Gaffney Cline Associates Resource Assessment of Manipur Blocks

RESOURCE ASSESSMENT OF THE MANIPUR BLOCK,
ONSHORE INDIA
Prepared for
JUBILANT OIL AND GAS PRIVATE LIMITED

JUBILANT OFFSHORE DRILLING PRIVATE LIMITED
JUBILANT ENERGY (KHARSANG) PRIVATE LIMITED
MAY, 2012
CONFIDENTIAL
This document contains proprietary and confidential information which may not, without the express
written permission of Gaffney, Cline & Associates, be released to any third party in any form, copied in
any way or reproduced, nor utilized for any purpose except that for which it is intended, and must be
returned upon request.
www.gaffney-cline.com
Jubilant Energy
Copy No. 1
PS-12-2046.01
Project No:
PS-12-2046.01
Prepared for: Jubilant Oil and Gas Private Limited, Jubilant Offshore Drilling Private Limited and
Jubilant Energy (Kharsang) Private Limited
This report was approved by the following Gaffney, Cline & Associates personnel:
Project Manager
___________________________
A. Nila Murti
Lead Geoscientist
7th January, 2013
Reviewed by
___________________________
Doug Peacock
Principal
7th January, 2013
Page No.
INTRODUCTION
...................................................................................................
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................
DISCUSSION
...................................................................................................
BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................
1.1
Geological Setting ...................................................................................
1.2
Petroleum System ...................................................................................
1.3
Data Availability & Current Activity..........................................................
PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES...........................................................................
13
2.1
Oinamlong Prospect................................................................................
16
2.2
Parbung Prospect....................................................................................
23
2.3
Nungba Prospect.....................................................................................
31
2.4
Kharkublen, Pherzawl, South Songsang and Songtal Leads................
36
1.
2.
TABLES
0.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.15
Manipur Blocks AA-ONN-2009/1 and AA-ONN-2009/2 Un-Risked

ProspectiveResources .........................................................................................
Oinamlong Prospect Lower Bhuban Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Prospective Resources ........................................................................................
Oinamlong Prospect Lower Bhuban Reservoir Geological Chance of Success
Oinamlong Prospect Renji Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Oinamlong Prospect Renji Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ..............
Oinamlong Prospect Upper Jenam Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Oinamlong Prospect Upper Jenam Reservoir Geological Chance of Success
Parbung Prospect Lower Bhuban Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Parbung Prospect Lower Bhuban Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ...
Parbung Prospect Renji Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Parbung Prospect Renji Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ..................
Parbung Prospect Upper Jenam Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Parbung Prospect Upper Jenam Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ....
Nungba Prospect Laisong Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Nungba Prospect Laisong Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ...............
Nungba Prospect Upper Disang Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
4
21
21
22
22
23
23
28
28
29
29
30
30
34
34
35
2.16
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
2.22
2.23
2.24
2.25
2.26
2.27
2.28
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.32
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.36
Nungba Prospect Upper Disang Reservoir Geological Chance of Success .....

Kharkublen Lead Lower Bhuban Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Kharkublen Lead Lower Bhuban Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ....
Kharkublen Lead Renji Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Kharkublen Lead Renji Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ....................
Kharkublen Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Kharkublen Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ......
Pherzawl Lead Renji Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Pherzawl Lead Renji Reservoir Geological Chance of Success........................
Pherzawl Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
Pherzawl Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Geological Chance of Success..........
Pherzawl Lead Laisong Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Pherzawl Lead Laisong Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ...................
South Songsang Lead Renji Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
South Songsang Lead Renji Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ...........
South Songsang Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic
South Songsang Lead Upper Jenam Reservoir Geological Chance of
Success
.....................................................................................................
Songtal Lead Lower Laisong Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Songtal Lead Lower Laisong Reservoir Geological Chance of Success...........
Songtal Lead Upper Disang Reservoir Un-Risked Deterministic Prospective
Resources
.....................................................................................................
Songtal Lead Upper Disang Reservoir Geological Chance of Success ............
35
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
FIGURES
0.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
Manipur Blocks Location Map .............................................................................

Manipur Blocks Regional Tectonic Setting..........................................................
Manipur Blocks Stratigraphic Column .................................................................
Discoveries and Fields Around Manipur Blocks .................................................
Surface Geological Map of Manipur Blocks ........................................................
Planned 2D Seismic Acquisition in Manipur Blocks............................................
Structural Prospects & Leads in Manipur Block ..................................................
Oinamlong-Nungba Structural Cross Section .....................................................
Oinamlong Structural Strike Section....................................................................
Top Lower Bhuban Depth Structure Map Oinamlong Area ...............................
Top Renji Depth Structure Map Oinamlong Area ...............................................
Top Jenam Depth Structure Map Oinamlong Area ............................................
Parbung Structural Cross Section .......................................................................
Parbung Structural Strike Section .......................................................................
1
7
8
9
10
12
13
17
17
18
19
20
24
24
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.16
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
Top Lower Bhuban Depth Structure Map Parbung Area ...................................

Top Renji Depth Structure Map Parbung Area ...................................................
Top Jenam Depth Structure Map Parbung Area ................................................
Nungba Structural Strike Section ........................................................................
Top Upper Laisong Depth Structure Map Nungba Area ....................................
Top Disang Depth Structure Map Nungba Area .................................................
Kharkublen Lead Cross Section ..........................................................................
Top Lower Bhuban Depth Structure Map Kharkublen Area...............................
Top Renji Depth Structure Map Kharkublen Area ..............................................
Top Jenam Depth Structure Map Kharkublen Area ...........................................
Pherzawl Lead Cross Section .............................................................................
Top Laisong Depth Structure Map Pherzawl Area .............................................
South Songsang Lead Cross Section .................................................................
APPENDICES
I.
II.
Abbreviated 2007 SPE PRMS Definitions

