RoydadNaft – Following reports concerning the value of the ASU package compressors at Apadana Petrochemical and the contractor responsible for the package, the company issued a clarification stating that the compressors are worth approximately €16 million, not €70 million. The company also said its contract with the contractor for this part of the project had been terminated due to failure to fulfill contractual obligations.

According to Roydad Naft, citing Apadana Petrochemical’s public relations office, a review of the contract terms, technical records and correspondence shows that some claims concerning the ASU project and the procurement of compressors for the package do not correspond with the project’s contractual and technical facts. The company therefore provided the following clarifications:

First, contrary to the figure that has been reported, the compressors in question are valued at approximately €16 million.

Second, PIDEC was given the necessary opportunity and time on two occasions to fulfill its obligations regarding the package. However, despite receiving substantial payments for this part of the contract, the company failed to fulfill its contractual obligations and complete the compressor procurement process.

Third, after completing the required contractual and legal procedures and complying with the relevant requirements, Apadana Petrochemical terminated the contract for this package and removed PIDEC from further activities in this area. The termination was also formally communicated to the company.

Fourth, under Amendment No. 9 to the contract, PIDEC was obligated to place orders for the compressors and the remaining package items within the ceiling of its contract. Despite this explicit obligation, the company failed to place the orders within the specified timeframe and cited reasons that, according to the employer, lacked contractual and technical validity.

Fifth, in response to the formal notice and contractual warning issued before the final termination notice, PIDEC attributed its failure to place the compressor orders to the employer’s lack of technical approval for the compressors. Following a review of the technical and contractual records, the employer rejected the claim, citing substantive evidence and documentation.

Sixth, and notably, after the formal termination of the contract had been communicated, PIDEC submitted an Unpriced Purchase Order (Unpriced PO) for the compressors. Given the current status of the contract and the formal termination notice, any decision to accept or reject such a document falls within the employer’s authority and discretion. Its submission alone cannot be considered fulfillment of previously outstanding contractual obligations.

Apadana Petrochemical emphasized the need to accelerate completion of the project and procurement of the required equipment, stating that all actions concerning this package have been and will continue to be carried out within the framework of the contract, technical documentation and the project’s legal requirements.

The company therefore said it expects accurate contractual and technical information to be taken into account when publishing news reports and analyses related to the project, and called for avoiding statements that could lead to an inaccurate understanding of the responsibilities of the parties involved.