DOCSLIB.ORG

Claimants' Memorial on the Merits

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Claimants' Memorial on the Merits IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE RULES OF THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW ________________________________________________________________________ CHEVRON CORPORATION and TEXACO PETROLEUM COMPANY, CLAIMANTS, v. THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR, RESPONDENT. ________________________________________________________________________ CLAIMANTS’ MEMORIAL ON THE MERITS ________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND........................................................................................... 12 A. TexPet’s Operations in Ecuador ........................................................................... 12 1. The TexPet-Petroecuador Consortium...................................................... 12 2. Ecuador’s Control over the Consortium ................................................... 15 3. The Consortium’s Operations................................................................... 17 4. TexPet’s Operations Complied with Then-Prevailing Industry Standards................................................................................................... 20 5. The Government Required TexPet to Build Public Infrastructure ........... 23 B. Post-Consortium Negotiations and Environmental Audits................................... 26 1. HBT AGRA’s Audit ................................................................................. 27 2. Fugro-McClelland’s Parallel Audit........................................................... 28 C. Ecuador Released TexPet from Public Environmental Claims in Exchange for Environmental Remediation and Other Payments .......................................... 30 1. TexPet and Ecuador Negotiated the Scope of Remedial Work ................ 30 2. The Ecuadorian State Was the Only Entity with Authority to Negotiate and Settle Public Environmental Claims.................................. 32 3. The Parties’ Agreements........................................................................... 33 a. The Final Draft Proposal............................................................... 34 b. The 1994 Memorandum of Understanding................................... 34 c. The 1995 Scope of Work .............................................................. 36 d. The 1995 Settlement Agreement .................................................. 38 e. The Municipal and Provincial Settlement Agreements ................ 40 D. TexPet Fulfilled Its Remediation Obligations and Received a Full Environmental Release from Ecuador .................................................................. 43 1. TexPet Hired Woodward-Clyde to Prepare the Remedial Action Plan.... 43 2. The Remedial Action Plan........................................................................ 44 a. Pit Closure..................................................................................... 45 b. Other Remediation Action Requirements..................................... 47 3. TexPet Remediated the Concession Area According to the Remedial Action Plan ............................................................................... 49 4. Ecuador and Petroecuador Formally Approved the Remediation Work ......................................................................................................... 54 5. The 1998 Final Release............................................................................. 56 6. There Is No Significant Risk to Human Health or the Environment Associated with TexPet-Remediated Sites ............................................... 57 E. Petroecuador’s Ongoing Impacts in the Former Concession Area....................... 62 i 1. Petroecuador Has Caused Extensive Environmental Damage since 1992 ................................................................................................. 62 2. The Belated PEPDA Remediation Program ............................................. 65 F. The Aguinda Litigation Concerned Individual, Not Public Claims...................... 67 1. The Aguinda Plaintiffs Treated the Aguinda Claims as Individual .......... 71 2. Texaco, Inc. Treated the Aguinda Claims as Individual........................... 73 3. The District Court Treated the Aguinda Claims as Individual ................. 73 4. The Second Circuit Treated the Aguinda Claims as Individual................ 74 G. The Lago Agrio Litigation Concerns Public Claims that Have Been Settled, and the Litigation Is Permeated with Fraud.......................................................... 75 1. The Lago Agrio Complaint and Initial Court Proceedings....................... 