Glossary
25
26
27
31
32
33
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
INTRODUCTION
As instructed on 22nd March, 2012 by Jubilant Oil and Gas Private Limited (JOGPL),
Jubilant Offshore Drilling Private Limited (JODPL) and Jubilant Energy (Kharsang) Private
Limited (JEKPL), Gaffney Cline & Associates (GCA) has conducted a resource assessment of
the Manipur Blocks, which consist of two licenses, the AA-ONN-2009/1 and AA-ONN-2009/2
licenses, located in the Assam-Arakan Basin, onshore eastern part of India (Figure 0.1). A
consortium (Jubilant) consisting of JOGPL (47%), JODPL (36%) and JEKPL (17%) holds 100%
working interests in both licenses, which were awarded during the New Exploration Licensing
Policy (NELP) VIII bid round. JOGPL is the operator in both licences.
FIGURE 0.1
MANIPUR BLOCKS LOCATION MAP
Source: Jubilant
1
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
The AA-ONN-2009/1 licence (the south block) has an area of 2,217 km2 and the AAONN-2009/2 licence (the north block) covers 1,740 km2. The AA-ONN-2009/1 Production
Sharing Contract (PSC) was signed on 30th June, 2010 and the AA-ONN-2009/2 PSC was
signed on 19th July, 2010, however the effective date of the Petroleum Exploration Licence
(PEL) in both blocks is 15th November, 2010. Both PSCs stipulated an Initial Exploration Period
which consists of the first four consecutive years. In the AA-ONN-2009/1 PSC, the work
commitment during the Initial Exploration Phase consists of the acquisition, processing and
interpretation of 500 km of 2D seismic and 300 km2 of 3D seismic, and the drilling of 5
exploration wells. In the AA-ONN-2009/2 PSC, the work commitment stipulated for the Initial
Exploration Period consists of the acquisition, processing and interpretation of 500 km of 2D
seismic and 200 km2 of 3D seismic, and the drilling of 3 exploration wells. At the end of the
Initial Exploration Phase there is a provision to proceed to a Subsequent Exploration Period of
maximum three consecutive years, which is subject to committing to drill one additional
exploration well per year.
The objective of this report is to assess the Prospective Resources for the Manipur
Blocks (AA-ONN-2009/1 and AA-ONN-2009/2). The Prospective Resource estimates as of
31st March, 2012 for the Manipur Blocks have been prepared in accordance with the Petroleum
Reserves Definitions as published in March, 2007 and referred to as the Petroleum Resources
Management System (SPE-PRMS) that was approved by the Society of Petroleum Engineers,
the World Petroleum Council, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, and the
Society of Professional Evaluation Engineers (an abbreviated version of the document is
included in Appendix I).
Prospective Resources are those quantities of petroleum that are 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. Prospective Resources are further subdivided in
accordance with the level of certainty associated with recoverable estimates assuming their
discovery and development and may be sub-classified based on project maturity. There is no
certainty that any portion of the Prospective Resources will be discovered. If discovered, there
is no certainty that it will be commercially viable to produce any portion of the resources
Prospective Resources include Prospects and Leads. Prospects are features that have
been sufficiently well defined, on the basis of geological and geophysical data, to the point that
they are considered drillable. Leads, on the other hand, are not sufficiently well defined to be
drillable, and need further work and/or data. In general, leads are significantly more risky than
prospects and therefore are not suitable for explicit quantification.
Prospective Resource volumes are presented as unrisked. It must be appreciated that
Prospective Resources are risk assessed only in the context of applying the stated 'Geological
Chance of Success', a percentage which pertains to the percentage probability of achieving the
status of a Contingent Resource (where the Geological Chance of Success is unity). This
dimension of risk assessment does not incorporate the considerations of economic uncertainty
and commerciality.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
GCA understands that the results of this assessment will be used for JOGPLs fund
raising purposes, including potential farm outs of individual blocks and will be shared with third
parties. However, JOGPL/JODPL/JEKPL will ensure that either the full GCA report is shared or
where an extract from it is to be shared, the same is correct and not misleading. Wherever in
JOGPL/JODPL/JEKPLs Information Memorandum or other documents as mentioned below,
GCA is quoted as making a particular statement or conclusion or evaluation,
JOGPL/JODPL/JEKPL will obtain GCAs approval for the use of such statement or conclusion
or evaluation from the GCA report, which will not be unreasonably withheld. This will apply, but
not be confined to, statement or references in documents of a public or semi-public nature such
as information memorandum, loan agreements, prospectuses, reserve statements, press
releases etc.
GCAs work involved reviewing the geological and geophysical work, as well as other
technical work presented by JOGPL. GCAs approach primarily consisted of an audit of the
data available and any existing interpretations produced by JOGPL or any third parties. It
involved checking and validating the available interpretation of the prospects and leads, and
auditing the technical work that had been performed by JOGPL and its contractors, without
doing significant amounts of original independent work or evaluation.
Unless otherwise noted, the information upon which this report is based on was provided
to GCA by JOGPL, in the form of documents, data and discussions. Information included
geological and geophysical data, as well as exploration and drilling plans. JOGPLs technical
staff presented the technical work in GCAs Singapore office and copies of relevant information
were made available to GCA.
GCA has no reason to believe that any material facts have been withheld from it, but
does not warrant that its inquiries have revealed all of the matters that a more extensive
examination might otherwise disclose. The opinions and statements contained in this report are
made in good faith and in the belief that such opinions and statements are representative of
prevailing physical and economic circumstances.
GCA is not in a position to attest to the property title, financial interest relationships or
encumbrances thereon for any part of the appraised properties.
It should be understood that the evaluation of petroleum properties involves judgments
in respect of a series of issues and parameters that cannot be measured precisely, including the
volumes of hydrocarbons that can be produced and sold in the future, the revenues that those
hydrocarbons may generate and the costs of producing them. The opinions expressed herein
represent GCAs judgment based upon its evaluation of these issues, the data that has been
made available and the companys professional experience in the consideration of these
matters. Any evaluation may be subject to significant variation over time as new information
becomes available or perceptions of market conditions change. GCA does not guarantee the
correctness or accuracy of any interpretation made by it and does not warrant that the opinions
contained herein will be any form of guarantee of the outcome.
GCA served as independent evaluators in the conduct of the analyses described in this
report, and in the determination of the professional opinions expressed herein. The firms
directors and employees have no financial or technical interest in JOGPL, JODPL, JEKPL or
any of their holdings, and the remuneration arising from this work was not contingent on the
results reported. This report was prepared solely for the use of JOGPL, JODPL and JEKPL and
its designated assignees, and should not be used for purposes other than those for which it was
intended.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
GCA has reviewed and evaluated the data provided for the AA-ONN-2009/1 and AAONN-2009/2 licenses to estimate the resource potential for the Manipur Blocks. GCAs
estimates of the resources for the two Manipur Blocks are presented in Table 0.1.
TABLE 0.1
MANIPUR BLOCKS
AA-ONN-2009/1 AND AA-ONN-2009/2
UN-RISKED PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES
AS OF 31st MARCH, 2012
(100% GROSS LICENCE INTEREST VOLUMES)
Prospect / Lead
Reservoir
Low
Estimate
45
Gas (Bscf)
Best
High
Estimate
Estimate
223
765
GCoS
Oinamlong Prospect
Lower Bhuban
16%
Oinamlong Prospect
Renji
222
1,274
4,857
20%
Oinamlong Prospect
Upper Jenam
134
790
3,075
15%
Parbung Prospect
Lower Bhuban
46
231
791
18%
Parbung Prospect
Renji
148
849
3,234
18%
Parbung Prospect
Upper Jenam
117
693
2,697
17%
Nungba Prospect
Laisong
18
113
425
12%
Nungba Prospect
Upper Disang
29
117
9%
Kharkublen Lead
Lower Bhuban
66
329
1,131
16%
Kharkublen Lead
Renji
115
663
2,526
18%
Kharkublen Lead
Upper Jenam
49
288
1,121
13%
Pherzawl Lead
Renji
67
384
1,465
16%
Pherzawl Lead
Upper Jenam
61
363
1,411
13%
Pherzawl Lead
Laisong
12
75
298
14%
South Songsang Lead
Renji
26
148
562
8%
South Songsang Lead
Upper Jenam
48
287
1,115
8%
Songtal Lead
Lower Laisong
23
145
542
10%
Songtal Lead
Upper Disang
33
204
815
8%
Notes:
1. Resources have been estimated for volumes within the boundaries of the licences only
2. Volumes are unrisked, the GCoS have not been applied.
3. The aggregation of Prospective Resources is not appropriate due to mathematical dependency
4. Gross volumes include volumes attributable to third parties, government and other working interest partners, thus
contain volumes which are not attributable to JOGPL, JODPL or JEKPL.
5. The figures presented in this table must be considered only in the light of comments contained in the accompanying
report dated May, 2012 of which this table forms an integral part.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
The Manipur Blocks are under-explored. Due to political and geographical reasons,
there has been very little hydrocarbon exploration activity in the area until very recently. No
seismic data or well data is available within the area. The operator started the exploration effort
in the blocks by conducting surface geological mapping and structural geology reconstructions;
and based on these has identified seven prospects and leads.
The blocks are located in an area of high structural complexity, where seismic data
alone often cannot resolve or capture the details of the subsurface configuration. In this kind of
geological setting, surface geological mapping, structural geology reconstructions and the
construction of balanced cross sections are needed to understand the subsurface configuration
and identify targets. Seismic and other types of data will then be acquired over the selected
targets to better understand the subsurface configuration.
Based on surface geology mapping and structural geology reconstructions, seven
structural features, Oinamlong, Nungba, Kharkublen, Parbung, Pherzawl, South Songsang and
Songtal, have been identified. Oinamlong and Nungba are located in the north block,
Kharkublen straddles both blocks and the rest are located in the south block. Three of the
features, Oinamlong, Nungba and Parbung, have been high-graded as prospects, the rest are
considered as leads, and will mature into prospects when they are included in firm drilling plans
and preparation for the drilling of the wells have been undertaken.
A structure can generally only be described as a prospect if all data acquisition and
technical work is complete and is considered drill-ready. However, although several types of
data including seismic and gradiometry, are currently being acquired and processed for the
Oinamlong, Nungba and Parbung features, there are firm plans to drill these in the 2012 and
2013 drilling campaign and preparations to drill are well underway; hence here they have been
categorised as prospects. The new data may influence the drilling trajectory and subsurface
location of these wells, but the change will unlikely be major and the subsurface locations will
not change more than a few hundred metres.
Acquisition of 2D seismic data is on-going for the prospects and will be followed by
acquisition for the leads. The results of the 2D seismic data will be processed, interpreted and
integrated in the current interpretation. An airborne gradiometry, gravity and magnetics survey
has been conducted and the results are being processed and are waiting for security clearance
from the government. The data will also be interpreted and integrated into the interpretation.
The new interpretation will enhance the subsurface understanding and may change slightly the
subsurface targets depths and locations. The integration of the data into the current
interpretation for the leads will likely upgrade them into prospects.
The drilling targets are the sandstone reservoirs of the Lower Bhuban, Renji, Jenam,
Laisong and the Disang Formations. Hydrocarbons have been discovered in the Lower Bhuban
and the Renji, but the rest of the target reservoirs have not been known as reservoirs in the
neighbouring area. Further away, in Myanmar and in Upper Assam, the equivalents of the
Eocene Disang sandstones have been proven to contain hydrocarbon. The GCoS for the
prospects and leads ranges from 9% to 20%, hence they range from fairly risky to of medium
risk. Integration of the gradiometry, gravity, magnetics and seismic data may lower the risks.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
DISCUSSION
1.
BACKGROUND
1.1
Geological Setting
The Manipur Blocks are located in the Assam-Arakan Basin, onshore NE India in the
state of Manipur. The area is tectonically active due to the collision between the Indian
subcontinent and the Eurasian continent. The block forms part of the Mizoram-Cachar Fold
Belt, to the west of the Assam-Arakan Fold-Thrust Belt (also known as the Indo-Burmese
Range) (Figure 1.1). The topography of the blocks is dominated by rugged jungle-covered hilly
terrain, formed by NNE-SSW oriented anticlines. West of the block, beyond the Cachar Hills
and straddling the India-Bangladesh border, lies the Surma Basin, a western extension of the
Assam Basin.
The Assam-Arakan Basin developed as a composite shelf-slope-basinal system in a
passive margin setting during the period from Early Cretaceous to Early Tertiary, when the
Indian Plate was drifting northwards following the breakup of Gondwanaland. The shelf part of
the basin is spread over the Brahmaputra Valley and rests on Pre-Cambrian granitic basement.
The slope to basinal part lies below the Naga Hills and the Mizoram-Cachar Fold Belt, and is
underlain by transitional and oceanic crust.
The collision of the Indian Plate with the Eurasian Plates during the Late Eocene
resulted in the subduction of the Indian Plate beneath western Burma. The rapidly subsiding
depocentre related to this subduction provided space for up to 11 km of Oligo-Miocene
sediments associated with a major delta system. The sediments were supplied by the uplift
areas created by the development of the Himalaya and the progressive uplift of the IndoBurmese Range.
The stratigraphic column of the Manipur Blocks is shown in Figure 1.2, along with the
lithology, the related tectonic events and formation thicknesses.
1.2
Petroleum System
The petroleum system in the Assam-Arakan Basin is generally proven in the Upper
Assam area, about 200 km to the north of the block and in the Surma Basin about 100 km to the
west of the block, where oil and gas have been discovered and produced (Figure 1.3). Within
the immediate vicinity of the Manipur Blocks no major discovery has been made, but
hydrocarbon shows have been reported. Approximately 30 km to the west of the blocks, of the
13 wells drilled in the Banaskandi structure, 3 are hydrocarbon bearing in the Upper Bhuban.
One well drilled in the Bhubandar structure, about 25 km to the west of the Manipur Blocks,
shows gas in the Upper Bhuban and has minor gas in the Lower Bhuban. Around 50 km west
of the block, 2 of the 3 Masimpur wells has hydrocarbon shows. One of the wells in the Rengte
structure, about 30 km to the west of the Manipur Blocks has gas indications during drilling.
Recently ONGC reported a 0.56 MMscfgd flow on testing the Hortoki-1 well about 40 km west of
the block.
The potential source rocks in the Manipur Blocks area are the shales of the Eocene age
Disang Group and the Oligocene Jenam Formation. East of the Manipur Blocks the Disang
claystones show Total Organic Carbon (TOC) values as high as 8%. The potential reservoirs
are the Lower Bhuban, Renji, Jenam, Laisong and Upper Disang Formations. The main
regional seal is the Middle Bhuban Formation, but seals can also be provided by the Jenam
claystones and the claystones and mudstones of the base Lower Bhuban Formation.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 1.1
MANIPUR BLOCKS REGIONAL TECTONIC SETTING
Source: Structural Geology Intl
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 1.2
MANIPUR BLOCKS STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN
Source: Oolithica Geoscience
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 1.3
DISCOVERIES AND FIELDS AROUND MANIPUR BLOCKS
Source: Jubilant
1.3
Data Availability & Current Activity
The Manipur Blocks are under-explored. The two licenses of the block were the first
petroleum exploration licenses to be awarded in the State of Manipur. There are only very few
published studies on the geology of western Manipur and only regional geology maps were
available when the block was awarded. No seismic data is available and no well has been
drilled in the Manipur Blocks.
A series of field-based studies have since been conducted by contractors on behalf of
the operator. The geological and stratigraphic mappings were conducted by Oolithica
Geoscience and the structural geology reconstruction was conducted by Structural Geology
International. These studies form the main basis of the current understanding of the
prospectivity of the area. The geological map of the Manipur Block, constructed based on
interpretation of satellite image and supplemented by field traverses and helicopter traverses is
shown in Figure 1.4. Nine balanced cross sections and 14 balanced structural strike sections
were created in the studies. The locations of these sections are shown in blue lines in Figure
1.4. A series of depth structure maps were created based on these sections.
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 1.4
SURFACE GEOLOGICAL MAP OF MANIPUR BLOCKS
Source: Jubilant
10
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Based on the surface geological mapping work, seven structural features have been
identified in the block (yellow shaded areas in Figure 1.4). These features were identified
based on the NNE-SSW oriented surface manifestation of structural uplifts observed in the
satellite imagery and during the field work, and were further confirmed after the balanced
structural sections and structure depth maps over the block have been constructed.
Recently an airborne Gradiometry Gravity-Magnetic survey was conducted over the
block. The number of lines acquired is 147, totalling 5,273 km, covering an area of around
4,000 km2. The survey covers the Manipur Blocks in a 1 km by 5 km grid. Processing of the
gradiometry data is underway. However the results are yet to be approved for release by the
government. After security clearance from the Ministry of Defence has been obtained, the data
will be interpreted by a contractor and integrated with the current geological dataset to further
confirm the subsurface configuration predicted by the structural geology work.
A series of 2D seismic surveys has been planned over the seven structural features; 240
line km in the north block and 432 line km in the south block. Priority has been placed to
acquire 120 line km of the 240 km planned in the north block and 100 line km of the 432 line km
planned in the south block, as shown in Figure 1.5. The thick blue lines in Figure 1.5 represent
the priority lines. The priority lines in the north block will image the Oinamlong and Nungba
Prospects. The priority lines in the south block will cover the Kharkublen and Parbung
Prospects. The survey of the priority lines is underway simultaneously in both blocks. Results
have been received for the first few lines, but they are still being processed and therefore have
not yet been included in the current review. The rest of the lines will be acquired in 2013 after
the rainy season is over.
Drilling preparations have commenced for the 2012 and 2013 drilling campaign. Three
wells have been planned for the 2012 and 2013 campaign, two in the north block (Oinamlong
and Nungba) and one in the south block (Parbung).
11
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 1.5
PLANNED 2D SEISMIC ACQUISITION IN MANIPUR BLOCKS
120 LKM
100 LKM
Source: Jubilant
12
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
2.
PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES
Seven structural features have been identified within the Manipur Blocks (Figure 2.1),
namely Oinamlong, Nungba, Parbung, Pherzawl, Kharkublen, South Songsang and Songtal.
Oinamlong and Nungba are located in the north block, Kharkublen straddles both blocks and
the rest are located in the south block.
FIGURE 2.1
STRUCTURAL PROSPECTS & LEADS IN MANIPUR BLOCK
Source: Jubilant
13
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Of the seven structural features, the Oinamlong, Nungba and Parbung features are
considered as prospects, and the rest as leads. All the seven structural features were identified
based on the same dataset, which consists mainly of satellite image, DEM data and surface
geology data, integrated in a structural geology study. Further data, gradiometry and seismic,
has been planned and is currently being acquired and processed. These will provide better
subsurface understanding for all of the structural features. The Oinamlong, Nungba and
Parbung features have been considered as prospects because drilling preparations for these
structures are well underway. Surface locations have been defined for the Oinamlong, Nungba
and Parbung features and civil engineering work has been initiated on the locations. Formation
depths have been estimated, and pore pressure studies and well design are underway for the
three features.
Drilling is planned to commence towards the end of 2012. The Oinamlong Prospect will
be drilled first, followed by the Nungba Prospect and the Parbung Prospect.
The gradiometry, gravity, magnetic and seismic data currently being processed will be
integrated with the current dataset to provide better understanding of the subsurface of the
leads, and may change the depth and location of the subsurface targets, although the change is
not likely to be more than a few hundred metres and the surface locations will not change. The
integration of the data may help to lower the risks in these prospects and leads.
The potential source interval within the Manipur area is the Disang claystones, which
show significant Total Organic Carbon (TOC) levels. Analysis of the Disang outcrop samples
shows TOC of 6-8%. The Disang samples also show that the Disang claystones have reached
the oil window and possibly into the gas window, with vitrinite reflectance (Ro) data ranging from
0.56 to 1.29 and some samples attaining Ro of 1% or above. Another possible source rock is
the Jenam claystones. The average TOC is 0.36%, but some samples show 2.6% of TOC. The
Jenam samples show maturity range from immature to mature for oil generation. Based on the
type of hydrocarbon discovered and produced within the vicinity of the Manipur Blocks, it is most
likely that the hydrocarbons trapped in the Manipur Blocks would be gas.
The structural traps were not defined based on seismic imaging of the subsurface, and
were only inferred from surface geology data and structural geology reconstruction. However,
there are surface manifestations of the anticlines, which were readily apparent in satellite
images and were confirmed by field observations, and the balanced structural sections were
constrained by good quality surface measured data and thorough stratigraphic mapping. In
general, the risk in trap is relatively low, although risks are elevated on those structures that
have to depend on fault instead of having four-way dip closure.
The target reservoirs are the Lower Bhuban Formation, the Renji Formation, the upper
part of the Jenam Formation, the Laisong Formation and the upper part of the Disang
Formation.
The Lower Bhuban is a sequence of basal claystones overlain by a sandstone
dominated section. The sequence is likely a product of offshore bars and distributary channels
deposited under moderate to high energy conditions. The Renji Formation is described as
typically comprising bright red sandstones. The Jenam sandstone is thought to have been
deposited in a shallow water near shore environment. The depositional setting is proximal tidal
delta front, with local development of distributary channels. The Laisong Formation is a
sandstone dominated package, deposited in shallow water fluvio-deltaic to nearshore / shoreline
environment. The Disang is a mainly shaly formation, but it contains some high-energy
amalgamated sandstone packages, which could represent storm or turbidite sands. The
Disang, Laisong and Jenam Formations have not been known as reservoirs in the area, but field
14
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
mapping within the blocks suggest high sandstone content. The Renji and the Lower Bhuban
Formations are not the main reservoirs in the neighbouring Bangladeshi fields, but
hydrocarbons have been recovered from these reservoirs in the nearby Cachar area. The
surface geology mapping exercise suggests that there is a prolonged period of non-deposition
or exposure at the top of Renji Formation, which may elevate its porosity.
The main risk associated with the prospects and leads is in general the presence of a
seal. The Lower Bhuban is reportedly sandstone dominated, hence intra-formational seals may
not be present or may be insufficient to provide good vertical seal. The claystone-rich upper
part of the Middle Bhuban, which is expected to provide seals for the Lower Bhuban may be
eroded at the top of the anticlines and may not have enough thickness to provide proper
sealing. For the Renji reservoir, the claystone section at the base of the Lower Bhuban
Formation may not provide sufficient thickness for sealing. The same problem is faced by the
Jenam reservoir, which is overlaid by the sand-prone Renji and Lower Bhuban Formations. The
Laisong and the Disang reservoirs have better chance of getting seals from the Jenam
claystones at the lower part of the Jenam Formation.
The range of volumes for the leads in the Manipur Blocks was estimated based on the
following assumptions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The structural closures are not filled to the maximum. The areal extent is assumed
to be 30%, 50% and 80% of the maximum areal closures for the Low, Best and
High Cases, respectively. The maximum closure areas of the prospects and leads
were defined from the depth structure maps created based on the balanced
structural sections and surface mapping. The areal extents range from 9 km2 to
170 km2, averaging 62 km2. In the Best Case the effective areas range from 4 to
85 km2, averaging 31 km2. These areal extents are similar to those in comparable
gas fields across the border in Bangladesh.
Net thicknesses for the Lower Bhuban were assumed to be 30, 50, and 70 m thick
for the Low, Best and High Cases, respectively, while for the Renji, Upper Jenam
and Laisong Formation net thicknesses were assumed to be 20, 40 and 60 m. The
Upper Disang net thicknesses were assumed to be 10, 20 and 30 m in the Low,
Best and High Cases, respectively. These thickness ranges are in general within
the total net reservoir thickness ranges shown by data from the Bakhrabad,
Beanibazar, Begumganj, Fenchuganj, Kailas Tila, Meghna, Rashidpur and Salda
Nadi gas fields in Bangladesh.
The Best Estimate porosity value for the Lower Bhuban sandstones is assumed to
be 17%, the Renji 14%, the Jenam 12%; while the Laisong and the Disang Best
Estimate porosity values are 10%. Porosity values decrease with increasing burial
depth. Regional burial history analysis shows the Laisong to be buried down to
5,500 m and the Lower Bhuban to about 3,000 m. Core data from outcrop
samples in the neighbouring area show Helium porosity ranging from 12% to 20%,
although except in Lower Bhuban, elevated porosity are thought to be the effect of
weathering. Gas fields in Bangladesh, which has younger reservoirs and less
burial depth show an average porosity value of 18% to 22%.
The hydrocarbon saturation is assumed to be ranging from 50% to 70%.
Gas Expansion Factors were estimated based on estimated depth of the reservoir,
assuming normal pressure gradient down to about 1,000 m TVDss with 700 psi
overpressure thereafter, a geothermal gradient of 20C/km and no CO2 or H2S.
For the normal pressured reservoirs, we have assumed a recovery factor range of
60%, 70% and 75% in the Low, Best and High Cases respectively. For overpressured reservoirs a range of 60%, 70% and 80% were used in the Low, Best
and High Cases respectively.
15
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
The resulting range of volumes for the prospects and leads in the Manipur Blocks is
within the range of the volumes of the gas fields across the India-Bangladesh border, several of
which are large gas fields. The Habiganj Field has a reported GIIP of 3.7 Tcf, the Kailas Tila
also 3.7 Tcf, the Rashidpur 2.2 Tcf and the Titas 4.1 Tcf. The smaller fields are reported to
have GIIP of between 25 Bcf to 1.4 Tcf.
2.1
Oinamlong Prospect
The Oinamlong Prospect is a NNE-SSW trending, elongated, double-plunging anticline

