Masela PSC

Pre-TCM Workshop

Introduction

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

1
 Agenda for SSD Presentation

1. Update of Reserves Evaluation since POD 2008

 Introduction (5mins)
 Stratigraphy (10mins)
 Geophysics (15mins)
 Facies Study (15mins)
 Petrophysics (10mins)
 SCAL,PVT (15mins)
 Deterministic GIIP (5mins)
 Geological Modeling and GIIPs (30mins)
 Development Scenario and Reservoir Simulation (20mins)

2. Delineation Strategy and Work Schedule

2
1. Introduction
 Study schedule since POD 2008
 Evaluation Results

3
2011 Depth Map @Top Plover Fm. (MH5000)

FWL (-3894mSS)
Abadi-5
North

Abadi-4ST
Abadi-7ST
Abadi-2ST
Abadi-6

West Abadi-1

South
Abadi-3

SouthWest

4
 Milestone of Subsurface Evaluation
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

9th Contract Year 10th Contract Year 11th Contract Year 12th Contract Year 13th Contract Year

Contract Condition
End of Exploration Period

Project Milestone
Pre-POD POD-1 POD-1 POD-1
full-approval Rev.2011 WPB
submitted submitted approval in principle

Delineation Activities
LEMIGAS Del. FS
Delineation Strategy DG&MN Del. FS
Reserves Classification Ses
Delinea

3D Seismic Acquisition (2012)

2nd Appraisal Drilling (2007-2008) A-4 A-5 A-7 A-6

Delineation Drilling (2012-2013)

Berkat-1 (2013)

Subsurface Studies
Fast-track Subsurface Eval. Post-Drill Comprehensive Subsurface Evaluation
Geophysical Study 3D Seis Horizon/Fault Interpretation
Depth Conversion Study

HR Inversion Jason Jason Inversion Re-Inversion Study (HR, Jason)

Quick-look Inversion
New High-Spec 3D Seismic 3D Seismic Feasibility Study
Geological Study
Petrophysics Petrophysics (ELAN) Inhou
Quick-look Petrophysics Well by Well (ELAN)
Stratigraphy Stratigraphic Analysis, Interpretation
Facies Study Facies Studies (Palynofacies Analysis, Depositional Facies, Facies Classification) Sedimentological Study
Aquifer Study Diagenesis Study Aquife
Geological Model Geological Modeling Geo Model Update
RE/PE Study Reservoir Simulation Res. Sim. Update
Equation of State(PVT)
Pressure Transient Analysis
SCAL / Relative Permeability Additional SCAL
Sand Production / Flow Assureance / OLGA model / Well Interface / Technical Interface
Other Study Berkat Prospect Evaluation

Long Term Development Plan LTDP

Reserves Certification DG&MN

LEMIGAS

5
 Study Results (GIIPs and Reserves)

2P_GIIP 1P_GIIP 2P_Res 1P_Res 1P90_Res

INPEX_2011 (Probabilistic) 29.01 17.30 18.86 10.38 9.34
INPEX_2011 (Deterministic) 28.99 18.13 18.84 10.88 9.79
INPEX_2008POD 27.18 15.75 16.31 9.45 8.51

INPEX_2011(Probabilistic)
D&M_2008
INPEX2011 (Deterministic)
INPEX_2008POD
LEMIGAS_2008
Zone A Zone D
North
A-5
A-4 A-7
A-6 A-2
West
A-1
Zone B SW
A-3
South
Zone E
(1997 SPE/WPC definition) (2001 SPE/WPC/SPEE def.)

P1/C1 Area P2/C2 Area P3/C3 Area

(2007 SPE-PRMS definition)

6
 Study Results (Geo Model GIIP Sensitivity Check)
Base case: 26.15 TCF Base case: 3.99 TCF

Base case: 30.14 TCF Base case: 33.60 TCF

Reservoir property uncertainties are critical

⇒ Need high-spec 3D seismic data & well data
7
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

2.1 Stratigraphy (Well Correlation)

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

1
 Geological Column
AGE Lithology & TECTONIC EVENT Seismic Marker
in Ma CHRONOSTATIGRAPHY Formation Name (modified from
Longley et al.(2002))
0 Pleistocene
Barracouta Fm
NEOGENE Q
PIACENZIAN
Pliocene ZANCLEAN
MESSINIAN MH 1000

Syn -tectonic
L
RORTONIAN
Peak

sediments
SERRAVALLIAN

M
Miocene subsidence
LANGHIAN
BURDIGARIAN Oliver Fm

E
AQUITANIAN Formation
CENOZOIC

CHATTIAN
of Timor

L
Oligocene RUPELIAN

E
PALEOGENE

PRIABONIAN
Trough
L BARTONIAN
Eocene Cartier Fm
M
LUTETIAN

50 YPRESIAN
Hibernia Fm
E
L

THANETIAN
Paleocene DANIAN Johnson Fm
E

I MAASTRICHTIAN MH 3000
LATE

Wangarlu Fm
CAMPANIAN

Post - rift thermal

SANTONIAN
CONIACIAN
TURONIAN

subsidence +
CENOMANIAN

100 Cretaceous .

ALBIAN Jamieson Fm
MH 4000
I
i

APTIAN
EARLY

I
i
BARREMIAN
I HAUTERVIAN Echuca Shoals Fm
. r
l
i
i
VALANGINIAN
t

BERRIASIAN
e

.
j

t
TITHONIAN
i
Rifting along NW Australia
LATE
MESOZOIC

I
KIMMERIDGIAN

150 OXFORDIAN MH 5000

. CALLOVIAN

MH 6000
.

BATHONIAN
MIDDLE

BAJOCIAN
Jurassic Syn - rift
i i
AALENIAN
Plover Fm Sandstone dominant
TOARCIAN
(Reservoir)
i i

PLIENSBACHIAN Limestone dominant

EARLY

SINEMURIAN
200 Marl dominant
HETTANGIAN

2 Shale dominant
 2011 Zoning Scheme

2011 Study
Facies DepthBIozone
• MH5000 and MH6000 as
Reservoir GR MD
Top/Bottom Reservoir.
Bio Zone 0 API 200

Zone
MH 5000
3850

Zone A • 16 regressive/ transgressive

R. aemula SB 90
Zone B surfaces as zone boundary
TS 80 (SB 10–TS 100).
W. digitata Zone C 3900
SB 60
II TS40
T. Balmei • Divided zone D into 3
I Zone D1 subzone, i.e. D1,D2 and D3,
W. Verrucosa

TS 30
P. Granosa Zone D2 3950
based on bio zone
TS 20
E.Kempiae

Dutorigia
Zone D3 • Defined TS 40 as Top D1
4000

V. Spinosum TS 10
Zone E
C. halosa MH 6000

3
 Type section well : Abadi-3
A-3 Systems
A-3
Bio Bio Zone definition
B Zone A Zone

B Zone A Zone
Age Surface Tract

Age
event
MH 5000 MH 5000 Seismic Marker - SB
Presence of R.aemula, A.
Aemura

Aemura
filamentosum and/or D.magma
SB 90 SB 90 1st aemula TS
Presence of W. Digitata in the absence of R.aemula,
TS 80 TS 80 A. filamentosum and D.magma
Digitata

Digitata
AND
Zone C

Zone C
Presence of W. Digitata in the absence of
SB 60 SB 60 W.verrucosa and W.indotata
MH 5400 MH 5400 Digitata RS
TS40 Co-occurrence of W.verrucosa and T.balmei above TS 40
(TS 40) (TS 40)
2nd balmei TS– seismic interpreted
D1

SB 40 SB 40
D1 Co-occurrence of W.verrucosa and T.balmei below TS 40
TS 30 TS 30 1st balmei TS
D2
Verrucosa

D2
Verrucosa

Co-occurrence of W.verrucosa and E.kempiae in the

TS 20 TS 20 absence of T.balmei and abundant Dutrigi. P.granosa
has a LSO within this sand
Kempiae TS
Co-occurrence of W.verrucosa and E.kempiae and
D3

D3

abundant Dutrigia.
Spinosum TS
Co-occurrence of W.verrucosa and V.spinosum
TS 10 in the absence of E.kempiae
TS 10
Spn

