Diamond Ocean Blackhawk is drilling MC 40 well for Anadarko
Following up on last year’s deepwater diligence post, 4 recent deepwater exploratory wells (table below) were spudded within 4.5 years of the effective date of their leases.
Particularly noteworthy is Anadarko’s well on newly acquired Mississippi Canyon Block 40, which was spudded only 18 months after the lease was acquired. Everything has to be in place for such an outcome: corporate priority, data gathering and analysis, well plan, permitting, and rig contract/availability.
The well was apparently a high priority not just for Anadarko, but also for Chevron and Murphy. MC 40 was acquired by Chevron (bidding alone) at Sale 257 for $4,409,990, the third highest bid at the sale. Murphy had submitted a losing bid of $3 million, but was assigned a 33% share of the lease by Chevron on 12/15/2023. One month earlier, Anadarko had been assigned a 33% interest and became lease operator.
Interestingly, BOEM’s Mean Range of Value (MROV) estimate for the block was only $576,000, so the three companies are seeing something that BOEM doesn’t. We’ll see how this plays out.
According to rig tracker data the Ocean Blackhawk is still on location at MC 40. Per BSEE permitting data, the well was approved to be bypassed in mid-May.
As we wait for the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration panel to rule on the Exxon-CNOOC-Chevron-Hess Stabroek dispute, key excerpts from Chevron’s SEC filing about their merger with Hess are pasted below. The text highlighted in red is particularly interesting.
If the ICC arbitration panel rules that the right-of-first-refusal (ROFR) provision applies, the Chevron filing says that the merger is off and Hess continues as Stabroek’s 30% owner. If that statement is correct, Exxon and CNOOC cannot obtain the Hess share. Their only benefit from the challenge would be to deny their rival Chevron from participating in the block or to receive payment from Chevron for approving the ownership change.
It’s also noteworthy that Exxon initially showed support for the deal (quote below).
p. 32: With respect to the Stabroek ROFR (as defined in the section entitled “The Merger—Stabroek JOA”), if the arbitration does not result in a confirmation that the Stabroek ROFR is inapplicable to the merger, and if Chevron, Hess, Exxon and/or CNOOC do not otherwise agree upon an acceptable resolution, then there would be a failure of a closing condition under the merger agreement, in which case the merger would not close. Some of these conditions are not in Hess’ or Chevron’s control.
Further, subject to any then ongoing arbitration relating to the Stabroek JOA, either Chevron or Hess may terminate the merger agreement if the merger has not been completed by October 22, 2024, (or April 22, 2025 or October 22, 2025, if the applicable end date is extended pursuant to the merger agreement) or by such later date as the parties may mutually agree.
p. 81: The Stabroek JOA contains a right of first refusal (the “Stabroek ROFR”) provision that, if applicable to a change of control transaction and properly exercised, provides the Stabroek Parties with a right to acquire the participating interest in the Stabroek Block held by the Stabroek Party subject to such transaction (at a value that is based on the portion of the value of the change of control transaction that reasonably should be allocated to such participating interest and is increased to reflect a tax gross-up) only after, and conditioned on, the closing of such transaction. Chevron and Hess believe that the Stabroek ROFR does not apply to the merger due to the structure of the merger and the language of the Stabroek ROFR provisions.
p. 82: On October 24, 2023, shortly after the merger was announced, Exxon issued the following statement, indicating its support for the merger: “Hess has been a valued partner in Guyana since 2014 and we look forward to continuing our successful operations in the Stabroek block with Chevron, pending the deal closing.” However, Exxon and CNOOC subsequently informed Chevron and Hess that they believe the Stabroek ROFR applies to the merger. Hess, Chevron, Exxon and CNOOC subsequently engaged in discussions regarding the applicability of the Stabroek ROFR to the merger.
If the arbitration does not result in a confirmation that the Stabroek ROFR is inapplicable to the merger, and if Chevron, Hess, Exxon and/or CNOOC do not otherwise agree upon an acceptable resolution, then there would be a failure of a closing condition under the merger agreement, in which case the merger would not close, and, pursuant to the terms of the Stabroek JOA, the Exxon affiliate and the CNOOC affiliate would cease to have rights under the Stabroek ROFR with respect to the merger. In that event, Hess would remain an independent public company and would continue to own its participating interest in the Stabroek Block. Based on the express terms of the Stabroek JOA, Chevron and Hess do not believe there is any material likelihood that the circumstances described in this paragraph will occur.
p. 118: In addition, with respect to the Stabroek ROFR, if the arbitration does not result in a confirmation that the Stabroek ROFR does not apply to the merger, and if Chevron, Hess, Exxon and/or CNOOC do not otherwise agree upon an acceptable resolution, then there would be a failure of a closing condition under the merger agreement, in which case the merger would not close.
Chevron continues to operate in Venezuela and is a beneficiary of the easing of US sanctions that facilitated the resumption of oil exports. Is the government of Guyana okay with Stabroek partners helping to support the regime that claims much of their offshore oil?
On the other hand, what about Exxon’s Stabroek partner, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp.? CNOOC has a 25% share of the Stabroek block (vs. 45% for Exxon and 30% for Hess) as a result of their takeover of (Canadian) Nexen in 2013. The CNOOC acquisition of Nexen was similar to Chevron’s acquisition of Hess. Was Exxon okay with that change in ownership?
CNOOC hasn’t released any public statements on the Stabroek dispute, but appears to be aligned with Exxon. Presumably, CNOOC also wants a larger share of the Stabroek pie. Is the Government of Guyana okay with an ally of Venezuela increasing their influence and having access to geologic, reservoir, and operational data for the Stabroek block? CNOOC is also partnered with Exxon on the block they acquired at the most recent licensing round.
