VIMP92-NortheastOffshore

DEPARTMENT OF
PRIMARY INDUSTRIES
AREA OF INTEREST
Orbost
100m
Lakes Entrance
V07-1
Maffra
V07-2
Sale
200m
Longford
V07-3
1000m
2000m
3000m
4000m
Victoria
Tasmania
50
km
2007 Acreage
Release
VIMP REPORT 92
HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY OF AREAS
V07-1, V07-2 AND V07-3,
NORTHEASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN,

VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA.
G. W. O'Brien, T. Bernecker, J.H. Thomas,
J. Driscoll, M. Harrison & E. Frankel
GEOSCIENCE VICTORIA
ENERGY GEOSCIENCE
April 2007
VIMP Report 92
Hydrocarbon Prospectivity
of Areas V07-1, V07-2 and V07-3,
North-Eastern Offshore
Gippsland Basin,
Victoria, Australia.
G. W. O'Brien
T. Bernecker
J. H. Thomas
J. Driscoll
M. Harrison
E. Frankel
April 2007
Bibliographic reference:
O'BRIEN, G.W., BERNECKER, T, THOMAS, J.H., DRISCOLL, J., HARRISON, M. AND FRANKEL, E., 2007.
Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of Areas V07-1, V07-2 and V07-3, North-Eastern Offshore
Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia. Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 92,
Department of Primary Industries
Crown (State of Victoria) Copyright 2007

GeoScience Victoria
ISBN 978-1-74199-076-8 (DVD)

ISBN 978 1-74199-604-3 (Online)
ISSN 1323 4536
This report may be purchased from:
Business Centre
16th Floor, 1 Spring Street
Melbourne, Victoria 3001
For information contact: information@DPI
GPO Box 4440, Melbourne, VIC 3001
Telephone: +61 3 9658 4440
Email: information.centre@dpi.vic.gov.au
Website: www.dpi.vic.gov.au/minpet/
For further technical information contact:

Manager Energy Geoscience
Minerals and Petroleum Division
PO Box 4440
Melbourne Victoria 3001
Website: www.dpi.vic.gov.au/minpet/
Authorship and Acknowledgements:

This report is a publication of the Energy Geoscience Group, GeoScience Victoria, and has been
prepared by Geoffrey O'Brien, Thomas Bernecker, Hywel Thomas, Jim Driscoll, Michael Harrison
and Eddie Frankel. The authors acknowledge the many individuals and animals who contributed,
especially Phil Skladzien, who prepared the aeromagnetic data. Dr Peter Tingate kindly created and
provided the PetroMod simulation of the Gippsland Basin.
Disclaimer
This publication may be of assistance to you but the authors and the State of Victoria and its
employees do not guarantee that this publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly
appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaim all liability for any error, loss
or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this
publication.
HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................5
1
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................6
EXPLORATION HISTORY OF THE GIPPSLAND BASIN....................................8
REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE GIPPSLAND BASIN ......................................12
3.1
Tectonic Evolution..................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Stratigraphy and Depositional History .................................................................... 13

3.2.1 Strzelecki Group (Early Cretaceous)..................................................................... 13
3.2.2 Latrobe Group (Late Cretaceous-Tertiary) ............................................................ 14
3.2.3 Seaspray Group .................................................................................................... 17
PETROLEUM SYSTEMS AND OCCURRENCES ..............................................18
4.1 Petroleum systems elements ................................................................................... 19

4.1.1 Source ................................................................................................................... 19
4.1.3 Seal ....................................................................................................................... 21
4.1.4 Traps ..................................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Maturity and Migration .............................................................................................. 22
4.2.1 Top Latrobe Group Plays ...................................................................................... 22
4.2.2 Intra- and Deep-Latrobe Group Plays ................................................................... 23
5
5.1
PROSPECTIVITY OF THE 2007 GAZETTAL BLOCKS.....................................24

Location ...................................................................................................................... 25
5.2 Previous Exploration ................................................................................................. 25

5.2.1 Seismic Coverage & Well Control ......................................................................... 25
5.3 Play Assessment ....................................................................................................... 27
5.3.1 Sedimentary Facies Correlation ............................................................................ 28
5.3.2 Area V07-1 ............................................................................................................ 30
5.3.3 Area V07-2 ............................................................................................................ 30
5.3.4 Area V07-3 ............................................................................................................ 31
5.4
Aeromagnetic Data and Interpretation..................................................................... 31
5.5
Seismic Interpretation and Structural Framework of Release Blocks.................. 32
5.6 Prospects and Leads................................................................................................. 34

5.6.1 Northern Platform .................................................................................................. 34
5.6.2 Northern Terrace ................................................................................................... 34
5.7
Risk ............................................................................................................................. 35
Click on an item above to open
SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 37
OFFSET WELLS ................................................................................................ 38

7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
Northright-1............................................................................................................. 38
Dart-1 ..................................................................................................................... 38
Hammerhead-1....................................................................................................... 38
Shark-1................................................................................................................... 38
The Sole Field......................................................................................................... 39
The Basker/Manta/Gummy Field............................................................................. 39
The Kipper Field ..................................................................................................... 42
The Longtom Field.................................................................................................. 45
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 48
APPENDIX 1: WELL AND FIELD SUMMARIES ..................................................... 56

APPENDIX 2: WELL SUMMARY LOGS................................................................ 120
APPENDIX 3: BIOSTRATA PALYNOLOGY REPORT.......................................... 122
APPENDIX 4: RELEVANT OPEN-FILE SEISMIC SURVEYS IN, AND ADJACENT
TO, THE GAZETTED BLOCKS ............................................................................. 123
Click on an item above to open
ii
List of Figures
Fig 1 Regional location map of the Gippsland Basin and surrounds.
Fig 2: 2007 Permit and pipelines map, Gippsland Basin
Fig 3 Location map of Gippsland Basin key wells.
Fig 4 Structural elements map showing topography and bathymetry, and surface expressions of the
major fault systems, Gippsland Basin
Fig 5: Structural elements map, Gippsland Basin
Fig 6 Total magnetic intensity image, Gippsland Basin (modified from Moore & Wong, 2002).
Fig 7 Stratigraphic architecture, petroleum systems elements and hydrocarbon occurrences
Fig 8 Simple PetroMod buoyancy-driven petroleum migration model.
Fig. 8a Plan view
Fig 8b 3D perspective
Fig 9 Location of the 2007 gazettal blocks; together with well control and surrounding fields
Fig 10: Bathymetry map, eastern Gippsland Basin
Fig 11: Seismic coverage, eastern Gippsland Basin
Fig 12: Seismic surveys, eastern Gippsland Basin
Fig 13 Well correlation between Basker-1 and Northright-1; stratigraphy and depositional facies
Fig 14 Well correlation between Basker-1 and Northright-1; stratigraphy and seismic facies
Fig 15: Play fairways and structural elements map, Gippsland Basin
Fig 16: Seismic line BMR68-21 through V07-1 and V07-3
Fig 17: Seismic line BMR68-11P2 through V07-1 and V07-3
Fig 20: Seismic line BMR68-13 through V07-3
Fig 21: Structural Interpretation of magnetic data in the eastern Gippsland Basin; from Moore &
Wong, 2002
Fig 22: First vertical derivative map
Fig 23: Seismic line through Sole-1, -2 across the Lake Wellington Fault System (g92a-3047)
Fig 24: Seismic line through Stonefish-1, East Pilchard-1, Kipper-1, -2, Admiral-1 and Wahoo-1
(g92a-3038)
Fig 25: Total magnetic intensity image
Fig 26: Top Latrobe Group depth structure map
Click on a Figure above to open
iii
Appendix 1
Well and Field Summaries
Appendix 2
Well Summary Sheets
Appendix 3
Biostrata Palynology Report [Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1]
Appendix 4
Relevant open-file seismic surveys in, and adjacent to, the gazetted blocks
Click on an Appendix above to open
iv
Executive Summary
This report examines the petroleum geology of three offshore areas which were jointly
released by the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Victoria in April 2007. The
blocks are named V07-1, V07-2 and V07-3 and are all located in the north-eastern offshore
Gippsland Basin, approximately 200 km from significant population and industry centres in
the east Gippsland region. There is sizable petroleum infrastructure onshore from the blocks,
including the plants at Longford, Lang Lang and Orbost, which process the produced
petroleum from offshore fields. These areas are close to three major pipeline networks which
distribute the processed gas to the Victorian, New South Wales and Tasmanian markets.
Areas V07-1 and V07-3 are geologically more diverse than Area V07-2, within which only
the Latrobe pinch-out play fairway is likely to be viable. Area V07-1 is attractive because it
contains both the pinch-out fairway and also the top-Latrobe fairway within which the Sole
and Patricia-Baleen gas discoveries occur. Access to a mature and generative Strzelecki
source is guaranteed in the south-western part of the block; there reservoir and sealing
components are also not seen as posing significant risks. However, the more northerly parts of
V07-1 lie on the Northern Platform, where uncertainties associated with the top seal quality
and hydrocarbon migration processes may be important. Area V07-3 is geologically the most
diverse (four play fairways have been identified) block and would also be the most attractive,
providing that the Golden Beach and intra-Latrobe fairways are located in areas of shallow
water depth. Access to mature source rock is possible from several grabens within V07-3,
though the nature of reservoir and sealing units is poorly defined.
A significant amount of new seismic data is required in order to adequately assess the
hydrocarbon potential of these new blocks within the north-eastern part of the Gippsland
Basin. These new seismic data, when combined with an improved understanding of the
hydrocarbon generation-migration and sealing processes in the areas, should provide the keys
to unlocking the untapped potential of these frontier areas.
Introduction
The Gippsland Basin, one of Australia's most prolific hydrocarbon provinces, is situated in
south-eastern Australia and is located about 200 km east of the city of Melbourne (Figure 1).
Most of the discoveries which have been made to date are reservoired within the siliciclastics
of the Late Cretaceous to Early Tertiary Latrobe Group. Initial proven reserves have been
estimated at 4.3 Bbbl of oil and 13.5 Tcf of gas, with the remaining 2P reserves assessed at
400 MMbbl of liquids and 7 Tcf of gas. The Gippsland Basin is areally restricted (46,000
km2) with approximately two thirds of the basin located offshore. In spite of its limited
geographic extent, 300 exploration wells have been drilled within it and approximately
80,000 line km of 2D seismic data and thirty 3D seismic surveys acquired. Consequently,
exploration within the Gippsland Basin is mature in comparison to other Australian basins,
though it is actually relatively under-explored in comparison to many other prolific basins
around the world.
The Gippsland Basin region contains a number of significant population centres and the
region is serviced by an extensive array of roads (Figure 1). Petroleum infrastructure is very
well developed, with a network of pipelines transporting hydrocarbons produced offshore to
onshore petroleum processing facilities at Longford and Orbost (Figure 2). From there,
pipelines deliver the gas across south-eastern Australia, to Sydney in New South Wales, to
Adelaide in South Australia and to Tasmania. Exploration activity in the Gippsland Basin is
expected to continue at the current robust levels, due to a combination of the basins inherent
untapped potential and the increasing demand for natural gas across south-eastern Australia.
Areas V07-1, V07-2 and V07-3 (Figure 2) were gazetted for work program bidding during the
2007 acreage release by the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Victoria Joint
Authority. The gazettal close on 17th April 2008.
This report provides relevant technical information with respect to the hydrocarbon
prospectivity of the gazetted areas. An introductory chapter describes the exploration history
and provides background information about the tectonic and depositional evolution of the
basin. The focus of the report lies in the hydrocarbon prospectivity assessment of the release
areas, summarising play types that were previously identified along the northern basin margin
and are believed to exist in areas further east.
The prospectivity assessment is primarily based on open-file information and data available
within previous operators well completion and relinquishment reports which have been
submitted to the Department under the requirements of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act
1967. Additional details are provided by recent geoscientific studies carried out by the Energy
Geoscience Group (GeoScience Victoria) in the Department of Primary industries (DPI)
Minerals and Petroleum Division. The sparsely explored nature of the gazetted acreage
necessitated an examination of the well from the adjacent permits, which were used to
provide a better understanding of the likely sequences and relationships within the acreage.
Appendix 1 contains technical information on all the relevant wells in, and around, the
gazettal blocks, including brief summaries of reasons for well failure, as well as a listing of
available data-sets. It also provides graphical summaries, including well-log motifs,
stratigraphy, palynology and the main depositional facies regimes for each well. Appendix 2
contains well and fields summaries. Appendix 3 contains a palynological report on two wells
that was prepared by Biostrata Pty Ltd for DPI in 2003 and Appendix 4 lists relevant seismic
surveys in, and adjacent to, the gazetted areas.
This report provides a summary of available data and is intended to act as a guide to the
exploration potential of the area. It should not be taken as a definitive account or record.
Prospective explorers are encouraged to make their own enquires in order to establish the
validity of the information and to make their own assessments of the areas hydrocarbon
potential.
Exploration History of the Gippsland Basin
The history of oil production in the Gippsland Basin dates back to 1924, when the Lake
Bunga-1 well (Figure 3), which was drilled near the township of Lakes Entrance, encountered
a 13 m oil column in glauconitic conglomerates overlying the Latrobe Unconformity, at a
depth of 370 m. Over 60 wells were drilled in the ensuing years, and by 1941, this area had
produced more than 8,000 barrels of heavy oil (15-20o API). The most productive well was
the Lake Entrance Oil Shaft which produced 4,935 barrels (Beddoes, 1972; Boutakoff, 1964).
Significant levels of exploration did not begin in the offshore Gippsland Basin until the mid1960s, following the acquisition of seismic surveys which allowed the imaging of the Central
Deep and the mapping of several large, anticlinal closures. The first successful well, East
Gippsland Shelf-1 - later known as Barracouta-1 - was drilled by Esso in 1964/65 and
discovered a 102.5 m gas-condensate column at a depth of 1,060 mKB. After the subsequent
discovery of a large gas-condensate accumulation at Marlin in 1966, the Gippsland Basin was
perceived essentially as a gas-prone province. However, when Kingfish-1 was drilled in 1967,
it encountered the largest Australian oil field known to date (1.2 Bbbl recoverable), the
Gippsland Basin gained international recognition as both a giant oil and gas province.
By the end of 1969, eleven fields had been discovered and the first five (Barracouta, Marlin,
Snapper, Kingfish and Halibut) were in production. After the initial exploration phase, which
had very high success rates, the subsequent discoveries made by the Esso/BHP Petroleum
joint venture were more limited through the early 1970s: Cobia-1 (1972), Sunfish-1 (1974)
and Hapuku-1 (1975) discovered significant volumes of hydrocarbons, but only Cobia came
into production. In 1978, following the boost to exploration resulting from the introduction of
Import Parity Pricing (i.e. the removal of artificial government pricing caps on locally
produced crude oil), the giant Fortescue oil field was discovered, followed by the Seahorse
and West Halibut discoveries.
Stimulated by the OPEC world oil price rise in 1979 and the relinquishment of a significant
portion of the original exploration permit by Esso/BHP in October that year, new explorers,
including Aquitaine, Shell and Phillips, commenced exploration in 1980. Shell, which had
previously discovered the Sole dry gas field in 1973, mapped the Basker-Manta structures and
drilled two successful wells, Basker-1 and Manta-1. Discoveries which were then deemed
non-commercial were made at West Seahorse, Baleen and Sperm Whale by Hudbay Oil in
1981. West Tuna, drilled in 1984, was the last of the large to giant oil discoveries made by the
Esso/BHP Petroleum joint venture. This discovery was rather unconventional, as the oil was
trapped by fault sealing mechanisms rather than having accumulated in a large anticlinal
closure. In 1986, the joint venture discovered the Kipper gas field - estimated at 500 billion
cubic feet (Bcf) recoverable - a significant find which intersected a 213 m gas column in
fluvial sandstones of the Golden Beach Subgroup. Lasmo made a minor but significant gas
discovery near the northern basin margin at Patricia-1 (adjacent to Baleen) in 1987, with sales
gas reserves of the order of 70 Bcf. This field was developed by OMV and later taken over by
Santos Limited. Another drilling campaign in 1989/90 led to the discovery of the Blackback
oil and gas field on the shelf edge, in water depths greater than 400 m. In 1989/90, Petrofina
made drilled the Archer-Anemone discovery in the southern part of the basin. Although the
field proved non-commercial, the well encountered substantial quantities of oil and gas and
further confirmed the prospectivity of the older part of the Latrobe Group (Golden Beach
Subgroup).
Additional exploration wells were drilled in the 1990s, though no new discoveries were made.
The principal operator, Esso/BHP Petroleum, concentrated their efforts on development and
work-over drilling in order to optimise production from the existing fields. Following the
privatisation of State Government-owned gas utility companies between 1995 and 1999, a
restructured gas market emerged which made it more attractive for explorers to search for gas
in the basin. This, together with a sustained recovery in the oil price, sparked a significant
resurgence in exploration activity.
More recently, a number of new companies have been granted exploration licences in the
basin and have committed to extensive work programs. Apache Energy entered the basin in
2004 after gaining interest in permits VIC/P54, VIC/P58 and VIC/P59. In 2006, Apache
Energy farmed-in to permits VIC/P42 and VIC/P45 along the southern flank of the basin. The
company is acquiring new 2D and 3D seismic data and is committed to the drilling of at least
two wells by 2008. Another newcomer to the Gippsland Basin is Nexus Energy, which
currently operates two blocks, VIC/P49 and VIC/P56 in the eastern, partly deeper water area
of the basin. Nexus Energy also shares an interest with Apache Energy in VIC/P54, in which
the Longtom gas field and the Grayling-1 gas discovery are located. In 2006, Nexus Energy
high-graded the Longtom field by successfully drilling Longtom-3 that intersected a suite of
gas-bearing sandstones within the Emperor Subgroup. The well has been suspended as a
future gas producer and is scheduled to begin production in 2009.
Other significant players in the Gippsland Basin are Bass Strait Oil and Gas Pty Ltd, which
holds VIC/P41 and VIC/P47 on the northern basin margin and also VIC/P42, located along
the southern margin, south of the Bream and Kingfish fields. The company recently drilled
two accumulations: Moby-1 encountered gas east of Patricia/Baleen and Zane Grey-1, drilled
west of Kingfish, encountered non-commercial quantities of oil and condensate. Santos
Limited is also re-establishing itself in the basin having taken over OMV's interests in the
Patricia-Baleen and Sole gas fields, as well in the Orbost gas processing plant.
On a regional scale, several 3D seismic surveys have been acquired in the last five years, with
the result that much of the basin is now covered by 3D seismic data. Esso/BHP Billiton
completed two major 3D seismic surveys, including the 4,060 km2 Northern Fields survey,
between October 2001 and July 2002. This was followed by the 1,000 km2 Tuskfish survey
which extended over the Blackback-Terakihi area and extended southwards into VIC/P59.
Sizable 3D surveys have also been acquired Apache Energy and Bass Strait Oil and Gas Pty
Ltd in the last three to four years.
There have also been new developments in the hydrocarbon production sphere. For example,
Anzon Australia has obtained a production licence for the Basker/Manta/Gummy field, which
will allow it to take advantage of the current high oil prices.
To date, over 300 exploration and stratigraphic wells have been drilled in the basin, with 132
exploration wells drilled offshore since the Barracouta discovery in 1965. Of these, 54 are
classed as hydrocarbon discoveries. This is an overall success rate of 41% from an average
exploration well density of approximately one well per 150 km2. Cumulative oil production to
30th June 2005 was 3.86 Bbbl. Remaining reserves in the fields currently under development
are estimated at 200 MMbbl; undeveloped in-place volumes are estimated to be around 400
MMbbl (Mehin, 2006 and unpublished data).
The States gas production has remained relatively constant over the last decade at around
6.5 Gm3 per annum, that is 230 Bcf per annum or on average 635 million cubic feet per day
(mmscf/d). Cumulative production from the Gippsland Basin to 30th June 2004 was 6.5 Tcf.
Initial gas reserves in the producing fields are currently estimated at 11.5 Tcf, leaving around
5 Tcf to be produced. Undeveloped in-place gas volumes are estimated to be 7 Tcf (Mehin,
2006 and unpublished data).
10
Estimates of the basins Yet-to-Find or undiscovered resource potential vary widely. In their
2000 World Petroleum Assessment, the USGS (USGS, 2000) estimated P50 reserves for the
Gippsland Basin of 600 MMbbl and 5 Tcf, whereas Geoscience Australia in 1993 (BRS,
1993) estimates most likely reserves of 180 MMbbl and 700 Bcf .
Despite its long history of extensive exploration, many parts of the basin, especially the
southern and eastern regions, are still relatively poorly understood and explored. In the
context of high oil prices and a growing demand for gas in south-eastern Australia, the
Gippsland Basin will continue to attract investment from both local and international
explorers.
11
Regional Geology of the Gippsland Basin
3.1
Tectonic Evolution
The east-west trending Gippsland Basin was formed as a consequence of the break-up of
Gondwanaland (Rahmanian et al., 1990; Willcox et al., 1992; Willcox et al., 2001; Norvick
& Smith, 2001; Norvick et al., 2001). The deposition of several major, basin-scale sequences
which range in age from Early Cretaceous to Late Tertiary and which are bounded by basinwide angular unconformities, reflects the strong tectonic control on the sedimentary
development of the basin. Other unconformities and disconformities are only recognised
using biostratigraphic age determinations delineating missing sections. This is of particular
relevance in the context of the upper Latrobe Group, where extensive channel incision and
subsequent infill processes resulted in complex sedimentary sequences that developed at
slightly different time intervals, the extent of which cannot be resolved by seismic mapping
alone.
As part of the Early Cretaceous rift system between Antarctica and Australia (during the Late
Jurassic to Late Aptian), the Gippsland Basin initial rift architecture consisted of a rift valley
complex which was composed of multiple, over-lapping to isolated, approximately E-W
trending half-grabens. Continued rifting into the Late Cretaceous generated a broader
extensional geometry which consisted of a depocentre - the Central Deep - which was flanked
by fault-bounded platforms and terraces to the north and south. The Rosedale and Lake
Wellington Fault systems marked the northern margin of the Central Deep and Northern
Platform respectively, with the Darriman and Foster Fault systems defining the southern flank
of the Central Deep, and the northern boundary of the Southern Platform (Figures 4 and 5).
To the east, the Central Deep is characterised by rapidly increasing water depths; these exceed
3,000 m in the Bass Canyon (Hill et al., 1998). The eastern boundary of the basin is defined
by the Cape Everard Fault System, a prominent NNE-striking basement high which is clearly
evident on the total magnetic intensity image in Figure 6. The western onshore extent of the
basin is traditionally placed at the Mornington High. However, the Latrobe Groups extent is
effectively defined by the outcrops of the Early Cretaceous Strzelecki Group (Hocking,
1988).
Initial rifting in the Early Cretaceous resulted in total crustal extension of approximately 30%
(Power et al., 2001); this extension produced a complex system of grabens and half-grabens.
Between 100 and 95 Ma, a phase of uplift and interpreted compression, which has been linked
to the separation of Australia from Antarctica (Duddy & Green, 1992), produced a new basin
12
configuration and provided the accommodation space for large volumes of basement-derived
sediments. Renewed crustal extension during the Late Cretaceous, perhaps associated with a
combination of rapid Turonian extension between Australia and Antarctica (as evidenced in
the Otway Basin) as well as the opening of the Tasman Sea, established the Central Deep as
the main depocentre. The first marine incursion is recorded by Late Santonian sediments in
the eastern part of the basin (Partridge, 1999). Many of the earlier generated faults were
reactivated during this tectonic phase.
Extensional tectonism continued until the Early Eocene and produced pervasive NW-SE
trending normal faults. By the Middle Eocene, sea-floor spreading had ceased in the Tasman
Sea and a compressional period began to affect the Gippsland Basin which initiated the
formation of a series of NE to ENE-trending anticlines (Smith, 1988). Compression and
structural growth peaked in the Middle Miocene and resulted in partial basin inversion. All
the major fold structures at the top of the Latrobe Group (Figure 5) which became the hosts
for the large oil and gas accumulations, such as Barracouta, Tuna, Kingfish, Snapper and
Halibut, are related to this tectonic episode.
Tectonism continued to affect the basin during the Late Pliocene to Pleistocene, as
documented by localised uplift. Uplift affected the Pliocene section on the Barracouta,
Snapper and Marlin anticlines, as well as around the township of Lakes Entrance. Ongoing
tectonic activity occurs in the basin, as evidenced by relatively minor earthquakes which
occur along and around major basin bounding faults at the present day.
3.2
Stratigraphy and Depositional History
Based on lithological variations, three broad stratigraphic successions are recognised in the
Gippsland Basin (Figure 7). These stratigraphic groups comprise a) the Strzelecki Group, a
thick sequence of non-marine, volcaniclastic-rich sediments; b) the Latrobe Group, a
sequence of marine and non-marine siliciclastics that hosts all of the known hydrocarbon
occurrences in the offshore; and c) the Seaspray Group, a carbonate-dominated sequence
provides the regional top seal for the oil and gas accumulations reservoired at the top of the
Latrobe Group.
3.2.1 Strzelecki Group (Early Cretaceous)
The Albian-Aptian Strzelecki Group sediments were deposited during low-strain, syn-rift
extensional tectonic episode and they unconformably overlie the Palaeozoic folded
13
sedimentary and igneous rocks. The group consists dominantly of interbedded lithic,
volcaniclastic sandstones and mudstones, including several coal-rich horizons. The sediments
accumulated in a non-marine environment under a fluvial depositional regime. The Strzelecki
Group has very strong affinities to the Eumeralla Formation within the Otway Group in the
Otway Basin (Duddy & Green, 1992). Although often regarded by the industry as economic
basement, it is considered to have potential for hydrocarbon generation and accumulation, in
particular in the western part of the basin (Mehin & Bock, 1998). The total thickness of the
Strzelecki Group is poorly known but is likely to exceed 1,500 m (Gilbert & Hill, 1994).
3.2.2 Latrobe Group (Late Cretaceous-Tertiary)
The Latrobe Group hosts all currently known hydrocarbons in the offshore and was deposited
in tectonic settings which ranged from active syn-rift to early post-rift. Four subgroups have
been defined - the Emperor, Golden Beach, Halibut and Cobia - each of which is bounded by
basin-wide unconformities. Each subgroup consists of individual formations that were
deposited formations in various sedimentary facies.
Emperor Subgroup
The Emperor Subgroup has only been intersected around the basin margins in the vicinity of
the bounding faults of the Northern and Southern terraces. Seismic data suggest that a thick
section of the subgroup exists below depths of 4-6 km in the Central Deep (Bernecker et al.,
2001). The Otway Unconformity, which separates the subgroup from the underlying
Strzelecki Group, developed in response to uplift along the basin margins. Large volumes of
erosional material were delivered to the evolving rift-valley, within which a system of deep
lakes developed.
The subgroup comprises marginal coarse-grained alluvial fan/plain as well as lacustrine facies
associations that are characteristic for rift-valley deposition prior to continental break-up. The
Kersop Arkose, a coarse-grained feldspathic sandstone, represents erosion of uplifted granites
at the southern basin margin. The unit has been defined in Moray-1 (the type section) but was
also intersected in Admiral-1, northeast of the Kipper gas field, providing evidence that the
early depocentre was oriented east-west and was relatively narrow. The Admiral Formation
consists of quartz-dominated lithic arenites that were derived from both Palaeozoic
sedimentary and metamorphic terrains and from newly uplifted Early Cretaceous sediments.
The Kipper Shale was deposited in a lacustrine environment and is dominated by mudstones,
with intercalated fine- to medium-grained sandstones (Marshall & Partridge, 1986; Marshall,
1989; Lowry & Longley, 1991). The palaeo-lake or lakes system probably covered much of
14
the Turonian rift-valley and received detrital sediment input from the basin margins. The
Curlip Formation consists of sandstones and conglomerates that are interbedded with thin
shales and minor coals. This formation overlies and interfingers with the Kipper Shale and its
top coincides with the basin-wide Longtom Unconformity, which marks the end of Emperor
Subgroup deposition. This unconformity was recognised by Partridge (1999), who showed
that it had been previously merged or confused with the Seahorse Unconformity at the top of
the Golden Beach Subgroup. Accordingly, numerous well intervals were erroneously
assigned to the Golden Beach Group. The hiatus between the Emperor and Golden Beach
subgroups correlates with the opening of the adjacent Tasman Sea and separates older
freshwater lacustrine sediments from younger non-marine and marine sediments.
Golden Beach Subgroup
The Golden Beach Subgroup consists of two formations, the marine Anemone Formation and
the fluvial/paralic Chimaera Formation. The Anemone Formation consists predominantly of
mudstones (shales) and fine-grained siliciclastics which were deposited in shallow to open
marine environments that prevailed in the eastern part of the basin. Marine Golden Beach
Subgroup has been intersected in Archer-1, Anemone-1, Angler-1 and Pisces-1. The
Chimaera Formation is a non-marine succession that comprises coarse-grained alluvial/fluvial
sediments as well as fine-grained floodplain deposits, including some coals. The formation
has been intersected, and occasionally fully penetrated, in wells near the Rosedale Fault
System but is missing on the Northern Platform and Northern Terrace. In the southern part of
the basin, the Chimaera Formation is only known from Omeo-1, -2 and Perch-1. The Golden
Beach Subgroup is essentially confined to the Central Deep, reflecting tectonic movement
along the basin margins, where conglomerates accumulated. Finer material was transported
by fluvial systems that continued to migrate across a gradually widening lower coastal plain
and terminated as deltaic bodies in the shallow sea. The alternation between marine and nonmarine influence persisted throughout the deposition of the Latrobe Group and had strongly
influenced the distribution of the elements of the petroleum system. The subgroup also
contains several volcanic horizons that, although undated, are probably principally
Campanian in age. These volcanics, most prominently developed in the Kipper field and in
the Basker/Manta/Gummy area, occur at the top of the Golden Beach Subgroup and correlate
with another depositional hiatus, represented by the Seahorse Unconformity.
Halibut Subgroup
The time gap recorded by the Seahorse Unconformity is longest in Golden Beach West-1,
where the Upper F. longus biozone directly overlies N. senectus sediments. Closer to the
Rosedale Fault System, F. longus sediments overlie the Campanian volcanics (Bernecker &
15
Partridge, 2001). The Halibut Subgroup hosts the bulk of the hydrocarbons in the Gippsland
Basin and consists of five formations that are distinguished according to their dominant
depositional facies regimes and which document the changes from non-marine to marine
environments in a west-east or onshore-offshore direction. The Barracouta Formation is
characterised by fluvial sediments and only contains minor coal and was deposited in upper
coastal plain settings. The Volador and Kingfish formations comprise the typical lower
coastal plain coal-rich sediments and are separated by the Kate Shale, a marine interval
recognised at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary across the basin. The Mackerel Formation
consists of near-shore marine sandstones which commonly have excellent reservoir qualities,
though it also contains intercalated marine shales.
A fall in sea-level in the Early Eocene, probably related to a period of basin inversion,
initiated a period of major canyon cutting during which parts of the lower coastal plain and
the shelf were eroded. The array of submarine channels that developed has added a
considerable complexity to seismic mapping, given that the major channels cut down
hundreds of metres into the underlying strata. During subsequent transgression, the channels
were filled with marine sediments (e.g. the Flounder Formation), which led to the formation
of a number of potential stratigraphic hydrocarbon traps (Johnstone et al., 2001). The Marlin
Unconformity highlights the major erosional event associated with channel incision,
terminating deposition of the Halibut Subgroup.
Cobia Subgroup
The Middle Eocene to Early Oligocene Cobia Subgroup is comprised of the coal-bearing
Burong Formation, a lower coastal plain facies, and the shallow to open marine Gurnard
Formation, a condensed section composed of fine- to medium-grained glauconitic
siliciclastics. The Gurnard Formation is the reservoir interval in the Patricia-Baleen gas field
and consists of fine- to medium-grained clastics. In most other wells, however, the formation
is mud-dominated, is characterised by low porosity-permeability values and is not considered
an effective seal. Also included in the subgroup is the Turrum Formation that consists of midEocene marine channel-fill sediments. Deposition of the Cobia Subgroup ceased during the
Early Oligocene as a consequence of a marked decline in sediment supply. Large areas of the
central basin were left with starved or condensed sections which led to the development of
what is traditionally known as the Latrobe Unconformity. On seismic sections, this surface
is expressed by a prominent reflector which marks the boundary between siliciclastic and
calcareous rocks. This reflector is commonly interpreted as a time-line, however,
16
biostratigraphic data clearly indicate that the Latrobe Unconformity should be considered a
composite of several, separate erosional events (Partridge, 1999).
3.2.3 Seaspray Group
The calcareous sediments of the Seaspray Group unconformably overlie the siliciclastics of
the Latrobe Group. This change from siliciclastics to carbonates relates to a wider change in
ocean circulation patterns along the southern Australian margin: the accumulation of marls
and limestones began in the Middle Eocene in the Eucla Basin, extended to the Otway Basin
during the Late Eocene and reached the Gippsland Basin during the Early Oligocene
(Holdgate & Gallagher, 1997). Since that time, cool-water carbonate production resulted in
progradation of the shelf edge. The Seaspray Group consists of the basal Lakes Entrance
Formation, which provides the regional seal to the oil and gas accumulations at the topLatrobe interval outside the Bass Canyon area, and the Miocene Gippsland Limestone. The
deposition of the Gippsland Limestone was vital to the evolution of the petroleum systems in
the Gippsland Basin, as it was deposited rapidly and reached a substantial thickness, thereby
maturing the deeper source rocks late in the basins development. This late maturation helped
to dramatically improve the rates of hydrocarbon preservation within the wider Gippsland
Basin.
The seismic velocity anomalies are related to a complex system of Mid-Miocene channels
that eroded up to 300 m into a sequence of calcareous sediments. These interfingering
channels, very well imaged on seismic sections, are filled with generally coarser and more
porous materials, characterised by higher velocities than the underlying carbonates and also
show considerable lateral velocity gradients (Bernecker et al. 1997; Holdgate et al., 2000).
Diagenetic processes also influence seismic velocities, especially the preferential cementation
of channel bases (Wong & Bernecker, 2001).
The modern shelf edge is located near a line that connects the Archer-Anemone discoveries
with the Blackback-Terakihi and Basker-Manta-Gummy areas. The slope gradient is <6 but
increases rapidly along the Bass Canyon, which has deeply eroded into older sequences,
reaching sediments of the Golden Beach Subgroup east of the Gippsland Rise (Marshall,
1990). Water depths in the Bass Canyon exceed 3,000 m in an eastward direction, rendering
the eastern part of the basin less attractive to explorers.
17
Petroleum Systems and Occurrences
Despite its relatively small areal extent, the Gippsland Basin is densely populated with
economic hydrocarbon accumulations, including a number of oil and gas fields that are
considered giants by global standards. All currently producing fields are located on the
western and northern parts of the present shelf; to date only four discoveries
(Archer/Anemone, Angler, Blackback and Gudgeon) have been made in the eastern, deeper
water area (Figure 2).
It has been a matter of speculation as to why there is a concentration of gas accumulations in

