Shell involvement in uranium price fixing cartel

New York Times: DUTCH ANNOUNCE URANIUM PROCESS: 1 March 1968 (Article said Royal Dutch Shell had refused to comment on reports that Shell, Philips Electronics and the Werkspoor Company of Amsterdam were all in discussions with the Dutch Government on a prototype ultra-centrifuge based nuclear reactor. According to the article: “Dutch political sources said the reason for the secrecy was the extreme sensitivity of the nuclear-proliferation issue. They said the centrifuge process presented the possibility that even small nations could manufacture weapons in factories so small than planes or satellites could not distinguish them from normal industrial plants.”)

New York Times: Shell Group Joins Gulf in Nuclear Unit: 5 June 1973 (Article reported on a joint venture between Gulf Oil Corporation and companies of the Royal Dutch Shell Group designed to exploit advanced nuclear reactor technology.

New York Times: GULF OIL TO DIVEST A LIGHT-WATER UNIT: 4 December 1973 (Article reported that after consultation with its partner in the nuclear business, Scallop Nuclear, Inc., a Royal Dutch-Shell Group company, Gulf planned to divest its lightwater reactor fuel fabrication operations of a wholly owned subsidiary company. Gulf said the action would permit the partnership to concentrate on the high-temperature gas-cooled reactor and the reprocessing of light-water reactor fuel.)

New York Times: Gulf Oil's Directors Approve Record 1974 Capital Budget: 18 December 1973 (Extract: “Gulf and Shell Nuclear, Ltd., a company of the Royal Dutch Shell Group, said it had completed arrangements to establish two joint ventures in the nuclear power industry. The ventures will be the General Atomic Company, for activities in the United States, and General Atomic International, for activities outside the United States.”

New York Times: Shell Loses $290-Million In Joint Nuclear Venture: 19 April 1975 (Extract: “General Atomic is mainly engaged in the design, development, manufacture and marketing of the high temperature gas-cooled reactor and its associated fuel.”

New York Times: VENTURE IS HALTED BY GULF AND SHELL: 25 October 1975 (Reported that General Atomic “was quitting production of high-temperature nuclear gas reactors.”

New York Times: Four Big Electric Utilities Have Joined Dispute Over Future Uranium Supply: 2 March 1976 (reported on litigation in state and federal Court in New Mexico involving charges of alleged fraud and misconduct on the part of Gulf Oil “and the General Atomic Company, a joint venture owned by the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Scallop nuclear unit of the Royal Dutch Shell Group.”)

New York Times: Amid Confusion, A Primer On Nuclear Energy Policy: 9 April 1977 (reported on Carter Administrations nuclear energy plans. Article discussed Shell’s expected withdrawal from a plant at Barnwell, S.C. designed to reprocess used fuel from nuclear reactors and turn by-product uranium into a solid. Article posed the question “Is most of the world’s plutonium created in power plants?” The answer being that most of it was being produced in reactors such as Windscale in Britain, specially designed to turn out plutonium for weapons.

New York Times: TOO HOT TO HANDLE: 10 April 1977 (Article covered contamination, technical and other issues associated with the sensitive and controversial subject of recycling nuclear fuel. The article mentioned that the $250 million plant built at Barnwell S.C. by Allied General Electric Nuclear Services, in which General Atomic was a joint owner, had not been granted a license to operate and faced considerable opposition.)

New York Times: Suit by Reserve Oil Charges Violations: 23 September 1977 (Reported legal proceedings had been instituted against General Atomic and its owners, Gulf Oil Corporation and “Scallop Nuclear Inc., part of the Royal/Dutch Shell Group.” The complex lawsuit involving various companies related to alleged price fixing of uranium as part of a secret cartel. The article stated that General Atomic was at one time marketing an advanced form of nuclear reactor, one of which was already on line in Colorado.)

Time Magazine: The Uranium Cartel’s Fallout: 21 November 1977 (reported on the alleged cartel price fixing of uranium case being heard by Judge Edwin Felter. EXTRACT: By a quirk of jurisdiction, Felter is presiding over one of the largest and most complex corporate lawsuits ever filed in an American court-a $2 billion-plus action by a New Mexico uranium mining company, United Nuclear Corp., against General Atomic Co., a 50%-owned subsidiary of Gulf Oil Corp., for fraud, coercion and breaches of the nation’s antitrust laws. Royal Dutch Shell owned the other 50% of General Atomic.)