75 a. The Lago Agrio Plaintiffs Do Not Seek Individual Damages, but Seek Enforcement of Their Collective Environmental Rights under the 1999 Environmental Management Act.............. 75 b. The Lago Agrio Litigation Is Being Tried as a Verbal Summary Proceeding.................................................................... 78 c. Chevron Objected to the Jurisdiction of the Lago Agrio Court.... 79 d. The Plaintiffs Brought Suit against the Wrong Party ................... 80 2. The Evidence-Gathering Process.............................................................. 83 a. The Parties Agreed to an Evidence-Gathering Judicial Inspection Process......................................................................... 83 b. The Judicial Inspections Demonstrated that TexPet Complied with Its Remediation Obligations and that There Was No Significant Risk to Human Health or the Environment Associated with TexPet-Remediated Sites ................................... 85 c. The Panel of Settling Experts for Sacha 53 .................................. 90 3. The Court Abandoned the Evidence-Gathering Process and Appointed a Single Global Assessment Expert ........................................ 91 a. The Plaintiffs Sought to Set Aside the Judicial Inspection Process and Designate a Single Global Expert............................. 91 b. The Plaintiffs Hand-Picked Richard Cabrera as the Global Expert and Secretly Met with Him before His Appointment ....... 92 c. Mr. Cabrera’s Appointment Was Non-Transparent, Illegal, and Procedurally Inappropriate................................................... 101 d. Mr. Cabrera Did Not Write the Reports that Were Submitted in His Name ................................................................................ 103 e. The Cabrera Reports Lack Any Scientific Basis or Support ...... 111 4. The Court Orders Regarding Cabrera..................................................... 115 a. The Court Has Ignored All Evidence of Serious Flaws and Fraud in the Cabrera Reports ...................................................... 115 ii b. Faced with Massive Evidence of the Plaintiffs’ Fraud and Collusion with Mr. Cabrera Revealed in the Crude Outtakes, the Court Attempted to Restrict Chevron’s Due Process Rights............................................................................. 116 H. The Ecuadorian Government Is Colluding with the Plaintiffs to Improperly Influence the Court and Undermine Chevron’s Defense.................................... 118 1. Government Officials Have Had Repeated Improper Contacts with the Lago Agrio Plaintiffs and Have Provided Them with Financial Support.................................................................................... 120 2. The Lago Agrio Plaintiffs and the Ecuadorian Government Have Shared Legal Counsel ............................................................................. 128 3. The Lago Agrio Court Has Succumbed to Corruption and Political Pressure by the Plaintiffs and the Government....................................... 132 a. The Lago Agrio Plaintiffs Are Engaged in Pressure Tactics Designed to Influence the Lago Agrio Court.............................. 132 b. The Ecuadorian Government Has Signaled the Required Outcome to the Lago Agrio Court .............................................. 135 c. Timeline of Political Conduct and Court Action ........................ 139 I. The Ecuadorian Judiciary Lacks Independence.................................................. 148 J. The Criminal Proceedings against Messrs. Veiga and Pérez Are Baseless and Are Designed to Undermine the Settlement and Release Agreements........ 150 1. The April 2003 Comptroller General Report Is Replete with Fundamental Errors................................................................................. 153 2. The Comptroller General Nonetheless Filed a Criminal Complaint with Ecuador’s Prosecutor General on the Basis of the CG Report ....... 156 3. Ecuador’s Prosecutor General Investigated and Dismissed the Falsification Proceedings........................................................................ 159 4. Ecuador’s Pichincha Prosecutors Investigated and Dismissed the Environmental Proceedings .................................................................... 161 5. Despite the Prosecutor General’s Requests to Dismiss the Falsification Proceedings, the President of the Supreme Court Breached Ecuadorian Criminal Procedure by Refusing to Archive the Case................................................................................................... 165 6. President Correa and the Government Demanded the Prosecution of Claimants’ Lawyers and Dismissed the Prosecutor General Who Refused to Pursue the Case....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Response to Doug Cassel's Apology for Chevron's Human Rights Violations in Ecuador*
