Current:Home > NewsEnbridge Now Expects $55 Million Fine for Michigan Oil Spill -Secure Horizon Growth
Enbridge Now Expects $55 Million Fine for Michigan Oil Spill
View
Date:2025-04-13 14:06:45
The potential fine Enbridge, Inc. expects for spilling more than 1 million gallons of tar sands oil into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River in 2010 continues to creep higher and now is estimated at $55 million.
The Canada-based company revealed the revised estimate earlier this week in a quarterly disclosure filing with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission. It cautions investors that the ultimate fine eventually imposed by the federal Environmental Protection Agency could cost the company even more.
The new figure offers a glimpse of the highly secretive and lengthy negotiations between Enbridge and the EPA and lawyers from the U.S. Department of Justice. In 2013, Enbridge estimated the fine would be $22 million. That figure jumped to $40 million last year. Those shifting numbers signal a resolution may be near, industry analysts say.
The penalty is for Clean Water Act violations surrounding the tar sands oil spill that fouled nearly 40 miles of the Kalamazoo River near Marshall, Mich. after its aging pipeline 6B ruptured nearly six years ago.
The spill triggered a massive cleanup effort that has cost the company more than $1.2 billion.
Before being asked by the EPA not to discuss the negotiations publically, Enbridge spokesman Michael Barnes said the EPA opened discussions last year with a proposed $85 million fine. That led to Enbridge to propose a $40 million fine and the EPA countered with $65 million, Barnes said.
But now, Barnes said he can no longer talk about the settlement discussions at the request of the EPA.
“We continue to meet with the DOJ and EPA to discuss possible settlement parameters,” he said. “The DOJ/EPA has bound us to confidentiality on the discussions.”
The EPA did not respond to requests for comment.
The $55 million figure represents the minimum fine the company expects, according to its SEC filing.
“Given the complexity of settlement negotiations, which we expect will continue, and the limited information available to assess the matter, we are unable to reasonably estimate the final penalty which might be incurred or to reasonably estimate a range of outcomes at this time,” the company said in the filing.
Enbridge also noted that the EPA could require it to institute programs such as enhanced monitoring of its pipelines that could add to its costs.
Andy Levine, a former EPA lawyer now in private practice in Philadelphia, said the disclosure of the $55 million figure indicates a settlement is near.
“This has been going on for some time now. So when you see the numbers getting closer and some movement by both sides, it tells me that a resolution is close at hand,” he said.
“This is not something that either side wants to go on forever.”
Enbridge and the EPA have twice agreed to extend the deadline for reaching a settlement.
“There comes a time when it has to be done so both parties can move on,” Levin said. “I think that’s what you’re seeing here. There have been two time extensions and the numbers are getting closer.”
Levin also said he believes Enbridge and the EPA want to avoid a lengthy and costly court battle.
“I’m not seeing a stalemate here,” he said. “It appears they want to keep this out of court.”
Enbridge already has been hit with millions in penalties. The company agreed to a $75 million fine from Michigan environmental officials and a $4 million settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division in 2014. The company also was tagged with a $3.7 million civil penalty by the U.S. Department of Transportation four years ago.
veryGood! (82)
Related
- Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
- CoCo Lee's Husband Bruce Rockowitz Speaks Out After Her Death at 48
- A New Shell Plant in Pennsylvania Will Soon Become the State’s Second Largest Emitter of Volatile Organic Chemicals
- The Fed decides to wait and see
- What do we know about the mysterious drones reported flying over New Jersey?
- Inside Clean Energy: Did You Miss Me? A Giant Battery Storage Plant Is Back Online, Just in Time for Summer
- Inside Clean Energy: Did You Miss Me? A Giant Battery Storage Plant Is Back Online, Just in Time for Summer
- A University of Maryland Center Just Gave Most State Agencies Ds and Fs on an Environmental Justice ‘Scorecard’
- Trump suggestion that Egypt, Jordan absorb Palestinians from Gaza draws rejections, confusion
- Live Nation and Ticketmaster tell Biden they're going to show fees up front
Ranking
- Arkansas State Police probe death of woman found after officer
- In Brazil, the World’s Largest Tropical Wetland Has Been Overwhelmed With Unprecedented Fires and Clouds of Propaganda
- Maria Menounos Proudly Shares Photo of Pancreatic Cancer Surgery Scars
- Experts raised safety concerns about OceanGate years before its Titanic sub vanished
- Retirement planning: 3 crucial moves everyone should make before 2025
- Inside Clean Energy: Flow Batteries Could Be a Big Part of Our Energy Storage Future. So What’s a Flow Battery?
- A year after Yellowstone floods, fishing guides have to learn 'a whole new river'
- Oil Companies Are Eying Federal Climate Funds to Expand Hydrogen Production. Will Their Projects Cut Emissions?
Recommendation
Why members of two of EPA's influential science advisory committees were let go
Community and Climate Risk in a New England Village
In Pennsylvania, a New Administration Fuels Hopes for Tougher Rules on Energy, Environment
These millionaires want to tax the rich, and they're lobbying working-class voters
Federal appeals court upholds $14.25 million fine against Exxon for pollution in Texas
Is greedflation really the villain?
Why Paul Wesley Gives a Hard Pass to a Vampire Diaries Reboot
How Jill Duggar Is Parenting Her Own Way Apart From Her Famous Family