& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Niko Resources unaccountable

Shakier Khan
The Canadian company Niko ReSSurces, blamed for the huge gas explosion in Sunamganj on Friday, is unaccountable to Petrobangla, the country's oil and gas regulatory authority, according to industry sources.
This is because Niko has no Production Sharing Contract (PSC) with Petrobangla unlike oilier foreign oil and gas companies operatingin Bangladesh.
Although companies sometimes have pointed out that Pctrobangla's role as a regulator is inconsistent with its role as a business partner FROM PAGE 1
with oil companies, it is generally considered that Petrobangla is able to Storm some form of regulatory ctiononbehalfofthegovernmcnt. It is alleged that Niko has no contract with Petrobangla as senior government officials violated all rules and regulations when it awarded the Tengratila gas field (also known as Chhatak Mfest Gas field), along with two other fields, to Niko through a joint venture with Bangladeshi explorer Bapex.
The lack of a PSC is having consequences now that there has been the explosion.
"Who was there to cross check what kind of drilling design was being followed here? Petrobangla? Na The ministry? Na Niko is virtually free to do anything because there is no contract between Petrobangla and Niko, ”
a source from Petrobangla told The Daily Star.
The government might find it difficult to receive any compensation if the investigation found Niko's negligence led to the destruction of a gas pocket, he said.
Background to Deal
In 1989, the Tengratila gas field was abandoned after nearly 30 years of production, but Niko expected gas to be present at a depth greater than was originally exploited.
This gas field, as well as that of Feni and Kamta, were originally ring-fenced as "marginal gas fields" for future use by Petrobangla. However, it is alleged that Niko got these, plus an unexplored field (Chhatak East), through some formof'shadydealing’.
The rule is that oil companies can only obtain a contract after a process of competitive biddingand then must sign PSCs that give the companies specific deadlines and tasks.
In addition, there is a rule that if a ring-fenced gas field is located within a block where an oil company is already operating under a PSC, that company should get priority in the biddingprocess.
The Tengratila field is located within block 12 where Unocal is operating. The government, under the influence of a certain bhaban, gave the contract to Niko in April 2003 despite theprotestofUnocal.
Referring to Article 65 of the PSC, Unocal had said in a letter to the energy state minister that if the government wanted to open up the Tengratila gas field, it should receive the right to explore gas found below 3,000 metres.
At the same time, Petrobangla -who had already questioned Niko's technical and financial capacity to win a contract in the 1997 bidding process - had already expressed its reservation that the joint venture between Niko and Bapex did not follow a proper process.The deal however wasagreed.
'Hie energy ministry has argued that the government was represented through Bapex's joint venture involvement
Insiders say that Bapex was only given a 40 percent share in the joint venture in exchange for Niko's access to these fields. Bapex has, it is said, virtually no role in the operation while Nikn does everything. Bapex is hardly involved there and there is no real technology transfer as p remised in the jointventure.
"It is true that there was no Bapex men at the Tengratila well site. But it is also true that if there were any, nothing would have changed. Bapex has almost no role in Niko's operations from the beginning," said a Petrobangla source.