FIFTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL FOR MR JAMES MAUGHAN

FIFTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL

Saturday,  March 15,  2014

Mr. James Maughan

Assistant Deputy Director

Division of Financial Assistance

Phone: 916-341-5694

Email: jmaughan@waterboards.ca.gov

Mail address:  1001 I Street, 16th Floor

Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Mr. James Maughan,

I am sending this letter to you today March 15, 2014 as a matter of 

FIFTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL. I have not received any response 

from you, since January 30, 2014 despite four (4) PERSUASIVE APPEALS

for you to respond. Also,  I respectfully asked you to please seek a permission 

from Mr. Tom Howard for him to allow you to send me an e-mail address

to where I could write him to but likewise, I have not receive any

response you.  

Again, my plea remain;  please send me back the "original" ERES educational

records credentials with the signatures of the three of you (Maughan,

Wilkinson and Hernandez) as soon as you can or send me an e-mail address

for me to communicate with Mr  Tom Howard.

I made the PERSUASIVE APPEAL FOURTH TIME DATED March 2, 2014

as part of this letter and I have it printed below.

Thank you very much.

Yours faithfully

 Antonio L. Buensuceso 

Sunday, March 2, 2014

FOURTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL FOR MR. JAMES MAUGHAN

Sunday,  March 2,  2014

Mr. James Maughan

Assistant Deputy Director

Division of Financial Assistance

Phone: 916-341-5694

Email: jmaughan@waterboards.ca.gov

Mail address:  1001 I Street, 16th Floor

Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Mr. James Maughan,

I am sending this letter to you today March 2, 2014 as a matter of 

FOURTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL. I have not received any response 

from you, since January 30, 2014 despite three PERSUASIVE APPEALS

for you to respond. Also,  I respectfully asked you to please seek a permission 

from Mr. Tom Howard for him to allow you to send me an e-mail address

to where I could write him to but likewise, I have not receive any

response you.

Again, my plea remain;  please send me back the "original" ERES educational

records credentials with the signatures of the three of you (Maughan,

Wilkinson and Hernandez) as soon as you can.

I made the PERSUASIVE APPEAL THIRD TIME DATED February 23, 2014

as part of this letter and I have it printed below.

Thank you very much.

Yours faithfully

 Antonio L. Buensuceso Jr.


PERSUASIVE APPEAL THIRD TIME 

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

JOHN DONOVAN MARCH 15, 2014 ARTICLES

What should frighten stiff Royal Dutch Shell shareholders

Mar 15th, 2014 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

By John Donovan

Any Shell shareholders diligent enough to wade through all the small print in the recently released Shell Strategic Report have grounds to shudder at the confirmation buried on page 8 that Royal Dutch Shell PLC mainly self insures its risk exposures. This information should be prominently displayed in large red text, flashing if that was possible.

The relevant section even cites the BP Deepwater disaster for whichBP had no external insurance. As a consequence, one of the worlds biggest companies was brought to the edge of bankruptcy by just one calamitous event.

Why didn’t BP have contingency insurance? Why does Shell have to self-insure?

Simply because the risks are so humungous that it is impossible or too expensive to do otherwise.

Once upon a time, my company used to create and supply promotional games to Shell.We were able to insure against prize over-redemption – the risk that due to printers error or negligence on our part, more prizes were printed and claimed than was catered for in the prize fund. A Noughts and Crosses games themed game run by Esso/Exxon had to be cancelled on the second day when the company was swamped by claims for the £100,000 top prizes, when only a small number should have been printed. Contingency Insurance costs on our games were minimized by our no claims record. It was even possible to obtainCelebrity Death, Disablement and Disgrace contingency insurance when we built a promotional game around a popular UK TV celebrity, Bruce Forsyth. Celebrities have been known to insure body parts for up to $1 billion.

Bruce is still alive and kicking almost 30 years later.

So its possible to obtain contingency insurance against every conceivable quantifiable risk.

The fact that the risks involved in Shell’s activities are so great andunquantifiable that Shell has to self-insure, speaks volumes.

That’s a risk too far even for Lloyd’s of London underwriters.

What should give shareholders even greater cause for concern is that it means there is no independent insurance expert scrutinising what Shell is doing.

Shareholder funds are being placed at risk when insurers will not provide cover at any affordable price.

Is it safe to trust Shell senior management to self-insure?

Ask the US authorities about Shell’s recent Alaskan debacle, when almost everything that could go wrong did go wrong.

Shell is currently placing a multi-billion dollar bet on the Prelude FLNG project. We have published information and evidence from a Prelude insider and anexpert analysis from Bill Campbell, the retired HSE Group Auditor of Shell International that would cause great concern to the project insures, if Shell had any.

It doesn’t, because the risks are too great to obtain cover.