Given the national security implications, is the Government of Guyana okay with leaving the resolution of this dispute to an ICC tribunal in Paris?
Are Exxon and Chinese partner (CNOOC) attempting to use Chevron’s acquisition of Hess to improve their already lucrative position in Guyana’s prolific Stabroek block?
The Stabroek operating agreement outlines terms for Hess, Exxon, and CNOOC to explore and develop the block.
This Stabroek agreement includes a right of first refusal (ROFR) provision which allows the parties to buy out the stake of one of them in the event of a ‘change of control’ transaction.
Chevron and Hess argue that the merger’s structure does not trigger the ROFR clause.
Exxon and CNOOC argue that the clause applies. This could force Hess to offer its stake in the Stabroek block to its partners first.
The Exxon/CNOOC position seems to be a stretch. Chevron did not buy the Stabroek share; they bought the company that holds that share. Hess is to be part of Chevron and there would be no change of control from the standpoint of the partnership.
As an offshore operator, Exxon has been highly responsible from a safety standpoint. However, the company has a shown tendency to stretch the envelope when it comes to contract rights. The most recent example was their acquisition of 163 GoM oil and gas leases for carbon disposal purposes, contrary to the terms of the sale notice and lease contracts.
The Honor Roll companies for 2023 (listed alphabetically) are Anadarko, bp, Cantium, Chevron, Eni, Hess, LLOG, Murphy, QuarterNorth, and Shell.
BOE Honor Roll criteria:
Must average <0.3 incidents of noncompliance (INCs) per facility-inspection.
Must average <0.1 INCs per inspection-type. (Note that each facility-inspection may include multiple types of inspections (e.g. production, pipeline, pollution, Coast Guard, site security, etc). On average, each facility-inspection included 3.3 types of inspections in 2023. Here is a list of the types of inspections that may be performed.
Must operate at least 3 production platforms and have drilled at least one well (i.e. you need operational activity to demonstrate compliance and safety achievement).
May not have a disqualifying event (e.g. fatal or life-threatening incident, significant fire, major oil spill). Due to the extreme lag in updates to BSEE’s incident tables, district investigations and media reports are used to make this determination.
platforms
2023 well starts
2023 (10 mos.) oil prod. (million bbls)
2023 (10 mos.) gas prod. (bcf)
Anadarko
10
11
66
60
BP
7
11
105
65
Cantium
96
10
5
6
Chevron
8
10
67
39
Eni
3
1
6
13
Hess
3
3
18
36
LLOG
10
7
25
35
Murphy
7
4
42
57
QuarterNorth
9
1
13
23
Shell
20
20
141
140
Also noteworthy:
Zero shut-in violations for Anadarko in 2023
<1 INC for every 10 facility inspections for Anadarko, Chevron, and Murphy
<1 INC for every 20 inspections (all types) for Anadarko, bp, Chevron, LLOG, Murphy, and QuarterNorth
On January 2, 2024, Chevron Corporation announced that for fourth quarter 2023, the Company will be impairing a portion of its U.S. upstream assets, primarily in California, due to continuing regulatory challenges in the state that have resulted in lower anticipated future investment levels in its business plans. The Company expects to continue operating the impacted assets for many years to come. In addition, the Company will be recognizing a loss related to abandonment and decommissioning obligations from previously sold oil and gas production assets in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, as companies that purchased these assets have filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, and we believe it is now probable and estimable that a portion of these obligations will revert to the Company. We expect to undertake the decommissioning activities on these assets over the next decade.
Biggest prize at the holiday party went to Anadarko: Mississippi Canyon 389 – 5 bids, $25.5 million high bid
Biggest holiday shopping spree: Shell’s 65 high bids accounted for 24% of the sale’s high bids (excluding CCS bids).
Big spender award: Hess – $88.3 million on only 20 high bids. Does Chevron approve? 😀
Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oi, Oi, Oi: Strong performance by Woodside. 18 high bids, $24.8 million
Heia Norge!: Equinor continues to shine in the GoM! 13 high bids, $20.6 million
Spirit of America award to Red Willow Offshore which is owned by the Southern Ute tribe. 22 high bids!
Deepwater independents for (energy) independence: Beacon, Murphy, LLOG, Kosmos, Talos, Houston Energy, Ridgewood, QuarterNorth, Alta Mar, CSL, CL&F, and Westlawn
Even pace wins the race: Another solid lease sale for bp – 24 high bids.
So happy together 😀: Chevron and Hess combined for 48 high bids, $114 million
Coal in their stockings? Repsol (Sale 261) and Exxon (Sales 257 and 259) made up their own rules for acquiring carbon dumping leases. Perhaps some solid carbon in their Christmas stockings would be appropriate.
Christmas in July?: A lease sale in 2024 is needed. Sometime near the 4th of July holiday would be good. It’s up to you Congress!
Holiday greetings to our friends around the world!
It’s always interesting to compare the high bids with the “runner-up” bids on the same tracts. Usually the gap is large and, as indicated in the table below, that is the case with the Sale 261 “top 10.” This tells us that bidding is independent, that tract evaluation is far from an exact science, that information and expert opinions differ, and that companies have different business and bidding strategies.
Particularly interesting in this sale were the tracts that both Hess and Chevron, its future parent, sought to acquire. Chevron and Hess bid against each other on two of the “top 10” tracts, and Hess outbid Chevron by wide margins. Will this affect post-merger relationships? 😉
In a future post, we’ll look at the 14 rejected Sale 259 high bids and the bidding on these tracts in Sale 261.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 