Spn

Interpreted Bio-event
E

MH 6000 FSO A. filamentosum MH 6000 Seismic Marker - MSF

FSO W. digitata
LSO W. verrucosa
FSO T. balmei HST
LSO P. granosa TST
FSO E. kempiae
FSO V. spinosum FSST-LST
Without Arrow : analytical data 4
Stratigraphic Well Correlation – 2011 version
Stratigraphic zone A Maximum flooding surface A-7
Stratigraphic zone B Transgressive surface
Stratigraphic zone C Sequence boundary
TD=3,955m
Stratigraphic zone D Facies boundary WD=554m
Stratigraphic zone E A-2 North Block
TD=3,986m
2 DST Zone
Conventional core
recovery
A-6 WD=580m
TD=4,000m A-4 A-5
WD=566m TD=4,000m TD=4,000m
mMSL South Block WD=649m WD=705m mMSL
3,750 3,750
A-3 A-1
TD=4,032m TD=4,230m 2

WD=423m WD=457m MH 5000

3,800 3,800
TS40

3,850 3,850

GWC
Field GWC
3,900 -3984mMSL
3,894m 3,900
MH 6000

3,950 3,950

datum: mean sea level

4,000 4,000

5
 Stratigraphic Well Correlation
SW NE
Abadi-3
Abadi-1 Erosional surface (core)
Abadi-6
Facies DepthBIozone

Palynology 0
GR
API 200
MD Facies
GR
DepthBIozone

MD
Abadi-4 Lag deposit (core)
Facies DepthBIozone Facies DepthBIozone

Abadi-5
0 API 200
bioevent 0
GR
API 200
MD
0
GR
API 200
MD
Abadi-2
3850 Facies DepthBIozone
3850 Facies DepthBIozone
R. aemula Zone A GR MD
GR MD
3800
0 API 200

3800
0 API 200
Abadi-7
Zone B Facies
GR
DepthBIozone

MD
W. digitata 3850 0 API 200

Zone C 3900
3900

3850
3800
3850
Zone D1
3900
3750

Zone D2 3950
3950
W. Verrucosa
3900
3850
3900
Zone D3
3950
3800

4000
4000

C. halosa
5 Zone E 3950
4 3900
3950
7
6 2

1
3 10km
6
 A-3 A-1 Stratigraphic Well Correlation – 2011 version

Zone A Zone
Age
A-4 Datum: TS40
MH 5000 A-5
A-6
A-7
Aemura

SB 90 A-2
B

TS 80
Digitata
Zone C

SB 60

TS 40 TS 40
D1

SB 40

TS 30
D2
Verrucosa

TS 20
D3

20m

TS 10
Spn
E

MH 6000 Interpreted Bio-event

FSO A. filamentosum
5 FSO W. digitata
4 LSO W. verrucosa
Correlation with High confidence FSO T. balmei
7
6 2 Correlation with Intermediate confidence LSO P. granosa
Correlation with Poor confidence LSO Abundant Dutrigia spp.
FSO E. kempiae
1
FSO V. spinosum
3 10km Without Arrow : analytical data
7
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

ABADI Geophysical Study Update

after POD

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

Confidential
1
Contents

1) Key Updated Items

2) Seismic Inversion
3) Interpretation
4) Velocity Model
5) Conclusion

Confidential
2
Key Updated Items
(1) Property Trend Related (2) GRV Related
Update
Velocity Model

POD GWC
Zone D - POD
P-Impedance - 2011

Update
Seismic
Inversion

2011
Zone D
P-Impedance
Update
Interpretation
Confidential
3
Seismic Inputs for Inversion
POD 2011
High Frequency Oriented Process. Low Frequency Preserved Process.
Lower Frequency is Noisy. Higher Frequency is Smaller.

Confidential
4
Updated Seismic Inversion
Average P-Impedance (Zone D)
Low Frequency Model Relative P-Impedance P-Impedance
(Well Information) (Seismic Information) (Final Product)
Below 15Hz

POD
+ =

Well Log Gridding is dominant for POD Version

Seismic is dominant for 2011 Version
Below 6Hz

2011 + =
Confidential
5
Well-Seismic Correlation
Relative P-Impedance Well-Seismic Correlation

MH5000-MH6000
POD 2011 Correlation
POD 0.20
2011 0.91

Seismic Well

Confidential
6
Updated Seismic Interpretation
MH5000 GWC and Interpretation
- POD Version
- 2011 Version

Abadi-1
Well Log
Relative Vp/Vs

High Vp/Vs Echuca Shoal Shale

(Shale)

(Sand) 2011 Seismic Inverted

Low Vp/Vs Relative Vp/Vs

Confidential
7
Velocity Models for POD and 2011

Water Velocity

Seismic Velocity

POD 2011
V(z) =-0.094 Z+3291 Vint = 3063 m/s

V(z) = 0.69 Z+1077 Vint = 2916 m/s

V(z) = 0.071 Z +3824 Vint = 4072 m/s

Confidential
Updated Depth Conversion
Depth Correction Required for Velocity Models

POD 2011

Confidential
9
Conclusion
1) Seismic AVO inversion result become more
accurate and independent from well data.

2) Seismic interpretation become more consistent

with lithology.

3) Velocity model become more stable to reduce

depth error.

1) North GRV is increased mainly due to velocity

model.

2) South GRV is reduced mainly due to seismic

interpretation.

Confidential
10
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

2.3 Facies Study

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

1
 Contents-Facies Study
1. Work Flow
2. Core Litho Facies
3. Electro Litho Facies
4. Depositional Facies
5. Reconstruction of paleo environment
6. Other Topics
– Abadi-7 Tight sand

2
 1. Work Flow
Electro Litho Facies interpretation
Define Litho Facies
in Core basis NGS extrapolation

FMI conductivity FMI conductivity

extraction standardize
Ave Hz Cond Hz Var Vert Var(5) VarH/VarV
Horizontal Variance Var H / Var V5
Abadi-4 Core #1 interval 10
Average Resistivity

100 0 500 1000 1500 0 100

Horizontal Variance

200 300 400 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

3837 3837 3837 3837

3838 3838 3838 3838

3839 3839 3839 3839

3840 3840 3840 3840

3841 3841 3841 3841

3842 3842 3842 3842

3843 3843 3843 3843

Seismic Interpretation
3844 3844 3844 3844

All plots; before standardized

3845 3845 3845 3845

Conditioning Correlate LF vs E-Log

FMI dip interpretation Extrapolate LF
E-Log data and Construct Model to non-core interval

Input idea/concept to GEO-MODEL

Palynofacies
Dip interpretation Depositional Facies
Reconstruct A-1_Shale_ori_3982-4008
0
A-2_shale_ori 3872-3896
0

paleo environment 270 90

270 90

A4
A5

A4
A5

A2 A2
A-4_Shale_ori_3933-3948 A5 shale_3915_3930 180
0

A7
0

180
A6 A7 A6

A1 A1
270 90 270 90

Depositional Map A3 A3

FMI image
180 180

Vector plot :No scale Vector plot :No scale

Seismic

3
 2. Define Core Litho Facies Litho
Facies

Abadi-4 Core #1
• Total 172m Core are recovered in 6
wells
• Based on core observations, total 9
types of litho facies were interpreted.

Sandstone
– Massive : S-m1
– Laminated, Crs-Fine grain : S-l1
– Laminated, Fine-V Fine grain : S-l2
– Bioturbated, Crs-Fine grain : S-b1
– Bioturbated, Fine-V Fine grain : S-b2

Heterolitho
– Laminated heterolitho : SM-l
– Bioturbated heterolitho : SM-b

Mudstone
– Laminated : M-l
– Bioturbated : M-b

4
 3. Calculate Electrical Litho Facies

• An investigation was
Criteria to calculate E-Litho Facies carried out to determine
Litho Facies 9 Core Litho Facies
any relationship between
CGR vs FMI conductivity Residuals SM-l SM-b M-l M-b each litho-facies and
electrical log
THOR vs POTA Residuals S-b2 S-l2
response/characteristic.
ROBT vs UT S-m1 S-b1 S-l1

• We constructed the
0 2 4 6 8 10 LF Code
appropriate calculation
S-m1 1 model from these
S-l1 2 relationships in the cored
S-b1
S-l2
3
5
intervals.
Electro-Litho facies
S-b2 6
Core-1
SM-l 7
Core-Litho facies
SM-b 8
• The model was applied to
M-l 9 estimate electrical litho-
M-b 10 facies for the non-cored
intervals.
5
 4. Depositional Facies interpretation
• Interpretation Wave dominated system Strand
Plain - Shoreface
- Shoreface system.
- Strand plain development toward
southeast.
- Possible tidal inlet cut or strong
terigeneous influx in part.

