Ann: Advent Energy Ltd - PESA Presentation , page-5

Need to clarify previous post.

MMR are required by law, to mitigate their loss. In other words, if the damage can be limited, then they are required to take appropriate action (otherwise they cannot be compensated for the loss). For MMR, they will need to prove that the drill survey seismics were not usable.

If they were usable, then their was still a loss since Fugaro breached the terms of their contract (if in fact the 'shot put interval' was an express term - which it woudl have been).

While the drill survey results (as stated on p 27) are used to identify shallow gas hazards, they are also used to pinpoint appropriate drill sites in conjunction with seismics.This was / is essential since MMR had been relying on outdated 2 D seismics. MMR will have placed significant reliance on the drill survey seismics before final well positioning (in the absence of newer 2D and 3D seismics).

I'm not sure if Fuguro had anything to do with the actual drill itself. If they did, then there are all types of problems. If they didn't, then MMR would still be working on the integration of data (in the absence of calibration error).

If they had of drilled and caused damage to the environment, then Fuguro would well and truly have been screwed.


Excuse my ramblings if this isn't making sense.