
An oil company supplying the U.S. military with gas in Iraq was able to overcharge the government because they were the only company authorized by Jordan to transport through their country, according to a Defense Department Inspector General report obtained by TPM via Freedom of Information Request.
The International Oil Trading Company (IOTC) was paid "about $160 to $204 million (or 6 to 7 percent) more for fuel than could be supported by price or cost analysis," according to the report. Investigators also found that Kellogg, Brown, and Root performed an "inherently
governmental function" by accepting fuel on behalf of the government.
Federal officials filed a civil lawsuit on Wednesday against BP and eight other companies that the government says committed environmental violations that caused or contributed to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill.
The lawsuit seeks for eight companies to be held liable without limitation for both removal costs and damages caused by the oil spill (including natural resource damages) and seeks civil penalties under the Clean Water Act.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A committee in the Utah state legislature is pushing the Mineral and Petroleum Literacy Act, which seeks to "educate" children about mining and petroleum drilling. The funds for the program would come out of surplus mining profits.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The New York Times reports today that BP is moving ahead with a project that would drill a two-mile-deep well off the coast of Alaska. How is BP getting around the moratorium on new offshore drilling? It's building its rig on an island -- a man-made island built by BP -- and declaring it "onshore."
The moratorium was instituted in response to the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, a leak BP is legally responsible for. And yet, BP is now the only company allowed to drill a new well in the Arctic.
The moratorium was blocked by a judge, but the Obama administration has challenged the block. Many oil companies are in a holding pattern until the legal challenges are over.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Even in a Washington as dominated by corporate money as today's, it's not often that you see a lawmaker side with financial backers over the public interest as brazenly as Alaska's senior senator did yesterday.
In the wake of last month's catastrophic Gulf Coast oil spill, Sen. Lisa Murkowski blocked a bill that would have raised the maximum liability for oil companies after a spill from a paltry $75 million to $10 billion. The Republican lawmaker said the bill, introduced by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), would have unfairly hurt smaller oil companies by raising the costs of oil production. The legislation is "not where we need to be right now" she said.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)When rescued workers were brought ashore following the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig last month, officials with drilling giant Transocean presented them with forms stating they had not been injured and that they had no first-hand knowledge of what happened. Lawyers for the workers are now crying foul about what they say is an all too common industry practice to impeach workers' credibility in future legal proceedings.
Some workers are saying they were coerced into signing the form, a charge Transocean denies. But the episode is reminiscent of reports that BP presented Alabama fishermen with contracts that included a no-sue clause in exchange for $5,000.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
As the oil industry went into full damage control mode following the catastrophic spill in the Gulf of Mexico, their corporate public relations went into overdrive too, with firms across Washington jumping in to help British Petroleum and BP firing up its Facebook page and Twitter feed. The universe of flacks Americans might be seeing on television and quoted in news stories has widened, with BP executives making the rounds, hosting journalists for explainer sessions and corporate PR folks helping craft an image of a company doing everything it can to help.
The industry already had an army of lobbyists and PR hands deployed in Washington to influence the negotiations over climate change legislation (which may be in dire straits thanks to the spill), and BP brought in the international consulting firm the Brunswick Group.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)There are two broad categories of costs associated with the catastrophic BP Gulf oil spill: one is cleanup; the other is damage caused by the oil -- to shoreline property, local tax revenues, the fishing and tourism industries, and other businesses and individuals.
Here's a guide to who's on the hook for which costs.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)The CEO of BP is trying to get out in front of potential lawsuits by casting the blame for the Gulf oil spill squarely on the owner of the rig: Transocean. But in doing so in media interviews Monday, BP's Tony Hayward appears to have also gotten out in front of the known facts.
"It wasn't our accident," he told the Today Show on Monday. Pressed by anchor Meredith Vieira, Hayward claimed: "the drilling rig was a Transocean drilling rig. It was their rig and their equipment that failed, run by their people, their processes."
But oil industry experts tell TPMmuckraker that BP, as the lease operator on the Deepwater Horizon rig, most likely did have a role in decision-making aboard the drilling vessel. And six BP employees were on the rig when it exploded April 20.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)BP has been offering $5000 payments to residents of coastal Alabama areas, in exchange for essentially giving up their right to sue the oil giant over its deadly Gulf Coast spill, according to the state's attorney general.
