Senate Joint Committee Public Hearing on the PIB |
“The fiscal terms in the current draft of the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) are not only the "harshest", but the "most uncompetitive in the world”, oil and gas operators in Nigeria have said. At the senate joint committee-led public hearing on the PIB held last Thursday in Abuja, Federal Capital Territory (FCT), representatives of the oil majors, including indigenous oil companies advanced an array of reasons for their mounting opposition to the Bill.
Under the platform of the
Oil Producers Trade Section (OPTS) which represents about
18 international and indigenous oil companies in Nigeria, both foreign and local operators are ostensibly united in their sharp criticism of the
proposed oil regime.
The OPTS
representative told the Nigerian parliament that the body (OPTS) supports the
Bill’s objectives to create a conducive business environment for petroleum operations;
and to enhance exploration and exploitation of petroleum resources in Nigeria. However,
the Bill as currently drafted will not deliver these objectives. As more and more
countries are opening their boundaries for exploration and production, what
Nigeria needs is an investment friendly and business conducive environment.
Given the scale and magnitude of reforms, Nigeria cannot afford to get things
wrong.
The global oil industry is expanding and the introduction of new drilling technologies has made the industry even more competitive. The discovery of
shale oil is positioning America to be the next export destination in no time.
All the countries with rich shale oil deposits have been in the public eye in
recent times, and they are all in competition with Nigeria for investment
drive.
The OPTS representative listed the following major problems facing oil
companies:
- Illegal oil bunkering and sabotage
- Lack of domestic gas infrastructure
- Attacks on oil company officials
- Fiscal regimes
First off, the current fiscal terms in the PIB will
make it difficult for Nigeria to attract investments and be globally
competitive. High royalties, taxes and levies in the current Bill are so harsh
that Nigeria will have the harshest oil regime in the world. This will further make future investments
uneconomic. The PIB proposes 18 and 26 per cent
royalties; 55 per cent tax rate and 20 to 75per cent government’s share of
profit oil leaving only $0.34 per barrel of oil as incentives to the oil
producers. Under these terms, production will fall by as much
as 25% by 2022. This is contrary to the current plans to add up to 1.5 million
barrels to production levels during the same period.
Lack of domestic gas infrastructure: Gas requires interconnected
transportation systems, including extensive transmission and distribution
systems before it gets to the consumer. These are lacking. As the holder of the
9th largest deposit gas reserves in the world, why hasn’t full scale
gas production taken off in Nigeria? There are two main reasons for this: 1)
low gas price; and 2.) lack of infrastructure. Gas sector in Nigeria is still
very much in its infancy. PIB makes matters worse by increasing gas tax by 25%.
Incentive-based approach is required to jumpstart the gas revolution.
In terms of Joint Venture (JV) Funding, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company
(NNPC) is a partner in 50-60% ownership of production with oil companies. JV
funding provides the single largest source of income to the country. Under the
new reform bill, the National Oil Company (NOC) will enter into Joint Venture relationships
with oil companies. OPTS argues that the proposed JV institutional structures
will not help revolutionize the industry, doubts persist whether the NOC will
contribute its 50% of the funding.
The grant of licenses/leases is another contentious issue IOCs worry
about. The main concern here is that the PIB does not provide for the frequency
of bid rounds – or when they will take place. OPTS however recommended that
licensing rounds should take place every two years.
The other unease about the PIB has to do with sanctity of contracts. This
simply means honouring existing contracts which is crucial to boosting investor
confidence. PIB does not preserve existing contracts. Although all governments
have sovereign rights to change their laws at any time, it is equally important
to respect existing production sharing contracts as this will guarantee
business certainty and investment confidence in the sector.
The international oil companies particularly SHELL, Mobil, Chevron,
AGIP, TOTAL and Pan Ocean Oil fully backed OPTS’s concerns and recommendations listed
above. The oil majors however made separate presentations highlighting particular
aspects of the Bill they want addressed.
SHELL’s Commercial director, and Upstream for Africa reiterated that NNPC has
been unable to contribute its own 55% percent of JV Funding for many years. And
NNPC’s signature inability to meet its financial obligation is worrisome. CHEVRON
and SHELL recommended that the PIB must address NNPC’s lingering unpaid share
of JV funding.