- Defined 3 Depositional Facies

- Facies 1 (USF)
- Upper shoreface, including
Foreshore/beach, Tidal inlet
- Facies 2 (LSF)
- Lower shoreface
- Facies 3 (OS)
- Offshore
Nayarit coast, Mexico

6
 GR FA

Facies 1 (USF) -Facies Character CGR_C

0 200

Facies 1 (USF) Abadi-3

Litho Facies
Lithology/Litho Facies
 Sandstone, fine to coarse grained. MH5000 FSO V. tabulata, LSO M. penitabulata

 Consist of massed combination of Massive Core-1

Sst (S-m1) and/or Laminated Sst (S-l1) and/or
Bioturbated Sst (S-b1) 3850

Distribution TS100 FSO Y. elangiana

LSO L. protothymosa
 2 - 20m in thickness
 Foreshore/beach, Upper (&Mid) Shoreface,
Tidal inlet

Log
 Low GR(<30API), box shape or coarsening Core-2
SB90
upward
 Good Resistivity and Neu-Den separation

Palyno Facies
 Total count : Very Low - Common 3875
 Diversity: Very Low - Common 10m
 Facies: relatively less marine influence
FSO M. penitabulata
Bioturbation/Ichno Facies TS80
FSO A. filamentosum, D. magna, R. aemula
Upper Shoreface FSO A. filamentosum(?) (Fragment)*
 Criptic – Common Lower Shoreface
 Skolithos, Makaronichnus Offshore SB80

FSO W. indotata, W. digitata, M. viriosa

7
 Facies 2 (LSF) -Facies Character
Abadi-6

Litho Facies
Facies 2 (LSF)
Lithology/Litho Facies TS20

 Sandstone, very fine to med grained.

 Consist of Finer Laminated Sst (S-l2) and Finer Core-5 LSO W. lacuna, P. granosa
Bioturbated Sst (S-b2), interfinger with (S-b1)

Distribution
 1 - 25m in thickness
 Lower shoreface, Core-6
above Fair Weather Wave Base

Log LSO Durotrigia spp. (Abundant)

 Mid GR (30-60API), crsning up and/or Core-7 3900

fluctuated
 Small Resistivity and Neu-Den separation

Palyno Facies
 Total count: Common, Low in part
 Diversity: Common, Low in part
 Facies: Common marine influence 10m
FSO E. kempiae
Bioturbation/Ichno Facies
 Abundant, Low in part
Upper Shoreface
 Cruziana
Lower ShorefaceFSO W. lacuna
Offshore

8
 Facies 3 (OS) -Facies Character
TS80

Abadi-5

Litho Facies
Facies 3 (OS)
Lithology/Litho Facies
 Hetero-litho (SM-l, SM-b) Core-3
 Massive, Bioturb, and Laminated Mudstone
(M-b, M-l).

Distribution
 1 - 30m in thickness
 Transition, Offshore, 3850 SB60
TS40
below Fair Weather Wave Base

Log Core-4
 HighGR (>60API)
SB40 OS

Palyno Facies
 Total count: Common - High
 Diversity: Common - High
TS30
 Facies: Strong marine influence Core-5

Bioturbation/Ichno Facies 10m

 Common - Abundant
 Cruziana - Zoophycos
Upper Shoreface
Lower Shoreface
TS20
Offshore

9
 4. Depositional Facies interpretation
10000
USF
1000 LSF
OS
100

10

Kair
1

0.1

0.01
All “Frac”, “partial frac” samples are removed from Cross Plot

0.001
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Core_Porosity

10
 5. Reconstruction of Paleo environment
Zone D Zone C Zone A

Upper Shoreface
Lower Shoreface
Offshore

5
4
7
6
Abadi-4
2
8.3km
1
MH5000 Abadi-2
MH5000

6.6km 3
Zone A
SB 90
Abadi-7
SB90

Zone B
TS 80 3850 TS80 MH5000
SB90

TS80

Zone C SB60
SB60

GR FA

TS 40 TS40

SB40
TS40

MH5000

Zone D1
3800

TS 30 TS30
SB90

Zone D2 3900

TS 20 TS20
SB40

TS30
TS40

3750
TS20

Zone D3
3850

TS 10 SB40

SB 10 3950
TS10

Zone E 3800

MH6000 MH6000
TS20
TS10

TS10

MH6000

MH6000
3900

11
 M-20
M-12
6. Abadi-7 Tight Sand “Tiger Skin”
GR W L Res W L_Porosity
Cal_PEX MCFL RXOZ TNPH
M-13 0.2 OHMM 2000 0.45 V/V -0.15

MSCT
BS
4 IN 14 HRLT RLA1 HRDD SRHOZ

HRCC Cal. Caliper {F13.4}60.2 OHMM 2000 1.95 G/C3 2.95

4 IN
Gamma-Ray 14 HRLT RLA2 HRDD PEFZ

Den
0 GAPI 200 0.2 OHMM 2000 0 10

Res FMI
 20m thickness Tight sand
Gamma-Ray HRLT RLA3 DTCO
200 GAPI 0 0.2 OHMM 2000 140 US/FT 40
M-25
M-14 0.2
XPT
HRLT RLA4
OHMM

HRLT RLA5
2000
Neu 3759m
0.2 OHMM 2000

HRLT Computed RT
0.2 OHMM 2000

MH_5400
MH_5000
M21
M-21M-17 7  Very low, constant GR
M-18
1

M-4
8
Tight Sand  Spiky Resistivity pattern, no-small
M-5 2

3750M22 M-22
M-6
M-7
3
“Tiger-Skin” 1cm
separation
9
4
M-23
M-24
M-8
3725
M-9
5A f-m, v hd, mod
5

srt, mod sil cmt

M-10

M-19
M-11 w/Qtz ovgth, p
 Neu-Den: nil-small separation
argil, mnr Pyr, tr
M-20
M-12
SC Glauc, p-fr vis  XPT : all pre-test resulted in Tight or
10 por
Super charge
M-13
6

M25
M-25M-14

MH_5400
M-21
SC7
M-26
11
8
3768m  FMI image : Thin Conductive Layer,
3750

1-5cm thickness
M-22
9
M-23
M-24

SC
12A
12
 MSCT sample : Fine to medium grain
10

M-25

T
M26
M-26
11
13

M-26
SC
12A
12
 NA conventional core, NA plugged
13

M-27
poro-perm measurements
M-27
M-28
M-28

3775
M-29
14A
1cm

3775
M-29
M-30
T
14A
16
 Estimated Porosity and K :
M-31

f-m, v hd, mod srt, Poro : 5 %

: 0.3 – 5 mD
M-32
15

16
p sil cmt w/Qtz K
17
M-30
M-33
ovgth, p argil, tr
M-31 Glauc, p vis por
18

M-32
M-34 19
12
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

2.4 Petrophysics

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.
 2008 POD petrophysical analaysis (by ELAN)
Parameter used in past analysis (Abadi-1,2,3) and Some core data were not available
POD analysis (Abadi-4,5,6,7) was not consistent. due to limited time frame to POD
submission
Parameters needed to be standardized.

Update petrophysical analaysis (by ELAN(Poro) and Inhouse (Perm))

(AFE No.: 09-0009)
Consistent parameters were used. Better predictability was obtained.
All core data were incorporated.

Better permeability - DST matching was obtained.

