Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Barbara Holzer, Broadcast Manager
w. (202) 588-7716
bholzer@citizen.org

Karilyn Gower, Press Officer
w. (202) 588-7779
kgower@citizen.org

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog
Facebook/publiccitizen

Follow us on Twitter

 

March 20, 2013

Decision Allowing BP to Bid on New Oil Contracts Signals Profits More Important Than Safety

Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen’s Energy Program

Can a company behind the biggest environmental catastrophe in the country’s history clean up its act in four months?

Most people would say “absolutely not.” But, astoundingly, the Department of Interior (DOI) has said “yes.”

Late last week, the DOI decided to allow BP – which behaved so badly that the federal government just four months ago suspended it from bidding on federal contracts – to participate in today’s lease auction.

If the corporation’s suspension has not been lifted after the 90-day review of the auction, BP’s leases will be offered to the second-highest bidder. This puts pressure and unreasonable time constraints on the U.S. Environment Protection Agency to lift BP’s suspension from federal contracts.

Allowing BP to bid is unacceptable. The purpose of this type of suspension – which was put in place in November after a BP-affiliated company pleaded guilty to criminal charges in connection with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster – is to protect taxpayers from negligent and criminal contractors. By blatantly disregarding the intent, the government is turning what should be an effective tool to protect taxpayers into a paper tiger.

A return to decision-making that prioritizes revenue collection above all else is a return to the regulatory climate that contributed to the Gulf of Mexico tragedy.

When announcing the criminal settlement with BP, the Department of Justice stated that the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion “resulted from BP’s culture of privileging profit over prudence.”

It’s inconceivable that since November, BP could have made the sweeping changes required to make the corporation eligible for federal contracts.

In fact, in addition to an ongoing federal trial, a BP affiliate also is in litigation with the state of California, which has filed a claim against the company for safety violations at gas stations throughout the state. And BP continues to stonewall Congress, which has asked the company to produce all documents related to the spill and provide a full accounting of how and why BP's responses to congressional investigation were inaccurate and incomplete.

Yet now, BP will have an opportunity to bid on leases that are opening up 39 million acres of federal waters for drilling exploration.

Today, Public Citizen has resubmitted a petition to the EPA calling on the agency to adjust BP’s suspension so it coincides with the affiliate’s five-year probation period. The letter includes details about the lawsuit filed by the California attorney general’s office and BP’s continued obstruction of a congressional investigation of the spill.

We call on the DOI to put prudence and safety over profit by upholding its original position to ban BP from bidding on offshore leasing while under suspension.

###

Copyright © 2014 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.


Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation

 

Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.

 

To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.