AG Troy King last night urged BP to stop the effort, and told Alabamians to be wary. "People need to proceed with caution and understand the ramifications before signing something like that," King said, according to the Alabama press.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Rep. Don Young (R-AK) praising earmarks is hardly news. After all, the Alaska lawmaker, whose "generous appetite for legislative pork," was once noted by the New Republic, is a co-sponsor of the Bridge to Nowhere, and bragged of an appropriations bill that he had "stuffed it like a turkey" with homestate spending items.
But these days, Young's pro-earmark position isn't jibing too well with the image the GOP caucus wants to project. Eager to present themselves as more restrained than House Democrats and the Obama administration, House Republicans last week announced a one-year earmark hiatus.
In the world of astroturf lobbying, forged letters and fake rallies are getting kind of passé. Here's what the real experts are doing...
Last week, we learned that online gamers can earn virtual currency by sending emails to Congress opposing health-care reform, stemming from a campaign by a health-insurance lobby group. The news of the scheme, reported by Gawker and the AP, suggests that at least some of the anti-reform emails lawmakers have received are something less than authentic expressions of grassroots passion, since they're being sent by people who have been incentivized to get involved through the offer of rewards.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)Last month, we told you about Newsweek's plan to team up with an oil-industry lobby group to host a panel discussion on global warming.
Several observers -- including Greenpeace, and a prominent professor of journalism ethics, expressed concern about the plan, in which Newsweek appeared to be giving a platform, for a price, to a key opponent of action on global warming. The panel will feature Jack Gerard, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, one of Newsweek's major advertisers. A spokesman for the magazine defended the arrangement as appropriate.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Newsweek magazine is teaming up with an oil-industry lobbying group to host an event on climate-change and energy issues involving lawmakers, just as the Senate gets set to take up legislation on the subject.
The panel discussion, entitled "Climate and Energy Policy: Moving?," will feature Jack Gerard, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, and, as moderator, Newsweek columnist Howard Fineman, according to an email invitation sent by a Newsweek business staffer and obtained by TPMmuckraker.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)Hat tip Alaska Dispatch...
Did U.S. prosecutors pressure police to end a child-sex-crimes investigation in order not to endanger the federal probe of corruption in Alaska politics, then withhold evidence about the episode? That's what court documents filed on behalf of a former state lawmaker convicted in the investigation are charging.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)Bill Allen, the former chief of an Alaska oil services company who became the key government witness in the Ted Stevens trial last year, was sentenced to three years in prison today for his role in the wide-ranging public corruption scandal in the state.
Allen was also fined $750,000.
The Anchorage Daily News reports from the courtroom:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Lately, we've been documenting the exodus of companies from the Chamber of Commerce over its opposition to serious efforts to address global warming.
But as the Senate gets set to take up climate change legislation, already passed by the House, there's a larger question behind the Chamber's woes: What's motivating energy-sector companies on both sides of the issue, and how are their positions affecting the debate on Capitol Hill?
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)Gale Norton is being investigated by a federal grand jury for allegedly talking to Shell about a job, while she was Interior Secretary in 2006, reports National Journal. Both Norton and Shell are said to have received subpoenas.
The existence of the federal investigation was first reported last month by the Los Angeles Times. In a nutshell, the Feds have been looking at an episode in which Norton's Interior Department awarded three oil shale leases on federal land in Colorado -- potentially worth hundreds of billions -- to a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell. Two months later, Norton resigned, saying she had no job lined up. But later that year, she was hired by Shell as in-house counsel.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (8)Did Gale Norton, President Bush's far-right interior secretary, illegally use her position to benefit an oil company that later hired her? Justice Department investigators want to know, reports the Los Angeles Times.
In a nutshell, here's what DOJ is looking into:
The memo -- sent by the American Petroleum Institute and obtained by Greenpeace, which sent it to reporters -- urges oil companies to recruit their employees for events that will "put a human face on the impacts of unsound energy policy," and will urge senators to "avoid the mistakes embodied in the House climate bill."
Looks like having sex with employees of oil companies you're supposed to be regulating -- not to mention doing drugs in the office -- isn't such a great career move after all.
An internal Interior Department report issued in September found that a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity" had existed from 2002 to 2006 in the department Denver office. Staffers had been getting drunk and having sex with oil company personnel, as well as doing coke and smoking pot in the office.