located in the west central part of the north block. It is a broad, asymmetric structural uplift with
a steep west limb and a gently dipping eastern limb. The prospect is targeting the Lower
Bhuban reservoir at 200 m TVDss, the Renji reservoir at 1,220 m TVDss and the Upper Jenam
reservoir at 2,100 m TVDss depth. The cross and strike sections through the prospect are
shown in Figures 2.2 and 2.3. The locations of the cross and strike sections are shown in
Figure 2.1. The structure maps for the Lower Bhuban, the Renji and the Jenam reservoirs are
shown in Figures 2.4 to 2.6.
The estimates of the Oinamlong Prospects Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated
Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.1, 2.3 and 2.5.
The GCoS for the Oinamlong Prospect ranges from 15% to 20% in the different
reservoirs. The main risk for all reservoir levels is associated with seal. The main shaly section
that is expected to provide the seal is the Middle Bhuban. However, the Middle Bhuban is found
to be quite sandy, although it is less so in the western part of Manipur. The seal risk is highest
for the Lower Bhuban target, which is located very near the surface, and therefore might not
have sufficient seal. The GCoS for the Oinamlong Prospects reservoir targets are summarised
in Tables 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6.
16
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.2
OINAMLONG-NUNGBA STRUCTURAL CROSS SECTION
FIGURE 2.3
OINAMLONG STRUCTURAL STRIKE SECTION
17
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.4
TOP LOWER BHUBAN DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP OINAMLONG AREA
Oinamlong
18
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.5
TOP RENJI DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP OINAMLONG AREA
Oinamlong
19
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.6
TOP JENAM DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP OINAMLONG AREA
Oinamlong
20
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.1
OINAMLONG PROSPECT LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
UN-RISKED DETERMINISTIC PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES
GROSS WORKING INTEREST (100%)
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
18.0
30.0
48.0
Net Thickness (m)
30
50
70
1.00
0.95
0.90
Net Rock Volume (10 m )
540
1,425
3,024
Porosity
0.14
0.17
0.20
Hydrocarbon Saturation
0.50
0.60
0.70
Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)
56
62
68
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
75%
Deterministic
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
74
318
1,020
EUR Gas (Bscf)
45
223
765
Geometric factor
6
TABLE 2.2
OINAMLONG PROSPECT LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
GEOLOGICAL CHANCE OF SUCCESS
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
80%
80%
40%
16%
21
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.3
OINAMLONG PROSPECT RENJI RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
51.0
85.0
136.0
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
1,020
3,230
7,344
Porosity
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.50
0.60
0.70
171
190
209
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
370
1,820
6,071
EUR Gas (Bscf)
222
1,274
4,857
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.4
OINAMLONG PROSPECT RENJI RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
70%
90%
50%
20%
22
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.5
OINAMLONG PROSPECT UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
34.2
57.0
91.2
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
684
2,166
4,925
Porosity
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.50
0.60
0.70
185
205
226
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
223
1,129
3,843
EUR Gas (Bscf)
134
790
3,075
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.6
OINAMLONG PROSPECT UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
2.2
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
60%
80%
50%
15%
Parbung Prospect
The Parbung Prospect is a NNE-SSW trending elongated double plunging anticline

