Chelsea Surat Reserves Report 2013

EVALUATION OF THE OIL RESERVES
AND ASSESMENT OF THE

CONTINGENT AND PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES
OF CHELSEA OIL AND GAS LTD.
IN THE SURAT ASSETS, BOWEN/SURAT BASIN, AUSTRALIA
(As of March 31, 2013)
Copies:
Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. (5 copies)

Electronic (5 copies)
Sproule (1 copy)
Project No.:
4325.70684
Prepared For:
Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd.
Authors:
Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph., Project Leader

Philip W. Pantella, P.Eng.
Suryanarayana Karri, P.Geoph.
Alexey Romanov, P.Geo.
Irina Baiseitova, M.Eng.
Vladimir Torres Hernandez, M.Sc.
Mustafa Ali Malik, M.Sc.
Exclusivity:
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Chelsea Oil and Gas
Ltd. It may not be reproduced, distributed, or made available to any other
company or person, regulatory body, or organization without the knowledge
and written consent of Sproule, and without the complete contents of the
report being made available to that party.
Table of Contents Page 1
Table of Contents
Introduction
Field Operations
Historical Data, Interests and Burdens
Evaluation Standards
Evaluation Procedures
Evaluation Results
BOE Cautionary Statement
Forward-Looking Statements
Exclusivity
Certification
Permit to Practice
Certificates
Summary
Table S-1
Summary of the Evaluation of the Oil Reserves of

Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd in Queensland, Australia
(As of March 31, 2013) after Income Taxes
Table S-1A
Summary of the Evaluation of the Oil Reserves of

(As of March 31, 2013) before Income Taxes
Table S-1B
Summary of the Oil Contingent Resources of

Table S-1C
Summary of the Oil Prospective Resources of

Table S-2
Summary of Selected Price Forecasts

(Effective March 31, 2013)
4325.70684.IB.smr
J:\Chelsea Oil & Gas 70684\Report\Summary.doc
Table S-3
Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Total Probable Plus Possible Reserves
Before and After Income Taxes
Table S-3A

Probable Undeveloped Reserves
Table S-3B

Total Possible Reserves
Figure S-1
PL 18 and PL 280 (Surat Assets) Location Map
Figure S-2
Daily Company Gross Oil Production Forecast
Figure S-3
Annual Cash Flow (After Income Taxes)
Figure S-4
Net Present Values (After Income Taxes)
Discussion
1. General
2. Geoscience
2.1 Regional Geology
2.2 Basin Development and Depositional History
2.3 Reservoir
2.4 Source Rock
3. Geophysics
3.1 Data Control
3.2 Fault Interpretation
3.3 Horizon Interpretation
3.4 Velocity Modeling
4. Petrophysical Evaluation
5. Structural Mapping and Rock Volumes
6. Fluid Properties
7. Drill Stem Test
8. Reserves, Contingent and Prospective Resources Assignment
9. Pricing
4325.70684.IB.smr
10. Operating and Capital Costs

11. Taxes and Royalties
Tables
Table D-1
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Oil Technically

Recoverable Volumes of Chelsea Oil Australia PTY Ltd in
Queensland, Australia (As of March 31, 2013)
Table D-1A
Volumetric
Reservoir
Data
and
Estimates
of
Contingent
Resources of Chelsea Oil Australia PTY Ltd in Queensland,

Australia (As of March 31, 2013)
Table D-1B
Volumetric
Reservoir
Data
and
Estimates
of
Prospective
Resources of Chelsea Oil Australia PTY Ltd in Queensland,

Australia (As of March 31, 2013)
Table D-2
Estimates of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values of

(As of March 31, 2013) before Income Taxes
Table D-3

Total Probable Plus Possible Reserves
Table D-3A

Probable Undeveloped Reserves
Table D-3B

Total Possible Reserves
References
4325.70684.IB.smr
Figures
Figure 1
Map of Eastern Australia Showing Locations of the

Bowen and Surat Basins Together with Adjacent Sedimentary
Basins
Figure 2
Location Map Showing the Geographic Distribution of Oil and

Gas in the
Bowen and Surat Basins
Figure 3
PL 18 and PL 280 (Surat Assets) Location Map
Figure 4
Bowen/Surat Basin Stratigraphic Column
Figure 5
Seismic Basemap with Wells, Block Areas and Fault Polygons
Figure 6
Seismic Basemap with Wells and Fault Polygons
Figure 7
Fault Framework from Interpreted Fault Sticks
Figure 8
Time Structure Map of Showgrounds
Figure 9
Depth Structure Map of Showgrounds
Figure 10
Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-SD87-4
Figure 11
Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-86B-4
Figure 12
Thomby Creek Field Seismic Line-SD87-17A
Figure 13
McWhirter Field Seismic Line-86B-24
Figure 14
McGregor Field Seismic Line-86B-23
Figure 15
Figure 16
Yellowbank Creek North Field Seismic Line-85B-5
Figure 17
Yellowbank Creek Field Seismic Line-78B-29
4325.70684.IB.smr
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20
Beardmore Field Seismic Line-81T-21
Figure 21
Beardmore Field Seismic Line-85-S2
Figure 22
3D Perspective View of Showgrounds Depth Structure Map
Figure 23
3D Perspective View of Base of Showgrounds Depth Structure

Map
Figure 24
Well Thomby Creek 2: Cementation Factor from Core Data
Figure 25
Thomby Creek-1 Well Logs
Figure 26
Top Showgrounds Sandstone Formation Depth Structure Map
Figure 27
Thomby Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 28
McWhirter Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 29
Yellowbank Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 30
Beardmore Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 31
Yellowbank Creek North Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 32
McGregor Field Volume Areas Assignment
Appendices
Appendix A
Definitions
Appendix B
Prices
Appendix C
Abbreviations, Units and Conversion Factors
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 1
Introduction
This report was prepared by Sproule International Limited (Sproule) at the request of Mr.
William Petrie, CEO, Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "the Company" or
Chelsea). The effective date of this report is March 31, 2013, and it consists of an
evaluation of the hydrocarbon reserves and an assessment of the contingent and prospective
resource volumes associated with the Companys interests in the Surat Assets (Petroleum
Leases 18 and 280) , located in the Bowen/Surat Basin, State of Queensland, Australia.
This report was prepared in April and May 2013 for the purpose of evaluating the Companys
oil reserves and estimating the contingent and prospective resource volumes according to the
Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook (COGEH) reserves and resources definitions that
are consistent with the standards of National Instrument 51-101. This report was prepared for
the Companys corporate purposes.
This report is contained in one volume, comprising the following sections: Introduction,
Summary, Discussion, National Instrument 51-101, and Appendices. The Introduction
includes the summary of evaluation standards and procedures and pertinent author
certificates; the Summary includes high-level summaries of the evaluation; and the
Discussion includes general commentaries pertaining to the evaluation of the oil reserves,
contingent and prospective resources. The National Instrument 51-101 section presents Form
51-101F2 Report on Reserves Data by Independent Qualified Reserves Evaluator or
Auditor, and NI 51-101 formatted tables using Forecast Prices and Costs. Reserves
definitions, product price forecasts, abbreviations, units, and conversion factors are included
in Appendices A, B and C.
Field Operations
In the preparation of this evaluation, a field inspection of the properties was not performed by
Sproule. The relevant engineering data were made available by the Company or obtained
from public sources and the non-confidential files at Sproule. No material information
regarding the reserves evaluation would have been obtained by an on-site visit.
Historical Data, Interests and Burdens

1. All historical production, revenue and expense data, product prices actually received, and
other data that were obtained from the Company or from public sources were accepted as
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 2
represented, without any further investigation by Sproule.

2. Property descriptions, details of interests held, and well data, as supplied by the
Company, were accepted as represented. No investigation was made into either the legal
titles held or any operating agreements in place relating to the subject properties.
3. Lessor and overriding royalties and other burdens were obtained from the Company. No
further investigation was undertaken by Sproule.
4. Sproule reserves the right to review all calculations made, referred to or included in this
report and to revise the estimates as a result of erroneous data supplied by the Company
or information that exists but was not made available to us, which becomes known
subsequent to the preparation of this report.
Evaluation Standards
This report has been prepared by Sproule using current geological and engineering
knowledge, techniques and computer software. It has been prepared within the Code of Ethics
of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA). This
report adheres in all material aspects to the best practices recommended in the COGE
Handbook, which are in accordance with principles and definitions established by the Calgary
Chapter of the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers. The COGE Handbook is
incorporated by reference in National Instrument 51-101.
Evaluation Procedures
1. The Company provided Sproule with operating and capital budgets for the fields being
evaluated. In addition, a summary of economic parameters for use in the evaluation was
provided. The economic parameters were independently reviewed by Sproule to ensure
reasonableness.
2. The forecasts of product prices used in this evaluation were based on Sproules March 31,
2013 price forecasts. Further discussion is included in Appendix B.
3. Well abandonment and disconnect costs were included in this report at the entity level for
wells which have reserves assigned. No allowances for reclamation or salvage values were
made. No provision for abandonment or decommissioning of facilities or pipelines has
been included in this evaluation.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 3
4. The inclusion of future drilling locations and other future capital investments required a
positive before tax net present value at a 10 percent discount rate.
5. For this evaluation, Sproule conducted economic analysis using the reserves evaluation
software Merak Peep (Peep). The functionality of the program is not the responsibility of
Sproule, and results were accepted as calculated by the model. Sproules responsibility is
limited to the quality of the data input and reasonableness of the outcoming results.
6. Tax pools were provided by the Company and have been included in the Reserves
Evaluation.
7. Contingent and Prospective oil resources were estimated and classified deterministically.
Contingent Resources are discovered and potentially recoverable, but currently subcommercial (contingencies may include economic legal, environmental, political and
regulatory matters or lack of market). Prospective Resources are undiscovered and
potentially recoverable.
Evaluation Results
1. The accuracy of reserves estimates and associated economic analysis is, in part, a
function of the quality and quantity of available data and of engineering and geological
interpretation and judgment. Given the data provided at the time this report was
prepared, the estimates presented herein are considered reasonable. However, they
should be accepted with the understanding that reservoir and financial performance
subsequent to the date of the estimates may necessitate revision. These revisions may be
material.
2. The net present values of the reserves presented in this report simply represent
discounted future cash flow values at several discount rates. Though net present values
form an integral part of fair market value estimations, without consideration for other
economic criteria, they are not to be construed as Sproules opinion of fair market value.
3. The dollar values presented throughout the report are in United States dollars, unless
otherwise stated.
4. Due to rounding, certain totals may not be consistent from one presentation to the next.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 4
BOE Cautionary Statement

BOEs (or McfGEs or other applicable units of equivalency) may be misleading, particularly if
used in isolation. A BOE conversion ratio of 6 Mcf:1 bbl (or an McfGE conversion ratio of 1
bbl:6 Mcf) is based on an energy equivalency conversion method primarily applicable at the
burner tip and does not represent a value equivalency at the wellhead.
Forward-Looking Statements
This report may contain forward-looking statements including expectations of future
production revenues and capital expenditures. Information concerning reserves may also be
deemed to be forward-looking as estimates involve the implied assessment that the reserves
described can be profitably produced in the future. These statements are based on current
expectations that involve a number of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual
results to differ from those anticipated. These risks include, but are not limited to: the
underlying risks of the oil and gas industry (i.e., corporate commitment, regulatory approval,
operational risks in development, exploration and production); potential delays or changes in
plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures; the
uncertainty of reserves estimations; the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to
production; costs and expenses; health, safety and environmental factors; commodity prices;
and exchange rate fluctuation.
Exclusivity
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. It may not be
reproduced, distributed, or made available to any other company or person, regulatory body,
or organization without the knowledge and written consent of Sproule, and without the
complete contents of the report being made available to that party.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 5
Certification
Report Preparation
This report entitled, Evaluation of the Oil Reserves and Assessment of the Contingent and
Prospective Resources of Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. in the Surat Assets, Bowen/Surat Basin,
Australia (As of March 31, 2013) was prepared by the following Sproule personnel:
Original Signed by Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph.

_______________________________
Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph.
Project Leader;
Vice President, Geoscience, International and
Partner
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Original Signed by Philip W. Pantella, P.Eng.

_______________________________
Manager, Engineering and Partner
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Original Signed by Suryanarayana Karri, P.Geoph.

_______________________________
Senior Petrophysicist; Supervisor,
Geoscience and Partner
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Original Signed by Alexey Romanov, P.Geo.

_______________________________
Alexey Romanov, P.Geo.
Petroleum Geologist and Partner
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 6
Original Signed by Irina Baiseitova, M.Eng.

_______________________________
Petroleum Evaluator
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Original Signed by Vladimir Torres Hernandez, M.Sc.

______________________________
Vladimir Torres Hernandez, M.Sc.
Senior Geological Specialist and Associate
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Original Signed by Mustafa Ali Malik, M.Sc.

_______________________________
Senior Petroleum Geophysical Specialist
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Sproule Executive Endorsement

This report has been reviewed and endorsed by the following Executive of Sproule:
Original Signed by Greg D. Robinson, P.Eng.

_______________________________
Greg D. Robinson, P.Eng.
Vice-President, International and Director
_22_/_05_/2013
dd/mm/yr
Permit to Practice
Sproule International Limited is a member of the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of Alberta and our permit number is PO6151.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 7
Certificate
Barrie F. Jose, M.Sc., P.Geoph.
I, Barrie F. Jose, Vice-President, Geoscience, International and Partner of Sproule, 900, 140
Fourth Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
1. I hold the following degrees:
a.
M.Sc. Geophysics (1979) University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
b.
B.Sc. (Honours) Geological Science with Physics (1977) Queens University, Kingston, ON,
Canada
2. I am a registered professional:
a.
Professional Geophysicist (P.Geoph.) Province of Alberta, Canada
3. I am a member of the following professional organizations:

a.
Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA)
b.
Canadian Society of Exploration Geophysicists (CSEG)
c.
Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG)
d.
Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists (CSPG)
e.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)
f.
Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain (PESGB)
g.
European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers (EAGE)
h.
Indonesian Petroleum Association, Professional Division (IPA)
4. I am a qualified reserves evaluator and reserves auditor as defined in National Instrument

51-101.
5. My contribution to the report entitled Evaluation of the Oil Reserves and Assessment of
the Contingent and Prospective Resources of Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. in the Surat Assets,
Bowen/Surat Basin, Australia (As of March 31, 2013) is based on my geophysical
knowledge and the data provided to me by the Company, from public sources, and from
the non-confidential files of Sproule. I did not undertake a field inspection of the
properties.
6. I have no interest, direct or indirect, nor do I expect to receive any interest, direct or
indirect, in the properties described in the above-named report or in the securities of
Original Signed by Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph.

Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 8
Certificate
Philip W. Pantella, B.Sc., P.Eng.
I, Philip W. Pantella, Manager, Engineering and Partner, of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth Ave SW,
Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
1. I hold the following degree:
a.
B.Sc. Chemical Engineering (1972), University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
a.
Professional Engineer (P.Eng.), Province of Alberta, Canada

a.
b. Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)
4. I am a qualified reserves evaluator as defined in National Instrument 51-101.

Bowen/Surat Basin, Australia (As of March 31, 2013) is based on my engineering
properties.
Original Signed by Philip W. Pantella, P.Eng.

4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 9
Certificate
Suryanarayana Karri, M.Sc., P.Geoph.
I, Suryanarayana Karri, Supervisor, Geoscience, Senior Petrophysicist and Partner of Sproule,

900, 140 Fourth Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
a.
M.Sc. Engineering Physics and Instrumentation (1983), Osmania University, Hyderabad, India
a.
Professional Geophysicist (P.Geoph.), Province of Alberta, Canada

a.
b.
Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)
c.
The Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts (SPWLA)
d.
Canadian Well Logging Society (CWLS)

51-101.
properties.
Original Signed by Suryanarayana Karri, P.Geoph.

4325.70684.IB.smr
Introduction Page 10
Certificate
Alexey Romanov, Ph.D., P.Geo.
I, Alexey Romanov, Petroleum Geologist and Partner of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth Ave. SW,
a.
Ph.D. Eng. (2007), Kazan State Technological University, Kazan, Russia
b.
M.Sc. Reservoir Evaluation and Management (2004), Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK
c.
M.Sc. (Honours), Petroleum Geology (2003), Kazan State Technological University, Kazan,
Russia

a.
b.. Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA)

c.
Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists (GSPG)
3. I am a qualified reserves evaluator as defined in National Instrument 51-101.

properties.
Original Signed by Alexey Romanov, P.Geo.

Alexey Romanov, Ph.D., P.Geo.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Certificate
I, Irina Baiseitova, M.Eng., Petroleum Evaluator of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth Ave. SW,
a.
M.Eng. Petroleum Engineering (2012), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
b.
B.Sc. (With Distinction), Petroleum Engineering (2003), Kazakh National Technical University,
Almaty, Kazakhstan
properties.
Original Signed by Irina Baiseitova, M.Eng.

4325.70684.IB.smr
Certificate
Vladimir Torres, M.Sc.
I, Vladimir Torres, Senior Geological Specialist and Associate of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth Ave
SW, Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
a.
M.Sc. Geology (1991), Azerbaijan State Oil Academy, Baku, Republic of Azerbaijan
b.
M.Sc. Petroleum Geosciences (1997), Institut Francais du Petrole, Paris, France

a. Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA)
b. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists (CSPG)
c. American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)
3.
My contribution to the report entitled Evaluation of the Oil Reserves and Assessment of
Bowen/Surat Basin, Australia (As of March 31, 2013) is based on my geological
properties.
Original Signed by Vladimir Torres, M.Sc.

Vladimir Torres, M.Sc.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Certificate
I, Mustafa Ali Malik, Senior Petroleum Geophysical Specialist of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth Ave
SW, Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
a.
M.Sc. Geophysics (1998),Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
b.
B.Sc. Physics (1995), University of Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
3.
a.
b.
Society of Exploration Geophysicist (SEG)
c.
Canadian Society of Exploration Geophysicist (CSEG)
d.
e.
European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers (EAGE)
My contribution to the report entitled Evaluation of the Oil Reserves and Assessment of
Bowen/Surat Basin, Australia (As of March 31, 2013) is based on my geophysical
properties.
Original Signed by Mustafa Ali Malik, M.Sc.

4325.70684.IB.smr
Certificate
Greg D. Robinson, B.Sc., P.Eng.
I, Greg D. Robinson, Vice-President, International and Director of Sproule, 900, 140 Fourth
Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta, declare the following:
a.
B.Sc. Civil Engineering (1978) University of Manitoba, Winnipeg MB, Canada
a.
Professional Engineer (P.Eng.) Province of Alberta, Canada

a.
b.
c.
Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers (SPEE)

51-101.
properties.
Original Signed by Greg D. Robinson, P.Eng.

Greg D. Robinson, P.Eng.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Summary Page 1
Summary
Tables S-1 and S-1A summarize our evaluation of the oil reserves of Chelsea Oil and Gas
Ltd., as of March 31, 2013, after and before Australian income taxes, respectively. Table S1B, presents the contingent oil resources of Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd., as of March 31, 2013.
Prospective Resources of Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. are summarized in the Table S-1C. The
Companys interests are located in the Petroleum Leases 18 and 280 (PL 18 and PL 280),
Bowen/Surat Basin, State of Queensland, Australia. Maps showing the location of the
Companys Surat Assets are included as Figure S-1 and Figures 1 to 3 (located in the
Discussion section of the report).
The reserves definitions and ownership classification used in this evaluation are in
accordance with Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook (COGEH) reserves definitions
and evaluation practices and procedures, which is compliant with Canadian National
Instrument 51-101.
No economic analyses were conducted for contingent and prospective resources.
The net present values of the reserves are presented in thousands of United States dollars
and are based on annual projections of net revenue, which were discounted at various
rates. These rates are 5, 10, 15 and 20 percent and undiscounted.
The price forecasts that formed the basis for the revenue projections in the evaluation were
based on Sproules March 31, 2013 pricing model. Table S-2 presents a summary of
selected forecasts.
Operating and Capital costs were escalated to the dates incurred at 1.5 percent per year.
Well abandonment and disconnect costs were included in this report at the entity level for
wells which have reserves assigned. No allowances for reclamation or salvage values were
made. No provision for abandonment or decommissioning of facilities or pipelines has been
included in this evaluation.
Summary forecasts of production and cash flow for the various reserves categories are
included as Tables S-3 through S-3B. Figures S-2 through S-4 present the results of our
evaluation in graphical form.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Table S-1
Chelsea Oil & Gas Ltd.

Block PL 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Escalated Prices and Costs
Remaining Reserves
Gross
Net Present Values
Company
Gross
Net
At 0%
After Income Taxes M$US

At 5.0%
At 10.0%
At 15%
At 20%
Oil (Mbbl)
Total Probable
140
140
125
4,470
4,100
3,773
3,484
3,226
Total Possible
261
261
231
5,267
4,593
4,023
3,540
3,129
Total Probable Plus Possible
401
401
356
9,738
8,693
7,796
7,024
6,356
Table S-1A
Chelsea Oil & Gas Ltd.

Block PL 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Escalated Prices and Costs
Remaining Reserves
Gross
Net Present Values
Company
Gross
Net
At 0%
Before Income Taxes M$US

At 5.0%
At 10.0%
At 15%
At 20%
Oil (Mbbl)
Total Probable
140
140
125
5,767
5,187
4,692
4,267
3,898
Total Possible
261
261
231
11,608
9,665
8,129
6,900
5,905
Total Probable Plus Possible
401
401
356
17,374
14,852
12,821
11,166
9,803
Values may not add due to rounding.
Table S-1B
Total of McWhirter and Thomby Creek Fields
Production Licenses 18 and 280, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Contingent Resources (Unrisked)
(1,5)
Pool/Location
Drainage
Area
Net Pay
Porosity
Water
Saturation
Oil
FVF
Original Oil
In Place
Technical
Recovery
Factor *
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
RB/STB
Mbbls
Original
Technically
Recoverable
Oil *
Mbbls
Working
Interest**
Company
Technically
Recoverable
Oil*
Mbbls
Showground sandstone
1C 2
- Cum Production -
2C 3
467
23
70
16
3C 4
979
10
98
73
72
* Not adjusted for economic cut-off

** average working interest, based on the Company's working interest of 50% in PL 280 and 100% in PL 18
Values may not balance due to rounding
1. Contingent Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations
using established technology or technology under development, but which are not currently considered to be commercially recoverable due to
one or more contingencies. Contingent resources have an associated chance of development (economic, regulatory, market and facility, corporate
commitment or political risks). These estimates have not been risked for the chance of development. There is no certainty that any portion of
the contingent resources will be developed or, if developed, there is no certainty as to either the timing of such development or whether
it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the resources.
2. 1C estimate is considered to be a conservative estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed
the 1C estimate.
3. 2C estimate is considered to be the best estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be
greater or less than the 2C estimate.
4. 3C estimate is considered to be an optimistic estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is unlikely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will
exceed the 3C estimate.
5. The individual field contingent resources volumes were estimated deterministically and the arithmetic summation has been provided. Statistial aggregation has not
been considered.
Table S-1C
Total of Beardmore, McGregor, McWhirter , Thomby Creek and Yellowbank Creek Fields
Production License 18/280, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Prospective Resources (Unrisked) (1,5)
Pool/Location
Drainage
Area
Net Pay
Porosity
Water
Saturation
Oil
FVF
Original Oil
In Place
Technical
Recovery
Factor *
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
RB/STB
Mbbls
Original
Technically
Recoverable
Oil *
Mbbls
Working
Interest **
Company
Technically
Recoverable
Oil*
Mbbls
2,868
149
93
138
Showground sandstone
Low
Best
4,504
10
441
89
393
High
6,884
15
1,064
84
897

1. Prospective Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from undiscovered
accumulations by application of future development projects. Prospective resources have both an associated chance of discovery and a
chance of development. The reported resources have not been risked for either chance of discovery (geological chance of success) or
chance of development (economic, regulatory, market, facility, corporate commitment, or political risks). There is no certainty that
any portion of the prospective resources will be discovered and if discovered, there is no certainty as to either the timing of such
development or whether it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the resources.
2. Low estimate is considered to be a conservative estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is likely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will exceed the low estimate.
3. Best estimate is considered to be the best estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is equally likely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the best estimate.
4. High estimate is considered to be an optimistic estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is unlikely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will exceed the High estimate.
5. The individual field prospective resources volumes were estimated deterministically and the arithmetic summation has been provided. Statistical aggregation
has not been considered. The summation of the unrisked prospect volumes may be misleading because it assumes success for each of the prospect entities.
The chance of this occurring is unlikely.
Summary
Table S-2
Summary of Selected Price Forecasts
(Effective March 31, 2013)
UK
Year
WTI Cushinga
Brentb
Oklahoma
($US/bbl)
($US/bbl)
Historical
2008
99.59
97.06
2009
61.63
61.53
2010
79.43
79.48
2011
95.00
111.22
2012
94.19
111.44
2013 3 mo. Actual
94.35
112.49
2013 9 mo. Estimate
92.85
109.60
2014
90.51
103.84
2015
87.69
99.17
2016
93.22
103.03
2017
96.96
106.65
2018
98.41
108.25
2019
99.89
109.87
2020
101.38
111.52
2021
102.91
113.20
2022
104.45
114.89
Forecast
Escalation rate of 1.5% thereafter
Note:
a. 40 degrees API, 0.4% sulphur
b. 38 degrees API, 1.0% sulphur
c. International Petroleum Exchange British National Balancing Point
4325.70684.IB.smr
3P : <Unnamed Sensitivity>
Table S-3
Economic Summary
Block PL 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia - Total Probable Plus Possible
Prod'n Start: 2014/01, As Of: March 31, 2013. Escalated Prices and Costs
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit
Company Economic Indicators

Net Revenue
91.38
100.00
0.00
91.38
0.00
Company (% of Total)
Company (% of Contr)
Partner (% of Contr)
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Australia Extended PRRT (2012) - 70684

SIL as of March 31, 2013
2013/01
2013/01
2020/04
Company Economics (per Unit)

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Plus: Other Income/Expense
Before Tax Cash Flow
Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
17,374
14,852
12,821
11,166
9,803
8,669
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.08
29.42
AT NPV
(M$US)
9,738
8,693
7,796
7,024
6,356
5,775
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.56
1.49
1.43
1.37
1.32
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
0.94
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.91
0.90
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
46.45
0.00
53.55
Company Prod and Investments

(M$US)
38,667
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.63
0
9,061
0
0
11,138
0
0.00
23.43
0.00
0.00
28.80
0.00
0.00
25.45
0.00
0.00
31.29
0.00
17,374
7,637
10,452
44.93
19.75
27.03
48.81
21.45
29.36
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
401
0
0
401
Comp Gross
401
0
0
401
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
10,472
666
11,138
Company
0
0
10,472
666
11,138
Company Net
356
0
0
0
356
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
M$US
0
263
340
239
133
72
39
8
0
1,094
M$US
0
876
1,134
798
444
239
130
27
0
3,647
M$US
72
1,634
2,256
1,816
1,307
975
797
203
0
9,061
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
5,186
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
10,472
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
666
0
666
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
-72
2,096
5,629
4,817
3,281
1,550
627
-554
0
17,374
M$US
0
0
495
3,318
2,289
1,046
451
38
0
7,637
M$US
-72
2,096
5,134
1,500
992
504
176
-592
0
9,738
05/08/2013 15:05
Table S-3A
Economic Summary
Block PL 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia - Probable Undeveloped
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit

Net Revenue
91.46
100.00
0.00
91.46
0.00
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00

2013/01
2013/01
2017/07

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
5,767
5,187
4,692
4,267
3,898
3,576
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.08
29.57
AT NPV
(M$US)
4,470
4,100
3,773
3,484
3,226
2,997
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.48
1.43
1.39
1.35
1.31
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
1.15
1.14
1.13
1.11
1.10
1.08
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
57.28
0.00
42.72

(M$US)
13,467
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.07
0
3,427
0
0
3,897
0
0.00
25.45
0.00
0.00
28.93
0.00
0.00
27.50
0.00
0.00
31.27
0.00
5,767
1,296
4,496
42.82
9.62
33.38
46.27
10.40
36.08

Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
140
0
0
140
Comp Gross
140
0
0
140
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
3,684
212
3,897
Company
0
0
3,684
212
3,897
Company Net
125
0
0
0
125
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
M$US
0
224
101
42
11
0
0
377
M$US
0
745
336
139
38
0
0
1,258
M$US
72
1,443
943
658
312
0
0
3,427
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
3,684
0
0
0
0
0
3,684
M$US
0
0
0
0
212
0
0
212
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
-72
2,474
2,582
859
-77
0
0
5,767
M$US
0
0
709
461
126
0
0
1,296
M$US
-72
2,474
1,873
397
-202
0
0
4,470
05/08/2013 15:05
PS : <Unnamed Sensitivity>
Table S-3B
Economic Summary
Block PL 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia - Total Possible
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit

Net Revenue
91.34
100.00
0.00
91.34
0.00
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00

2013/01
2013/01
2020/04

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
11,608
9,665
8,129
6,900
5,905
5,093
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.17
29.34
AT NPV
(M$US)
5,267
4,593
4,023
3,540
3,129
2,778
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.60
1.53
1.46
1.39
1.33
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
0.82
0.82
0.81
0.80
0.79
0.77
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
40.99
0.00
59.01

(M$US)
25,200
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.93
0
5,634
0
0
7,241
0
0.00
22.36
0.00
0.00
28.73
0.00
0.00
24.35
0.00
0.00
31.30
0.00
11,608
6,341
5,957
46.06
25.16
23.64
50.18
27.41
25.75
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
261
0
0
261
Comp Gross
261
0
0
261
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
6,787
454
7,241
Company
0
0
6,787
454
7,241
Company Net
231
0
0
0
231
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
M$US
0
39
239
198
122
72
39
8
0
717
M$US
0
131
798
659
406
239
130
27
0
2,389
M$US
0
190
1,314
1,159
996
975
797
203
0
5,634
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
1,501
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
6,787
M$US
0
0
0
0
-212
0
0
666
0
454
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
-378
3,047
3,958
3,357
1,550
627
-554
0
11,608
M$US
0
0
-214
2,856
2,163
1,046
451
38
0
6,341
M$US
0
-378
3,260
1,102
1,194
504
176
-592
0
5,267
05/08/2013 15:05
Figure S-1
http://www.ga.gov.au/oceans/ea_Surat.jsp
PL 18 and PL280 (Surat Assets) Location Map

70684
Figure S-2
70684
MCWHIRTER, THOMBY CREEK, YELLOWBANK CREEK NORTH

DAILY COMPANY PRODUCTION FORECAST
GROSS OIL
Figure S-3

ANNUAL CASH FLOW (AFTER INCOME TAX)
70684
Figure S-4

NET PRESENT VALUE (AFTER INCOME TAX)
70684
Discussion Page 1
Discussion
1. General
Petroleum Leases 18 and 280 (PL 18 and PL 280) are located approximately seven
kilometres south of the Silver Springs Gas field complex on the western flank of the Surat
Basin in southeastern Queensland, Australia. The oilfields in these leases were discovered
by Bridge Oil and later acquired by Brisbane Petroleum and Delbaere Associates in June
1993. The oil in all fields is accumulated in the Triassic Showgrounds Sandstones (Figure 4).
PL 18 with an area of 186 square kilometers contains the Thomby Creek Oil Field, McGregor
Field, Yellowbank Creek Field and Yellowbank Creek North Field.
PL 280 with an area of 91 square kilometers contains the Beardmore Field.
The McWhirter Field straddles the boundary between PL 18 and PL 280.
The Thomby Creek Oil field was discovered by Bridge oil in 1979 with 5 producing wells
being drilled to April 1981. These 5 wells produced 51.5 Mbbls of oil to May 1986 when the
field was suspended. Thomby Creek-5 well was put back on production in 1999 and shut-in
at the end of 2009. The cumulative oil production from the field was 58.6 Mbbls to March
31, 2013.
The Yellowbank Creek Oil Field was discovered by the Yellowbank Creek-2 well in 1982. Two
more wells, YBC-3 and YBC-4, were drilled in 1982. All three wells were shut in
(Yellowbank-2 in December 1993, Yellowbank-3 in March 2010, Yellowbank-4 in April 2006)
due to excessive water cut and they have remained shut-in. The cumulative oil production
from the three wells was 425 Mbbls.
Within the McWhirter Area (located in both PL 18 and PL 280), the McWhirter East-1 well
was drilled in November 1978 but only completed for production in December 1997. This
well produced 49.9 Mbbls to 2006. The McWhirter-1 discovery well had been plugged and
abandoned by Crusader in 1993, after producing 2,038 bbls. Two more dry holes were
drilled in the area (McWhirter-2 and Abbott-1).
The YBCN-1 well located in the Yellowbank Creek North area was drilled in August 1987 but
only completed for production in June 1993, producing 32.9 Mbbls until it was shut-in in
April 2004 due to high water cut.
4325.70684.IB
J:\Chelsea Oil and Gas\Report\Chelsea Summary.doc
Discussion Page 2
Three wells were drilled within the Beardmore Area (Beardmore-1, Beardmore-2 and
Beardmore Southwest-1A). The Beardmore-1 well was drilled in 1981 and three DSTs were
conducted. Mud cut oil was recovered at surface from the Showgrounds sandstone and the
Kuttung Formation. The Beardmore-2 well was drilled in 1987 and a DST flowed gas to
surface at a small rate. Several barrels of condensate/oil cut mud were retrieved during
circulation. Well Beardmore-SW 1A was drilled in 1982. Only mud was recovered during a
test of the Showgrounds sandstone formation.
The Company owns a 100-percent interest in Petroleum Lease 18 and a 50 percent interest
in Petroleum Lease 280. The remaining interests in the Petroleum Lease 280 are held by
Longreach Oil Ltd.
2. Geoscience
2.1
Regional Geology
The Bowen Basin was formed during the earliest Permian to Late Triassic time. It is a
narrow, elongate northsouth trending basin, recognized as the northern element of the
Bowen-Gunnedah-Sydney basin system (Figure 1), with a length of 900 km extending from
Collinsville in Queensland to Moree in New South Wales. It covers a total area of just over
200,000 km2. The rocks in the Bowen Basin consist of Early Permian marine sediments, Late
Permian coal measures, Early Triassic red beds, and Middle Triassic terrigenous sediments
(Fielding et al. 1990).
The Bowen Basin consists of two main depocentres, the Taroom and Denison troughs
(Figure 1). The north-trending Taroom Trough is the largest and most easterly, containing
up to 9000 m of Permian and Triassic sediments and covers an area of approximately
50,000 km2 (Hawkins et al. 1992). It is bounded to the west by the Wunger Ridge, Roma
and Collinsville shelves and the Comet Ridge. Its eastern limit is the structural eastern
margin of the basin. To the west and separated from the Taroom Trough by the Comet
Ridge, the north-northwest trending Denison Trough is 320 km long and 60 km wide. It is
bounded on the west by the Nebine Ridge and Springsure Shelf and on the north and south
by the Capella and Roma Shelves, respectively.
The distribution of discovered oil and gas within the Bowen and Surat Basins is shown in
Figure 2. A more local map of the well and seismic control in the vicinity of PL 280 and PL
18 is provided in Figure 3.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 3
2.2
Basin Development and Depositional History
The stratigraphic sequence in the Bowen Basin is summarized in Figure 4. Various tectonic
models have been put forward to explain the origin of the Bowen Basin, usually involving
Permian extension and Triassic compression. In the compressional phase, extensional faults
were reversed and extensive erosion took place with up to 3,0004,000 m of section lost
from some parts of the basin.
The evolution of the Bowen Basin commenced in the Late Carboniferous or Early Permian
through an initial rift formed by back-arc extension, followed by a mid-Permian sag phase
and then to a Late Permian-Middle Triassic foreland basin stage. Uplift, thrusting, and a
more fluvial environment existed in the Triassic with red bed deposition of the Rewan
Group. Reservoir sands are developed locally within the Rewan Group in the Taroom Trough
but are of poor quality.
Uplift in the west resulted in the alluvial quartzose deposits of the Clematis Group around
the Early-Middle Triassic boundary. The fluvial system of the Clematis Group extended over
the Denison Trough and into the Taroom Trough where it is represented along the
southwest margin by the principal petroleum reservoir, the Showgrounds Sandstone. This is
the primary reservoir target within the Companys PL 18 and PL 280 leases. This succession
in the Taroom Trough is significantly thinner in the southern part of the trough than in its
maximum development in the north. A basin transgression in the south and west portions of
the Taroom Trough halted fluvial deposition and a widespread seal of the fine-grained
sediments of the Snake Creek Mudstone Member of the lower Moolayember Formation were
deposited. A return to dominantly alluvial systems in the Middle Triassic saw the deposition
of the youngest Bowen Basin sequence, the upper Moolayember Formation. Up to 5,000 m
of Triassic sediments are preserved in the northern Taroom Trough.
2.3
Reservoir
The rocks in the Bowen Basin consist of Early Permian marine sediments, Late Permian coal
measures, Early Triassic red beds, and Middle Triassic terrigenous sediments (Fielding et al.
1990).
The Showgrounds Sandstone is the primary reservoir in the PL 18 and PL 280. The average
porosity is 16% and water saturation is approximately 44%. Permeability varies from 5 md
over the Yellowbank Creek North area to 300 md in the Yellowbank Creek area. The
Showgrounds Sandstone reservoir at Thomby Creek Field has an average permeability of 30
md.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 4
2.4
Source Rock
In the Denison Trough (Figure 1), gas-prone Type III source rocks of considerable potential
exist throughout the Permian succession with the marine Cattle Creek Formation and the
alluvial coal-bearing Reids Dome Beds constituting the most favorable source facies
(Jackson et al. 1980, Baker et al. 1991). The Taroom Trough and the Surat Basin can be
classified as a more oil-prone region than the Denison Trough, based on known discoveries
(Figure 2).
Hawkins et al. (1992) have concluded that the entire Permian to Triassic succession of the
Taroom Trough is dominated by Type III kerogen.
The Blackwater Group, particularly along the eastern and southern margins, contains
significant amounts of oil-prone kerogen while restricted source potential also exists in the
Back Creek Group (Figure 4).
Thomas et al. (1982) have interpreted the Blackwater Group to be within the oil window
throughout much of the Taroom Trough, whereas the Back Creek Group is overmature for
gas over much of the northern part of the Taroom Trough.
3. Geophysics
3.1
Data Control
Seismic control for PL 18 and PL 280 is through a 2D seismic grid of various vintages and
line spacing. In total 37 seismic lines were shot in these two blocks and seismic data is of
fair to good quality. Some mistie problems between different vintages were observed and
minimized prior to the horizon interpretation. In total, 30 wells, including dry holes, have
been drilled in the two blocks and production has been obtained from five oilfields. Most
wells were drilled either on or in close proximity to the 2D seismic control. The Company
has provided all the data related to 2D seismic, time horizons, well locations, well logs,
formation tops, and production profile data. Figure 5 and 6 show the base map with wells,
2D seismic and the interpreted fault polygons.
3.2
Fault Interpretation
A map and 3D perspective view of the fault framework developed by Sproule is shown in
Figure 7. The Showgrounds interval may be compartmentalized by these faults, and they
play a role in establishing areal extent of the fields and the associated reserves volumes.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 5
3.3
Horizon Interpretation
Due to the complexity of the area and presence of complex faults system, Sproule refined
the horizon picks provided by the Company for the Evergreen, Showgrounds and Basement
horizons. Sproule used these horizon interpretations for the velocity model and depth
conversion. Figures 8 and 9 show the time and depth structure maps of the Showgrounds
reservoir respectively.
Thomby Creek Field:
Figure 10 shows a strike line SD87-4, which passes through the wells Thomby Creek-3 and
Thomby Creek-5. The Thomby Creek Field is a subtle four-way dip anticlinal structure
transected by some local NNW-SSE trending faults. There are six wells drilled in the Thomby
Creek Field, of which five lie in the Companys PL 18. The field is compartmentalized by
these faults, which affect the reservoir and its capacity to produce. Figure 10 shows three
interpreted horizons; Evergreen, Showgrounds Sandstone and Basement on east-west dip
profile SD87-4.
Figure 11 shows a north-south strike profile 86B-4 (NNE-SSW). This line passes through
the well Thomby Creek-6A.
Figure 12 provides another north-south strike profile SD87-17A over the crest of the field
passing through the Thomby Creek-6/6A, 2 and -1 wells.
McWhirter Field:
Figure 13 shows a NW-SE seismic line 86B-24 which passes through the McWhirter-1 well.
The seismic line shows the three interpreted horizons; Evergreen, Showgrounds and
Basement. The McWhirter structure is transected by a major north-south fault, indicated by
a light green fault on the seismic section.
McGregor Field:
Figure 14 shows the seismic line 86B-23 in the NW-SE direction. This lines passes through
the wells McGregor-1, Yellowbank Creek North-1 and Yellowbank Creek-1. The McGregor
Field is bounded by two SSW-NNE trending faults to the east and west of the McGregor-1
well. Figure 15 also shows a dip line 81B-3 in west-east direction across the McGregor Field
and north flank of the Yellowbank Creek North Field.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 6
Yellowbank Creek North Field:

Figure 16 shows a seismic line 85B-5, which passes through the well Yellowbank Creek
North-1. The field is a structural high, bounded by two north-south faults, as shown by a
white ellipsoid in Figure 16.
Yellowbank Creek Field:
Figure 17 shows the seismic line 78B-29 (E-W direction) passing through the Yellowbank
Creek-1 well, which was a dry hole and did not produce. The well was drilled very close to
the fault in a structurally low position.
Figure 18 shows the seismic line 85B-6 in west-east direction. This line passes through the
Yellowbank Creek-3 well, which was a producing well near the northern apex of the fault
block.
Two more producing oil wells, Yellowbank Creek-2 and Yellowbank Creek-4, were drilled and
the seismic line 81B-2 passes through these wells as shown in Figure 19. The structural high
is bounded by faults on all but the south side, and the two wells are drilled in two adjacent
fault blocks.
Beardmore Field:
Figure 20 shows seismic line 81T-21, which passes through the wells Beardmore-1 and
Beardmore-2. Beardmore-1 appears to have been drilled near the fault.
The Beardmore Southwest-1A well lies south of the seismic line 85-S2 (Figure 21). The field
is a four way dip structure which is bisected by a fault which runs through the middle of the
field. The fault lies to the east of the Beardmore 2 and Beardmore Southwest 1A wells.
3.4
Velocity Modeling
The horizon interpretation was mainly focused on the reservoir level marker, which is the
Showgrounds Sandstone. A velocity model was created from the available well tops in the
two blocks and the time structure surface, and used in the time to depth conversion.
A 3D perspective view of the Showgrounds Sandstone depth structure map is shown in
Figure 22, which honours the well tops. A Showgrounds-Base depth structure map was
created by an isochore, as shown in 3D perspective view in Figure 23.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 7
4. Petrophysical Evaluation
Sproule conducted a petrophysical analysis of the Showgrounds Formation in Thomby
Creek, Beardmore, McGregor, McWhirter, Yellowbank Creek and Yellowbank Creek North
Fields. The objective of the analysis was to estimate the porosity and water saturation for
the wells having open-hole log data to estimate the original hydrocarbon in place.
The main challenge was to gather the digital data of the wells. The Company supplied open
hole well log data in digital LAS files. However, the data interval did not include the
Showgrounds Formation which is the main target reservoir. Paper copies of the well logs
were either provided by the Company or downloaded from the government website covering
the Showgrounds Formation.
Log data from nineteen wells were analyzed manually, targeting the Showgrounds
Formation. For the majority of wells, the density log was used to calculate the total porosity
and where the density logs were not available the porosity was estimated from the sonic
log.
Since the Showgrounds Formation is mainly composed of sandstone, the matrix density was
set as 2.65 gm/cc and a value of 55 usec/foot was used as the sonic matrix travel time.
The Density porosity equation is:
e =
Where:
( ma b )
( ma fl )
e is the porosity from density log; b is the measured bulk density in gm/cc, ma is
fl is the fluid density in gm/cc.
the matrix density in gm/cc and

The Sonic porosity equation is:
e =
( DT DTma )
( DT fl DTma )
e is the porosity; is the measured sonic travel time in usec/foot, ma is the

matrix travel time in usec/foot and fl is the fluid travel time in usec/foot.
Where:
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 8
The water saturation was estimated by using the Archie Equation, assuming the formation
aRw
Sw = m
Rt
1/ n
to be clean (having low shale volume).