The Bill further penalizes oil producers for non-production of gas even
when production is not economically viable. Unviability of gas production is
compounded by the low domestic gas price which discourages investment in the
sector. Countries like Indonesia, India etc have high gas prices of $24 per barrel
which is currently different from $6 per barrel obtained in Nigeria. To deliver gas for power and development,
there should be reform of institutions, far more efficient contract and
approval systems and the development of competitive fiscal regimes.
The quantity determination of crude oil and petroleum products is
another issue attracting intense criticism. The Department of Petroleum
Resources (DPR)
is responsible for the quantity measurement of crude oil and petroleum products.
Contrary to popular belief that the information regarding the amount of
oil extracted and produced in Nigeria is unavailable, SHELL insists that crude oil
production is well-measured across the Niger Delta. Measurement takes place at
three points: 1.) the well head; 2.)
flow station; and 3) Crude oil tank fiscalization is again carried out at the
export terminals. At this stage, water is separated from crude and the tank
content is allowed to settle for the minimum period specified for that type of crude
oil or product. DPR is physically present at the 275 flow stations and 5 export
terminals to measure and document the quantity of crude oil (volume, and weight) produced
and exported. However, it is impossible to have very accurate
data of production levels because Nigeria does not have the technology to
undertake that task.
Due in large part to the high cost of fiscal metering, this should be done at the export terminals. In other countries, the measurement is undertaken by one agency unlike in Nigeria where too many agencies are involved, with attendant high costs. SHELL recommends that the measurement or quantity determination of crude oil should be done at the fiscal sales point.
Due in large part to the high cost of fiscal metering, this should be done at the export terminals. In other countries, the measurement is undertaken by one agency unlike in Nigeria where too many agencies are involved, with attendant high costs. SHELL recommends that the measurement or quantity determination of crude oil should be done at the fiscal sales point.
MOBIL: Exxon has a long history of investment operations in Nigeria having
started deepwater projects since 1993. The company plans to invest over 30
billion dollars in Nigeria, but the PIB provisions as currently framed are hurting
those intentions.
MOBIL’s does not want the PIB to be applied retroactively. Reinforcing
OPTS’s position regarding the sanctity of existing contracts, the oil giant
urged the Nigerian government to respect the terms of subsisting production
sharing contracts, while new contracts will be subjected to the new
regulations.
TOTAL: TOTAL is very concerned about dry gas also known as non-associated gas
which is not derived from oil. PIB does not allow oil companies to undertake
production of dry gas notwithstanding that much of Nigeria’s gas is dry gas.
This, position, in its view, has grave implications on the domestic power
generation capacities and economic development.
CHEVRON is very concerned about lease duration and deepwater projects which
currently comprise 30% of government revenues. Lengthening the duration of oil
licences and leases topped the oil major’s list of recommendations. CHEVRON claims
it has made huge investments in gas production based on 1993 contract terms
which were then attractive and investment competitive. Potentially, the fiscal terms in the PIB will
change all that, as they are the most
onerous in the world.
On gas investment, CHEVRON says it has reduced gas flaring by 70% and
currently produces about 40% of the gas sold in domestic market. Increasing gas
taxes from 30% to 80% makes further investment in gas uneconomic. Aligning with
the position of other major IOCs, CHEVRON reiterates that low gas price is making
the sector unviable. And again, a realistic timetable is needed for achieving
the domestic gas supply obligations (DGSO) set out in Bill. There is also the
issue of uncertainty in the transition period when the sector will be
deregulated.
As with CHEVRON, Pan Ocean Oil
has two major concerns with the PIB: the fiscals and gas. Although the company
pledged its full support for the Niger Gas Masterplan, the PIB provisions will
threaten the achievement of the objectives laid out in the Master plan. The increase
of gas tax, they restated, will make the gas sector uncompetitive.
AGIP: AGIP’s major concern is that the PIB does not clearly define where the
oil measuring points are. Apparently, AGIP supports SHELL’s recommendation that
the measuring of crude oil and products should be done at the sales points.
Expanding access to fair, speedy and independent dispute resolution
mechanisms is very important to AGIP. Currently, the state high courts reserve
the jurisdiction to resolve disputes. But considering the huge volume of
investments involved, an independent judicial mechanism that can effectively
and expeditiously settle disputes, especially where such disputes may involve a
regulator, is imperative.
No comments:
Post a Comment