And today, reports the Associated Press, Interior took disciplinary action against those involved -- ranging from a warning letter to termination. The department wouldn't provide further details on the punishments.
Workers in the office were also found to have accepted golf and ski trips, snowboarding lessons and concert tickets from oil companies.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (19)
Top NeoCon Richard Perle Seeks Oil Deal With Iraqi KurdsRichard Perle has almost always gone along with the Bush administration's policies.
But now the longtime neoconservative policy wonk is trying to get in on an oil-drilling deal with Iraqi Kurds despite the administration's public opposition to such deals there.
Perle, one of the most influential proponents of 2003 invasion of Iraq, is in talks to join a consortium of investors with the Kurdish Regional Government, today's Wall Street Journal reports.
The Bush administration has publicly discouraged energy firms from making unilateral deals with Iraqi Kurds until after Iraq's federal government in Baghdad agrees to a law for sharing future revenues. Disagreements over oil money have inflamed sectarian tensions in Iraq and undermined political unity.
But investigators are looking into whether the Bush administration privately gave the go-ahead to energy firms seeking the lucrative deals with the Kurds.
The Journal reports that Perle is talking with a Turkish firm, AK Group International, and also a representative from the government of Kazakhstan. They are targeting the co-called "K18 concession" which is near the city of Erbil and is estimated to hold 150 million or more barrels of oil.
Houston-based Endeavour International would conduct the exploration and drilling, according to the Journal.
During the run-up to the Iraq war, Perle was chairman of the Defense Policy Board, which advises the Pentagon. He is currently a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank in Washington.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)
State IG to Probe Deals Between Texas Oil Firm and Iraqi KurdsPublicly, the U.S. State Department said it was discouraging U.S. oil companies from forging deals with Iraqi Kurds last year.
But privately, Bush administration officials may have sent different signals.
Now the State Department's Inspector General has launched an investigation into what exactly was said to whom.
The New York Times reports:
The State Department's internal watchdog division will investigate allegations that department officials did nothing to prevent a Texas oil company with close ties to President Bush from concluding an oil deal with the Kurdistan regional government that undermined both American policy and the Iraqi central government.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)The Kurds' deal last year with Hunt Oil Company of Dallas -- and similar contracts between the Kurds and other energy companies -- have infuriated the Iraqi government, which has called them "illegal" attempts to usurp Baghdad's authority.
American officials have also stated publicly that the contracts undermine Baghdad's fragile central government and that they have discouraged such deals until the Iraqi government passes a national oil law.
But earlier this month a Congressional committee released internal e-mail messages and documents from the State Department and Hunt Oil that suggested that State Department officials did not try to dissuade Hunt Oil from signing the deal with the Kurds.
This week, the acting inspector general of the State Department, Harold W. Geisel, disclosed in a letter to lawmakers, which was also provided to The New York Times, that he had "initiated a review of the responses provided to the Congress recently on the issues surrounding oil contracts, oil field development and U.S. policy in Iraq."
Lawmakers Call On State Department To Investigate Oil DealsFirst we heard about how Texas-based Hunt Oil might have gotten a behind-the-scenes thumbs up to forge an oil deal with the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq.
We say behind-the-scenes because officially the White House and State Department opposed all oil deals with the Kurds until the Iraqi federal government in Baghdad reached a deal on oil-revenue sharing. (which they haven't yet)
Last week we told you about how Bob Schaffer, the Republican candidate for Senate from Colorado, helped forge a deal between Aspect Energy, where he worked, and the Kurds at about the same time last fall.
Now several lawmakers want the State Department's Inspector General to investigate the matter.
From the AP:
Any behind-the-scenes meddling would have violated administration policy, which was to discourage the business dealings until Baghdad passed a law that would fairly divide the nation's oil resources among the various provinces. The hydrocarbon law is widely seen as necessary to prevent sectarian tensions once Iraq boosts its oil production."We are concerned that U.S. policy regarding these oil contracts has not been clearly defined, communicated, or consistently implemented by the Iraqi government, the Kurdistan Regional Government and international oil companies seeking to do business in Iraq," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Harold Geisel, the State Department's acting inspector general.
The letter was signed by [Sen. Carl Levin] Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, as well as Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York, John Kerry of Massachusetts and Claire McCaskill of Missouri.
