ICSID has registered the request for arbitration of the issues indicated above as discussed in note 14(a). In addition, the Company will actively defend itself against the lawsuit, which may take an extended period of time to settle. Alternatively, the Company may attempt to receive a stay order on the lawsuit pending either a settlement and/or results of ICSID arbitration. The Company believes that the outcome of the lawsuit and/or ICSID arbitration and the associated cost to the Company, if any, are not determinable. As such, no amounts have been recorded in these consolidated financial statements. Settlement costs, if any, will be recorded in the period of determination.
c. In accordance with natural gas sales contracts to customers of production from the Hazira field in India, the Company had committed to deliver certain minimum quantities and was unable to deliver the minimum quantities for a period ending December 31, 2007. The Company's partner in the Hazira field delivered the shortfall volumes in return for either: (a) delivery of replacement volumes five times greater than the shortfall; (b) a cash payment; or (c) a combination of (a) and (b). The Company's partner has served a notice of arbitration as the Company is unable to supply gas from the D6 block to the partner and the arbitration process has commenced. The Company estimates the cash amount to settle the contingency at US$11.6 million. The Company believes that the agreement with its partner is not effective as the Government of India's gas utilization policy prevents the Company from supplying the gas to the partner. The Company believes that the outcome is not determinable.
The Company may not be able to supply gas to a customer in Hazira whose contract runs until mid-2016. The Company had previously planned to supply gas from the D6 Block to the customer. Due to a change in the gas allocation policy by the Government of India, the Company may not be able to fulfill the contract with gas supply from the D6 Block. The Company has notified the customer that the underperformance of reservoir is a force majeure event. The customer does not agree with this position and has served a notice of arbitration on the Company. The matter is subjudice in a court of law. The Company believes that the outcome is not determinable.
d. In a May 2012 letter, the GOI alleged that the joint venture partners in the D6 Block are in breach of the PSC for the D6 Block as they failed to drill all of the wells and attain production levels contemplated in the Addendum to the Initial Development Plan for the Dhirubhai 1 and 3 fields. The GOI has further asserted that joint venture costs totaling $1.462 billion (the Company's share totaling $146.2 million) are therefore disallowed for cost recovery. The joint venture partners are of the view that the disallowance of recovery of costs incurred by the joint venture has no basis in the terms of the PSC and that there are strong grounds to challenge the action of the GOI. Reliance Industries Ltd. (Reliance) has commenced arbitration proceedings against the GOI challenging the allegations and the disallowance of cost recovery on behalf of the partners. To the extent that any amount of joint venture costs are disallowed, such amount would be treated as profit petroleum in the future, a portion of which would be payable to the GOI under the PSC. Because profit petroleum percentages for the joint venture partners and the GOI change as the joint venture partners recover specified percentages of their investments, the potential impact on the Company's future profit petroleum expense (which represents the GOI's share of profit petroleum) is dependent on the future revenue and expenditures in the block and cannot be precisely determined at this time. Based on the economic inputs used for the proved and proved plus probable reserves in the March 31, 2012 Ryder Scott Report, the Company has estimated the potential undiscounted before tax impact to be between $25 to $46 million. The arbitral tribunal is in the process of being constituted with Reliance and the GOI having nominated two of the three arbitrators. The outcome of these proceedings is not determinable at December 31, 2012
Most Popular Stories
- Ex-Mobster to Bulger: Just Say Sorry
- Google Stock Split Ahead
- Guns Are Hot in California
- El Paso Symposium Offers Help to Startups
- Small Businesses Hiring, but Worry About Expense
- OSH Selling Most of Its Stores to Lowe's
- Home Lending Offices Not Seeing Effects of Pickup
- How Green Is Google?
- Florida Enterprises Look to Costa Rica
- San Francisco Renters Battle Over Conversions