New York Times: Key Ruling Expected Soon In Uranium Antitrust Suit: 2 January 1978 (reported: “Judge Felter is trying a $2.27 billion damage suit against the General Atomic Corporation of San Diego by the United Nuclear Corporation, a uranium mining company with large holdings in Mexico. Gulf and a subsidiary of the Royal Dutch-Shell Group are equal partners in General Atomic”. The article said that Gulf had conceded that its Canadian subsidiary had been involved in a uranium cartel.)

New York Times: General Atomic Seeking Removal of Judge in Suit Against Gulf Oil: 9 January 1978 (reported that General Atomic had petitioned the New Mexico Supreme Court in an attempt to have Judge Felter removed from hearing the cartel case on the grounds that he was prejudiced.)

New York Times: Nuclear Protest in South Carolina Ends in 3rd Day With Arrest of 250: 2 May 1978 (article reporting an anti-nuclear protest at the Barnwell, S.C. nuclear waste reprocessing plant in which Royal Dutch Shell Group was a partner. About 250 protestors were arrested. Extract: “Eventually the venture, operated jointly by Allied Chemical, Gulf Oil, and Royal Dutch Shell Group, was to process waste material from nuclear power plants along the Eastern Seaboard.”

Time Magazine: Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery: 12 June 1978 (Article about Gulf Oil under the headline Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery. It said in relation to Shell, “General Atomic, a joint Gulf-Royal Dutch/Shell venture, pulled out of the production of high-temperature nuclear gas reactors after heavy losses.” Article also mentioned the cartel litigation. EXTRACTS: "Gulf is also enmeshed in a web of lawsuits growing out of allegations that it secretly participated in a worldwide cartel to manipulate supplies and raise the price of uranium. Last week the company pleaded no contest in the U.S. Government’s case growing out of the cartel arrangement…”.)

New York Times: The Great Uranium Flap: 9 July 1978 (Further report of the litigation over an alleged cartel. The article stated: Everyone agrees there was a cartel; whether it did anything illegal is in dispute.” The Royal Dutch Shell Group was named in the article as being an owner of General Atomic. The uranium price fixing was described by one participant in the litigation as “…one of the massive rip-offs of all times…”

New York Times: Gulf Pact Set With Scallop: 19 March 1979 (The first paragraph stated: “The Gulf Oil Corporation said it had reached an agreement with Scallop Nuclear Inc., a unit of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, under which the uranium supply and light water reactor fuel fabrication activities of the General Atomic Company would be operated for the account and benefit of Gulf Oil. Gulf and Scallop jointly own General Atomic.”)

New York Times: United Nuclear Wins Court Round: 3 September 1980 (Extracts: "The New Mexico Supreme Court has upheld a lower court decision voiding any obligation by the United Nuclear Corporation to deliver nearly $1 billion worth of uranium to the General Atomic Company." "The case - the largest in the history of the state - arose out of agreements in the early 1970’s that called for U.N.C. to deliver 27 million pounds of uranium to General Atomic, which is a joint venture of the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. Arguing that General Atomic was part of an international cartel that was trying to corner the uranium market, U.N.C. sued to have those contracts overturned. In 1978, a New Mexico state court rendered a default judgment against General Atomic on the ground that the company refused to supply certain information during the discovery process.")

New York Times: Exxon and Gulf End Uranium Suit: 8 May 1981 (Reported the settlement of a uranium contract lawsuit between Exxon Corporation and Gulf Oil Corporation relating to the alleged uranium cartel. The price of the uranium was “revised” as part of the settlement. EXTRACTS: “Gulf later assigned the contract to the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Scallop Nuclear, which was to receive the uranium.” “Litigation began in early 1978, when Exxon declared the agreement null and void because of Gulf’s alleged participation in an international uranium cartel, Exxon said.")

New York Times: Gulf to Obtain General Atomic: 22 December 1981 (Reported that Gulf Oil Corporation would become the full owner of the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Royal Dutch/Shell Group’s Scallop Nuclear Inc., under a tentative agreement between the partners. The article reported that Gulf would take over Scallop’s high temperature, gas-cooled reactor program, its fusion program and the special products division.)