The values of a, m and n were respectively 1, 1.56 and 1.7. These values are supported by
core data from the Thomby Creek-2 well. An FRF-PHI cross plot was constructed and the
best fit gave a value of m= 1.56 (Figure 24). The Rw of the Showgrounds Formation was
found to be between 0.49 ohmm and 0.577 ohmm at the reservoir temperature.
The following table summarizes the average reservoir parameters for the Showgrounds
Formation in the analyzed wells.
Average Reservoir Parameters for Showgrounds Sandstone Formation.
S
No
Well Name
Top
MD
Base
MD
Pay
Feet
Feet
Feet
Average
Rw
Thomby Creek-1
6080
6110
30
Rt
(OHMM)
55
Thomby Creek-2
6090
6119
29
40
0.115
0.546
0.49
Thomby Creek-3
6135
6152
17
19
0.164
0.612
0.49
Thomby Creek-4
6077
6084
29
0.133
0.577
0.49
Thomby Creek-5
6050
6085
35
70
0.109
0.412
0.49
Thomby Creek-6A
6099
6134
34
47
0.090
0.622
0.49
McGregor-1
6083
6096
13
100
0.109
0.384
0.62
Yellowbank Creek-1
6109
6122
13
30
0.127
0.646
0.572
Yellowbank Creek-2
6010
6024
14
60
0.170
0.331
0.577
10
Yellowbank Creek-3
6070
6089
20
65
0.133
0.358
0.49
11
Yellowbank Creek-4
6048
6066
18
30
0.170
0.452
0.49
12
Yellowbank Creek North-1
6114
6117
22
0.170
0.598
0.577
13
Beardmore SW-1A
5991
5996
50
0.061
0.949
0.577
14
Beardmore-1
6080
6095
15
20
0.230
0.478
0.577
15
Beardmore-2
6007
6014
45
0.162
0.410
0.577
16
McWhirter East -1
6047
6056
10
55
0.197
0.304
0.577
17
McWhirter -1
6049
6055
70
0.152
0.336
0.577
18
McWhirter -2
6086
6096
10
0.152
1.000
0.577
19
Hollow Tree-1
5919
5923
25
0.160
0.586
0.577
4325.70684.IB.smr
PHI
(V/V)
0.097
Sw
(Archie)
0.530
OHMM
0.49
Discussion Page 9
Figure 25 shows an example of the open hole log data across the Showgrounds Formation in
the Thomby Creek-1 well.
5. Structural Mapping and Rock Volumes

A single reservoir level (Showgrounds Sandstone) was mapped at this time. The reservoir
formation tops provided by the Company were reviewed and edited where necessary, and
used to control the top Showgrounds Formation depth structural map during the time to
depth conversion workflow. The top Showgrounds depth structure map is shown in Figure
26.
Isochores for the pay interval within the Showgrounds sandstone were calculated and used
to develop a base net reservoir structural map.
The rock volume between the top and the base reservoir surfaces and down to an oil water
contact, ODT or spill point level depth depending on the
field or area, were used to
calculate the net rock volume (NRV). The STOOIP for the Showgrounds sandstone net
reservoir interval was calculated for each field by fault block and reserves or resources
category (Figures 27-31). A summary is shown in the following table.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 10
Fields Volumes Categorization

Field or Area
Category
Prospective
Resource
Reserve
East
Reserve
West
McWhirter North
Reserve
Yellowbank Creek
Prospective
Resource
Yellowbank Creek North
Beardmore
Reserve
Prospective
Resource
m TVDSS
acres
acre ft
70
1,160
Probable
36
1,156
Possible
25
800
14
393
Possible
Prospective
Resource
GRV
Thomby Creek
McWhirter South
Area
Case
B
Reserve
Depth
Block
Probable
Fluid Level
type
OWC
-1588
Possible
25
824
2C
14
334
3C
28
786
Low
68
2,333
Best
128
4,300
High
221
5,392
P10
Spill
-1585
164
1,244
P90
ODT
-1580
116
819
P10
Spill
-1585
159
901
P90
ODT
-1580
129
761
High
Spill
-1585
220
1,431
Low
ODT
-1580
154
1,000
P10
Spill
-1590
174
2,653
P90
ODT
-1586.5
148
2,132
High
Spill
-1590
82
1,199
Low
ODT
-1586.5
63
904
3P
OWC
-1573
35
263.6
High
Spill
-1590
384
3,706
Low
ODT
-1579
131.8
761
6. Fluid Properties
Yellowbank Creek Field
Two surface fluid samples from wells Yellowbank Creek 3 and Yellowbank Creek 4 were
obtained during drillstem tests. API oil gravities of 53.5 and 45.5 degree were reported for
the Yellowbank Creek 3 and Yellowbank Creek 4 wells.
Yellowbank Creek North Field
One surface fluid sample from the Yellowbank Creek North 1 well was analyzed. An API oil
gravity of 55.3 degree was reported for this oil sample.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 11
Thomby Creek Field

The API gravity was obtained for surface samples of the reservoir fluid produced from the
Thomby Creek 2 and Thomby Creek 5 wells. The reported API oil gravity was variable in the
range of 49-50 degrees.
McWhirter Field
Laboratory PVT analyses were conducted on a downhole reservoir fluid sample from the
McWhirter 1 well. The results are summarized in the following table:
McWhirter Oil Properties
Well
McWhirter 1
Oil density at standard conditions

Reservoir temperature
52.5 deg API

180 deg F
Initial reservoir pressure

Initial formation volume factor
Oil viscosity at initial reservoir conditions
Initial solution gas-oil ratio
2,200 psia
1.303 rb/stb
0.416 cp
357 scf/bbl
Saturation pressure
415 psia
Oil viscosity at saturation pressure
0.352 cp
Beardmore Field
An API oil gravity of 51.32 degrees was determined for a surface oil sample from the
Beardmore 2 well.
Considering the limited availability of complete reservoir fluid properties data, reservoir fluid
parameters typical for PL 18 area were used for the evaluation. These parameters are
presented in the following table:
Beardmore Oil Properties
Oil density at standard conditions
Reservoir temperature
Initial reservoir pressure
Initial formation volume factor
Oil viscosity at initial reservoir conditions
Initial solution gas-oil ratio
Saturation pressure
4325.70684.IB.smr
53.5 deg API

170 deg F
2,697 psia
1.323 rb/stb
0.428 cp
357 scf/bbl
652 psia
Discussion Page 12
7. Drill Stem Tests

Well Yellowbank Creek 2 tested 49 degree API oil at a rate of 1,536 barrels per day from the
Showgrounds zone (1,831-1,836.7 m) in April 1982.
Well Yellowbank Creek 3 tested oil at a rate of 509 barrels per day with a reported GOR of
200 ft3/bbl from the Showgrounds zone (1,845-1,855 m) in August 1982 at a surface
flowing pressure of 181 psia.
DST 1 was conducted in the well Yellowbank Creek 4 over the Showgrounds interval 1,8381,888 m. KB. Only mud was recovered from the drill pipe when the DST tool was pulled. The
results of DST 1 were explained by mechanical problems with the packer. DST 2 was
conducted in the well Yellowbank Creek 4 over the interval of 1,825-1,888 m KB. Oil, water
and gas were recovered from the drill pipe but the well did not flow naturally.
Yellow Bank Creek North Field
The Showgrounds Sandstone (1,859.2-1,870 mKB) was tested in the well Yellowbank Creek
North 1 on August 5, 1987. No fluid was produced to surface. However, 10.8 bbls of oil and
15.2 bbls of water were recovered by reverse circulation. Pre-flow pressure data was used
in pressure analyses. The results of pressure transient analyses were provided by the
Company and are summarized in the following table:
Yellowbank Creek North 1 Buildup Analysis
Reservoir Pressure, psia
1,532.4
Permeability, mD
827
Apparent skin
60
The measured reservoir pressure of 1,532.4 psia was much lower than hydrostatic pressure
and the apparent pressure depletion of the reservoir was attributed to fluid production from
nearby fields.
Thomby Creek Field
Three DSTs were conducted in the Thomby Creek 1 well. During DST 1, the well tested oil
from the interval of 1,851-1,861 m. at 468 psia flowing pressure. The associated oil rate
was not reported. During DSTs 2 and 3, only water was tested from the deeper intervals of
1,861-1,863 m and 1,871-1,912 m.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 13
The Thomby Creek 2 well tested oil at the rate of 360 barrels per day from the interval of
1,856-1,868 m with an unstabilized flowing pressure of 180 psia.
The Thomby Creek 3 well tested only water from the interval of 1,866-1,877 m and the well
was abandoned.
During the DST conducted on the Thomby Creek 4 well, only gas was produced to the
surface at a rate too small to measure from the interval of 1,848-1,871 m. Some oil was
recovered during reverse circulation.
The Thomby Creek 5 well tested oil at a rate of 440 barrels per day from the interval of
1,845-1,856 m.
Three DSTs were run in the well Thomby Creek 6A, but only small amounts of mud were
recovered.
McWhirter Field
The McWhirter 1 well tested oil at a rate of 150 barrels per day from the interval of 1,837 to
1,847 m (Showgrounds Sandstone) at a flowing pressure of 410 psia increasing to 1,392
psia. The duration of the flow period was 89 minutes.
The Showgrounds sandstone was tested in the McWhirter East 1 well over the interval of
1,840-1,849.3 m. During the test, gas to surface was observed and 40 bbls of oil was
recovered.
Beardmore Field
Three DSTs were run in the well Beardmore 1. Mud cut oil and water were recovered at
surface during DST-1 (1,850.1-1,858.4 m). Water and mud were recovered from DSTs 2
and 3.
During DST-1, across the interval of 1,828-1,835.5 m, conducted in the Beardmore 2 well,
only gas produced to the surface at a rate too small to measure. Some oil cut mud was
recovered during reverse circulation. Only mud with traces of oil was recovered from the
tested interval of 1,827-1,840 m. (DST 2).
Drilling mud was recovered at the surface during the test of the Showgrounds (1,825.41,836.1 m) in the well Beardmore Southwest 1.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 14
McGregor Field
Two DSTs were run in the well McGregor 1.
During DST-1, across the interval of 1,851.5-1,861.5 m of the McGregor 1 well, some gas
flowed to the surface, but no volume was reported. A bottom hole sample recovered from
the well consisted of 12 gallons of water and 5 gallons of oil.
For DST-2, across the interval 1,850.6-1,856.1 m, no gas to surface was reported and drill
pipe recovery was reported to be 103 m of water-cut mud.
The results of pressure transient analyses were provided by the Company and are
summarized in the following table:
McGregor 1 Buildup Analysis
DST-1
DST-2
Reservoir Pressure, psia
1,626
1,609
Permeability, mD
2-4
Apparent skin
12
The measured reservoir pressure of 1,626 psia was much lower than expected and the
reservoir pressure depletion was explained by the limited area of the pool.
8. Reserves, Contingent and Prospective Resources Assignment