located in the southwest corner of the south block. It is a fairly broad structural uplift, with a
well-defined plunge to both north and south. The prospect is targeting the Lower Bhuban
reservoir at 200 m TVDss (200 m above sea level), the Renji reservoir at 1,300 m TVDss and
the Upper Jenam reservoir at 2,330 m. The ground level at the drilling site is 753 m. The cross
and strike sections through the Parbung Prospect are shown in Figures 2.7 and 2.8. The
locations of the cross and strike sections are shown in Figure 2.1. The structure maps for the
Lower Bhuban, the Renji and the Jenam reservoirs are shown in Figures 2.9 to 2.11.
23
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.7
PARBUNG STRUCTURAL CROSS SECTION
FIGURE 2.8
PARBUNG STRUCTURAL STRIKE SECTION
24
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.9
TOP LOWER BHUBAN DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP PARBUNG AREA
Parbung
25
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.10
TOP RENJI DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP PARBUNG AREA
Parbung
Pherzawl
26
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.11
TOP JENAM DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP PARBUNG AREA
Parbung
Pherzawl
27
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
The estimates of the Parbung Prospects Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated
Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.7, 2.9 and
2.11.
The GCoS for the Parbung Prospect ranges from 17% to 18% in the different reservoirs.
The main risk for all reservoir levels is associated with seal. The main shaly section that is
expected to provide the seal is the Middle Bhuban. However, the Middle Bhuban is found to be
quite sandy, although it is less so in the western part of Manipur. The GCoS for the Parbung
Prospects reservoir targets are summarised in Tables 2.8, 2.10 and 2.12.
TABLE 2.7
PARBUNG PROSPECT LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
21.0
35.0
56.0
Net Thickness (m)
30
50
70
1.00
0.95
0.90
630
1,663
3,528
Porosity
0.14
0.17
0.20
0.50
0.60
0.70
50
55
61
60%
70%
75%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
77
329
1,055
EUR Gas (Bscf)
46
231
791
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6

