@Former Member posted:

Govt. reveals controversial Canadian politician was part of review process – Industry experts

Apr 17, 2022 News ---  Source --- Kaieteur News Online ---  https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...ss-industry-experts/

After approving Exxon’s Yellowtail licence…

By Kiana Wilburg

Kaieteur News –

Kaieteur News had previously reported that Redford, is a former politician, for one, with a career plagued by scandal. As Premier of the Canadian province of Alberta, she drew widespread public controversy in Canada when it was discovered that during her attendance of the funeral of Nelson Mandela the State footed the CAD$45,000 cost of her trip, including about CAD$10,000 for a privately chartered return flight from South Africa. Redford reportedly refused several calls to repay the money spent for the South Africa trip, but eventually bowed to pressure in 2014 and delivered the funds back to the public purse, with an apology.

Kaieteur News had also reported that Redford announced her resignation in March 2014 as Alberta Premier, and as a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) in August of that year, a day before an Attorney General (AG) report on her spending practices was scheduled for release. The AG report found that she and her office had “used public resources inappropriately”; “used public assets (aircraft) for personal and partisan purposes” and that Redford “was involved in a plan to convert public space in a public building into personal living space.”

All of this, Kaieteur News ventilated shortly after the Government had announced that it hired Redford in August 2020 to review the Payara FDP which is Exxon’s third oil project in the Stabroek Block.

Given the foregoing, industry experts who have spoken with this newspaper said the PPP/C Government should reveal how the Redford consultancy was allowed to participate in the FDP review for Yellowtail Project without being subjected to the Procurement Law requirements.

Will be quite interested to know why this individual is still involved with these projects in Guyana.

Experts mock Guyana’s wild approval rate of Exxon projects

Apr 22, 2022 News --- Source -- Kaieteur News Online -- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...e-of-exxon-projects/

Kaieteur News – A Field Development Plan (FDP) is one of the most critical documents governments assess before granting companies permission to move ahead with oil projects.

In developing the FDP, an oil company such as ExxonMobil will be selective in what international principles it follows. It will also take note of the factors used to tally how much it will charge the country for the project. At the end of the day, the oil company presents the government with a FDP that secures the interest of its shareholders.

Canadian lawyer, Alison Redford

Given the importance of this document, numerous industry experts have said the government must ensure proper due diligence is done by way of experienced professionals. It is on this very principle that they have expressed grave concern about Guyana’s use of Alison Merrilla Redford, a Canadian lawyer and former politician. She was used not once, but twice for the review of ExxonMobil’s Payara and Yellowtail FDPs. They were keen to note that both projects will cost Guyana a whopping US$19B. Given the fact that Redford has no well known track record of being a fierce defender of States on field development plans, industry experts cannot comprehend why she was selected for such an important job. What has surprised them as well is “Guyana’s wild rate of approval for Exxon’s projects” following Redford’s input. They noted that Redford reviewed both Payara and Yellowtail within 42 and 52 days respectively.

More than a dozen industry experts who have experience reviewing FDPs said emphatically, “No proper review is done with such break-neck speed.” Specifically, one industry expert said, “…Other teams having performed reviews of field development plan in other major offshore producing areas, find it difficult to envision that a rigorous analysis of the Yellowtail FDP and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was possible within 52 days. Even with two mega groups of specialists and engineers assigned, it is not possible. The question therefore arises as to whether the Bayphase/Redford partnership skimmed the documents Exxon submitted to the government rather than probing it and requesting additional data for a proactive assessment.”

Another expert agreed with the foregoing perspective while adding, “For most FPDs you have over 100 items to check that is why proper review takes a year and change, sometimes longer depending on project size. In the first instance, the government must have its own FDP guidelines on minimum requirements they expect from the company. That should be public. This is needed because citizens would better understand the standards the administration is setting for companies to abide by. The North Sea Transition Authority (NTSA) does this. That authority regulates and influences the oil, gas and carbon storage industries of the UK Continental Shelf.”

The NSTA clearly states via its guidelines on its website that all FDPs must provide a clear explanation why the development concept being presented is considered optimum from a technical, environmental and economic perspective. The authority also requires that companies set out the commitments they will follow to ensure enhanced oil recovery and sound development. The expert noted that Guyana is yet to prove if the Redford/Bayphase group achieved this since their findings remain a State secret.

Experts also told Kaieteur News that FDPs must also provide a production strategy that aligns with the country’s interest. Such a strategy includes: Short-term and long-term plans on production acceleration and recoverable reserves, the number of production and injection wells and the cost to the nation, and an explanation of hydrocarbon bearing sands penetrated not included under the current development plan but which could be profitable if assumption changes such as extent of reservoir or oil price.

FDPs also include detailed information, which the government needs experienced persons to review regarding production technology and well engineering. In this area, government specialists must diligently assess proposed well design concepts including trajectory and location, in flow performance prediction, sand control and sand management, explanation of concept selection and how value for money would be achieved on each component of the project.