The original oil in place associated with the oil reserves and contingent and prospective
resources were estimated volumetrically, as described in the preceding Section 5: Structural
Mapping and Rock Volumes. Reservoir rock and fluid property data were obtained from core
analyses, well logs and PVT data. Recovery factors were selected after reviewing the
performance of existing wells and by comparing the reservoir under study with published
information on analogous reservoirs that have more firmly established recovery factors from
extended production histories.
Table 1 presents the volumetric parameters used in the calculation of the volumes initially in
place and technically recoverable volumes (before the economic cut off). Summary Tables
S-1 and S-1A present summaries of the reserves assigned to McWhirter, Thomby Creek and
Yellowbank Creek North fields after economic cut off with the before and after tax net
present values, respectively, for each reserves category.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 15
Economics have not been run on the contingent and prospective resources with the volumes
reported as being technically recoverable.
Thomby Creek Field
Probable and Probable plus Possible reserves as well as contingent and prospective
resources were assigned to the Showgrounds Sandstone Formation. Probable plus Possible
Reserves were initially assigned to the areas of blocks B and C. Later, under economic
analysis, it was found that the Probable technically recoverable volume assigned in block C
was not sufficient to support the cost of the proposed well and as a result, only Possible
reserves could be assigned. Possible reserves were also assigned to the area of block A.
Contingent 2C and 3C resources were assigned to the area of block D. Prospective
Resources were assigned to the southern portion of blocks C and D. The areal extent for the
assigned reserves and resources is shown in Figure 27.
A recovery factor of 10 percent was assigned for the reserves in blocks A and C and a
higher recovery factor of 20 percent was assigned for the reserves in block B in recognition
of the historic performance of the Thomby Creek-1 and -5 wells.
Recovery factors of 5 and 10 percent were assigned for 2C and 3C contingent resources
respectively. No 1C resources were assigned because of the current uncertainty with respect
to these resources.
Recovery factors of 2, 10 and 20 percent were assigned to the low, best and high
prospective resources cases, respectively. These recovery factors were interpreted from the
performance of existing wells. No reserves or resources were assigned to the previously
drilled wells because it was interpreted from production statistics that these reservoir
volumes had been depleted.
The cumulative oil production of the Thomby Creek field (wells 1, 2, 4 and 5) was 58.64
Mbbl to March 31, 2013. All wells have been shutin since 2009.
McWhirter Field
Probable and Probable plus Possible reserves were assigned to the east area of the
McWhirter Field. No Contingent 1C resources were recognized because of the current
uncertainty with respect to these resources; but Contingent 2C and 3C resources were
assigned to the northern portion of the structure west of the fault and Prospective
Resources were assigned to the southern portion. The areal extent for the assigned reserves
and resources is shown in Figure 28.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 16
A recovery factor of 25 percent was estimated for both Probable and Probable plus Possible
Reserves based on the performance of the McWhirter East 1 well.
The drilling of one vertical well was included in the probable area. Drilling of two vertical
wells was specified for the probable plus possible reserves category. An initial oil production
rate of 150 bpd was used in the forecast. Due to the absence of production history data
from the McWhirter Field, the estimate of the initial rate was based on the DST results from
the McWhirter 1 well.
Recovery factors of 5 and 10 percent were assigned to the 2C and 3C Contingent resources
cases, respectively, and again, no 1C Contingent resources were recognized because of
current uncertainties. Recovery factors of 2, 5 and 10 percent were assigned to the low,
best and high prospective resources cases, respectively. The assigned recovery factors for
the contingent and prospective resources were influenced by the performance of the
McWhirter 1 well. Total oil production from the McWhirter Field (wells 1 and East 1) was 52
Mbbl to 2006.
Prospective resources were assigned to the Showgrounds Sandstone Formation. Recovery
factors of 20, 30 and 40 percent were assigned for the low, best and high estimates,
respectively. These recovery factors were estimated based on the performance of the
currently shut in wells Yellowbank Creek 2, Yellowbank Creek 3 and Yellowbank Creek 4.
The areal extent for prospective resources is shown in Figure 29.
No reserves were assigned to the existing wells because it was interpreted from production
statistics that these reservoir volumes had been depleted, all production having ceased in
March 2010. The cumulative field oil production (wells 2, 3, and 4) was 425 Mbbls.
Yellow Bank Creek North Field
Proved (1P), Proved plus Probable (2P), and Proved plus Probable plus Possible (3P)
technically recoverable volumes were initially assigned to the Showgrounds Sandstone
Formation with recovery factors of 30%, 40% and 50%, respectively. Under economic
analysis it was found that the technically recoverable volumes assigned at the 1P and 2P
certainty levels were not economic to develop with a new well and, accordingly, only
Possible reserves could be assigned. The areal extent for reserves is shown in Figure 31.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 17
The cumulative oil production from the Yellowbank Creek North-1 well was 32.9 Mbbl and
the well has been shut-in since 2004 due to high water cut.
The drilling of one vertical well was specified for the reserves evaluation. An initial oil
production rate of 40 bpd, estimated based on Yellowbank Creek North 1 well production
data, was used in our forecast for the possible case.
Beardmore Field
factors of 2, 5 and 10 percent were assigned for the low, best and high resources cases,
respectively. These recovery factors were estimated with consideration for the test results
of the Beardmore-1, Beardmore-2 and Beardmore-SW1 wells. The areal extent for the
assigned resources is shown in Figure 30.
McGregor Field
factors of 2, 5 and 10 percent were assigned for the low, best and high resources cases,
respectively. The areal extent for the assigned resources is shown in Figure 32.
9. Pricing
Sproules oil price forecast in effect on March 31, 2013 for Brent crude formed the basis for
the prices used in our evaluation of the Surat area oil reserves.
A negative price offset of 2.5 US$/bbl was applied to the Brent crude oil price forecast.
Transportation costs were included in the operating costs.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Discussion Page 18
10. Operating and Capital Costs

The Company provided estimates of investments and expenses required to develop and
operate the Thomby Creek, McWhirter and Yellowbank Creek North fields.
Costs of US$ 1.479 million and US$ 2.151 million were provided by the Company for drilling
and completing vertical and horizontal wells, respectively. The capital costs for developing
of Thomby Creek, McWhirter and Yellowbank Creek North fields are summarized in the
following table.
Gross Capital Expenditures, M$US

(2013 Terms)
2P
Drilling of 1 horizontal well in Thomby

Creek Field (Block B)
3P
2014
2014
2,151
2,151
Drilling of 1 horizontal well in Thomby

Creek Field (Block C)
Drilling of 1 vertical well in Thomby Creek
Field (Block A)
Drilling of one vertical well in Yellowbank
Creek North Field
Drilling of one vertical well in McWhirter
Field (probable area)
Drilling of one vertical well in McWhirter
Field (possible area)
1,479
1,479
1,479
1,479
1,479
1,479
5,109
Abandonment cost*
300
*Well abandonment and disconnect at cessation of production.
2016
2,151
Total
4325.70684.IB.smr
2015
5,109
3,630
1,479
600
Discussion Page 19
The operating costs for Thomby Creek, McWhirter and Yellowbank Creek North fields are
summarized in the following table.
Operating Expenditures
(2013 Terms)
Cost Unit
Transportation cost
$US/bbl
Administrative Cost
M$US/yr
72
Insurance Cost
M$US/yr
75
Petroleum Tenure Rent Cost
M$US/yr
23
Power
M$US/yr
50
Chemicals
M$US/yr
10
Lubricants
M$US/yr
10
Storage
M$US/yr
75
Well interventions were scheduled at costs of US$ 105 thousand (vertical well) and US$ 120
thousand (horizontal well) per two years for each well.
Export tariffs were estimated at US$ 5.5 per barrel of oil.
Well abandonment and disconnect costs of $US 100 thousand per well were used. No
allowances for reclamation or salvage values were made.
Prices and costs were escalated at 1.5 percent annually.
11. Taxes and Royalties

Corporate income tax is applied at a rate of 30%. The Company has advised that their
outstanding tax loss carry forward, as of March 31, 2013, was AUD 1.65 million. A
Queensland royalty of 10% and an over-riding royalty of 3% are applied to the value of
production after deducting costs associated with processing and transportation. Petroleum
Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) is applied to the taxable revenue at a rate of 40% after
applicable deductions that include the 10% Queensland royalty. A historical cost pool for
PRRT purposes of AUD 9.2 million has also been applied.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Table D-1
McWhirter, Thomby Creek and Yellowbank Creek North Fields
Production License 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Technically Recoverable Volumes
Pool/Location
Drainage
Area
Net Pay
Porosity
Water
Sat'n
Oil
FVF
Original Oil
In Place
Technical
Recovery
Factor *
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
RB/STB
Mbbls
Gross Original
Technically
Recoverable Oil
*
Mbbls
Gross Remaining
Technically
Recoverable Oil *
Company Remaining
Technically
Recoverable Oil *
Mbbls
Mbbls

Shut-in Wells: YBC-2, YBC-3, YBC-4
- Cumulative Production -
425
57
Thomby Creek Field

Shut-in Wells: TC-1, TC-2, TC-5
Block A
Possible Undeveloped
70
17
11
50
1.323
373
10
37
37
37
Block B
Probable Undeveloped
Probable plus Possible Undeveloped
36
61
32
32
11
11
50
50
1.323
1.323
372
629
20
20
74
126
74
126
74
126
25
49
11
50
1.323
391
10
39
39
39
372
1,393
20
15
57
74
202
74
202
74
202
Block C
Total Thomby Creek Blocks A,B and C
Shut-in Wells: TC-1, TC-2, TC-5
McWhirter Field ( East Area)
Proved (Shut-in well: McWhirter East 1 )
Yellowbank Creek North Field
Shut-in Well: YBCN-1
TOTAL (Arithmetic)

80
170
9
7
- Cumulative Production 17
32
1.323
17
32
1.323
476
867
25
25
50
119
217
69
167
69
167
45
60
1.323
135
50
33
68
35
35
848
1,547
2,395
23
19
20
193
294
487
143
261
404
143
261
404
Table D-1A
McWhirter and Thomby Creek Fields
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Contingent Resources (Unrisked)
(1,5)
Pool/Location
Thomby Creek Field

Block D
1C 2
2C 3
3C 4
McWhirter Field (West Area)
1C (Shut-in Well: McWhirter 1)2
2C 3
3C 4
TOTAL (Arithmetic)
Drainage
Area
Net Pay
Porosity
Water
Sat'n
Oil
FVF
Original Oil
In Place
Technical
Recovery
Factor *
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
RB/STB
Mbbls
Gross Original
Technically
Recoverable Oil
*
Mbbls
Company
Remaining
Technically
Recoverable Oil *
Mbbls
14
42
24
27
11
11
50
50
1.323
1.323
107
360
5
10
0
5
36
100
100
0
5
36
80
165
7
6
360
619
5
10
2
18
62
62
58
11
36
467
979
5
10
2
23
98
70
73
16
72
17
32
32
1.323
1.323
Working
Interest **
1C (Shut-in Wells) 2
2C 3
3C 4

1. Contingent Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations
using established technology or technology under development, but which are not currently considered to be commercially recoverable due to
one or more contingencies. Contingent resources have an associated chance of development (economic, regulatory, market and facility, corporate
commitment or political risks). These estimates have not been risked for the chance of development. There is no certainty that any portion of
the contingent resources will be developed or, if developed, there is no certainty as to either the timing of such development or whether
it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the resources.
2. 1C estimate is considered to be a conservative estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed
the 1C estimate.
3. 2C estimate is considered to be the best estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be
greater or less than the 2C estimate.
4. 3C estimate is considered to be an optimistic estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is unlikely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will
exceed the 3C estimate.
5. The individual field contingent resources volumes were estimated deterministically and the arithmetic summation has been provided. Statistial aggregation has not
been considered.
Table D-1B
Beardmore, McGregor, McWhirter, Thomby Creek and Yellowbank Creek Fields
Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Prospective Resources (Unrisked)(1,5)
Drainage
Area
Net Pay
Porosity
Water
Sat'n
Oil
FVF
Original Oil
In Place
Technical
Recovery
Factor *
(ac)
(ft)
(%)
(%)
RB/STB
Mbbls
Gross Original
Technically
Recoverable Oil
*
Mbbls
132
225
384
6
8
10
21
21
21
46
46
46
1.323
1.323
1.323
511
1,128
2,491
2
5
10
146
11
38
1.323
397
166
333
8
8
11
11
38
38
1.323
1.323
536
1,010
McWhirter Field (West Area)

Low 2
Best 3
High 4
155
182
220
7
7
6.5
17
17
17
32
32
32
1.323
1.323
1.323
Thomby Creek Field

Low 2
Best 3
High 4
68
128
221
34
34
24
11
11
11
50
50
50
63
72
82
14
15
15
16
16
16
38
38
38
Pool/Location
Beardmore Field (East Area)

Low 2
Best 3
High 4
McGregor Field
Low 2
Best 3
High 4

Low 2
Best 3
High 4
TOTAL (Arithmetic)
Low 2
Best 3
High 4
Company
Remaining
Technically
Recoverable Oil *
Mbbls
10
56
249
50
50
50
5
28
125
5
10
8
27
101
100
100
100
8
27
101
700
872
974
2
5
10
14
44
97
56
56
56
8
24
54
1.323
1.323
1.323
750
1,382
1,733
2
10
20
15
138
347
100
100
100
15
138
347
1.323
1.323
1.323
510
586
676
20
30
40
102
176
270
100
100
100
102
176
270
2,868
4,504
6,884
5
10
15
149
441
1,064
93
89
84
138
393
897
Working
Interest **

1. Prospective Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from undiscovered
accumulations by application of future development projects. Prospective resources have both an associated chance of discovery and a
chance of development. The reported resources have not been risked for either chance of discovery (geological chance of success) or
chance of development (economic, regulatory, market, facility, corporate commitment, or political risks). There is no certainty that
any portion of the prospective resources will be discovered and if discovered, there is no certainty as to either the timing of such
development or whether it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the resources.
2. Low estimate is considered to be a conservative estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is likely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will exceed the low estimate.
3. Best estimate is considered to be the best estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is equally likely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the best estimate.
4. High estimate is considered to be an optimistic estimate of the quantity that will actually be recovered. It is unlikely that the actual
remaining quantities recovered will exceed the High estimate.
5. The individual field prospective resources volumes were estimated deterministically and the arithmetic summation has been provided. Statistical aggregation
has not been considered. The summation of the unrisked prospect volumes may be misleading because it assumes success for each of the prospect entities.
The chance of this occurring is unlikely.
Table D-2
Total of McWhirter, Thomby Creek and Yellowbank Creek North Fields
Production License 18, Surat Basin, Queensland, Australia
Reserves and Net Present Values
As of March 31, 2013
Technically Recoverable Volumes
Working
Interest
Gross
Oil
Volumes*
Working
Interest
Net
Oil
Volumes*
(%)
(Mbbls)
(Mbbls)
0%
5%
140
100
140
125
5,767
5,187
33
261
100
261
231
11,608
83
401
100
401
356
17,374
Original
Oil In Place
Recovery
Factor*
Original
Recoverable
Oil *
Cumulative
Production
to
March 31,
2013
Gross
Remaining Oil
Volumes*
Working
Interest
(Mbbls)
(%)
(Mbbls)
(Mbbls)
(Mbbls)
848
22
190
50
1,547
19
294
2,395
20
484
Category
Notes:
* adjusted for economic cut-off

Net Present Values

Before Australian Income Taxes
(M$US)
10%
15%
20%
4,692
4,267
3,898
9,665
8,129
6,900
5,905
14,852
12,821
11,166
9,803
Table D-3
Economic Summary
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit

Net Revenue
91.38
100.00
0.00
91.38
0.00
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00