the north, whereas oil fields are more common in the southeast. The reasons for this may
partly be due to the initial focus on top-Latrobe Group plays, which has resulted in numerous
discoveries in sediments of the N. asperus and P. asperopolus biozones (Figure 7). The
Latrobe Group is thickest in the Central Deep, where prospective horizons are located below
3,500 mSS (approx. 2.5 seconds TWT) and it is thus not surprising that less is known about
the prospectivity of older sediments.
Another and perhaps more likely explanation for the distribution of oil and gas in the
Gippsland Basin is the nature of the Latrobe Group source systems themselves. The upper
coastal plain Latrobe Group depocentres, located between Barracouta and Kingfish, may have
produced a mostly gas-prone hydrocarbon inventory, whereas the lower coastal depocentres
east of Kingfish would probably be more oil-prone, as originally suggested by Moore et al.
(1992). The results of a, buoyancy-driven migration model which illustrates this hypothesis is
shown on Figures 8a and 8b. Migration of gas generated within the upper coastal plain
depocentres located between Barracouta and Kingfish effectively simulates the giant Bream,
Barracouta, Snapper and Marlin discoveries, as well as the smaller Golden Beach discovery.
Migration of oil from the lower coastal plain depocentres located near and to the east of
Fortescue simulates the oil in the nearby Kingfish, Fortescue, Halibut-Cobia-Mackerel,
Blackback and Flounder fields, as well as the oil present within Tuna further to the north.
Whilst the model presented is very simplistic, it does provide an explanation for the essential
distribution of oil and gas within the basin. A key factor for the gazetted blocks is whether oil
and gas generated within the Central Deep proper can migrate to the north and northeast
across the Rosedale Fault and be trap. Importantly, any oil would need to remain
unbiodegraded, which may be difficult given the relatively shallow reservoir depths over
much of the gazetted areas.
18
4.1
Petroleum systems elements
The identification and characterisation of all the required components of petroleum systems in
the Gippsland Basin is the subject of ongoing work and is not a simple task, especially given
that many of the systems elements are located at great depth.
4.1.1 Source
Only a few wells have penetrated the oil- or gas-mature section of the deeper Halibut and the
Golden Beach subgroups and hence the distributions of the main source rock intervals and
source rock kitchens are not fully understood. It is generally considered that the source rocks
for both the oil and gas in the basin are represented by organic-rich, non-marine, coastal plain
mudstones and coals (Burns et al., 1987; Moore et al., 1992). Source rocks of dominantly
terrestrial plant origin (kerogen type II/III) are widely distributed throughout the Latrobe
Group and generally exhibit high TOC values (>2.0%), high Rock-Eval pyrolysis yields and
moderate to high hydrogen indices (>250), suggesting that they have the potential to generate
both oil and gas. The richest Latrobe Group source rocks (mainly humic to mixed type) occur
within lower coastal plain and coal swamp facies. Well correlations show that much of the T.
lilliei interval is represented by low energy, lagoonal/paludal sediments in the east-southeast.
This facies extends beneath the giant Kingfish oil field and across the basin to the north. In
the Central Deep, T. lilliei sediments accumulated in a marine environment with interbedded
sandstones and marine shales (Rahmanian et al., 1990; Moore et al., 1992; Chiupka et al.,
1997). Data from the Hermes-1 well, located in the southern part of the basin, proves the
existence of a thick, rich source rock interval at this level. The >950 m T. lilliei section within
this well has TOC concentrations that generally exceed 10% (Petrofina, 1993). A recent study
of condensate recovered from the Archer/Anemone discovery suggests that source rock
potential may also exist within marine sediments (Gorter, 2001), a very relevant consideration
with respect to Area V07-3.
The result of work in progress at GeoScience Victoria (OBrien & Boreham, in preparation)
also suggests that the Strzelecki Group sediments within the onshore and offshore Gippsland
Basin have the potential to generate significant quantities of gas. For example, fair to good
quality Strzelecki-aged source rocks have been intersected in a number of wells, including
Wellington Park-1, Harlequin-1 and Dutson Downs-1 onshore and Wirrah-1, -2 and -3
offshore. Overall, the Strzelecki Group appears to have a broadly similar source rock quality
19
to its temporal equivalent, the proven gas-generating, Albian-Aptian Eumeralla Formation in

the Otway Basin.
This work indicates that the gas reservoired in onshore Gippsland Basin fields such as Trifon,
Gangell and Seaspray were almost certainly generated by the Strzelecki Group. Similarly, dry
gas accumulations located on the Northern Strzelecki Terrace, such as Patricia-Baleen and
Sole, may well have a Strzelecki source. If this interpretation is correct, this gas has probably
migrated to the Top Latrobe level in the Late Tertiary, following loading by the prograding
carbonate shelf. It may be that these Strzelecki-sourced gases are present around the basin
margins (and not in the Central Deep) because they are actually able to migrate up to the Top
Latrobe level through the thin to absent Latrobe Group shales, something that would be
impossible through the very thick Latrobe shales within the Central Deep.
The Patricia-Baleen and Sole gas accumulations are both severely to moderately biodegraded
respectively, which is probably a result of their shallow reservoir depths. In the offshore
areas, it appears that gas (and oil) accumulations shallower than about 1,500 m undergo
biodegradation. In contrast, the onshore gas accumulations such as Trifon and Gangell appear
to be unbiodegraded. It may be that this difference is due to the fact that the reservoirs on the
Strzelecki Terrace offshore, for example, constitute part of a very widely inter-connected
aquifer system, something not likely in the onshore fields. The dryness of the shallow
reservoired gases offshore is in part due to the observed biodegradation, though it is also due
in part to the gas-prone nature of the interpreted Strzelecki source rock system.
If confirmed the validity of the Strzelecki Group as a working source system is confirmed,
then traps which are remote from the mature Central Deep Latrobe Group source system, such
as those located on the Northern Terrace or Northern Platform, or are located in Latrobe
migration shadows, can still be charged with relatively dry gas, providing that a local, mature
Strzelecki Group source system is present and has generated hydrocarbon in the Late Tertiary.
4.1.2
Reservoirs
Marine near shore barrier and shore face sandstones are traditionally regarded as the best
reservoirs in the Gippsland Basin. The most productive of these were drilled at or near the
top-Latrobe Group level and are commonly referred to as the top-Latrobe coarse clastics
reservoirs. This is an unfortunate misnomer, given that similar coarse sandstone intervals are
developed throughout the stratigraphic column. All of these sandstones are diachronous and
developed in response to periodic marine regressive cycles associated with low depositional
20
rates. This provided an ideal environment for high levels of reworking and winnowing of the
deltaic and coastal plain sediments. Geographically, this reservoir facies is best developed in
the Barracouta, Snapper, Marlin, Bream and Kingfish fields. Reservoir distribution within the
intra-Latrobe sequences can be complex and frequently involves the alternation of multiple
stacked sandstone/shale sequences that are characteristic for fluvial/deltaic environments.
Submarine channelling, the presence of numerous thin condensed sequences and an overall
lower net-to-gross ratio all contribute to lower reservoir qualities. Nevertheless, there are
numerous examples for good quality reservoirs within deltaic sandstones as well as within
fluvial and submarine channels.
In contrast to the Latrobe Group, the prediction of permeable reservoirs within the Early
Cretaceous Strzelecki Group has proven difficult, even though primary porosities are often
high. Unless an improved model for the prediction of permeability within the Strzelecki-aged
sands can be developed, any drilling targets at this level are inherently high-risk.
4.1.3 Seal
For the top-Latrobe Group reservoirs, a basin-wide, high quality regional seal is provided by
the marls of the Early Oligocene Lakes Entrance Formation. The thickness of this seal varies
considerably and ranges from approximately 100 m to over 300 m in deeper water parts of the
basin. In addition, many potential intra-formational sealing units are present within the
Latrobe Group. These include floodplain sediments deposited in upper and lower coastal plain
environments, as well as lagoonal to offshore marine shales. These seals are commonly thin
and mostly occur within stacked sandstone/mudstone successions. The attendant low shale
volume in such settings has made the prediction of cross-fault seal problematic. Excellent
seals, such as the Turonian (lacustrine) Kipper Shale, are developed adjacent to the basinbounding faults and other effective seals are formed by several distinct volcanic horizons of
Campanian to Paleocene age (e.g. at the Kipper field). The Kipper Shale exceeds thicknesses
of 500 m, whereas the volcanics are often less than 50 m thick, although they are known to
exceed 100 m at the Kipper field.
4.1.4 Traps
At the level of the basin-wide Latrobe Unconformity, the basin is dominated by a series of
north-easterly-trending anticlines and synclines. Along the anticlinal trends, four-way dip
closures have developed and form the traps for the major fields within the basin. It is
interpreted that these anticlines formed during the inversion of deeper Early Cretaceous
21
grabens and half-grabens that were initially filled with the volcaniclastic-dominated
sediments of the Strzelecki Group. As the tectonic stress regimes changed, these structural
lines of weakness have been structurally reactivated. The same northeast trends of the
anticlines and underlying grabens are present in the onshore, where Lower Cretaceous rocks
are exposed within both the Strzelecki and Otway ranges.
4.2
Maturity and Migration
Numerous studies of the hydrocarbon generation and migration histories of the Gippsland
Basin, but the results of these investigations remain largely unpublished. It has been
suggested that the main period of hydrocarbon generation and expulsion was initiated in the
Miocene, as a result of increased sedimentary loading of the Tertiary carbonate sequences
(Moore et al., 1992). Some workers (Duddy et al., 1997) have proposed that the source rocks
within the basin are currently at their peak levels of hydrocarbon generation and expulsion.
Given this, and the fact that the traps in the top-Latrobe Group interval formed as a result of
compressional events in the Tertiary, the relative timing of trap formation and reservoir
charging is ideal. This late charge scenario does not apply to the deeper Latrobe Group
intervals, however. The Late Cretaceous depocentres underwent an early phase of generation
and migration - in about the Late Paleocene to Early Eocene (Moore et al., 1992). At this
time, no regional top seal (the Lakes Entrance Formation) had been deposited and hence by
necessity any trapping would have involved intra-Latrobe Group sealing units and earlyformed traps. What percentage of this early-generated hydrocarbon inventory was lost, as
opposed to being trapped, remains problematical.
Two principal types of petroleum plays are present on both the northern margin and in the
Central Deep: these are Top-Latrobe plays and the intra-Latrobe/Golden Beach plays. The
elements associated with these plays are as follows.
4.2.1 Top Latrobe Group Plays
Source: Halibut and Golden Beach subgroups; ?Strzelecki Group.

Seal:
Lakes Entrance Formation.
Reservoirs:
Burong, Barracouta, Kingfish, Flounder formations; Gurnard Formation
where it is present.
Traps: Erosional remnants, as exemplified by Tuna. Halibut/Cobia/Fortescue, Volador or
Sunfish (reservoirs are intra-Latrobe). Anticlines as exemplified by Snapper, Moonfish,
Marlin, Turrum and Leatherjacket. Occasional top-Latrobe sediments as exemplified by
Sweetlips.
22
4.2.2 Intra- and Deep-Latrobe Group Plays
Source: Halibut and Golden Beach and Emperor subgroups; ?Strzelecki Group.
Seal:
Intra-Halibut/Golden Beach mudstones, Kipper Shale or younger volcanics.
Reservoirs:
Intra-Latrobe, Golden Beach and Emperor sandstones.
Traps: Highside fault closures as exemplified by Angler and Dolphin.

Lowside fault closures as exemplified by Kipper, Basker/Manta/Gummy,
Longtom, West Tuna and Archer/Anemone.
Faulted anticlines as exemplified by Flounder, Seahorse, Whiting and Turrum.
23
Prospectivity of the 2007 Gazettal Blocks
Following the partial relinquishment of VIC/P41 by Bass Strait Oil & Gas in 2006, Victorias
DPI and the Commonwealths DITR gazetted three areas in the offshore, north-eastern
Gippsland Basin (Figures 2 and 9). These areas provide explorers with the opportunity to
explore an as yet untapped region within this prolific hydrocarbon province, at a time when
exploration activity is reaching new heights in Victoria. Discoveries along the Rosedale Fault
System and northern basin margin have provided the impetus to further examine the
stratigraphically deeper part of the Latrobe Group which can be accessed within the gazetted
blocks.
The three areas are located in the essentially unexplored north-eastern part of the offshore
Gippsland Basin and cover parts of the Northern Platform, Northern Terrace and Central
Deep (Figure 5).
V07-1, V07-2 and V07-3 (Figures 2 and 9) straddle the northeast corner of the Gippsland
Basin. Blocks V07-1 and V07-2 are situated on the present day shelf in water depths less than
200 m whilst V07-3 lies on the northern flank of the Bass Canyon in water depths ranging
from 200 m to 3,000 m. A submarine canyon initially trending northwest-southeast incises the
shelf edge (Figures 4 and 10) in V07-3.
Areas V07-1 and the southwest extremity of V07-3 comprise the recently relinquished part of
Bass Strait Oil and Gass permit VIC/P41. Northright-1, a dry hole drilled in VIC/P41 by
Eagle Bay Resources in 2001, is the only well located in the gazettal area. The remaining
areas have not been under licence since the early 1970s when Shell had the area under
licence VIC/P9 and acquired the GS70A seismic survey. The seismic coverage is shown in
Figure 11 and the principal seismic surveys shown in Figure 12.
In 1987, the BMR acquired the BMR-68 seismic survey. These data provide good regional
coverage of the gazetted area and were reprocessed in 2002. The blocks are also covered by
the Gippsland Basin NGMA 3167 high-resolution airborne magnetic survey. These data were
acquired in 1998/99 by Geoscience Australia (formerly the Australian Geological Survey
Organisation) between 1470E and 1500E with flight lines flown in an east-west direction at an
altitude of 130 m with a flight line spacing of 400 m; whilst the eastern deep water had a
flight line spacing of 800 m was used.
24
5.1
Location
Release Area V07-1 consists of 23 blocks and lies on the shallow continental shelf in water
depths of 20-200 m, southward of the States Three-Mile Zone. It comprises 14 full and 9 part
blocks and covers approximately 1,239 km2; it partly surrounds the retention lease (VIC/RL3)
around the Sole gas field. Most of the area extends across the Northern Platform, where
shallow Palaeozoic basement is overlain by a thin veneer of Early Cretaceous (Strzelecki
Group) and the Paleocene (Latrobe Group Kingfish Formation) sediments. Water depths in
the block gradually increase in a south-easterly direction. Bids for Area V07-1 close on
Thursday, 17th April 2008, at 4PM AEST.
Area V07-2 spans the easternmost part of the Northern Platform and Terrace and consists of
21 blocks (1,422 km2). Water depths range principally between 70 and 200 m, though they
increase to 300 m in the southernmost part of the block. Area V07-2 has not been explored
since the 1970s, when Shell acquired seismic survey GS70A. Aeromagnetic data indicate the
presence of a magnetic low in the area, which has been interpreted as a shallow sub-basin,
(Figure 6). Bids for Area V07-2 close Thursday, 17th April 2008, at 4PM AEST.
Area V07-3 consists of 32 graticular blocks (2,160 square kilometres) and is located on the
upper continental slope. Water depths within V07-3 increase rapidly from approximately 200
m to almost 1,000 m in the middle of the block; and 2,000 m in the south-east and south-west
corners of the block, along the northern flank of the Bass Canyon. Bids for Area V07-3 close
Thursday, 17th April 2008, at 4PM AEST.
5.2
Previous Exploration
5.2.1 Seismic Coverage & Well Control
Seismic coverage consists principally of older regional seismic lines (e.g. Esso 1969, Shell
1970-1992, and BMR 1987); seismic density decreases eastwards, ranging from detailed over
V07-1 to regional over V07-3 (Figures 11 and 12). Some of V07-1 is covered by more
modern seismic data, including 223 line km of 2D data acquired by Bass Strait Oil. In
addition, there are several 3D surveys located immediately south and south-east of the block.
Both V07-2 and V07-3 are covered with vintage seismic 2D data, which become
progressively sparser in the southern portion of V07-3. The far south-western portion of V073 is overlapped by the 1999 regional deepwater GDW-99 survey, which was acquired by
Seismic Australia for DPI.
25
Much of the recent seismic data from the region were acquired by Bass Strait Oil Ltd during
its evaluation of permit area VIC/P41. This included 223 km of 2D data as infill and 575 km2
of 3D data southward of the Rosedale Fault System, in the general area of the Sole gas field.
This latter survey led to the identification of the Kipling lead which has a prospective
resource of 118 MMbbl recoverable and 820 Bcf of gas (Reid, 2005).
Older data includes regional lines acquired by BMR (now Geoscience Australia) in 1987 and
the Shell seismic survey GS70A, much of which covers Area V07-2 on a widely spaced grid
(Figure 12). Shell Development Australia also reprocessed the data from the older surveys,
which ultimately led to the drilling of Hammerhead-1 and Shark-1.
Only sparse seismic data are available for the northernmost part of Area V07-1 and the
southern portion of Area V07-3.
Only one well, Northright-1, has been drilled within the three gazettal block. Consequently, in
order to develop an understanding the regions geology, it also is necessary to examine the
results of exploration wells and discoveries drilled to the west and south of the three gazettal
blocks,. These wells can be used for geological correlation and to gain some understanding of
the petroleum systems that operate in the north-eastern part of the Gippsland Basin.
The lack of exploration wells in the three gazettal blocks requires that prospectivity
assessments for the areas be made by examining the working petroleum systems elements that
are located further to the west. The currently producing Basker/Manta field is an example of
an intra-Latrobe petroleum system. The source for both the gas and oil appears to be located
within the eastern Central Deep, in the thick section of coal-bearing, lower coastal plain
sediments of the Volador Formation. Reservoir units in the Basker/Manta field occur in
fluvial sandstones of the Chimaera Formation (Golden Beach Subgroup) and in lower coastal
plain channel sandstones of the Volador Formation (Halibut Subgroup). Top sealing in both
hydrocarbon-bearing intervals is provided by a series of interbedded claystones and siltstones.
The Rosedale Fault System controls the distribution of hydrocarbons along the northern
margin of the Central Deep, as exemplified by the Latrobe-sourced Kipper and Longtom
discoveries. Exploration failures along the Rosedale Fault Zone have been ascribed to either
the presence of variable sealing lithologies or to the complex nature of fault seal integrity in
the area.
26
Further to the north, on the Northern Terrace, the commercial discoveries are exclusively dry
gas and are believed, based upon the latest work (OBrien & Boreham, in preparation) to have
been sourced locally from the underlying, thermally mature Strzelecki Group. The Sole gas
field is part of a rotated Strzelecki Group half-graben that developed during the Albian-Aptian
and was reactivated during the Turonian Latrobe rifting event; a relatively thick sequence of
sandstones and lacustrine shales of the Emperor Subgroup was deposited in the hanging wall
of the Strzelecki fault block. The Sole field is perhaps an example of a Strzelecki-Halibut
petroleum system, broadly similar to the one possible responsible for the Patricia/Baleen gas
accumulation; the only difference is that the reservoir unit there is part of the Cobia
Subgroup, above the Marlin Unconformity. The trap itself appears to be a Late Tertiary
inverted hanging wall feature, which has clearly been charged in the Late Tertiary. The gases
in the Sole field occur at shallow depths (approximately 800 m) and have been strongly
biodegraded, which is has further decreased the heavier hydrocarbons in the already dry
reservoired gases (OBrien & Boreham, in preparation).
No discoveries have been yet been made on the offshore Northern Platform. Only thin
intervals of Strzelecki and Latrobe group sediments are preserved across the Northern
Platform and these rapidly thin out towards the present day coastline. A local mature
Strzelecki source is lacking in this area and hydrocarbons would have to have migrated
relatively long distances from the Northern Terrace or even from south of the Rosedale Fault
System (in the Central Deep). A viable play in the central and southern part of the Northern
Platform may be the stratigraphic pinch-out of thin (>100 m), sandy Latrobe Group sediments
that overlie Strzelecki Group and Palaeozoic basement. However, the sealing lithologies are
very thin across the Northern Platform and parts of the area are probably located north of the
terminal edge of the regional seal.
5.3
Play Assessment
Since the 1980s, when the north-eastern offshore part of the basin was last explored, the
understanding of the petroleum geology in the province has been advanced significantly. New
geophysical and basin modelling techniques have allowed a better assessment of the
remaining hydrocarbon potential of the basin. In the context of Gippsland's exploration
resurgence, it seems timely to have a new look at the prospectivity in the basin's eastern
frontier.
27
5.3.1 Sedimentary Facies Correlation
The oil and gas discoveries made along the Rosedale Fault System, together with several deep
exploration wells, provide excellent geological control on the sedimentary facies distribution
in the north-eastern part of the basin and help explain the stratigraphic and structural
relationships between the Central Deep, the Northern Terrace and the Northern Platform. The
controlling influence of the Rosedale and Lake Wellington Fault systems are evident in the
well correlation between Basker-1 and Northright-1 (Figures 13 and 14).
Uplift along the Lake Wellington System occurred during the late Early Cretaceous
establishing the Northern Platform and eroding Strzelecki Group sediments. The amount of
eroded sediments is large, according to palynological data that was obtained from the
Northright-1 well. The well reached TD in the Foraminisporis wonthaggiensis Zone of
Hauterivian to Barremian age and the colouration of the palynomorphs indicate a TMI
(Thermal Maturation Index) of 2.4+, suggesting that this older section is thermally mature. It
is interpreted that as much as 2 or 3 km of section may have been eroded at the overlying
unconformity with the Latrobe Group (Partridge, 2003).
The downthrown side of the fault system developed as a rotated half-graben, as part of the
Northern Terrace, and was rapidly filled with the Emperor Subgroup. The seismic character at
the interpreted base of the subgroup (Figure 14) suggests the presence of a thick volcanic unit
that was presumably associated with tectonic extension during the Early Turonian. The halfgraben accommodated a thick sequence of coarse-grained alluvial fan and fluvial sediments
(Admiral Formation), lacustrine shales (Kipper Shale) and interbedded as well as overlying
fluvial, partly lacustrine siliciclastics (Curlip Formation). On Figures 13 and 14 the preferred
interpretation involves an over 1 km thick Emperor Subgroup with the Curlip Formation
intersected by Sole-1. This deviates from the biostratigraphic interpretation, based on poor
palynological data as reported by Partridge (2001), which place the sediments at Sole-1s TD
into the Admiral Formation. However, total thickness of the P. mawsonii Zone, penetrated in
the Longtom area, suggests that almost the complete section of the Emperor Subgroup is
developed in this half-graben. The Longtom Unconformity (Figure 13) represents termination
of graben-fill sedimentation and signals further tectonism involving in particular the Rosedale
Fault System.
The Rosedale Fault System separates the Northern Terrace from the Central Deep. Because of
its complex nature, petroleum exploration along this fault system has met with variable
success, mainly because fault-seal integrity is one of the major risks in this part of the basin.
28
Moreover, the exact stratigraphic distribution of reservoir and sealing facies became only
clear after biostratigraphic review of earlier samples. It is now clear that the Golden Beach
Subgroup is confined to the Central Deep and that hydrocarbon accumulations at Kipper and
Basker/Manta (Figures 13 and 14) rely heavily on intra-formational sealing rocks such as the
Campanian Volcanics or the carbonaceous sediments of the lower coastal plain.
After the Campanian, the basin entered a tectonically quieter episode and with the Tasman
Sea now open, was increasingly influenced by marine depositional processes. This is
delineated on the well-correlation (Figure 13). In the Basker/Manta area, marginal marine
conditions were established soon after the Seahorse Unconformity as represented by parts of
the Volador Formation. The Kate Shale is a distinct marine marker horizon that can be
mapped within in the eastern Central Deep extending onto the Northern Terrace in Sole area
(Bernecker & Partridge, 2005). This unit represents a maximum flooding event during the
earliest Paleocene and is under- and overlain by coarse-grained near shore marine sandstones.
Where developed, the Kate Shale separates the Volador Formation from the Kingfish
Formation, which is significantly more marine in the eastern, as opposed to the western, parts
of the basin.
The Kingfish Formation provides good quality reservoirs at top-Latrobe level on the Northern
Terrace because of the strong marine influence,. These reservoirs are sealed by the marls and
mudstones of the basal Seaspray Group. The Sole gas field is a prime example for this
configuration in this part of the basin. On the Northern Platform, the Latrobe Group thins
rapidly and pinches-out northward of Northright-1. The well only encountered 30 m of the
Kingfish Formation, and, although reservoir quality sands were intersected, hydrocarbon
charge is seen as the main risk.
According to the facies correlation presented in Figure 13, four main play fairways can be
distinguished (Figure 15):
Intra-Latrobe play fairway in which the Halibut Subgroup petroleum system operates
and where additional reservoirs are developed within the Chimaera Formation of the
Golden Beach Subgroup; e.g. Basker/Manta field.
Golden Beach-Emperor play fairway in which a Strzelecki/Emperor/Golden Beach

petroleum system is likely to operate. Reservoirs in the stratigraphically older parts of
the Latrobe Group are commonly sealed by the Campanian Volcanics, migration and
seal distribution is controlled by the Rosedale Fault System; e.g. Longtom and Kipper
fields.
29
Top Latrobe play fairway which is dependant on a Strzelecki source and intra/top
Latrobe reservoirs.
Latrobe pinchout play fairway which relies on stratigraphic trapping of Latrobe

