Remove 2018 Remove E&P Remove Offshore
article thumbnail

2023 Begins With Increased (or Unlimited) Liability for Vessel Owners

The Energy Law Blog

11] The Coast Guard is not responsible for adjusting OPA limits for offshore facilities (other than deepwater ports). 11] The Coast Guard is not responsible for adjusting OPA limits for offshore facilities (other than deepwater ports). Those limits were last increased in 2018 to $137,659,500 by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. [12]

Oil 98
article thumbnail

FIFTH CIRCUIT BEGINS TO CLEAN UP ITS JURISPRUDENCE ON HOW TO DETERMINE WHETHER A CONTRACT IS (OR IS NOT) MARITIME

The Energy Law Blog

Recently, the court applied Doiron in the context of a contract to plug and abandon a series of offshore wells in Crescent Energy Services, L.L.C., 3] In Crescent , litigation ensued after Crescent’s employee suffered injuries while conducting P&A work on a platform. 3d 568 (5th Cir 2018). [3] 3] 2018 WL 3420665 (5th Cir.

E&P 40
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

EPA’s Proposed Rule on Vessel Incidental Discharges Brings VIDA One Step Closer to Full Implementation

The Energy Law Blog

The VIDA, enacted in December 2018, will standardize incidental discharge permits and regulations, replacing the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) that commercial vessels are currently required to follow. Communications include firm news, insights, and events.

article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit to Hold Oral Argument in Sojitz v. UNOCAL in April 2020

The Energy Law Blog

Last year, in another dispute over who should bear the cost of decommissioning offshore facilities, the Southern District of Texas held that a former sub-assignee of offshore operating rights was entitled to equitable subrogation from the record title owner and initial assignor. Sojitz Energy Venture, Inc. Union Oil Co. 3d 687 (S.D.

Royalty 52