2013/01
2013/01
2020/04

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
17,374
14,852
12,821
11,166
9,803
8,669
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.08
29.42
AT NPV
(M$US)
9,738
8,693
7,796
7,024
6,356
5,775
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.56
1.49
1.43
1.37
1.32
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
0.94
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.91
0.90
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
46.45
0.00
53.55

(M$US)
38,667
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.63
0
9,061
0
0
11,138
0
0.00
23.43
0.00
0.00
28.80
0.00
0.00
25.45
0.00
0.00
31.29
0.00
17,374
7,637
10,452
44.93
19.75
27.03
48.81
21.45
29.36
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
401
0
0
401
Comp Gross
401
0
0
401
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
10,472
666
11,138
Company
0
0
10,472
666
11,138
Company Net
356
0
0
0
356
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
M$US
0
263
340
239
133
72
39
8
0
1,094
M$US
0
876
1,134
798
444
239
130
27
0
3,647
M$US
72
1,634
2,256
1,816
1,307
975
797
203
0
9,061
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
5,186
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
10,472
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
666
0
666
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
-72
2,096
5,629
4,817
3,281
1,550
627
-554
0
17,374
M$US
0
0
495
3,318
2,289
1,046
451
38
0
7,637
M$US
-72
2,096
5,134
1,500
992
504
176
-592
0
9,738
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3
Production Detail
production detail 1
Date
# of Oil
Wells
Project
Oil
Rate
Proj
Oil
Volume
Company
Gross
Oil
Volume
Company
Net
Oil
Volume
Oil
Price
# of Gas
Wells
Project
Gas
Rate
Project
Gas
Volume
Company
Gross
Gas
Volume
Company
Net
Gas
Volume
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
0.0
2.0
4.8
6.0
5.9
5.0
4.4
4.0
0.0
---
Bbl/d
0
259
353
239
130
70
39
25
0
---
MSTB
0
95
129
87
47
26
14
3
0
401
MSTB
0
95
129
87
47
26
14
3
0
401
MSTB
0
84
114
78
42
23
13
3
0
356
$US/Bbl
112.10
106.34
101.67
105.53
109.15
110.75
112.37
114.02
0.00
---
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
---
mcf/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Date
Project
NGL
Rate
Project
NGL
Volume
Company
Gross
NGL
Volume
Company
Net
NGL
Volume
NGL
Price
Project
BOE
Rate
Project
BOE
Volume
Company
Gross
BOE
Volume
Company
Net
BOE
Volume
Total
Project
Sales
Revenue
Total
Company
Sales
Revenue
Blended
BOE
Price
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
Bbl/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
---
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$US/Bbl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
Bbl/d
0
259
353
239
130
70
39
25
0
---
MBOE
0
95
129
87
47
26
14
3
0
401
MBOE
0
95
129
87
47
26
14
3
0
401
MBOE
0
84
114
78
42
23
13
3
0
356
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
$US/Bbl
0.00
106.34
101.67
105.53
109.15
110.75
112.37
114.02
0.00
107.97
Gas
Price
MMSCF $US/MMBTU
0
5.00
0
5.07
0
5.15
0
5.23
0
5.31
0
5.39
0
5.47
0
5.55
0
0.00
0
---
Production Details 2
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3
Revenue & Burden Detail

Revenue and Burden Detail
All values are company interest unless specified otherwise
Date
Oil
Revenue
Gas
Revenue
NGL
Revenue
Total
Sales
Revenue
Fixed
Variable
Oil
Well Oil
Variable
Gas
Well
Gas
Processing
Oil
Transport
Total
OPEX
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
10,054
13,100
9,217
5,165
2,836
1,593
350
0
42,314
M$US
72
338
499
575
579
528
500
125
0
3,216
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
96
98
99
101
102
104
35
0
636
M$US
0
1,200
1,659
1,142
628
345
194
43
0
5,209
M$US
72
1,634
2,256
1,816
1,307
975
797
203
0
9,061
Before
Tax
Cash
Flow
PRRT
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash
Flow
M$US
-72
2,096
5,629
4,817
3,281
1,550
627
-554
0
17,374
M$US
0
0
0
1,647
1,366
649
266
38
0
3,965
M$US
0
0
495
1,670
923
397
185
0
0
3,672
M$US
-72
2,096
5,134
1,500
992
504
176
-592
0
9,738
Revenue and Burden Detail 2
Date
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalties
Queensland
Royalty
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
Carbon
Tax
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
263
340
239
133
72
39
8
0
1,094
M$US
0
876
1,134
798
444
239
130
27
0
3,647
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
5,186
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
10,472
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
666
0
666
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3A
Economic Summary
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit

Net Revenue
91.46
100.00
0.00
91.46
0.00
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00

2013/01
2013/01
2017/07

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
5,767
5,187
4,692
4,267
3,898
3,576
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.08
29.57
AT NPV
(M$US)
4,470
4,100
3,773
3,484
3,226
2,997
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.48
1.43
1.39
1.35
1.31
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
1.15
1.14
1.13
1.11
1.10
1.08
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
57.28
0.00
42.72

(M$US)
13,467
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.07
0
3,427
0
0
3,897
0
0.00
25.45
0.00
0.00
28.93
0.00
0.00
27.50
0.00
0.00
31.27
0.00
5,767
1,296
4,496
42.82
9.62
33.38
46.27
10.40
36.08

Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
140
0
0
140
Comp Gross
140
0
0
140
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
3,684
212
3,897
Company
0
0
3,684
212
3,897
Company Net
125
0
0
0
125
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
M$US
0
224
101
42
11
0
0
377
M$US
0
745
336
139
38
0
0
1,258
M$US
72
1,443
943
658
312
0
0
3,427
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
3,684
0
0
0
0
0
3,684
M$US
0
0
0
0
212
0
0
212
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
-72
2,474
2,582
859
-77
0
0
5,767
M$US
0
0
709
461
126
0
0
1,296
M$US
-72
2,474
1,873
397
-202
0
0
4,470
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3A
Production Detail
production detail 1
Date
# of Oil
Wells
Project
Oil
Rate
Proj
Oil
Volume
Company
Gross
Oil
Volume
Company
Net
Oil
Volume
Oil
Price
# of Gas
Wells
Project
Gas
Rate
Project
Gas
Volume
Company
Gross
Gas
Volume
Company
Net
Gas
Volume
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
0.0
1.8
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
---
Bbl/d
0
221
107
44
21
0
0
---
MSTB
0
81
39
16
5
0
0
140
MSTB
0
81
39
16
5
0
0
140
MSTB
0
71
35
14
4
0
0
125
$US/Bbl
112.10
106.34
101.67
105.53
109.15
0.00
0.00
---
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
---
mcf/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Date
Project
NGL
Rate
Project
NGL
Volume
Company
Gross
NGL
Volume
Company
Net
NGL
Volume
NGL
Price
Project
BOE
Rate
Project
BOE
Volume
Company
Gross
BOE
Volume
Company
Net
BOE
Volume
Total
Project
Sales
Revenue
Total
Company
Sales
Revenue
Blended
BOE
Price
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
Bbl/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
---
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$US/Bbl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
Bbl/d
0
221
107
44
21
0
0
---
MBOE
0
81
39
16
5
0
0
140
MBOE
0
81
39
16
5
0
0
140
MBOE
0
71
35
14
4
0
0
125
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
$US/Bbl
0.00
106.34
101.67
105.53
109.15
0.00
0.00
105.27
Gas
Price
MMSCF $US/MMBTU
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
---
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3A

Date
Oil
Revenue
Gas
Revenue
NGL
Revenue
Total
Sales
Revenue
Fixed
Variable
Oil
Well Oil
Variable
Gas
Well
Gas
Processing
Oil
Transport
Total
OPEX
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
8,570
3,962
1,697
497
0
0
14,725
M$US
72
325
343
348
193
0
0
1,280
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
96
98
99
59
0
0
352
M$US
0
1,023
502
210
60
0
0
1,795
M$US
72
1,443
943
658
312
0
0
3,427
PRRT
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash
Flow
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
709
461
126
0
0
1,296
M$US
-72
2,474
1,873
397
-202
0
0
4,470
Date
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalties
Queensland
Royalty
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash
Flow
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
Total
M$US
0
224
101
42
11
0
0
377
M$US
0
745
336
139
38
0
0
1,258
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
3,684
0
0
0
0
0
3,684
M$US
0
0
0
0
212
0
0
212
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
-72
2,474
2,582
859
-77
0
0
5,767
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3B
Economic Summary
Company Description
Model
Global Params
Escalation Date
Discount Date
Economic Limit

Net Revenue
91.34
100.00
0.00
91.34
0.00
Contr
NOC
Net Expl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net Dev
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
Net Opex
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
0.00

2013/01
2013/01
2020/04

Net Revenue
Less:
Bonuses & Fees
Operating Costs
Tariffs
Prod & Asset Taxes
Capital Costs
Less Income Tax
After Tax Cash Flow
Disc. Rate
(%)
0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
BT NPV
(M$US)
11,608
9,665
8,129
6,900
5,905
5,093
AT ROR (%)
AT Payout (yrs)
F&D ($US/BOE)
>800.00
1.17
29.34
AT NPV
(M$US)
5,267
4,593
4,023
3,540
3,129
2,778
BT PIR
(fraction)
1.60
1.53
1.46
1.39
1.33
1.27
AT PIR
(fraction)
0.82
0.82
0.81
0.80
0.79
0.77
Contr Take (%)

NOC Take (%)
Gov't Take (%)
40.99
0.00
59.01

(M$US)
25,200
(%)
100.00
($US/BOE)
108.93
0
5,634
0
0
7,241
0
0.00
22.36
0.00
0.00
28.73
0.00
0.00
24.35
0.00
0.00
31.30
0.00
11,608
6,341
5,957
46.06
25.16
23.64
50.18
27.41
25.75
Oil
Gas
NGL
Tax
Total
(MSTB)
(MMSCF)
(MSTB)
(MSTB)
(MBOE)
Project
261
0
0
261
Comp Gross
261
0
0
261
Acquisition
Exploration
Development
Abandonment
Total
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
(M$US)
Project
0
6,787
454
7,241
Company
0
0
6,787
454
7,241
Company Net
231
0
0
0
231
Economic Summary
Date
Company
Sales
Revenue
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalty
Queensland
Royalty
Operating
Costs
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
M$US
0
39
239
198
122
72
39
8
0
717
M$US
0
131
798
659
406
239
130
27
0
2,389
M$US
0
190
1,314
1,159
996
975
797
203
0
5,634
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
1,501
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
6,787
M$US
0
0
0
0
-212
0
0
666
0
454
Peep 2010.1
Carbon
Tax
Before
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
PRRT
&
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash Flow
Total
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
-378
3,047
3,958
3,357
1,550
627
-554
0
11,608
M$US
0
0
-214
2,856
2,163
1,046
451
38
0
6,341
M$US
0
-378
3,260
1,102
1,194
504
176
-592
0
5,267
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3B
Production Detail
production detail 1
Date
# of Oil
Wells
Project
Oil
Rate
Proj
Oil
Volume
Company
Gross
Oil
Volume
Company
Net
Oil
Volume
Oil
Price
# of Gas
Wells
Project
Gas
Rate
Project
Gas
Volume
Company
Gross
Gas
Volume
Company
Net
Gas
Volume
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
0.0
0.3
2.8
4.0
4.8
5.0
4.4
4.0
0.0
---
Bbl/d
0
38
246
195
117
70
39
25
0
---
MSTB
0
14
90
71
43
26
14
3
0
261
MSTB
0
14
90
71
43
26
14
3
0
261
MSTB
0
12
80
63
38
23
13
3
0
231
$US/Bbl
0.00
106.34
101.67
105.53
109.15
110.75
112.37
114.02
0.00
---
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
---
mcf/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MMSCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Date
Project
NGL
Rate
Project
NGL
Volume
Company
Gross
NGL
Volume
Company
Net
NGL
Volume
NGL
Price
Project
BOE
Rate
Project
BOE
Volume
Company
Gross
BOE
Volume
Company
Net
BOE
Volume
Total
Project
Sales
Revenue
Total
Company
Sales
Revenue
Blended
BOE
Price
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
Bbl/d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
---
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MSTB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$US/Bbl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
Bbl/d
0
38
246
195
117
70
39
25
0
---
MBOE
0
14
90
71
43
26
14
3
0
261
MBOE
0
14
90
71
43
26
14
3
0
261
MBOE
0
12
80
63
38
23
13
3
0
231
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
$US/Bbl
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
90.96
110.75
112.37
114.02
0.00
69.42
Gas
Price
MMSCF $US/MMBTU
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
---
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
Table D-3B