SHELL SHAREHOLDERS BE WARNED.

Extract from Page 08 of SHELL STRATEGIC REPORT 2013

Shell mainly self-insures its risk exposures.

Shell insurance subsidiaries provide insurance coverage to Shell entities, generally up to $1.15 billion per event and usually limited to Shell’s percentage interest in the relevant entity. The type and extent of the coverage provided is equal to that which is otherwise commercially available in the third-party  insurance market. While from time to time the insurance subsidiaries may seek reinsurance for some of their risk exposures, such reinsurance would not provide any material coverage in the event of an incident like BP Deepwater Horizon. Similarly, in the event of a material environmental incident, there would be no material proceeds available from third-party insurance companies to meet Shell’s obligations.

Posted in: Alaska, Arctic, Bill Campbell, Corporate Governance, Gas, GoogleNews, John Donovan, Prelude FLNG Project, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell Employee Safety, United States.
Tagged: Gas · John Donovan · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc · Self Insurance

Shell will cut U.S. jobs

Mar 15th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Extract from an article by Josh Cain published 14 March 2014 by Houston Business Journal under the headline: Shell will cut oil field spending, U.S. jobs after disappointing shale plays

Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RYSE: RDSA), the oil and gas giant with a massive presence in Houston, said on March 13 that it would cut jobs and oilfield spending in the U.S. in light of disappointing returns from several shale plays.

FULL ARTICLE

Posted in: Gas, Oil, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shale Gas, Shale Oil, Shell Job Cuts, United States.
Tagged: Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

JOHN DONOVAN MARCH 14, 2014 ARTICLES

Peter Voser regrets on unconventional oil and gas

Mar 14th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Peter Voser said the failure of Royal Dutch Shell’s huge bet on US shale was a big regret of his time as chief executive of the company. Shell has invested at least $24bn in so-called unconventional oil and gas in North America. But it is a bet that has yet to pay off. “Unconventionals did not exactly play out as planned,” Mr Voser said.

From an oil industry expert: Unconventional Oil and Gas

The following is an extract from an article by Guy Chazan published on 6 October 2013 by the Financial Times under the headline: “Peter Voser says he regrets Shell’s huge bet on US shale”

Peter Voser said the failure of Royal Dutch Shell’s huge bet on US shale was a big regret of his time as chief executive of the company. Shell has invested at least $24bn in so-called unconventional oil and gas in North America. But it is a bet that has yet to pay off. Its North American upstream business has struggled to turn a profit and in August Shell announced a strategic review of its US shale portfolio after taking a $2.1bn impairment. “Unconventionals did not exactly play out as planned,” Mr Voser said.

In an attempt to catch up with smaller producers, Shell’s spending on R&D and exploration in the domain of “unconventionals” has exploded, but as admitted by Peter Voser, with very disappointing results.

Since this term – unconventionals – is appearing more frequently in articles about the oil and gas industry and Shell’s problems in particular, it may assist to provide a clarification of what it actually means.

A CONVENTIONAL oil or gas field is a typical field where oil and gas are produced from a reservoir via a well to which the production fluids are able to flow. These were the only types of reservoirs developed until quite recently.

UNCONVENTIONALS cover the range from shale oil and gas to tar sands where extraction of hydrocarbon from the reservoir rocks requires the extensive use of fracking or the application of heat (either in-situ or after removal of the rock from the ground).

The potential volume of “unconventional” hydrocarbons is far greater than “conventionals” – it has been known for many years that there is probably more oil in the Athabasca tar sands than there is in Saudi Arabia, but until the price of oil reached the current level it was simply uneconomical to produce.

The challenge of “unconventionals” is therefore the cost of production.

That is the stumbling block that led to the failure admitted by Peter Voser and probably a factor in his decision to take early retirement.

Posted in: Gas, GoogleNews, Oil, Peter Voser, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shale Gas, Shale Oil, Unconventionals, United States.
Tagged: Gas · Oil · Peter Voser · Royal Dutch Shell Plc · Unconventional Oil

The scandal of Corporate bonuses, and why they continue:

Mar 14th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Extract from an informative article by former Royal Dutch Shell senior executive, Paddy Briggs, published 27 Feb 2014

Seven-figure bonuses are common across the corporate world – at the very top of course! Here, for example, is what “The Guardian” reported about the remuneration of Peter Voser the then top man in Shell just under a year ago:

“Royal Dutch Shell Chief executive Peter Voser received a €3.3m (£2.8m) cash bonus in 2012, a year in which the Anglo-Dutch oil group reported a fall in profits from $28.6bn to $27bn. The bonus took his total salary package to €5.1m, down from €5.2m the previous year.”

