Economy
NCDMB Issues NCEC Guidance Notes to Ease Oil Contracts, Cut Production Costs
By Adedapo Adesanya
The Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board (NCDMB) says it has issued the Nigerian Content Equipment Certificate (NCEC) guidance notes to speed up oil and gas industry contracting processes, weed out firms lacking technical capacity to perform, and to reduce Nigeria’s cost of oil production.
The document forms part of concerted efforts to operationalize the Presidential Directives (PDs) on Local Content Requirements, which mandates NCDMB to take further steps to eliminate intermediaries in the contracting process, lacking demonstrable capacity.
Emphasising that one of the key requirements for participating in the Nigerian oil and gas industry contracting process is the possession of NCECs issued by the NCDMB, the document states that “Unmerited possession and/or misapplication of the NCECs during tendering/bid evaluations contribute to contracting delays and admittance of unqualified intermediaries into the contracting process”.
According to NCDMB, the goal of the new document is to “tackle cases of single and multiple NCEC applications not matched to capacities on ground, submission of fake/forged documents, under declaration of personnel, non-existent offices/equipment, and many other dubious applications.”
It will also enhance timely review and approval of applications from genuine service companies as the document provides all the requirements needed to complete credible application at first attempt.
The eight NCEC categories cover Manufacturing & Related Services (MS); Fabrication & Construction (FC); Construction & Moveable Equipment (EC); Services & Support (SS); Quality Control Inspection and Testing (QS); Non-Moveable Assets (DA); Procurement & Supplies (PS); and Consultancy Services (CS).
The document advised service companies to provide details of their specific service offering with sufficient supporting evidence while applying for any of the NCEC categories via the application portal. Providing further explanation, NCDMB stressed that it does not solicit or require any payment for the application, processing, or approval of NCEC or any of its certifications.
It added that “in line with the Presidential directive on Local Content compliance, NCDMB prohibits the use of agents/middlemen/third parties in raising/submission of NCEC application on behalf of service companies. Service Companies registered on the NOGIC-JQS are liable for any claims/documentations submitted in support of application for NCEC or any other NCDMB certifications using their assigned login in details.”
The document also indicated that companies and their subsidiaries or local partners cannot apply for or obtain NCEC as separate companies using the same facilities, equipment, assets, or documentation and NCEC is not transferable for use by another company.”
Continuing, the guidance notes enjoined service companies to only apply for NCECs based on their core service area, noting that spurious applications contribute to delays in the processing of genuine applications, warning that cases determined to constitute abuse of NCEC applications shall attract applicable sanctions.
The NCEC notes also indicated that companies applying for multiple NCECs must have the capacities in terms of assets, facilities, equipment and personnel to execute the scope of activities under the target NCEC categories, adding that NCDMB will carry out facility visits to ascertain the capacities and capabilities claimed by the company in all the multiple NCEC applications.
It stated further that NCECs are not granted in anticipation of establishment of local capacities but are approved based on functional equipment/assets with dedicated resources/utilities in place to operate or perform the services, hence applicants must be ready to demonstrate operability and availability of owned assets/equipment as may be required during facility visit by NCDMB team.
The document also listed services which do not require NCECs. They include GSM service providers, commercial airlines, educational institutes, legal advisory services, public relations and events management, government agencies, and CSR projects with community vendors.
Speaking on the guidance notes, the Executive Secretary of NCDMB, Mr Felix Ogbe enjoined oil and gas stakeholders to study the guidance notes while applying for NCECs, warning that submission of forged, altered, or falsified documents constitutes a criminal offence and will attract legal consequences as well as board’s administrative punishments.
He noted that NCDMB had set target timelines for the review and processing of NCEC applications, with the portal providing timestamp of all activities/interactions undertaken from the point of submission of application and all reviews by the board.
By Aduragbemi Omiyale
The Deep Offshore Oil and Gas Projects Incentives (Tax Remission) Order, 2026, approved recently by President Bola Tinubu, has been described as a landmark reform that significantly enhances Nigeria’s competitiveness for deep offshore investment and strengthens the nation’s pathway towards achieving its 3 million barrels of oil per day (MMbopd) production ambition by 2030.
The chief executive of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Limited, Mr Bayo Ojulari, in a statement signed by the Chief Corporate Communications Officer of NNPC, Mr Andy Odeh, said the development is one of the most significant policy interventions for the upstream sector in recent years.
He thanked Mr Tinubu for his relentless leadership and unwavering commitment to creating an enabling environment for investment and sustainable growth in Nigeria’s energy sector through several Presidential Executive Orders which have strengthened the nation’s oil and gas sector.
“This is a transformative reform that sends a strong signal to global investors that Nigeria is committed to providing a stable, competitive and investment-friendly environment for deep offshore development. Fiscal certainty is a critical driver of investment decisions, and this framework provides the additional clarity the industry has long sought,” he said.
“For NNPC, the order aligns directly with our strategy of protecting our existing production base, accelerating near-term growth, and attracting new investment into high-value assets. It strengthens our confidence in achieving our strategic production ambition of 3 MMbopd while creating greater value for our shareholders and the Nigerian economy,” the NNPC chief added.