 Inhouse study for permeability estimation (K-Nearest Neighbor Method)

Independent Dependent
Variables Variable Zushi et al. (2011, IPA)

FZI

Core
Facies GR ρB PHIE Perm.
Group Group 1 Group 2 GR ρB FZI
9.0, 2.47, 21.0 (d3)
1 ?
8.0, 2.49, 6.0 (d1)
K Data from Facies Group 1
RQI=0.0314 φ
2 e
φe
φ z=(1 - φ )
e

1 RQI 23.0, 2.56, 11.0

FZI=

ρB
φz
d1 ? d3
2
d2
19.0, 2.50, 8.0 (d2)
1
35.0, 2.55, 5.0
GR

2 W1=1/d1, W2=1/d2, W3=1/d3

FZI1*W1+FZI2*W2+FZI3*W3
FZI(?) =
W1+W2+W3
 Points: Log Sw data
2008 POD used Sw log from petrophysical analaysis Curves: Update Sw model

Severe mud invasion affected

true resistivity measurement in some wells

Large uncertainty remains in Sw estimation from logs

Update model used Sw-Height function from SCAL

Consistent capillary pressure data were obtained from
core measurements in SCAL in 2009 .

Sw model was updated based on the SCAL data.

Log-derived Sw was used as supplementary data
Water saturation

Permeability (md)
Function: Sw = -0.3973*log(K)+1.734)*Pow(Height,-(0.09171*log(K)+0.4774))+0.01743*log(K)+0.03001
 Resistivity Neutron Porosity K Sw
(ohm-m) Density (%) (mD) (%)
0.2 - 2000 Sonic 0 - 25 0.01 - 1000100 - 0

M H_5000

CORE #1
Porosity
3850
PIGN ELAN(POD)
PIGN ELAN 2011
CORE #2
PIGN 2011 over PIGN POD

K
KINT ELAN (POD)
3900
K_MBR 2011
K_MBR over KINT

Sw
Sw ELAN (POD)

3950
Sw Function 2011
Function over ELAN
Core Swir @300psi

M H_6000
 Masela PSC
pre-TCM workshop
2.5 SCAL & PVT
21th June 2011

1
 The Number of capillary pressure data
A-1 A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5
Capillary Pressure 5 2 12 15 (1.5in) 25 (1.5in)
(Centrifuge) (1.0in) (1.0in) (1.0in) 6 (1.0in) 10 (1.0in)
Capillary Pressure
3 2 3 0 4
(Mercury Injection)

Capillary Pressure
0 6 0 0 0
(Porous Plate)

• Additional SCAL (Abadi-4 & 5) is available after construction of POD model.

• Two groups of centrifuge capillary pressure data
– corelab houston/abudhabi(1.5 in plug), abadi-4, 5 showing lower Swir
– corelab jakarta(1 in plug), abadi-1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (Tests were repeated for abadi-4, 5.)
showing higher Swir
– Corelab comments that the larger diameter sample gives more reliable data.
• 1.5in plug data is used for base case. 1.0in plug for sensitivity case

2
 Conversion to height function
Conversion from PC to Height function

Pc=h x (rw-rg)

Log derived Sw

3
Height function (base case for 2011model)

4
Log Sw & capillary Swir (base case for 2011model)

5
 PVT Samples from DST

Abadi-1 PVT is used for POD model since Abadi-6 data is not
available and only preliminary data is available for Abadi-4 & 5 at
the time of POD model construction .
6
 Sample selection
100
Abadi-1 Abadi-2 Abadi-3

Abadi-4 Abadi-5 Abadi-6

DST#1
Abadi-6 Field Average
10 DST#2
Mol%

0.1

0.01
CO2 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11+
Component

Abadi-5 composition isPhysical

Figure. 3.2 closest toSample
Recombined average composition.
Wellstream Composition

Abadi-5 sample was selected as a representative fluid sample.

7
 Gas FVF

Bg = 0.004(cf/scf) was used for GIP calculation.

8
 PVT modeling (Abadi-5)
Original components was lumped into 8 pseudo components.

EOS parameters were tuned to experimental data (CCE and CVD)

Crit Acentric Parachor V Crit Z Crit

Crit Pres Omega A Omega B V Crit Z Crit Boil Temp Ref Dens Ref Temp
Temp Factor s (Visc) (Visc)
Components
(ft3 /lb- (ft3 /lb-
(psia) (F) (F) (lb /ft^3) (F)
mole) Dew point
mole)
4,209psi
CO2 1056.6 88.79 0.45724 0.077796 0.225 78 1.5057 (error 0%)1.5057 0.27408
0.27408 -109.21 48.507 67.73

C1N2 651.08 -117.91 0.50296 0.074277 0.013308 76.589 1.5683 0.28471 1.5797 0.28677 -259.49 26.802 -259.3

C2 693.65 90.104 0.45724 0.077796 0.0986 108 2.3707 0.28463 2.3707 0.28463 -127.39 34.211 -130.27

C3C4 577.34 234.04 0.45724 0.077796 0.16592 161.94 3.5035 0.27862 3.5035 0.27862 -22.278 36.095 -7.9986

C5C6 453.58 408.41 0.45724 0.077796 0.2632 245.66 5.2294 0.26287 5.2294 0.26287 112.84 40.473 64.779

C7P 386.98 584.28 0.45724 0.077796 0.32823 352.81 7.1647 0.25689 7.1647 0.25689 251.05 46.58 60.53

C12P 263.39 813.13 0.50296 0.074277 0.63378 520.46 12.587 0.25626 12.678 0.25812 498.15 51.056 60
GOR 54,505 cf/bbl (error 0.27%)
C20P 134.85 1176.3 0.45724 0.077796 1.0573 883.9 21.779 0.18551 21.937 0.18686 834.17 56.437 60
Liquid stock tank density 48.02 lb/cf (error
0.27%)
9
 PVT matching quality (Abadi-5)
CCE Density
Z-factor Relative vol Liquid drop

CVD
2 phase Z-factor Liquid drop Vapour Z-factor Mol recovery

Overall good matching could be obtained with the tuned EOS model.
Black oil table was generated for reservoir simulation.
10
Confidential

Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

2.6 Deterministic GIIP

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

1
Confidential

GIIP : POD vs 2011.

40
1P 2P 3P
35

30

25

20
SW+W

15
South
North
10

0
POD 2011_Jan POD 2011_Jan POD 2011_Jan

1P 2P 3P
POD 2011_Jan POD 2011_Jan POD 2011_Jan
North 15.30 17.64 21.86 26.30 21.86 26.30
South 0.45 0.49 5.32 2.69 5.32 2.69
SW - - - - 1.22 1.11
W - - - - 1.67 1.61
Total 15.75 18.13 27.18 28.99 30.07 31.71

2
Confidential
Deterministic GIIP
 Deterministic GIIP has been estimated based on the following
conditions.
 No change in these conditions between of POD and 2011
evaluation.
Equation GIIP = GRV * NGR * Porosity * (1-Sw) * Bg(250)

1P, 2P : North and South Block, 1997 SPE/WPC definition

Area definition for GRV
3P : SouthWest and South Block

For North Block : Average in North wells (A-2,4,5,6,7)

Petrophysical parameter
For South Block : Average in South wells (A-1, -3)

Cut off criteria Effective Porosity > 6%, Permeability > 0.1md

FWL -3,894mMSL

3
Confidential
2011 Deterministic GIIP

Main updates since POD version

– GRV
• Updated Zoning
• Updated Depth Conversion
• Updated Seismic Interpretation
– Petrophysics
• Updated Porosity & Permeality based on latest study
• Updated N/G, based on latest zoning and Petriphysics Study
• Used SW derived from SCAL (Height function)
– Cf. SW used in POD : SW derived from ELAN

SW is the main factor of GIIP increase in 2011 evaluation

4
Confidential

1P-2P-3P Area
2008 POD 2011
9010000 9010000

GWC
GWC
Faults Abadi-5
Faults
9000000 Major faults Abadi-5 9000000
appraisal wells
North
zone D gas area North
appraisal wells
development wells Abadi-4 Abadi-4
8990000 4km spacing 8990000

4km deviation limit Abadi-7

Abadi-6 Abadi-7 Abadi-2
Abadi-2 Abadi-6

8980000 8980000

West
West Abadi-1
8970000
Abadi-1 8970000
South
Proved area Abadi-3
South Proved area
Abadi-3
Probable area
SW Probable area SW 0 10km
8960000
0 10km 8960000