reservoirs and access to a Strzelecki source.
Except for the pinch-out play, all play-types have been pursued successfully in the basin and
extending these fairways further east into the gazettal areas appears plausible.
5.3.2 Area V07-1
The majority of Area V07-1 comprises part of the Northern Platform (Figures 4 and 5).
According to seismic interpretations (Figure 16), the main play type is the stratigraphic pinchout of the Latrobe Group. North of the Lake Wellington Fault Zone, the Palaeozoic basement
is at shallow depths and is overlain by a thin veneer of Early Cretaceous (Strzelecki Group)
and the Paleocene (Kingfish Formation) sediments. The northernmost limit of the Latrobe
Group and the ultimate pinch-out is interpreted to lie immediately north of Northright-1;
consequently, much of Area V07-1 falls within the Latrobe pinch-out play fairway (Figure
16). Reservoir quality sandstones are known to exist on the platform; hydrocarbon charge
would either be derived from the mature Strzelecki Group sources on the Northern Platform
or from Latrobe Group sources along, or south of, the Rosedale Fault System.
The south-western corner of this gazettal block lies between the Rosedale and Lake
Wellington fault systems and is part of the top-Latrobe play fairway (Figure 17), where topLatrobe gas accumulations appear to have been sourced from the Strzelecki Group. High
resolution seismic mapping can trace the continuation of these half-grabens laterally and
should delineate appropriate hanging wall inversion structures, similar to Sole that may have
received and preserved a gas-charge from the proposed Strzelecki source system.
5.3.3 Area V07-2
Area V07-2 is dominated by shallow basement across its entire northern portion and hence
the only play that has been interpreted to exist within Area V07-2 is the Latrobe pinch-out
play-type. On seismic data, the undulating basement surface is readily mappable (Figures 18
and 19) and hence multiple pinch-out features may be developed. The currently available data
do not permit any comment about the presence and properties of the potential reservoir units.
Recent work on the Southern Platform (Bernecker et al., 2006) highlighted the presence of an
Oligocene sandstone unit above the Latrobe Unconformity. If equivalent sandstones exist on
30
the Northern Platform, then hydrocarbon charge would potentially come from the mature
Strzelecki grabens (Figures 18 and 19).
5.3.4 Area V07-3
From a petroleum geological perspective, Area V07-3 is the most diverse of the 2007
Gippsland gazettal blocks as it covers the main four play-fairways (Figure 15) that have been
mapped on the basis of extensive well control further west. Regional seismic lines across the
area (Figures 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20) outline the distribution of basement highs that are flanked
by sediment-filled grabens. Several basin-wide unconformities can be recognised and, if put
into the regional context, allow the correlation between various basin-fill sequences.
Shallow basement in the northern part of V07-3 equates to the Latrobe pinch-out play
fairway, highlighted on Figure 18. The nature of the top-Latrobe play fairway is less clear in
the area, due to very limited seismic data; the play would have to rely on the presence of a
Strzelecki-Emperor filled rotated half graben (Figure 17) similar to that seen on Figure 19.
The Golden Beach-Emperor play fairway (Figure 20) is only a valid target in the western
segment of the area, because submarine erosion associated with the development of the Bass
Canyon removed parts of the deeper Latrobe Group. The westernmost part of Area V07-3 is
crossed by the East Gippsland Rise, a basement high that represents the eastern boundary of
the Gippsland Basin.
The intra-Latrobe play fairway only affects is only present in the south-western corner of the
area. Access to the intra-Latrobe petroleum system (Volador Formation source and Golden
Beach/intra-Volador reservoirs, intra-Volador seals) appears viable. However, lateral facies
variations could possibly mean that the entire Volador section further east is dominantly
marine in nature. This may translate to enhanced reservoir properties, while shaly sealing
units may be less frequently developed. Moreover, water depths in this segment vary between
1,000 and 2,000 m, significantly increasing the potential drilling costs.
5.4
Aeromagnetic Data and Interpretation
A magnetic interpretation of the area is available in VIMP Report 69 (Moore & Wong, 2002)
and is reproduced here in Figure 21. The dominant feature in the area is the magnetic anomaly
underlying the Sole field which appears to be associated with an anomaly at a depth of
31
approximately 2 km. The source of this anomaly is evident on the seismic line in the well
correlation from Basker-1 to Northright-1 (Figures 13 and 14).
This tectonic structure is seen best in the first vertical derivative image in Figure 22, where
the basement horsts such as those along the Gippsland Rise and along the footwall of the
Rosedale Fault, east of Shark are clearly visible. The first vertical derivative map also shows
the extent of the Campanian Volcanics and Palaeozoic intrusives.
The intersection of the Lake Wellington Fault with the Gippsland Rise marks southern extent
of the Northern platform where Latrobe Group sediments overlie basement or a thin veneer of
remnant Strzelecki Group. This area covers most of V07-1 and all of V07-2. The Latrobe
Group pinches out in the north of these blocks, but may be thinly developed over rugose
basement terrain visible in V07-2.
5.5
Seismic Interpretation and Structural Framework of Release Blocks
The BMR regional seismic survey across the Gippsland Basin includes several lines over the
three gazettal blocks. These regional lines, when combined with other seismic data and the
aeromagnetic interpretation, have allowed a first-order structural framework to be developed.
The structural setting of the acreage release blocks is controlled by the positions of the Lake
Wellington and Rosedale fault systems which are clearly recognised on the seismic data.
The Lake Wellington Fault System is marked by the clear truncation of Cretaceous sediments
against basement (Figures 13 and 14). Northright-1 and Wahoo-1 were drilled north of the
Lake Wellington and both wells reached total depth in the Early Cretaceous Strzelecki Group
sediments which are believed to be present as a thin remnant overlying Palaeozoic sediments.
The Sole gas field abuts the Lake Wellington Fault System and lies on a terrace (Northern
Terrace) which is characterised by a marked angular unconformity penetrated by Sole-1. The
Top Latrobe seismic horizon is clearly identified on the seismic data at the Sole-1 well
location and is associated with a marked amplitude anomaly (Figure 23). The unconformity
can be unambiguously tied to the well and occurs at the top of the Emperor subgroup at a
depth of 1,012 mSS. The unconformity is therefore believed to be the Longtom
Unconformity.
32
The southern boundary of the Northern Terrace is marked by a second major fault, the
Rosedale Fault System. South of this fault, the Longtom Unconformity is less evident and the
Emperor Subgroup is overlain by the Golden Beach Sub-group and younger Latrobe Group
sediments. The Longtom Unconformity is, however, visible at Admiral-1 (Figure 24) south of
the Rosedale Fault System and may be associated at this location with Late Cretaceous
wrenching influenced by Palaeozoic fault trends.
The structural setting of the blocks is shown in Figures 5 and 15 where the east-west trending
Lake Wellington and Rosedale fault systems swing south-east to the east of the Sole gas field.
Within V07-3, the Late Cretaceous fault systems intersect with an older Early Cretaceous
fault system, defining what has been called the Northern Graben. This rifted area is bounded
to the east by the East Gippsland Rise and is clearly evident on the BMR seismic lines
(Figures 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20) and the aeromagnetic data (Figure 25)
A magnetic interpretation of the area (Figure 6) demonstrates the dominant feature in the area
to be a magnetic anomaly underlying the Sole field, which appears to be associated with an
anomaly at a depth of approximately 2 km. The source of this anomaly is evident on the
seismic line in the well correlation from Basker/Manta to Northright-1 (Figure 14).
This feature is seen best in Figure 22, where the basement horsts such as those along the
Gippsland Rise and along the footwall of the Rosedale Fault, east of Shark are clearly visible.
Figure 22 also clearly shows the extent of the Kipper Volcanics and Palaeozoic intrusives.
The intersection of the Lake Wellington Fault with the Gippsland Rise marks southern extent
of the Northern Platform, where Latrobe Group sediments overlie basement or only a thin
veneer of remnant Strzelecki Formation is present. This area covers most of V07-1 and all of
V07-2. The Latrobe Group pinches out in the north of these blocks but may be thinly
developed over the rugose basement terrain visible in V07-2. It is also likely that Oligocene
sands may be present within the Lakes Entrance Formation in and around the basement highs
(Figure 19)
South of the Rosedale Fault, in the vicinity of the Bass Canyon, there is ample evidence on
the seismic data for early - perhaps Oligocene - submarine erosion of the Latrobe Group and
the deposition of a thick Lakes Entrance Formation (Figure 16). This unit would provide an
excellent seal to the Latrobe Group sediments in the south of V07-3.
33
5.6
Prospects and Leads
5.6.1 Northern Platform
North of the Lake Wellington Fault, the principal plays are drape of the Latrobe Group
sediments over Palaeozoic basement relief, such as observed in V07-2. Additional potential
lies in basement onlap trap and erosional remnants of both Latrobe group sediments and later
Oligocene sands.
The key risks for these plays are distance from a mature source and the capacity of the
overlying Seaspray Group to provide an adequate seal at these shallow and proximal
locations.
5.6.2 Northern Terrace
A number of oil and gas discoveries are located on the Northern Terrace, including the Sole
and Patricia-Baleen dry gas fields and the Leatherjacket oil discovery. Essentially all of the
significant hydrocarbon accumulations are either over or immediately basin-ward of the Lake
Wellington Fault System. An extension of this fairway exists in V07-3 and the presence of
Latrobe Group and underlying Emperor sub-group sediments is likely to occur in V07-3 and
in the extreme southwest of V07-1. These areas have not been covered by recent seismic data
acquisition and SEGY coverage is limited.
The geological interval beneath the Longtom Unconformity has not been fully mapped or
explored and there is clear evidence of underlying structures. This section provides an
opportunity for deeper plays which can be sourced either from underlying the Strzelecki
Group sediments or from across the Rosedale Fault from Latrobe Group petroleum systems in
the Central Deep. A significant amount of additional work is needed to fully constrain the
deeper potential of the Northern Terrace.
South of the Rosedale Fault System, the fault blocks that host the Longtom, Kipper and
Basker/Manta fields extend into the southwest of V07-3. Seismic data quality is generally
poor and depth conversion is hampered by the rapidly increasing water depth. However, a
Top Latrobe rollover has been identified in the eastern graben in V07-3 (Figure 26) and other
Volador, Golden Beach and Emperor plays are likely to exist which may be enhanced by the
progressive erosion of these sediments on the west flank of the Gippsland Rise by the palaeo
Bass Canyon.
34
In summary, the three blocks on offer lie at the eastern limit of the Gippsland Basin and
straddle a range of tectono-stratigraphic zones. Most of V07-1 and V07-2 overlie the
Northern Platform whereas the south-west of V07-3 covers an extension of the fault blocks
hosting the Longtom, Kipper and Basker/Manta fields. Significant early Tertiary submarine
channelling to the south of the Rosedale Fault has led to erosion of the western flank of the
Gippsland Rise and may provide an opportunity for subcrop traps or even channel fill plays.
These have not been fully evaluated in this area.
5.7
Risk
Exploration risks for the 2007 Gippsland gazettal blocks fall into two categories:
The amount of modern seismic data is very limited, especially in the eastern areas. The one
drilled exploration well, Northright-1, provides insight into the geology of only the Northern
Platform. Exploration in the region will require the acquisition of significant amounts of
seismic data.
The understanding of source rock distribution, hydrocarbon generation and migration is
critical and largely unknown in the eastern offshore basin. It will be important to ascertain
whether the Strzelecki Group in the east is coal-bearing and whether the sediments are
sufficiently thermally mature to generate hydrocarbons. It is nevertheless likely that the
generated hydrocarbons will be gas only, based on the discoveries made to date that can be
related to a Strzelecki source. The classic Latrobe Group source rock kitchen area of the
Central Deep (Volador Formation) may lie too far west to enable charging of the potential
reservoir units in the gazettal areas.
Distribution and effectiveness of sealing facies is not seen as a major risk over most of the
areas. An effective regional seal - the marls of the lower Seaspray Group - is likely to be
present over the majority areas, though the exact lithologies in the eastern offshore areas
remain unknown. The quality of intra-formational seals depends very much on the overall
facies associations and their variations through time. Well control in the Central Deep and on
the Northern Terrace indicates that the Latrobe Group sediments tend to have more marine
affinities in the more eastern areas.
Uncertainties also relate to the behaviour of the main fault systems and related structures. The
transition between the Central Deep and the Northern Terrace is controlled by a complex fault
system (the Rosedale Fault System) that has juxtaposed reservoir and sealing facies in several
35
locations, but is also known to act as migration pathway in others. Fault seal integrity is
certainly one issue that requires detailed attention by any explorer.
36
Summary
The Gippsland Basin has enjoyed resurgence in recent years, with a number of new explorers
undertaking exploration and development programmes in the region. The three 2007 gazettal
blocks are located in the north-eastern offshore part of the basin and provide opportunities to
explore untapped parts of this prolific hydrocarbon province. Recent discoveries, especially
along the Rosedale Fault System and northern basin margin, have provided a new impetus to
further examine the stratigraphically deeper part of the Latrobe Group.
Areas V07-1 and V07-3 are geologically more diverse than Area V07-2, within which only
the Latrobe pinch-out play fairway is likely to be viable. Area V07-1 is attractive because it
contains both the pinch-out fairway and also the top-Latrobe fairway within which the Sole
and Patricia-Baleen gas discoveries occur. Access to a mature and generative Strzelecki
source is guaranteed in the south-western part of the block; there reservoir and sealing
components are also not seen as posing significant risks. However, the more northerly parts of
V07-1 lie on the Northern Platform, where uncertainties associated with the top seal quality
and hydrocarbon migration processes may be important. Area V07-3 is geologically the most
diverse (four play fairways have been identified) block and would also be the most attractive,
providing that the Golden Beach and intra-Latrobe fairways are located in areas of shallow
water depth. Access to mature source rock is possible from several grabens within V07-3,
though the nature of reservoir and sealing units is poorly defined.
Clearly, a significant amount of new data - especially seismic data - are required in order to
adequately assess the hydrocarbon potential of these new blocks within the north-eastern part
of the Gippsland Basin. These new seismic data, when combined with an improved
understanding of the hydrocarbon generation-migration and sealing processes in the areas,
should provide the keys to unlocking the untapped potential of these frontier areas.
37
7
7.1
Offset Wells
Northright-1
The well was drilled by Eagle Bay Resources in 2001 and unsuccessfully targeted a Latrobepinch-out play on the basins Northern Platform. Northright-1 penetrated 27 m of Latrobe
Group sediments (Kingfish Formation) and reached its total depth (TD) at 391 mKB, within
the Strzelecki Group. Although the Latrobe section included a valid reservoir interval, the
well was dry, probably because of inadequate sealing facies. It is also possible that the well
was located either in a migration shadow or was perhaps located too far from the Central
Deep source kitchen.
7.2
Dart-1
Dart-1, drilled by Esso in late 1973, intersected a similar facies succession and targeted a
separate culmination which did not prove to be a valid closure.
7.3
Hammerhead-1
Drilled by Shell in 1982, Hammerhead-1 tested an interpreted fault-truncated, intra-Latrobe

rollover against the Rosedale Fault (Shell Development, 1982). The primary reservoir
objective, a lower L. balmei (Paleocene) shore face sandstone (1,432 mKB in the well), was
water-wet. Hammerhead-1 reached TD in a shale-dominated sequence, believed to be part of
the Golden Beach Subgroup. Seismic mapping was not carried out at the T. lilliei level to
determine if closure existed. A palynological review some time later indicated that the
mudstones are actually Turonian in age (P. mawsonii biozone) and they therefore actually
corresponded to the Kipper Shale (Partridge, 1999).
7.4
Shark-1
Shark 1 (1989) was the last well drilled by Shell Development Australia in the former permit
VIC/P22, following a string of discoveries in this fault-controlled part of the basin; these
discoveries included Basker-1 (1983), Manta-1 (1984) and Kipper-1 (1986). The well tested a
down-faulted Golden Beach section, with the play reliant upon an impermeable Golden Beach
interval for cross-fault seal,. The lack of hydrocarbons in Shark-1 may well be due to the
absence of a sealing facies across the major fault, in particular the missing Campanian
Volcanics (Figure 22) that are prominently developed in Kipper and the Basker/Manta area.
38
7.5
The Sole Field
7.5.1
Sole-1
Shell Development drilled Sole-1 in 1973 and discovered a dry gas field on the Northern
Strzelecki Terrace which is estimated to contain in excess of 250 Bcf GIIP. The reservoir
interval is represented by marine sandstones near the top of the Latrobe Group. The overall
Latrobe section is 213 m thick and is predominantly marine. The Latrobe group includes a 10
m thick interval of Kate Shale, below which a thin interval of coal-bearing, lower coastal
plain sediments is developed. The seismic data across the Sole field (Figure 23) suggest that
the structure itself is a hanging-wall fold that has formed during the Late Tertiary via mild
inversion of the Lake Wellington Fault Zone.
A key question with the Sole field is whether the dry gas within the reservoir was sourced
from the Central Deep and then migrated across the Rosedale Fault into the trap at Sole, or
whether it has been generated more locally on the Northern Strzelecki Terrace, perhaps from
within the Strzelecki Group.
7.6
The Basker/Manta/Gummy Field
The Basker/Manta/Gummy fields were discovered by a consortium led by Shell Petroleum

(Australia) with five exploration wells initially drilled: Basker-1 (1983), Basker South-1
(1983), Manta-1 (1984), Chimaera-1 (1984) and Gummy-1 (1990). Water depths range from
133.5 m in Manta-1 to 156 m in Gummy-1 and 162 m in Basker-1. The Basker field lies
approximately 58 km offshore, approximately 18 km east of the Flounder field. The Manta
field lies 4 km north of the Basker field and the Gummy field lies some 2 km north-east of
Manta.
The fields are characterised by multiple stacked fluvial and alluvial sandstone reservoirs and
seals with thin hydrocarbon columns. These accumulations are contained within the downthrown side of a series of fault-blocks, which cut across the plunging Sole/Dart structure. All
four faults, mapped as Basker, Manta, Chimaera and Gummy faults, show large pre-intraCampanian unconformity throws. Whilst adjacent wells, such as Basker South-1 and
Chimaera-1, have comparable reservoir sections, post-drill studies showed they did not test
valid structures.
The proportion of sandstone within the coastal plain sequence between the intra- and Lower
Campanian markers was higher in Manta-1 than in Basker-1 (32% compared to 21%) and
individual bed thickness was also greater (17 m compared to 7 m) corresponding to the
39
transition from coastal plain facies to a sandy alluvial facies as seen in Hammerhead-1. The
sedimentary section below the top of the volcanics thins from Basker-1 to Manta-1. The
predominantly siltstone sequence above the volcanics in Basker-1 and Basker South-1 (from
which marginal marine dinoflagellates were recovered) is not present in Manta-1, indicating
that in this well the Campanian section is entirely non-marine.
Geophysical analysis conducted in the vicinity of the fields confirm that seismic
characteristics can not be used to predict reservoir development in intra-Latrobe Group
coastal plain facies as individual sandstone units are generally less than 5 m thick. Also, the
largest impedance contrasts are between the high and low carbonaceous shales and siltstones.
Gaffney Cline and Associates reported in October 2005 the following P50 reserves:
Basker: 26 Mstb oil, 10 PJ sales gas, 0.1 MMbbl condensate/LPG
Manta: 4.1 Mstb oil, 68 PJ sales gas, 2.7 MMbbl condensate/LPG
Gummy: 16 PJ sales gas, 0.7 MMbbl condensate/LPG
Recent press releases [March 2007] suggest development drilling in 2006 has increased gas
and oil reserves considerably. 2P oil reserves are rated at nearly 40 Mstb oil whilst gascondensate reserves have nearly quadrupled.
7.6.1
Basker-1
Basker-1 was drilled to evaluate multiple thin fluvial/coastal Late Cretaceous sandstones of
the Volador and Chimaera formations. Vertical seals are provided by interbedded coastal
plain mudstones, while the sandstones are laterally sealed by a fault. Pronounced thickening
of the Campanian section (Chimaera Formation) on the down-thrown side of the bounding
fault is an indication of relatively continuous growth which can lead to increased potential for
clay smearing along the fault-plane. Critical factors recognised prior to drilling were the
unknown presence of source rocks in the mature basal section of the Latrobe Group, and the
extent of both vertical and lateral seals.
Basker-1 encountered 22.1 m net hydrocarbon sand (18.8 m net oil sand; 1.8 m net gas sand;
1.5 m net unspecified hydrocarbon sand) within the Volador Formation. Pressure data
suggests the sandstones have limited lateral extent; with the accumulations being the result of
both stratigraphic and structural trapping mechanisms. Further details regarding Basker-1 can
be found in Appendix 1.
40
7.6.2
Manta-1
Manta-1 was drilled to test the Volador Formation near the culmination of a mapped closure.
The prospective sandstones were of fluvial/alluvial origin interbedded with lacustrine/paludal
shales, in a similar setting to those penetrated in Basker-1.
Pre-drill critical factors were hydrocarbon charge for the structure by lateral migration
through the Basker boundary fault or by vertical migration along faults from mature source
rocks underlying the volcanic section, extent and thickness of sand units, and accessibility to
the kitchen area to the south.
A total of 28.7 m net oil sand (19.1 m in units equal or greater than 3 m) and 73.8 m net
gas/condensate sand (60.6 m in units equal or greater than 3 m) was intersected in Manta-1.
The oil-bearing sands were concentrated within the Campanian coastal plain sequence
between the intra- and Lower Campanian markers. A total of 24.1 m of oil and 27.6 m of gas
were found within this sequence above the volcanics. A 54 m sandstone within the volcanic
section (top at 3,274 mKB) contained a 39 m gas/condensate column. This constituted a new
objective within this play type. A further 4.6 m oil sands and 7.2 m gas sands were found in
sandstones within the volcanics.
Interbedded shales and argillaceous siltstones provide vertical seal to the hydrocarbon
accumulations. Lateral seals for the accumulations were difficult to ascertain, however,
drilling of Chimaera-1 in the adjacent fault-block to the north confirmed:
The Chimarera-1 Campanian coastal plain sequence was not sandier than Manta-1, and the
fine-grained sediments in this sequence act as a seal for the sandstones in Manta-1.
The gas/condensate sequence in Manta-1 is juxtaposed across the Manta Fault with a large
sandy water-wet sequence in Chimaera-1. This confirms the fault-plane is acting as a seal. A
small closure may exist independent of the fault, however, this would not account for the
height of the hydrocarbon column. If the fault is sealing within the volcanics, then it can be
assumed it acts as a seal for the section above the volcanics.
Sandstones within the Volador Formation coastal plain section are interpreted to be fluvial
point bar deposits with occasional channel deposits. Porosity values range from 17-25%.
Sandstones in the Chimaera Formation are lithologically similar to sandstones near the base
of Hammerhead-1. Logs indicate porosity in the range 10-20% with values of up to 17% in
the gas/condensate sand 3,274-3,329 mKB. Further details regarding Manta-1 can be found in
Appendix 1.
41
7.6.3
Gummy-1
Gummy-1 was drilled after mapping in 1988 indicated a significant north-west extension to
the Manta field. The structure tested is a down-thrown fault-trap formed due to the
intersection of the NE-SW trending Basker/Manta anticline by the NW-SE trending Gummy
Fault. Closure was mapped at both the Golden Beach Subgroup and Halibut Subgroup levels.
The expression of the Gummy Fault changes along its length; to the east and west the Gummy
Fault is clearly expressed and has a very large throw, whereas in the eastern central portion it
is very subtle.
The major pre-drill risk identified was the sealing capacity of the Gummy Fault. Regional
studies suggested a component of strike/slip must be present in the development of the fault,
possibly enhancing the sealing capacity. The well was designed to test the concept that
relatively small fault throws (which are greater than a typical sand thickness) would create an
effective trap in the shale dominated environment. Seal and trapping within the Golden Beach
Subgroup was thought to be provided by juxtaposition against shales and volcanics or by
fault-plane seal as seen in Manta-1.
A total of 28 m of net condensate-rich gas sand was interpreted within the low porosity
sandstones of the Chimaera Formation. Interbedded weathered volcanic flows and tuffs,
together with shaly intervals, provide top-seal, and lateral sealing potential is further
enhanced by clay smearing. The effectiveness of these sealing properties is confirmed by the
presence of two gross hydrocarbon columns of 25 m and 130 m along with numerous
individually sealed hydrocarbon-bearing sandstones.
The Chimaera Formation comprises two distinct sedimentary environments; an upper coastal
plain facies (interval 3,097-3,495 mKB) and a braided stream facies (interval 3,495-3,563
mKB), within which are the majority of the reserves in the Gummy field. This gas-bearing
sequence has a sand/shale ratio of 74%, although poor reservoir quality accounts for a net-togross of 32%, with the average log-derived porosity for this zone is 11%. Further details
regarding Gummy-1 can be found in Appendix 1
7.7
The Kipper Field
The Kipper field was discovered in 1986 by an Esso-BHP Petroleum-led consortium and
represents the first significant hydrocarbon discovery within the Golden Beach Subgroup. The
field lies approximately 42 km offshore on the northern flank of the Gippsland Basin, close to
the Rosedale Fault System and is approximately 20 km south-east of the Patricia/Baleen fields
42
and approximately 15 km east of the Tuna field. Estimates of in place reserves are 620 Bcf
gas and 30 MMbbl oil (Register of Australasian Petroleum 2006).
The field is a low-side fault-dependent trap with a significant gas column within fluvial to
deltaic sandstones at the top of the Chimera Formation. Top-seal is provided by a thick
volcanic section whilst fault-seal to the north is interpreted to be dependent upon the
juxtaposition of reservoir lithologies against thick lacustrine shales.
Two wells were drilled; Kipper-1 (1986) intersected four minor oil pools in the Flounder and
Volador formations before encountering a 290 m gross (191 m net) gas column sealed by
volcanics in the Chimaera Formation (termed the S-1 gas reservoir). Kipper-2 (1987) was
drilled down-dip to the discovery well and intersected the same S-1 gas reservoir. The well
extended the gas column by 26 m below the previously lowest known gas in Kipper-1 and
delineated an underlying 14 m oil leg which had been prognosed based on data from Kipper1. Water depths range from 94 m in Kipper-1 to 107 m in Kipper-2.
The S-1 reservoir geometry and continuity is complex with significant lateral facies variation
between Kipper-1 and Kipper-2. Kipper-1 intersected predominantly coarse-grained to
granular sandstones and conglomerates with minor interbedded siltstones and shales with a
net-to-gross of 66% whereas Kipper-2 intersected a sequence of interbedded sands, silts and
coals with net-to-gross values of 52% and 37% for the gas and oil sections respectively. Sloan
et al. (1992) suggested that Kipper-1 penetrated a series of fluvial, sand-dominated channel
systems, while Kipper-2 intersected the channel flanks with a greater abundance of overbank
deposits.
Total areal closure measures 38 km2, the top of the reservoir is 1,955 mTVDSS, and GOC and
OWC levels are mapped at 2,284 mTVDSS and 2,298 mTVDSS respectively (Malek &
Mehin, 1998). The Kipper field demonstrates the effectiveness of two important components
of Golden Beach Subgroup plays; namely that regional volcanics can provide competent topseal, and that fault-dependent prospects on the low-side of major basin margin faults can
prove to be successful traps.
7.7.1
Kipper-1
The overall net-to-gross of the S-1 gas zone is 66% with the upper 211 m of the gas column
exhibiting 18% average porosity and 80% average gas saturation whilst the lower 79 m
records 14% and 75% respectively. The Chimera Formation reservoir section comprises
43
sandstones and conglomerates with minor interbedded siltstones and shales that developed in
a fluvial/deltaic environment. Marine dinoflagellates are present in a few horizons, suggesting
occasional marine incursions. Petrographic examination of SWC thin sections throughout the
reservoir suggest poorer porosities at the base are a result of higher proportions of rock
fragments and depositional matrix rather than diagenetic cements.
The S-1 gas zone is top-sealed by 96 m of volcanics. No fault-independent closure is mapped

at the base-volcanics on the low-side of the fault, so therefore the gas is trapped by a sealing
fault. Two possible geometries for the fault-sealing mechanism have been postulated: the
emplacement and subsequent alteration of impermeable volcanic material in the fault-plane
(e.g. as a dyke), or impermeable Kipper Shale or Strzelecki Group sediments could be
juxtaposed against the reservoir across the fault-plane.
RFT samples taken throughout the gas reservoir recovered wet gas and condensate with API
gravities decreasing from 52.7 to 39.9 at the base of the reservoir. Gas sample analysis
indicates 10-18% CO2. RFT pressure data confirms the gas is part of a simple hydraulic
system, and interprets a deepest possible GWC at 2,312 mKB giving a total gross gas column
of 326 m (assuming the up-hole water gradient and no down-dip oil leg). However,
compositional analysis of gas samples indicates the gas has sufficient wet components to
support a down-dip oil leg.
Further hydrocarbon-bearing intervals were intersected deeper within the Chimaera

Formation, which suggests further hydrocarbon potential may exist deep in the Kipper
structure provided reservoir is present. Further details regarding Kipper-1 can be found in
Appendix 1.
7.7.2
Kipper-2
Kipper-2 was drilled in order to define the basal contact of the S-1 gas accumulation
discovered by Kipper-1, and to establish the existence of an oil leg. The well successfully
defined the down-dip potential of the S-1 reservoir, the definition of an oil leg to the S-1
reservoir, and established the positions of the GOC and OWC.
The S-1 gas reservoir section comprises fluvial to deltaic sandstones and siltstones with a
further 24.5 m of volcanics between 2,242.5 and 2,267.0 mKB, and is top-sealed by 141 m of
volcanics (2.070-2.211 mKB). A gross gas column of 95 m (49.2 m net) from 2,211-2,306
mKB with average porosity of 18% and an average gas saturation of 67% was intersected. An
44
oil leg immediately below the gas had a gross column of 14 m (5.2 m net) with average
porosity of 17% and oil saturations of 43% (including a transition zone 2,317.8-2,320 mKB).
RFT pressure measurements indicate both the gas and oil legs form one hydraulic system. Oil
API gravities range from 40.4 to 42.9 and the oil is a typical Gippsland crude. Wire-line
tests indicate a GOC at 2,306 mKB and an OWC at 2,320 mKB. Further details regarding
Kipper-2 can be found in Appendix 1.
7.8
The Longtom Field
The Longtom field is located approximately 10 km north-west of the Tuna field, 14 km southwest of the Patricia/Baleen field, and lies in approximately 56 m of water. The gas field lies
on the Northern Terrace of the Gippsland Basin and comprises a three-way dip-closure
against a sealing fault on the down-thrown side of a major WNW-ESE basin terrace fault (the
Longtom Fault), part of the Rosedale Fault System. The integrity of the fault-seal is
maintained as a result of juxtaposition of the Admiral Formation reservoir on the downthrown
side against the Strzelecki Group on the up-thrown side. Admiral Formation sandstones
comprise the reservoir section of the Longtom field. Top-seal is provided by the Kipper Shale
whilst fault-seal is provided by juxtaposition of the Admiral Formation reservoir intervals
against impermeable Strzelecki Group sediments.
The field was discovered by BHP Petroleum in 1995 by the drilling of the Longtom-1/ST1
well, penetrating a 386 m (gross) gas column within Admiral Formation sandstones. The
reservoir properties of the Admiral Formation were much poorer than prognosed with the netto-gross ratio ranging from 30% (Longtom-1/ST1) to 52% (Longtom-1), much lower than the
50% average expected. The Admiral Formation comprises lacustrine shales and fluvial sands,
siltstones and shales. Visual porosity was fair; however, petrology examination of six SWCs
of the sands indicated extensive compaction had affected the sands resulting in an over
packed framework of grains. This resulted in significant reduction of inter-particle porosity
and destruction of pore throat apertures. This reduction in porosity was thought to be a
function of the proximity to the Longtom Fault [the subsequent drilling of Longtom-2 and -3
confirmed that porosity did improve with increasing distance from the fault]. The Longtom
field was initially deemed sub-economic as the reservoir section was regarded as being of
poor quality. In addition, the possible lack of lateral continuity and thinness of the sands was
thought to further reduce the productive capacity of the reservoir. However, subsequent
drilling of the appraisal wells Longtom-2 and -3 has shown the Longtom field to be
economically viable.
45
A revised contingent resource of 435 PJ gas and 5.2 MMbbl condensate has recently been
confirmed by the consultancy firm Gaffney, Cline and Associates (February 2007 press
release). FEED work for the Longtom field was completed early in 2007 and a preliminary
field development plan tying three wells from the field into the Santos-operated
Patricia/Baleen field and onshore gas processing plant has been submitted. First gas is
expected during Q3 2008.
7.8.1
Longtom-1
Longtom-1 was drilled to test the hydrocarbon potential of the Longtom structure. The
primary objective was the Admiral Formation sands with top-seal being provided by the
overlying Kipper Shale. Sandy intervals within the Kipper Shale provided a secondary
objective with top-seal provided by volcanics. Intra-formational seals within the two
objectives were thought to provide stacked hydrocarbon occurrences in both targets. The
Strzelecki Group on the up-thrown fault-block was expected to provide cross fault-seal.
Longtom-1 proved that the integrity of both the top-seal (Kipper Shale) and cross fault-seal
(Strzelecki Group); this was identified as a major risk pre-drill. It also indicates that intraformational seals are working and that stacked hydrocarbon accumulations are likely.
A total of 22.3 m net gas sand is interpreted over a gross 42.4 m interval in the well.
Porosities range from 7-11%, with corresponding water saturations of 77-48%. The base of
the gas zone corresponds to the intersection of the Longtom Fault. The GWC and GOC
cannot therefore be determined from wire-line logs. Interpretation of RFT pre-test data
suggests a gross gas column of 260 m. From the MWD data, Longtom-1/ST1 intersected
approximately 41 m TVT of net hydrocarbon-bearing sand contained within two reservoir
units [unit 1 extends from 2,056-2,081 m TVDRT; unit 2 from 2,110-2,249 mTVDRT]. Gas
appears to be the only hydrocarbon phase present. There is no evidence of a GOC or GWC.
The Admiral Formation within Longtom-1 was much thinner than prognosed due to the
bounding fault being intersected within the well at 1935 mRT. As the well did not penetrate
the Strzelecki Group, an estimated 160 m of unknown Admiral Formation is present below
TD, which could potentially comprise a significant thickness of sand.
BHP Petroleum concluded that the Longtom structure has successfully trapped hydrocarbons,
however the reservoir properties were poor. The well confirmed the source, migration and
timing conditions were adequate for trapping gas. Gas accumulations surrounding the
Longtom field have oil legs of various volumes below the gas column, and is was postulated
46
that the same would be expected in Longtom, however volumes were thought to be small and
uneconomic. Further details regarding Longtom-1 can be found in Appendix 1.
7.8.2
Longtom-2/ST1
Longtom-2/ST1 was drilled by a Nexus Energy and Apache Oil JV in November 2004 to
appraise the gas-bearing Admiral Formation sandstones encountered in Longtom-1. In
addition, the deeper Admiral Formation that proved undrilled in Longtom-1 was to be tested.
The main risk presented pre-drill was the lack of significant reservoir development within
Admiral Formation sandstones.
Two tests were run, the first within the lower reservoir section that flowed at a stabilised rate
of 18-19 Mmscf/d over a 12 hour period. Despite similar log responses to the section which
had already flowed, the second test over the upper reservoir section did not flow any
hydrocarbons to surface, and the initial results were viewed as disappointing. Subsequent
work by Nexus Energy proved the test was unsuccessful as a sub-surface valve had failed.
Core cut from this reservoir interval via a sidetrack confirmed the sand section to have
excellent reservoir properties. Nexus Energy denotes the Admiral Formation gas-bearing units
as (from deepest to shallowest) the 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 sands. Further details
regarding Longtom-2/ST1 can be found in Appendix 1.
7.8.3
Longtom-3
As a result of the problems associated with the drilling of Longtom-2/ST1, Apache Oil
decided against the drilling of the Longtom-3 production well, hence Nexus Energy currently
has 100% equity in the Longtom field. Longtom-3 was drilled in July 2006 and two
production tests confirmed the commercial viability of the Longtom field [the first test over
the 400 reservoir interval flowed at 23 Mmscf/d whilst the second test over the 100, 200 and
300 sands produced 77 Mmscf/d]. The well also confirmed the reservoir intervals are
stratigraphically connected between the wells rather than being stratigraphically isolated sand
bodies. In addition, the reservoirs are thought to be connected to a series of vertically
separate, but laterally connected, common aquifers.
47
References
ALEXANDER, R., KAGI, R.I., WOODHOUSE, G.W. & VOLKMAN, J.K., 1987. The geochemistry
of some biodegraded Australian oils. The Australian Petroleum Exploration Association
Journal, 23, pp. 53-63
BAILLIE, P.W., 1992. Gippsland Basin South Platform: unprospective or underexplored?: In