Date
Oil
Revenue
Gas
Revenue
NGL
Revenue
Total
Sales
Revenue
Fixed
Variable
Oil
Well Oil
Variable
Gas
Well
Gas
Processing
Oil
Transport
Total
OPEX
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
1,484
9,138
7,520
4,668
2,836
1,593
350
0
27,589
M$US
0
13
156
227
386
528
500
125
0
1,936
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
0
0
0
42
102
104
35
0
283
M$US
0
177
1,157
931
567
345
194
43
0
3,414
M$US
0
190
1,314
1,159
996
975
797
203
0
5,634
Before
Tax
Cash
Flow
PRRT
Income
Tax
After
Tax
Cash
Flow
M$US
0
-378
3,047
3,958
3,357
1,550
627
-554
0
11,608
M$US
0
0
0
1,647
1,366
649
266
38
0
3,965
M$US
0
0
-214
1,209
798
397
185
0
0
2,375
M$US
0
-378
3,260
1,102
1,194
504
176
-592
0
5,267
Date
Surat
Over
Riding
Royalties
Queensland
Royalty
Tariffs
Capital
Aband
Carbon
Tax
2013(12)
2014(12)
2015(12)
2016(12)
2017(12)
2018(12)
2019(12)
2020(12)
2021(12)
Total
M$US
0
39
239
198
122
72
39
8
0
717
M$US
0
131
798
659
406
239
130
27
0
2,389
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
M$US
0
1,501
3,740
1,547
0
0
0
0
0
6,787
M$US
0
0
0
0
-212
0
0
666
0
454
M$US
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Peep 2010.1
05/08/2013 15:05
References Page 1
References
Australia Government Site, Geoscience Australia, www.ga.gov.au
Baker J.C., Price P.L. and Golding S.D. (1991) Coal as a source rock for hydrocarbon gas in
the Aldebaran Sandstone, Denison Trough, Bowen Basin - geochemical evidence. In:
Queensland Coal Symposium (Edited by Griffiths P.). The Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy Southern Queensland Branch, 57-61.
Dickins, J.W. and Malone E.J. (1973) Geology of the Bowen Basin, Queensland, Department
of Mineral and Energy, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Bulletin 130,
Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.
Exon N.F. (1976) Geology of the Surat Basin in Queensland, Department of National
Resources, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Bulletin 166, Australian
Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.
Fielding C.R., Falkner A.J., Kassan J., and Draper J.J. (1990) Permian and Triassic
depositional systems in the Bowen Basin. Proceedings of the Bowen basin symposium,
Mackay, 1990. Geological Society of Australia, Queensland Division, 21-5.
Hawkins P.J., Jackson K.S., and Horvath Z. (1992) Regional geology, petroleum geology,
and hydrocarbon potential of the southern Taroom Trough, Bowen Basin, Queensland.
Queensland Geology 3, 1-42.
Jackson K.S, Hawkins P.J. and Bennett A.J.R. (1980). Regional facies and geochemical
evaluation of the southern Denison Trough, Queensland. The APEA Journal 20, 143-58.
Summons Roger E., Zumberge John E., Boreham Christopher J., Bradshaw Marita T., Brown
Stephen W., Edwards Dianne S., Hope Janet M. and Johns Natalie (2002), Geoscience
Australia Canberra Geomark Research Houston, The Oils Of Eastern Australia Petroleum
Geochemistry And Correlation Volumes 1 and 2, Bowen-Surat And Cooper-Eromanga
Basins.
Thomas B.N. and Reiser R.F. (1968) The Geology of the Surat 1:250,000 Sheet Area,
Department of National Resources, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geological Survey of
Queensland, Record 1968/56.
4325.70684.IB
J:\Chelsea Oil and Gas\Report\Chelsea Summary.doc
References Page 2
Thomas B.M., Osborne D.G. and Wright A.J. (1982) Hydrocarbon habitat of the
Bowen/Surat Basin. The APEA Journal 22, 213-26.
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, www.en.wikipedia.org
4325.70684.IB.smr
Figure 1
Summons et al (2002)
Map of Eastern Australia Showing Locations of the

Bowen and Surat Basins Together with Adjacent Sedimentary Basins
70684
Figure 2
Client Area
Summons et al (2002)
Location Map Showing the Geographic Distribution of Oil and Gas in the
Bowen and Surat Basins
70684
PL 280
PL 18
http://www.ga.gov.au/oceans/ea_Surat.jsp
70684
Figure 3
PL 18 and PL280 (Surat Assets) Location Map
Figure 4
Primary Reservoir Target
Source
http://www.bountyoil.com/
Bowen/Surat Basin Stratigraphic Column

70684
Block PL18
Area = 185.5 KM2
Block PL280
Area = 90.6 KM2
Seismic Basemap with Wells, Block Areas and Fault Polygons
Figure 5
70684
Block PL280
Block PL18
Figure 6
Seismic Basemap with Wells and Fault Polygons

70684
Block PL280
Block PL18
70684
Figure 7
Fault Framework From Interpreted Fault Sticks
Time Structure Map of Showgrounds
Figure 8
70684
Thomby Creek Field
McWhirter Field
McGregor Field
Yellowbank Creek North
Beardmore Field
Yellowbank Creek
Depth Structure Map of Showgrounds
Figure 9
70684
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-SD87-4
Figure 10
70684
NNE
SSW
Evergreen
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Showgrounds
Basement
Basement
Figure 11
Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-86B-4

70684
SSW
NNE
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Thomby Creek Field Seismic Line-SD87-17A
Figure 12
70684
SE
NW
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
McWhirter Field Seismic Line-86B-24
Figure 13
70684
NW
SE
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Figure 14
70684
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Figure 15
70684
Yellowbank Creek North-1
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Yellowbank Creek North Field Seismic Line-85B-5
Figure 16
70684
Yellowbank Creek-1
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Yellowbank Creek 1 Well - Seismic Line-78B-29
Figure 17
70684
E
Yellowbank Creek-3
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Figure 18
70684
Evergreen
Showgrounds
Basement
Figure 19
70684
Beardmore Field Seismic Line-81T-21
Figure 20
70684
Beardmore Southwest-1A
Beardmore Field Seismic Line-85-S2
Figure 21
70684
3D Perspective View of Showgrounds Depth Structure Map
Figure 22
70684
Figure 23
3D Perspective View of Base of Showgrounds Depth Structure Map

70684
Figure 24
Well Thomby Creek 2: Cementation Factor from Core Data

70684
Showgrounds SST
Figure 25
Thomby Creek-1 Well Logs

70684
Figure 26
Thomby Creek
McWhirter
Yelowbank
Creek North
Yellowbank
Creek
Beardmore
Top Showgrounds Sandstone Formation Depth Structure Map

70684
Probable
Possible
2C
3C
Low
Best
High
PL18
OWC
70684
Figure 27
Thomby Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment
Figure 28
McWhirter North
ODT
Probable
West
Possible
East
2C
3C
Low
Best
High
PL280/PL18
McWhirter South
Spill Point
McWhirter Field Volume Areas Assignment

70684
Figure 29
ODT
Spill Point
Low
Best
High
Yellowbank Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment

70684
Figure 30
ODT
Low
Best
High
Spill Point
PL280/PL18
Beardmore Field Volume Areas Assignment

70684
Figure 31
697800
698000
698200
698400
698600
698800
699000
6932400
6932400
6932600
6932600
6932800
6932800
6933000
6933000
697600
6932200
6932200
73
-15
MCGREGOR 1
6932000
6932000
3
57
-1
6931800
6931800
-1
57
3
6931600
OWC
6931600
YELLOWBANK CREEK NORTH 1
6931000
6931000
6931200
6931200
6931400
6931400
73
-15
YELLOWBANK CREEK 1
6930800
6930800
Possible
6930600
100
200
300
400
500m
1:10240
697600
697800
698000
698200
698400
698600
698800
699000
Yellowbank Creek North Field Volume Areas Assignment

70684
6930400
6930400
6930600
-15
7
Figure 32
697200
697400
697600
697800
698000
698200
698400
698600
698800
699000
6934200
6933600
6933600
6933800
6933800
-15
80
6934000
6934000
-1585
6934200
697000
85 0
-15 -158
6933400
-1580
-1585
6933200
6932600
6932600
6932800
6932800
-15
85
6933000
6933000
-1580
6933200
6933400
-1585
15
85
-158
5
6932000
6931600
6931400
6931400
-1580
6931600
Low
High
100
200
300
400
500m
-1585
1:12824
697200
697400
697600
-1
58
6931000
6931000
697000
6931200
6931200
-1585
Best
85
YELLOWBANK CREEK 1
697800
698000
698200
698400
698600
698800
McGregor Field Volume Areas Assignment

70684
6931800
6931800
6932000
YELLOWBANK CREEK NORT H 1
-158
0
6932400
-1580
6932200
MCGREGOR 1
80
-15 85
-15
6932200
6932400
-15
85
699000
Appendix A Page 1
Appendix A Definitions
The following definitions form the basis of our classification of reserves and values
presented in this report. They have been prepared by the Standing Committee on Reserves
Definitions of the Petroleum Society of the CIM (CIM), incorporated in the Society of
Petroleum Evaluation Engineers (SPEE) Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook
(COGE Handbook) and specified by National Instrument 51-101 (NI 51-101).
Reserves are estimated remaining quantities of oil and natural gas and related substances
anticipated to be recoverable from known accumulations, from a given date forward, based
on:
analysis of drilling, geological, geophysical and engineering data;
the use of established technology;
specified economic conditions, which are generally accepted as being reasonable,

and shall be disclosed; and
a remaining reserve life of 50 years.
Reserves are classified according to the degree of certainty associated with the estimates.
1. Proved Reserves
Proved reserves are those reserves that can be estimated with a high degree of certainty
to be recoverable. It is likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed
the estimated proved reserves.
2. Probable Reserves
Probable reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered
than proved reserves. It is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered
will be greater or less than the sum of the estimated proved plus probable reserves.
3. Possible Reserves
Possible reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than
probable reserves. It is unlikely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will
exceed the sum of the estimated proved plus probable plus possible reserves. Possible
reserves have not been considered in this report.
4325.70684.IB.smr
J:\Chelsea Oil & Gas 70684\Report\Appendices\Appendix A - Definitions.doc
Appendix A Page 2
Other criteria that must also be met for the categorization of reserves are provided in
Section 5.5 of the COGE Handbook.
Each of the reserves categories (proved, probable, and possible) may be divided into
developed or undeveloped categories.
4. Developed Reserves
Developed reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered from existing
wells and installed facilities or, if facilities have not been installed, that would involve a
low expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of drilling a well) to put the reserves
on production. The developed category may be subdivided into producing and nonproducing.
5. Developed Producing Reserves
Developed producing reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered
from completion intervals open at the time of the estimate. These reserves may be
currently producing or, if shut in, they must have previously been on production, and
the date of resumption of production must be known with reasonable certainty.
6. Developed Non-Producing Reserves
Developed non-producing reserves are those reserves that either have not been on
production, or have previously been on production, but are shut in, and the date of
resumption of production is unknown.
7. Undeveloped Reserves
Undeveloped reserves are those reserves expected to be recovered from known
accumulations where a significant expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of
drilling a well) is required to render them capable of production. They must fully meet
the requirements of the reserves classification (proved, probable, possible) to which
they are assigned.
In multi-well pools, it may be appropriate to allocate total pool reserves between the
developed and undeveloped categories or to subdivide the developed reserves for the
pool between developed producing and developed non-producing. This allocation should
be based on the estimators assessment as to the reserves that will be recovered from
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix A Page 3
specific wells, facilities, and completion intervals in the pool and their respective
development and production status.
8. Levels of Certainty for Reported Reserves
The qualitative certainty levels contained in the definitions in Sections 1, 2 and 3 are
applicable to individual reserves entities, which refers to the lowest level at which
reserves estimates are made, and to reported reserves, which refers to the highest level
sum of individual entity estimates for which reserve estimates are made.
Reported total reserves estimated by deterministic or probabilistic methods, whether
comprised of a single reserves entity or an aggregate estimate for multiple entities,
should target the following levels of certainty under a specific set of economic
conditions:
a.
There is a 90% probability that at least the estimated proved reserves will be
recovered.
b.
There is a 50% probability that at least the sum of the estimated proved reserves
plus probable reserves will be recovered.
c.
There is a 10% probability that at least the sum of the estimated proved reserves
plus probable reserves plus possible reserves will be recovered.
A quantitative measure of the probability associated with a reserves estimate is

generated only when a probabilistic estimate is conducted. The majority of reserves
estimates will be performed using deterministic methods that do not provide a
quantitative measure of probability. In principle, there should be no difference between
estimates prepared using probabilistic or deterministic methods.
Additional clarification of certainty levels associated with reserves estimates and the
effect of aggregation is provided in Section 5.5.3 of the COGE Handbook. Whether
deterministic or probabilistic methods are used, evaluators are expressing their
professional judgement as to what are reasonable estimates.
9.
Remaining Recoverable Reserves are the total remaining recoverable reserves

associated with the acreage in which the Company has an interest.
10. Company Gross Reserves are the Companys working interest share of the remaining
reserves, before deduction of any royalties.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix A Page 4
11. Company Net Reserves are the gross remaining reserves of the properties in which
the Company has an interest, less all Crown, freehold, and overriding royalties and
interests owned by others.
12. Net Production Revenue is income derived from the sale of net reserves of oil, nonassociated and associated gas, and gas by-products, less all capital and operating costs.
13. Fair Market Value is defined as the price at which a purchaser seeking an economic
and commercial return on investment would be willing to buy, and a vendor would be
willing to sell, where neither is under compulsion to buy or sell and both are competent
and have reasonable knowledge of the facts.
14. Barrels of Oil Equivalent (BOE) Reserves BOE is the sum of the oil reserves, plus
the gas reserves divided by a factor of 6, plus the natural gas liquid reserves, all
expressed in barrels or thousands of barrels. Equivalent reserves can also be expressed
in thousands of cubic feet of gas equivalent (McfGE) using a conversion ratio of 1 bbl:6
Mcf.
15. Oil (or Crude Oil) a mixture consisting mainly of pentanes and heavier hydrocarbons
that exists in the liquid phase in reservoirs and remains liquid at atmospheric pressure
and temperature. Crude oil may contain small amounts of sulphur and other nonhydrocarbons, but does not include liquids obtained from the processing of natural gas.
16. Gas (or Natural Gas) a mixture of lighter hydrocarbons that exist either in the
gaseous phase or in solution in crude oil in reservoirs, but are gaseous at atmospheric
conditions. Natural gas may contain sulphur or other non-hydrocarbon compounds.
17. Non-Associated Gas an accumulation of natural gas in a reservoir where there is no
crude oil.
18. Associated Gas the gas cap overlying a crude oil accumulation in a reservoir.
19. Solution Gas gas dissolved in crude oil.
20. Natural Gas Liquids those hydrocarbon components that can be removed from
natural gas as liquids including, but not limited to, ethane, propane, butanes, pentanes
plus, condensate, and small quantities of non-hydrocarbons.
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix B Page 1
Appendix B Prices (As of March 31, 2013)

