|
 The first salvo in the previously unreported dispute was fired by BP
in December. The oil company demanded, through arbitration, $110
million from the private equity-backed NARL Refining for its alleged
failure to properly manage and maximize profits from the
Come-by-Chance plant in Newfoundland.
NARL filed a counter arbitration claim along with two lawsuits
accusing BP - which is the refinery's sole supplier under a two-year
contract - of providing varieties of crude that benefit its trading
book but hurt the refinery's equipment and profits.
The dispute could jeopardize the ongoing operation of the 115,000
barrel per day (bpd) refinery. It also exposes a rift in the
rough-and-tumble global oil market, where disputes often are handled
quietly to avoid compromising long-term relationships or revealing
trading strategies.
"Disagreements among parties in supply contracts are not uncommon,
but we don't typically see these conflicts out in the open," said Ed
Hirs, an energy economist at the University of Houston. "That's why
these contracts call for disputes to go to arbitration, keeping it
out of public view."
BP and NARL Refining declined to comment.
Hirs said contracts include negotiated terms that majors such as BP
would prefer to keep private. The allegation that BP put its
interest over those of a client could also hurt business, he said.
The refinery's operators are SilverPeak Financial Partners, a group
of Wall Street veterans, including Neal Shear, who helped build
Morgan Stanley's oil trading division; Kaushik Amin, former chief
executive officer of RBS Sempra Commodities and global head of
liquid markets for Lehman Brothers; and Harsh Rameshwar from Merrill
Lynch Commodities.
Although they're experienced trading oil, they began refining it
when they purchased the plant for an undisclosed price from South
Korea's national oil company 18 months ago. They are up against BP,
one of the world's largest producers, which supplies its own
refineries and select third-party assets around the globe.
The high-stakes feud centers on what is the best slate of crudes to
run through Come-by-Chance - and how that should be determined.
There are dozens of varieties of crude in the world, each with its
own characteristics, and a refinery's profits and operations can
vary widely depending on choice.
The dispute began quietly in December with arbitration in New York.
BP argued that NARL was failing to live up to the terms of the
supply contract, according to court records. Typically, arbitration
filings are not public. But the dispute spilled into the open when
NARL went to a federal court in New York to seek to freeze the
business relationship pending a resolution of the arbitration.
[to top of second column] |
The "tolling" contract at issue is a routine arrangement for
independent refineries that lack the trading operations and credit
lines necessary to operate effectively in the global market. There
is no dispute that BP was to supply crude to the refinery and take
back roughly 82 percent of the refined fuels, such as gasoline,
diesel and jet fuel, paying NARL a fixed “toll” of $9.45 per barrel
on the first 90,000 barrels of oil put through each day.
NARL earns a higher profit on oil refined in excess of 90,000 bpd,
termed "merchant barrels," BP says in its arbitration filing. The
oil company alleges NARL ran the refinery at more than 90,000 bpd to
capitalize on the incentive - even when it was not economically
advantageous to do so. This came "at the expense of both the
Refinery's gross margin and [BP's] legitimate expectations for
benefit under the contract," BP said in court documents.
In a counterclaim, NARL seeks to end the contract. Early on, NARL
says in court documents, it deferred to BP in managing the crude
slate. But as the months rolled on, the new owners say in filings,
they began to make decisions independent of BP.
NARL alleges that BP made only lesser grades available, resulting in
"significant and long-term damage" to refinery equipment, including
a vacuum tower that had to be shut down abruptly last the fall. The
light crudes contain higher levels of asphaltenes, a tar-like
substance that can clog lines and pipes, NARL argued.
As evidence, NARL submitted a BP presentation that acknowledged the
asphaltenes problem with U.S. domestic crudes, calling it an
"industry-wide" issue.
In a second federal suit, this one filed in Texas, NARL alleges BP
interfered with its plans to secure a hedging program, costing it at
least $10 million, and scuppered plans to extend a vital financing
deal with Citigroup Energy Canada.
NARL says in court filings that BP sent several letters to Citigroup
- which is a party to the supply and offtake agreement - falsely
accusing the refinery owners of mismanaging the plant; it says the
correspondence was in an effort to thwart financing negotiations and
impose its will on the refinery owners.
BP counters in filings that the supply agreement required them to
notify Citigroup of their concerns about NARL's management of the
refinery.
Citigroup declined to comment.
(Reporting By Jessica Resnick-Ault and Jarrett Renshaw; Editing by
Jonathan Leff and Lisa Girion)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
