Baker Botts has posted an on-demand video webinar hosted by partners Manny Grillo, Shalla Prichard and Jim Prince titled “Baker Botts Corporate Series: Staring Down the Barrel,” in which the moderators discuss the state of the energy finance market and the related legal developments.

The firm says the video shares insights from the finance and restructuring market and highlights some of the latest developments and trends. The program takes a look at the impact of last year’s deal activity and what it will mean for this year. The panelists comment on what they have seen and expect to see this year from both a legal and business perspective and the opportunities created by the markets.

Watch the video.

In petrochemical projects, the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contracts are often negotiated after the technology licenses have been negotiated between the technology licensors and the project owner, write Sean Goldstein, Jean Shimotake and Raymond Azar of White & Case LLP.

“Both sets of agreements are also typically settled before financing is sought for the project. Given the significant interrelationship between the EPC contracts and license agreements, and common lender requirements for the bankability of such project documentation, these timing differences may give rise to a number of issues.” they write.

They discuss issues for the EPC contractor, project owner and lenders, along with possible solutions.

Read the article.

On March 17, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a major proposal to revise the safety standards for onshore natural gas pipelines, reports Kevin A. Ewing of Bracewell LLP.

“The proposed rule follows years of study as well as specific direction from Congress requiring new pipeline safety initiatives. The proposal spans over 500 pages and contains numerous major and minor revisions and agency statements that together demonstrate PHMSA’s intention to assert substantially more control over the design, operation and maintenance of pipelines to prevent incidents,” he writes.

More pipelines would be subject to Integrity Management requirements if the rule is approved, he explains. “It would also expand the definition of regulated gathering lines, accelerate pipeline repairs, and set a higher bar for data gathering and analysis of risk, among other changes. The proposed rule does not address underground gas storage, valves and leak detection, or quality management systems.”

Read the article.

Although continuing low oil prices affect the LNG industry in expected ways (e.g. delays and cancellations in the development of LNG export projects) and unexpected ways (e.g. take-overs between major players in an already consolidated industry), a prolonged LNG oversupply notwithstanding tapering Asian demand could be the most widespread industry impact in 2016, write Philip Weems and Monica Hwang in an article on King & Spalding‘s Energy Law Exchange.

The article examines the top ten questions the LNG industry may face this upcoming year. “Given that LNG is now considered the most valuable physical ‘commodity’ after crude oil, how the industry reacts to the oversupplied, low-price environment could have far-reaching consequences globally,” the article says.

Read the article.

On January 22, 2016, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell unveiled a proposed rule to reduce the waste of natural gas that results from venting, flaring and leaks by oil and gas production on public and tribal lands, reports Van Ness Feldman LLP.

“The ‘Methane and Waste Reduction Rule’ — which was published in the Federal Register on February 8, 2016, setting off a 60-day comment period — would update existing provisions of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM’s) onshore oil and gas leasing and operations regulations and introduce new requirements aimed at curbing waste and minimizing royalty-free use of production,” according to the article written by Kyle Danish, Jonathan Simon, R. Scott Nuzum, and Avi Zevin.

Their article examines key legal and policy changes in the proposed methane and waste reduction rule.

Read the article.

The third program in Norton Rose Fulbright‘s global litigation school web seminar series discusses unconventional oil and gas development in the United States and the dramatic rise in claims associated with that activity.

“These claims have ranged from environmental claims alleging that hydraulic fracturing, a process used in unconventional oil and gas development, is causing contamination to underground fresh water aquifers to claims for nuisance due to the increased noise and dust associated with the drilling,” the firm says on its site. “It has also led to an increase in the number of heavy truck accidents and lawsuits involving crude by rail and several high profile derailments.”

Watch the video.

In an industry known for its inventiveness, energy companies may turn to a new source of capital outside traditional debt or equity markets or even large asset sales, reports Sidd Dadhich in an article posted on the website of The Texas Journal of Oil, Gas, and Energy Law.

“The crowdfunding phenomenon has given entrepreneurs passed over by institutional investors access to much needed capital. The 2012 Jobs Act made equity crowdfunding, which gives investors a piece of the company they fund, easier for accredited investors,” according to the article.

The SEC did not open up equity crowdfunding to individuals (or couples) with net worths below $1 million, but newly released rules will enable non-accredited investors to join in equity crowdfunding under certain constraints, beginning in January 2016.

“If companies and crowdfunding portals can adequately manage the litigation risk, the possibility of opening investment opportunities to the ‘little guy’ will be a welcome prospect for all parties involved,” Dadhich writes.

Read the article.

An article in Kane Russell Coleman & Logan’s new Energy Law Today blog reports on a case before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that raises the question: “When will an anti-indemnity statute bar an often well-crafted legal indemnity term in a master-service agreement?”.

The case is Tetra Techs., Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co., No. 15-30446.

“In Tetra, the commercial fight was between Tetra, which sought to enforce an indemnity clause against its subcontractor, Vertex Services.  Continental, Vertex’s insurer, tried to block any indemnity payment, relying, in large part, on the LOAIA,” writes Andrea (A.J.) Johnson.

“The district court held that the decommissioning of a platform in a salvage operation did not come under the LOAIA, and, thus, Tetra’s claim for indemnity was enforceable. In opposition, appellant Continental contends that the trial court too restrictively interpreted the [Louisiana Oilfield Anti-Indemnity Act].”

Read the article.