Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘rejected bid’

Following up on the Keathley Canyon Block 828 bid rejection

Posted in energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, Regulation, tagged , , , , , , on September 16, 2026| Leave a Comment »

The Buckskin field (LLOG) is located in Keathley Canyon blocks 785, 828, 829, 830, 871, and 872 in 6,800 ft (2,073 m) of water. The KC 828 lease expired last year and LLOG’s bid for that block at the BBG2 sale was rejected. That bid rejection has been appealed.

As suspected, the rejection of LLOG’s Sale BBG2 bid for Keathley Canyon Block 828 has been appealed. This is an interesting case because KC 828 is part of LLOG’s Buckskin field. The block had been previously leased, but that lease expired on 9/3/2025.

We assume the lease expired due to inactivity given that the last well reached total depth more than a year prior to the expiration date. LLOG wanted to reacquire the lease back, but BOEM’s valuation was 20 times higher than LLOG’s bid. It’s also interesting that no other company submitted a bid. Did no one want a lease in an established field? BOEM valued this block far higher than any other block in the sale.

LLOG’s letter of appeal is not publicly available. Below is the summary blurb from the Serial Register Page:

By letter dated May 27, 2026, LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. appealed the  Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) decision for OCS-G 38173, covering all of Block 828, Keathley Canyon. LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.  is requesting reconsideration of the rejection decision. The Adjudication Section received the written request and statement of reasons within the 15 days of the rejection decision, on May 28, 2026.

According to the applicable regulation, the BOEM/MMA Director is the deciding officer and the decision is not subject to appeal to the Interior Board of Land Appeals. The rejection seems rather straightforward under BOEM’s bid evaluation policies, but perhaps there is much more to the story.

Read Full Post »

Bid rejection and lingering Lease Sale 257 mysteries

Posted in CCS, energy policy, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , , , , , , on February 27, 2023| Leave a Comment »

BOEM published their Sale 257 Decision Matrix on Friday (2/24/2023), and my previous speculation regarding the rejected Sale 257 high bid has proven to be partially incorrect. The rejected high bid was submitted by BP and Talos and was for Green Canyon Block 777. BOEM’s analytics assigned a Mean of the Range-of-Value (MROV) of $4.4 million to that tract, which tied for the highest MROV for any tract receiving a bid. The BP/Talos bid was $1.8 million or just 40% of BOEM’s MROV. BOEM’s tract evaluation is interesting given that the other bid on this wildcat tract (by Chevron, $1.185 million) was considerably lower than the rejected BP/Talos bid.

The Sale 257 bid that I thought might have been rejected was for lease G37261. This lease was never issued per the lease inquiry data base and the final bid recap. BHP’s bid of $3.6 million for that tract (Green Canyon Block 79) was more than 5 times BOEM’s MROV of $576,000, and was accepted per the decision matrix. Why was the lease never issued?

Both Green Canyon 79 and 777 should again be for sale in legislatively mandated Sale 259, which will be held in just a few weeks on March 29, 2023, just 2 days prior to the deadline. It will be interesting to see what the bidding on those tracts looks like.

Meanwhile, Exxon and BOEM are still mum about the 94 Sale 257 oil and gas leases that Exxon acquired for carbon sequestration purposes. Note the large patches of blue just offshore Texas on the map above. These leases were all valued by BOEM at only $144,000 each, which is equivalent to the minimum bid of $25/acre. This valuation reflects the absence of perceived value for oil and gas production purposes. Exxon bid $158,400 for each tract, $27.50/acre or 10% higher than the minimum bid. Given that (1) the Notice of Sale only provided for lease acquisition for oil and gas exploration and production purposes, and (2) it was common knowledge that these tracts were acquired for carbon sequestration, should these bids have been rejected?

Read Full Post »

Which Sale 257 bid was rejected?

Posted in CCS, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , on November 21, 2022| Leave a Comment »

On September 14, 2022, BOEM announced that 307 high bids from Lease Sale 257 in the Gulf of Mexico were accepted. BOEM also announced that one high bid was rejected for not providing the public with fair market value. BOEM has not identified the rejected bid.

Per BOEM’s Lease Area Block Online Query file, 306 Sale 257 leases were effective on Oct. 1, 2022. A comparison of these data with the sale results identified 2 Sale 257 leases that have not been awarded:

leaseblockhigh bidder(s)bidcomments
G37261GC 70BHP$3.6 millionlone bid; 7th highest
bid in sale
G37294GC 777BP (75%),
Talos (25%)		$1.8 million2 bids; next highest
$1.185 million

So one of these 2 bids was rejected and the other has lease not yet been awarded for some reason (or perhaps there has been a clerical/IT issue).

Which bid was rejected? I would guess it was the BHP bid even though that bid was the 7th highest bid in the entire sale. The fact that this bid was $2.5 to $3 million higher than the other 7 BHP bids (all of which were accepted) tells us that the company valued this tract highly. Perhaps BOEM, which has all of the geologic data, thought the value was even higher, which is why the bid may have been rejected.

There was another bidder (Chevron) for the BP/Talos tract, so the competition makes it less likely that the bid would have been rejected.

Ironically, the 94 carbon sequestration bids, which made something of a mockery of the lease sale, could not be rejected on fair market grounds. The bids exceeded the minimum required, and the tracts have little or no value from an oil and gas production standpoint. A competitive process would be require to repurpose these leases for carbon sequestration.

Read Full Post »