Possible area Possible area

Tested Expl. & Appr. wells Direct offset dev. well Beyond direct offset location Tested Expl. & Appr. wells
Direct offset dev. well Beyond direct offset location
8950000
610000 620000 630000 640000 650000 660000 670000 680000
8950000
610000 620000 630000 640000 650000 660000 670000 680000

5
 0.2 OHMM 2000 1.95 G/C3 2.95 0 (%) 25 0.01(MD) 1000 1 0
Bit Size
Confidential
Abadi-2
4 IN 14 HLLD DTCO PORO_SONIC KAIR_SONIC
0.2 OHMM 2000 150 US/F 50 0 (%) 25 0.01(MD) 1000
HCAL
4 IN 14 HALS_RT Effective Porosity
Intrinsic Less
permeability
Irreducible
fromWater
Abadi Permeability Model
0.2 OHMM 2000 0 V/V 0.25 0.01 mD 1000
Smoothed Deep Phase-Shift Derived Resistivity
Effective
C=Smoothed@0.3m
Porosity, VISO,G=2m
VPAR, and Bound
K_MBR
Water Removed
0.2 OHMM 2000
Resistivity Neutron 0Porosity
V/V 0.25 0.01 K
mD 1000 Sw
(ohm-m) Density (%) (mD) (%)
0.2 - 2000 Sonic 0 - 25 0.01 - 1000100 - 0

MH5000

Porosity
PIGN ELAN(POD)
Core#1
PIGN ELAN 2011
3800
PIGN 2011 over PIGN POD

Core#2
K
KINT ELAN (POD)
K_MBR 2011
K_MBR over KINT

Sw
Sw ELAN (POD)
Sw Function 2011
Function over ELAN
MH6000
3900 Core Swir @300psi
Effective Porosity, VISO, VPAR, and Bound Water Removed
0 V/V 0.25
Effective Porosity Less Irreducible
K_MBR
Water
0 6
V/V 0.25 0.01 mD 1000 SW_110117
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

2.7 Abadi Field Geological Model

& GIIPs (1P,2P,3P)

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.
 GeoModel Work Flow and Input Data
Work Flow / Method Input data
(Seismic interpretation) (Well correlation)
STRUCTURE / -MH5000 : Top reservoir -Zones A/B/C/D1/D2/D3/E
STRATIGRAPHY -TS40: Intra reservoir from biostratigraphic /

Probabilistic reserves calculation (P90/P50/P10)

-MH6000: Base reservoir facies analysis
-Fault interpretation
Structure framework

FACIES (Seismic data)

SIS

1P / 2P / 3P GIIP , Reserves
-Inverted Vp/Vs volume
(Well data etc.)
with facies probability
function by Vp/Vs -Well facies log from facies analysis

Uncertainty Analysis /
-Depositional interpretation
-Tight facies difinition (at and around Abadi-7) FaciesModel

POROSITY (Seismic data)

SGS (Well data)
with inverted seismic -Inverted P-impedance volume
cube as secondary -Porosity log
-Inverted PHIE Cube
guide from ELAN
from inverted P-imp and Vp/Vs
PHIE Model

PERMEABILITY (Well data) (Secondary property)

SGS -Permeability log -Porosity model
with porosity model from Inhouse processing
as secondary guide
PERM Model

WATER SATURATION 210

160
Sw-height function
110
based on latest SCAL data
60

Sw – Height function 10

-40







Sw Model

 Abadi structure and Pressure data

ABADI ABADI
MDT/XPT Results
MDT/XPT Results
3740 Abadi-1 MDT Gas(DST Zone)
3750 Abadi-1 Transit. Zone?
3760 Abadi-1 Water Zone
Abadi-2 MDT Gas
3770
Abadi-3 MDT Gas
3780
Abadi-4ST2 XPT Gas
3790 Abadi-4ST2 XPT Water Zone
FWL (-3894mSS) 3800 Abadi-5 XPT Gas
3810 Abadi-5 XPT Water Zone
Abadi-5 Abadi-6 XPT Gas
3820
Abadi-7 XPT Gas
North
Abadi-4ST
3830
Abadi-7 XPT Tight

Depth (m MSL)
3840 Abadi-2ST, -4ST2, -5, -7 and -6 Gas (0.101psi/ft)
Abadi-7ST
3850 Abadi-4ST2 and Abadi-5 Wtr Grad (0.434psi/ft)
Abadi-2ST 3860 Hydro Static (0.433psi/ft)
Abadi-6 3870
3880
3890 FWL (-3894mSS)
West Abadi-1 3900
3910
South 3920
Abadi-3 3930

SouthWest 3940
3950
3960

Pressure (psia)
 Zoning / Layering

Eroded by Callovian unconformity

MH5000
A
Regressive Surface of Erosiion
B
Overall transgression
TS40 C
D1 Transgressive Surface of Erosiion
Transgressive Surface of Erosiion
D2
D3 Overall progradation
E
MH6000

Upscaled facies Facies log

6

      

      

$ $ $ $ $ $ $
Inverted Vp/Vs volume

& %


-3 -, -

'

'

 

' '

 

 

 

. ( . (



 

/ /
  

  

/

1 0 1 0 

1 0



1 1

2 2
Abadi-4ST2

 

+ +

+

     

 

! ! ! ! ! !

 

     

, "

# " # " # " # " # " # "

! ! ! ! ! !

     
Abadi-2ST
Facies model settings

Probability of
Facies Occurrence
Low High
Abadi-7

Low
Facies 1
(FPF)

Inverted Vp/Vs
High
Facies 3
Facies Probability Function
 Tight facies (Facies 4) around Abadi-7ST
Abadi-6 Abadi-4ST2 Abadi-5 Abadi-7ST
Pimp Phi K Pimp Phi K Pimp Phi K
Pimp Phi K

D1

D2

D3

Facies Model with Facies 4

Relative P-impedance volume

Abadi-2ST Abadi-7ST
 Facies Model

Abadi-4ST2 Abadi-2ST Abadi-7ST

Facies model

Inverted Vp/Vs


P-impedance
Porosity Model

      

      

$ $ $ $ $ $ $

& %


-3 -, -

# # # # # #

! ! ! ! ! ! !

        

" " " " , " " "

3 3 3 3 3 3

 
Abadi-4ST2

! ! ! ! ! ! !

      

" " " " " " "

# # # # # # #



      




 

2 2 2


 
2 2 2

1 1 1 

( ( (

  

4 4 4

 

  

  

 &  &  &



$ $ $

     

* * *

  

+ + +




1 1
Porosity Model

 

&


  #

#

  

   #
1 1

,  3

, ,

#
Abadi-2ST

 
Abadi-7ST
 Porosity modeling: global distribution

-Assumption of global porosity / permeability -As quality of the inverted seismic volume
parameter distribution has been identified improved, global distribution was tried to
to be most sensitive to GIIP. estimate from the seismic data.
Sensitivity to GIIP (2008 POD)
North+South / All Zones
GIP (Bcf)
60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140%
Inverted PHIE Cube
in Zone D2
Structure

Facies Proportion

Facies Direction

Facies Continuity Histogram of seismic PHIE Cube in Zone D2 / Facies 1

Porosity Trend

Poro/Perm Distribution

Sw

Global porosity distribution has been

Should be ‘rescaled’
assumed same as well data distribution

Zone D2 /
Facies1

Well PHIE Well PHIE

 Points: Log Sw data
Curves: Update Sw model

Sw-Height function

Sw = -0.3973*log(K)+1.734)*Pow(Height,-(0.09171*log(K)+0.4774))
+0.01743*log(K)+0.03001
Water saturation fraction
 Permeability / Sw models

Permeability model

Abadi-4ST2 Abadi-2ST Abadi-7ST

Sw model
 Uncertainty analysis and 1P/2P/3P reserves

 Sensitivity check

Base case: 26.15 TCF Base case: 3.99 TCF

Base case: 30.14 TCF Base case: 33.60 TCF

 Probabilistic GIIP calculation (North Block)
Assumption setting: Normal Dist.
Monte-Carlo Simulation



!"

