Response from Oil and Gas Authority5 Oct 2016 20:57
I expect many of those who have written to the Oil and Gas Authority have received a copy of this following letter that seems to try to answer all complaints concerning Xcite Energy.
It does not seem to cover my specific issue.
RE: Xcite Energy Limited (“Xcite Energy”) and the Bentley field
Thank you for your e-mail of 28 September to Andy Samuel in which you describe your unfortunate situation with regard to your Xcite Energy shares. The letter has been passed on to OGA Correspondence to respond.
The OGA has received a large amount of correspondence on this matter and we have therefore gathered answers to the key points raised across the correspondence in one letter.
Some of the points raised indicate a potential misunderstanding of the OGA’s objective and powers. The OGA responsibility is to pursue the best available course of action to achieve our statutory principal objective of maximising the economic recovery of the UK’s oil and gas resources.
Xcite Energy currently holds and operates 100% of the Bentley field. The licence was granted under a Promote Licence in 2003, and converted to a Traditional Licence in 2005.The OGA has had a number of discussions with Xcite on the technical requirements for the field and has extended the initial term of the licence more than once, to provide the operator with time to complete a development plan that the OGA could consider whether or not to approve. To date no such plan has been submitted and the OGA has not to this date given any such an approval.
The OGA has clear published guidelines on how it assesses Field Development Plans, including financial guidance:
General guidance on FDPs
Financial Guidance for an FDP from para 39 onwards
A number of correspondents have raised the issue of licensing. All Traditional Licences are issued on broadly the same terms and those terms do not give the OGA a power to ‘suspend’ that licence.
Traditional licences do have a power to revoke a licence in certain specific circumstances. However, any decisions to use that power would made by the OGA on a case by case basis in accordance with the principal objective mentioned above, and we would be unable to comment on the details of such considerations for any individual licensees.
Some correspondents have raised the UK Guarantees Scheme for infrastructure. The OGA does not have a role in administering this, but note there are a number of criteria including importantly in relation to commerciality of a project and financial credibility.
On financing matters, beyond wider initiatives such as shooting new seismic for the industry as a whole, the OGA has not been established to provide financial support to individual projects or companies in the UK Continental Shelf and has no remit to do so. The OGA also does not comment on individual company’s financial arrangements – these are a matter for the company’s Board of Dir