Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Legal Nature of the Papua New Guinea Petroleum Arrangement
#31
The nature, legal and spirit of the PNG petroleum laws are supportive of private developers. The developers rights are protected by law and by agreements with the State. The goal for the State is to entice private money to explore, locate and bring to market national hydrocarbon resources for the benefit of the nation. The O&G world has been investing and trying to invest in PNG and it's not because they fear being mistreated by a corrupt Gov't.
This is why Duma could not legally cancel IOC's PA with his threat last June of a 180 day cancellation trigger, there was no legal grounds for that threat. Vinson eloquently told PNG they had no such right at that time and Vinson has been proven correct. IOC has been productive in the field, locating the largest fields in PNG which will enrich the nation, generous with State participation, considerate of the local landowners with humanitarian efforts and, as far as we know, been above board politically when dealing with PNG officials. The State has shown an interest in working with IOC, granting them license extensions when needed and helping with the PRL 15 SD efforts. IOC's stance has been that they are doing what is needed of them on the license front and they have never been fearful of a Gov't not working with them in a legal manner. After all, it benefits the State to bring the resources to market and sooner is better than later.
Reply

#32
Let's be practical. If your were a Super Major would you have crossed the leases bridge with the PNG govt?? Or would you spend millions bidding on leases when you don't know who the owner will be????
Reality IOC has the NG, the leases and will sell them down or maybe even out. Next problem.
Reply

#33
How about those 3 IBers who have not been paid a penny yet. Wouldn't they have checked on the leases before trying to sell them ??? Do they want to get paid??? Would their firms have let them work on this deal if there was a chance they wouldn't get paid??? LOL if you believe that!! These IBers will do the sell down or sell out and get paid. Next!!
Reply

#34

(05-12-2013, 11:31 PM)Tree Wrote:

(05-12-2013, 12:17 PM)petrengr1 Wrote:

(05-11-2013, 01:33 AM)Tree Wrote:

This is a great little paper.

http://www.paclii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl/journals/MLJ/2003/6.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=application%20and%20for%20and%20pdl%20and%20png

IOC and partners have nothing to worry about regarding any license extensions, PRL or PDL approvals, JVOA approvals or selling a stake or building an LNG project as long as IOC works in good faith operating within the legal nature of the PNG O&G Act and subsequent agreements.

1)  2009 PA will not expire leaving IOC without a PA

2)  PDL's are not granted they are earned.  IOC is doing as needed to earn the approval and that cannot happen until new partners are named and project is FID ready in detail.

3)  Exploration license extensions wil be granted as IOC continues to work in good faith within the legal frmework to earn those extensions.

4)  PNG has the safest type of  O&G legal framework for IOC and others to operate within.  Subject to legislation, not case by case [political agreements.

Pet, Thanks for the response to this post. Your highlighted points from the paper are interesting for sure. For many, this is their first time seeing what you point out.   Others have known this stuff for years. I have added comments in 'green'.  After all the goal on this IOC forum is to keep things real and to attempt to keep the history documented.    There seems to be an effort to portray great risk for IOC in the areas of a 2009 PA expiry date, licenses lost and extensions not  granted and, of course, IOC's fate has been represented as being in the hands of a DPE Minister which is above the law if RDS is bribing him.   I hope you don't consider this a scolding.   And thanks for being so cordial.  More of that is needed here for sure.  