%













GIIP = a +b +c +d + - - + const.





























Depth conversion (High-Low): P1 – P99

Other parameters (High-Low): P10 – P90
Term Coef Percentiles: GIIP_North (BCF)
Constant 26151.4 P100 9,509
Depth_Conv 3615.71
Facies_Prop 5649 P95 14,938
PoroPerm_Dist 5554.59 P90 17,268 P90 / P10 Models were created
Poro_Trend 2250.15 P85 18,917 by downgrading main factors
Sw 2331.24
Gas_FVF 1207.59
P80 20,267 (Facies Proportion and
Depth_Conv*Depth_Conv 273.147 P75 21,433 PoroPerm Histogram)
Facies_Prop*Facies_Prop -611.853 P70 22,460
PoroPerm_Dist*PoroPerm_Dist -321.853
P65 23,437
Poro_Trend*Poro_Trend -983.353
P60 24,390
P50 Model = Base Case Model
Sw*Sw -507.853
Gas_FVF*Gas_FVF 285.147 P55 25,281
Depth_Conv*Facies_Prop 995.594 P50 26,161
Depth_Conv*PoroPerm_Dist 844.594
Depth_Conv*Poro_Trend 287.281 P45 27,021
Depth_Conv*Sw 324.469 P40 27,918
(etc…) (etc…) P35 28,856
P30 29,810
P25 30,870
P20 32,039
P15 33,366
P10 35,040
P5 37,404
P0 42,772
 1P/2P GIIP calculation (North Block)

Zone A Zone B Zone C

Net Pay:
-Clipping higher net pay
than well net pay
Calculated surfaces from P90 Model

-Limiting area

Calculation of 1P GIIP by Zone

(1 offset rule +)

Avarage Porosity:

Avarage Sg:
6
 1P/2P GIIP calculation (North Block)

Zone D1 Zone D2 Zone D3 Zone E

Net Pay:
-Clipping higher net pay
than well net pay
-Limiting area
(1 offset rule +)

Avarage Porosity:

Avarage Sg:
 3P_GIIP 2P_GIIP 1P_GIIP 3P_Res 2P_Res 1P_Res 1P90_Res
INPEX_2011 (Probabilistic) 45.92 29.01 17.30 32.14 18.86 10.38 9.34
INPEX_2011 (Deterministic) 31.71 28.99 18.13 22.20 18.84 10.88 9.79
INPEX_2008POD
30.07 27.18 15.75 21.05 16.31 9.45 8.51
(Deterministic)

Area category in deterministic approach

 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM workshop
Development scenario &
reservoir simulation

21th June 2011

1
Development plan

2
 Subsequent development scenarios

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

conceptual conceptual conceptual

3
 Multi FLNG case

FLNG2.5
FLNG2.5
FLNG2.5

FLNG2.5

CONCEPTUAL

4
 FLNG + Onshore case

FLNG2.5

CONCEPTUAL

DC number is subject to optimization

5
 1st FLNG location
• DC & FLNG location
– To minimize uncertainty
– Better reservoir property

FLNG

X, m Y,m
Term (WGS84)
(WGS84)
DC 666323.8 8991424.5
location
FLNG 662163.8 8991954.5
location
6
GIP distribution

Zone D

7
1 FLNG

8
1 FLNG + 3 FLNGs

9
1 FLNG + 3 FLNGs

Final recovery 63%

The profile is for reservoir simulation of 2010 model.

Simulation study with 2011 model is now being conducted.

10
1 FLNG + onshore 3.8MTPA x 2

11
1 FLNG + onshore 3.8MTPA x 2

Final recovery 66%

The profile is for reservoir simulation of 2010 model.

Simulation study with 2011 model is now being conducted.

12
 Simulation conditions
Parameters Setting and Comment
FLNG rate 421mmscf for 2.5MTPA (capacity 462mmscfpd)
Onshore rate proportional to it
Turn down rate Half rate of initial rate of 1 train
(i.e. ¼ of initial rate for 2 train case)
Phasing FLNG every two years starting 2018
Onshore starting 2021/2022, Floater after 10+ years
Lump up Year 1 is 0.79, Year 2 is 0.85, after year 3 is 0.911
Well head pressure 2200psi (onshore tieback)
1500psi (FLNG (1th, 2nd) no compressor)
900psi (FLNG(3rd,4th)/floater with compressor
Well efficiency 0.911 (0.93x0.98), Onshore same value
Well numbers 5 wells for 1DC (FLNG)
9 wells for 1DC (onshore)
Max WGR for well 5stb/mmscf (close well if water breakthrough)
shut

13
 Simulation results
• Basic simulation results

Block Simulation Recovery

(tcf)
North 26.2 63% FLNG x4
66% FLNG+OLNG(3.8x2)

The result is based on reservoir simulation of 2010 model.

Simulation study with 2011 model is now being conduced.

14
 Masela PSC
Pre-TCM Workshop

3. Delineation Strategy and Work Schedule

21st June, 2011

INPEX Masela, Ltd.

1
 Giant Abadi field reserves
Bayu / Undan
Well density: 26km2/well
Field Comparison before FID Tangguh (Vorwata)
Well density: 31km2/well
0 10 20 30
Hingkip-1

Bayu-4 (km)
Bayu-2 Abadi A-5 Vor-1 Vor-8
Undan-1 Vor-4
Undan-4
Undan-3 Bayu-3 Mistral-1 Well density: Vor-11
Undan-2 Vor-7 Vor-3 Vor-5
Bayu-5 121km2/well (North) A-4ST2 Vor-6 Vor-9
Bayu-1
Trulek-1 171km2/well (Full area) Vor-2 Vor-10
A-2ST A-7ST
A-6

A-1

A-3

RR (DG&MN ’08)
1P – 2P – 3P (tcf)
RR (DG&MN ’97) 9.76 18.47 32.94
1P – 2P – 3P (tcf) -47% +78%
-20% 3.4tcf +20%
Capable to build ±15mtpa LNG plants with 2P

RR (Tangguh total)
1P – 2P – 3P (tcf)
14.4 18.3 23.7
-21% +30%

New hard data acquisition is necessary to narrow reserves range of Abadi field.
2
 Abundant & Continuous Gas Supply from Abadi
Contribution to formulate a LNG/Gas Supply Plan
from Abadi
1. Abadi field development (Masela FLNG Project) is positioned as
one of the nation’s highest priority LNG project in GOI Energy
Policy.

2. The implementation of the approved Abadi POD-1 and optimal

subsequent development plan are essential to implement such
Energy Policy.

3. Subsequent development concept could be optimized, when 1P

gas reserves are proven upwards.
Gas Production Rate

Future Expansion

Initial Development

years

3
 3. Common understandings on LNG projects

1. 1P reserves, certified by international agency such as

Degolyer & MacNaughton, is used for LNG / gas marketing.

2. 2P reserves is the basis of optimal development scenarios

throughout the field life.

3. Staged development is the best option for such a super

giant gas field as Abadi.

4. 1P x 90% reserves is the basis for POD according to POD

guideline for LNG project in Indonesia.

4
 How to prove up Abadi 1P reserves
Roadmap for proving-up reserves

Prelim. 2P Res.: 18.86TCF (INPEX 2011)

1P Increase by Additional Works

Requirement for Subseq. Development
(12.08 TCF, Total 10 MTPA)
Updated 1P90
Prelim. 1P90 Res.: 9.34TCF (INPEX 2011)

DG&MN 1P90 Res.: 8.78TCF

1st Stage 2.5MTPA FLNG: 4.6TCF

5
 How to prove up Abadi 1P reserves
1. The latest subsurface evaluation, our best estimates of OGIP in
Abadi field, is the basis.
2. 2007 SPE-PRMS definition will be applied to define 1P, 2P and 3P at
the time of re-certification in 2014.
3. Increase of 1P reserves can be achieved by reducing uncertainty
range of reservoir parameters and structure. This requires more
appraisal activities such as drillings and new high-spec 3D seismic
acquisition.
4. Appraisal drillings should be conducted P9 P1

in Abadi North where 80-90% of reserves 0 0

bear. P5
0
5. To decide amount of delineation works, P90 P50 P10

we would take into account technical

requirements from both deterministic
and probabilistic reserves evaluation. Probabilistic approach

6
 5. GIIPs and Reserves of the Abadi Field
Capable to build ±15mtpa LNG plants

2P_GIIP 1P_GIIP 2P_Res 1P_Res 1P90_Res

INPEX_2011 (Probabilistic) 29.01 17.30 18.86 10.38 9.34
INPEX_2011 (Deterministic) 28.99 18.13 18.84 10.88 9.79
INPEX_2008POD 27.18 15.75 16.31 9.45 8.51
D&M_2008 28.41 16.26 18.47 9.76 8.78
LEMIGAS_2008 20.78 12.89 12.47 7.74 6.97

INPEX_2011(Probabilistic)
D&M_2008
INPEX2011 (Deterministic)
INPEX_2008POD
LEMIGAS_2008
Zone A Zone D
North
A-5
A-4 A-7
A-6 A-2
West
A-1
Zone B SW
A-3
South
Zone E
(1997 SPE/WPC definition) (2001 SPE/WPC/SPEE def.)