C.M. Barton, K. Hill, C. Abele, J. Foster & N. Kempton (Eds) Energy, Economics and
Environment - Gippsland Basin Symposium, Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,
pp. 165-169.
BEDDOES, JNR, L.R., 1972. Oil and Gas Fields of Australia, Papua New Guinea and New
Zealand. Tracer Petroleum & Mining Publications Pty Ltd.
BERNARD, B. B.; BROOKS, J. M., & SACKETT, W. M., 1976. Light (C1-C3) hydrocarbons
in shelf sediments of the Gulf of Mexico. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical
Union. 57. (12). pp. 931.
BERNARD, B.B., BROOKS, J.M. & SACKETT, W.M., 1977. A geochemical model for
characterization of hydrocarbon gas sources in marine sediments. 9th Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 2934, 435-438.
BERNECKER, T. & PARTRIDGE, A.D., 2001. Emperor and Golden Beach Subgroups: The onset
of Late Cretaceous Sedimentation in the Gippsland Basin, SE Australia. In Hill, K.C. &
Bernecker, T. (Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins Symposium, A Refocused Energy
Perspective for the Future, Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia, Special Publication,
pp. 391-402.
BERNECKER, T. & PARTRIDGE, 2005: Approaches to palaeogeographic reconstructions of the

Latrobe Group, Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. The Australian Petroleum
Production and Exploration Association Journal, 45 (1), pp. 581-600.
BERNECKER, T., PARTRIDGE, A.D. & WEBB, J.A., 1997. Mid-Late Tertiary deep-water
temperate carbonate deposition, offshore Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. In James,
N.P. & Clarke, J.D.A (Eds) Cool Water Carbonates, SEPM Special Publications 56, pp. 221236.
48
BERNECKER, T., WOOLLANDS, M.A., WONG, D., MOORE, D.H. & SMITH, M.A., 2001.
Hydrocarbon prospectivity of the deep-water Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia. The
Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association Journal, 41 (1), pp. 79-101.
BOUTAKOFF, N., 1964. Lakes Entrance oil and the continental shelf. Australian Petroleum
Exploration Association Journal, 4, pp.99-110.
BRS, 1993. Oil and gas resources of Australia 1992, Bureau of Resource Sciences, Canberra,
128 p.
BROWNE, I. & STALTARI, G., 1984. Report on the compilation and interpretation of seismic
reflection data from VIC/P12, Gippsland Basin, Victoria. Geophysical Exploration
Consultants Pty. Ltd. Report for Union Texas Australia Inc, unpublished.
BURNS, B.J., BOSTWICK, T.R. & EMMET, J.K., 1987. Gippsland terrestrial oils - recognition
and biodegradational effects. Australian Petroleum Exploration Association Journal, 27(1),
pp. 73-84.
CHIUPKA, J. W., MEGALLAA, M., JONASSON, K.E. & FRANKEL, E., 1997. Hydrocarbon plays
and play fairways of four vacant offshore Gippsland Basin areas. 1997 acreage release.
Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 42, Department of Natural Resources
and Environment.
CLARK, A. B. S. & THOMAS B. M., 1988, The intra-Latrobe play: a case history from the
Basker/Manta block (VIC/P19), Gippsland Basin. Australian Petroleum Exploration
Association Journal, 28,(1), pp. 100-112.
DAVIS, J.B. & SQUIRES, R.M., 1954. Detection of microbially produced gaseous hydrocarbons
other than methane. Science, 119, pp 381-38.
DENTON, E. R., 1982. Report on the seismic interpretation of the Mudlark Prospect, offshore
Gippsland Basin, VIC/P13, Victoria. General Geological Services report for Bass Strait Oil
and Gas N.L., unpublished.
49
DUDDY, I. R., 2000. Modelling of source rock maturation histories for 7 wells and 7 pseudo
wells, Gippsland Basin Deep Water Project. Geotrack Report 41, 91p, unpublished.
DUDDY, I.R. & GREEN, P.F., 1992. Tectonic development of Gippsland Basin and environs:
identification of key episodes using Apatite Fission Track Analysis (AFTA). In C.M. Barton,
K. Hill, C. Abele, J. Foster & N. Kempton (Eds) Energy, Economics and Environment Gippsland Basin Symposium, Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, pp. 111-120.
DUDDY, I.R., GREEN, P.F. & HEGARTY, K.A., 1997. Impact of thermal history on
hydrocarbon prospectivity in SE Australia. In Collins, G. (Ed.) 1997 Great Southern Basin
Symposium, Abstracts, Australian Petroleum Exploration Association, Vic./Tas Branch, pp.
14-17.
DUFF, B. A., GROLLMAN, N. G., MASON, D. J., QUESTIAUX, J. M., ORMEROD, D. S. & LAYS,
P., 1991. Tectonostratigraphic evolution of the south-east Gippsland Basin; Australian
Petroleum Exploration Association Journal, 31, (1), pp. 116-130.
FEARY, D.A. & LOUTIT, T.S., 1998. Cool-water carbonate facies patterns and diagenesis - the
key to the Gippsland Basin velocity problem. Australian Petroleum Production and
Exploration Association Journal, 38 (1), pp. 137-146.
FRANK, D.S., SACKETT, W.M., HALL, R., & FREDERICKS, A.D., 1970. Methane, Ethane, and
Propane Concentrations in the Gulf of Mexico. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Bulletin, 54, pp. 1933-1938.
GEORGE, S. C., EADINGTON, P.J., LISK, M. & QUEZEDA R. A., 1998. Geochemical comparison
of oil trapped in fluid inclusions and reservoired oil in Blackback oilfield, Gippsland Basin,
Australia, PESA Journal, 26, pp. 64-81.
GILBERT, M.B. & HILL, K.A., 1994: Gippsland, a composite basin - a case study from the
offshore Northern Strzelecki Terrace, Gippsland Basin, Australia. Australian Petroleum
Exploration Association Journal, 34, pp. 495-511.
GORTER, J.D., 2001. A Marine Source Rock in the Gippsland Basin? In Hill, K.C. &
Bernecker, T. (Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins Symposium, A Refocused Energy
50
Perspective for the Future, Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia, Special Publication,
pp. 385-390.
GROSS, M. D., 1993. Determination of reservoir distribution over the Blackback/Terakihi oil
field, Gippsland Basin, Australia; Australian Petroleum Exploration Association Journal, 33,
(1), pp. 1-14.
HILL, P.J., EXON, N.F., KEENE, J.B. & SMITH, S.M., 1998. The continental margin off east
Tasmania and Gippsland: structure and development using new multibeam sonar data,
Exploration Geophysics, 29, pp. 410-419.
HOCKING, J.B., 1988. Gippsland Basin. In Douglas, J.G. & Ferguson, J.A. (Eds) Geology of
Victoria , Victorian Division Geological Survey Australia Inc., Melbourne, pp. 322-347.
HOLDGATE, G.R. & GALLAGHER, S., 1997. Microfossil palaeoenvironments and sequence
stratigraphy of Tertiary cool-water carbonates, offshore Gippsland Basin, southeastern
Australia. In James, N.P. & Clarke, J.D.A (Eds) Cool Water Carbonates, SEPM Special
Publications 56, pp. 221-236.
HOLDGATE, G.R., WALLACE, M.W., DANIELS, J., GALLAGHER, S.J., KEENE. J.B. & SMITH,
A.J., 2000. Controls on Seaspray Group sonic velocities in the Gippsland Basin multidisciplinary approach to the canyon seismic velocity problem. Australian Petroleum
JOHNSTONE, E.M., JENKINS, C.C. & MOORE, M.A., 2001. An integrated structural and
palaeogeographic investigation of Eocene erosional events and related hydrocarbon potential
in the Gippsland Basin. In Hill, K.C. & Bernecker, T. (Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins
Symposium, A Refocused Energy Perspective for the Future, Petroleum Exploration Society
of Australia, Special Publication, pp. 403-412.
KEALL, J.M. & SMITH, M. A., 1996. The Golden Beach-Latrobe petroleum system, Gippsland
Basin, Australia. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Meeting Abstracts,
pp 73.
51
LOWRY, D.C. & LONGLEY, I.M., 1991. A new model for the Mid-Cretaceous structural
history of the northern Gippsland Basin. Australian Petroleum Exploration Association
Journal, 31, pp. 143-153.
MARSHALL, N.G., 1989. An unusual assemblage of algal cysts from the Late Cretaceous,
Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. Palynology, 13, pp. 21-56.
MARSHALL, N.G., 1990. Campanian dinoflagellates from southeastern Australia. Alcheringa,

14, pp. 1-38.
MARSHALL, N.G. & PARTRIDGE, A.P., 1986. Palynological analysis of Kipper-1, Gippsland
Basin. Esso Australia Ltd. Palynological Report 1986/18, 21p, 3 charts, unpublished.
MEBBERSON, A. J., 1989. The future for exploration in the Gippsland Basin. Australian
Petroleum Exploration Association Journal, 29, (1), pp. 430-439.
MEHIN, K., 2006. Petroleum exploration and development opportunities in2004/05. Victorian
Supplement, PESA News April/May 2006, Issue Number 81, pp. 10-11.
MEHIN, K. & BOCK, M.P., 1998. Cretaceous source rocks of the onshore eastern Gippsland
Basin, Victoria. Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 31, Department of
Natural Resources and Environment, 98p.
MOORE, D.H. & WONG, D., 2001. Down and Out in Gippsland: Using Potential Fields to
Look Deeper and Wider for New Hydrocarbons. In Hill, K.C. & Bernecker, T. (Eds) Eastern
Australasian Basins Symposium, A Refocused Energy Perspective for the Future, Petroleum
Exploration Society of Australia, Special Publication, pp. 363-371.
MOORE, D.H. & WONG, D., 2002 VIMP 69
MOORE, P.S., BURNS, B.J., EMMETT, J.K. & GUTHRIE, D.A., 1992. Integrated source,
maturation and migration analysis, Gippsland Basin, Australia. The Australian Petroleum
Exploration Association Journal, 32, pp. 313-324.
52
NORVICK, M. & SMITH, M.A., 2001. Mapping the plate tectonic reconstructions of southern
and southeastern Australia and implications for petroleum systems. The Australian Petroleum
NORVICK, M.S., SMITH, M.A. & POWER, M.R., 2001. The plate tectonic evolution of eastern
Australasia guided by the stratigraphy of the Gippsland Basin. In Hill, K.C. & Bernecker, T.
(Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins Symposium, A Refocused Energy Perspective for the
Future, Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia, Special Publication, pp. 15-23.
OBrien, G.W., & Boreham, C.J., in preparation. Viable and non-viable Albian-Aptian and
Turonian petroleum systems of southern Australia: Key success factors. To be submitted to
the Eastern Australian Basin Conference (2008).
OZIMIC, S., NICHOLAS, E., PAIN, L., & VUCKOVIC, V., 1987. Australian Petroleum
Accumulations, Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Department of Primary Industries and Energy,
Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra, 252 p.
PARTRIDGE, A. D., 1996, Large break-up lakes of Bass Strait; Gippsland Basin Symposium,
University of Melbourne, Abstract, pp. 3-6.
PARTRIDGE, A.D., 1999. Late Cretaceous to Tertiary geological evolution of the Gippsland
Basin, Victoria. PhD-thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 439p (unpublished).
PARTRIDGE, A.D., 2003. Early Oligocene age for top of Latrobe reservoirs in Tommyruff-1
and Wyrallah-1, southwest Gippsland Basin. Biostrata Report 2003/4.
PETROFINA EXPLORATION AUSTRALIA S.A., 1993. Exploration permit VIC/P20 end of permit
term technical report. Report GL/93/052, pp. 76.
PHILP, R. P., 1994. Geochemical characteristics of oils derived predominantly from

terrigenous source materials; in Scott, A. C., and Fleet, A. J., (eds), Coal and Coal-bearing
Strata as Oil-prove Source Rocks? Geological Society Special Publication, 77, pp.71-91.
POWER, M.R., HILL, K.C., HOFFMAN, N., BERNECKER, T. & NORVICK, M., 2001. The
structural and tectonic evolution of the Gippsland Basin: Results from 2D section balancing
53
and 3D structural modelling. In Hill, K.C. & Bernecker, T. (Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins
Symposium, A Refocused Energy Perspective for the Future, Petroleum Exploration Society
of Australia, Special Publication, pp. 373-384.
PURCELL, P., 1999. The birth of an anachronym. PESA News April/May 1999, pp. 88.
RADKE, M. & WELTE, D.H., 1983. The Methylphenanthrene Index (MPI): A Maturity
Parameter based on Aromatic Hydrocarbons. In M. Bjoroy et al., (eds) Advances in Organic
Geochemistry 1981. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 505-512.
RAHMANIAN, V.D., MOORE, P.S., MUDGE, W.J. & SPRING, D.E. 1990. Sequence stratigraphy
and the habitat of hydrocarbons, Gippsland Basin. In: BrookS, J. (ed.), Classic Petroleum
Provinces, Geological Society Special Publication No. 50, pp. 525-541.
REITSEMA, R.H., LINDBERG, F.A., & KALTENBACK, A.J., 1978. Light hydrocarbons in Gulf of
Mexico water: source and relation to structural highs. Journal of Geochemical Exploration,
10, pp.139-151.
REITSEMA, R.H., KALTENBACK, A.J., & LINDBERG, F.A., 1981. Source and migration of light
hydrocarbons indicated by carbon isotope ratios. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Bulletin, pp.1535-1542.
SACKETT, W. M, 1977. Use of hydrocarbon sniffing in offshore exploration. Journal of

Geochemical Exploration, 7(2), pp. 243-254.
SHELL, 1990. Devilfish-1 Well Completion Report. (unpublished)
SLOAN, M. W., MOORE, P. S., & MCCUTCHEON, A., 1992. Kippera unique oil and gas
discovery, Gippsland Basin, Australia; Australian Petroleum Exploration Association
Journal, 32 (1), pp. 1-8.
SMITH, M. A., 1999. Petroleum systems, play fairways and prospectivity of the Gazettal Area
V99-2, offshore southern Gippsland Basin. Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum
Report 61, Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
54
SMITH, M.A., BERNECKER, T., LIBERMAN, N., MOORE, D.H. & WONG, D., 2000. Petroleum
prospectivity of the deepwater Gazettal Areas V00-3 and V00-4, southeastern Gippsland
Basin, Victoria, Australia. Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 65,
Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
SMITH, G.C., 1988. Oil and gas. In: Douglas, J.G. & Ferguson, J.A. (Eds) Geology of
Victoria, Geological Society of Australia Special Publication 5, 514-531.
SMITH, G. C., & COOK, A. C., 1984. Petroleum occurrence in the Gippsland Basin and its
relationship to rank and organic matter type; The Australian Petroleum Exploration
Association Journal, 24(1), pp. 196-216.
THOMAS, J.H., BERNECKER, T. & DRISCOLL, J.P., 2003. Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of Areas
V03-3 and V03-4, in the Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia: 2003 Acreage Release.
Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 80. Department of Primary Industries.
USGS WORLD ENERGY ASSESSMENT TEAM, 2000. U.S. Geological Survey World Petroleum
Assessment 2000 - Description and results. USGS Digital Data Series DDS-60, Multi Disk
Set, Version 1.0, CD-ROM.
WILLCOX, J.B., COLWELL, J.B., & CONSTANTINE, A.E., 1992. New ideas on Gippsland Basin
regional tectonics. In C.M. Barton, K. Hill, C. Abele, J. Foster & N. Kempton, (eds), Energy,
Economics and Environment Gippsland Basin Symposium, pp.93-110, (Australasian Institute
of Mining & Metallurgy, Melbourne Branch).
WILLCOX, J.B., SAYERS, J., STAGG, H.M.J. & VAN DE BEUQUE, S., 2001. Geological
framework of the Lord Howe Rise and adjacent ocean basins. In Hill, K.C. & Bernecker, T.
(Eds) Eastern Australasian Basins Symposium, A Refocused Energy Perspective for the
Future, Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia, Special Publication, pp. 211-225.
WONG, D. & BERNECKER, T., 2001. Prospectivity and Hydrocarbon Potential of Area V01-4,
Central Deep, Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia: 2001 Acreage Release. Victorian
Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 67, Department of Natural Resources and
Environment.
55
Appendix 1
Well and Field Summaries
This section is a compilation of relevant well and hydrocarbon field
information, including pre- and post-drill appraisals, level of hydrocarbon
shows/accumulations, formation test data, and palynological summaries.
The data was compiled primarily from well completion reports, which are
available on the accompanying CDs. A listing of open-file data available from
DPI is included at the end of each well/field description.
Data for the following wells and fields are provided:
Admiral-1
Basker Manta Gummy Field
Basker-1
Manta-1
Gummy-1
Chimaera-1
Dart-1
East Pilchard-1
Hammerhead-1
Judith-1
Kipper Field
Kipper-1
Kipper-2
Leatherjacket-1
Longtom field
Longton-1/ST1
Longtom-2
Moby-1
Northright-1
Scallop-1
Shark-1
Sole-1
Sweep-1
Wahoo-1
Whale-1
Whaleshark-1
Click item above to open
56
Admiral-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
21 m
101 m
2162 mKB (driller); 2162 mKB (logger)
Operator
Partners
Esso Australia Resources Ltd

BHP Petroleum (Victoria) Pty Ltd
Shell Company of Australia Pty Ltd
The News Corporation Ltd
TNT Management Pty Ltd
Crusader (Victoria) Pty Ltd
Petroz NL
22-11-1989
08-12-1989
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
25%
25%
20%
10%
10%
7.5%
2.5%
VIC/P19 (when drilled)

VIC/P55 (current)
38 09' 12.2"S
148 38' 50.7"E
G69A-267, SP:12651
G85A-8038, SP:2341
G92A-3038, SP:2772
G94A-4044, SP:2626
GISN05-06, SP:1677
GS81A-20, SP:5228
Dry hole, plugged and abandoned
Structure
The Admiral structure is a footwall fault-dependent closure against the Rosedale Fault
System. Faulting is non-continuous at the top of the volcanics; however the faults are seen to
propagate just below the intra-T. lilliei unconformity. Seismic resolution below the volcanics
remains very poor.
Target
Admiral-1 was drilled to test a fault-dependent closure of N. senectus to T. apoxyexinus
sandstones (the S-1 reservoir section) top-sealed by volcanics and juxtaposed by normal
faulting against impermeable Strzelecki Group sediments. The play was considered
analogous to the Kipper field with the main risks identified as fault-seal, cap-seal and
reservoir quality. Secondary objectives involved testing the presence of multiple reservoirs
within the intra-Latrobe Group section.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
122 mKB
Gippsland Limestone Formation 122 mKB
Lakes Entrance Formation
998 mKB
Latrobe Group
1236 mKB
Cobia Subgroup
1236 mKB
Gurnard Formation
1236 mKB
Halibut Subgroup
1255 mKB
Flounder Formation
1255 mKB
Kingfish Formation
1269 mKB
Kate Shale
1423 mKB
Volador Formation
1432 mKB
1492 mKB
[undifferentiated]
1492 mKB
Emperor Subgroup
1508 mKB
57
Curlip Formation
Kipper Shale
Admiral Formation
Kersop Arkose
1508 mKB
1598 mKB
2072 mKB
2117 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR; A. Partridge, 1990. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
1234.5
Lower N. asperus
1238.0 - 1241.4
P. asperopolus
1254.1
Upper L. balmei
1275.0 - 1285.8
Lower L. balmei
1314.0 - 1430.8
Upper F. longus
1437.0 - 1477.5
P. mawsonii
1518.3 - 2103.5
Reservoir
Admiral-1 penetrated 38 m of good quality water-bearing reservoir quality Curlip Formation
sandstones in a 93 m gross section below the volcanics. Log analysis confirmed average
porosities of 17.6%. The well was deepened below the proposed TD to test the potential of
sediments below the Kipper Shale. However, the Admiral Formation and Curlip Arkose
sandstones proved immature, shaly and water-saturated.
Seal
Pre-drill investigations suggested prospective reservoirs would be top-sealed by volcanics
and juxtaposed against impermeable Strzelecki Group sediments by a normal fault. However,
the volcanics were poorly developed, being just 11 m thick. The character of the gamma ray
log suggests the presence of clastic material, which may in turn suggest proximity to the edge
of a volcanic flow.
Hydrocarbon shows
No significant hydrocarbons were encountered.
Results
The geometry of the trap tested by the Admiral-1 well was found to be correct.
The most likely reason for failure of the Admiral prospect is the lack of top-seal as the
volcanics failed to extend north to the bounding fault.
Another possibility for failure is the presence of a thick section of Emperor Subgroup
below the intra-T. lilliei Unconformity rather than the prognosed Strzelecki Group
sediments. This suggests that Emperor Subgroup sediments may occur on the
hanging wall of the bounding fault and that Strzelecki Group seal is not juxtaposed
against the potential reservoir. However the Emperor Subgroup is shaly and thus
fault-seal would be expected with very little movement along the bounding fault.
The demonstrated occurrence of reservoir section below the volcanics suggests
similar prospects may be successful in situations where the volcanics extend to a
bounding fault. Improved seismic data quality in the older Latrobe Group section
would help define such traps.
Geochemical analysis showed the lacustrine P. mawsonii sediments are rated as fair
source rocks for gas only.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, February 1990 (PE902121) basic data
Well Completion Report Volume 2, June 1990 (PE902122) interpretative data
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, September 1990 (PE990260)
Other data available upon request
58
Basker/Manta/Gummy fields
Summary
The Basker/Manta/Gummy fields were originally part of Permit VIC/P19 that was awarded in
1981 to a consortium led by Shell Petroleum (Australia). In 1985 the consortium farmed out
50% of the permit to Esso/BHP Petroleum whilst retaining one graticular block (the
Basker/Manta block). By 2000 Woodside Petroleum had acquired 100% interest in the
Basker/Manta block, by then referred to as VIC/RL6. Woodside also applied for retention
leases over two adjacent blocks which were the locations for extensions of the fields
(VIC/RL9 and VIC/RL10). Anzon Australia subsequently acquired Woodsides assets in
March 2004.
Beach Petroleum acquired a 25% interest in the blocks in October 2004, increasing to 37.5%
in August 2005; finally increasing to 50% in January 2006.
The Basker field lies approximately 58 km offshore, approximately 18 km east of the Flounder
field. The Manta field lies 4 km north of Basker and the Gummy field lies some 2 km northeast
of Manta. Gaffney Cline and Associates reported in October 2005 the following P50 reserves:
Basker: 26 Mstb oil, 10 PJ sales gas, 0.1 Mbbl condensate/LPG
Manta: 4.1 Mstb oil, 68 PJ sales gas, 2.7 Mbbl condensate/LPG
Gummy: 16 PJ sales gas, 0.7 Mbbl condensate/LPG
Petroleum production licence VIC/L26 was granted over the Basker and Manta fields in
October 2005. The Baker-2 development well was connected to the FPSO (Floating
Production Storage Offtake) vessel in November 2005. Four further development wells were
drilled in 2006 (Basker-3, -4, -5 and Manta-2).
Recent press releases [March 2007] suggest development drilling in 2006 has increased gas
and oil reserves considerably. 2P oil reserves are rated at nearly 40 Mstb oil whilst gascondensate reserves have nearly quadrupled. Up to six new development wells are planned
during 2007 and 2008. A 15 year gas sales agreement was signed in March 2007 with Alinta
to supply 225 PJ of gas, commencing in 2009, to supply the Tamar Valley Power Station in
northern Tasmania.
Five exploration wells were initially drilled in VIC/P19: Basker-1 (1983), Basker South-1
(1983), Manta-1 (1984), Chimaera-1 (1984) and Gummy-1 (1990). Water depths range from
133.5 m in Manta-1 to 156 m in Gummy-1 and 162 m in Basker-1.
The Basker/Manta/Gummy fields are characterised by multiple stacked fluvial and alluvial
sandstone reservoirs and seals with thin hydrocarbon columns. These accumulations are
contained within the down-thrown side of a series of fault-blocks, which cut across the
plunging Sole/Dart structure. All four faults, mapped as Basker, Manta, Chimaera and
Gummy faults, show large pre-intra-Campanian unconformity throws. Whilst adjacent wells,
such as Basker South-1 and Chimaera-1, have comparable reservoir sections, post-drill
studies showed they did not test valid structures.
Basker South-1 failed to find commercial hydrocarbon accumulations, however, hydrocarbon
shows and low hydrocarbon saturations were interpreted over the same Latrobe Group
interval as the Basker field. Chimaera-1 encountered a 4 m gas column in a similar Golden
Beach Subgroup sandstone to the Manta field. Clark & Thomas (1988) attributed the lack of
commercial hydrocarbons in these wells to inadequate lateral fault-seal. Lateral seal in the
Manta field occurs via two mechanisms; along the fault-plane itself and by juxtaposition
against favourable lithologies.
The Tuna field to the west of the permit boundary contains oil and gas in numerous point
bar/crevasse splay and braided stream deposits that are sealed by interbedded coastal plain
mudstones. This is a similar depositional environment as interpreted for the sandstones in the
Basker/Manta/Gummy fields.
59
Production tests were performed on one oil sand in Basker-1 and oil and gas sands in Manta1. Gas sands in Gummy-1 were not tested.
Most Gippsland crude oils are characterised by relatively high wax content, consistent with a
terrestrial source. High wax oils were encountered in Basker-1 (pour point 36C) and Manta-1
(pour point 32C), and they are interpreted to be low maturity crude oils generated at a
corresponding vitrinite reflectance of 0.8-0.9% (Burns et al., 1987). With increasing maturity,
source rocks will generate successively lower molecular weight hydrocarbons. Analyses of
Gippsland Basin gases show variable CO2 content. The 17% registered in Basker-1 is a
relatively high reading, although greater concentrations were recorded in Bignose-1 (32%),
Volador-1 (36%) and Grunter-1 (57%). CO2 is formed as part of the depletion of oxygen in
kerogen during the initial stage of generation. As such, high CO2 is consistent with a low
maturity kitchen area. Other possible mechanisms for the presence of CO2 include volcanic
sources.
Geophysical analysis conducted in the block confirm that seismic characteristics can not be
used to predict reservoir development in intra-Latrobe Group coastal plain facies as individual
sandstone units are generally less than 5 m thick. Also, the largest impedance contrasts are
between the high and low carbonaceous shales and siltstones.
The proportion of sandstone within the coastal plain sequence between the intra- and Lower
Campanian markers was higher in Manta-1 than in Basker-1 (32% compared to 21%) and
individual bed thickness was also greater (17 m compared to 7 m). The section below the top
of the volcanics thins from Basker-1 to Manta-1. The proportion of volcanics is higher in
Manta-1 than Basker-1 indicating the sequence is thinning at the expense of the sediments.
The predominantly siltstone sequence above the volcanics in Basker-1 and Basker South-1
(from which marginal marine dinoflagellate were recovered) is not present in Manta-1,
indicating that in this well the Campanian section is entirely non-marine.
Dip-meter analysis by King & Rayner (1992) suggests palaeo-flow direction for Basker-1,
Manta-1 and Gummy-1 was predominantly from the northwest to the southeast.
60
Basker-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
25 m
162 m
3991 mKB (driller)
Operator
Partners
Shell Development (Australia) Pty Ltd

Mincorp Offshore Pty Ltd
21-04-1983
10-09-1983
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
40%
20%
20%
15%
5%

VIC/L26 (current)
38 18' 26.5"S
148 41' 53.2"E
BMR68-68-12P2, SP:1122
BMR82-082-03, SP:518.3
G88A-9195, SP:2219
G88A-9195A, SP:2219
G92A-3044, SP:2162
G92A-3054, SP:2100
G94A-4083, SP:2845
G94A-4096, SP:2766
GDW99-01, SP:141.5
GS81A-37, SP:5477
GS81A-69A, SP:6263
Producing oil field
Structure
The Basker field is a large intra-Latrobe Group fault-trap created by the intersection of a major
syn-depositional fault with the gentle south-western extension of the Sole/Dart structure.
Fault-closure was mapped at all levels within the Latrobe Group at and below the Early
Paleocene transgressive shale.
Target
The well was drilled to evaluate multiple thin fluvial/coastal Late Cretaceous (Campanian to
Santonian) sandstones below the intra-Campanian seismic marker. Vertical seals are
provided by interbedded coastal plain mudstones, while the sandstones are laterally sealed
by a fault. The projected TD was 4350100 mKB, within the top of the Strzelecki Group. TD
was revised to 3991 mKB due to porosity and permeability deterioration in Chimaera
Formation sandstones below a volcanic sequence. Pre-drill, the Basker field was identified as
2
a large fault-trap with areal closure of 28 km at the intra-Campanian level and a drainage
2
area of up to 120 km to the south of the field. Pronounced thickening of the Campanian
section on the down-thrown side of the bounding fault is an indication of relatively continuous
growth which can lead to increased potential for clay smearing along the fault-plane.
Critical factors recognised prior to drilling were the unknown presence of source rocks in the
mature basal section of the Latrobe Group, and the extent of both vertical and lateral seals.
Basker-1 encountered 22.1 m net hydrocarbon sand (18.8 m net oil sand; 1.8 m net gas sand;
1.5 m net unspecified hydrocarbon sand) reservoired in thin fluvial Late Campanian
sandstones. These values were calculated using a porosity cut-off of 13% (corresponds to
approximately 5 mD permeability at in-situ conditions) and a hydrocarbon saturation cut-off of
61
35%. Pressure data suggests the sandstones have limited lateral extent. The accumulations
are a result of both stratigraphic and structural trapping mechanisms.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
187 mKB
Gippsland Limestone Formation 187 mKB
1807 mKB
Latrobe Group
2119.5 mKB
Halibut Subgroup
2119.5 mKB
Flounder Formation
2119.5 mKB
Kingfish Formation
2187 mKB
Kate Shale
2474 mKB
Volador Formation
2496 mKB
3286 mKB
Chimaera Formation
3286 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, J. van Niel, 1983. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. asperopolus
2125.0
Lower M. diversus
2155.0 - 2185.0
Upper L. balmei
2198.0
F. longus
2551.0 - 3110.0
F. longus/T. lilliei
3114.0 - 3216.0
T. lilliei
3237.0 - 3936.0
Palynofacies
Environment of deposition
2125 - 2185 mKB
Marine
2198 mKB
Shoreface, slight marine influences
2210 mKB
Lagoonal? (brackish/fresh water)?
2225 - 2673 mKB
Marine, near source/nearshore
2876 - 3936 mKB
Non-marine (swamp, lake or fluvial deposits)
Seal
Seal is provided vertically by interbedded shales and siltstones, and laterally by the bounding
fault.
Reservoir
Reservoir quality of Maastrichtian (F. longus) Volador Formation barrier sandstones is
excellent with clean, well-sorted, quartzose sands (porosity values average 27.5%, up to
30.5%) however, these are water-bearing.
Campanian (T. lilliei) Chimaera Formation sandstones generally fine upwards and are
interbedded with carbonaceous shales and coals, suggesting they are point bar sandstones.
There are occasional coarsening-up sandstones and these are interpreted as crevasse splay
deposits. Alternatively, they could represent a distal part of an alluvial fan complex.
Sandstones in the upper tested units (3090-3098 mKB) have a blocky gamma ray response
and a dominant easterly dip. High resolution resistivity curves confirm the interval is
comprises approximately seven stacked units. The lower 5 m are represented by at least four
fining-up sandstone sequences that culminate within a sealing carbonaceous shale. The
upper 3 m consists of a thin fining-up sequence overlain by several coarsening-up units.
These fining-up units show mainly north-easterly dip and are interpreted to be point bar
deposits. The coarsening-up units have a dominant easterly dip and are thought to represent
crevasse splay deposits. The sand tested in the second production test (3128.5-3132 mKB) is
also composed of many small fining-up units overlain by a coarsening-up unit.
62
Hydrocarbon shows
Depth interval
(mKB)
2987.3-2988.4
3018.0-3019.8
3056.2-3057.0
3090.2-3098.0
3128.5-3132.1
3195.8-3197.3
3222.8-3223.8
3240.5-3241.5
3274.6-3276.9
3474.1-3474.9
3757.4-3758.6
Table 1: Hydrocarbon shows in Basker-1

