Showing posts with label dumping. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dumping. Show all posts

Friday, September 28, 2012

How Chevron Squanders Big Bucks on Ecuador Case

Want a good example of how the lawyers at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher rip off their wealthy client Chevron?

It is becoming increasingly obvious that Chevron CEO John Watson and General Counsel R. Hewitt Pate are unable to stop the Gibson Dunn "rescue team" from squandering shareholder money to flout the company’s $19 billion environmental liability in Ecuador.

In a sickening example of overkill that might explain why people hate the legal profession, Chevron recently reported that it has employed 41 different law firms and almost 500 lawyers and legal assistants to fight the indigenous groups in Ecuador. These groups -- including the Cofan, Secoya, and Siona -- have been victimized by Chevron's deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste into the precious Amazon ecoysystem that the tribes depend on for their survival.

See this video for background on the case and this summary of the evidence against the oil giant.

In New York federal court this week, Gibson Dunn sent 11 lawyers to a relatively inconsequential hearing on a subpoena given to a non-party in its far-fetched “RICO” conspiracy case against the indigenous groups and their lawyers who are fighting to hold Chevron accountable. 

The firm dispatched five high-billing partners from various offices around the country – Randy Mastro (New York), Lauren Elliott (New York), Peter Selig (Washington, D.C.), William Thomson (Los Angeles), and Richard Mark (New York) – along with six other associates.

It was only Mastro, however, who stood up and argued to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan while the others seemed to sit around churning their billable hours while occasionally giving Mastro a cite to the record, a task any secretary could do.

Gibson Dunn obviously has some underutilized senior partners trying to jack up their billable hours at the expense of Chevron shareholders.

Let’s run the numbers.

Five partners, billing an average rate of $800 per hour, amounts to $4000 per hour. The hearing took several hours over two days, not to mention significant preparation time, travel time, and the writing of the subpoena itself. The six associates probably billed an average of $400 an hour to sit in the gallery and essentially do little but fetch coffee while watching the proceedings.

That’s roughly $6,400 per hour billed to Chevron shareholders for doing a whole lot of nothing. The entire proceeding easily could have been handled by Mastro and one associate. This reminds us of how 10-20 Chevron lawyers and technical staff would show up to watch American lawyer Steven Donziger be deposed for 15 days in 2010 and 2011. One person would ask questions, while the rest would watch. Various other Chevron lawyers around the country would bill for watching a live internet stream of Donziger’s testimony. 

The total bill for that exercise in overkill was at least $100,000 per day.

Chevron admitted it polluted Ecuador, but it claims it spent $40 million on a “remediation” that was nothing more than a fraudulent cover-up of its toxic waste pits. In the meantime, Chevron has spent an estimated $1 billion on its defense in the case, with Gibson Dunn’s per-partner profits in 2010 jumping 20% during a sharp downturn in the legal profession -- largely because of the wasteful billing practices that we saw this week in New York.

Chevron shareholders should not expect CEO Watson and top lawyer Pate to do much about safeguarding the company's assets when it comes to the Ecuador gamble. They double down on the company's increasingly futile defense almost weekly, so it means little to squander another $100,000 of shareholder money on a day in court so Mastro can renovate his house in the Hamptons over the winter.

Watson almost lost part of his job over his mishandling of the Ecuador litigation at the company's last annual meeting.

With waste like this and the increasing risk that billions of dollars worth of Chevron assets around the world will be seized, expect an even more forceful push by shareholders against Watson next year.


Become a follower of The Chevron Pit.
Also follow us on Twitter at @ChevronPit and like us on Facebook.
Visit and watch a video on ChevronToxico.com to find out more.

Saturday, June 5, 2010

Bob Herbert of NYT on Chevron: Rain Forest Jekyll and Hyde

Bob Herbert's column today detailing the extent of the disaster caused by Chevron in Ecuador is not the first time his attention has turned to the tragedy in the region. The below article appeared in the New York Times on October 20, 2005.

