Pemerintah Kaji Kontrak Selain Bagi Hasil

Pemerintah Kaji Kontrak Selain Bagi Hasil (berita di tempointeraktif).

Menarik berita tempo tersebut, isinya bahwa: Pemerintah akan mengkaji penerapan bentuk lain kontrak kerja sama minyak dan gas bumi. Saat ini kontrak kerja sama yang berlaku adalah kontrak bagi hasil antara kontraktor dan pemerintah… (dst-nya).

Kalau mau mengkaji kontrak selain PSC, maka terlebih dahulu kita harus tahu kontrak apa aja yang ada selain model PSC, bisa dilihat di posting sebelumnya.

Baru setelah itu melangkah ke hal hal yang berikutnya, apa saja sich alternatif yang tersedia, yang kira kira bisa diusulkan sebagai bentuk kontrak lain selain PSC ?

Sebelum melangkah lebih jauh, mungkin ada baiknya kita (seperti biasa) masuk ke definisi dulu biar seragam, ini saya ambil definisi SPE mengenai kontrak kontrak dimaksud, saya copy - paste aja nih.

Concession: A grant of access for a defined area and time period that transfers certain rights to hydrocarbons that may be discovered from the host country to an enterprise. The enterprise is generally responsible for exploration, development, production and sale of hydrocarbons that may be discovered. Typically granted under a legislated fiscal system where the host country collects taxes, fees and sometimes royalty on profits earned

Production Sharing Contract: In a production-sharing contract between a contractor and a host government, the contractor typically bears all risk and costs for exploration, development, and production. In return, if exploration is successful, the contractor is given the opportunity to recover the investment from production, subject to specific limits and terms. The contractor also receives a stipulated share of the production remaining after cost recovery, referred to as profit hydrocarbons. Ownership is retained by the host government; however, the contractor normally receives title to the prescribed share of the volumes as they are produced. Reserves consistent with the cost recovery plus profit hydrocarbons that are recoverable under the terms of the contract are typically reported by the upstream contractor.

Pure-Service Contract: an agreement between a contractor and a host government that typically covers a defined technical service to be provided or completed during a specific period of time. The service company investment is typically limited to the value of equipment, tools, and personnel used to perform the service. In most cases, the service contractor's reimbursement is fixed by the terms of the contract with little exposure to either project performance or market factors. Payment for services is normally based on daily or hourly rates, a fixed turnkey rate, or some other specified amount. Payments may be made at specified intervals or at the completion of the service. Payments, in some cases, may be tied to the field performance, operating cost reductions, or other important metrics. Risks of the service company under this type of contract are usually limited to nonrecoverable costs overruns, losses owing to client breach of contract, default, or contract dispute. These agreements generally do not have exposure to production volume or market price; consequently, reserves are not usually recognized under this type of agreement.

Risk Service Contract: These agreements are very similar to the production-sharing agreements with the exception of contractor payment. With a risked-service contract, the contractor usually receives a defined share of revenue rather than a share of the production. As in the production-sharing contract, the contractor provides the capital and technical expertise required for exploration and development. If exploration efforts are successful, the contractor can recover those costs from the sale revenues and receive a share of profits through a contract-defined mechanism. Under existing SEC regulations, it may be more difficult for the contractor to justify reserves recognition, and special care must be taken in drafting the agreement. Provided that the requirements for reserves recognition are satisfied, reported reserves are typically based on the economic interest held or the financial benefit received.

Buy Back Agreement: An agreement between a host government and a contractor under which the host pays the contractor an agreed price for all volumes of hydrocarbons produced by the contractor. Pricing mechanisms typically provide the contractor with an opportunity to recover investment at an agreed level of profit. These agreements may include financial incentives for more efficient, lower cost developments and production levels higher than the minimum level agreed. These agreements may give rights to oil volumes and generally carry a risk for the contractor. They may allow booking of reserves.

Nah, inilah model kontrak perminyakan yang tersedia around the world, jadi selain PSC, ya tinggal model service contract lah, nggak ada lagi, kalau concession, ya berat, lupakanlah! ini urusannya legal nih, apa boleh? karena by definition, concession itu ada transfer of ownership, apa nggak bertentangan dengan UUD 45 pasal 33?. Lagian ngapain milih concession, bagi host country dalam banyak hal bagusan PSC-lah.

Kalau begitu, alternatifnya tinggal ke model service contract? apakah mau yang pure, risk atau model buyback contract, ya mau yang mana lagi?

Untuk beberapa blok yang less risky secara geologi, misalnya: pengelolaan lapangan tua (brownfield), EOR project atau pekerjaan pekerjaan "technical services" dalam rangka "production enhancement" lainnya, maka ada baiknya diadopsi model service contract ini, sementara untuk blok baru, yang secara geologi resikonya masih besar, ya berat juga kalau mau menawarkan model service contract, siapa yang mau? ngebor sumur eksplorasi, kalau sukses cuma dikasih fee doang (kasarnya gitu ya), ya nggak maulah IOC. Mereka mikirnya gini, resiko jelas ada (gede lagi), reward-nya terbatas, ya nggak menarik dong!. Padahal nature bisnis oil itu khan berani ngambil resiko dalam rangka dapet reward yang segede gedenya. Kalau untuk blok yang kaya gini, PSC tetap lebih fair kalau kita melihat dari perspektif baik IOC maupun host country (negara).

Sebenarnya secara konseptual, PSC itu sesuatu yang baik (diantara model model kontrak perminyakan di dunia ini, yang paling banyak khan PSC, kalau jelek tentu nggak banyak yang mau pakai), kalau dalam prakteknya dianggap kurang "menguntungkan" bagi negara, tentu kita bisa mengusulkan perubahan term & conditions menjadi lebih baik, cuma kalau adanya cost recovery dijadikan alasan kalau PSC jelek?, lha model lain juga khan ada mekanisme cost recovery, namanya aja lain, yang namanya biaya yang telah dikeluarkan, kalau "proyeknya" sudah memberikan hasil, ya bagaimanapun harus dikembalikan dong biayanya. Tapi kenapa kok cost recovery jadi gede (atau digedein)?, lha kalau itu kasusnya, apa yang salah model kontraknya? bukankah model yang lain pun tetap aja bisa jadi kaya gitu nantinya kalau niatnya memang mau gede gedein cost!. Model service contract pun, bisa saja nantinya cost recovery jadi gede (digedein taruhlah), apalagi nantinya kalau fee-nya di set kurang menguntungkan buat IOC (Contractor), ya lebih baik "main" di cost recovery dong!.

Menyusun kontrak alternatif ini memang bukan pekerjaan mudah, perlu kajian yang mendalam, saya percaya bapak/ibu dan kolega saya di Migas (dan BPMIGAS) dapat memberikan usulan yang terbaik bagi negara (dan tentu saja cukup fair bagi Contractor). Selamat mengkaji !