    Response to Doug Cassel's Apology for Chevron's Human Rights Violations In Ecuador* Notre Dame law professor Doug Cassel has sold his credibility as a human rights advocate to Chevron, a company that in Ecuador and elsewhere has proven itself to have committed significant human rights abuses against vulnerable peoples.1 In an argument based heavily on Chevron’s own misrepresentations, Cassel asserts in an “Open Letter” to the human rights community that a court finding in Ecuador that Chevron's toxic dumping decimated indigenous groups and wrecked the delicate Amazon ecosystem is illegitimate. We believe that Cassel's facts are inaccurate or stripped from context, his scholarship is rife with shortcomings, and his conclusions are deeply flawed. What is indisputable is that Cassel remained silent for the entire 18 years of this landmark battle for human rights justice until Chevron recently retained him.2 This is a sad spectacle indeed for a man who has dedicated much of his career to the field of human rights law. Cassel cites supposed "defects" in the Ecuador trial process—defects which take place regularly in trials the world over—to condemn not only the entire eight-year proceeding that resulted in the judgment against Chevron, but also the entire judicial system of a U.S. ally with an independent judiciary where Chevron itself has won multiple cases in recent years.3 Cassel also engages in false and defamatory * This document was prepared by members of the legal team that represents the Lago Agrio plaintiffs. Chevron operated under the “Texaco” brand in Ecuador from 1964-1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Confrontation, Repression in Correa's Ecuador
    Confrontation, repression in Correa’s Ecuador A special report by the Committee to Protect Journalists Committee to Protect Journalists Confrontation, repression in Correa's Ecuador Rafael Correa's administration has led Ecuador into a new era of widespread repression by pre-empting private news broadcasts, enacting restrictive legal measures, smearing critics, and filing debilitating defamation lawsuits. A CPJ special report by Carlos Lauría President Rafael Correa rips a copy of the national daily La Hora during a conference in Cotacachi County. Correa has taken an aggressive stance toward news media. (El Universo) Published September 1, 2011 QUITO, Ecuador Jeanette Hinostroza, anchor of the Teleamazonas newsmagazine "30 Plus" and regular critic of President Rafael Correa, knew she had more fodder for her commentary when she learned in April that a woman had been charged with disrespecting the two-term Ecuadoran leader. Correa had abused his authority and demeaned his office, Hinostroza told viewers, by ordering the woman’s arrest based on what he considered to be an insulting gesture. It wasn’t long before Hinostroza found herself in the crosshairs of Correa, a president who freely calls reporters “ignorant” and “liars.” The next day, the Correa administration ordered Teleamazonas, a Quito-based private network known for its criticism of the president’s policies, to pre-empt 10 minutes of Hinostroza’s program with a harsh and personal rebuttal from a government spokesman who called her ethics into question. That Saturday, during his weekly address on state radio, Correa went on to question Hinostroza’s intellect, mocking her as a “redhead” who should be ignored.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Southern District of New York
    Case 1:19-cr-00561-LAP Document 328 Filed 06/09/21 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, 11 Cr. 0691 (LAP) v. STEVEN DONZIGER, Defendant. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND OFFER OF PROOF Martin Garbus, Esq. OFFIT | KURMAN 590 Madison Ave., 6th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel. 347.589.8513 Fax. 212.545.1656 [email protected] Counsel for defendant Case 1:19-cr-00561-LAP Document 328 Filed 06/09/21 Page 2 of 26 INTRODUCTION This case is extraordinary. For the first time in the history of the United States, a private law firm with substantial ties to the oil and gas industry has been granted the powers of the United States to prosecute an adverse party and human rights attorney. To make matters worse, Mr. Donziger has been denied a jury of his peers and the presiding judge (the Hon. Loretta Preska) was handpicked by the aggrieved party (the Hon. Lewis Kaplan) to preside over the case.1 Even more disturbing is that this appears to be the nation's first corporate prosecution given that the oil company (Chevron) against whom Mr. Donziger won a large pollution judgement in Ecuador is a client of the very law firm (Seward & Kissel) now prosecuting him after the charges were declined by the U.S. attorney. In short, this case has all the trappings of a deeply troubled and conflicted prosecution run by an oil company. As a threshold issue, this case has been riddled with such structural decay as to warrant immediate dismissal on all charges.