Late Update: Read more for the text of the entire letter.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Bob Schaffer Helped Out With Kurdish Oil Deal Opposed By US State DepartmentBob Schaffer voted for the war in Iraq in 2002, then left Congress and went to work for the oil men hoping to profit from it.
We recently learned that the energy company that the Colorado Republican went to work for in 2003, Aspect Energy, is among the handful of companies who signed deals with Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government last year.
Those oil deals were officially opposed by the Bush administration, but maybe tacilty endorsed behind closed doors.
Schaffer visited Iraq's Kurdish region in November 2006 along with other officials from Aspect Energy.
State Department officials say those oil deals have threatened security in Iraq by undermining the federal government in Baghdad, which about 150,000 U.S. troops are now helping to prop up.
Schaffer said he had no idea that U.S. officials formally opposed to such deals.
Schaffer said he was unaware the State Department had warned energy firms not to strike oil deals with the Kurdistan Regional Government at the time of his visit. "We didn't experience any discouragement," Schaffer said.
Late Update The Daily Sentinel in Colorado has a taped interview of Schaffer talking about his trip to Iraq and the oil contract.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)
Waxman Says White House Knew About Hunt Oil Deal In IraqHouse oversight committee Chairman Henry Waxman says the Bush Administration knew about the September 2007 deal that Texas-based Hunt Oil struck with Kurdish officials in Iraq.
That contradicts what President Bush said at the time.
That deal was controversial because it came at a time of precarious negotiations in Baghdad about a possible revenue-sharing agreement between the warring factions in Iraq. The Kurds decision to forge a deal independent of the Baghdad government angered the Sunni and Shia Arabs in Iraq.
In a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Waxman asked for further information about the U.S. involvement in Iraqi oil deals, the Hunt Oil deal as well as more recent deals. He quoted the president speaking shortly after the deal was announced almost a year ago.
Administration officials criticized the Hunt Oil contract because it jeopardized the efforts of the Iraqi parliament to come to an agreement on the national oil legislation. When President Bush was asked about the Hunt Oil contract, he stated:"I knew nothing about the deal. I need to know exactly how it happened. To the extent that it does undermine the ability for the government to come up with an oil revenue sharing plan that unifies the country, obviously if it undermines it I'm concerned"
The documents that the Committee has received tell a different story about the role of Administration officials. Ray Hunt, the head of Hunt Oil, personally informed advisors to President Bush of meetings he and other Hunt Oil officials planned with representatives of the Kurdish government. Other Hunt Oil officials kept State Department officials informed about the company' s intentions.
Today's Must ReadA couple weeks ago, we learned that Iraq's oh-so-very-sovereign Ministry of Oil was about to award a round of no-bid contracts to several western oil companies that would bring the large multinationals back into Iraq for the first time in more than 35 years.
The Bush Administration insisted that they were not going to interfere in this deal, which was between Iraq's democratic leaders and private-sector companies.
But today's New York Times report confirms what many people have suspected for years -- that U.S. officials are working behind the scenes to influence the future of Iraq's massive oil reserves.
In their role as advisers to the Iraqi Oil Ministry, American government lawyers and private-sector consultants provided template contracts and detailed suggestions on drafting the contracts, advisers and a senior State Department official said.
...
The American government lawyers provided specific advice, the State Department official said, like: "These are the clauses you may want. You will need a clause on arbitration. You will need this clause to make this work."
Advisers from the State, Commerce, Energy and Interior Departments are assigned to work with the Iraqi Oil Ministry, according to the senior diplomat. In addition, the United States Agency for International Development has a contract for Management Systems International, a Washington consulting firm, to advise the oil and other ministries. The agency's program is called Tatweer, the Arabic word for development.
And guess who some of their clients are? Global oil companies including Cheveron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP.
So the company that touts big oil as clients is helping the Iraqi government negotiate with those companies -- and getting paid by the U.S. government to do so.
But USAID and the consulting firm they hired don't call that a conflict of interest, the call it "mentoring."
"The legal department of the Ministry of Oil passed us a draft of the contract," Samir Abid, a Canadian of Iraqi origin who is an employee of the Tatweer program, said in a telephone interview. "They passed it to us and asked for our comments because we were mentoring them."