to we, the ignorant masses. I have gone through it and picked out a few interesting parts for you to read.
At the risk of being scolded again, I will try to high light some of the interesting parts and give a couple of comments.
The process of granting a PPL commences on application for or upon invitation by the Minister, for a PPL.[39] For the purpose of granting an exploration or a production licence, the earth’s surface is divided up into gratucular sections called-blocks, comprising five minutes longitudes and five minutes latitude.[40] An application for a PPL would be made in respect of not more than 60 blocks[41]and in special circumstances the minimum acreage could be increased to 200 blocks.[42]
The conditions under which petroleum exploration and production will be undertaken are prescribed by legislation.[43] A PPL is granted for a term not exceeding 6 years[44]and renewable for a further term of 5 years but for a reduced area,[45] and is also subject to work and expenditure requirements.[46]
Comment: This is where we are at present. We have had the first six years and we are now in the fifth year of the 5 year extension for a reduced area.
Agreed.  This should have been common knowledge as all of this has been explained multiple times over several years.  Minister does not solely invite applicants, bit he may applicants.  
A licence sets out the basic terms and conditions under which petroleum exploration will be undertaken.[47]
Where petroleum discovery is made in a exploration acreage, a declaration would be made of a location, within the exploration acreage, of a petroleum discovery. [48] Subsequent to the declaration of a location, the oil company may apply for and be granted a further extension of the exploration licence for a further period of not more than 3 years.[49]
Comment: Where a discovery has been made the license can be extended for a further 3 years. We had a discovery in PPL 238 and PPL237 (Elk/Antelope) and a further discovery in PPL237 at Triceratops. If I understand this correctly, we need a discovery in PPL 236 before March 2014 in order to qualify for a further 3 year extension. This could happen at Wahoo-1 if we make a discovery.
Agree on 237 & 238.  Those licenses are secure.  However, we do not necessarily  need a discovery in 236 before March 2014 to qualify for extension.  That would be ideal, but not necessary.  An extension can also be granted without a discovery.  Likely there will be exploration in 236 by Mrch 2014.  The Gov't has shown willingness to grant extensions to IOC if they are operating in good faith and working to satisfy license requirements.  
(b) Petroleum Retention Licence  (PRL)
An exploration licensee may also exclusively apply for a Petroleum Retention Licence (retention licence) in respect of blocks within the exploration acreage in which petroleum is located.[57] This may be done within 2 years from the date on which the blocks were declared as a location.[58]
A retention licence can be issued over "... a gas field or, a part of the gas field or, for better administration of petroleum activities." [59] The provision is designed primarily to allow holders of an exploration licence to retain and hold natural gas discoveries within the acreage pending commercial extraction of the same. However, provisions are also made for retention licence to be issued in respect of oil discoveries within the acreage "... for better administration of petroleum activities." The proviso creates scope for retention licences to be issued in respect of marginal oil fields where the reserves cannot be commercially produced.[60] That is, where a discovery is over a marginal field and it is not commercially viable to produce the petroleum discovered within the location, a retention licence may be issued over the respective blocks in the exploration acreage, which would allow the exploration licensee to retain the discovery pending further appraisal, further and additional discovery and commercial production of the petroleum discovered within the acreage.[61]
A retention licence may be granted for 5 years[62]and may be extended for further terms of 5 years at each extension.[63] Accordingly, a retention licence can be further extended over number of 5 years extension periods before commercial production can be realised. It therefore allows a holder of an exploration licence to hold onto the acreage pending commercial production of the discovery.[64]
Comment: According to the above, it appears that, once you have a PRL, it can be extended for several 5 year periods. I believe this will just apply to the area of the PRL and not to the entire PPL area.
Agree.  PRL 15 is secure.  PRL 15 was carved out to sell as it alone supports an LNG project.  Ambitious PPL 237 drilling plans may locate other locations which can be deemed PRL's.
C. Charecteristics of Petroleum Agreements
The PNG petroleum agreements deal with matters, which include State equity participation, foreign currency management, local business development and procurement of local goods and services. For the purpose of this paper, particular consideration is given to those provisions dealing with State equity participation.
The State takes its share of the revenue from production and sale of petroleum, primarily from petroleum taxation computed and collected under the Income Tax Act,[71] petroleum royalty and from direct equity participation in the project. In computing the State’s share of the petroleum produced or the revenue derived from sale of petroleum produced within the acreage, and the oil companies’ share of the petroleum produced, the amount taken up by the State pursuant to the exercise of its rights to take equity participation in the petroleum project within a license area is regarded and treated by oil companies as the State’s share of the oil or revenue. Accordingly, the State equity participation policy regime is an important element of the State’s petroleum policy regime, and that which forms the core of the petroleum agreement.