    [Show full text]
  • Donziger's Counterclaims
    Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK Document 567-1 Filed 08/15/12 Page 94 of 152 COUNTERCLAIMS Defendants and Counter-Claimants Steven Donziger, The Law Offices of Steven R. Donziger, and Donziger & Associates, PLLC (collectively, “Donziger”) for their Counterclaims against Plaintiff and Counter-Claim Defendant Chevron Corporation (“Chevron”) allege as follows: I. INTRODUCTION 1. By no later than 2009, Chevron recognized that it was on the verge of losing one of the largest oil-related contamination lawsuits ever to go to trial, Maria Aguinda y Otros v. Chevron Corporation (the “Lago Agrio Litigation”), which had been wending its way through the United States and then the Ecuadorian court systems for 16 years. Chevron’s own documents, internal environmental audits, and expert analyses confirmed the toxic legacy its predecessor, Texaco, Inc. (“Texaco”), intentionally and knowingly had left behind in the Oriente region of Ecuador. And Chevron was running out of maneuvers to dodge entirely or delay a final adjudication of the claims against it on the merits. 2. Texaco—and, later, a merged entity referring to itself as “ChevronTexaco” — repeatedly had demanded that the trial not be heard in United States federal court in New York, the plaintiffs’ preferred forum, but rather in Ecuador, a forum which Chevron successfully argued to the Southern District of New York and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was “fair” and “totally adequate” and capable of handling a complex lawsuit against a foreign corporation such as Chevron. In so doing, Chevron did not believe that the 30,000 indigenous peoples and others impacted by Texaco’s misconduct (the “Afectados”)—who grew up drinking from the streams into which the company has admitted dumping billions of gallons of toxic “production water” during its 25 years of profitable operations in the region—would re- 92 685851 Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK Document 567-1 Filed 08/15/12 Page 95 of 152 file their environmental claims in Ecuador, or that Chevron would fail in its efforts to derail any Ecuadorian lawsuit.
    [Show full text]
  • The West African Oil & Gas Market 2013-2023
    The West African Oil & Gas Market 2013-2023 Table 4.28 Exploration Fields that Gabon Oil Company is Involved in Fields Operator MAGHENA Addax AGALI Anadarko NKANI Atas E2 Eni D3 Eni D4 Eni F2 Eni F3 Eni F7 Eni EPAEMENO GGPC EOV GGPC DUSSAFU Harvest ETEKAMBA Maurel & Prom OMOUEYI Maurel & Prom NYANGA MAYOMBE Maurel & Prom KARI Maurel & Prom MOABI MPDC NGUMA MPDC SHAKTHI Oil India MBELI Ophir Gabon NTSINA Ophir Gabon MANGA Ophir Gabon GNONDO Ophir Gabon NZIEMBOU Perenco OGUEYI Perenco DE 7 Perenco AROUWE Perenco DUSSAFU Sasol IGOUMOU MARIN Shell Gabon BC9 Shell Gabon BCD10 Shell Gabon SALSICH Sino Gabon LOTUS Sinopec MBINDA Total Gabon ALOUMBE Total Gabon DIABA Total Gabon AZOBE Tullow Oil AKOUM Tullow Oil KIARSSENY Tullow Oil Source: Gabon Oil Company 4.7.5.3 Prospects for Pre-Salt Development As with Angola and several other West African countries, the rapid development of Brazil’s pre-salt formations has sparked considerable interest in the prospects for Gabon’s pre-salt regions, which were part of the same prehistoric supercontinent, Pangea. Gabon’s pre-salt regions had been www.visiongain.com Page 99 The West African Oil & Gas Market 2013-2023 4.8 Republic of the Congo Oil & Gas Market Forecast 2013-2023 Table 4.31, Figure 4.32 and Figure 4.33 show visiongain’s forecast for Republic of Congo’s oil & gas market over the next ten years. Table 4.31 Republic of the Congo Oil & Gas Market Forecast 2013-2023 ($bn, AGR %, CAGR%, Cumulative) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2013-23 Capex $bn 1.55 1.70 2.57 4.15 4.55 2.70 2.50 1.80 1.87 2.10 2.40 2.80 29.14 AGR (%) 9.8 50.9 61.6 9.6 -40.7 -7.4 -28.0 3.9 12.3 14.3 16.7 CAGR (%) 2013-18 8.0 2018-23 2.3 CAGR (%) 2013-23 5.1 Source: Visiongain 2013 Figure 4.32 Republic of the Congo Oil & Gas Market Forecast 2013-2023 ($bn, AGR%) 5.0 80% 4.5 60% 4.0 3.5 40% 3.0 20% 2.5 $Bn AGR 0% 2.0 1.5 -20% 1.0 -40% 0.5 0.0 -60% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Year Source: Visiongain 2013 www.visiongain.com Page 103 The West African Oil & Gas Market 2013-2023 6.