Gas Recovery Factor
Deterministic
TABLE 2.8
PARBUNG PROSPECT LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
80%
90%
40%
18%
28
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.9
PARBUNG PROSPECT RENJI RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
27.0
45.0
72.0
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
540
1,710
3,888
Porosity
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.50
0.60
0.70
215
239
263
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
246
1,212
4,043
EUR Gas (Bscf)
148
849
3,234
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.10
PARBUNG PROSPECT RENJI RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
70%
80%
50%
18%
29
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.11
PARBUNG PROSPECT UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
24.6
41.0
65.6
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
492
1,558
3,542
Porosity
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.50
0.60
0.70
225
250
275
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
195
990
3,371
EUR Gas (Bscf)
117
693
2,697
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.12
PARBUNG PROSPECT UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
60%
90%
50%
17%
30
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
2.3
Nungba Prospect
The Nungba Prospect is a NNE-SSW trending, elongated, narrow anticline located in the
eastern part of the north block. Around half of the area of the anticline extends outside the
block boundary. The structure is a narrow, almost symmetric structural uplift. The structure has
a readily identifiable southern plunge but a less apparent northern plunge. The prospect is
targeting the Laisong reservoir at 200 m TVDss and the Upper Disang reservoir at 3,500 m
TVDss. The cross section through the Nungba Prospect is shown together with the Oinamlong
Prospect in Figure 2.2. The strike section through the Nungba Prospect is shown in Figure
2.12. The locations of the cross and strike sections are shown in Figure 2.1. The structure
map for the Laisong and the Disang (also known as Nony Shale) reservoir is shown in Figures
2.13 and 2.14.
The estimates of the Nungba Prospects Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated
Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.13 and 2.15.
The Nungba Prospect is considered high risk. There are high risks associated with the
reservoirs, which have not been found to be productive in the neighbouring area, although the
age equivalent sands have been proven across the Myanmar border. There is also a high risk
associated with seals for the Laisong reservoir, which is located very near the surface, hence
might not have sufficient seal. The GCoS for the Nungba Prospect reservoirs are summarised
in Tables 2.14 and 2.16.
FIGURE 2.12
NUNGBA STRUCTURAL STRIKE SECTION
31
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.13
TOP UPPER LAISONG DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP NUNGBA AREA
Nungba
32
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.14
TOP DISANG DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP NUNGBA AREA
Nungba
33
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.13
NUNGBA PROSPECT LAISONG RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
15.1
25.2
40.2
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
302
956
2,173
Porosity
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.50
0.60
0.70
72
80
88
60%
70%
75%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
31
162
567
EUR Gas (Bscf)
18
113
425
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6

Gas Recovery Factor
Deterministic
TABLE 2.14
NUNGBA PROSPECT LAISONG RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
70%
50%
70%
60%
12%
34
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.15
NUNGBA PROSPECT UPPER DISANG RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
2.6
4.3
6.8
Net Thickness (m)
10
20
30
1.00
0.95
0.90
26
81
184
Porosity
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.50
0.60
0.70
221
245
270
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
42
147
EUR Gas (Bscf)
29
117
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.16
NUNGBA PROSPECT UPPER DISANG RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
70%
40%
70%
60%
9%
35
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
2.4
Kharkublen, Pherzawl, South Songsang and Songtal Leads
The Kharkublen Lead is a NNE-SSW trending elongated double plunging anticline

straddling the north and south blocks in their western side. It is a tight, slightly asymmetric east
vergent anticline. The lead targets the Lower Bhuban reservoir at around 100 m TVDss, the
Renji reservoir at around 1,800 m TVDss and the Upper Jenam reservoir at approximately
4,200 m TVDss. The cross section of the Kharkublen Lead is shown in Figure 2.15. The
structure depth maps of the Lower Bhuban, Renji and Upper Jenam at Kharkublen structure are
shown in Figures 2.16 to 2.18. The estimates of the Kharkublen Leads Gas Initially In Place
(GIIP) and Estimated Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in
Tables 2.17, 2.19 and 2.21, while the GCoS are summarised in Tables 2.18, 2.20 and 2.12.
The Pherzawl Lead is a NNE-SSW trending elongated double plunging anticline at the
southern-most part of the south block. It is an asymmetric, west-vergent structural uplift with a
well-defined, gently-dipping east limb and a steeply-dipping west limb. Part of the anticline
extends outside the block boundary. The lead targets the Renji reservoir at around 1,500 m
TVDss, the Upper Jenam reservoir at around 2,300 m TVDss and the Laisong reservoir at
around 4,000 m TVDss. The cross section of the Pherzawl Lead is shown in Figure 2.19. The
structure depth map of the Renji and the Jenam Formations in the Pherzawl area can be seen
at the structure depth maps of the respective reservoirs in Parbung area (Figures 2.10 and
2.11). The structure depth map of the Laisong reservoir at Pherzawl area is shown in Figure
2.20. The estimates of the Pherzawl Leads Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated Ultimate
Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.23, 2.25 and 2.27, while
the GCoS are summarised in Tables 2.24, 2.26 and 2.28.
The South Songsang Lead is a NNE-SSW trending elongated anticline at the southernmost part of the south block. The structure has a clear southern plunge but a less apparent
northern plunge. The South Songsang anticline is separated from the Nungba anticline by a
strike slip fault. If the fault is non-sealing, the lead could be part of a greater Nungba anticline.
The lead targets the Renji reservoir at around 1,100 m TVDss and the Upper Jenam reservoir at
around 2,100 m TVDss. The cross section of the South Songsang Lead is shown in Figure
2.21. The estimates of the South Songsang Leads Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated
Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.29 and 2.31,
while the GCoS are summarised in Tables 2.30 and 2.32.
The Songtal Lead is a small NNE-SSW trending double plunging anticline at the
southeastern corner of the south block. The lead targets the Lower Laisong reservoir at around
650 m TVDss and the Upper Disang reservoir at around 1,950 m TVDss. The cross section of
the Songtal Lead is shown in Figure 2.7, in the Parbung cross section. The estimates of the
Songtal Leads Gas Initially In Place (GIIP) and Estimated Ultimate Recovery (EUR) ranges for
each reservoir are summarised in Tables 2.33 and 2.35, while the GCoS are summarised in
Tables 2.34 and 2.36
36
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.15
KHARKUBLEN LEAD CROSS SECTION
37
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.16
TOP LOWER BHUBAN DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP KHARKUBLEN AREA
Kharkublen
38
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.17
TOP RENJI DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP KHARKUBLEN AREA
Kharkublen
39
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.18
TOP JENAM DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP KHARKUBLEN AREA
Kharkublen
40
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.19
PHERZAWL LEAD CROSS SECTION
41
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.20
TOP LAISONG DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP PHERZAWL AREA
Pherzawl
42
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
FIGURE 2.21
SOUTH SONGSANG LEAD CROSS SECTION
43
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.17
KHARKUBLEN LEAD LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
30.0
50.0
80.0
Net Thickness (m)
30
50
70
1.00
0.95
0.90
900
2,375
5,040
Porosity
0.14
0.17
0.20
0.50
0.60
0.70
50
55
61
60%
70%
75%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
110
471
1,508
EUR Gas (Bscf)
66
329
1,131
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6