The State in taking up equity in the project, through its Nominee, also becomes a joint venturer and a joint licensee of the PDL . The non-State joint venturers finance the Nominee’s pro rata percentage of exploration, development and other cost and expenditures under the "carried interest" arrangement. Under the arrangement, the amount owed to the oil companies by the Nominee is "deemed" as a loan from the oil companies to the Nominee at a commercial interest rate, to be debited from the Nominee’s revenue from its proportionate share of the petroleum produced within that PDL .[85]

Comment:  Upon the granting of the PDL the State will owe IOC for 22.5% of the sunk costs for the drilling of  wells, building roads etc in PRL 15 but these cost will be carried by IOC (or the operator and partners) and the costs will be recovered in the future from the State’s share of production.
Agree.  This is what the O&G Act requires.  This too should be common knowledge as it has been on the MBs for years.  
Production Development License (PDL)
If significant petroleum discovery is made that can sustain commercial production, a PDL , which is the production licence, will be issued to the holder of the PPL.[65] The basic requirement of a PDL is fixed by legislation.[66] A PDL is issued to the holder of an exploration or retention licence for a period not exceeding 25 years, renewable for a term not exceeding 20 years.[67]
Comment: So a PDL is good for at least (25 +20) 45 years.
Agree.  From O&G Act.  Been discussed for years.
A PDL confers on the licensee the exclusive rights to explore for petroleum within the licence area, to produce petroleum within the licence area, to sell or otherwise disposed of petroleum so produced and to carry out such other works in the licence area as are necessary to conduct petroleum operations in accordance with the terms of the licence.[68] The works necessary to carry out petroleum operations include construction of flow lines and gathering lines, roads, bridges and other civil works, airports, seaports and related facilities.[69]
Comment: In the case of a gas discovery (which can’t be barged down the river), I believe we will have to have the proper licenses for the pipelines and plants before we start construction and laying pipe.
Agree to a point.  Lack of PDL does not mean pre-construction investing as IOC has been performing to de-risk, accelerate and make cheaper the LNG construction cheaper cannot occur or is a risky endeavor.  It is a pre PDL logical investment.  PDL is guaranteed granted as IOC meets the PDL license requirements within O&G Act.
Have a good day/weekend.

All need to read Part B of the above linked report.


The source of information discussed in the two threads http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/showthread.php?tid=3589&page=4

comes from three places.

1.The IOC 2012 Annual Report, Annual Information Form, http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documen...20Form.pdf

If this link does not work go to the IOC web site to find it.

2. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Oil and Gas Act 1998
And

3. Melanesian Law Journal

Legal Nature of the Papua New Guinea Petroleum Arrangement [2003] MLJ 6; [2003-04] 29 MLJ 117 (1 January 2003) http://www.paclii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl/journals/MLJ/2003/6.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=application%20and%20for%20and%20pdl%20and%20png

This article represents the opinion of the author but is not the same as the Oil and Gas Act 1998.

Work discussed in this Article that was conducted prior to 1998 was done under the former law, Petroleum Act, which was repealed by this current Oil and Gas Act 1998.

All of IOC’s work has been done since 1998 and is, therefore, covered by the current law.

CORRECTION OF MY PREVIOUS POST

I hate to keep beating this dead horse  but, in the interest of accuracy, I must make a correction to what I said in this thread above where I was only looking at the Melanesian Law Journal

article.  I am correcting what I said regarding the extension of a PPL license  where a discovery has been made. Section 30 of the Oil and Gas law says the following:

“30. EXTENSION OF PETROLEUM PROSPECTING LICENCE IN RESPECT OF LOCATION.

(1) Where–

(a) petroleum is discovered in a petroleum prospecting licence area within the period of two years before the date of expiration of a petroleum prospecting licence that has been extended under Section 29; and

(b) the Minister has made a declaration of a location under Section 34, or the licensee has nominated a block or blocks under that section for the purpose of a declaration of a location,

the Minister may grant a further extension of the licence in respect of the block or blocks to which Paragraph (b) applies.

(2) A further extension granted under Subsection (1)–

(a) shall be for a period not exceeding three years; and

(b) shall be subject to any conditions that the Minister, after considering a report of the Board, thinks fit and specifies in the licence.

(3) Where, before the expiration of a petroleum prospecting licence that includes blocks that constitute a location, the licensee–

(a) makes written application to the Minister for an extension or a further extension of the licence in respect of some or all of those blocks; and

(b) satisfies the Minister that–

(iii) the blocks contain all or part of a petroleum pool or are otherwise properly included in a location; and

(iv) the construction, establishment and operation of facilities for the recovery of petroleum is not economically feasible,

the Minister may grant an extension or a further extension of the petroleum prospecting licence in respect of those blocks.

(4) An extension under Subsection (3) shall be for a period not exceeding one year.”

This is the only place in the Oil and Gas Law where the “three year” extension is mentioned. A careful reading of this Section 30 shows that the three year extension only covers that area of the PPL that is within the blocks covered by the “location” which is declared for a discovery. It does not extend the entire PPL license area. So an oil company can retain the right to any discovery that is made within the PPL.

