Months-long negotiations over how to divvy up among Gulf states the potential $20 billion in Deepwater Horizon oil spill penalties remain frayed despite Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D-Calif.) claim yesterday that there is agreement among the region's senators on a bill.

A spokeswoman for Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby (R) called Boxer's statement "premature" and said Shelby wanted to "dispel" any suggestion that deal had been reached.

"Senator Shelby has not yet agreed to anything," said Shelby spokeswoman Julie Eckert.

Likewise, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said this morning he was "not prepared to say there is a firm deal at this point" and that he favored a competing proposal floated by Shelby.

That contradicts Boxer's statement yesterday that "we have an agreement among all parties" on a legislative formula for dividing up the money anticipated to result from the federal government's prosecution under the Clean Water Act of the companies responsible for the oil spill (E&ENews PM, June 28).

Senators from all five Gulf states have been negotiating for months behind closed doors in an effort to unite behind a single bill that would capture and send at least 80 percent of the money to the Gulf.

The sticking points have arisen over how to further subdivide up that multibillion-dollar lump sum, with Louisiana pushing for a formula that would devote the bulk to environmental restoration and, thus, to Louisiana's disappearing coastal wetlands.

Other senators have advocated for a more even split of the pot so their states could invest in economic restoration projects, such as port dredging, convention centers and highway interchanges, as some state leaders have suggested.

Boxer, who chairs the Environment and Public Works Committee, said yesterday a markup would be held after the July 4 recess on the bill (S. 861) sponsored by Louisiana Sens. Mary Landrieu (D) and David Vitter (R), which Boxer called "a fair formula between the states."

A spokesman for Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who had floated a competing formula that would have favored Florida by dividing up the money based in part on a state's miles of coastline, said Nelson would support the markup and was also in agreement with Boxer.

But Shelby's office was "surprised" by Boxer's statements and said they were in "substantial but not complete agreement," according to aides.

"The Vitter-Landrieu bill, as was introduced in April, was never on the table," said a Shelby staffer. "Nobody's talking about moving that."

Vitter-Landrieu would devote the bulk, or 60 percent, of the money to a state-federal task force that would oversee environmental restoration. But Shelby would like to see half of that money distributed among the states based on a formula that assesses impact, according to a Shelby aide. They conceded that defining impact remains a key sticking point in the talks.

"[Boxer] has been very good to work with," the aide said. "I think she correctly stated that we are moving forward and making good progress."

But the notion that all are in agreement? "It's just not correct," the aide said.

Sessions said he favored Shelby's approach. "The bill Sen. Shelby and I have supported -- he has drafted -- I think is a good approach," said Sessions. "But we need to get it done, and hopefully we are making progress in discussions."

Boxer's office did not respond by press time to a request for comment.

Reporter Katie Howell contributed.