Gas Recovery Factor
Deterministic
TABLE 2.18
KHARKUBLEN LEAD LOWER BHUBAN RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
80%
80%
40%
16%
44
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.19
KHARKUBLEN LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
24.0
40.0
64.0
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
480
1,520
3,456
Porosity
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.50
0.60
0.70
189
210
231
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
192
947
3,158
EUR Gas (Bscf)
115
663
2,526
Area (km )
Geometric factor
6
Deterministic
TABLE 2.20
KHARKUBLEN LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
70%
80%
50%
18%
45
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.21
KHARKUBLEN LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
9.0
15.0
24.0
Net Thickness (m)
20
40
60
1.00
0.95
0.90
180
570
1,296
Porosity
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.50
0.60
0.70
256
284
312
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
81
412
1,401
EUR Gas (Bscf)
49
288
1,121
Geometric factor
6
DETERMINISTIC
TABLE 2.22
KHARKUBLEN LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
50%
80%
50%
13%
46
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.23
PHERZAWL LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
13.4
22.4
35.8
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
Net Rock Volume (106 m3)
268
849
1,931
Porosity
0.12
0.50
196
0.14
0.60
218
0.16
0.70
240
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
111
549
1,832
EUR Gas (Bscf)
67
384
1,465
Deterministic
TABLE 2.24
PHERZAWL LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
70%
70%
50%
16%
47
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.25
PHERZAWL LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
13.4
22.4
35.8
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
268
849
1,931
Porosity
0.10
0.50
216
0.12
0.60
240
0.14
0.70
264
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
102
518
1,764
EUR Gas (Bscf)
61
363
1,411
Deterministic
TABLE 2.26
PHERZAWL LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
60%
70%
50%
13%
48
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.27
PHERZAWL LEAD LAISONG RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
2.7
4.5
7.2
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
54
171
389
Porosity
0.08
0.50
265
0.10
0.60
294
0.12
0.70
323
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
20
107
373
EUR Gas (Bscf)
12
75
298
Deterministic
TABLE 2.28
PHERZAWL LEAD LAISONG RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
80%
40%
80%
70%
14%
49
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.29
SOUTH SONGSANG LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
6.0
10.0
16.0
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
120
380
864
Porosity
0.12
0.50
168
0.14
0.60
187
0.16
0.70
206
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
43
211
703
EUR Gas (Bscf)
26
148
562
Deterministic
TABLE 2.30
SOUTH SONGSANG LEAD RENJI RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
70%
70%
50%
40%
8%
50
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.31
SOUTH SONGSANG LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
11.1
18.5
29.6
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
222
703
1,598
Porosity
0.10
0.50
206
0.12
0.60
229
0.14
0.70
252
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
81
409
1,393
EUR Gas (Bscf)
48
287
1,115
Deterministic
TABLE 2.32
SOUTH SONGSANG LEAD UPPER JENAM RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
70%
60%
50%
50%
8%
51
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.33
SONGTAL LEAD LOWER LAISONG RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
13.5
22.5
36.0
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
20
1.00
40
0.95
60
0.90
270
855
1,944
Porosity
0.08
0.50
103
0.10
0.60
114
0.12
0.70
125
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
75%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
39
207
723
EUR Gas (Bscf)
23
145
542
Deterministic
TABLE 2.34
SONGTAL LEAD LOWER LAISONG RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
60%
50%
70%
60%
10%
52
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
TABLE 2.35
SONGTAL LEAD UPPER DISANG RESERVOIR
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
Area (km )
19.8
33.0
52.8
Net Thickness (m)

Geometric factor
10
1.00
20
0.95
30
0.90
198
627
1,426
Porosity
0.08
0.50
197
0.10
0.60
219
0.12
0.70
241
Gas Recovery Factor
60%
70%
80%
Low Case
Best Case
High Case
GIIP (Bscf)
55
291
1,019
EUR Gas (Bscf)
33
204
815
Deterministic
TABLE 2.36
SONGTAL LEAD UPPER DISANG RESERVOIR
Source
Migration
Reservoir
Trap
Seal
GCoS
80%
60%
40%
70%
60%
8%
53
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
APPENDIX I
ABBREVIATED 2007 SPE PRMS DEFINITIONS
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Society of Petroleum Engineers, World Petroleum Council, American Association of Petroleum

Geologists and Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers
Petroleum Resources Management System
Definitions and Guidelines (1)
March 2007
Preamble
Petroleum resources are the estimated quantities of hydrocarbons naturally occurring on or within the Earths
crust. Resource assessments estimate total quantities in known and yet-to-be-discovered accumulations;
resources evaluations are focused on those quantities that can potentially be recovered and marketed by
commercial projects. A petroleum resources management system provides a consistent approach to estimating
petroleum quantities, evaluating development projects, and presenting results within a comprehensive
classification framework.
International efforts to standardize the definition of petroleum resources and how they are estimated began in
the 1930s. Early guidance focused on Proved Reserves. Building on work initiated by the Society of Petroleum
Evaluation Engineers (SPEE), SPE published definitions for all Reserves categories in 1987. In the same year,
the World Petroleum Council (WPC, then known as the World Petroleum Congress), working independently,
published Reserves definitions that were strikingly similar. In 1997, the two organizations jointly released a
single set of definitions for Reserves that could be used worldwide. In 2000, the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists (AAPG), SPE and WPC jointly developed a classification system for all petroleum
resources. This was followed by additional supporting documents: supplemental application evaluation
guidelines (2001) and a glossary of terms utilized in Resources definitions (2005). SPE also published
standards for estimating and auditing reserves information (revised 2007).
These definitions and the related classification system are now in common use internationally within the
petroleum industry. They provide a measure of comparability and reduce the subjective nature of resources
estimation. However, the technologies employed in petroleum exploration, development, production and
processing continue to evolve and improve. The SPE Oil and Gas Reserves Committee works closely with
other organizations to maintain the definitions and issues periodic revisions to keep current with evolving
technologies and changing commercial opportunities.
The SPE PRMS document consolidates, builds on, and replaces guidance previously contained in the 1997
Petroleum Reserves Definitions, the 2000 Petroleum Resources Classification and Definitions publications, and
the 2001 Guidelines for the Evaluation of Petroleum Reserves and Resources; the latter document remains a
valuable source of more detailed background information.
These definitions and guidelines are designed to provide a common reference for the international petroleum
industry, including national reporting and regulatory disclosure agencies, and to support petroleum project and
portfolio management requirements. They are intended to improve clarity in global communications regarding
petroleum resources. It is expected that SPE PRMS will be supplemented with industry education programs
and application guides addressing their implementation in a wide spectrum of technical and/or commercial
settings.
It is understood that these definitions and guidelines allow flexibility for users and agencies to tailor application
for their particular needs; however, any modifications to the guidance contained herein should be clearly
identified. The definitions and guidelines contained in this document must not be construed as modifying the
interpretation or application of any existing regulatory reporting requirements.
The full text of the SPE PRMS Definitions and Guidelines can be viewed at:
www.spe.org/specma/binary/files/6859916Petroleum_Resources_Management_System_2007.pdf
These Definitions and Guidelines are extracted from the Society of Petroleum Engineers / World Petroleum Council / American
Association of Petroleum Geologists / Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers (SPE/WPC/AAPG/SPEE) Petroleum Resources
Management System document (SPE PRMS), approved in March 2007.
AI.1
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
RESERVES
Reserves are those quantities of petroleum anticipated to be commercially recoverable by application
of development projects to known accumulations from a given date forward under defined conditions.
Reserves must satisfy four criteria: they must be discovered, recoverable, commercial, and remaining based on
the development project(s) applied. Reserves are further subdivided in accordance with the level of certainty
associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on project maturity and/or characterized by
their development and production status. To be included in the Reserves class, a project must be sufficiently
defined to establish its commercial viability. There must be a reasonable expectation that all required internal
and external approvals will be forthcoming, and there is evidence of firm intention to proceed with development
within a reasonable time frame. A reasonable time frame for the initiation of development depends on the
specific circumstances and varies according to the scope of the project. While 5 years is recommended as a
benchmark, a longer time frame could be applied where, for example, development of economic projects are
deferred at the option of the producer for, among other things, market-related reasons, or to meet contractual
or strategic objectives. In all cases, the justification for classification as Reserves should be clearly
documented. To be included in the Reserves class, there must be a high confidence in the commercial
producibility of the reservoir as supported by actual production or formation tests. In certain cases, Reserves
may be assigned on the basis of well logs and/or core analysis that indicate that the subject reservoir is
hydrocarbon-bearing and is analogous to reservoirs in the same area that are producing or have demonstrated
the ability to produce on formation tests.
On Production
The development project is currently producing and selling petroleum to market.
The key criterion is that the project is receiving income from sales, rather than the approved
development project necessarily being complete. This is the point at which the project chance of
commerciality can be said to be 100%. The project decision gate is the decision to initiate commercial
production from the project.
Approved for Development
A discovered accumulation where project activities are ongoing to justify commercial development in the
foreseeable future.
At this point, it must be certain that the development project is going ahead. The project must not be
subject to any contingencies such as outstanding regulatory approvals or sales contracts. Forecast
capital expenditures should be included in the reporting entitys current or following years approved
budget. The project decision gate is the decision to start investing capital in the construction of
production facilities and/or drilling development wells.
Justified for Development
Implementation of the development project is justified on the basis of reasonable forecast commercial
conditions at the time of reporting, and there are reasonable expectations that all necessary
approvals/contracts will be obtained.
In order to move to this level of project maturity, and hence have reserves associated with it, the
development project must be commercially viable at the time of reporting, based on the reporting entitys
assumptions of future prices, costs, etc. (forecast case) and the specific circumstances of the project.
Evidence of a firm intention to proceed with development within a reasonable time frame will be sufficient
to demonstrate commerciality. There should be a development plan in sufficient detail to support the
assessment of commerciality and a reasonable expectation that any regulatory approvals or sales
contracts required prior to project implementation will be forthcoming. Other than such
approvals/contracts, there should be no known contingencies that could preclude the development from
proceeding within a reasonable timeframe (see Reserves class). The project decision gate is the
decision by the reporting entity and its partners, if any, that the project has reached a level of technical
and commercial maturity sufficient to justify proceeding with development at that point in time.
AI.2
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Proved Reserves
Proved Reserves are those quantities of petroleum, which by analysis of geoscience and engineering
data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be commercially recoverable, from a given date
forward, from known reservoirs and under defined economic conditions, operating methods, and
government regulations.
If deterministic methods are used, the term reasonable certainty is intended to express a high degree
of confidence that the quantities will be recovered. If probabilistic methods are used, there should be
at least a 90% probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the estimate. The
area of the reservoir considered as Proved includes:
(1)
the area delineated by drilling and defined by fluid contacts, if any, and
(2)
adjacent undrilled portions of the reservoir that can reasonably be judged as continuous with it
and commercially productive on the basis of available geoscience and engineering data.
In the absence of data on fluid contacts, Proved quantities in a reservoir are limited by the lowest
known hydrocarbon (LKH) as seen in a well penetration unless otherwise indicated by definitive
geoscience, engineering, or performance data. Such definitive information may include pressure
gradient analysis and seismic indicators. Seismic data alone may not be sufficient to define fluid
contacts for Proved reserves (see 2001 Supplemental Guidelines, Chapter 8). Reserves in
undeveloped locations may be classified as Proved provided that the locations are in undrilled areas of
the reservoir that can be judged with reasonable certainty to be commercially productive.
Interpretations of available geoscience and engineering data indicate with reasonable certainty that the
objective formation is laterally continuous with drilled Proved locations. For Proved Reserves, the
recovery efficiency applied to these reservoirs should be defined based on a range of possibilities
supported by analogs and sound engineering judgment considering the characteristics of the Proved
area and the applied development program.
Probable Reserves
Probable Reserves are those additional Reserves which analysis of geoscience and engineering data
indicate are less likely to be recovered than Proved Reserves but more certain to be recovered than
Possible Reserves.
It is equally likely that actual remaining quantities recovered will be greater than or less than the sum of
the estimated Proved plus Probable Reserves (2P). In this context, when probabilistic methods are
used, there should be at least a 50% probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or
exceed the 2P estimate. Probable Reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to
Proved where data control or interpretations of available data are less certain. The interpreted
reservoir continuity may not meet the reasonable certainty criteria. Probable estimates also include
incremental recoveries associated with project recovery efficiencies beyond that assumed for Proved.
Possible Reserves
Possible Reserves are those additional reserves which analysis of geoscience and engineering data
indicate are less likely to be recoverable than Probable Reserves
The total quantities ultimately recovered from the project have a low probability to exceed the sum of
Proved plus Probable plus Possible (3P), which is equivalent to the high estimate scenario. When
probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 10% probability that the actual quantities
recovered will equal or exceed the 3P estimate. Possible Reserves may be assigned to areas of a
reservoir adjacent to Probable where data control and interpretations of available data are
progressively less certain. Frequently, this may be in areas where geoscience and engineering data
are unable to clearly define the area and vertical reservoir limits of commercial production from the
reservoir by a defined project. Possible estimates also include incremental quantities associated with
project recovery efficiencies beyond that assumed for Probable.
AI.3
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Probable and Possible Reserves

