Public Lands: Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act: Qui Tarn

摘要

Plaintiffs filed this qui tarn action under the False Claims Act (FCA) asserting that BP had falsely certified that its offshore facility known as Atlantis complied with all applicable federal statutory and regulatory requirements. One of the two plaintiffs was a former employee for a third party that had responsibility for administering the Atlantis facility. Plaintiffs are seeking to enjoin BP from further producing oil and natural gas and to recover the revenue received from the sale of hydrocarbons from Atlantis. BP filed this motion seeking to dismiss both the claims under the FCA and the claims under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). As to the FCA claims, BP argued that plaintiffs have not pled a false claim for property and money witii sufficient specificity. As to the OCSLA claims, BP argued that the court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin activities under the OCSLA, plaintiffs have failed to join an indispensable party and that plaintiffs lack standing. The District Court denied BP's motions as to both the FCA and OCSLA claims. Under the FCA, a claim may be made where the United States has, due to fraud, paid out sums of money or property to an individual. If, as alleged by the plaintiffs, BP had misrepresented on its permit applications for botii the lease and the Atlantis facility compliance witii the OCSLA requirements then a FCA claim has been alleged. In order to produce hydrocarbons from the outer continental shelf, a party must show that it has complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements. Compliance is a condition precedent to the extraction of hydrocarbons. BP does not have a fee simple ownership of the minerals located within the geographic confines of the lease. Its right to develop the hydrocarbon resources is dependent upon full compliance witii post-lease regulations. The District Court also concluded that the alleged false misrepresentations are "material" as required by the FCA. The court also concluded that the plaintiffs have met the FRCP Rule 9(b) standard for alleging fraud with some particularity. Finally, the court concluded that the plaintiffs have standing to make their OCSLA claims because they have suffered an injury in fact. One of the plaintiffs is a resident of the Texas Gulf Coast region who alleged a direct interest in the protection, preservation and enhancement of the Gulf of Mexico environment.