Average
Net pay
Estimated Average
Porosity
(m)
Permeability (mD)
(%)
1.1 oil
21.9
715
1.8 gas
18.6
40
0.8 oil
16.7
35
6.9 oil
23.4
1670
3.7 oil
21.8
670
1.5 unspecified
18.8
120
1.0 oil
20.7
360
1.0 oil
24.2
2640
2.3 oil
23.3
1580
0.8 oil
19.3
160
1.2 oil
13.0
5
Average
Hydrocarbon
Saturation (%)
35
63
40
74
54
61
44
46
51
63
36
The top of significant gas and oil shows occurred at depths of 2810 mKB and 2985 mKB
respectively. Good oil indications were observed in scattered thin sands between 3090 and
3245 mKB (Table 1). Log evaluation shows two of these sands [intervals 3090-3098 mKB and
3129-3132 mKB] to have good porosity and hydrocarbon saturation values. Two RFTs
recovered oil samples, and the horizons were production tested.
RFT 1: 3091.5 mKB - segregated; 6 gal chamber; 46 scf gas; 9 L waxy crude; 10 L filtrate
RFT 2: 3131 mKB - non-segregated; 1 gal chamber; 2.23 scf gas; 0.55 L oil; 3 L mud filtrate
RFT 3: 3951 mKB - non-segregated; 6 gal chamber; 2 L water
Production test intervals were perforated with four shots per foot using a 2 unijet perforating
gun.
Production Test 1
Interval
3090-3094 mKB
3095-3098 mKB
Production Test 1 evaluated the two thickest sandstones with the highest hydrocarbon
saturations. The two intervals were considered to be one reservoir unit with a shale parting.
The flow rates achieved were 4967 barrels of oil per day (4.967 kbd oil) with 39.2 API (pour
point 36 C) and 4.82 Mcfd gas (GOR 970 scf/stb) on a choke. CO2 comprised 16.86% of
the gas composition. It was thought there was considerably higher flow potential. Reservoir
characteristics were excellent with permeability of 1 D and only slight damage to the
formation. Results indicated the reservoir interval had limited extent and held between 10-15
Mstb STOIIP. The crude sampled was very waxy. RFT pressure data indicates an OWC of
3108.3 mKB. Data also confirms a permeability barrier approximately 300 m from the well,
which is significantly less than the distance to the interpreted boundary fault. This further
confirms the accumulation is reservoired within a fluvial channel.
Production Test 2
Interval
3128.5-3132 mKB
Test 2 was performed on a sandstone unit with similar characteristics to the first test zone,
although the hydrocarbon saturation was lower. The test flowed at 3.270 kbd oil with 40.8
API and 11.8 Mcfd gas (GOR 3609 scf/stb) on a choke. CO2 comprised 10.15% of the gas
composition. Reservoir properties were good, however, the reservoir size was very limited.
Reserves estimated at 0.22-0.31 Mstb STOIIP. The recovery factor was also likely not to
exceed 15% as there is no evidence of water-drive. The recovery mechanism would therefore
be solution gas-driven.
63
Geochemical analysis
The carbonaceous shales and coals of the Campanian section below the volcanics have
maximum TOC values of 22% and 71% respectively. VR values of 0.75-0.9 confirm the
section is mature for oil generation within the Basker structure. Volcanics and shales within
the volcanic sequence would be a barrier to vertical migration. Hydrocarbon migration into the
traps would therefore rely on movement along faults.
The Campanian section above the volcanics has maximum TOC values of 34% and 76% for
the carbonaceous shale and coal units respectively. VR values of 0.5-0.7 indicate the section
is immature within the Basker structure. However, the section enters the oil generating
window in the deeper kitchen area south of Basker (seismic data suggests the section at this
level has a thickness of between 500 m and 800 m). The mechanism for lateral migration of
hydrocarbons into the Basker structure is thought to be via intraformational sandstones.
Data available
Well Completion Report, August 1983 (PE902560) basic and interpretative data
Palynology Report by J. Niel, August 1983 (PE990309)
64
Manta-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
25 m
133.5 m
3572 mKB (driller)
Operator
Partners

08-01-1984
23-03-1984
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
40%
20%
20%
15%
5%

VIC/L26 (current)
38 16' 27.31"S
148 43' 19.69"E
BMR68-68-12P2, SP:1033
G88A-9193, SP:2300
G92A-3044, SP:2331
GS81A-71A, SP:5518
Producing oil field
Structure
Pre-drill seismic interpretation based on data acquired in 1981/82 defined a fault-trap within
the Campanian interval of the Latrobe Group. Total depth was programmed to be 3000 mKB.
Post-drill interpretation confirmed the Manta prospect is analogous to the Basker field. Manta1 was a smaller intra-Latrobe Group fault-trap.
Target
The well was drilled to test the Upper Cretaceous Volador Formation (interval 25452790 mKB) overlying Campanian volcanics near the culmination of the mapped closure. The
prospective sandstones were of fluvial/alluvial origin interbedded with lacustrine/paludal
shales, similar to those penetrated in Basker-1 and Hammerhead-1.
Pre-drill critical factors were hydrocarbon charge for the structure by lateral migration through
the Basker boundary fault or by vertical migration along faults from mature source rocks
underlying the volcanic section; extent and thickness of sand units; and accessibility to the
kitchen area to the south.
From log interpretation and petrophysical evaluation, a total of 28.7 m net oil sand (19.1 m in
units equal or greater than 3 m) and 73.8 m net gas sand (60.6 m in units equal or greater
than 3 m) was intersected in Manta-1. These values were calculated using a porosity cut-off
of 13% and a hydrocarbon saturation cut-off of 40% for the oil sands. The corresponding
values for the gas sands were 10% and 30% respectively.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Gippsland Limestone Formation
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
158 mKB
158 mKB
1534 mKB
1956 mKB
1956 mKB
1956 mKB
2038 mKB
2290 mKB
2314 mKB
65

Chimaera Formation
2836 mKB
2836 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, J. van Niel, October 1984. All depths are measured in mKB)
M. diversus
2006.0 - 2040.0
Upper L. balmei
2084.0
Lower L. balmei
2210.0 - 2296.0
F. longus
2322.0 - 2538.0
F. longus/T. lilliei
2564.0 - 2653.0
T. lilliei
2700.5 - 3036.0
T. lilliei/N. senectus
3051.0 - 3160.0
N. senectus
3167.0 - 3572.0
Palynofacies: environment of deposition
1935-2311 mKB
(Marginal) marine
2322-3437 mKB
Mostly non-marine (swamp, lake or fluvial deposits), with the
exception of 2382 - 2442 mKB, 2538 mKB, 3036 mKB, 3094.5 mKB
and 3167 - 3210 mKB which are brackish-lagoonal or marginal
marine
Seal
Pre-drill studies suggested interbedded paludal shales similar to those encountered in
Basker-1 provided vertical seal, however, the development of these shales was thought to be
marginally poorer. Post-drill analysis confirmed interbedded shales and argillaceous siltstones
provided vertical seal to the hydrocarbon accumulations. The gas/condensate sand at
3274 mKB is overlain by a finely interbedded sequence of siltstones, sandstones and
volcanics.
Lateral seals for the accumulations were difficult to ascertain, however, drilling of Chimaera-1
in the adjacent fault-block to the north confirmed:
The Chimarera-1 Campanian coastal plain sequence was not sandier than Manta-1,
and the fine-grained sediments in this sequence act as a seal for the sandstones in
Manta-1.
The gas/condensate sequence in Manta-1 is juxtaposed across the Manta Fault with
a large sandy water-wet sequence in Chimaera-1. This confirms the fault-plane is
acting as a seal. A small closure may exist independent of the fault, however, this
would not account for the height of the hydrocarbon column. If the fault is sealing
within the volcanics, then it can be assumed it acts as a seal for the section above the
volcanics.
Reservoir
Pre-drill seismo-stratigraphic studies suggested a facies change just to the north of Manta,
corresponding to the transition from coastal plain facies to a sandy alluvial facies as seen in
Hammerhead-1. It was predicted that sand development within the Campanian section would
be better in Manta-1 than Basker-1. This proved correct; sandstone development within the
lower coastal plain section between the intra- and Lower Campanian markers was 32% in
Manta-1 and 21% in Basker-1. In addition to this, the maximum thickness of a sandstone bed
in Manta-1 was 17 m as opposed to 7 m seen in Basker-1.
Sandstones within the coastal plain section above the volcanics are fine- to coarse-grained
and generally have fining-up characteristics on the gamma-ray log. They are interpreted to be
fluvial point bar deposits. Units with a blocky characteristic such as the 17 m sandstone at
2751 mKB are probably channel deposits. Porosity values range from 17-25%.
Sandstones in the volcanics section are lithic, fine-grained to conglomeratic and are
moderately sorted with angular and subangular grains in an argillaceous matrix. They are
lithologically similar to sandstones near the base of Hammerhead-1. Logs indicate porosity in
the range 10-20% with values of up to 17% in the gas/condensate sand 3274-3329 mKB.
66
Analysis of core samples between 3300-3307 mKB give measured porosity values of 1017.5% with vertical permeabilities of 0-83 mD and horizontal permeabilities of 8.5-222 mD.
This differs considerably from data recorded in a production test (interval 3290-3299 mKB and
3309-3315 mKB indicated permeabilities of 3.25-3.5 mD), and it is probable that during drying
of the core the matrix clay collapsed leading to large anomalous values.
Hydrocarbon shows
Manta-1 encountered 13 oil-bearing sandstones and 17 gas-bearing sandstones (Table 2)
The oil sands were concentrated within the Campanian coastal plain sequence between the
intra- and Lower Campanian markers. The hydrocarbon-bearing sands were generally 3 m to
5 m thick, however, one was 17 m thick with 12.9 m net oil above an OWC. A total of 24.1 m
of oil and 27.6 m of gas were found within this sequence above the volcanics. A 54 m
sandstone within the volcanic section (top at 3274 mKB) contained a 39 m gas/condensate
column. This constituted a new objective within this play type. A further 4.6 m oil sands and
7.2 m gas sands were found in sandstones within the volcanics.
Pressure measurements determined the hydrocarbon column heights. This, along with the
assumption that the sands had constant thickness closed at the Manta Fault, resulted in
reserves estimates being calculated. The total STOIIP for the interval 2615-2768 mKB is
6.1 Mstb and the total GIIP in the interval 2600-3320 mKB was estimated to be in the order of
35-50 Bcf (with 2.1-3 Mstb of associated condensate).
RFT analysis
2662.4 mKB:
2617.0 mKB:
2671.0 mKB:
2728.0 mKB:
2678.0 mKB:
2754.0 mKB:
2738.5 mKB:
3308.3 mKB:
3315.0 mKB:
3281.5 mKB:
Non-segregated; 2 gal; 20.0 scf gas; 6.5 L oil; 2.2 L filtrate

Non-segregated; 2 gal; 80.0 scf gas; 14.0 L waxy oil; 0.5 L contaminated
filtrate
Non-segregated; 6 gal; 75.0 scf gas; 0.5 L oil; 0.5 L contaminated filtrate
Non segregated; 2 gal; 75.0 scf gas; 0.7 L oil; 0.5 L contaminated filtrate
on-segregated; 6 gal; 165.0 scf gas; 1.0 L oil; 0.6 L contaminated filtrate
Segregated; 6 gal; 79.24 scf gas; 10.2 L oil; 3.0 L filtrate; 1.6 L emulsion
Non-segregated; 6 gal; 165.0 scf gas; 1.0 L oil; 0.75 L contaminated filtrate
Non-segregated; 6 gal; 2.0 scf gas; 20.8 L filtrate
Segregated; 6 gal; 0.5 scf gas; 22.0 L filtrate
Segregated; 6 gal; 175.0 scf gas; 1.15 L oil; 0.9 L contaminated filtrate
Production test intervals were perforated with four shots per foot using a perforating gun 2
enerjet.
67
Depth interval
(mKB)
2607.4-2608.2
2614.9-2617.9
2623.1-2626.3
2646.3-2648.7
2649.3-2649.9
2662.1-2663.3
2668.8-2672.8
2674.3-2680.7
2683.9-2686.9
2721.2-2722.0
2726.1-2729.4
2731.2-2731.9
2736.3-2741.2
2743.6-2744.5
2751.1-2751.7
2751.7-2765.6
2801.4-2802.4
2808.7-2809.5
2811.9-2813.1
2884.0-2885.4
2995.9-2996.6
3040.2-3040.8
3043.7-3044.9
3046.0-3047.5
3145.4-3146.4
3154.5-3155.4
3216.9-3217.6
3241.8-3243.2
3258.3-3260.4
3261.0-3261.9
3273.5-3317.0
Table 2: Hydrocarbon shows Manta-1

Average Porosity
Average Hydrocarbon
Net pay (m)
(%)
Saturation (%)
0.8 oil
22.2
45.0
3.0 oil
19.9
57.6
3.2 oil
23.0
47.5
2.4 gas
17.9
59.2
0.6 gas
22.7
71.6
1.2 oil
19.9
68.9
4.0 gas
19.4
80.7
6.4 gas
21.4
76.3
3.0 gas
19.2
72.2
0.8 gas
21.7
71.8
3.3 gas
20.9
82.3
0.7 gas
16.6
49.4
4.9 gas
20.4
65.0
0.9 gas
18.4
41.3
0.6 possible gas
23.5
59.8
12.9 oil
21.7
63.4
1.0 oil
19.9
41.5
0.8 oil
21.8
55.0
1.2 oil
18.7
41.8
1.4 oil
24.8
48.3
0.7 oil
15.2
40.5
0.6 oil
20.2
42.8
1.2 gas
19.5
61.1
1.5 gas
18.1
77.4
1.0 oil
20.6
47.5
0.9 oil
22.2
43.3
0.7 gas
17.7
31.6
1.4 gas
17.9
52.4
1.5 gas
11.9
49.7
0.9 gas
11.8
31.1
39.0 gas
13.5
56.6
Production test 1
Interval
3309-3315 mKB
3290-3299 mKB
The maximum flow rate of 1.044 kbd condensate with 54 API and 18.586 Mcfd gas (GOR
17803 scf/stb) was achieved on a choke over a duration of two hours. CO2 comprised
2.9% of the gas composition. 0.015 kbd water was produced. Permeability was estimated by
Horner analysis to be 3.25-3.5 mD. The volume of GIIP could not be determined from the test
data as there was no evidence of depletion. However, the volume of GIIP calculated from
pure volumetrics is of the order 20 Bcf.
68
Production test 2
Interval
2755-2761 mKB
A maximum flow rate of 5.157 kbd oil with 42 API and 4.518 Mcfd gas (GOR 876 scf/stb)
was achieved on a choke over a duration of two hours. Permeability was estimated by
Horner analysis to be 1500-2000 mD with negligible amounts of water being produced.
Interpretation of the test was difficult as build-up was very rapid. The oil was slightly undersaturated and a gas cap was thought to be unlikely. Volume calculations resulted in a value of
16 Mstb STOIIP (based on depletion and assuming the entire reservoir to be filled with oil and
have uniform oil saturation). This is higher than the 3.7 Mstb STOIIP calculated from maps
and RFT data. The discrepancy is thought to arise due to the existence of an aquifer below
the oil leg helping to maintain reservoir pressure, resulting in anomalous volumes using the
depletion method.
Production test 3
Interval
2623-2626 mKB
2615-2618 mKB
Test 3 flowed at a maximum rate of 6.369 kbd oil with 43 API and 5.134 Mcfd gas (GOR
806 scf/stb) on a 1 choke over a duration of two hours. Permeability was estimated by
Horner analysis to be in the range 900-1200 mD with negligible amounts of water being
produced. As with test 2, build-up was very rapid. Volume calculations resulted in a value of
6.6 Mstb STOIIP. This value is anomalously higher than the 1.7 Mstb STOIIP calculated by
mapping, and this is as a result of the same processes as discussed in production test 2. In
addition the reservoir fluid has a bubble point close to the initial reservoir pressure, indicating
a gas cap may be present. A possible GOC was placed at 2751.7 mKB and an OWC was
observed at 2765.5 mKB. The GWC was inferred at 3317.0 or 3320.0 mKB depending on log
evaluation and pressure data analysis respectively.
The WCR concludes that there is no stratigraphic enhancement of hydrocarbon trapping and
accumulation size appears to be controlled by the size of the structure.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, (PE905618) basic and interpretative data (Text)
Well Completion Report Volume 2, (PE902500) basic and interpretative data
(Figures)
Palynology Report by J. Niel, October 1984 (PE990520)
69
Gummy-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
28.4 m
156 m
3563 mKB (driller)
Operator
Partners
Shell Company of Australia Ltd

Petroz NL
04-05-1990
10-06-1990
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
40%
20%
20%
17.5%
5%

VIC/L26 (current)
38 17' 59.56"S
148 44' 21.28"E
G69A-252, SP:848.6
G88A-9191, SP:2201
Plugged and abandoned.
Structure
The Gummy field was drilled after mapping in 1988 indicated a significant northwest
extension to the Manta field. The structure tested is a down-thrown fault-trap formed due to
the intersection of the NE-SW trending Basker/Manta anticline by the NW-SE trending
Gummy Fault. Closure was mapped at both the Golden Beach Subgroup and Halibut
Subgroup levels. The expression of the Gummy Fault changes along its length; to the east
and west the Gummy Fault is clearly expressed and has a very large throw, whereas in the
eastern central portion it is very subtle. The Gummy Fault is clearly present at the top of the
Golden Beach Subgroup and was interpreted to extend upward for at least 100 m into the
Halibut Subgroup.
Target
The well had two objectives:
To test coastal plain fluvial sands of the lower Latrobe Group (Halibut Subgroup) and
upper Golden Beach Subgroup in a dip and fault-closed structure (target reservoirs
were expected to be thin stacked sands).
To test alluvial sands of the Golden Beach Subgroup (target reservoirs expected to
be thick sands similar to the Manta gas/condensate field).
The major pre-drill risk identified was the sealing capacity of the Gummy Fault. Regional
studies suggested a component of strike/slip must be present in the development of the fault,
possibly enhancing the sealing capacity.
Well results confirm the existence of closure at pre-intra-Campanian unconformity levels,
however, a trap may not exist within the Halibut Subgroup.
From petrophysical evaluation, a total of 28 m of net gas pay (based on 10% porosity and
40% hydrocarbon saturation cut-offs) was interpreted within the low porosity sandstones of
the Golden Beach Subgroup (3200-3550.5 mKB).
70
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
184 mKB
184 mKB
1755 mKB
2081 mKB
2081 mKB
2081 mKB
2137.5 mKB
2366 mKB
2374 mKB
3035.5 mKB
3035.5 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, M. MacPhail, 1990. All depths are measured in mKB)
Lower M. diversus
2098.0
Upper L. balmei
2128.0 - 2199.5
Lower L. balmei
2259.0 - 2368.0
Upper F. longus
2423.5 - 2619.5
Palynofacies: Environment of deposition:
2098.0 - 2368.0 mKB Marginal marine
2423.5 - 2454.0 mKB Coastal plain
2525.0 mKB
Marginal marine(?)
2549.0 - 2619.5 mKB Coastal plain
Seal
According to pre-drill studies deep-Latrobe Group trapping was dependent on the sealing
nature of the Gummy Fault. The well was designed to test the concept that relatively small
fault throws (which are greater than a typical sand thickness) would create an effective trap in
the shale dominated environment. Seal and trapping within the Golden Beach Subgroup was
thought to be provided by juxtaposition against shales and volcanics or by fault-plane seal as
seen in Manta-1.
Depth
interval
(mKB)
3035-3563
3035-3187
3187-3224
3224-3420
3420-3495
3495-3550
Table 3: Hydrocarbon shows Gummy-1

Net Pay
Gross
Net
Average
Net-tothickness
pay
gross (%)
Porosity
(m)
(m)
(%)
528
27.8
5
12
152
0
0
0
37
1.2
3
11
196
4.3
2
12
75
6.4
9
13
55
15.9
29
12
Net Pay
Average
Hydrocarbon
Saturation (%)
58
0
51
48
58
62
Post-drill analysis showed the lower coastal plain sediments of the Halibut Subgroup have a
low sand/shale ratio of 28% which translates to good potential for intraformational top and
lateral sealing. Sealing lithologies of overbank shales, siltstones and coals attain a maximum
thickness of 20 m, although the average is approximately 7 m.
Interbedded weathered volcanic flows and tuffs, together with shaly intervals, provide good
sealing potential within the Golden Beach Subgroup. The volcanic flows are interpreted as
intermediate to basic in composition averaging 17 m in thickness (range 5-30 m). The lateral
sealing potential is further enhanced by clay smearing. The effectiveness of these sealing
71
properties is confirmed by the presence of two gross hydrocarbon columns of 25 m and

130 m along with numerous individually sealed hydrocarbon-bearing sandstones.
Reservoir
Reservoir quality of the fluvial, coastal barrier and marine sandstones of the Halibut Subgroup
(2137.5-3035.5 mKB) is generally excellent with log-derived porosity averaging 20% (range
16-30%). Net-to-gross for the interval averages 39%. The sandstones are quartzose, fine- to
coarse-grained with weak to moderate siliceous cement, and in places sideritic, pyritic and
calcareous cement. Sandstones in the lower coastal plain sequence comprise fluvial channel,
point bar and crevasse splay deposits. The sands are quartzose, predominantly fine- to
medium-grained, subangular to rounded, moderately well-sorted and weak to moderately
cemented by silica and occasional pyrite, sideritic and calcareous cement. The average
thickness is 3 m with a maximum thickness of 8.5 m. The sequence has a sand/shale ratio of
28%, net-to-gross 24% and average log-derived porosity of 18%. Dip-meter analysis indicates
a dominant northwest to southeast palaeo-current direction (King & Rayner, 1992).
Upper coastal plain fluvial and braided stream sandstones (3035.5-3563 mKB) in the Golden
Beach Subgroup have generally poor reservoir characteristics which contributes to the low
petrophysically derived hydrocarbon saturations (average 51%). Log-derived porosities
average 13% (range 3-18%) for the net sand interval (10% porosity cut-off). Permeabilities
derived from RFT draw-down data are low and indicate likely poor deliverability. The overall
net-to-gross of the section is 10%. The Golden Beach Subgroup is dominated by upper
coastal plain facies (3097-3495 mKB) with a sand/shale (and volcanics) ratio of 19% and netto-gross of 4%. The sandstones are quartzose, commonly lithic, fine- to medium-grained,
angular to subrounded, poor to moderately sorted, with weak to strong dolomitic and siliceous
cement, trace pyrite cement and argillaceous matrix in parts. The average thickness of fluvial
sand bodies is 1-2 m and, as observed in the overlying Halibut Subgroup, dipmeter analysis
indicates a dominantly south-easterly palaeo-flow direction (King & Rayner, 1992). Braided
stream facies (3495-3563 mKB) contain the majority of the reserves in the Gummy field. The
sequence has a sand/shale ratio of 74% although poor reservoir quality accounts for a net-togross of 32%. The sandstones are quartzose, fine- to medium-grained (occasionally coarseto very coarse grained), subangular to subrounded, poor to moderately sorted with common
to abundant lithics, argillaceous and very fine sand matrix and moderately strong siliceous
cement. The average log-derived porosity for this zone is 11%.
Hydrocarbon shows
Gummy-1 did not successfully test the Halibut Subgroup objective. Whilst sustained levels of
background gas began at around 2650 mKB and good hydrocarbon shows were intersected
near where closure was expected (interval 2875-2921 mKB), petrophysical evaluation
indicates these are water-bearing. Post-drill mapping suggests that subtle late stage throw on
the Gummy Fault is not large enough to provide adequate fault-seal and thus intra-Latrobe
Group closure does not exist within the Halibut Subgroup at this location.
The Golden Beach Subgroup was successfully tested. At least two significant condensate-rich
gas columns were encountered (gross columns of 25 m and 130 m at 3190-3215 mKB and
3420-3550 mKB respectively) along with numerous individual hydrocarbon-bearing
sandstones (Table 3). Petrophysical evaluation confirmed the following:
A total of 28 m of net gas pay (based on 10% porosity and 40% hydrocarbon
saturation cut-offs) was interpreted within the low porosity Golden Beach sands from
3200-3550.5 mKB. 12 m of this total occurs in individual sands less than 3 m thick
between 3200-3495 mKB.
The massive sandstone at interval 3495-3556 mKB contains approximately 16 m of
net gas, predominantly in the top 33 m.
A 23 m thick transition zone in interval 3527-3550.5 mKB is picked based on
resistivity logs. Gas saturation in this interval decreases gradually from 60% at
3527 mKB to the interpreted GWC at 3550.5 mKB.
RFT samples, pressure gradients from RFT data and CNL/LDL crossovers indicate
gas is the hydrocarbon reservoired in the Golden Beach Subgroup.
72
RFT 1 3201.5 mKB:

filtrate
6 gal chamber; 157.9 scf gas; 0.95 L condensate at 48.6 API; 2 L
RFT 2 3421.5 mKB:
2 gal chamber; 0.75 scf gas; light scum oil; 9.25 L filtrate
Samples of predominantly back barrier/lagoonal mudstones and siltstones between
2395.5 mKB and 2619.5 mKB were analysed for source potential and maturity. TOC values
ranged from 0.7 to 3.1% indicating fair to very good source rocks. Rock-Eval pyrolysis
revealed generative potential (S1 + S2) from marginal to good and likely to generate both oil
and gas. The samples in the interval 2395.5-2549.0 mKB are immature whilst the deepest
sample at 2619.5 mKB just reached the oil window. The presence of strong gas shows and
traces of fluorescence and cut within the Halibut Subgroup indicates the presence of either
migrating hydrocarbons or early in-situ generation.
The charge to the Golden Beach Subgroup comprises condensate-rich gas. A condensate
sample from 3201.5 mKB is typical of a mature condensate derived from terrestrial organic
matter deposited in very oxic conditions. Sterane and triterpane parameters suggest a
maturity level approximately equivalent to a vitrinite reading of 1.1%.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, December 1990 (PE902076) basic data
Well Completion Report Volume 2, October 1990 (PE902077) interpretative data
Palynology Report by M. MacPhail, July 1990 (PE990446)
73
Chimaera-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
Operator
Partners
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
25 m
129.6 m
3826 mKB (driller)
28-03-1984
19-05-1984
40%
20%
20%
15%
5%

VIC/L26 (current)
38 15' 56.37"S
48 43' 19.16"E
BMR82-082-03, SP:247.1
BMR82-082-02, SP:315.4
GS81A- 71A, SP:5480
No significant hydrocarbons encountered; plugged and abandoned
Structure
Chimaera-1 is located approximately 1 km north of the Manta-1 well, close to the northern
limit of permit block VIC/L26. The Chimaera structure is analogous to that of the Basker,
Manta, and Gummy structures, located on a fault block immediately north of the Manta field.
Target
The main objective of Chimaera-1 was to test the hydrocarbon potential of the fault block
immediately north of Manta-1. The stratigraphic targets included the coastal plain sandstones
between the intra and Lower Campanian markers (Golden Beach Subgroup) which contained
oil in Manta-1, as well as the alluvial sandstones within the volcanic sequence which yielded
gas and condensate in Manta-1.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Gippsland Lakes Formation
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
133.75 mKB
133.75 mKB
1468 mKB
1923 mKB
1923 mKB
1923 mKB
2003 mKB
2244 mKB
2273 mKB
2817 mKB
2817 mKB
Palynological data
(from J. van Niel October 1984. All depths measured in mKB)
Lower M. diversus
Lower L. balmei
F. longus
F. longus [probably]
T. lilliei
N. senectus
N. senectus [probably]
T. pachyexinus [probably]
1996.8 - 2001.6
2256.0 - 2266.0
2272.2 - 2452.0
2475.8 - 2534.0
2589.0 - 2695.0
2958.0 - 3319.0
3340.0
3404.0 - 3804.0
74
Reservoir
Coastal plain sandstones in the Golden Beach Subgroup were fine- to coarse-grained and
well-sorted, but less sandy than expected with approximately 32% sandstone. Sandstones
within the volcanic section were found to be overall lithic in composition, with varying amounts
of argillaceous matrix and cement, and had porosities of up to 14%.
Seal
Fault seal was believed to be provided laterally by the fault and vertically by the interbedded
shales and siltstones for the upper objective, and by volcanics for the lower objective.
Hydrocarbon shows
The upper objective was found to be water wet. The lower objective within the volcanics was
interpreted from log interpretation to have 4.3 m of possible gas in a 54 m reservoir, however
this was deemed sub-economic.
Results
Failure of the upper objective is thought to be due to lateral seal problems and
because closure may not exist at this level.
Effective sealing caused by the Manta fault inhibits movement from the hydrocarbonbearing sandstones found in Manta-1 into the Chimaera structure.
Data available
Well Completion Report, March-May 1984 (PE912881) final well report.
Well Completion Report, October 1984 (PE902489) basic data.
Palynology Report by J. van Niel, October 1984 (PE990354)
75
Dart-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
9.8 m
124 m
Operator
Spud Date
Rig Released
Esso Australia Ltd