(See above for separate criteria for Probable Reserves and Possible Reserves.)
The 2P and 3P estimates may be based on reasonable alternative technical and commercial
interpretations within the reservoir and/or subject project that are clearly documented, including
comparisons to results in successful similar projects. In conventional accumulations, Probable and/or
Possible Reserves may be assigned where geoscience and engineering data identify directly adjacent
portions of a reservoir within the same accumulation that may be separated from Proved areas by
minor faulting or other geological discontinuities and have not been penetrated by a wellbore but are
interpreted to be in communication with the known (Proved) reservoir. Probable or Possible Reserves
may be assigned to areas that are structurally higher than the Proved area. Possible (and in some
cases, Probable) Reserves may be assigned to areas that are structurally lower than the adjacent
Proved or 2P area. Caution should be exercised in assigning Reserves to adjacent reservoirs isolated
by major, potentially sealing, faults until this reservoir is penetrated and evaluated as commercially
productive. Justification for assigning Reserves in such cases should be clearly documented.
Reserves should not be assigned to areas that are clearly separated from a known accumulation by
non-productive reservoir (i.e., absence of reservoir, structurally low reservoir, or negative test results);
such areas may contain Prospective Resources. In conventional accumulations, where drilling has
defined a highest known oil (HKO) elevation and there exists the potential for an associated gas cap,
Proved oil Reserves should only be assigned in the structurally higher portions of the reservoir if there
is reasonable certainty that such portions are initially above bubble point pressure based on
documented engineering analyses. Reservoir portions that do not meet this certainty may be assigned
as Probable and Possible oil and/or gas based on reservoir fluid properties and pressure gradient
interpretations.
Developed Reserves
Developed Reserves are expected quantities to be recovered from existing wells and facilities.
Reserves are considered developed only after the necessary equipment has been installed, or when
the costs to do so are relatively minor compared to the cost of a well. Where required facilities become
unavailable, it may be necessary to reclassify Developed Reserves as Undeveloped. Developed
Reserves may be further sub-classified as Producing or Non-Producing.
Developed Producing Reserves
Developed Producing Reserves are expected to be recovered from completion intervals that
are open and producing at the time of the estimate.
Improved recovery reserves are considered producing only after the improved recovery
project is in operation.
Developed Non-Producing Reserves

Developed Non-Producing Reserves include shut-in and behind-pipe Reserves
Shut-in Reserves are expected to be recovered from:
(1)
(2)
(3)
completion intervals which are open at the time of the estimate but which have not yet
started producing,
wells which were shut-in for market conditions or pipeline connections, or
wells not capable of production for mechanical reasons.
Behind-pipe Reserves are expected to be recovered from zones in existing wells which will
require additional completion work or future re-completion prior to start of production. In all
cases, production can be initiated or restored with relatively low expenditure compared to the
cost of drilling a new well.
AI.4
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Undeveloped Reserves
Undeveloped Reserves are quantities expected to be recovered through future investments:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
from new wells on undrilled acreage in known accumulations,

from deepening existing wells to a different (but known) reservoir,
from infill wells that will increase recovery, or
where a relatively large expenditure (e.g. when compared to the cost of drilling a new
well) is required to
(a) recomplete an existing well or
(b) install production or transportation facilities for primary or improved recovery
projects.
CONTINGENT RESOURCES
Those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known
accumulations by application of development projects, but which are not currently considered to be
commercially recoverable due to one or more contingencies.
Contingent Resources may include, for example, projects for which there are currently no viable markets, or
where commercial recovery is dependent on technology under development, or where evaluation of the
accumulation is insufficient to clearly assess commerciality. Contingent Resources are further categorized in
accordance with the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on project
maturity and/or characterized by their economic status.
Development Pending
A discovered accumulation where project activities are ongoing to justify commercial development in the
foreseeable future.
The project is seen to have reasonable potential for eventual commercial development, to the extent that
further data acquisition (e.g. drilling, seismic data) and/or evaluations are currently ongoing with a view to
confirming that the project is commercially viable and providing the basis for selection of an appropriate
development plan. The critical contingencies have been identified and are reasonably expected to be
resolved within a reasonable time frame. Note that disappointing appraisal/evaluation results could lead
to a re-classification of the project to On Hold or Not Viable status. The project decision gate is the
decision to undertake further data acquisition and/or studies designed to move the project to a level of
technical and commercial maturity at which a decision can be made to proceed with development and
production.
Development Unclarified or on Hold
A discovered accumulation where project activities are on hold and/or where justification as a
commercial development may be subject to significant delay.
The project is seen to have potential for eventual commercial development, but further
appraisal/evaluation activities are on hold pending the removal of significant contingencies external to
the project, or substantial further appraisal/evaluation activities are required to clarify the potential for
eventual commercial development. Development may be subject to a significant time delay. Note that a
change in circumstances, such that there is no longer a reasonable expectation that a critical
contingency can be removed in the foreseeable future, for example, could lead to a reclassification of the
project to Not Viable status. The project decision gate is the decision to either proceed with additional
evaluation designed to clarify the potential for eventual commercial development or to temporarily
suspend or delay further activities pending resolution of external contingencies.
AI.5
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Development Not Viable