The Times wrote Sunday, in a story about Iraq's oil in the Week in Review section, many oil experts say that Iraq is among the easiest places in the world to pull oil out of the ground.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)
The Great Red Scare: Take IIAs we reported yesterday, the China-drilling-off-Cuba story that has been a talking point for high level Republicans for the last few weeks is an urban legend. And the GOP is slowly acknowledging that:
From Roll Call:
"We're not using the China talking point anymore, but we will continue to point out that it is absurd that Cuba is developing its deep-water energy resources while Democrats are blocking America from doing the same," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio).
Searching For The True Source Of A Bogus StoryWe've been trying to find the original source for that mysterious meme about China drilling for oil off the coast of Cuba and Florida.
It's flat out wrong. The AP debunked it a few days ago after Vice President Dick Cheney tried to pass it off in remarks to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce about high energy prices.
But it lives on. GOP operative Mary Matalin repeated it on CNN just last night.
We've traced the evolution of the non-fact and found it emerged a few months ago with an inexplicable spate of letters to the editor at small and regional daily newspapers. Within weeks it was popping up as a talking point among many Republican lawmakers and getting traction from conservative pundits.
In most instances, the Republicans point to the (fake) story as reason to suspend the current moratoriums on offshore drilling that are largely based on environmental concerns. It may also serve to gin up opposition to the Cuban regime, a sentiment that has been vital to GOP support in Florida.
It is true that Sinopec, the Chinese oil company, along with a half dozen other foreign firms, signed an agreement with the Cuban government to possibly explore for drilling opportunities offshore. The Sinopec deal was forged back in 2005, and any actual drilling has been delayed until at least 2009.
A 1977 agreement between Cuba and the United States set the maritime boundary at the halfway mark along the 90-mile stretch from Key West to the Cuban coast. Cuban drilling about 50 miles off the coast of Florida could begin next year.
Cheney said he got the misinformation from a George Will column published on June 5.
By then, it was already a common talking point for GOP lawmakers. Also on June 5, Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) spoke on the House floor and said: "The Chinese are drilling off the coast of Florida with their new energy partner, Cuba."
On May 23, David Gay, a Republican Congressional candidate from New York, said: "I think it is appalling that we allow Cuba and China to drill in the Florida Straits, meanwhile forbidding our own selves from seeking the common good, in this case, a way to lower the price of gasoline."
No doubt the notion was helped along by Weekly Standard writer Fred Barnes, who cited it unsourced in a column widely distributed by Yahoo.
A few weeks before that, our old friend Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) cited the alleged Chinese drilling in a May 1 press release.
Our Nexis search also found a reference to Chinese drilling from Rep. Thelma Drake (R-VA) in an April 12 op-ed in the Daily Press of Newport news.
It was in late March that the whole thing initially picked up steam. As though on cue, letter-to-the-editor writers nationwide began complaining about China's alleged drilling in the Gulf and fired off missives to their local papers.
On March 29. Jerry Lightsey in Texas wrote the Austin American-Statesmen, saying:
"China is drilling offshore from Cuba in waters where we should be."
"As I write this letter, China is drilling oil in our own back yard, in the Gulf of Mexico for Cuba. They are drilling in the exact same spots we would be drilling in, but the tree huggers won't let us."
"China is drilling off the coast of Cuba only 90 miles from the U.S., some of it being done laterally into our ocean spaces."
"We cannot drill in the Gulf of Mexico, although China and Cuba are drilling there right now."
Before late March, we could find only trace evidence of this story, in obscure places online like this one here. What triggered this sudden, widespread and misinformed outrage? Was there some sort of email blast that went out?
Maybe the March 17 news story from McClathy planted the seed. The story didn't say that China was drilling, but it raised the spector:
HAVANA, Cuba -- Imagine oil rigs drilling in deep waters just 45 miles off the coast of South Florida. Refineries process the oil in Cuba and sell it across the Caribbean and beyond. Canadian and Mexican companies supply billions of dollars in equipment and services.This could happen, as Havana invites foreign companies to explore its probable oil and natural-gas reserves while Washington's embargo against the communist-led island keeps U.S. companies locked out.
South Florida is watching closely, amid debate over drilling near its shores and concerns about U.S. energy policy. Oil companies increasingly seek to tap Cuba's deep-water reserves, now that oil prices are soaring and profits are more likely.
But all those letters all at once seems like an awful big coincidence.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (22)