16-11-1973
22-11-1973
Permit Area

VIC/RL3 (current)
38 08' 11.970" S
148 55' 28.235" E
BMR40-040-06, SP:117.5
G69B-365; SP 6596
G69B-393; SP 10297
G92A-3045, SP:2097
G92A-3046, SP:2501
GEBR01-30, SP:176.1
GGI85A-A-01, SP:44.2
GS67A-6A, SP:48.3
GS81A-18, SP:6198
GS81A-200, SP:6217
GS82A-89A, SP:5896.5
GS91A-01, SP:2033
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
Status
100%
Dry hole; plugged and abandoned
Structure
Dart-1 is located approximately 8 km southwest of Sole-2 and approximately 18 km northwest
of Shark-1, near the western limit of permit block VIC/RL3. The Dart structure is situated on a
southwest plunging fold, approximately 76 m down-dip from the Sole anticlinal structure.
Target
Down-dip from the Sole field, the primary target of Dart-1 was the nose of an anticline at topLatrobe Group level. Dart-1 was prognosed to be separated from the Sole structure by an
impermeable stratigraphic barrier. Abnormally high amplitude responses on seismic lines
present over the structure suggested a possible hydrocarbon accumulation.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
133.8 mKB
133.8 mKB
731 mKB
922 mKB
922 mKB
922 mKB
1055 mKB
1067 mKB
1122 mKB
1122 mKB
Palynological data
(from L. Stover, 1974; revised by A. Partridge, 2000. All depths measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
922.3
L. balmei
980.2 - 1045.5
F. longus
1079.0 - 1080.2
P. mawsonii
1122.0 - 1219.0
76
Reservoir
Approximately 180 m of Latrobe Group sediments were anticipated, consisting of
predominantly fine- to coarse-grained sands; exhibiting excellent reservoir quality.
Seal
Marls of the Seaspray Group were thought to act as the top seal, whilst an impermeable
facies variation, as evidenced in seismic reflections, was prognosed between Dart-1 and the
Sole field.
Hydrocarbon shows
No hydrocarbon shows were detected in Dart-1.
Well analysis
Dart-1 encountered no hydrocarbon shows, suggesting that the up-dip seal required
for stratigraphic accumulation was absent.
The Latrobe Group sediments intersected by the well contained excellent reservoir
sands; fine- to coarse-grained with porosities above 30%.
The abnormally high amplitude responses on seismic reflections were thought to
result from a decrease in internal velocity and formation density between the
unconsolidated nature of the Latrobe Group sands and the overlying Lakes Entrance
Formation marls.
Data available
Well Completion Report, February 1974 (PE905445)
Palynology Report by L. Stover, January 1974 (PE990372)
Palynology Report by T. Davies & N. Ioannides, July 1999 (PE912660)
77
East Pilchard-1
KB/RT
25 m
Water Depth
91.3 m
Total Depth
3138 mRT (driller); 3140 mRT (logger)
Operator
Esso Australia Resources Pty Ltd
50%
Partner BHP Petroleum (Bass Strait) Pty Ltd
50%
Spud Date
03-07-01
Rig Released 13-08-01
Permit Area
VIC/L9
Long./Lat.
38 11' 54.184" S
148 33' 42.825" E
Seismic Ref.
GL88A-3D-30, SP:960
G85A-8053, SP:2296
Status Strong oil and gas shows; completed and suspended as future gas producer
Structure
East Pilchard-1 is located approximately 4 km southwest of Kipper-1 and approximately 3 km
to the northwest of Scallop-1. The structure of the targeted sands is analogous to the Kipper
field, with the trap occurring as a lowside fault-dependent closure (the Pilchard Fault).
Target
East Pilchard-1 targeted braided fluvial to upper deltaic sands and gravels of the Golden
Beach and the Emperor subgroups, sealed by volcanics. The targets exist on the Pilchard
fault block, with flat spots observed on the G99A Kipper 3D seismic survey.
The primary risk identified was that of fault seal. In addition, it was unclear whether observed
flat spots were hydrocarbon accumulations, residual gas, or lithological complications within
the reservoir interval.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Volcanics
Chimaera Formation
Palynological data
(from T. Davies, 2001. All depths measured in mRT)
Lower N. asperus-P. asperopolus
1650.0 - 1680.0
P. asperopolus
1680.0 - 1720.0
Lower L. balmei
1938.0 - 2177.0
F. longus [probable]
2177.0 - 2415.0
Lower? T. lillilei
2415.0 - 2675.0
N. senectus
2675.0 - 2805.0
T. apoxyexinus
2805.0 - 2850.0
Lower T. apoxyexinus
2850.0 - 2905.0
Lower T. apoxyexinus-?P. mawsonii
2970.0 - 3127.0
116 mRT
116 mRT
1216 mRT
1644 mRT
1644 mRT
1644 mRT
1656 mRT
1656 mRT
1691 mRT
2101 mRT
2114 mRT
2430 mRT
2430 mRT
2592 mRT
78
Reservoir
East Pilchard-1 penetrated a total of 100.7 m (net) gas sands within the Chimaera Formation.
However, the reservoir section had a lower net-to-gross than prognosed which resulted in
multiple sealed reservoirs, referred to as the S100, S200, S300, S400 and S500 series.
The reservoirs comprise fine- to coarse-grained sands interbedded with siltstone which were
deposited in a fluvial system. The petrology report states visible porosity in the sandstone
reservoirs of up to 18.6% which decreases with increasing clay and metamorphic rock
fragments. The report further states the sandstones were derived from a continental
provenance which was dominated by granitic and low-grade metasedimentary rocks that also
included minor siliciclastics and volcanics.
Routine core analysis yielded porosity and permeability values of up to 18.2% and 3470 mD
[permeability to air] respectively at 2594 mRT.
Seal
The trap is fault-dependent; therefore depending on a necessary sand-shale juxtaposition
was a large risk factor. The Chimaera Formation sandstone and gravel reservoir is overlain by
a volcanic layer consisting of basalt, tuff and altered volcanics. The volcanic thickness was
not considered a risk pre-drill, with the well subsequently penetrating a thicker sequence,
totaling some 162 m.
Sand-on-sand juxtapositional relationships have been observed along the Pilchard Fault.
However, similar observations had been noted in the Manta and Gummy fields, and these
have yielded commercial hydrocarbon accumulations.
Hydrocarbon shows
East Pilchard-1 intersected multiple reservoir systems with most coinciding with some form of
hydrocarbon show as detailed below:
2592.5-2793 mRT: Gas-bearing sands termed the S100 to S320 reservoirs. No
hydrocarbon contacts were observed on the log data with gas on rock being recorded
in all cases. Net pay 68.9 m [based on effective porosity cut-off of 8%].
2793-2966.2 mRT: Thinner gas-bearing sands intercalated with water-bearing sands
termed the S400 reservoirs. Net pay 13.9 m [based on effective porosity cut-off of
8%].
3023.8-3138 mRT: Thinner lower quality gas-bearing sands termed the S500
reservoirs. Net pay 17.9 m [based on effective porosity cut-off of 8%].
TOC and Rock-Eval pyrolysis indicate the Halibut and Golden Beach subgroups shales,
siltstones and coals have good to excellent oil and gas source potential. In addition, the T.
lilliei and older section is regarded as being mature for effective hydrocarbon generation. VR
work indicates the top of the effective oil generation window is approximately 2600 mKB.
Compositional analysis of the gas indicates CO2 levels ranging from 11.2-22.1%, which is
reported as being comparable to other northern margin gasses. The geochemistry report
interprets the CO2 to have resulted from igneous sources.
Data available
Well Completion Report November 2001 (PE909977) basic data
Well Completion Report November 2001 (PE909978) interpretative data
Palynology Report by T. Davies, November 2001 (PE910162)
79
Hammerhead-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
22 m
121 m
Operator
Partners

17-05-1982
02-07-1982
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Seismic Ref.

VIC/P55 (current)
38 10' 34.23"S
148 49' 59.30"E
G88A-9184, SP:2464
G92A-3045, SP:2463
GEBR01-34, SP:862
GISN05-27, SP:1326
GS81A-81, SP:5124
Status
Lat./Long.
40%
20%
20%
15%
5%
Structure
Hammerhead-1 is located on the border of permit blocks VIC/P55 and VIC/P41. It was drilled
to test a potential intra-Latrobe Group trap on the southern basin-ward side of the Rosedale
2
Fault System. Areal extent covering approximately 25 km . A gross reservoir interval of 190 m
was prognosed.
Target
The target comprised Upper Cretaceous to Paleocene shallow marine to marginal marine
sandstones, top-sealed by intra-Latrobe Group shales, and laterally sealed against upthrown
tight Strzelecki Group continental sediments. Critical factors included the absence of direct
evidence of effective seals within the area and uncertainties concerning source rock quality
within the drainage area of the trap (southern section of VIC/P19).
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
Kipper Shale
143 mKB
143 mKB
1058 mKB
1291 mKB
1291 mKB
1291 mKB
1484 mKB
1502 mKB
1646 mKB
1646 mKB
2047 mKB
Palynological data
The Palynology report by W. Harris (1986) states that most samples were barren,
with only the following constraints being possible [depths in mKB]:
1429
No younger than L. balmei
1623
No older than T. lilliei
2049
No older than T. lilliei
80
Mary Dettmanns (1988) study for LASMO confirmed the following constraints [depths in
mKB]:
1623 - 1839
F. longus/L. balmei
1846
no younger than L. balmei
2049 - 2085
N. senectus
2104 - 2116
no older than P. mawsonii
2123
no older than N. senectus
Reservoir
Reservoir quality of the Latrobe Group was excellent, especially in the Kingfish Formation.
The sands are generally medium- to coarse-grained and well-sorted. Log evaluation indicates
porosity values of 21-30% for sands above 1500 m and 17-21% for those below. Porosity
values for the Strzelecki Group lithic sandstones average at 14%.
Seal
The presence and continuity of intra-Latrobe Group shales, and the presence of sealing
lithology deep in the Strzelecki Group were the primary critical factors.
Hydrocarbon shows
No significant shows encountered.
Results
The Paleocene top-seal was much thinner than expected and included only 6 m of
good sealing quality (remaining prognosed top-seal consisted of about 50 m of
interbedded sand and shale developed in a coastal plain/lagoonal setting). This is
regarded as the main cause of failure of the trap.
Strzelecki Group sediments may have been penetrated; however, palynology in this
section suggests Campanian age sediments which are much younger than would be
expected in this basin margin setting.
Seismic and dipmeter data suggests two faults were penetrated, one at 2050 mKB
and the other at 2080 mKB.
Data available
Well Completion Report July 1982 (PE902661) basic and interpretative data
Palynology Report by M. Dettmann, June 1988 (PE908571)
Palynology Report by W. Harris, August 1986 (PE990454)
Palynology Report by Paltech Pty. Ltd., July 1982 (PE990453)
81
Judith-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
21 m
76.4 m
2958 mKB (driller)
Operator
Shell Company of Australia Ltd 29.17%
Partner Gas & Fuel Exploration NL
70.83%
Spud Date
14-10-1989
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status

VIC/P47 (current)
38 09' 18.47"S
148 33' 20.11"E
G66B-47, SP:3270
G69A-249, SP:13529
G81A-5169, SP:1955
G91A-2088, SP:2255
G92A-3052, SP:2105
G92D-2034, SP:3280
GL88A-3D-26, SP:600
Structure
Judith-1 is located in the southern region of permit block VIC/P47; approximately 8 km west of
Admiral-1 and 5 km north of East Pilchard-1. The structure exists on the down-thrown side of
a rotated fault block.
Target
The primary objective of Judith-1 was to test the hydrocarbon potential of the Admiral
Formation alluvial fan sandstones within a rotated fault block. Possible north-westerly
extension of the Kipper gas field at the base of the Golden Beach Subgroup level, sub Kipper
volcanics, was also considered a target for Judith-1.
Stratigraphic Tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
Kipper Shale
Admiral Formation
97 mKB
97 mKB
955 mKB
1451 mKB
1451 mKB
1451 mKB
1472 mKB
1472 mKB
1509.5 mKB
1742 mKB
1768 mKB
1886 mKB
1886 mKB
1987 mKB
1987 mKB
2076 mKB
2637 mKB
82
Palynological Data (Data from WCR by M. MacPhail, February 1990. All depths are
measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
1449.0
Upper N. asperus
1451.0
Middle N. asperus
1454.0
Lower N. asperus
1471.0
P. asperopolus
1488.0 - 1503.5
Middle M. diversus
1509.5
Lower M. diversus
1546.0
Upper L. balmei
1571.5 - 1622.0
Lower L. balmei
1667.5 - 1701.5
Upper F. longus
1764.0 - 1835.5
Lower F. longus
1858.0 - 1875.5
T. apoxyexinus
1984.0
P. mawsonii
1993.0 - 2721.0
Reservoir
The following reservoir intervals were intersected:
The Latrobe Group fluvial, estuarine and coastal barrier sandstones were interpreted
as excellent reservoirs, comprising fine- to coarse-grained quartzose; with fair to very
good visual porosity, ranging from 21-29% [log-derived].
The secondary objective braided stream sandstones present beneath the top Golden
Beach Subgroup volcanics predominantly comprising medium- to coarse-grained
quartzose; with fair to good visual porosity 17-24% [log derived].
Occasional fluvial and alluvial fan sandstones were found within the Kipper Shale
interval, comprising clean medium- to coarse-grained well-sorted quartzose; with
good visual porosity, 11-25%; [log derived].
The primary objective beneath the Kipper Shale was interpreted as alluvial fan
sandstones consisting of fine- to coarse-grained quartzose with a high component of
lithics (25-30%) and clay; with poor visual porosity, 6-12% [log derived].
Seal
Both the top and lateral sealing was prognosed as provided by the Kipper Shale for the
primary objective. Low gas saturations within this interval until TD indicate that the Kipper
Shale is an effective seal.
The secondary objective was thought to have a top-seal of weathered volcanics; it was found
to be thicker than first anticipated. Lateral seal at base Golden Beach Subgroup level was
however interpreted to be absent, therefore failing at this level.
Hydrocarbon Shows
No significant hydrocarbon shows recorded, hence the well was plugged and abandoned.
Geochemical Analysis
Rock-Eval pyrolysis was carried out on cuttings for the interval between 1555-2923 mKB,
over approximately every 50 m. Data from this analysis, as well as in-depth descriptions,
including liptinite fluorescence, is available in Appendix 5 in the WCR Volume 2.
Results
Judith-1 intersected a valid hydrocarbon bearing trap (the Kipper Shale) overlying the
primary objective Admiral Formation, however the reservoir had low effective porosity
and very low permeability.
The secondary objective at top-Golden Beach Subgroup level showed that the Kipper
field did not extend past the bounding Kipper Fault.
Data Available
Well Completion Report June 1990 (PE900021) basic and interpretative data
Palynology Report by M. MacPhail, February 1990 (PE990461)
83
Kipper Field
Summary
The Kipper field was discovered in 1986 by an Esso-BHP Petroleum-led consortium and
represents the first significant hydrocarbon discovery within the Golden Beach Subgroup. The
field lies approximately 42 km offshore on the northern flank of the Gippsland Basin, close to
the Rosedale Fault System and is approximately 20 km southeast of the Patricia/Baleen fields
and approximately 15 km east of the Tuna field. The field straddles two permit boundaries,
VIC/RL2 and VIC/L9. Estimates of in place reserves vary; 500 Bcf gas and 30 Mstb oil
(Alexanders Gas & Oil Connections press release, 2000); 750 Bcf gas and 30 Mstb oil (Sloan
et al., 1992); 800 Bcf gas and 30 Mstb oil (Malek & Mehin, 1998).
In 1999 Shell Development (Australia) and Crusader (Victoria) acquired the interests of
Australian Worldwide Exploration (AWE) and News Corporation. By May 2000, Shells
interests in the field were acquired by Woodside Petroleum and Santos, whilst Santos
subsequently took over Woodsides interest in May 2006.
The Kipper field is currently in the FEED stage of development, with production through Esso
and BHP Billitons existing infrastructure and processing facilities. The initial Kipper
development concept is based upon the installation of a number of subsea wells and
pipelines. First gas is expected in 2009. The current position of the Kipper field partners are:
Operator:
Partners:
Esso Exploration and Production Australia Inc

BHP Petroleum (Australia)
Santos Ltd
32.5%
32.5%
35%
The field is a lowside fault-dependent trap with a significant gas column within fluvial/deltaic
sandstones at the top of the Golden Beach Subgroup. Top-seal is provided by a thick volcanic
section whilst fault-seal to the north is interpreted to be dependent upon the juxtaposition of
reservoir lithologies against thick lacustrine shales.
Two wells were drilled; Kipper-1 (1986) intersected four minor oil pools in the Cobia and
Halibut subgroups before encountering a 290 m gross gas column sealed by volcanics in the
Golden Beach Subgroup (termed the S-1 gas reservoir). Kipper-2 (1987) was drilled down-dip
to the discovery well and intersected the same S-1 gas reservoir. The well extended the gas
column by 26 m below the previously lowest known gas in Kipper-1 and delineated an
underlying 14 m oil leg which had been prognosed based on data from Kipper-1. Water
depths range from 94 m in Kipper-1 to 107 m in Kipper-2.
The S-1 reservoir geometry and continuity is complex with significant lateral facies variation
between Kipper-1 and Kipper-2. Kipper-1 intersected predominantly coarse-grained to
granular sandstones and conglomerates with minor interbedded siltstones and shales with a
net-to-gross of 66% whereas Kipper-2 intersected a sequence of interbedded sands, silts and
coals with net-to-gross values of 52% and 37% for the gas and oil sections respectively.
Sloan et al. (1992) suggested that Kipper-1 penetrated a series of fluvial, sand-dominated
channel systems, while Kipper-2 intersected the channel flanks with a greater abundance of
overbank deposits.
2
Total areal closure measures 38 km , the top of the reservoir is 1955 mTVDSS, and GOC and
OWC levels are mapped at 2284 mTVDSS and 2298 mTVDSS respectively (Malek & Mehin,
1998).
The Kipper field demonstrates the effectiveness of two important components of Golden
Beach Subgroup plays; namely that regional volcanics can provide competent top-seal, and
that fault-dependent prospects on the lowside of major basin margin faults can prove to be
successful traps.
84
Kipper-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
21 m
94 m
2875 mKB (driller); 2873.5 mKB (logger)
Operator
Partners
Esso (Australia)
BHP Petroleum (Australia)
Shell (Australia)
05-03-1986
11-04-1986
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
25%
25%
20%
10%
10%
7.5%
2.5%

VIC/RL2 (current)
38 10' 35.855"S
148 35' 46.777"E
BMR1989B-090-04P1, SP:2340
G67B-66, SP:4321
G69A-266, SP:12356
G85A-8047, SP:2242
G94A-4041, SP:2132
GISN05-03, SP:1856
GL88A-48, SP:461
GS81A-60, SP:5548
New gas field discovery, plugged and abandoned
Structure
The Kipper structure is an anticlinal rollover with dominantly fault-dependent closure located
on the lowside of a NW-SE trending normal fault. The structure is interpreted to have formed
from the combination of an Eocene compressional event acting parallel to the normal fault
with minor inversion at top-Latrobe Group level. The northern limit of the structure is
controlled by the Kipper Fault.
Target
To evaluate the hydrocarbon potential of a series of intra-Latrobe Group (Halibut
Subgroup) fault-dependent closures.
Test the hydrocarbon potential of a small top-Latrobe Group anticlinal closure.
Kipper-1 successfully tested the secondary target of a small anticlinal closure at top-Latrobe
level where a small oil accumulation was discovered within the P. asperopolus Flounder
Formation (termed the P-1 oil zone). The well also successfully tested the primary intraLatrobe Group fault-seal dependent target where three small oil accumulations were
discovered in Maastrichtian F. longus sediments (T-1 to T-3 oil zones), and the major Kipper
gas field discovered in upper Santonian to Campanian (N. senectus to T. apoxyexinus)
Chimera Formation sediments (S-1 gas zone).
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
115 mKB
115 mKB
900 mKB
1419.5 mKB
1419.5 mKB
1419.5 mKB
85
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
Kipper Shale
1437 mKB
1437 mKB
1459 mKB
1726 mKB
1733 mKB
1998 mKB
1998 mKB
2279 mKB
2279 mKB
2485 mKB
Palynological Data (Data from WCR by N. Marshall & A. Partridge, 1986; revised by A.
Partridge, 2001. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
1412.5
Lower N. asperus
1427.6 - 1433.4
P. asperopolus
1436.2 - 1454.4
Lower M. diversus
1478.0 - 1493.0
Upper L. balmei
1506.0 - 1562.5
Lower L. balmei
1603.0 - 1727.0
Upper F. longus
1733.5 - 1855.0
T. lilliei
1895.0
N. senectus
1995.0 - 2080.0
T. apoxyexinus
2135.0 - 2196.5
P. mawsonii
2296.5 - 2862.0
Seal
The P-1 oil zone is sealed by the overlying calcareous Seaspray Group (Lakes Entrance
Formation). Top-seal for the T-2 and T-3 oil accumulations is provided by interbedded shale
and coal units (intra-Volador Formation), whilst the T-1 oil accumulation is top-sealed by a
marine shale (Kate Shale). The P-1 and T-1 zones are thought to be trapped in small
independent closures whilst the T-2 and T-3 zones are thought to include a minor component
of fault-seal provided by juxtaposed shaly Latrobe Group section.
The S-1 gas zone is top-sealed by 96 m of volcanics (1893-1989 mKB). The volcanics are
interpreted as extrusive according to their widespread occurrence, relict structures and
geochemical analysis (TAI and VR data suggests the volcanics have had no heating effect on
surrounding sediments). The volcanics are associated with the opening of the Tasman Sea
approximately 80 Ma (Lowry, 1987; Lowry & Longley, 1991). Closure is not mapped at the
base-volcanics level on the high-side of the fault so the gas cannot be contained in a valid
trap if the fault leaks. No fault-independent closure is mapped at the base-volcanics on the
lowside of the fault, so therefore the gas is trapped by a sealing fault. Two possible
geometries for the fault-sealing mechanism have been postulated:
The emplacement and subsequent alteration of impermeable volcanic material in the

fault-plane (eg. as a dyke).
Impermeable Kipper Shale or Strzelecki Group sediments could be juxtaposed
against the reservoir across the fault-plane.
Reservoir
The P-1 oil zone reservoir section comprises sandstones and silty sandstones which are
interpreted to be marine infill of the Tuna-Flounder channel complex.
Uppermost F. longus sediments represent a regressive nearshore sand-dominated and
transgressive marine shale sequence. The T-1 oil zone is reservoired within this sandy unit.
The rest of the Upper F. longus section consists of interbedded sandstones, siltstones and
shales that were deposited in a floodplain environment. The T-2 and T-3 oil zones are
reservoired within fluvial channel sandstones.
86
The reservoir section of the S-1 gas zone is T. apoxyexinus to N. senectus in age and
consists of predominantly coarse-grained to granular sandstones and conglomerates with
minor interbedded siltstones and shales that developed in a fluvial/deltaic environment.
Marine dinoflagellates are present in a few horizons, suggesting occasional marine
incursions. Davies & Ioannides (1999) suggest the volcanic section in the Kipper field and at
least the upper part of the reservoir section belongs to the T. lilliei zone.
Hydrocarbon shows
Kipper-1 penetrated four thin oil zones, a 290 m gas column and further thin gas sands below
the main gas column.
P-1 oil zone
A 20 m gross section within the Gurnard and Flounder formations yielded oil shows
(1425 mKB to an OWC of 1445 mKB). Log analysis indicates 2.8 m net oil sand within the P.
asperopolus unit; with average porosity of 21% and average oil saturation of 42% (regarded
as a low estimate as per the RFT sample data). Geochemical analysis of the oil indicated it
has undergone mild biodegradation.
T-1 oil zone
The T-1 oil zone encompasses a 3.8 m gross oil column (3.5 m net) in Upper F. longus sands
(1735.3-1739.0 mKB). No OWC was seen for the zone, however, RFT pressure data
suggests the total column is not much greater than that encountered. Average porosity values
of 21% and average oil saturation values of 48% were recorded. The RFT yielded unusually
low gravity oil for the Gippsland Basin, which is interpreted to be a result of a larger than
usual component of naphthenic hydrocarbons in the oil.
T-2 oil zone
A 17 m gross oil column (11 m net) was intersected within Upper F. longus sands (1797.5
mKB to an OWC at 1814.5 mKB; RFT pressure data was inconclusive but supports this
general depth). Average porosity of 22% and average oil saturation of 56% were recorded.
T-3 oil zone
16.5 m gross oil column (10 m net) Upper F. longus sands (1822.5 mKB to an OWC at 1839
mKB; RFT pressure data was inconclusive but supports this general depth).
Average porosity of 21% and average oil saturation of 40% were recorded.
Two thin water-saturated sandstones separate the T-2 and T-3 oil zones. The distribution of
the four oil zones over the stratigraphic interval, together with the differences in API gravity,
demonstrate that each accumulation has been generated at slightly different maturation
levels, and have taken different migration pathways to the respective reservoirs.
S-1 Gas zone
The 290 m gross gas column (191 m net) in N. senectus to T. apoxyexinus sands was
intersected between 1989 and 2279 mKB, although work by Davies & Ioannides (1999)
suggest a T. lilliei age for at least the upper portion of the reservoir interval. A basal contact
for the gas column was not identified. The overall net-to-gross of the S-1 gas zone is 66%.
The upper 211 m exhibits 18% average porosity and 80% average gas saturation whilst the
lower 79 m records 14% and 75% respectively. Petrographic examination of SWC thin
sections throughout the reservoir suggest poorer porosities at the base are a result of higher
proportions of rock fragments and depositional matrix rather than diagenetic cements (lithic
fragments have become ductile on compaction and infill intergranular porosity). Two samples
from the lower portion of the reservoir are poorly sorted conglomeratic sandstones. Authigenic
kaolinite is also present throughout the reservoir. Permeabilities in the range 500-1000 mD
interpreted from data collected during production testing at the top of the reservoir.
RFT samples taken throughout the gas reservoir recovered wet gas and condensate with API
gravities decreasing from 52.7 to 39.9 at the base of the reservoir.
87
Gas sample analysis indicates 10-18% CO2. RFT pressure data confirms the gas is part of a
simple hydraulic system, and interprets a deepest possible GWC at 2312 mKB giving a total
gross gas column of 326 m (assuming the up-hole water gradient and no down-dip oil leg).
However, compositional analysis of gas samples indicates the gas has sufficient wet
components to support a down-dip oil leg. In addition, PVT analysis of a gas sample at
2028.4 mKB shows the dewpoint pressure is similar to the reservoir pressure suggesting the
gas is close to saturation at the top of the reservoir.
Production Test 1 was performed over the interval 2005-2013 mKB. Gas flowed at 24.5 Mcfd
through a 1 choke; the condensate yield was 21.4 stb/Mscf, with an API of 54.6 at 15.6 C,
over a flow period of 11.57 hours. Gas density was 0.74, CO2 was 14.5% and H2S was not
detected.
Log analysis indicates 13.8 m gross (11 m net) gas-bearing P. mawsonii sandstones 24402469.8 mKB. Porosities range from 13-17% and average gas saturations 17-28% (leading to
the assumption that these sands are water-productive). A further 6 m gross (2.8 m net) gas
sands are interpreted over the interval 2473-2579.3 mKB with average porosities of 10-15%
and average gas saturations of 37-61%. These sands are interpreted to be thin, isolated
accumulations which are stratigraphically trapped.
Two abnormally pressurised sandstones were intersected between 2832 mKB and
2848 mKB. Gas and a trace of possible oil were recovered by RFT from the lower sand
(average porosity 14%, average gas saturation 72%, possible oil had 39.3 API and may be a
mix of condensate and waxy oil). The sands did not give any liquid hydrocarbon during drilling
and are interpreted to be gas-productive. These deep hydrocarbons are thought to have a
significant stratigraphic trap component based on mild overpressure and are probably not
extensive. The presence of the deep hydrocarbons suggest further hydrocarbon potential may
exist deep in the Kipper structure provided reservoir is present.
RFT analysis yielded the following:
1437.7 mKB; 24.3 scf gas; 18.0 L 47 API oil; 23.75 L filtrate
1736.5 mKB; 37.0 scf gas; 40.0 L 34.5 API oil; <0.1 L mud
1801.4 mKB; 139.7 scf gas; 28.0 L 53 API oil; 1.75 L mud/filtrate
1823.2 mKB; 67.3 scf gas; 34.5 L 43 API oil; 0.5 L water
2028.4 mKB; 278.8 scf gas; 0.65 L 54 API condensate; 0.65 L mud
2157.0 mKB; 283.6 scf gas; 0.5 L condensate 48.7 API at 15.6 C; 1.25 L filtrate
2221.5 mKB; 274.4 scf gas; 0.086 L condensate 46.6 API at 15.6 C
2269.5 mKB; 64.0 scf gas; scum of condensate 41.5 API at 15.6 C; 34.5 L filtrate
2276.4 mKB; 15.7 scf gas; trace condensate; 32.0 L filtrate
2845.5 mKB; 225.2 scf gas; scum of oil/condensate 36.5 API at 15.6 C; 4.5 L filtrate
Analysis of cuttings indicates the Latrobe Group has fair source rock potential above the
volcanics with TOCs of about 1%. The Latrobe Group below the volcanics (particularly the
Turonian to early Santonian P. mawsonii Kipper Shale) has good source rock potential with
TOCs averaging 2% and shown to be gas and probably condensate-prone. Sedimentological
studies interpret the Kipper Shale as a lacustrine sequence on the basis of very uniform and
regular bedding as shown by dipmeter logs in the lower portions of the sequence (indicating a
low energy environment of deposition). Geochemical analysis has the onset of maturity at
approximately 2300 mKB.
The P- and T-oil zones are likely to be sourced from Halibut Subgroup sediments in the
Central Deep. The expelled hydrocarbons migrated up-dip into the Kipper structure. The most
likely source for the S-1 gas is the Kipper Shale which is mature within the Kipper structure.
88
Geophysical properties
During drilling of Kipper-1, it became apparent that the applied seismic method had
failed. The intra-Campanian objective turned out to be the basaltic volcanics which in
turn formed a seal for the S-1 gas zone. It also incorrectly mapped the top-Strzelecki
Group boundary by at least 800 m (pre-drill prognosis at 2079 mKB).
Data quality is good above the top of the Campanian volcanics top-Latrobe Group
sediments accumulated in a well developed continuous trough. Data quality degrades
to poor below the top of the volcanics with poor fault definition and discontinuous
reflectors.
Three seismic horizons have been interpreted, namely top-Latrobe Group, topCampanian volcanics and base-Campanian volcanics.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, July 1986 (PE906044) basic data
Well Completion Report Volume 2, February 1987 (PE906050) interpretative data
Final Well Report Kipper-1 (PE905997)
Palynology Report by N. Marshall & A. Partridge, September 1986 (PE990487)
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, February 2001 (PE911337)
89
Kipper-2
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
22 m
107.3 m
2600 mKB (driller)
Operator
Partners

BHP Petroleum (Australia) Pty Ltd
Shell Development (Australia)
12-03-1987
22-04-1987
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
25%
25%
20%
10%
10%
7.5%
2.5%

VIC/RL2 (current)
38 11' 31.59"S
148 36' 45.20"E
G85A-8041, SP:2350
G88A-9166, SP:2393
G92A-3038, SP:2561
G94A-4043, SP:2287
G94A-4047, SP:2114
GL88A-48, SP:631
Field extension, plugged and abandoned
Structure
Kipper-2 was drilled on the flank of the Kipper structure.
Target
Kipper-2 was drilled in order to define the basal contact of the S-1 gas accumulation
discovered by Kipper-1, and to establish the existence of an oil leg. The well successfully
defined the down-dip potential of the S-1 reservoir, the definition of an oil leg to the S-1
reservoir, and established the positions of the GOC and OWC.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
129 mKB
1539 mKB
1539 mKB
1539 mKB
1544 mKB
1544 mKB
1568 mKB
1870 mKB
1890 mKB
2070 mKB
2070 mKB
90
Palynological data
(Values from WCR M. Hannah 1987; reviewed by A. Partridge, 2001; adjusted by
DNRE 2002. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
1523.9 - 1538.1
Lower N. asperus
1544.0
P. asperopolus
Lower M. diversus
Upper L. balmei
Lower L. balmei
Upper F. longus
Lower F. longus
N. senectus
T. apoxyexinus
1550.1 - 1565.0
1577.0 - 1585.5
1603.0 - 1809.5
1871.5
1890.0 - 1944.0
1954.0 - 2055.1
2211.0 - 2293.0
2315.0 - 2590.1
Seal
The S-1 gas reservoir is top-sealed by 141 m of volcanics (2070-2211 mKB) which are
regarded as extrusive in nature. The mechanism for fault-seal is as postulated in Kipper-1. A
further sequence of volcanics was penetrated between 2242.5 and 2266.5 mKB with gas
shows encountered in sandstones below.
Reservoir
The S-1 gas reservoir is mainly confined to the N. senectus biozone, however, the oil leg is
reservoired in T. apoxyexinus sediments. The reservoir section consists of fluvial/deltaic
sandstones and siltstones with a further 24.5 m of volcanics between 2242.5 and
2267.0 mKB.
Hydrocarbon shows
A gross gas column of 95 m (49.2 m net) from 2211-2306 mKB with average porosity of 18%
and an average gas saturation of 67% was intersected. An oil leg immediately below the gas
had a gross column of 14 m (5.2 m net) with average porosity of 17% and oil saturations of
43% (including a transition zone 2317.8-2320 mKB). RFT pressure measurements indicate
both the gas and oil legs form one hydraulic system. Oil API gravities range from 40.4 to
42.9 and the oil is a typical Gippsland crude dominated by n-alkanes with only a moderate
amount of light gasoline components (an oil sample taken at 2305.2 mKB with an API of
48.1 is just above the GOC and is considered to be a result of mixing oil and condensate).
The S-1 oil seen in Kipper-2 is distinctively different from the oils seen in the Kipper-1 Lower
N. asperus and Upper F. longus sediments as it lacks this gasoline fraction (C8-C10). The
Kipper-2 oil is presumably derived from a terrestrial source.
Wireline tests indicate a GOC at 2306 mKB and an OWC at 2320 mKB. Cut and fluorescence
were visible in core down to 2339.5 mKB, however, this is interpreted to be residual oil shows.
The residual oil column can be attributed to leakage along the fault or alternatively a minor
post-Latrobe regional tilting event.
An RFT survey confirmed the following:
The S-1 reservoir sands were normally pressurised with little draw-down from the
original basin gradient. This suggests limited communication with producing fields.
Both the RFT results and PVT data indicate the presence of a continuous S-1 gas
sand.
Overall the S-1 reservoir gas sand pressure was consistent with the Kipper-1
pressure data, although pressures appeared to be 5 psi lower (probably due to further
basin draw-down or limitations in the repeatability of the pressure gauges).
The most likely GOC was 2306 mKB which is an intermediate depth between the low
proven gas and high proved oil ascertained from the RFT sample data. The most
likely OWC was assessed at 2320 mKB which lies between the low proven oil and
high proved water depth.
91
A gross oil column of 14 m2 m was revealed in Kipper-2.