Mr Voser has since left the Shell top job and is generally regarded as having been a pretty poor Chief Executive. But then at Shell, as in the City, payment by results seems not to be the order of the day. The “bonus” comes as a matter of right even if the profits fall.

FULL ARTICLE

Paddy Briggs worked for the Oil Company Shell for 37 years, retiring in 2002 to pursue other interests. He is now a writer, journalist and blogger – specialising in sport, politics, the Arts, pensions and his professional business subject of brand and reputation management. Paddy was, for four years, one of two pensioner-elected trustees of the £13 billion Shell Contributory Pension Fund.

Posted in: GoogleNews, Oil Company Profits, Paddy Briggs, Peter Voser, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, The Guardian.
Tagged: Peter Voser · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

Ben Van Beurden’s plans overshadowed by Peter Voser’s £22m pay deal

Mar 14th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Extracts from an article by ROB DAVIES published on 14 March 2014 by The Daily Mail newspaper under the headline: “Shell boss Ben Van Beurden’s plans for the company are overshadowed by former boss Peter Voser’s £22m pay deal”

Shell boss Ben van Beurden’s grand plan to spruce up the oil giant has been overshadowed by criticism of his predecessor’s £22million two-year pay deal. The Dutchman set out a blueprint that will see Shell shrink its North American shale operations and improve efficiency by focusing on individual projects and businesses. But some investors seized on the fact that former boss Peter Voser earned £22million over two years – including a £1.5million bonus for 2013, a year that ended with the group’s first profit warning in a decade. One veteran City fund manager said: ‘Van Beurden said the 2013 performance was not what he expects from Shell. That begs the question of why any bonus was paid at all.’

FULL ARTICLE

Posted in: Ben van Beurden, Daily Mail, Oil Company Profits, Peter Voser, Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Tagged: Ben van Beurden · Peter Voser · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

Shell cuts spending in U.S. to lower shale exposure

Mar 14th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Extracts from a Reuters article by Karolin Schaps and Dmitry Zhdannikov published 13 March 2014

LONDON, March 13 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell will cut spending by a fifth and lay off staff at its American exploration and production business, the company said on Thursday, in another sign that oil majors are struggling to profit from the booming U.S. shale sector. The spending cuts announced on Thursday follow Shell’s decision in January to suspend its controversial Arctic drilling programme and pledge to cut capital expenditure and streamline operations worldwide after the company’s least profitable fourth quarter in five years. “I don’t think it is a matter of trying to reinvent the company in a fundamentally different way; it is a matter of tackling some of the issues that we know need tackling,” van Beurden told journalists on a conference call after Thursday’s strategy update.

FULL ARTICLE

Posted in: Alaska, Arctic, Ben van Beurden, Profits Warning, Reuters, Royal Dutch Shell Firesale, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell, Shell Job Cuts, United States.

Shell Cuts Americas Spending by 20%, Extends Refinery Sales

Mar 14th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Ben van Beurden, CEO Royal Dutch Shell Plc

Extracts from an article by Eduard Gismatullin published on 13 March 2014 by Bloomberg News

Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) plans to lower spending in the Americas by a fifth as Europe’s largest oil producer focuses on more profitable operations. It’s “not acceptable” that Shell, now deploying about 36 percent or $80 billion of its capital in North America, has been losing money, Chief Executive Officer Ben van Beurden said.

Van Beurden has pledged to shrink spending costs this year and speed up asset sales including refineries after The Hague-based company issued its first profit warning in a decade. He also scrapped targets for cash flow, delayed drilling off Alaska and promised to restructure shale operations in North America.

Van Beurden plans to dispose of about $15 billion of assets through 2015. Shell agreed to sell holdings valued at more than $4.5 billion, including in Australia and Brazil, and is seeking buyers for stakes in oil and gas fields, as well as pipeline and fuel-marketing assets from the U.S. to Nigeria. The company may also exit its $6.3 billion investment in Woodside Petroleum Ltd.

FULL ARTICLE

Posted in: Australia, Ben van Beurden, Bloomberg, Nigeria, Oil, Oil Company Profits,Profits Warning, Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Tagged: Australia · Ben van Beurden · Nigeria · Royal Dutch Shell Plc · Woodside

Shell says Nigerian oil theft costs billions

Mar 13th, 2014

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

Extracts from a Reuters article by Alex Lawler andSimon Falush published 13 March 2014

* Shell says $1 bln/month oil theft figure probably accurate

* Proposed legal changes curbing Nigeria’s oil output

* Some Nigerian risks worsened, Shell says in annual report

Nigeria is important for Shell because the African country provides almost 10 percent of the company’s output and is seen as a source of future growth.

FULL ARTICLE

Posted in: Africa, Corruption, Environment, Human Rights, Nigeria, Oil, Reuters, Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Tagged: Niger Delta · Nigeria · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.