Transcript Slide 1

TYPICAL MISMATCHES BETWEEN LNG SUPPLY
CONTRACTS AND US GAS MARKETING
AGREEMENTS
East Coast AIPN
Luncheon and Roundtable
Hosted by
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
Washington D.C.
October 1, 2004
© 2004, CHADBOURNE & PARKE LLP
All Rights Reserved
Overview of Presentation
 Volume
and Scheduling Mismatches
 Force
Majeure Mismatches
 Force
Majeure in LNG Transport Contracts
 Pricing
 Credit
Mismatches
Support Mismatches
2
Volume and Scheduling Mismatches
 LNG supply contracts
 Annual contract quantities
& adjustments
 Annual / quarterly take-or-pay obligations
 Annual delivery program / 90 day program /
ratable deliveries
 Delivery in ‘Standard Cargo Lots’ (usually
range from 87,000 cbm to 138,000 cbm)
 Physical storage & vaporization / send-out
constraints
 Non-availability of ‘Cover LNG’ in event of
Seller’s delivery failure
 Buyer’s ‘reasonable efforts’ undertaking to
receive off-specification LNG prior to
exercise of rejection rights
 LNG boil-off during loading, transportation
and discharge operations
3
Volume and Scheduling Mismatches (continued)
 Typical
downstream gas marketing contracts
 Monthly / daily / hourly delivery quantities &
adjustments
 Take-or-pay obligations
 Pipeline takeaway constraints & imbalance
charges
 Availability of cover gas or alternative fuel in
event of delivery failures
 Buyer’s right to reject all or part of offspecification gas (UCC and UK Sale of Goods
Act)
4
Force Majeure Issues
 Typical force majeure
 Scope of coverage
clauses in LNG SPAs
‘Traditional’ force majeure events
 Upstream facility events
 Marine transportation events
 Downstream customer facility events
 Construction-related events
 Political events
 Events affecting third-parties

 Responsibilities
of the party seeking force majeure
relief
Notification of event and anticipated duration
 Mitigation obligation & use of diligence to resume normal
performance
 Periodic updates

5
Force Majeure Mismatches
 Effect
of Buyer-related force majeure under
LNG sale and purchase agreement
 Buyer
gets reduction in Adjusted Annual Contract
Quantity (AACQ) [relief from annual take-or-pay
obligation]
 Seller is relieved from delivery obligation
 Seller is entitled to remarket LNG to others during
period of Buyer force majeure
 Contract termination rights for extended periods
of force majeure
6
Force Majeure Mismatches (continued)

Potential mismatch with other key project contracts

LNG transportation contracts

Usually very limited excuses from payment of charter hire.
 Standard charter forms provide no relief to charterer for ‘project
force majeure’ or political force majeure events.

LNG terminalling and gas pipeline transportation contracts


Depending on which party is affected by force majeure event,
excuse from payment of demand (reservation) charges may not be
available, but if facility owner was prevented from performing,
business interruption or other available insurance proceeds can be
refunded by facility owner to offset demand charges.
Natural gas sales contracts

Typical U.S. gas market contract forms may not cover upstream
LNG production and transportation risks.
 May also be limited as to duration during which force majeure relief
may be sought.
 Excuse for non-performance due to political events is often
covered.
7
Force Majeure Mismatches (continued)
 Special

force majeure issues
Extension of LNG contract term by period of force
majeure?

Automatic vs. optional extension
 Alignment with other project contracts

‘Force Majeure Restoration Quantity’ obligations

Mandatory vs. optional lifting obligation
 Alignment with other project contracts
 Impact on downstream take-or-pay / ship or pay
obligations

Partial force majeure

Apportionment of impact among other counterparties

Only to the extent possible under other project contracts
 Goal is to avoid discriminatory treatment
8
Force Majeure Issues in LNG Transportation
Contracts

Relationship between ‘Exceptions’ and off-hire events in
LNG tanker charter parties

Scope of traditional charter party exceptions clause

No relief to Charterer for project force majeure
 Capital and operating elements of hire remain payable

Some ways that project force majeure has been handled
in recent LNG projects

Delayed Charterer termination right, with interim creditbacked hire payment obligation
 Continued payment of capital element of charter hire, with
temporary suspension of obligation to pay operating
element of charter hire and no contract termination right
 Right of Charterer to cancel the Charter ‘for convenience’
upon payment of a liquidated termination payment
 Subcharter rights and related ship owner consents
9
Pricing Mismatches
 Choice




of pricing index
Traditional LNG supply contracts use oil-based
pricing indexes (JCC, ICP, etc).
Newer US-oriented LNG supply contracts are using
NYMEX / Henry Hub index
Basis differential risk (i.e., pricing difference between
index hub location and applicable market area [which
in part reflects transportation costs]) may be allocated
to either Seller or Buyer
Even with the use of a common pricing index,
inconsistent contract price ceilings and floors still
leave room for potential pricing mismatches between
LNG supply contracts and gas marketing contracts
10
Pricing Mismatches (continued)

Invoicing and Payment Mismatches

Even with the use of a common pricing index, mismatches
in the applicable index may occur due to invoicing and
payment timing mismatches

FOB LNG purchases are usually invoiced at or shortly after
loading and can become payable before the cargo is even
discharged (on longer voyages)
 Ex-ship LNG purchases are usually invoiced at or shortly after
discharge and can become payable before sendout of the
vaporized LNG is completed
 Invoicing and payment under many gas marketing contracts is
set on a monthly basis for delivered quantities
 Index reference that applies on the date of invoicing in the
above settings may be different due to passage of time

LNG transportation contracts typically require payment of
charter hire monthly in advance, regardless of volume of
LNG commodity actually transported
11
Credit Support Mismatches
 LNG Supply and Transportation Contracts
 Many ‘traditional’ LNG supply and transportation contracts
do not require the Seller / Transporter to maintain credit
support in the event of an unexcused Seller / Transporter
performance failure
 Of those LNG supply and transportation contracts that do,
typical Seller’s / Transporter’s credit support is in the form of
a corporate guarantee and often cover only select
performance obligations
 Often no credit support default provision or credit support
replacement obligation
 US Gas Marketing and Transportation Contracts
 Fairly detailed credit support obligations applicable to both
Seller / Transporter and Buyer / Shipper
 Fairly easy and quick recourse to available credit support
 Clear guidelines as to credit support defaults and credit
support replacement obligations
 Fairly ‘light’ triggers to require additional credit support, and
contract termination rights if credit support is not promptly
forthcoming
12
TYPICAL MISMATCHES BETWEEN LNG SUPPLY
CONTRACTS AND US GAS MARKETING
AGREEMENTS
Question and
Answer Session
© 2004, CHADBOURNE & PARKE LLP
All Rights Reserved