(2007 SPE-PRMS definition) P1/C1 Area P2/C2 Area P3/C3 Area

7
 5. GIIPs and Reserves of the Abadi Field
GIIP Sensitivity Check Reservoir property uncertainties are critical
⇒ Need high-spec 3D seismic data & well data
Base case: 26.15 TCF Base case: 3.99 TCF

Base case: 30.14 TCF Base case: 33.60 TCF

8
 2011 Depth Map @Top Plover Fm. (MH5000)

North
FWL (-3894mSS) ⑦
① Abadi-5

Abadi-4ST
②
Abadi-7ST
Abadi-2ST

④ Abadi-6
③
West
⑤
⑥ Abadi-1

South
Abadi-3

SouthWest

9
 6. Delineation drilling candidates
P90 Case 7
1
2 Difference 7
(Base – P90)
4 3
1
5

FWL fm P50 velocity model 2

FWL fm P90 velocity model
Base Case 7 FWL fm P99 velocity model
1
2

4 3
4 3

P10 Case 7
1
2

3
4
Hydrocarbon Pore Volume
5
Maps

10
 6. Delineation drilling candidates
Well Loc. Adding 1P reserves Important Subsurface Information
Loc. 1 -Large potential to add 1P reserves with -Narrow structural uncertainty
deterministic approach -Aquifer strength
-Narrow RF uncertainty by testing aquifer -Formation water property
-Temperature variation
Loc. 2 -Large potential to add 1P reserves with -Reduce uncertainty for future DC loc.
probabilistic approach -Test geo-hazard risk
Loc. 3 -Large potential to add 1P reserves with -Reduce uncertainty for future DC loc.
probabilistic approach

Loc. 4 -Large potential to add 1P reserves with -Narrow structural uncertainty

deterministic approach -Aquifer strength
-Narrow RF uncertainty by testing aquifer -Formation water property
-Temperature variation
Loc. 5 -Narrow structural uncertainty in South
Loc. 6 -3P area can be changed to 1P and 2P -Control of structure and reservoir in the west
Loc. 7 - Similar to Loc.1 - Similar to Loc.1

(1P/2P/3P area definition

For deterministic approach)

11
 1P/2P Area and 1st Stage Production Area

12
 Delineation drilling candidates
0 10 20 30

(km)

Abadi Bayu / Undan

A-5 Hingkip-1

Bayu-4
Bayu-2
A-4ST2 Undan-1
Undan-4
Undan-3 Bayu-3 Mistral-1
Undan-2
A-2ST A-7ST Bayu-5
Bayu-1
A-6 Trulek-1

Well density 26km2/well

A-1
Tangguh (Vorwata)

A-3

Vor-1 Vor-8
Vor-4

Vor-3 Vor-5 Vor-11

Vor-7
Vor-9
Vor-6
Well density 121km2/well (North) 171km2/well (Full area)
Vor-2 Vor-10
After 4 wells Drilling in North
Well density 31km2/well
Well density 67km2/well (North) 109km2/well (Full area)

Even if we have 4 additional wells, still well density would not be so high.
New high-spec 3D help to overcome this issue.
13
 High-spec 3D Seismic Acquisition
Porosity Trend Estimated from Burial Depth
High Porosity
Need to confirm by seismic inversion to evaluate aquifer.

Predict the amount of aquifer below

GWC in the Abadi North based on
the P-impedance and Vp/Vs trend.

New 3D Proposed Area

Low Porosity
2,900 sqkm
Abadi
Optimize well location based on
more accurate reservoir property
prediction.
Delineate the structure shape
between Abadi and Berkat.
Berkat

Structural Closure
(Most Likely Case)
2001 3D Full Fold Area
2,060 sqkm
(Red Line : GWC -3894mSS)

BPMIGAS claimed that prior to acquire new 3D seisimic, reprocessing of the

existing 3D data should be tried.
14
 Milestone of Subsurface Evaluation (INPEX original)

15
 Milestone of Subsurface Evaluation (Revised Schedule)

16
 PRE-TCM : 21st JUNE 2011
AGENDA
 Abadi Delineation & Berkat Exploration Drilling Campaign
 Work Schedule
 Requirements & Assumptions
 Drilling, Tender & Logistics Strategies
 Outline of Drilling Program
 Well Cost Estimates

 Civil Engineering to Enhance Aviation Safety for Drilling Operations

 Risk Reduction Measures for Personnel Transportation in the Area of
Tanimbar Islands

 Revised 2011 WP & B for the Drilling Department

1
 PRE-TCM : 21st JUNE 2011

ABADI DELINEATION & BERKAT EXPLORATION

DRILLING CAMPAIGN (2012-13)

Drilling Department

2
 Work Schedule - DRILLING

Year 2011 2012 2013

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

DRLG submit Procurement

DELINEATION & EXPLORATION List/Plan & Revised 2011 WP&B

Prepare Well AFE's, Procurement Plan & List S A S DRLG submit AFE via 2012 WP&B

& Revised 2011 WP&B Decision to Drill BPMIGAS approval of Procurement

List/Plan & Revised 2011 WP&B

Create Drilling & Logistics Strategies OCM

- Rig/contract/procurement TCM

Complete templates: Consolidate Tenders, Programmes

Tender, award & mobilise Subject to Tender, Award & Mobilise

BPMIGAS approval
Conduct Environmental Impact Assessment (UKL/UPL) EIA S A

Cabotage for Rig & vessels (PPKA) S Apply for dispensation

Tender
Conduct Saumlaki/Selaru Logistics survey & remedial works Survey
Civil Engineering

Recruit Operations Personnel - 4xNat/5xExpat (RPTK), 7xNat/3xExpat (AFE) Recruitment process

Apply Well Delivery Process (WDP) Drill Well On Paper & Risk Analysis Pre-Spud

Refine well designs to minimise operational risks

Rig Window
Drill & test 4 x delineation, 1 x exploration wells Drill 4 x Appraisals and 1 x Exploration

S A
Submit / Approval Drlg Dept responsibility Other or Joint Department responsibility

3
 Requirements & Assumptions
 4 x Abadi delineation & 1 x Berkat exploration wells

 All vertical wells

 Full data acquisition program for the Plover

(logging, coring & testing)

 1 x Test for each well

 No conversion to gas producer in future

4
 Drilling, Tender & Logistics Strategies
 No Rig sharing
 Dynamic Position Rig (preferable)
 Use 5-1/2” drill pipe
 Combined tender package
 Re-stocking / Consignment scheme applied
 Supply base is Banyuwangi
 Crew change base is Saumlaki
 Medivac location is Darwin
 Emergency landing helipad in West Selaru
5
 Outline of Drilling Program (1)
 Water Depth : 520 – 750m MSL (+/- 540 – 770m BRT)
 Drilling Rig : Drill ship or Semi-submersible Rig
 Wellhead : Subsea Wellhead system
 Casing Program :
- 30” CP x 20” x 13-3/8” x 9-5/8” x 7” Liner
- Planned Set depth:
30” : set 60m below Sea Bed, cement same
20” : in hard streak of U.Woodbine (+/- 1,000m BRT)
13-3/8” : below bottom Puffin sand (2,420–2,870m BRT)
9-5/8” : top of Jamieson limestone (3,650–3,820m BRT)
* 9-5/8” casing is set with Liner and tied-back to Wellhead
7” Liner : TD in Plover (3,970 – 4,110m BRT)

