long term impact in health and ecosystems.  BP was talking to other manufactures about ordering biodegradable dispersants from them after this spill because the EPA initially advised BP that they were not going to be able to use it out of the health and ecosystem concerns.  Subsequent politics changed this landscape and initial government positions, including the suspect role our USCG had.  As a consequence, good producers were left holding the bag, including huge unfilled orders of alternative products.

All that aside, Tony and BP make Chase a lot of money in the GoM oil spill. Hundreds of millions of dollars in orders for Nalco dispersants.   Then Tony leaves BP and goes to work for an upstart energy company called Genel.  Again to no surprise, Genel’s big financial play is selling oil out of Iraqi, where they have cozy relations with the locals (due to the influence of the British Government-our only ally in the war to take their oil in the first place.  BP owned all the oil in Iraqi back a 100 years ago when they were called the Anglo-Persian oil company and have always wanted their oil back).

So what does that have to do with anything?   Look at who the Chairman of Genel Energy is that hired Mr. Hayward to a multi-million dollar job after leadership wrecked the Gulf of Mexico.  None other than his friend, and Nalco owner, Rodney Chase.  Yes, Tony Hayward is now the CEO of Genel Energy.  The same guy who “wanted his life back” and who was “never going to leave until the job was finished”.   This is all typical of the incestuous relationships in under our new world order.

Now on July 20 2011 the company Ecolab agreed to buy Nalco for 5.4 Billion, and in 2011 Ecolab was named one of the “World’s Most Ethical Companies” by Ethisphere magazine.

Warren Buffett, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Soros, Apollo, Blackstone, Goldman Sachs, Hathaway Berkshire all had large holdings in Nalco.

Bill Gates owns 25% of Ecolab though his investment companies.

BP Settlement Update Rule 495

Law firm Update Brent Coon & Associates

As most of you recall, BP challenged the DHECC procedures for calculating losses.  This resulted in an appeal to the 5th Circuit last year, and BP won the argument.  The appeals panel ordered the trial court to figure out a better mechanism for handling the loss calculations. This applied primarily to BEL cases.  As a consequence of that order, Judge Barbier ordered the Claims Administrator to modify the way the accounting was done.   All of these issues are why there was an injunction on paying BEL since last year.

Patrick Juneau (the CA) filed a report to Judge Barbier a few months ago with a new plan for these calculations, what has been called Policy 495.   This policy was accepted by Judge Barbier last month.   We oppose this  policy in principle, as it will materially alter the outcome of a number of claims detrimentally. In fact, the PSC filed a letter with the Court advising that approval of the new policy would be A MATERIAL CHANGE TO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.

We also took that position and advised the PSC that we would file a motion to re-notice the class and give everyone a second chance to opt out of the agreement, as they way Juneau said calculations would be handled is apparently no longer the case, and such a material change should constitute a right to new notice.

The Court nonetheless did approve it, and BP then immediately filed a motion to stay payments again and to have the policy apply RETROACTIVELY to reduce past payments on claims, and to be paid back for those overpayments, along with attorneys fees and interest.

The Court has entertained a PSC motion to revisit the ruling adopting 495, and the Court Friday at least issued a clarifying order stating how the acceptance of the new claims policy is to be applied.  Again, all of these issues are subject to further Court modification and appeals by the PSC or BP back to the 5th Circuit.

It is regrettable that this settlement has deteriorated into such a mess, but these were all issues we were concerned about two years ago, which is why our firm objected to the settlement as drafted and expressed our concerns that there were too many important terms in the settlement that were likely to be the subject of debate and reinterpretation down the road because of ambiguities, inconsistencies, and absence of sufficient detail on various application issues (which is why we now have hundreds of amendments to the initial settlement).  Everyone on the PSC and BP teams assured the court that this would NOT be the case, and the settlement would treat all claimants more favorably than the GCCF, that it would be transparent, that it would be CLAIMANT FRIENDLY, and that it would be FAST, FAIR and EFFICIENT.

BPs long track record of lying under oath, lying as officers of the Court, lying to Congress, and lying to the media were not fully appreciated by the PSC and we now all live with the consequences.  Can’t say they weren’t warned.

New Judge Order Rule 496 Order