If you get a PRL before the PPL expires you can extend the area of the PRL for an additional period of two five year terms in addition to the initial five year term.  (not “a number of 5 year extension periods” as was stated in the Melanesian Law Journal)

“43. TERM OF PETROLEUM RETENTION LICENCE.

Subject to this Act and to any condition in the licence, a petroleum retention licence remains in force–

(a) for a period of five years commencing on the day on which the licence takes effect; and

(b) where the licence is extended under Section 45–for a further period of five years at each extension.

44. APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF PETROLEUM RETENTION LICENCE.

(1) The holder of a petroleum retention licence may make application to the Minister for an extension of the licence.

(2) An application under this section may be made twice only in respect of a licence.”

This is also in agreement with what IOC said in the 2012 Annual Report (Annual Information Form). Page 27:

“The initial period of a petroleum retention license is for five years and further extensions of two 5-year terms  may be granted at the discretion of the State.” 

This does not agree with what is stated in the Melanesian Law Journal article. I guess I will have to agree with the Oil and Gas Act and the IOC Annual Report i.e. a PRL has an initial period of five years and may be granted two extensions of five years each.

So, before the PPL’s expire in March 2014 we need to make as many discoveries as possible and get our “Locations” declared or apply for a PRL. We can retain all discoveries.

This does not preclude the possibility that the State will issue new PPL’s for part or all of the same area to IOC based on the substantial amount of work IOC has done, but I believe this will be at the discretion of the State.

We have to move all of these discoveries along to the PDL stage in order to be assured of the right to a long term license of 25 years with the possibility of a 20 year extension.

OK, let the arrows fly. I will take cover and may remain in hiding until further notice.

No, I am not short. I would just like for everyone’s understanding, including mine, to be accurate.

If this is wrong in some way please correct it but if you do please provide the source of your information.
Reply

#35
So we need to get as many farm in agreements done as quickly as possible and drill drill drill. This certainly explains the PRE drilling plans I found on their website. Who else can IOC get a deal with.
Reply

#36

'jft310' pid='22302' datel Wrote:So we need to get as many farm in agreements done as quickly as possible and drill drill drill. This certainly explains the PRE drilling plans I found on their website. Who else can IOC get a deal with.

jft- Maybe Total will "step up to the plate"....(or a "significant other" ) . Hopefully we should know something shortly ! ( notice I didn't use the bad word....."soon" ) . GLTY.

Reply

#37

'Tree' pid='22201' datel Wrote:

'CAC' pid='22198' datel Wrote:

I FIXED THIS...  

http://www.paclii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl/journals/MLJ/2003/6.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=application%20and%20for%20and%20pdl%20and%20png

[WE THINK/HOPE] IOC and partners have nothing to worry about regarding any license extensions, PRL or PDL approvals, JVOA approvals or selling a stake or building an LNG project as long as IOC works in good faith operating within the legal nature of the PNG O&G Act and subsequent agreements [WHICH WE THINK/HOPE PNG AGREES THEY ARE DOING] .

1)  [WE THINK/HOPE THE] 2009 PA will not expire leaving IOC without a PA

2)  PDL's are not granted they are earned.  [WE THINK/HOPE PNG AGREES THAT] IOC is doing as needed to earn the approval and that cannot happen until new partners are named and project is FID ready in detail.

3)  [WE THINK/HOPE] Exploration license extensions wil be granted as IOC continues to work in good faith within the legal frmework to earn those extensions.

4)  PNG has the safest type of  O&G legal framework for IOC and others to operate within.  Subject to legislation, not case by case [political agreements.

5) WE THINK/HOPE RDS IS ETHICALLY ABOVE TRYING TO USE THIS ISSUE IN A WAY THAT HARMS IOC...OR THAT PNG IS NOT SUSCEPTIBLE TO IT. 

That's what makes a market.  Diferent levels of understanding risk.  Bet you our thinks/hopes pan out just fine.  In the meantime it's more exciting for some to worry about everything.

I fixed it.  Actually, Duma fixed it.

Next time maybe we can avoid the confrontational ugliness  by a few  if they have any humility.      WE THINK/HOPE THEY AGREE  that's the case.