2277.2 mKB; 123.8 scf gas; 0.5 L 57 API condensate at 22.5 C; 0.75 L water
2303.0 mKB; 121.8 scf gas; 0.5 L condensate; 1.5 L water
2305.2 mKB; 41.5 scf gas; 0.25 L condensate; 14.5 L water
2306.5 mKB; 34.4 scf gas; 9.25 L 34 API oil at 26.1 C; 4.0 L water
2308.0 mKB; 44.6 scf gas; 10.5 L 39 API oil at 28 C; 4.0 L water
2318.4 mKB; 5.0 scf gas; 0.25 L 39 API oil at 28 C; 20.0 L water
2321.2 mKB; 20.8 L water
2334.2 mKB; 22.0 L water
Analysis of cuttings samples from the Latrobe Group shales reveals fair to good
source rock potential (TOC average values of 2.52% in the T. apoxyexinus shales)
and mostly low HI values (mode generally less than 100-150; considered gas-prone).
Elemental analysis of the kerogens indicates a dominant Type III kerogen in all
samples confirming their rating as gas-prone. Vitrinite Reflectance data indicates the
section is immature rising to early mature at TD (Ro of 0.7% at TD). This immaturity is
also confirmed by Tmax values of less than 435 C.
The T. apoxyexinus shales in Kipper-2 are of a similar facies to the Kipper-1 P.
mawsonii shale. They also display similar HI indices and can therefore be considered
as a continuation of the same depositional environment at this time. It is postulated
that the source of the Kipper-2 S-1 hydrocarbon accumulation is deeper in the basin
to the south and west.
Geophysical properties
Data quality is good above the top of the Campanian volcanics with the top-Latrobe
Group sediments being manifested as a well developed continuous trough. Data
quality degrades to poor below the top of the Volcanics.
Two seismic horizons are interpreted within the WCR, namely top-Latrobe Group and
base-Volcanics (top S-1 reservoir). Pre-drill and post-drill mapping showed an error of
1.1% and 0.3% respectively and so revision of the pre-drill maps was not
necessitated.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, September 1987 (PE902224) basic data
Well Completion Report Volume 2, October 1987 (PE902225) interpretative data
Palynology Report by M. Hannah, September 1987 (PE990488)
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, February 2001 (PE911335)
92
Leatherjacket-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
Operator
Partners
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
21 m
106 m
951 mKB (driller)
BHP Petroleum (Australia) Pty Ltd
23-02-1986
04-03-1986
25%
25%
20%
10%
10%
7.5%
2.5%

VIC/P55 (current)
38 05' 16.86"S
148 46' 41.83"E
G69B-363, SP:6990
GS81A-76 SP:5751
Plugged and abandoned, new field oil discovery
Structure
The Leatherjacket structure is situated on the high-side of a NE-SW trending inverted normal
fault, and is mostly fault-dependent closure with a minor amount of independent closure. The
inverted normal fault shows complete inversion along the central portion, displacing the top of
the Latrobe Group. Similar inversion is seen at the top-Strzelecki Group level.
Target
To assess the hydrocarbon potential of a top-Latrobe Group closure, and the Strzelecki
Group.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
undifferentiated
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Admiral Formation
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
127 mKB
127 mKB
745 mKB
745 mKB
745 mKB
756 mKB
756 mKB
807 mKB
811.5 mKB
818 mKB
818 mKB
853 mKB
853 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, M. MacPhail & A. Partridge, 1986. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
742.1
Lower N. asperus
750.7 - 754.0
P. asperopolus
755.6
Upper L. balmei
757.4 - 759.8
Lower L. balmei
775.9 - 809.9
P. mawsonii
838.8 - 849.0
C. hughesi
910.7
93
Reservoir
Two reservoir intervals were intersected in the Leatherjacket-1 well:
Upper hydrocarbon accumulation: Lower L. balmei (Kingfish Formation) sands
deposited in a coastal plain to shallow marine environment. Log analysis indicates
average porosity of 30% and an average oil saturation of 54%. Core cut reveals
completely disaggregated friable sand.
Lower hydrocarbon accumulation: Volador Formation sands deposited in a shoreface
environment. Log analysis indicates average porosity of 21% and an average oil
saturation of 55%.
Seal
The Kingfish Formation reservoir is top-sealed by interbedded shales and coals of the
Kingfish Formation, whilst impermeable Seaspray Group and Gurnard Formation are
juxtaposed to the high-side reservoir. The Volador Formation reservoir is top-sealed by the
overlying marine Kate Shale.
Hydrocarbon shows
The Kingfish Formation sands comprise a 25.5 m gross (18.3 m net) oil-bearing section from
763.5 mKB to an OWC at 789 mKB.
RFT 765.0 mKB: 45.4 L chamber; 0.04 choke; 7.7 scf gas; 26 L oil at 24.4 API; 17 L
water
RFT 788.5 mKB: 45.4 L chamber; 0.04 choke; 0.14 scf gas; 0.5 L oil at 25.5 API; 8 L
water
RFT pressure data suggests two separate oil systems are present within the Kingfish
Formation.
The Volador Formation sands comprise a 7.7 m gross (6.5 m net) oil column from 811.3 mKB
to an OWC at 819 mKB.
RFT 812.8 mKB: 45.4 L chamber; 0.04 choke; 0.31 scf gas; 0.25 L oil at 25.3 API;
12 L water
Results
The low API gravities and geochemical analysis show the oils are moderately
biodegraded and are interpreted to have originally been normal waxy Gippsland
Basin oils.
The two oil accumulations have anomalously low resistivities (and hence oil
saturations) for the reservoir quality involved, as seen in other biodegraded oil
occurrences in the northern area (Flathead-1, Sperm Whale-1). This could be
attributed to the biodegradation of the oil, or to partial leakage of oil leaving almost
residual oil accumulations, or alternatively to the particular petrographic character of
the sands in this area.
The fault-plane profile of the Leatherjacket Fault shows the upper hydrocarbon
accumulation OWC is controlled by a juxtaposed lithology leak point within the
Gurnard Formation. However, it is possible the structure is under-filled (25.5 m of a
possible 43 m) due to limited migration of hydrocarbons.
Log analysis shows the Strzelecki Group sands to be of moderate reservoir quality
with average porosities of 13-19%. The sediments are much coarser grained than
previously seen in the Gippsland Basin, and they are postulated to have been
deposited near the edge of the rift-basin.
Geochemical analysis of cuttings show the Latrobe Group and Strzelecki Group
sections have very poor source potential and are immature. The oil accumulations
are interpreted to have been sourced and generated from the mature part of the
Gippsland Basin to the southwest and undergone extensive lateral and vertical
secondary migration (as in Flathead-1 and Sperm Whale-1).
94
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 2, April 1987 (PE906165) interpretative data
Final Well Report attachment to WCR (PE906169)
Palynology Report by M. MacPhail & A. Partridge, August 1986 (PE990490)
95
Longtom Field
Summary
The Longtom field lies on the Northern Terrace of the Gippsland Basin and comprises a
three-way dip-closure against a sealing fault on the down-thrown side of a major WNW-ESE
basin terrace fault (the Longtom Fault), part of the Rosedale Fault System. The integrity of the
fault-seal is maintained as a result of juxtaposition of the Admiral Formation reservoir on the
downthrown side against the Strzelecki Group on the upthrown side.
The field was discovered by BHP Petroleum in 1995 by the drilling of the Longtom-1/ST1 well,
penetrating a 386 m (gross) gas column within the Emperor Subgroup. The field was however
deemed sub-economic as the reservoir section was regarded as being of poor quality.
The stratigraphic nomenclature of the Longtom field reservoir section is confusing as several
formation names have been proposed for the Emperor Subgroup reservoir section. BHP
Petroleum (1995) referred to the reservoir sands as the Judith Formation following their
penetration in the Judith-1 well. Bernecker & Partridge (2001) refined the stratigraphy of the
Emperor and Golden Beach subgroups, and referred to the reservoir section as the Admiral
Formation. Nexus Energy continues the use of the term Admiral Formation, but refers to the
gas-bearing reservoirs as (from deepest to shallowest) the 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 sands.
BHP Petroleum relinquished part of permit VIC/P1 and Nexus Energy subsequently acquired
permit VIC/P54 in 2003. Apache Oil farmed-in and took over operatorship of the block in 2004
with a view to providing A$17.25m of the planned A$18.5m expenditure to drill two wells
back-to-back (Longtom-2 and Grayling-1). Nexus Energy retained a 37.5% interest in Permit
VIC/P54.
Longtom-2 was drilled in November 2004. Two tests were run, the first within the lower
reservoir section which flowed at a stabilised rate of 18-19 Mmscf/d over a 12 hour period.
The upper reservoir section did not flow. These initial results were viewed as disappointing.
Subsequent work by Nexus Energy proved the test was unsuccessful as a sub-surface valve
had failed. Core cut from this reservoir interval confirmed the sand section to have excellent
reservoir properties.
As a result of the problems associated with the drilling of Longtom-2, Apache Oil decided
against the drilling of the Longtom-3 appraisal well, hence Nexus Energy has 100% equity in
the Longtom field. Apache Oil had the option of buying back into the project after payment of
an agreed back-in penalty, however, they have since decided not proceed with this.
Longtom-3 was drilled in July 2006. Two production tests confirmed the commercial viability
of the Longtom field. The first production tested the 400 reservoir section which had failed
during Longtom-2, and flowed at a rate of 23 Mmscf/d. The second test was over the 100, 200
and 300 reservoir intervals with an estimated flow of 77 Mmscf/d when bypassing the test
separator, and 59 Mmscf/d when flowing through the test separator. The well also confirmed
the reservoir intervals are stratigraphically connected between the wells rather than being
stratigraphically isolated sand bodies. In addition, the reservoirs are thought to be connected
to a series of vertically separate, but laterally connected, common aquifers.
A sales gas agreement was signed with Santos in December 2005 whereby Santos agreed to
process up to 450 PJ of raw gas through its existing Patricia/Baleen facilities near Orbost (the
Patricia/Baleen field is approximately 15.5 km northeast of the Longtom field). Santos further
agreed to purchase the first 350 PJ of sales quality gas at a defined price. A revised
contingent resource of 435 PJ gas and 5.2 Mbbl condensate has recently been confirmed by
the consultancy firm Gaffney, Cline and Associates.
The Longtom field is currently being appraised and a development plan has been finalised,
with first gas expected late-2008.
96
Longtom-1 & Longtom-1/ST1

KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
25 m
56.2 m
Longtom-1:
Longtom-1/ST1
Operator
Spud Date
Rig Released
BHP Petroleum Pty Ltd 100%

12-05-1995
14-06-1995
Permit Area

VIC/P54 (current)
38 06' 00.03"S
148 18' 54.28"E
G81A-5137, SP:2696
G91A-2004 SP:2582
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
2242 mRT (driller)

2445 mMDRT (driller); 2270 m TVDRT (driller)
Gas field, plugged and abandoned
Structure
The Longtom structure comprises a three-way dip closure against a sealing fault on the downthrown side of a major WNW-ESE basin terrace fault (the Longtom Fault). The most likely fill
case predicted the structure as being 9 km long, 1 km wide and as having 380 m of vertical
closure.
Target
Longtom-1 was drilled as an exploration well and designed to test the hydrocarbon potential
of the Longtom structure. The primary objective was the Judith Formation (Admiral Formation)
sands with top-seal being provided by the overlying Kipper Formation (Kipper Shale). Sandy
intervals within the Kipper Shale provided a secondary objective with top-seal provided by
volcanics associated with the 80 Ma Unconformity. Intraformational seals within the two
objectives were thought to provide stacked hydrocarbon occurrences in both targets. The
Strzelecki Group on the upthrown fault-block was expected to provide cross fault-seal.
Stratigraphic tops*
Seaspray Group
136 mRT
136 mRT
1184 mRT
Latrobe Group
1245 mRT
Cobia Subgroup
1245 mRT
Gurnard Formation
1245 mRT
Halibut Subgroup
1256 mRT
Kingfish Formation
1256 mRT
Kate Shale
1462.5 mRT
Volador Formation
1467 mRT
unnamed Volcanics**
1533 mRT
Emperor Subgroup
1561 mRT
Kipper Shale
1561 mRT
Admiral Formation
1810 mRT
Strzelecki Group
1935 mRT
undifferentiated
1935 mRT
*Depths refer to Longtom-1.
**No age control for the unnamed Volcanics. No coarse-grained siliciclastics immediately
below the volcanics, therefore regard that no Golden Beach Subgroup is present.
97
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, A. Partridge, 1995. All depths are measured in mRT)*
Middle P. tuberculatus
1242.0 - 1244.0
Lower N. asperus
1253.0
P. asperopolus
1268.0
Lower M. diversus
1308.0
Upper L. balmei
1358.0
Lower L. balmei
1428.0
Upper F. longus
1483.0 - 1510.0
P. mawsonii
1567.0 - 1934.0
P. notensis
1986.0 - 2172.0
*All measurements refer to Longtom-1 bar two samples analysed from Longtom-1/ST1
between 2316.0 and 2445.0 mMDRT, both of which were of P. mawsonii age.
Reservoir
The reservoir properties of the Admiral Formation were much poorer than prognosed with the
net-to-gross ratio ranging from 30% (Longtom-1/ST1) to 52% (Longtom-1), much lower than
the 50% average expected. Difficulties were experienced while attempting to log the
sidetracked open hole, with only a GR/resistivity LWD log being used to evaluate the hole
from 1780-2445 mMDRT (TD). Permeability measurements from six pressure tests gave
readings of 0.6-15.9 mD.
The Admiral Formation comprises lacustrine shales and fluvial sands, siltstones and shales.
The sands are described as fine- to medium-grained, poorly to moderately sorted with
common lithic fragments and argillaceous matrix. Visual porosity was fair; however, petrology
examination of six SWCs of the sands indicated extensive compaction had affected the sands
resulting in an over packed framework of grains. This resulted in significant reduction of
inter-particle porosity and destruction of pore throat apertures. This reduction in porosity may
well be a function of the proximity to the Longtom fault, and porosity may well improve with
increasing distance from the fault. Pore-filling kaolinite is abundant and occludes most of the
remaining porosity. The possible lack of lateral continuity and thinness of the sands was also
thought to further reduce the productive capacity of the reservoir.
Seal
The well proved that the integrity of both the top-seal (Kipper Shale) and cross fault-seal
(Strzelecki Group); this was identified as a major risk pre-drill. It also indicates that
intraformational seals are working and that stacked hydrocarbon accumulations are likely.
Hydrocarbon shows
Longtom-1
Gas peaks at 9% with significant quantities of C1-C4 being reported at 1889 mRT. Log
interpretation indicates gas is present over the interval 1891-1933.4 mRT. Using a Vsh cut-off
of 50%, a total of 22.3 m net gas sand is interpreted over a gross 42.4 m interval. Porosities
range from 7-11%, with corresponding water saturations of 77-48%. The base of the gas zone
corresponds to the intersection of the Longtom Fault. The GWC and GOC cannot therefore
be determined from wireline logs.
Interpretation of RFT pre-test data suggests a gross gas column of 260 m. Permeabilities of
less than 1 mD have been interpreted from the pre-test draw-down mobility. Immediately
below the fault at 1935 mRT, clastic sediments of the Strzelecki Group were penetrated.
Wireline logs indicate these are entirely water-saturated.
Longtom-1/ST1
From the MWD data, interval 2232-2410 mMDRT (2046-2249 mTVDRT) has approximately
41 m TVT of net hydrocarbon-bearing sand contained within two reservoir units. Unit 1
extends from 2056-2081 m TVDRT and unit 2 from 2110-2249 mTVDRT. Gas appears to be
the only hydrocarbon phase present. There is no evidence of a GOC or GWC.
98
Results
No DST or production tests were run and no conventional core was cut.
The Admiral Formation within Longtom-1 was much thinner than prognosed due to
the bounding fault being intersected within the well at 1935 mRT. Within Longtom1/ST1, the Admiral Formation had far less reservoir than predicted.
The Longtom structure has successfully trapped hydrocarbons but with poor reservoir
quality. This proves the source, migration and timing conditions were adequate for
trapping gas. Gas accumulations surrounding the Longtom structure have oil legs of
various volumes below the gas column. The same is expected of the Longtom field,
however volumes were thought to be small and uneconomic.
Longtom-1/ST1 did not penetrate the Strzelecki Group, thus an estimated 160 m of
unknown Admiral Formation is present below TD. There could potentially be
significant thicknesses of sand in this interval; however the reservoir properties are
expected to degrade further with depth.
The Longtom Fault was intersected at 1935 mRT, about 200 m SSW than expected.
The steeply dipping Kipper Shale and Admiral Formation were 2not migrated
accurately, leading to a large fault location error. The well was planned to intersect
the full Admiral Formation thickness. The sidetracked well intersected the Admiral
Formation about 20 m deeper than prognosed, indicating a steeper average dip than
originally mapped on the surface.
Data available
Well Completion Report Volume 1, January 1996 (PE900877) basic data
Well Completion Report Volume 2, December 1995 (PE904282) interpretative data
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, August 1995 (PE 990491)
99
Longtom-2/ST1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
21.5 m
56.8 m
Longtom-2:
2385.1 mTVDAHD mRT (driller); 2422.0 mMDRT (driller)
Longtom-2/ST1:2118.1 mTVDAHD mRT (driller); 2148.0 mMDRT (driller)
Operator
Apache Energy Ltd
Partner Apache Northwest Pty Ltd
Nexus Energy Vic P54 Pty Ltd
Spud Date
10-11-2004
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
VIC/P54
38 06' 11.89"S
148 19' 00.92"E
G63-12, SP:32
Status
Gas field, plugged and abandoned
Structure
Longtom-2/ST1 was drilled on the Longtom field.
Target
Longtom-2/ST1 was drilled to appraise the gas-bearing Admiral Formation sandstones
encountered in Longtom-1/ST1. In addition, the deeper Admiral Formation that proved
undrilled in Longtom-1/ST1 was to be tested. The main risk presented pre-drill was the lack of
significant reservoir development within Admiral Formation sandstones.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
undifferentiated
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
unnamed Volcanics
Emperor Subgroup
Kipper Shale
Admiral Formation
78.3 mMDRT
78.3 mMDRT
1287 mMDRT
1287 mMDRT
1287 mMDRT
1296 mMDRT
1296 mMDRT
1515 mMDRT
1521 mMDRT
1580 mMDRT
1635 mMDRT
1635 mMDRT
1941 mMDRT
Palynological data
Palynological data is presently confidential.
Reservoir
Admiral Formation sandstones comprise the reservoir section of the Longtom field.
Seal
Top-seal is provided by the Kipper Shale whilst fault-seal is provided by juxtaposition of the
Admiral Formation reservoir intervals against impermeable Strzelecki Group sediments.
100
Hydrocarbon shows
DST 1 (lower Admiral Formation)
2153.1 - 2161.4 mTVDAHD [2184.0 - 2192.5 mMDRT]
2180.8 - 2211.0 mTVDAHD [2212.5 - 2243.5 mMDRT]
Cumulative gas produced 7.65 Mmscf
Cumulative Condensate 20.2 bbl
Average CGR 2.6 bbl/Mmscf
Final gas flow rate 19.1 Mmscf/d (unstabilised at the end of the test)
Estimated stabilised flow 13.6 Mmscf/d (at 1472 psia)
DST 2 (upper Admiral Formation)
1999.1 - 2018.2 mTVDAHD [2026.0 - 2045.5 mMDRT]
2083.5 - 2091.8 mTVDAHD [2112.5 - 2121.0 mMDRT]
2095.2 - 2112.7 mTVDAHD [2124.5 - 2142.5 mMDRT]
No flow to surface (valve failure)
Data available
Interpretative data remains confidential until January 2010.
Other basic data available upon request
101
Moby-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
21.5 m
53 m
660 mRT (driller)
Operator
Partners
Bass Strait Oil Company Ltd

Eagle Bay Resources NL
Moby Oil & Gas Ltd
07-10-2004
17-10-2004
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
40%
25%
35%
VIC/P47
38 01' 44.25" S
148 30' 27.40" E
GL88A-72, SP:461
Baleen 3D Inline 601, CP: 4403 (from Interpretation Report)
Status
Gas field; plugged and abandoned
Structure
Moby-1 is located approximately 5 km east of the Patricia/Baleen gas field and approximately
4.5 km WSW of Whale-1.
Target
The primary objective of Moby-1 was to test the hydrocarbon potential of the Gurnard
Formation; the secondary objective being the Barracouta Formation.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
undifferentiated
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
undifferentiated
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
74.5 mRT
74.5 mRT
555 mRT
555 mRT
555 mRT
587 mRT
587 mRT
590 mRT
590 mRT
Palynological data
Twenty-one samples from Moby-1 were analysed by A. Partridge in February 2005 and the
interpreted results are included in the interpretative data WCR.
Reservoir
Gurnard Formation.
Seal
Lakes Entrance Formation.
Hydrocarbon shows
Most data is still confidential. High ditch gas readings and fluorescence readings were
reported over interval 562-574 mRT.
Six sidewall core samples were collected and submitted for geochemical analysis.
Interpretation of these results is included in the interpretative data WCR.
102
Data available
Well Completion Report, February 2005 (PE911450)
Interpretative data remains confidential until November 2009.
Other basic data available upon request.
103
Northright-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth (dr/log)
25 m
105.5 m
391 mRT
Operator
Spud Date
Rig Released
Eagle Bay Resources NL

26-04-2001
01-05-2001
Permit Area
Seismic Ref.

V07-1 (current)
37 55' 57.754" S
149 08' 58.942" E
GEBR99-4, SP:210
Status
Long./Lat.
100%
Structure
Northright-1 is located approximately 17 km south of the Victorian coastline and
approximately 22.5 km NNE of Sole-1. The Northright structure is a reverse fault trap against
a major east-west trending basin margin fault, the Lake Wellington Fault System.
Target
The objective of Northright-1 was to test the hydrocarbon potential of a reverse fault structural
trap at the top-Latrobe Group level. The target reservoir sands were regarded as shallowing
markedly from the south towards the Lake Wellington Fault System, situated updip from the
Sole and Leatherjacket accumulations.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
130 mRT
130 mRT
250 mRT
310 mRT
310 mRT
310 mRT
337 mRT
337 mRT
Palynological data
(from A. Partridge, 2003. All depths measured in mRT)
F. wonthaggiensis
337.0 - 391.0
Reservoir
It is probable that the Northright-1 well intersected a basal Seaspray Group channel
sandstone, referred to by Eagle Bay Resources as the top-Latrobe Group. This sandstone
section comprised subangular to well rounded, poorly to moderately sorted, predominantly
very coarse grained quartz, with fair to very good inferred porosity.
The secondary objective fluvial channel sandstones, referred to as the Golden Beach Group
by Eagle Bay Resources, are actually within the top-Latrobe Group reservoir section,
comprising angular to rounded, poorly to moderately sorted, medium-grained to granular
quartz grains, also with fair to very good inferred porosity.
Seal
Marls of the Tertiary Lakes Entrance Formation were prognosed to be the top-seal to the
Latrobe Group sandstone.
104
Hydrocarbon shows
Northright-1 did not encounter any hydrocarbon shows or significant gas concentration in
either primary or secondary reservoir objectives.
Data available
Well Completion Report, May 2001 (PE908025) basic and interpretative data
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, August 2003 (PE912662)
105
Scallop-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
25.9 m
109.6 m
3174 mRT (driller); 3177.5 mRT (logger)
Operator
Esso Australia Resources Pty Ltd

BHP Billiton Petroleum Vic Pty Ltd
Woodside Group
Santos Group
02-02-2003
04-03-2003
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
Status
25%
25%
30%
20%
VIC/RL2
38 12' 48.615" S
148 35' 28.879" E
G67B-151, SP:3608
G85A-8043, SP:2180
G92A-3038, SP:2434
G94A-4042, SP:2069
G99A Kipper 3D seismic survey from interpretative report
GS81A-27, SP:5855
Sub-economic oil and gas discovery, plugged and abandoned
Structure
Scallop-1 is located approximately 3 km southwest of Kipper-2 and 3 km southeast of East
Pilchard-1.
Target
The primary objective of Scallop-1 was to test the hydrocarbon potential of the sub-volcanic
Golden Beach Subgroup, expected to consist of good quality braided fluvial to upper deltaic
sands.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
undifferentiated
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
135.5 mRT
135.5 mRT
1723 mRT
1723 mRT
1723 mRT
1768 mRT
2189 mRT
2207 mRT
2543 mRT
2543 mRT
Palynological data
(Data from basic WCR, 2003. All depths are measured in mRT)
P. asperopolus
1725.0 - 1762.0
L. balmei
1800.0 - 2204.0
Upper F. longus
2250.0 - 2355.0
Lower F. longus
2402.5 - 2529.5
T. lilliei
2586.7 - 2750.0
Upper N. senectus
2758.0 - 2886.0
Lower N. senectus
2898.0 - 3149.5
106
Reservoir
The primary objective was the Golden Beach Subgroup sands analogous to the Kipper field
[termed the S1 sand]; whilst secondary objectives were T. lilliei sandstones [both targets
within the Chimaera Formation].
Seal
The proposed sealing unit is similar to the Kipper field with volcanics providing top seal.
Hydrocarbon shows
It was reported that Scallop-1 intersected a 35 m gross gas column as well as 10 m gross oil
column within the Chimaera Formation.
Confidential
Well analysis
Scallop-1 encountered non commercial quantities of gas, estimated at 315 Bcf [gross]
by Santos.
Data available
Well Completion Report, August 2003 (PE915060) basic data
End of Well Report, February 2003 (PE909938)
th
Interpretative data remains confidential until 4 April 2008.
Other basic data are available upon request.
107
Shark-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
Operator
Partners
Spud Date
Rig Released
Permit Area
28.4 m
319.7 m
3518 mKB (driller)
Shell Company of Australia Ltd 45%
Ampol Exploration Ltd
30%
Santos Ltd
25%
25-10-1989
08-12-1989
Seismic Ref.

VIC/P41 (current)
38 15' 34.2" S
149 03' 7.0" E
G92A-3051, SP:3038
G92A-3052C, SP:3902
GEBR01-23, SP:1055
GS73A-09, SP:147
GS88B-100, SP:451
Status
No hydrocarbon shows, plugged and abandoned
Long./Lat.
Structure
Shark-1 is located approximately 16 km SSE of Sole-1 and approximately 30 km east of
Manta-1. The structure lays basin-ward of the Rosedale Fault System on the downthrown
side of a fault block bound by listric normal faults. The downthrown fault trap was mapped at
top-Golden Beach Subgroup and several intra-Golden Beach Subgroup levels.
Target
The primary objective was to test the hydrocarbon potential of a structure at the top of the
intra-Golden Beach Subgroup which has both fault and dip closure. A secondary objective
was prognosed as Emperor Subgroup coastal plain sands, thought to lie in a similar
geological setting and trap to the Basker/Manta field.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Mackerel Formation
Volador Formation
Chimaera Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
Kipper Shale
348 mKB
348 mKB
1526 mKB
1816 mKB
1816 mKB
1816 mKB
1854 mKB
1915 mKB
2310 mKB
2310 mKB
2438 mKB
2438 mKB
2945 mKB
Palynological data
(from M. MacPhail 1990; revised by A. Partridge 2003. All depths measured in mKB)
Upper L. balmei
1850.0
Lower L. balmei
1880.0
Lower T. longus
2074.0 - 2097.0
T. lilliei
2245.0
Lower T. apoxyexinus
2377.0 - 2426.0
P. mawsonii
2456.0 - 3510.0
108
Reservoir
The primary target within the intra-Golden Beach Subgroup level was found to comprise
medium-grained, moderately well-sorted estuarine and barrier sandstones with minor
interbeds of siltstone, shale and coal. Log-derived porosities were in the range of 22-30%.
Secondary objective sandstones of the Emperor Subgroup in Shark-1 comprised fine- to
coarse-grained quartzose with fair to moderate porosity (17-25% log derived); interpreted as a
sandy upper coastal plain sequence.
Seal
Weathered basalts were predicted to exist as an effective top seal for the primary objective
Golden Beach Subgroup sandstone. Sixty metres of tuffaceous material was encountered in
its place, however upon studying, this unit was thought to probably act as a useful alternative.
Individual siltstone units in the Kipper Shale up to 140 m thick are thought to provide effective
lateral and vertical seals. The major threat of seepage for the Shark prospect is at the
bounding fault where sand-shale juxtaposition was considered unlikely.
Hydrocarbon shows
No significant hydrocarbons were encountered in any of the intersected sandstones. Poor
source rocks were encountered in lower coastal plain sections within the Halibut and Golden
Beach subgroups. Petrophysical evaluation indicates the reservoir objectives were entirely
water bearing.
Rock-Eval pyrolysis was carried out on cuttings for the interval between 1937-3510 mKB,
over approximately every 40 m. Data from this analysis, as well as in-depth descriptions,
including liptinite fluorescence, are available in Appendix 4 of the Well Completion Report
(volume 2).
Well analysis
Shark-1 failed to encounter significant hydrocarbon shows.
Lithological and stratigraphical sequences encountered were mostly as predicted.
The secondary objective reservoir in the Emperor Subgroup comprised upper coastal
plain facies as opposed to the prognosed lower coastal plain facies.
Rather than the weathered basalts encountered at the top of the Golden Beach
Subgroup, approximately 60 m of tuffaceous material with very poor porosity existed,
viewed as a good alternative seal.
Poor source rocks were encountered within the Halibut and Golden Beach
subgroups; however no source intervals were encountered in the Emperor Subgroup.
The well is considered to have tested a valid trap. The lack of local hydrocarbon
generation and/or longer distance migration was regarded as the main reasons for
failure.
Data available
Well Completion Report, April 1990 (PE910881) Final Report
Well Completion Report, March 1990 (PE905000) Volume 1
Well Completion Report, March 1990 (PE905003) Volume 2
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, October 2003 (PE912672)
Palynology Report by M. MacPhail, February 1990 (PE905003)
109
Sole-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
10 m
128.9 m
1129 mRT (driller)
Operator
Spud Date
Rig Released

28-01-1973
09-02-1973
Permit Area

VIC/RL3 (current)
38 06' 59.5" S
149 02 04.4" E
G69B-393, SP:10225
G80A-4136, SP:3765
G92A-3046, SP:2105
G92A-3047, SP:2105
GEBR99-10, SP:1575
GGIS85A-A-05, SP:87
GS02-10-021, SP:1260
GS91A-01, SP:2430
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
Status Non commercial gas shows, plugged and abandoned