    [Show full text]
  • El País Que Queríamos
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositorio UASB-DIGITAL El contenido de esta obra es una contribución del autor al repositorio digital de la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Sede Ecuador, por tanto el autor tiene exclusiva responsabilidad sobre el mismo y no necesariamente refleja los puntos de vista de la UASB. Este trabajo se almacena bajo una licencia de distribución no exclusiva otorgada por el autor al repositorio, y con licencia Creative Commons - Reconocimiento-No comercial-Sin obras derivadas 3.0 Ecuador El país que queríamos Alberto Acosta Juan Cuvi Edgar Isch Decio Machado Esperanza Martínez Francisco Muñoz Darwin Seraquive María Fernanda Solíz 2013 Se incluye en el Repositorio UASB-Digital con la autorización de María Fernanda Soliz, coautora del libro. 1 El país que queríamos ÍNDICE Presentación: El país que queríamos, ¿ahora sí?...................................................................9 Primera edición: 2013 1. Unidad..........................................................................................................................................25 No. de ejemplares: 1000 2. Programa de Gobierno de la Unidad Plurinacional Documento en permanente construcción colectiva..........................................................34 Autor: Alberto Acosta 3. Nuestro compromiso: Construir el Buen Vivir-Sumak Kawsay...................................86 Coautores: Juan Cuvi, Edgar Isch, Decio Machado, Esperanza Martínez, Francisco 4. Construir una economía
    [Show full text]
  • News: Icsid Tribunal Applies Ad Hoc Approach To
    Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development www.investmenttreatynews.org March 2010 PAGE 1 NEWS: NEWS: ICSID tribunal applies ad ICSID TRIBUNAL APPLIES AD HOC hoc approach to confidentiality in APPROACH TO CONFIDENTIALITY IN arbitral proceeding ARBITRAL PROCEEDING By Ugo Ukpabi* PAGE 2 In Giovanna A Beccara and Others v. the crux of the dispute centered on NEWS: A merits hearing takes place The Argentine Republic a tribunal the appropriate disclosure and use in protracted NAFTA dispute over composed of Pierre Tercier, Georges of personal information relating to US tobacco settlements Abi - Saab, and Albert Jan Van den individual claimants in the case. Berg has decided that questions of PAGE 3 NEWS: Ecuadorians battle Chevron in ICSID arbitrations should be in U.S. court over BIT arbitration confidentiality and transparency “…unless there [is] an in long-running environmental agreement of the [p]arties on damage dispute determined on a case by case basis. the issue of confidentiality/ of Argentina’s response to response PAGE 5 The dispute – one of many arising out transparency, the Tribunal NEWS: Tribunals have been shall decide on the matter constituted in ICSID cases involving to its financial crisis – concerns debt Egypt, Cambodia and Argentina Argentinesecurity issued creditors, by Argentina including and the [questions of confidentiality claimants.held by numerous In late 2001, non-Argentine Argentina and was and transparency] on a case PAGE 6 NEWS: Canadian mining firm by case basis…” accused of links to murder of underunable those to meet bond its instruments.financial obligations As an Disagreements between the parties protester, has Chiapas mine shut alternativeand failed to to pay meeting amounts its obligations owed began in March of 2008 when down under the bond issue, the Argentine Argentina requested production Republic launched an Exchange of certain electronic information PAGE 7 Offer (the “Exchange Offer”).