“In light of the foregoing, how can Guyana feel assured that the reviews by Bayphase and Redford have been performed with their best interest in mind? It is Exxon’s job to advance their best interest: It is the government’s job to safeguard the best interest of its people. It is not clear that this is taking place,” expressed one of the specialists with over 40 years experience.

Another industry expert also raised alarm about the oversight provided by Bayphase and the input of the Alison Redford Group which was paid for by the Canadian government. She said, “Guyanese should be concerned that it was not revealed by Natural Resources Minister, Vickram Bharrat that the Redford group was involved in reviewing the US$10B Yellowtail Project until after the work was completed and the production licence awarded. Why? Redford’s group was not listed by the National Tender and Procurement Board as one of the companies submitting a proposal for the Yellowtail or Payara reviews. Why was she given a direct contract on both? Why were Guyanese kept in the dark? Why are her reports not public? Why are the reports by Bayphase not public?”

In the interest of transparency, the industry experts agreed that the PPP/C Government should disclose a summary of the work performed by Bayphase and the Redford group to date, along with a summary of the type of data used and the methods by which it was assessed.

Govt.’s timeline for review of Exxon’s oil projects makes it impossible for proper reviews to be done – Experts

Apr 24, 2022 News ---  Source --- Kaieteur News Online --- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...-to-be-done-experts/   ---

By Kiana Wilburg

Kaieteur News – Is the PPP/C Government hell-bent on dancing to the tune of ExxonMobil no matter the cost to the nation?

That’s the question several industry experts have been asking themselves after observing that the government had explicitly asked hired contractors to review the Payara and Yellowtail Field Development Plans in 42 and 52 days respectively.

Alison Merrilla Redford, a Canadian lawyer and former politician

For both projects, the administration utilised two contractors—Bayphase Consultancy from the UK and the Alison Redford Group out of Canada.

With respect to the Payara FDP review, Redford was directly contracted and paid via a grant from the Canadian High Commission to conduct the review in six weeks. She was hired for the job even though she has no known track record in doing same for years in the interest of States with similar production fields. Kaieteur News had also reported that the terms of reference for the Payara review were also a secret. All that remains known is that she was hired to review the Payara FDP, a job that was initially started by Bayphase under the Granger administration.

Despite promises to be transparent, Vice President, Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo; President, Irfaan Ali; and Natural Resources Minister, Vickram Bharrat have failed thus far to make Redford’s report on Payara, available for public scrutiny.

As for the Yellowtail Project, the nation was only told Redford was part of the process until the production licence was awarded. Prior to that, the government had pursued an open bidding process and ExxonMobil’s client, Bayphase, was selected for the review process. Industry experts were alarmed when they subsequently learned that Redford was involved all along.

Significantly, analysts have said that the short timeframe which the government imposes on contractors makes it impossible for any proper review to be done. “It is as though the intention was for there to be no proper due diligence; just give the appearance that something is being done and hurry it through,” commented one analyst.

Kaieteur News previously reported that a Field Development Plan is one of the most critical documents governments assess before granting companies permission to move ahead with oil projects.

Given the importance of this document, numerous industry experts have said the government must ensure proper due diligence is done by way of experienced professionals. It is on this very principle that they have expressed grave concern about Guyana’s use of Alison Merrilla Redford, a Canadian lawyer and former politician.

More than a dozen industry experts who have experience reviewing FDPs said emphatically no proper review can be done in 42 or 52 days.

Specifically, one industry expert said, “For most FPDs, you have over 100 items to check. That is why a proper review takes a year and change, sometimes longer depending on project size. In the first instance, the government must have its own FDP guidelines on minimum requirements they expect from the company. That should be public. This is needed because citizens would better understand the standards the administration is setting for companies to abide by. The North Sea Transition Authority (NTSA) does this. That authority regulates and influences the oil, gas and carbon storage industries of the UK Continental Shelf.”

The NSTA clearly states via its guidelines on its website that all FDPs must provide a clear explanation why the development concept being presented is considered optimum from a technical, environmental and economic perspective. The authority also requires that companies set out the commitments they will follow to ensure enhanced oil recovery and sound development. The expert noted that Guyana is yet to prove if the Redford/Bayphase group achieved this since their findings remain a State secret.

Experts also told Kaieteur News that FDPs must also provide a production strategy that aligns with the country’s interest. Such a strategy includes: Short-term and long-term plans on production acceleration and recoverable reserves, the number of production and injection wells and the cost to the nation, and an explanation of hydrocarbon bearing sands penetrated not included under the current development plan but which could be profitable if assumption changes such as extent of reservoir or oil price.

FDPs also include detailed information, which the government needs experienced persons to review regarding production technology and well engineering. In this area, government specialists must diligently assess proposed well design concepts including trajectory and location, in flow performance prediction, sand control and sand management, explanation of concept selection and how value for money would be achieved on each component of the project.