A discovered accumulation for which there are no current plans to develop or to acquire additional data
at the time due to limited production potential.
The project is not seen to have potential for eventual commercial development at the time of reporting,
but the theoretically recoverable quantities are recorded so that the potential opportunity will be
recognized in the event of a major change in technology or commercial conditions. The project decision
gate is the decision not to undertake any further data acquisition or studies on the project for the
foreseeable future.
PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES
Those quantities of petroleum which are estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable
from undiscovered accumulations.
Potential accumulations are evaluated according to their chance of discovery and, assuming a discovery, the
estimated quantities that would be recoverable under defined development projects. It is recognized that the
development programs will be of significantly less detail and depend more heavily on analog developments in
the earlier phases of exploration.
Prospect
A project associated with a potential accumulation that is sufficiently well defined to represent a viable
drilling target.
Project activities are focused on assessing the chance of discovery and, assuming discovery, the range
of potential recoverable quantities under a commercial development program.
Lead
A project associated with a potential accumulation that is currently poorly defined and requires more data
acquisition and/or evaluation in order to be classified as a prospect.
Project activities are focused on acquiring additional data and/or undertaking further evaluation designed
to confirm whether or not the lead can be matured into a prospect. Such evaluation includes the
assessment of the chance of discovery and, assuming discovery, the range of potential recovery under
feasible development scenarios.
Play
A project associated with a prospective trend of potential prospects, but which requires more data
acquisition and/or evaluation in order to define specific leads or prospects.
Project activities are focused on acquiring additional data and/or undertaking further evaluation designed
to define specific leads or prospects for more detailed analysis of their chance of discovery and,
assuming discovery, the range of potential recovery under hypothetical development scenarios.
AI.6
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
RESOURCES CLASSIFICATION
PROJECT MATURITY
AI.7
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
APPENDIX II
GLOSSARY
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
GLOSSARY
List of Standard Oil Industry Terms and Abbreviations
ABEX
ACQ
o
API
Ft
Fx
G
Foot/feet
Foreign Exchange Rate
gram
g/cc
grams per cubic centimetre
Gal
gal/d
G&A
GBP
GDT
GIIP
GJ
GOR
GTL
GWC
HDT
HSE
HSFO
HUT
H2S
IOR
gallon
gallons per day
General and Administrative costs
Pounds Sterling
Gas Down to
Gas initially in place
Gigajoules (one billion Joules)
Gas Oil Ratio
Gas to Liquids
Gas water contact
Hydrocarbons Down to
Health, Safety and Environment
High Sulphur Fuel Oil
Hydrocarbons up to
Hydrogen Sulphide
Improved Oil Recovery
BOP
Abandonment Expenditure
Annual Contract Quantity
Degrees API (American Petroleum Institute)
American Association of Petroleum
Geologists
Amplitude versus Offset
Australian Dollars
Billion (109)
Barrels
per barrel
Billion Barrels
Bottom Hole Assembly
Bottom Hole Compensated
Billion standard cubic feet
Billion standard cubic feet per day
Billion cubic metres
Barrels of condensate per day
Bottom Hole Pressure
Barrels of liquid per day
Barrels per day
Barrels of oil equivalent @ xxx mcf/Bbl
Barrels of oil equivalent per day @ xxx
mcf/Bbl
Blow Out Preventer
Bopd
Barrels oil per day
Bwpd
BS&W
BTU
Bwpd
CBM
CO2
CAPEX
CCGT
cm
CMM
CNG
Cp
CSG
CT
DCQ
Deg C
Deg F
DHI
DST
DWT
Barrels of water per day

Bottom sediment and water
British Thermal Units
Barrels water per day
Coal Bed Methane
Carbon Dioxide
Capital Expenditure
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine
centimetres
Coal Mine Methane
Compressed Natural Gas
Centipoise (a measure of viscosity)
Coal Seam Gas
Corporation Tax
Daily Contract Quantity
Degrees Celsius
Degrees Fahrenheit
Direct Hydrocarbon Indicator
Drill Stem Test
Dead-weight ton
E&A
Exploration & Appraisal
E&P
Exploration and Production
EBIT
Earnings before Interest and Tax
k
KB
KJ
kl
km
km2
kPa
KW
KWh
LKG
LKH
LKO
LNG
LoF
LPG
LTI
LWD
m
M
m3
Mcf or
Mscf
MCM
MMcf or
MMscf
AAPG
AVO
A$
B
Bbl
/Bbl
BBbl
BHA
BHC
Bscf or Bcf
Bscfd or Bcfd
Bm3
Bcpd
BHP
Blpd
Bpd
Boe
boepd
EBITDA
EI
EIA
EMV
EOR
EUR
FEED
FPSO
FSO
Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation

and amortisation
Entitlement Interest
Environmental Impact Assessment
Expected Monetary Value
Enhanced Oil Recovery
Estimated Ultimate Recovery
Front End Engineering and Design
Floating Production, Storage and Offloading
Floating Storage and Offloading
IPP
Independent Power Producer
IRR
Internal Rate of Return

Joule (Metric measurement of energy) I kilojoule =
0.9478 BTU)
Permeability
Kelly Bushing
Kilojoules (one Thousand Joules)
Kilolitres
Kilometres
Square kilometres
Thousands of Pascals (measurement of pressure)
Kilowatt
Kilowatt hour
Lowest Known Gas
Lowest Known Hydrocarbons
Lowest Known Oil
Liquefied Natural Gas
Life of Field
Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Lost Time Injury
Logging while drilling
Metres
Thousand
Cubic metres
Thousand standard cubic feet
Management Committee Meeting
Million standard cubic feet
m3d
Cubic metres per day
mD
MD
MDT
Mean
Median
MFT
mg/l
MJ
Measure of Permeability in millidarcies

Measured Depth
Modular Dynamic Tester
Arithmetic average of a set of numbers
Middle value in a set of values
Multi Formation Tester
milligrams per litre
Megajoules (One Million Joules)
AII.1
Jubilant Energy
PS-12-2046.01
Mm3
Mm3d
MM
MMBbl
MMBTU
Mscfd
MMscfd
MW
MWD
MWh
Mya
NGL
N2
NPV
OBM
OCM
ODT
OPEX
OWC
p.a.
Pa
p.a.
Pa
P&A
PDP
PI
PJ
PSDM
Psi
Psia
Psig
PUD
Thousand Cubic metres

Thousand Cubic metres per day
Million
Millions of barrels
Millions of British Thermal Units
Value that exists most frequently in a set of
values = most likely
Thousand standard cubic feet per day
Million standard cubic feet per day
Megawatt
Measuring While Drilling
Megawatt hour
Million years ago
Natural Gas Liquids
Nitrogen
Net Present Value
Oil Based Mud
Operating Committee Meeting
Oil down to
Operating Expenditure
Oil Water Contact
Per annum
Pascals (metric measurement of pressure)
Per annum
Pascals (metric measurement of pressure)
Plugged and Abandoned
Proved Developed Producing
Productivity Index
Petajoules (1015 Joules)
Post Stack Depth Migration
Pounds per square inch
Pounds per square inch absolute
Pounds per square inch gauge
Proved Undeveloped
PVT
Pressure volume temperature
2Q06
P10
P50
P90
Rf
RFT
RT
Rw
10% Probability
50% Probability
90% Probability
Recovery factor
Repeat Formation Tester
Rotary Table
Resistivity of water
2D
3D
4D
1P
2P
3P
%
Mode
SCAL
cf or scf
cfd or scfd
scf/ton
SL
Special core analysis

Standard Cubic Feet
Standard Cubic Feet per day
Standard cubic foot per ton
Straight line (for depreciation)
so
Oil Saturation
SPE
SPEE
Ss
Stb
STOIIP
sw
T
TD
Te
THP
TJ
Tscf or Tcf
TCM
TOC
TOP
Tpd
TVD
TVDss
USGS
US$
VSP
WC
WI
WPC
WTI
wt%
1H05
Society of Petroleum Engineers

Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers
Subsea
Stock tank barrel
Stock tank oil initially in place
Water Saturation
Tonnes
Total Depth
Tonnes equivalent
Tubing Head Pressure
Terajoules (1012 Joules)
Trillion standard cubic feet
Technical Committee Meeting
Total Organic Carbon
Take or Pay
Tonnes per day
True Vertical Depth
True Vertical Depth Subsea
United States Geological Survey
United States Dollar
Vertical Seismic Profiling
Water Cut
Working Interest
World Petroleum Council
West Texas Intermediate
Weight percent
First half (6 months) of 2005 (example of date)
Second quarter (3 months) of 2006 (example of
date)
Two dimensional
Three dimensional
Four dimensional
Proved Reserves
Proved plus Probable Reserves
Proved plus Probable plus Possible Reserves
Percentage
AII.2

Gaffney Cline Associates Resource Assessment of Manipur Blocks

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

Gaffney Cline Associates Resource Assessment of Manipur Blocks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RESOURCE ASSESSMENT OF THE MANIPUR BLOCK,

JUBILANT OIL AND GAS PRIVATE LIMITED

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................

Geological Setting ...................................................................................

Petroleum System ...................................................................................

Data Availability & Current Activity..........................................................

Kharkublen, Pherzawl, South Songsang and Songtal Leads................

Manipur Blocks AA-ONN-2009/1 and AA-ONN-2009/2 Un-Risked

Nungba Prospect Upper Disang Reservoir Geological Chance of Success .....

Manipur Blocks Location Map .............................................................................

Top Lower Bhuban Depth Structure Map Parbung Area ...................................

Abbreviated 2007 SPE PRMS Definitions

South Songsang Lead

South Songsang Lead

Source: Structural Geology Intl

Source: Oolithica Geoscience

Data Availability & Current Activity

The Oinamlong Prospect is a NNE-SSW trending, elongated, double-plunging anticline

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

The Parbung Prospect is a NNE-SSW trending elongated double plunging anticline

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Net Thickness (m)

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Gas Recovery Factor

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

Kharkublen, Pherzawl, South Songsang and Songtal Leads

The Kharkublen Lead is a NNE-SSW trending elongated double plunging anticline

Net Thickness (m)

Net Rock Volume (10 m )

EUR Gas (Bscf)

Gas Expansion Factor (scf/rcf)

Net Thickness (m)