You can find the original at: http://select.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/opinion/20herbert.html

October 20, 2005

Op-Ed Columnist

Rain Forest Jekyll and Hyde?

By BOB HERBERT

Please welcome the latest entry to the Chutzpah Hall of Fame: the mighty Chevron Corporation.

On Oct. 28, during a gala ceremony at its headquarters in San Ramon, Calif., the company, which until May was known as ChevronTexaco, will honor the latest recipients of the annual Chevron Conservation Awards. The awards are meant to recognize the achievements of men and women who have "helped to protect wildlife, restore wilderness, create natural preserves and parks, and institute educational programs to heighten environmental awareness."

Meanwhile, Chevron's lawyers are in Ecuador defending the company against charges that it contributed to one of the worst environmental disasters on the planet. The company is accused of dumping more than 18 billion gallons of toxic waste, over a period of 20 years, into the soil and water of a previously pristine section of the Amazon rain forest.

According to a class-action lawsuit brought on behalf of some 30,000 impoverished residents of the rain forest, this massive, long-term pollution has ruined portions of the jungle, contaminated drinking water, sickened livestock, driven off wildlife and threatened the very survival of the indigenous tribes, which have been plagued with serious illnesses, including a variety of cancers.

Chevron, which likes to promote itself as a champion of the environment, contends that no such catastrophe occurred. A spokesman told me yesterday that the billions of gallons of waste that was dumped "wasn't necessarily toxic."

"We've done inspections," the spokesman said. "We've done a deep scientific analysis, and that analysis has shown no harmful impacts from the operations. There just aren't any."

You would have a very difficult time selling that story to the people in the rain forest who have been drinking and bathing in water fouled with the byproducts of oil-drilling processes. Parents have watched their children play and their livestock feed in areas contaminated with oily substances. Pits that perpetually ooze gunk and oil are ubiquitous.

Two years ago, a reporter from The Times interviewed a man named René Arévalo who lived near a separation plant that was once operated by a Texaco subsidiary. The house in which Mr. Arévalo and his five children lived had been built on a mound of dirt that covered a pit where wastewater had been dumped.

The family got its water from a well. "If you dig here just a meter deep," said Mr. Arévalo, "you hit oil. The water is contaminated, very contaminated. But we drink it. What else can we do?"

Texaco merged with Chevron in 2001. From the early 1970's to 1992, the Texaco subsidiary was part of a consortium that ran the oil-drilling operations in an area of virgin rain forest known simply as the Oriente - the East. Texaco discovered oil there in the late 60's.

According to nearly all accounts, neither Texaco nor its primary partner in the consortium, Ecuador's state oil company - Petroecuador - paid much attention to the effects of the venture on the surrounding environment and its people. Tremendous amounts of waste generated from the drilling, extraction, processing and transportation operations - billions upon billions of gallons - were dumped into unlined pits in the ground or poured into freshwater streams.

"The systematic way that they disposed of toxic waste in Ecuador was to dump it into open-air pits that they dug out of the jungle soil, or directly into rivers, streams and swamps in one of the most delicate ecosystems on the planet," said Steven Donziger, who is part of a team of American and Ecuadorean lawyers handling the lawsuit.

Crude oil was also spilled in the jungle, millions of gallons of it.

Disasters of this kind, involving poor people in remote areas of foreign countries, tend to stay low on the level of awareness of the American news media. The suffering tends to go unnoticed by the outside world.

The families in the vicinity of the Ecuadorean oil-drilling operations have had to drink from contaminated rivers and streams because they had such limited access to running water. And any pollution-related illnesses they may contract pose an even greater danger than normal because of their abject poverty and the absence of adequate health care.

Officials at Chevron do not see any of this as their problem. They will tell you that they've cleaned up any mess they might have made, and then some. And they will deny to their dying breath that they have harmed anyone.

After all, they're champions of the environment.

