The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) has pushed back against criticism of the 2025 oil and gas licensing round.

The Commission argued that reports that portrayed the award of oil blocks as politically influenced distorted a process it described as transparent, competitive and technically driven.

Speaking recently in Lagos at the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Nigeria Council Executive Masterclass on Energy Journalism at the weekend, the Commission Chief Executive (CCE), Mrs Oritsemeyiwa Eyesan, represented by Mr. Dr. Amba Ndoma Egba, Deputy Director, Acreage Administration, said some media reports failed to reflect the technical and commercial rigour behind the exercise.

“Others, regrettably, reduced a rigorous and competitive technical process to political speculation and unsubstantiated headlines,”.

ALSO READ: Pinnacle Convenes 2026 Vendors’ Forum

In what appeared to be a direct response to public debate surrounding the recently concluded bid round, the Commission said some reports had unfairly reduced a rigorous regulatory exercise to political speculation, warning that such narratives could weaken investor confidence in Nigeria’s upstream petroleum industry.

She warned that inaccurate reporting could widen the gap between regulatory processes and public understanding of the petroleum industry.

The CCE said the licensing round attracted significant global interest, with 50 blocks offered across onshore, offshore, deepwater and frontier basins.

She explained that, after prequalification, 196 applicants advanced to the technical and commercial stages, while 143 companies submitted 200 bids covering 37 assets before the process culminated in the commercial bid conference held on July 21.

The defence comes days after the announcement of winners in the licensing round, which has drawn scrutiny from industry watchers and commentators. NUPRC said the exercise was designed to meet global standards of transparency and competitiveness and formed part of its broader effort to position Nigeria as an investment-friendly upstream jurisdiction.

Beyond the licensing round, the Commission used the forum to announce a more aggressive transparency strategy. It said it would hold regular technical engagements with energy editors and correspondents and continue publishing oil production data, acreage status, rig disposition and operational performance reports on its website.

“If you do not understand our methodology, you cannot accurately report our outcomes. And if you cannot accurately report our outcomes, the public cannot hold us accountable,” Eyesan said.

NUPRC argued that many controversies surrounding the oil sector stem from poor understanding of technical concepts such as reserve classifications, licensing categories and field development obligations.

The Commission urged journalists covering the industry to seek technical clarification before publishing reports on reserves, production or asset awards. Earlier in his welcome address, the Chairman of SPE Nigeria Council, Mr.Francis Nwaochei, said the Masterclass themed: “Engineering the Narrative: Why Technical Knowledge Matters in Energy Journalism” speaks directly to the role that credible journalism plays in shaping public understanding of Nigeria’s energy industry.

“The stories that appear in our newspapers, on television, online platforms and across social media influence public perception, investor confidence and even policy conversations. That is why accuracy matters,”.

He explained that Nigeria’s energy industry is evolving rapidly, hence today’s conversations extend beyond crude oil production but include gas development, energy security, carbon management, digital technologies, local content, infrastructure development, financing, regulatory reforms and the transition to a lower-carbon future.

He argued that, as the industry becomes more complex, reporting on it also requires greater depth and context.

“This Masterclass is not about turning journalists into petroleum engineers. That is not our expectation. Rather, our goal is to inspire you to become even more effective energy journalists by developing the confidence to ask the right questions, conduct due diligence and present accurate, balanced and well-researched reports,”.

The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) has declared that Nigeria’s domestic gas suppliers delivered an average of 2.05 billion cubic feet of gas per day in the first half of 2026.

It added that the figure represents about 65 percent of the Domestic Gas Delivery Obligation (DGDO) target, which points to the persistent gap between gas allocated for domestic use and the actual volumes delivered to industries, power plants and other local consumers, prompting the regulator to introduce a Gas Swap Framework aimed at improving compliance.

The Commission Chief Executive of the NUPRC, Oritsemiyewa Eyesan, made the disclosure during the recently concluded stakeholders’ workshop on the Gas Swap Framework for DGDO in Abuja.

The workshop, organised by the commission, was aimed at deepening stakeholders’ understanding of the proposed Gas Swap Framework as a practical mechanism to improve compliance with the DGDO and obtain industry input before implementation.

ALSO READ: Billy Gas Leak: Reps Blames NUPRC, NOSDRA for Inaction

This was contained in a statement issued on Friday by the Head, Media and Corporate Communications of the commission, Eniola Akinkuotu.

The statement read, “Nigeria’s average Domestic Gas Delivery Obligations performance rose to 2.05 billion cubic feet (Bcf) daily year-to-date ending June 2026.”

Delivering the keynote address through the Executive Commissioner, Development and Production, Enorense Amadasu, Eyesan described the Domestic Gas Delivery Obligation as one of the Federal Government’s most critical policy tools for ensuring that gas produced in Nigeria supports economic growth and domestic industrialisation.