    [Show full text]
  • Dear Secretary Salazar: I Strongly
    Dear Secretary Salazar: I strongly oppose the Bush administration's illegal and illogical regulations under Section 4(d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, which reduce protections to polar bears and create an exemption for greenhouse gas emissions. I request that you revoke these regulations immediately, within the 60-day window provided by Congress for their removal. The Endangered Species Act has a proven track record of success at reducing all threats to species, and it makes absolutely no sense, scientifically or legally, to exempt greenhouse gas emissions -- the number-one threat to the polar bear -- from this successful system. I urge you to take this critically important step in restoring scientific integrity at the Department of Interior by rescinding both of Bush's illegal regulations reducing protections to polar bears. Sarah Bergman, Tucson, AZ James Shannon, Fairfield Bay, AR Keri Dixon, Tucson, AZ Ben Blanding, Lynnwood, WA Bill Haskins, Sacramento, CA Sher Surratt, Middleburg Hts, OH Kassie Siegel, Joshua Tree, CA Sigrid Schraube, Schoeneck Susan Arnot, San Francisco, CA Stephanie Mitchell, Los Angeles, CA Sarah Taylor, NY, NY Simona Bixler, Apo Ae, AE Stephan Flint, Moscow, ID Steve Fardys, Los Angeles, CA Shelbi Kepler, Temecula, CA Kim Crawford, NJ Mary Trujillo, Alhambra, CA Diane Jarosy, Letchworth Garden City,Herts Shari Carpenter, Fallbrook, CA Sheila Kilpatrick, Virginia Beach, VA Kierã¡N Suckling, Tucson, AZ Steve Atkins, Bath Sharon Fleisher, Huntington Station, NY Hans Morgenstern, Miami, FL Shawn Alma,
    [Show full text]
  • La Naturaleza Con Derechos De La Filosofía a La Política
    LA NATURALEZA CON DERECHOS DE LA FILOSOFÍA A LA POLÍTICA Alberto Acosta y Esperanza Martínez Compiladores Quito, 2011 3 3 LA NATURALEZA CON DERECHOS De la filosofía a la política Alberto Acosta y Esperanza Martínez compiladores 1era. Edición Ediciones Abya-Yala Av. 12 de octubre 14-30 y Wilson Casilla 17-12-719 Telf.: (593-2) 2506251 Fax: (593-2) 2506267 E-mail: [email protected] www.abyayala.org Quito-Ecuador Edición: Nadesha Montalvo Rueda Diagramación: Ediciones Abya-Yala Quito-Ecuador ISBN: 978-9978-22-995-8 Impresión: Ediciones Abya-Yala Quito-Ecuador Impreso en Quito-Ecuador, mayo de 2011 Auspiciado por la Fundación Rosa Luxemburg 4 4 Contenido Prólogo Esperanza Martínez.......................................... 7 La Pachamama y el humano Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni .................................... 25 Democracia de la Tierra y los Derechos de la Naturaleza Vandana Shiva................................................. 139 El derecho de la naturaleza: fundamentos Ramiro Ávila Santamaría ................................ 173 Los derechos de la Naturaleza en serio Eduardo Gudynas ............................................ 239 El Sujeto Naturaleza: elementos para su comprensión Diana Murcia................................................... 287 Los Derechos de la Naturaleza Una lectura sobre el derecho a la existencia Alberto Acosta................................................... 317 Post scriptum................................................... 369 5 5 5 6 6 Prólogo Esperanza Martínez Bióloga y miembro de Acción Ecológica. Coordinadora de la campaña “Amazonía por la vida/El Yasuní depende de ti”. Con esta y otras publicaciones se están dando pasos hacia la construcción de una doc- trina de los Derechos de la Naturaleza. En la lectura de cada uno de los artículos se despren- den elementos importantes que nos permiten entender las razones y la potencialidad del reco- nocimiento de estos derechos.