Chevron Lawyer Admits Chevron Corruption

One of Chevron's chief Ecuadorian lawyers, Rodrigo Perez Pallares, has admitted under oath that the company has been lying to courts in the United States and Ecuador to evade a potential $27 billion liability in Ecuador. Chevron is accused in a lawsuit of deliberately dumping more than 18.5 billion gallons of toxic "produced water" and oil waste into Ecuador's Amazon rainforest when Texaco (now Chevron) operated and reaped the profits of an oil concession there from 1964 to 1992.

For years, Chevron's primary defense in the case – given that the scientific evidence of pollution is overwhelming -- is that the government of Ecuador "released" it from any future liability in return for a partial "remediation" even though that so-called "remediation" has been exposed as a complete fraud.

But the sworn testimony of Perez Pallares, Chevron's own lawyer and the man who negotiated and signed the "release" agreement, proves what the Amazonian communities have long said – that Chevron knows that this legal defense is bogus. When Perez Pallares was asked in a deposition in the United States if the "release" impacts claims of third parties parties who did not sign the release (like those of the Amazonian residents currently suing Chevron) his response was simple: The release has no impact on those claims.

This testimony directly contradicts what Chevron is saying in various courts around the world, to its shareholders, to journalists, and to the SEC and regulatory authorities. Perez Pallares made his statements on November 16, 2006, during a deposition in a separate litigation between Ecuador's government and Chevron in New York federal court. In that case, Chevron hastily withdrew the "release" claim when it appeared a U.S. federal judge could actually review it and issue a ruling.

An excerpt from the stunning testimony of Perez Pallares:

Q: But what [Article 8 of the MOU] does do instead is it carves out entirely any action brought by parties who were not parties to the settlement agreement. Would you agree with that?

The Witness (Pallares): I agree…

Q: If I'm understanding you correctly, and I don't mean to mischaracterize your testimony – you'll tell me if I'm incorrect – I think what you're saying is that a plaintiff can sue in Ecuador but can only obtain relief to the extent that Ecuador permits that relief.

Pallares: That's exactly it.

Q: But the MOU and the settlement doesn't affect that one way or the other. It doesn't give them rights they would not otherwise have. Is that a fair statement?

Pallares: That's correct.

Read the entire page of the testimony here.

Note also that section VIII of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by Chevron and Ecuador's government in 1994 explicitly states (in reference to the release):

The provisions of this agreement shall apply without prejudice to the rights possibly held by third parties for the impact caused as a consequence of the operations of the former PETROECUADOR-TEXACO Consortium.

Remember, Perez Pallares negotiated and signed the "release" for Chevron so we can assume he knows what he's talking about.

Chevron's CEO, John Watson, and General Counsel, Hewitt Pate, know that the company has been lying about its "release" of liability in Ecuador – which is why they've been desperate to attack the people bringing the lawsuit against the company and their allies. This desperation (and Watson's thin skin about the Ecuador issue) was on display in recent days when the company's annual shareholder meeting exploded into chaos when Watson couldn't handle being confronted by critics of Chevron's abysmal human rights and environmental record. Instead of talking to the critics, who had a legal right to be present at the shareholder meeting, Watson lost control of the meeting and ordered Chevron's private security forces and the Houston Police Department to crush the protestors – arresting five non-violent company critics, including a reverend from Oakland, CA. Now Chevron and the Houston Police Department are facing additional liability for blowing their cool and treating the shareholder's meeting like a junior high school student council meeting.

Given the size of Chevron's Ecuador liability and his own involvement in covering it up, Watson's desperation is understandable. Watson and Pate know that the scientific evidence – more than 62,000 chemical sampling results – and trial record – more than 200,000 pages of evidence, testimony, and motions – conclusively demonstrate Chevron's culpability in a disaster that is several orders of magnitude larger than the terrible tragedy caused by BP's spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Given Chevron's despicable conduct in Ecuador, it is not surprising that Watson is using any means necessary to escape the liability – even if it includes lying to U.S. and Ecuadorian courts about the so-called "release" that his own lawyer knows is a bogus defense.