Providing an update on industry performance, she said only 27 out of about 63 producing companies were allocated Domestic Gas Delivery Obligations, while only 23 of the allottees were actively supplying gas to domestic customers.

According to her, average domestic gas delivery stood at 2.05 billion cubic feet per day between January and June 2026 against a 7C1 Domestic Gas Delivery Obligation allocation of 3.16 billion cubic feet per day, translating to a compliance level of about 65 per cent.

Eyesan said the figures showed that allocating more companies to the scheme alone would not guarantee improved domestic gas supply.

She said, “The YTD June 2026 data, however, shows that a broader allocation base does not automatically translate into actual delivery.

“This delivery gap underscores the need for practical, innovative, and market-responsive solutions that protect the integrity of the obligation while enabling real physical delivery of gas to domestic users. It is in this context that the proposed Gas Swap Framework becomes especially important.”

She explained that the proposed Gas Swap Framework was designed to address logistical and infrastructure constraints preventing some producers from meeting their obligations.

According to the commission’s chief executive, the framework will allow operators whose gas is stranded or cannot be easily evacuated to fulfil their DGDO by partnering with operators that already have the infrastructure required to transport and deliver gas to designated domestic customers.

Eyesan said, “With the right commitment and implementation, the framework will help turn obligation into actual supply, make better use of existing assets, support gas-to-power delivery, and build greater confidence in Nigeria’s domestic gas market.”

She urged industry stakeholders to support the initiative, stressing that collaboration between producers, transporters and regulators would be critical to improving domestic gas availability and strengthening Nigeria’s gas value chain.

The DGDO is a regulatory mechanism introduced under Nigeria’s gas policy to ensure that a specified portion of gas produced by upstream companies is reserved for domestic consumption, particularly for electricity generation, industrial manufacturing and other strategic sectors.

The initiative forms part of the Federal Government’s drive to leverage the country’s vast gas reserves to boost economic diversification, deepen industrialisation and improve energy security.

However, industry stakeholders have consistently identified infrastructure limitations, evacuation constraints and commercial challenges as key factors affecting full compliance with the obligation.

The slow response of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) and the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA) to the prolonged gas seepage in Billy Community, Degema Local Government Area of Rivers State, has been strongly condemned.

The House of Representatives Committee on the South South Development Commission (SSDC) handed the condemnation on Thursday, in Abuja, describing the situation as a major environmental and public health emergency that has lingered for nearly eight months.

During an investigative hearing, the lawmakers questioned officials of both agencies over what they described as regulatory lapses and delayed intervention, amid reports that the persistent gas seepage has contaminated water sources, polluted the air, disrupted economic activities and exposed residents to serious health and safety risks.

The probe followed growing concerns over the incident, first reported in late 2025, which has continued unabated despite months of investigations.

Residents of the riverine community have alleged that the emissions have rendered boreholes unsafe, crippled fishing and farming, their primary sources of livelihood, and left families living in constant fear of possible fire outbreaks and other health hazards.

Lawmakers also criticised the absence of key stakeholders, including the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd), the NNPC Exploration and Production Limited (NEPL), the Rivers State Government, the state’s Ministries of Environment and Health, and the Chairman of Degema Local Government Area.

ALSO READ: Shell Bids Farewell to EVP Nigeria and Country Chair Marno, as Elohor Assumes Role

They argued that the absence of the agencies and operators denied the committee the opportunity to obtain explanations on emergency response efforts, remediation plans and measures taken to protect affected residents.

The Chairman of the Committee, Julius Pondi, said the investigation was being conducted in line with the House’s constitutional oversight powers under Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

He said the hearing was intended to establish the facts surrounding the incident, assess the response of regulatory agencies and industry operators, and determine the environmental, health and socio-economic consequences of the prolonged gas seepage.

“The committee considered it necessary to invite all relevant stakeholders because of the grave environmental, public health, socio-economic and ecological implications of the incident for the people of Billy Community and the wider South-South region,” Pondi said.

He noted that Billy Community depends largely on fishing, farming and other natural resource-based livelihoods, making the impact of the incident particularly severe.

“As representatives of the Nigerian people, we have a duty to ensure that operators in the oil and gas industry conduct their activities in accordance with extant laws, government regulations and international best practices, while ensuring that host communities are adequately protected from avoidable environmental and safety hazards,” he added.

Pondi said the committee was determined to establish both the immediate and underlying causes of the incident, evaluate emergency response measures and remediation efforts, and assess the wider impact on the affected community.

“I wish to emphasise that this committee approaches this engagement with an open mind. Our objective is neither to prejudge any individual or institution nor apportion blame without due process.