Oh yeah, if they didn't tell us until today it makes it ok lash out at what some can't comprehend.

Press release today says, "On March 28, 2013 , the Minister for Petroleum & Energy approved and the DPE registered the deferral of the well commitments for PPL 236 and PPL 238."
Also today, OSH is performing seismic work in PPL 237 where their lead appears to join Tri.
Pre queued up for ambitious drilling program
Now we need to worry about dry holes and disasters I imagine.  More warning on that too later.
Next up - the slaying of the PA expiry nonsense.
All for the benefit of 'the ignorant masses' (not my description).  Maybe we will all learn and remember that as long as IOC/partners works in good faith and keeps Gov't advised they have no problem receiving Gov't cooperation.

Reply

#38

'Tree' pid='22340' dateline='<a href="tel:1368498 Wrote:

'Tree' pid='22201' dateline='<a href="tel:1368203 Wrote:

'CAC' pid='22198' dateline='<a href="tel:1368202 Wrote:

I FIXED THIS...  

http://www.paclii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl/journals/MLJ/2003/6.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=application%20and%20for%20and%20pdl%20and%20png

[WE THINK/HOPE] IOC and partners have nothing to worry about regarding any license extensions, PRL or PDL approvals, JVOA approvals or selling a stake or building an LNG project as long as IOC works in good faith operating within the legal nature of the PNG O&G Act and subsequent agreements [WHICH WE THINK/HOPE PNG AGREES THEY ARE DOING] .

1)  [WE THINK/HOPE THE] 2009 PA will not expire leaving IOC without a PA

2)  PDL's are not granted they are earned.  [WE THINK/HOPE PNG AGREES THAT] IOC is doing as needed to earn the approval and that cannot happen until new partners are named and project is FID ready in detail.

3)  [WE THINK/HOPE] Exploration license extensions wil be granted as IOC continues to work in good faith within the legal frmework to earn those extensions.

4)  PNG has the safest type of  O&G legal framework for IOC and others to operate within.  Subject to legislation, not case by case [political agreements.

5) WE THINK/HOPE RDS IS ETHICALLY ABOVE TRYING TO USE THIS ISSUE IN A WAY THAT HARMS IOC...OR THAT PNG IS NOT SUSCEPTIBLE TO IT. 

That's what makes a market.  Diferent levels of understanding risk.  Bet you our thinks/hopes pan out just fine.  In the meantime it's more exciting for some to worry about everything.

I fixed it.  Actually, Duma fixed it.

Next time maybe we can avoid the confrontational ugliness  by a few  if they have any humility.      WE THINK/HOPE THEY AGREE  that's the case.

Oh yeah, if they didn't tell us until today it makes it ok lash out at what some can't comprehend.

Press release today says, "On March 28, 2013 , the Minister for Petroleum & Energy approved and the DPE registered the deferral of the well commitments for PPL 236 and PPL 238."
Also today, OSH is performing seismic work in PPL 237 where their lead appears to join Tri.
Pre queued up for ambitious drilling program
Now we need to worry about dry holes and disasters I imagine.  More warning on that too later.
Next up - the slaying of the PA expiry nonsense.
All for the benefit of 'the ignorant masses' (not my description).  Maybe we will all learn and remember that as long as IOC/partners works in good faith and keeps Gov't advised they have no problem receiving Gov't cooperation.

**************

What beneficial purpose does this post serve? You absolutely can't help yourself. I t's comical. 

Reply

#39
The PA expiration is pure nonsense. Its been addressed. Think IOC mgt wasn't aware ????Think they didn't have a plan?? Think they would let this slip?? That's the comedy to think IOC would let this slip away without a plan and an execution.
The truth is we need a deal so we have something else to micro manage for IOC. This horse is dead the PA expiration hoop to hoop.
Reply

#40
There are some of us who were not entirely reassured by expiring licenses. Yes, it's clear that cooperation is now good, but once you are on territory where there might very well be a natural practice, but no real legal duty to extent licenses, I don't think it's pure nonsense to have at least a residue of concern here, like I did.

Or let me put it another way. If I was a betting man I would have put money on the extensions, but was I 100% convinced? Not quite. For instance, I feel quite a bit better after the news today out of the DPE, with which IOC seems to have had a somewhat difficult relation.

Who doesn't, raise their hand. If you do, that means you weren't 100% convinced either. I was perhaps 90% convinced, but not 100%.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)