In a riveting turn of events, the U.S. Supreme Court has opted not to review a groundbreaking ruling by the Alaska high court. The ruling, made in May, asserted that Williams Alaska Petroleum Inc., the erstwhile owner of an oil refinery in North Pole, Alaska, could be held accountable for potential fines and civil penalties arising from a chemical leak that contaminated nearby groundwater.
Alaska Refinery Leak Liability Fight: The Hazardous Substance Dilemma
Williams Alaska Petroleum had sought a reversal of the state high court’s decision, arguing that it contradicted due process precedent. The former owner contended that it could not be held liable under state law for the release of a hazardous substance, specifically the solvent sulfolane. Intriguingly, the environmental regulator did not classify sulfolane as hazardous until after the refinery changed hands.
Unveiling the Controversy
The heart of the dispute lies in whether Williams Alaska Petroleum was given fair notice about the hazardous nature of sulfolane. The company asserts it was aware of the contamination and alerted state officials, but the regulatory acknowledgment came post-refinery sale in 2004 to Flint Hills Resources Alaska LLC.
Alaska Refinery Leak Liability Fight : Allegations of Unjust Burden
Williams Alaska Petroleum further claimed an unjust financial burden, arguing it was unfairly saddled with a hefty $72 million bill for the expansion of North Pole’s drinking water system. This expansion was part of a settlement between Flint Hills and the state to counteract the contaminated groundwater. The former owner contends that this cost constitutes a government taking, adding another layer of complexity to the legal skirmish.