    [Show full text]
  • UK/Netherlands SNS Hackathon Output Report
    UK/Netherlands SNS Hackathon Output Report April 2019 Contents Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 How Does a Hackathon Event Work? ................................................................................................................... 5 Findings ............................................................................................................................................................... 6 Operator Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Operator 1: Shell .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Operator2: Oranje Nassau Energie B.V. ........................................................................................................ 8 Operator 3: Spirit Energy .............................................................................................................................. 9 Operator 4: Neptune Energy ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • July 21, 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090
    July 21, 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Attn: File No. S7-06-16, Docket No. 33-10064, Business and Financial Disclosure Required by Regulation S-K The Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law,1 University of Chicago Abrams Environmental Law Clinic,2 and Oceana3 respectfully submit these comments in response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s “concept release” on business and financial disclosures. Specifically, in response to the SEC’s question about increasing environmental disclosures,4 these comments advocate for either new rules or an interpretive release with guidance clarifying the disclosure requirements around the risks from offshore oil and gas operations, particularly in frontier areas like ultra-deepwater and the Arctic Ocean. The SEC is tasked with the tripartite mission of protecting investors; maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitating capital formation.5 In pursuit of that mission, the SEC requires certain mandatory disclosures by issuers of securities. This disclosure regime is driven by the concept that all investors should have access to certain facts about an investment.6 The disclosure of meaningful information to the public creates a common pool of knowledge that investors may use to evaluate for themselves whether to buy, sell, or hold a particular security.7 With changing 1 Policy Integrity is a non-partisan think tank dedicated to improving the quality of government decision-making through advocacy and scholarship in the fields of administrative law, cost-benefit analysis, and public policy. These comments do not necessarily reflect the views of NYU School of Law, if any.
    [Show full text]
  • OPEC: Its Role and Influence Since 1960
    OPEC: Its Role and Influence since 1960 Prof. Dr J. Clifford Jones Download free books at Dr J. Clifford Jones OPEC: Its Role and Influence since 1960 2 Download free eBooks at bookboon.com OPEC: Its Role and Influence since 1960 1st edition © 2014 Dr J. Clifford Jones & bookboon.com ISBN 978-87-403-0748-1 3 Download free eBooks at bookboon.com Dedicated to the memory of: Anne Gray (Forshaw) 1936–2012 whose presence brought warmth to so many. 4 Download free eBooks at bookboon.com OPEC: Its Role and Influence since 1960 Contents Contents Preface 8 1 The origins of OPEC and its primary aims 9 1.1 Introduction 9 1.2 Oil production in Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in 1960 9 1.3 The OPEC conference in 1960 10 1.4 Other early OPEC conferences 11 1.5 Further information 13 1.6 The OPEC basket price 14 1.7 References 15 2 Entrants to OPEC after 1965 17 2.1 Algeria, entered 1969 17 2.2 Nigeria, entered 1971 19 2.3 Ecuador joined 1973, withdrew 1992, rejoined 2007 20 5 Click on the ad to read more Download free eBooks at bookboon.com OPEC: Its Role and Influence since 1960 Contents 2.4 Gabon, entered 1975, withdrew 1996 21 2.5 Angola, joined 2007 23 2.6 Further information 24 2.7 References 24 3 Production quotas 26 3.1 Background 26 3.2 Iran 26 3.3 Kuwait 27 3.4 Venezuela 27 3.5 Saudi Arabia 29 360° 3.6 Iraq 29 3.7 Qatar 31 3.8 Libya 33 thinking 3.9 Indonesia 360° 33 .
    [Show full text]