6
 Outline of Drilling Program (2)
 Mud Program
 36” / 26” hole: Seawater & Hi Vis sweeps (Riserless drilling)
 17-1/2” hole: Seawater Polymer – Gel WBM
 12-1/4” hole: High Performance WBM
(Note: Fluid selection study is being conducted, AFE 09-0003B)
 8-1/2” hole: CaCO3 WBM Drill-In-Fluid
 Completion fluid: Formate Brine

 Troublesome formations
 17-1/2” hole (Woodbine limestone):
- Severe String Vibration in vertical hole
- Possible Losses
 12-1/4” hole (Wangarlu shale):
- Shale instability
- Ledge across shale/limestone interface @ TD
 8-1/2” hole (Plover sand):
- Possible losses through natural fractures
- Aggressive sandstone (low ROP)

7
Planned Time – Depth Curve (deepest well case)

8
 Cost estimation pre-conditions
 Well duration 73-74 days per well (No contingency)
 Rig rate: $400K /day
 24 days for Rig Mob/Demob, 5 days for in-field move
 5 ％ /year of cost escalation (10% /year for domestic
items) from last tender
 2 x 12,000 HP Multi-Purpose Vessels & 1 x Material
barge for logistics support (subject to Rig selection)
 Casing: 20% of spare pipe included
 Tubing: 50% of spare pipe included
 Liner Hanger: 3 sets of back-up included, for 5 wells
 Wellhead: 3 sets of back-up included, for 5 wells
9
 Contingency Plan
 Contingency Plan
The following contingency plan is considered:

 These costs are not included in the AFE, but will be

included in the Procurement list

 Total contingency cost 11.9 MM$

- 11-3/4” x 13-3/8” Expandable Casing Liner (7.7MM$ - 3 sets / 1200m)
- 7-5/8” x 9-5/8” Expandable Casing Liner (2.2MM$ - 3 sets / 900m)
- 4-1/2” Liner Hanger / 4-1/2” Casing (0.4MM$ - 3 sets / 1200m)
- Casing Drive system for 13-3/8” Casing (1.6MM$ for 5 wells)
(may not be required depending on site hazard survey results)

10
 Cost Estimation for AFE
4 x Abadi wells Berkat-1 5 wells total
Description
(Delineation wells) (Exploration well) (4 Abadi wells + Berkat-1)

Estimated Total Cost $278,461,400 $69,625,400 $348,086,800

- Offshore Drilling Unit $127,290,400 $31,722,600 $159,013,000

- Purchase items $14,780,400 $3,695,300 $18,475,700
(OCTG, Liner Hanger, Wellheads)
- Services
MWD / Motor $9,736,200 $2,412,900 $12,149,100
Mud $6,024,600 $1,477,100 $7,501,700
Wireline Logs $10,901,300 $2,718,400 $13,619,700
Well Testing $19,673,000 $4,910,300 $24,583,300
- Multi-purpose vessels $19,980,000 $4,980,000 $24,960,000
- Material Barge $11,230,800 $2,798,900 $14,029,700
- Helicopter / Fixed wing $11,991,000 $2,988,000 $14,979,000
- Fuel $16,112,700 $4,016,200 $20,128,900

11
 Civil Engineering to Enhance Aviation
Safety for Drilling Operations

Risk Reduction Measures for Personnel Transportation

in the Area of Tanimbar Islands

12
 Motive and method
 Current personnel transport infrastructure and the services
available in the area do not fully meet the industry’s safety
requirement.
 Hazards and the necessary mitigation measures were
identified and evaluated to improve safety on personnel
transport, in and between islands of Yamdena, Selaru and
Ambon associated with the project business activities which
fall into any of the categories in each aspect of the
followings:
 Mode of transport
 Air transport
 Marine transport
 Land transport
 Route of transport
 Ambon to and from Yamdena
 Yamdena to and from Selaru
 Surface transport routes in each island
 Period of occurrence of transport
 From the present up to the time of FID

13
 Identified
hazards
 Air (Olilit Airport in Saumlaki)  Marine
 Bad weather
 Quality of Fuel  Poor Maintenance
 No security personnel and equipment to  Floating material
detect hazardous material  Engine problem
 Short Runway  Smoking on board
 Wild animal entry the runway  Plastic fuel tank
 Transfer equipment or material
 Poor Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting  Lack of jetty or wrong design of jetty
Equipment and personnel (floating jetty is required)
 Poor Air Traffic, communication services
personnel and equipment  Land
 Utilization of Short Take off and Landing  Social and Security
Aircraft  Weather and visibility conditions
 No Clinic in the airport  Impact by other vehicle
 No first aid kit in airport  Travelling around the village
 Driver fatigue due to long distance
 Manual refueling equipment among village to village
 Waiting room is not strerille  The road infrastructure are not well
maintained and narrow space
 No appropriate airport carriage only by  Travelling around the village
manual pallet.  Travelling to bush and jungle area
 "Damaged Runway"  Engine malfunction
 No lighting in the runway  Bad weather
 NDB Malfunction  Travelling to bush and jungle area by
motorbike
 No Fire Fighting and First Aid

14
 Mitigation measures
 Infrastructure  Services
 Air
 Fence in Olilit Airport  Air
 Runway Repair in Olli Airport  Air Chartering
 Runway Lighting in Olli Airport
 Refueling Facilities in Olli Airport
 Navigation System in Olilit Airport  Marine
 Air Traffic Services in Olli Airport  Boat with double engines
 Airport Rescue and Firefighting in Olli  Qualified skipper with the assistant
Airport
 Baggage Inspection Facilities in Olilit  Jetty improvement in Selaru
Airport
 Helipad for normal drilling support in
Olli Airport  Land
 Helipad for emergency landing in  Car leasing with a driver in Saumlaki
Selaru
 Logistics site survey  Car leasing with a driver in Selaru
 Logistics coordinator

15
 Proposed WP&B Revision

Unit: thousand USD

AFE Budget
Proposal 2011 2012-
Personnel Transport Air 3,070 768 2,303
Infrastructure Improvement 3,070 768 2,303
Personnel Transport Air 576 96 480
Service Improvement Marine 274 55 219
Land 102 20 82
952 171 781
4,022 939 3,084

16
Revised 2011 WP&B – DRILLING BUSINESS OBJECTIVES

Revised 2011 WP & B for Drilling

17
Revised 2011 WP&B – DRILLING BUSINESS OBJECTIVES

STRATEGY
 Create Drilling & Logistics Strategies (Rig / contract / procurement)

ABADI DELINEATION & BERKAT EXPLORATION WELLS

 Prepare Draft Well AFE’s, Procurement List & Plans

 Commence tenders for Abadi Delineation (4) & Berkat-1 exploration wells

 Refine all delineation & exploration well designs to minimize operational risks
for drilling / testing

 Plan & commence remedial works for Saumlaki airport & Selaru emergency
landing

 Apply the Well Delivery Process to drill & test all delineation & exploration wells

 Conduct well integrity study & develop Well Integrity Management system –
including for the Abadi Development wells

18
 Revised 2011 WP&B – DRILLING – New AFE’s

Activities AFE Amount Description

ALL ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Remediate existing Saumlaki airport
facilities and runway for safe
Logistics Survey & Remedial Actions $3,070,343
operations, plus construct
emergency landing heipad at West
Tender for Long Lead items to drill Tender and source Long lead items:
$18,475,700
delineation/exploration wells (5) OCTG, Liner Hangers, Wellheads
Conduct well integrity & cementing
Well Integrity Study & Management
$674,500 study and establish a well integrity
System
management system
Logistics Supervisor & Drilling
Engineer on intermittent assignment
Manpower 2011 (TSA) $354,500
from Tokyo to Jakarta (July to Dec
2011) to support the Drlg Team
Tender for agent & all permits to drill Select agent and process required
$1,456,000
delineation/exploration wells permits for the drilling campaign

19