Sproules short-term outlook for oil and gas prices adopts the NYMEX futures market for the
forecast period ending March 31, 2016. The forecast used in this evaluation was derived
as of March 31, 2013, and reflects the arithmetic average of the futures market at the
close of trading each day, for the month prior to the Termination of Trading date for an
April contract. The oil price forecasts are based on the NYMEX Division light, sweet (lowsulphur) crude oil futures contract, which specifies the West Texas Intermediate crude as a
deliverable, and the gas price forecasts are based on the NYMEX Division Henry Hub natural
gas futures contract.
The NYMEX oil and gas futures prices are the foundation of Sproules energy pricing models
in the early years. This data is combined with Sproules assumptions respecting long-term
prices, inflation rates, and exchange rates, together with estimates of transportation costs
and prices of competing fuels, to forecast wellhead and plantgate prices for Canadian oil,
natural gas, and natural gas by-product production. The following paragraphs briefly
describe some of the key considerations included in Sproules long-term outlook for oil and
natural gas price forecasts.
Oil Prices
In the long term, the price of oil will be governed by supply and demand, and the degree
that OPEC is able to manage supply will be a major determinant in establishing oil prices for
the next 10 years. A strong demand for crude oil, instability in the Middle East, and the
increasing cost of exploration and development has served to increase the price of crude oil
throughout the world. In recognition of these factors, Sproule's long-term forecast has been
set at $90.00 US per barrel (2013 dollars).
The oil price forecasts set out in Table S-2 are based on a forecast of prices for West Texas
Intermediate crude at Cushing, Oklahoma. The price of this marker crude is expected to
directly reflect world oil prices over the forecast period. The UK Brent prices were forecast
based on historical pricing relationships to WTI. The actual wellhead price of oil will vary
with the quality of the crude and the cost of the transportation from the wellhead to the
trading hub.
4325.70684.IB.smr
J:\Chelsea Oil & Gas 70684\Report\Appendices\Appendix B - Prices (March 31, 2013).doc
Appendix C Page 1
Appendix C Abbreviations, Units and Conversion Factors
This appendix contains a list of abbreviations found in Sproule reports, a table comparing
Imperial and Metric units, and conversion tables used to prepare this report.
Abbreviations
AFE
authority for expenditure
AOF
absolute open flow
APO
after pay out
Bg
gas formation volume factor
Bo
oil formation volume factor
bopd
barrels of oil per day
bfpd
barrels of fluid per day
BPO
before pay out
BS&W
basic sediment and water
BTU
British thermal unit
bwpd
barrels of water per day
CF
casing flange
CGR
condensate gas ratio
D&A
dry and abandoned
DCQ
daily contract quantity
DSU
drilling spacing unit
DST
drill stem test
EOR
enhanced oil recovery
EPSA
exploration and production sharing agreement
FVF
formation volume factor
GOR
gas-oil ratio
GORR
gross overriding royalty
GWC
gas-water-contact
HCPV
hydrocarbon pore volume
ID
inside diameter
IOR
improved oil recovery
IPR
inflow performance relationship
IRR
internal rate of return
permeability
KB
kelly bushing
LKH
lowest known hydrocarbons
LNG
liquefied natural gas
4325.70684.IB.smr
J:\Chelsea Oil & Gas 70684\Report\Appendices\Appendix C -International Abbrev and Conv Factors.doc
Appendix C Page 2
LPG
liquefied petroleum gas
md
millidarcies
MDT
modular formation dynamics tester
MPR
maximum permissive rate
MRL
maximum rate limitation
NGL
natural gas liquids
NORR
net overriding royalty
NPI
net profits interest
NPV
net present value
OD
outside diameter
OGIP
original gas in place
OOIP
original oil in place
ORRI
overriding royalty interest
OWC
oil-water-contact
P1
proved
P2
probable
P3
possible
P&NG
petroleum and natural gas
PI
productivity index
ppm
parts per million
PSU
production spacing unit
PSA
production sharing agreement
PSC
production sharing contract
PVT
pressure-volume-temperature
RFT
repeat formation tester
RT
rotary table
SCAL
special core analysis
SS
subsea
TVD
true vertical depth
WGR
water gas ratio
WI
working interest
WOR
water oil ratio
2D
two-dimensional
3D
three-dimensional
4D
four-dimensional
1P
proved
2P
3P
proved plus probable

proved plus probable plus possible
API
degrees API (American Petroleum Institute)
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix C Page 3
Imperial and Metric Units

Imperial Units
M (103)
one thousand
MM (106)
Million
B (10 )
12
T (10 )
Metric Units
Prefixes
one billion
k (103)
one thousand
M (106)
million
12
one billion
18
E (10 )
one trillion
G (109)
one milliard
T (10 )
one trillion
in.
Inches
cm
centimetres
ft
Feet
metres
mi
Mile
km
ft
square feet
ac
Acres
3
cf or ft
cubic feet
scf
Standard cubic feet
gal
Gallons
Mcf
Thousand cubic feet
Mcfpd
Thousand cubic feet per day
MMcf
million cubic feet
MMcfpd
million cubic feet per day
Bcf
billion cubic feet (109)
bbl
Barrels
Mbbl
Thousand barrels
stb
stock tank barrel
bbl/d
barrels per day
bbl/mo
barrels per month
Btu
British thermal units
Length
Area
kilometres
square metres
ha
Volume
hectares
cubic metres
litres
m3
cubic metre
stm3
stock tank cubic metres
m /d
Energy
cubic metre per day
joules
3
megajoules per cubic metre (106)
TJ/d
terajoule per day (1012)
gram
oz
ounce
lb
pounds
kg
kilograms
ton
ton
tonne
lt
long tons
Mlt
thousand long tons
psi
pounds per square inch
Pa
pascals
kPa
kilopascals (103)
degrees Celsius
Kelvin
k$
thousand dollars
psia
pounds per square inch absolute
psig
pounds per square inch gauge
degrees Fahrenheit
M$
Mass
MJ/m
Pressure
Temperature
degrees Rankine
thousand dollars
Dollars
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix C Page 4
Imperial and Metric Units (Contd)

Imperial Units
sec
second
min
Metric Units
Time
second
minute
min
minute
hr
hour
hour
day
day
day
wk
week
week
mo
month
month
yr
year
annum
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix C Page 5
Conversion Tables
Conversion Factors Metric to Imperial
cubic metres (m3) (@ 15C)
x 6.29010
= barrels (bbl) (@ 60F), water
x 6.3300
= bbl (@ 60F), Ethane
m (@ 15C)
x 6.30001
= bbl (@ 60F), Propane
m3 (@ 15C)
x 6.29683
= bbl (@ 60F), Butanes
m3 (@ 15C)
x 6.29287
= bbl (@ 60F), oil, Pentanes Plus
x 0.0354937
= thousands of cubic feet (Mcf) (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
1,000 cubic metres (10 m ) (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
x 35.49373
= Mcf (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
hectares (ha)
x 2.4710541
= acres
1,000 square metres (103m2)
x 0.2471054
= acres
10,000 cubic metres (ha.m)
x 8.107133
= acre feet (ac-ft)
m /10 m (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15 C)
x 0.0437809
= Mcf/Ac.ft. (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
joules (j)
x 0.000948213
= Btu
megajoules per cubic metre (MJ/m3) (@ 101.325 kPaa,
x 26.714952
= British thermal units per standard cubic foot (Btu/scf)
m (@ 15C)
m (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)

3
15C)
(@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
dollars per gigajoule ($/GJ)
x 1.054615
= $/Mcf (1,000 Btu gas)
metres (m)
x 3.28084
= feet (ft)
kilometres (km)
x 0.6213712
= miles (mi)
dollars per 1,000 cubic metres ($/103m3)
x 0.0288951
= dollars per thousand cubic feet ($/Mcf) (@ 15.025 psia) B.C.
x 0.02817399
= $/Mcf (@ 14.65 psia) Alta.
x 0.158910
= dollars per barrel ($/bbl)
($/10 m )
3
dollars per cubic metre ($/m )

3
gas/oil ratio (GOR) (m /m )
x 5.640309
= GOR (scf/bbl)
kilowatts (kW)
x 1.341022
= horsepower
kilopascals (kPa)
x 0.145038
= psi
tonnes (t)
x 0.9842064
= long tons (LT)
kilograms (kg)
x 2.204624
= pounds (lb)
litres (L)
x 0.2199692
= gallons (Imperial)
x 0.264172
= gallons (U.S.)
litres (L)
3
cubic metres per million cubic metres (m /10 m ) (C 3 )
x 0.177496
= barrels per million cubic feet (bbl/MMcf) (@ 14.65 psia)
x 0.1774069
= bbl/MMcf (@ 14.65 psia)
m /10 m (C 5+ )
x 0.1772953
= bbl/MMcf (@ 14.65 psia)
tonnes per million cubic metres (t/106m3) (sulphur)
x 0.0277290
= LT/MMcf (@ 14.65 psia)
millilitres per cubic meter (mL/m3) (C 5+ )
x 0.0061974
= gallons (Imperial) per thousand cubic feet (gal (Imp)/Mcf)
(mL/m ) (C 5+ )
x 0.0074428
= gallons (U.S.) per thousand cubic feet (gal (U.S.)/Mcf)
Kelvin (K)
x 1.8
= degrees Rankine (R)
millipascal seconds (mPa.s)
x 1.0
= centipoise
m /10 m (C 4 )
4325.70684.IB.smr
Appendix C Page 6
Conversion Tables (Contd)

Conversion Factors Imperial to Metric
barrels (bbl) (@ 60F)
x 0.15898
= cubic metres (m3) (@ 15C), water
bbl (@ 60F)
x 0.15798
= m3 (@ 15C), Ethane
bbl (@ 60F)
x 0.15873
= m3 (@ 15C), Propane
bbl (@ 60F)
x 0.15881
= m3 (@ 15C), Butanes
bbl (@ 60F)
x 0.15891
= m3 (@ 15C), oil, Pentanes Plus
thousands of cubic feet (Mcf) (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
x 28.17399
= m3 (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
Mcf (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
x .02817399
= 1,000 cubic metres (103m3) (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
acres
x 0.4046856
= hectares (ha)
acres
x 4.046856
= 1,000 square metres (103m2)
acre feet (ac-ft)
x 0.123348
= 10,000 cubic metres (104m3) (ha.m)
Mcf/ac-ft (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
x 22.841028
= 103m3/m3 (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
Btu
x 1054.615
= joules (J)
British thermal units per standard cubic foot (Btu/Scf) (@ 14.65 psia, 60F)
x .03743222
= megajoules per cubic metre (MJ/m3) (@ 101.325 kPaa,
$/Mcf (1,000 Btu gas)
x 0.9482133
= dollars per gigajoule ($/GJ)
$/Mcf (@ 14.65 psia, 60F) Alta.
x 35.49373
= $/103m3 (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
$/Mcf (@ 15.025 psia, 60F), B.C.
x 34.607860
= $/103m3 (@ 101.325 kPaa, 15C)
feet (ft)
x 0.3048
= metres (m)
miles (mi)
x 1.609344
= kilometres (km)
$/bbl
x 6.29287
= $/m3 (average for 30-50 API)
GOR (scf/bbl)
x 0.177295
= gas/oil ratio (GOR) (m3/m3)
horsepower
x 0.7456999
= kilowatts (kW)
psi
x 6.894757
= kilopascals (kPa)
long tons (LT)
x 1.016047
= tonnes (t)
pounds (lb)
x 0.453592
= kilograms (kg)
gallons (Imperial)
x 4.54609
= litres (L) (.001 m3)
gallons (U.S.)
x 3.785412
= litres (L) (.001 m3)
barrels per million cubic feet (bbl/MMcf) (@ 14.65 psia) (C 3 )
x 5.6339198
= cubic metres per million cubic metres (m3/106m3)
bbl/MMcf (C 4 )
x 5.6367593
= (m3/106m3)
bbl/MMcf (C 5+ )
x 5.6403087
= (m3/106m3)
LT/MMcf (sulphur)
x 36.063298
= tonnes per million cubic metres (t/106m3)
gallons (Imperial) per thousand cubic feet (gal (Imp)/Mcf) (C 5+ )
x 161.3577
= millilitres per cubic meter (mL/m3)
gallons (U.S.) per thousand cubic feet (gal (U.S.)/Mcf) (C 5+ )
x 134.3584
= (mL/m3)
degrees Rankine (R)
x 0.555556
= Kelvin (K)
centipoises
x 1.0
= millipascal seconds (mPa.s)
4325.70684.IB.smr
15C)

Chelsea Surat Reserves Report 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chelsea Surat Reserves Report 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EVALUATION OF THE OIL RESERVES

AND ASSESMENT OF THE

Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd. (5 copies)

Chelsea Oil and Gas Ltd.

Barrie F. Jose, P.Geoph., Project Leader

Table of Contents Page 1

Summary of the Evaluation of the Oil Reserves of

Summary of the Evaluation of the Oil Reserves of

Summary of the Oil Contingent Resources of

Summary of the Oil Prospective Resources of

Summary of Selected Price Forecasts

Table of Contents Page 2

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

PL 18 and PL 280 (Surat Assets) Location Map

Daily Company Gross Oil Production Forecast

Annual Cash Flow (After Income Taxes)

Net Present Values (After Income Taxes)

Table of Contents Page 3

10. Operating and Capital Costs

Volumetric Reservoir Data and Estimates of Oil Technically

Resources of Chelsea Oil Australia PTY Ltd in Queensland,

Resources of Chelsea Oil Australia PTY Ltd in Queensland,

Estimates of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values of

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Summary of Oil Reserves and Net Present Values

Table of Contents Page 4

Map of Eastern Australia Showing Locations of the

Location Map Showing the Geographic Distribution of Oil and

PL 18 and PL 280 (Surat Assets) Location Map

Bowen/Surat Basin Stratigraphic Column

Seismic Basemap with Wells, Block Areas and Fault Polygons

Seismic Basemap with Wells and Fault Polygons

Fault Framework from Interpreted Fault Sticks

Time Structure Map of Showgrounds

Depth Structure Map of Showgrounds

Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-SD87-4

Thomby Creek Field - Seismic Line-86B-4

Thomby Creek Field Seismic Line-SD87-17A

McWhirter Field Seismic Line-86B-24

McGregor Field Seismic Line-86B-23

McGregor Field Seismic Line-81B-3

Yellowbank Creek North Field Seismic Line-85B-5

Yellowbank Creek Field Seismic Line-78B-29

Table of Contents Page 5

Yellowbank Creek Field Seismic Line-85B-6

Yellowbank Creek Field Seismic Line-81B-2

Beardmore Field Seismic Line-81T-21

Beardmore Field Seismic Line-85-S2

3D Perspective View of Showgrounds Depth Structure Map

3D Perspective View of Base of Showgrounds Depth Structure

Well Thomby Creek 2: Cementation Factor from Core Data

Thomby Creek-1 Well Logs

Top Showgrounds Sandstone Formation Depth Structure Map

Thomby Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment

McWhirter Field Volume Areas Assignment

Yellowbank Creek Field Volume Areas Assignment

Beardmore Field Volume Areas Assignment

Yellowbank Creek North Field Volume Areas Assignment

McGregor Field Volume Areas Assignment

Abbreviations, Units and Conversion Factors

Historical Data, Interests and Burdens