“Rather, we seek to establish the facts, identify operational or regulatory shortcomings where they exist, and make practical recommendations that will strengthen environmental governance and improve regulatory oversight,” he added.

The hearing became tense as lawmakers questioned NOSDRA over why the incident had remained unresolved several months after it was first reported.

Representing the Director-General and Chief Executive Officer of NOSDRA, Chukwuemeka Woke, Cytrus Nkangwung said the agency officially received notification of the incident on 25 November 2025, after reports of gas bubbling first surfaced the previous month.

He explained that the incident differed from a conventional oil spill because the gas was seeping naturally from the ground and water sources rather than escaping from any known oil and gas facility.

The NOSDRA’s Zonal Head, Augustine Bello, told the committee, “This incident is not the regular incident that attracts reporting. It is not a leak from any facility. It is gas bubbling that enveloped the community. When we became aware of it, we reached out to stakeholders within the community. It is different from a conventional oil spill.”

The explanation failed to convince the lawmakers.

The Chairman of the House Committee on Host Communities, Robinson Dekor, expressed frustration that regulators had yet to determine the source of the seepage despite months of investigations.

“I feel sad sitting here listening to what you are telling us today. Gas is bubbling from the ground, and after all these months, you are still telling us you do not know the cause.

“Today is a black day in the history of Nigeria that people’s lives could be on the line for this number of months and nothing has been done about it. You sit here suggesting to us that you do not even know what is responsible for it.

“It is a huge shame that people’s lives are at risk. Do you know how many people have died? Their livelihoods have been destroyed, yet nobody seems to care,” he lamented.

Lawmakers also questioned the absence of emergency relief for residents who have remained exposed to polluted air and contaminated water.

“What happened to the people of Billy?” Pondi asked, wondering why residents had continued to endure the crisis while investigations dragged on.

On his part, Dekor urged the committee to compel all absent operators and government agencies to appear before lawmakers.

“I want to suggest that we compel all these agencies to appear before this committee. Something must be done. People should not die simply because they live in oil-producing communities,” he stressed.

The committee also queried NOSDRA over its request for a N3.4bn presidential intervention fund despite ongoing investigations.

Responding, Bello said the proposed funding was intended to support emergency containment measures, environmental assessment and humanitarian interventions pending the outcome of scientific investigations.

Responding to lawmakers’ concerns, NUPRC maintained that there was no evidence linking the gas seepage to existing oil and gas infrastructure.

The Leader of the commission’s delegation and Director of Development and Production, Joseph Ogunsola, said preliminary scientific findings suggested the gas was naturally migrating from deep underground formations through groundwater pathways and boreholes.

“The result of our evaluation indicates that there is no relationship between any pipeline or facility and the character of the gas seepage. Scientific evidence available to us presently points to a subsurface occurrence rather than a failure of surface infrastructure,” he said.

Ogunsola acknowledged the severe impact of the incident on the community, saying, “Billy Community is severely affected. The water is contaminated; there are reports of air pollution and there are safety concerns.”

He disclosed that the commission had adopted a dual approach involving scientific investigation and humanitarian intervention.

According to him, relief materials have already been delivered through an industry-supported initiative, while a medical outreach and the provision of safe drinking water are expected to commence within two weeks.

“The Commission Chief Executive mobilised the industry because no operator has been found culpable. Nevertheless, we agreed that the industry must rally round and support the people of Billy while investigations continue.

“There is also a planned medical outreach in the next two weeks, while hydrological studies are ongoing to determine how best to provide uncontaminated potable water to the community,” he added.

On the possibility of relocating residents, Ogunsola said the commission had advised the appropriate authorities to consider a managed evacuation based on expert health and safety assessments.

“We cannot today determine the full extent of the impact of this seepage. Laboratory analysis shows there are gases that should not ordinarily be inhaled. The government should therefore consider managed evacuation of the affected residents following an appropriate health and risk assessment,” he said.

Despite the explanations, lawmakers insisted that the prolonged nature of the incident reflected serious shortcomings in environmental regulation and emergency response.

The committee directed all absent operators and relevant government agencies to appear at its next hearing, warning that scientific uncertainty must not become an excuse for delaying urgent intervention.

The Billy gas seepage, first reported in late 2025, is regarded as one of the most unusual environmental incidents in Nigeria’s oil-producing Niger Delta. Unlike conventional oil spills caused by ruptured pipelines or failed facilities, preliminary investigations indicate that the gas is naturally migrating from deep underground formations rather than originating from existing petroleum infrastructure.

While scientific investigations continue, the incident has heightened concerns over environmental safety, public health and regulatory preparedness in Nigeria’s petroleum-producing communities, with lawmakers insisting that immediate relief and stronger regulatory action are needed to protect residents and restore public confidence.