In light of the foregoing, and in the interest of transparency, the industry experts agreed that the PPP/C Government should disclose a summary of the work performed by Bayphase and the Redford group to date, along with a summary of the type of data used and the methods by which it was assessed.

Pres. Ali and Vickram Bharrat should honour promise to release Alison Redford  reports on oil projects – VP Jagdeo says

May 02, 2022 News -- Source - Kaieteur News Online -- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...the-redford-reports/

Kaieteur News – If President Irfaan Ali and Natural Resources Minister, Vickram Bharrat made commitments to release the reports of Canadian lawyer, Alison Redford on ExxonMobil’s projects then they should do so. This statement was made by Vice President, Bharrat Jagdeo during an engagement with members of the media last Friday.Kaieteur News asked the former President to explain why the reports by the Canadian lawyer have not been made public despite the government’s promise to do so. This newspaper had previously reported that Redford authored two reports.

Vice President, Bharrat Jagdeo

The first review report was done in August 2020 on the Field Development Plan (FDP) for the Payara project. During the David Granger administration, the contract to review the Payara FDP was awarded to Bayphase Consultancy headquartered in the UK but electoral disruptions and the COVID-19 pandemic stymied the completion process. Redford was subsequently hired by the PPP administration to review what was done by Bayphase and complete the review of the Payara FDP. Bayphase was also awarded the contract to review the Yellowtail FDP worth US$10B. On the same day it awarded the licence to ExxonMobil for the project, Government disclosed that Redford was also part of the review process. Importantly, the review of Payara and Yellowtail were completed in 42 and 52 days respectively.

The government came in for harsh criticism from several industry experts who noted that no proper review can be done in such a short space of time while adding, that Redford has no known track record in this highly technical field. While Jagdeo did acknowledge the need for the government officials to honour their statement commitments, he also noted that the reports following a review process is not where the public’s focus should be. He said it is the production licences that represent the final word of the government. Expounding further, the Vice President said, “There are lots of issues in the review report that are subsequently clarified so if they write up a report, often it is based on what the submission is (in the Field Development Plan) and when they make the engagement (with the company) that is when you end up with the final stuff so the report of a review does not mean everything is correct.”

Jagdeo further explained that a review report may point to several issues but when clarification is offered by the company, the consultant realizes that “it is not really a big issue.” He said the review report does not reflect the entire picture of what the government arrived at. He also alluded that perhaps the government’s hesitation to release the documents is due to fear of them being used selectively and disparagingly. Irrespective of this fear, industry experts are still demanding that the reports be made public so that citizens can understand the quality and value of the work conducted by Redford.

Canadian lawyer and former politician, Alison Redford

Kaieteur News previously reported that a Field Development Plan is one of the most critical documents governments assess before granting companies permission to move ahead with oil projects. Given the importance of this document, numerous industry experts have said the government must ensure proper due diligence is done by way of experienced professionals. It is on this very principle that they have expressed grave concern about Guyana’s use of Alison Merrilla Redford, a Canadian lawyer and former politician.

More than a dozen industry experts who have experience reviewing FDPs said emphatically, no proper review can be done in 42 or 52 days. Specifically, one industry expert said, “For most FPDs, you have over 100 items to check. That is why a proper review takes a year and change, sometimes longer depending on project size. In the first instance, the government must have its own FDP guidelines on minimum requirements they expect from the company. That should be public. This is needed because citizens would better understand the standards the administration is setting for companies to abide by. The North Sea Transition Authority (NTSA) does this. That authority regulates and influences the oil, gas and carbon storage industries of the UK Continental Shelf.”

The NSTA clearly states via its guidelines on its website that all FDPs must provide a clear explanation why the development concept being presented is considered optimum from a technical, environmental and economic perspective. The authority also requires that companies set out the commitments they will follow to ensure enhanced oil recovery and sound development. The expert noted that Guyana is yet to prove if the Redford/Bayphase group achieved this since their findings remain a State secret.

Experts also told Kaieteur News that FDPs must also provide a production strategy that aligns with the country’s interest. Such a strategy includes: Short-term and long-term plans on production acceleration and recoverable reserves, the number of production and injection wells and the cost to the nation, and an explanation of hydrocarbon bearing sands penetrated not included under the current development plan, but which could be profitable if assumption changes such as extent of reservoir or oil price.

FDPs also include detailed information, which the government needs experienced persons to review regarding production technology and well engineering. In this area, government specialists must diligently assess proposed well design concepts including trajectory and location, in flow performance prediction, sand control and sand management, explanation of concept selection and how value for money would be achieved on each component of the project. In light of the foregoing, and in the interest of transparency, the industry experts agreed that the PPP/C Government should disclose a summary of the work performed by Bayphase and the Redford group to date, along with a summary of the type of data used and the methods by which it was assessed.