Mr Ojulari noted that recent reforms across the petroleum sector have already stimulated more than $34 billion in new investment commitments, stating that the Deep Offshore Incentives Order is expected to build on that momentum by enabling timely FIDs on strategic offshore developments.
The new order establishes a transparent, predictable and globally competitive fiscal framework for qualifying greenfield deep offshore developments. It provides the certainty required to unlock long-term capital, accelerate Final Investment Decisions (FIDs), and maximise value from Nigeria’s offshore resources.
The framework, which reinforces Nigeria’s position as one of the world’s attractive destinations for deep offshore oil and gas development, is expected to unlock over $50 billion in new investments, including major projects starting with Bonga South-West, which was approved in March 2026, and the Zabazaba and Owowo Deep Offshore projects. Bonga South West is expected to be the first FID on a Nigeria deepwater Production Sharing Contract asset since 2008.
By Aduragbemi Omiyale
The board of Geregu Power Plc has acknowledged the concerns raised by shareholders, stakeholders, as well as regulators over the inability of the company to pay bondholders for their investment in its N40 billion bond sale.
There were reports that the power-generating organisation defaulted in repaying investors who bought its debt instrument.
In 2022, the company issued a seven-year paper to investors at a coupon of 14.5 per cent to be paid semi-annually. The note is expected to mature in July 2029. But data from the FMDQ Securities Exchange showed that there have been defaults in the 8th coupon payment and the 4th bullet principal repayment.
Reacting to the issue on Thursday, Geregu said it is actively having talks with advisers and others on ways to iron things out.
“Geregu remains actively engaged with relevant stakeholders and advisers regarding the resolution of the various challenges and is committed to achieving an orderly and mutually beneficial outcome.
“Discussions and engagements are ongoing, and the Company will continue to act in good faith in fulfilling its responsibilities,” part of the statement signed by its scribe, The Structure HQ, stated.
The firm explained that since assuming responsibility for its affairs, the current board and management have undertaken a comprehensive review and reconciliation of its transactions, liabilities, operational commitments, financing arrangements, financial obligations and related corporate documentation.
It stressed that this action was to ensure transparency, accuracy and prudent financial management, adding that it remains committed to transparency, responsible corporate governance and constructive engagement with all stakeholders.
The majority stake of Geregu Power was controlled by Mr Femi Otedola. He divested his stake in the energy firm in 2025, with the sale of 95 per cent of his shares in Amperion to MA”AM Energy.
Earlier in 2023, he sold N399 million shares of Geregu to another investor. Before then, he sold his stake in Forte Oil to invest in Geregu Power, which now has the former Governor of Zamfara State, Mr Abdulaziz Yari, as its chairman.
By Adedapo Adesanya
A former Commissioner for Insurance of the National Insurance Commission (NAICOM), Mr Mohamed Kari, has warned the federal government to reduce its intervention in the sector’s post-recapitalisation process.
He charged the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, to ignore calls for regulatory concessions in the just-concluded insurance industry recapitalisation exercise in the country.
The call, he said, was critical, especially when the companies clamouring for such concessions were chronic defaulters whose failure or strict regulatory discipline poses absolutely zero systemic risk to the Nigerian financial system or the broader economy.
Recall that NAICOM had requested insurance companies, as part of the recapitalisation process, to transfer their entire recapitalisation funds into an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). However, NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re, in a recent petition, had petitioned NAICOM over what they described as unlawful fees and regulatory demands arising from the implementation of the Nigerian Insurance Industry Reform Act (NIIRA) 2025.
Mr Kari, who was also a former chief executive of NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re, said it was globally accepted that a government may occasionally intervene to rescue or support a consequential player in the financial sector, strictly where its distress poses a genuine ‘too big to fail’ systemic risk whose collapse would trigger a wider economic catastrophe.
“However, one must examine the reality of the two institutions in question today. These are no longer the market giants they once were decades ago,” he said.
He warned that having suffered years of steep decline, loss of market share, and severe operational shrinkage, their current market footprint is virtually insignificant.
“Their failure or strict regulatory discipline poses absolutely zero systemic risk to the Nigerian financial system or the broader economy. Why then should government intervene to shield operators whose distress carries no systemic consequence whatsoever?
“Rescuing or granting regulatory concessions to insignificant, chronic defaulters cannot be justified under any sound macroeconomic policy,” he added.
“When political intervention steps in to shield such non-systemic entities from standard regulatory checks, the equilibrium of the market breaks down as it creates unfair advantage.
“Operators that meet compliance targets carry the full cost of regulatory fidelity, while non-compliant firms that secure political exemptions operate with an artificial cost advantage.
“It disincentivises real capacity building: When political lobbying becomes an alternative to recapitalisation, companies are discouraged from making the hard structural choices necessary to refine their balance sheets and operations.”
He noted that if such a concession is granted to both insurance industry players in the defunct, it “distorts investor confidence: Both domestic and international investors look for predictable, transparent environments. A playing field where rules can be bent for select players frightens away patient capital. It weakens policyholder protection.”