Structure
Sole-1 is located approximately 19 km northeast of Hammerhead-1 and approximately 16 km
north of Shark-1. It was drilled to intersect an interpreted anticlinal structure within the Eocene
Latrobe Valley Formation (Kingfish Formation).
Target
Sole-1 was drilled to test the hydrocarbon potential of the Kingfish Formation sandstones. An
east-west oriented anticline at top-Latrobe Group level was the primary target of this well.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
Volador Formation
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip Formation
139 mRT
139 mRT
640 mRT
810 mRT
810 mRT
810 mRT
941 mRT
951 mRT
1022 mRT
1022 mRT
Palynological data
(from A. Partridge 1974. All depths measured in mRT)
Lower L. balmei
851.0 - 889.0
F. longus
936.0 - 1021.0
C. distocarinatus
1026.0 - 1125.0
Reservoir
The Kingfish Formation shoreface to lower coastal plain sandstones comprised fine- to
coarse-grained quartz grains, with minor siltstone, and are interpreted to have good to
excellent visible porosity (average determined porosity of 32.6%).
110
Seal
Marls of the Lakes Entrance Formation were deemed as effective top seals for any
hydrocarbons present within the Kingfish Formation.
Hydrocarbon shows
An 18 m gas column (810-827.9 mRT) overlying a possible 10 m residual oil zone was
intersected in the Kingfish Formation. It was deemed non-commercial, and plugged and
abandoned without flow testing.
Well analysis
It is now understood that the Sole-1 well was drilled on a down flank position in the
hope of recognizing any potential oil column below the gas column that was apparent
from seismic reflection data.
Further research in the area surrounding Sole-1 has revealed it was drilled on the
southeastern flank of what is now known as the Sole gas field.
The GWC was found to exist at 827.9 mRT.
The Sole field is now 100% operated by Santos.
Data available
Well Completion Report, 1973 (PE905086)
th
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, 4 December, 1974 (PE990578)
111
Sweep-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
25 m
69 m
900 mKB (driller)
Operator
Esso Australia Ltd
Partner Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd
Spud Date
18-07-1978
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
50%
50%

VIC/P55 (current)
38 03' 26.73"S
148 38' 12.98"E
G77A-3161, SP:2210
G85A-8099, SP:3115
GB79-165, SP:770
GISN05-02, SP:1345
Structure
Sweep-1 is located approximately 8 km WSW of Wahoo-1 and approximately 10 km north of
Admiral-1. It was drilled on a structure consisting of a small WSW-ENE trending anticlinal
culmination, comprising three en echelon anticlines which coalesce with depth to have a
single lowest closing contour.
Target
Two objectives were cited: to assess the oil potential of the Latrobe Group sands, and to
evaluate the uppermost Strzelecki Group, which had proved hydrocarbon-bearing at
Flathead-1.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Lakes Entrance Greensand
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Volador Formation
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
94 mKB
94 mKB
615 mKB
745 mKB
756.5 mKB
756.5 mKB
756.5 mKB
772 mKB
772 mKB
817 mKB
842 mKB
842 mKB
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, A. Partridge & H. Stacey, 1978. All depths are measured in mKB)
P. tuberculatus
744.5 - 755.0
Middle N. asperus
759.0
Lower N. asperus
761.0 - 785.0
Lower L. balmei
790.0 - 812.0
F. longus
819.0 - 838.0
112
Reservoir
The Latrobe Group comprises two lithological units: Lower N. asperus open marine finegrained sandstones; and F. longus to Lower L. balmei coarse-grained to granular clean
porous sands (plus minor coals and shales) of terrestrial to shallow marine origin. In contrast,
the Strzelecki Group comprises immature fine-grained sandstone and minor claystone, and is
commonly associated with feldspar and diagenetic chlorite.
Seal
Marls and calcareous mudstones of the Lakes Entrance Formation were prognosed to act as
seal to the reservoirs.
Hydrocarbon shows
No hydrocarbons encountered in either the Latrobe Group or the Strzelecki Group. Two FIT
tests proved unsuccessful.
Results
Post-drill geophysical reinterpretation confirmed the presence of a valid structure. The
lack of hydrocarbons has therefore been attributed to either non-generation, migration
prior to trap development, or lack of a valid seal.
Data available
Well Completion Report, September 1978 (PE902747) basic and interpretative data
Extended Service Well Report, July 1978 (PE906358)
Palynology Report by A. Partridge & H. Stacey, October 1978 (PE990594)
113
Wahoo-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
9.45 m
74.7 m
745.5 mRT (driller)
Operator
Esso Exploration and Production Australia
Partner Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd
Spud Date
27-05-1969
Permit Area
Lat./Long.
Seismic Ref.
Status
50%
50%

VIC/P55 (current)
38 01' 42"S
148 44' 48"E
BMR68-11P2, SP:5325
G69B-358, SP:7265
G77A-3180, SP:2650
G80A-4133, SP:2140
G85A-8031, SP2180
GS81A-5B, SP:5815
Structure
Wahoo-1 was drilled near the crest of a large fault-line closure having approximately 213 m of
closure.
Target
To assess the hydrocarbon potential of the Latrobe Group sands.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
undifferentiated
Latrobe Group
Cobia Subgroup
Gurnard Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Volador Formation
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
84.2 mRT
84.2 mRT
429.2 mRT
429.2 mRT
429.2 mRT
461.5 mRT
461.5 mRT
557.8 mRT
591.3 mRT
591.3 mRT
Palynological data
(Data from WCR, modified by A. Partridge, 1975. All depths are measured in mRT)
Lower N. asperus
458.1
Upper L. balmei
480.1 - 487.7
F. longus
562.1 - 576.1
C. hughesii
592.2 - 623.3
Reservoir
Porous and permeable sands of the Latrobe Group were present but saturated with water.
The sands were described as fine- to very coarse-grained.
Seal
Lakes Entrance Formation marls were prognosed as the seal for any accumulation. Post-drill
analysis questions whether the Wahoo structure is sealed, and thus a trapping situation did
not exist at the time of hydrocarbon migration.
114
Hydrocarbon shows
None encountered. No tests were run.
Results
Two possible reasons were given for the lack of hydrocarbons: Post-drill mapping
indicates the location of the well is between 30 m and 60 m structurally low to the
crest of the structure. Alternatively, the seal across the fault to the north and
northwest of the well may have been breached. Permeable Miocene-Oligocene marls
and limestones may be juxtaposed against the Latrobe Group, thereby allowing
hydrocarbons to continue migrating up-dip away from the Wahoo structure.
If hydrocarbons are present on structure and up-dip, they would probably not be
economically viable due to the remaining small areal closure.
Data available
Well Completion Report, April 1970 (PE906519) basic and interpretative data
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, January 1975 (PE990631)
115
Whale-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
9.45 m
52 m
810 mRT (driller)
Operator
Hudbay Oil (Australia) Ltd
Partner Gas & Fuel Exploration NL
Beach Petroleum NL
Spud Date
01-12-1981
Permit Area
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
Status

VIC/P47 (current)
38 01' 17.182" S
148 33 34.172" E
G68A-120A, SP:8540
G92A-3027, SP:2100
G92A-3028, SP:2500
GB79-162, SP:585
GB81-37 (N-S), SP:175
GB81-41 (E-N), SP:135
GL88A-81, SP:400
GS81A-5B, SP:5160
Minor oil shows; plugged and abandoned
Structure
Whale-1 is located towards the northern margin of the Gippsland Basin, approximately 3 km
east of Flathead-1 and approximately 16.5 km west of Wahoo-1. A large anticlinal structure is
bounded to the north by a large east-west trending fault, containing an upthrown block of
Strzelecki Group strata. The Whale structure is closely associated with the Flathead-1
structure to the west.
Target
The primary objective for both the Whale-1 and Flathead-1 wells were to test the hydrocarbon
potential at top-Latrobe Group level of the apparent closure of the anticlinal structures
associated with the upthrown fault block. The secondary objective for Whale-1 was the topStrzelecki Group sands sealed by the overlying lowermost Latrobe Group shales.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish Formation
Strzelecki Group
undifferentiated
Palynological data
Middle N. asperus
440.0 - 445.0
Lower N. asperus
455.0 - 465.0
C. striatus
475.0 - 502.0
62 mRT
62 mRT
404 mRT
459 mRT
459 mRT
459 mRT
473 mRT
473 mRT
116
Reservoir
The Strzelecki Group consisted of interbedded claystone, siltstone and argillaceous
sandstone with relatively poor porosities ranging between 2-10% in the sandstones. The
Latrobe Group was composed of very coarse to granular, occasionally conglomeratic
sandstones, with minor siltstone, and had porosities typically ranging between 5-20%.
Seal
The primary trap located at Whale-1 is fault dependent therefore there was high risk in terms
of hydrocarbon potential. The top seal of the primary objective Latrobe Group was prognosed
as the overlying Seaspray Group carbonates. The shales of the lowermost Latrobe Group
were believed to act as suitable top seals for the secondary objective Strzelecki Group sands;
however internal variations in the Strzelecki Group were thought to be effective localised
lithological traps as well.
Hydrocarbon shows
No commercial hydrocarbons were detected in Whale-1. Visible oil stains were detected in
the sandstones at depths ranging between 444-465 mRT. Oil shows totaling 52 m were
reported from cores and cuttings in the 14 m of Latrobe Group and within the lesser reservoir
quality of the Strzelecki Group sandstones.
Three oil-stained sidewall cores with depths of 447.4 mRT, 461.5 mRT and 468.5
mRT were provided for geochemical analysis. The first two shallower samples were
subjected to analysis for their API gravity and sulphur content; the final sample not
tested because of its low soluble organic matter (SOM) content.
The composition of the SOM extracted from the sidewall cores was found to be
migrated organic matter, and the extracts were in effect determined to be samples of
crude oil.
Capillary gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) traces show the cores are virtually devoid
of n-alkanes and therefore have most likely undergone bacterial alteration. This is
supported by the much lower than normal proportions of saturates in the SOM and
the API gravity, relative to normal unaltered Gippsland crude oils, as well as the
higher percentage of sulphur, relative to that observed for an unaltered Gippsland oil.
The shallowest sample was found to have a higher proportion of saturates in the
SOM, higher API gravity and lower sulphur value compared to the middle sample,
suggesting the shallower sample underwent slightly more biodegradation.
Well analysis
The structure was believed to be capable of containing a medium sized oil field at the
primary production level; however Whale-1 only intersected a thin suitable reservoir
section of 14 m.
Data available
Well Completion Report, July 1982 (PE900000) basic and interpretative data
Whale-1 Prospect Report, May 1981 (PE911800)
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, November 2000 (PE915174)
117
Whaleshark-1
KB/RT
Water Depth
Total Depth
22 m
717 m
2870 mRT (driller); 2865 mRT (logger)
Operator
Esso Australia Resources Ltd
Partner BHP Petroleum (Victoria) Pty Ltd
Spud Date
02-08-1992
Permit Area
Long./Lat.
Seismic Ref.
Status
50%
50%

VIC/P49 (current)
38 23' 45.8" S
148 53' 27.4" E
G91B-2029, SP:2330
G91B2031, SP:2205
GDW99-01, SP:790
GDW99-18, SP:1800
GEBR01-23, SP:225
GH88B-132, SP:1275
GH88A-32, SP:1255
GMG68B-M5B, SP:255
GS82A-86, SP:6875
No hydrocarbon shows, therefore plugged and abandoned
Structure
Whaleshark-1 was drilled in the north-central region of the VIC/P49 permit block,
approximately 21 km southwest of Shark-1 and approximately 20 km southeast of Manta-1.
The Whaleshark structure exists at the top-Latrobe Group level as an erosional remnant with
four-way dip closure. It trends east-west and is possibly underpinned by an intra-Latrobe
Group horst.
Target
The objective of drilling this well was to test the hydrocarbon potential of the east-west
trending structure at top-Latrobe Group which had been mapped with four-way dip closure.
Stratigraphic tops
Seaspray Group
Latrobe Group
Halibut Subgroup
Flounder Formation
Mackerel Formation
Volador Formation
Palynological data
P. tuberculatus
2617.0 - 2721.0
P. asperopolus
2725.0 - 2726.0
Upper M. diversus
2746.0 - 2756.0
Lower M. diversus
2760.0 - 2765.0
Upper L. balmei
2783.0
Lower L. balmei
2786.0 - 2807.0
Upper F. longus
2822.0 - 2850.0
739 mRT
739 mRT
2612 mRT
2722 mRT
2722 mRT
2722 mRT
2758 mRT
2809 mRT
118
Reservoir
The primary reservoir target of Whaleshark-1 was the prognosed coastal plain to nearshore
marine sands immediately sub-cropping the top-Latrobe Unconformity. The top-Latrobe
Group level was found to consist primarily of siltstones and shales, grading down to fair to
good quality reservoir sands beneath the Lower L. balmei section.
Seal
The top seal was prognosed as shales and marls of the Lakes Entrance Formation
immediately overlying the top Latrobe Group. This was determined to be an ineffective seal
however because it is only 110 m thick and is highly faulted in the area around Whaleshark-1.
Hydrocarbon shows
No hydrocarbons were encountered in any of the intersected sandstones.
Well analysis
Post-drill analysis indicated that the Whaleshark area did not have access to mature
source rock since the time of trap formation. This was viewed as the most important
factor involved in the lack of hydrocarbons in Whaleshark-1.
It is also believed that the well was drilled on the flank of the closure at the top of
porosity level. Approximately another 40 m of closure was interpreted up-dip of the
well location at the top of porosity level.
Further post-drill interpretation suggests the prognosed top sealing unit, the Lakes
Entrance Formation, was highly faulted and too thin to provide an effective trap over
the Latrobe Group reservoir.
Data available
Well Completion Report, February 1993 (PE900983) basic data
Well Completion Report, March 1993 (PE900984) interpretative data
Palynology Report by A. Partridge, January 1993 (PE990645)
119
Appendix 2
Well Summary Logs
Admiral-1
Basker-1
Chimaera-1
Dart-1
East Pilchard-1
Gummy-1
Hammerhead-1
Judith-1
Kipper-1
Kipper-2
Leatherjacket-1
Longtom-1/ST1
Longtom-2
Manta-1
Moby-1
Northright-1
Scallop-1
Shark-1
Sole-1
Sweep-1
Wahoo-1
Whale-1
Whaleshark-1
Click item above to open
120
Legend for Well Summary Sheets

The well summary sheets detail well-log curves, biostratigraphic/palynological
sub-divisions and intervals with hydrocarbon shows/tested zones. Formation
tops have been picked based on lithological and log character, and aided by
biostratigraphic data. It is worth noting that the well summary sheets do not
have relative sea-level curves superimposed on them. The curve merely
represents the interpreted environments of deposition.
Palynology (spore-pollen zones):
P. tu
P. tuberculatus
N. as
N. asperus
P. as
P. asperopolus
M. di
M. diversus
L. ba
L. balmei
F. lo
F. longus
T. li
T. lilliei
N. se
N. senectus
T. ap
T. apoxyexinus
P. ma
P. mawsonii
H. un
A. di
P. pa
C. pa
C. st
C. hu
P. no
F. wo
C. au
R. wa
H. uniforma
A. distocarinatus
P. pannosus
C. paradoxa
C. striatus
C. hughesii
P. notensis
F. wonthaggiensis
C. australiensis
R. watherooensis
Lithology:
SST
Sandstone
CST
Claystone
SLT
Siltstone
glauc
Glauconitic
CGL
Conglomerate
pyr
Pyritic
MST
Mudstone
calc
Calcareous
(if capitals, major component. lower case, minor component)
Symbols:
Dry hole
Oil show (weak)/Gas show (weak)
Gas show (weak)
Oil show (weak)/Gas show (strong)
Gas show (strong)
Oil show (weak)/Gas zone
Tested interval
Gas zone
Oil show (strong)/Gas show (strong)
RFT sample
Oil show (weak)
Oil show (strong)/Gas zone
FIT sample
Oil show (strong)
Oil zone/Gas show (strong)
MDT sample
Oil zone
Oil zone/Gas zone
Fluorescence
121
Admiral-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
0
Gurnard Fm.
Flounder Fm.
Cobia
Subg.
Halibut
Subgroup
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Kingf.
Fm.
Kt Shale
Depth
GAPI 200
P. tuberculatus
(mKB)
160
Lower
L. balmei
1400
Upper
F. longus
1500
SHALE,
SST,
COAL
SST grading
to SHALE
SST
VOLCANICS
GROUP
LATROBE
Curlip
Formation
CGL
1700
Kipper Shale
MARL
SST, SHALE,
COAL
1600
Emperor Subgroup
3
g/cm 2.95
SHALE, SLT
1300
P. mawsonii
40 1.50
terrestrial
SHALE, SLT
P. asperopolus
Upper L. balmei
Volad.
Fm. Intra-T. lilliei
Gold. Beach. Marker (1492 mKB)
V/V 0.01
RHOB
1200
Lower
N. asperus
Mid-Paleocene
Marker (1385 mKB)
s/ft
0.60
Depositional Environment
marine
Open
Marine
Open Marine
Submarine Channel
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Coastal Barrier
Shallow to
Open Marine
Lower
Coastal Plain
volcanics
Alluvial Fan
SHALE,
SST
Fluvial
SHALE,
SLT,
fine sst
(rare coal)
Lacustrine
SST,
shale
Fluvial/
Lacustrine
1800
1900
2000
Admiral
Fm.
2100
Kersop
Arkose
Picks based on palynological analysis by
Partridge, 1990
Seismic Markers based on interpretations by Esso
lithic feldspathic
SST, CGL
TD: 2162 mKB

KB: 21 m
Alluvial
Basker-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
0
Lakes Entrance
Formation
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Flounder
Fm.
GAPI 200
P. asperopolus
Lw. M. di
Kingfish
Formation
Upper L.
balmei
Mid-Paleocene
Marker (2268 mKB)
Marker (2498 mKB)
140
2100
2200
Maastrichtian
Marker (2678 mKB)
LATROBE
F. longus
Intra-Campanian
Marker (2893 mKB)
s/ft
0.60
V/V 0.01
40 1.50
3
g/cm 2.95
RHOB
terrestrial
CST
marine
Open
Marine
SST, SLT
(glauc, pyr)
Submarine
Channel
SLT, sst
(glauc, pyr)
Shallow Marine/
Shoreface
2300
2500
2600
Volador Formation
Halibut Subgroup
(mKB)
2400
Kt Shale Lower Paleocene
GROUP
Depth
SST, slt,
cst
Coastal
Barrier
Shallow to
Open Marine
SLT, CST (glauc, pyr)

SLT, CST,
sst, coal
Back Barrier/
Lagoonal
SST, grading
to SLT
Coastal
Barrier
SST, SLT,
CST, coal
Back Barrier/
Lagoonal
2700
2800
2900
SST, SLT
CST, COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
SLT, SST
Fluvial
volcanic
horizons with
interbedded
SST, SLT,
CST,
coal
Coastal
Plain/
Fluvial
F. longus/
T. lilliei
Lower Campanian
Marker (3212 mKB)
3200
3300
Chimaera Formation
3400
3500
T. lilliei
3600
3700
3800
3900

J. van Niel, 1983
Seismic Markers based on interpretations by Shell
TD: 3991 mKB

KB: 25 m
Chimaera-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Lower
M. diversus
2000
2100
2200
Lower
L. balmei
2300
Volador Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kt Shale
F. longus
2400
F. longus ?
2500
2600
T. lilliei
GROUP
2700
2800
2900
Chimaera Formation
3000
LATROBE
V/V -0.15
RHOB
terrestrial
MARL
SST, SLT, cst, pyr,
micaceous, glauc
in part
N. senectus ?
3400
T. apoxyexinus ?
3500
3600
3700
3800
TD: 3826 mKB
KB: 25 m
Submarine
Channel
Nearshore
Marine/ Paralic
SST, pyr
Shoreface/
Coastal
Barrier
Lower Paleocene
Marker (2271 mKB)
Offshore
Marine
SLT, CST, pyr, glauc

interbedded SLT,
CST, SST, pyr,
carbonaceous
SST, pyr
Shoreface
interbedded SLT,
SST, CST, pyr,
carbonaceous,
glauc in part
Lower Coastal
Plain/ Paralic
Maastrichtian
Marker (2392 mKB)
Lagoonal
intra-Campanian
Marker (2510 mKB)
interbedded
SLT, SST, CST,
coal, pyr,
glauc in part
Lower Coastal
Plain/ Paralic
Lower Campanian
Marker (2699 mKB)
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
interbedded SST,
SLT, VOLCANICS,
carbonaceous
Upper Coastal
Plain
VOLCANICS, slt
Volcanics
SST, SLT,
volcanics, pyr
Upper Coastal
Plain
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
SST, slt
Upper Coastal
Plain/ Fluvial
3200
3300
Open
Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT, glauc,
pyr, coal at base
N. senectus
Picks based on palynological analysis

by J. van Niel, 1984
marine
GAPI 200 (mKB) 140 s/ft 40 1.95 g/cm2.95
1900
Mackerel
Formation
Flounder
Fm.
Depth
0.45
VOLCANICS
SST, cst,
pyr
interbedded
SST, SLT, CST.
coal, pyr,
micaceous
VOLCANICS
SST, slt,
pyr
Volcanics
Upper Coastal
Plain/ Fluvial
Upper Coastal
Plain
Volcanics
Upper Coastal
Plain/ Fluvial
interbedded SST,
SLT, cst,pyr,
micaceous in part
Upper Coastal
Plain
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
interbedded
SST, SLT
Upper Coastal
Plain
Dart-1
Stratigraphy
GR
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Depth
SP
NPHI
RHOB
MV 120 0.7 V/V -0.15
terrestrial
marine
3
GAPI 200 (mKB) 550 s/m250 1.25 g/cm2.75
MARL,
tr. glauc, tr. fossils
Open
Marine
900
Kingfish Formation
Halibut Subgroup
P. tuberculatus
Kt Shale
Curlip Formation
Emperor Subgroup
1000
L. balmei
interbedded SST
MARL, SLT
CST,thin COAL,
increasing pyrite
with depth
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Shallow to
Open Marine
Volador
Formation
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY GRP.
SLT
F. longus
1100
interbedded
SST, CST,
some COAL,
trace lithics,
trace glauc.
P. mawsonii

by L. Stover, 1974; revised by
A. Partridge, 2000
predominantly
SST, some dark
lithics, trace
pink grains
1200
TD: 1219 mKB

KB: 9.8 m
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Fluvial
East Pilchard-1
-10
Stratigraphy
GR
Flounder Fm
Kingfish
Formation
RHOB
1800
1900
Open
Marine
MARL
SLT
Open Marine
SLT
Submarine Channel
interbedded
SST, SLT, CST,
thin COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
1700
2000
Lower
L. balmei
2100
Kt Shale
Volador
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
marine
terrestrial
3
GAPI 180 (mRT) 500 s/m100 1.95g/cm2.95
1600
Lwr N. as/P. as
P. asperopolus
NPHI
mV 70 0.45 V/V -0.15
SST grading to SLT

SLT
2200
probable
F. longus
2300
Shoreface to
Shallow Marine
Shallow to
Open Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT, CST,
thin coal
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Volcanics
Volcanics
Chimaera Formation
volcanics
2400
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Cobia
Subgroup
Gurnard
Fm
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Depth
SP
Lower?
T. lilliei
2500
2600
2700
N. senectus
T. apoxyexinus
2800
Lower
T. apoxyexinus
Lower
T. apoxyexinus?P. mawsonii

by T. Davies, 2001
2900
3000
3100
TD: 3138 mRT
RT: 25 m
CGL, SST,
SLT
Fluvial/
Deltaic
Gummy-1
Stratigraphy
GR
0
Lakes Entrance
Formation
Upper
L. balmei
Lower
L. balmei
GAPI 200
Depth
(mKB)
160
Kate
Shale
Upper
F. longus
s/ft
60
V/V
0.6
RHOB
40 1.00
terrestrial
2100
SLT, SST (glauc, pyr)
2200
SST, SLT
2300
SST
2500
2600
marine
3
g/cm 2.95
CALCAREOUS
CST, marl
2400
Volador Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish
Formation
SEASPRAY
GROUP
GROUP
Lower
Flounder M. diversus
Fm.
LATROBE
NPHI
SST, SLT
SLT (glauc, pyr)
thinly bedded
SST, SLT, MST
SST grading to SLT
SLT (glauc)
thinly bedded SST,
SLT, MST, COAL
Open
Marine
Submarine Channel
Shallow Marine/
Shoreface
Tidal Inlet
Coastal Barrier
Shallow to
Open Marine
Back Barrier/Lagoonal
Coastal Barrier
Shallow Marine
Back Barrier/
Lagoonal
2700
2800
interbedded SST,
SLT, COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
2900
3000
interbedded SST,
SLT
VOLCANICS, SST, slt
Fluvial
Braided Stream
Chimaera Formation
3100
3200
3300
VOLCANIC
horizons with
interbedded
SST, SLT, CST
coal, tuff
3400
SST, slt, cst

M. MacPhail, 1990
Coastal
Plain/
Fluvial
TD: 3563 mKB

KB: 28.4 m
Braided Stream
Hammerhead-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
Kingfish
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Kt Shale
Volador
Formation
Depth
RHOB
terrestrial
marine
3
GAPI 180 (mKB) 140 s/ft 40 1.95 g/cm 2.95
calcareous
MST, MARL
Open
Marine
1300
SST,
shale
1400
SST grading to SLT
1500
1600
SLT
SST, mst,
shale, coal
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Coastal
Barrier
Shallow to
Open Marine
Lower Coastal
Plain
Curlip
Formation
1700
Emperor Subgroup
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
GR
0.45 V/V -0.15
1800
1900
SST,
SLT,
mst
Fluvial
SHALE,
sst, slt
Lacustrine
2000
Kipper
Shale
2100
Palynolological constraints are poor and are TD: 2130 mKB

therefore not represented on this diagram.
KB: 22 m
Judith-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
0
Mid N. as
Gurnard
Flounder Lower N. as
P. asperopolus
Fm.
Kingfish
Formation
Mid M. di
Upper
L. balmei
Lower
L. balmei
Volador
Formation
terrestrial
marine
MARL, glauc, pyr
1500
1600
1700
Kt Shale
Upper
F. longus
Open Marine
SST, SLT, galuc

SST, SLT, galuc
Open Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT,
COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Submarine
Channel
1800
SST, glauc
SLT, glauc
Shoreface
Offshore
Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT, coal
Coastal
Plain
volcanics
volcanics
Lower F. longus
1900
2000
Curlip
Fm.
GROUP
RHOB
Lower M. di
Chimaera
Fm. T. apoxyexinus
SST, SLT
SST, SLT, pyr
Fluvial
Fluvial/
Lacustrine
2100
Kipper Shale
2200
Emperor Subgroup
LATROBE
V/V-0.15
GAPI 200 (mKB) 140 s/ft 40 1.5 g/cm 2.95
Golden
Beach
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Cobia
Halibut Subgroup
Subgr.
Lakes
P. tu
Entrance Fm. Upper N. as
Depth
0.6
2300
P. mawsonii
2400
SLT, sst,
carbonaceous
in part, minor
pyr
Lacustrine
Lithic SST,
SLT,
carbonaceous
in part
Fluvial/
Alluvial
2500
Admiral Formation
2600

by M. MacPhail, 1990
T measurements in intervals 2100-2300
mKB (approx) and 2670-2685 mKB (approx)
are erroneous and therefore omitted from
the above well motif
2700
2800
2900
TD: 2958 mKB
KB: 21 m
Kipper-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
0
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Flound.
Kingfish
Formation
Fm.
Volador
Formation
GAPI 200
(mKB)
160
s/ft
0.45
V/V -0.15
40 1.95
3
g/cm 2.95
RHOB
terrestrial
MARL
P. tuberculatus
Lower
N. asperus
1400
P. asperopolus
Lwr. M. di
1500
SLT (pyr, glauc)

SLT, sst (pyr, glauc)
SST, SLT, coal
Upper
L. balmei
1600
Lower
L. balmei
1700
Kate
Shale
Chimaera Formation
Cobia
Subgroup
LATROBE
GROUP
Halibut Subgroup
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Gurnard
Fm.
Depth
SLT,
COAL,
sst
Mid Paleocene
Marker (1689 mKB)
SST grading to SLT

SLT (glauc)
Upper
F. longus
T. lilliei
interbedded
SST, SLT,
coal
marine
Open
Marine
Open
Marine
Submarine Channel
Lower Coastal Plain
Lower
Coastal
Plain
Shoreface to
Shallow Marine
Shallow to
Open Marine
Lower
Coastal
Plain
1900
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
SST, CGL,
slt, cst,
carbonaceous
in part
Fluvial/
Deltaic
(minor
marine
incursions)
2000
N. senectus
2100
T. apoxyexinus
2200
2400
SST, SLT,
cst,
carbonaceous
in part
Fluvial
2500
P. mawsonii
Kipper Shale
Emperor Subgroup
Curlip
Formation
2300
2600
2700
2800

N. Marshall & A. Partridge, 1986, modified
by A. Partridge, 2001
Seismic marker based on subsequent
interpretations by Esso (Kipper-2 WCR)
TD: 2875 mKB

KB: 21 m
SLT, CST,
sst,
carboanceous
Lacustrine
(minor marine
incursions)
Kipper-2
Stratigraphy
GR
GAPI 200
Depth
(mKB)
T
160
Kingfish Flounder Fm.

Formation Gurnard Fm.
Volador
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Cobia
Subgoup
Lakes
P. tuberculatus
Entrance Fm. Lwr N. as
LATROBE
40 1.00
terrestrial
1600
Upper
L. balmei
1700
Mid Paleocene
Marker
(1811 mKB)
1800
Lower
L. balmei
1900
2000
marine
3
g/cm 2.95
Open
Marine
Open
SLT (glauc, pyr) Marine
SLT (pyr, glauc)
Lwr M. di
Lower
F. longus
RHOB
Marl
P. asperopolus
Upper
F. longus
s/ft
100
Submarine Channel
SST, SLT,
COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
SST grading
to SLT (pyr)
Coastal
Barrier
SLT (glauc, pyr)
Shallow to
Open Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT,
coal
Lower
Coastal
Plain
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
interbedded
SST, SLT,
VOLCANICS,
coal
Fluvial/
Deltaic
SLT, sst
Coastal
Plain
2100
2200
Chimaera Formation
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Kate
Shale
NPHI
N. senectus
2300
2400
T. apoxyexinus
2500

M. Hannah, 1987; reviewed by A. Partridge,
2001; adjusted by DNRE 2002
Seismic marker based on interpretations

by Esso
TD: 2600 mKB

KB: 22 m
Leatherjacket-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
0
(mKB)
180
Kingfish
Formation
Lower
L. balmei
Kt Shale
750
800
Vol. Fm.
Admiral
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
40 1.6
V/V 0.01
RHOB
terrestrial
marine
g/cm 2.95
Open
Marine
P. tuberculatus
Upper L. ba
Emperor
Subgroup
s/ft
0.6
MARL
Cobia Gurnard Lower N. as

Fm. P. asperolpolus
Subg.
Undifferentiated
STRZELECKI GROUP
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
GAPI 200
Depth
P. mawsonii
Open Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT, coal
Back Barrier/
Coastal Plain
SST,
SLT
Lower
Coastal Plain
SHALE (glauc)
SST
Shallow Marine
Lower Coastal Plain
coarse
SST, CGL
Alluvial/
Fluvial
coarse lithic
SST, CGL
Fluvial
850
900
C. hughesi

M. MacPhail & A. Partridge, 1986
sandy SLT
(glauc, pyr)
TD: 951 mKB

KB: 21 m
Longtom-1
NPHI
0.45 V/V -0.15

RHOB
T
Depth
0 GAPI 200 (mRT) 140 s/ft 40 1.95 g/cm32.95
Stratigraphy
Gurn.
Fm.
Halibut Cobia
Subgroup Subg.
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Mid P. tu
Lw. N. as
P. as
Lower
M. diversus
Upper
Kingfish
L. balmei
Fm.
Kt Shale
Lower
L. balmei
Volad. Up. F. longus

Fm.
Kipper Shale
terrestrial
MARL
1200
1300
1400
SLT, fine sst

Interbedded
SST, SLT,
coal
SLT
1500
Interbedded
SST, SLT, coal
VOLCANICS
marine
Open
Marine
Open Marine
Back Barrier/
Coastal
Plain
Shallow to
Open Marine
Back Barrier/
Coastal Plain
Volcanics
1600
1700
SLT,
SHALE,
sst
Lacustrine
P. mawsonii
1800
Admiral
Fm.
Emperor Subgroup
80 Ma
unnamed Volcs. Unconformity
(1533 mRT)
Undifferentiated
STRZELECKI
GROUP
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPR.
GROUP
GR
SST, SLT,
SHALE
Alluvial/
Fluvial
SST,
SHALE
Fluvial
2000
P. notensis

Seismic Marker based on interpretations
by BHP Petroleum
2100
2200
TD: 2242 mRT

RT: 25 m
Longtom-2
NUCL
50
Stratigraphy
Cobia
Subg.
Halibut
Subgroup
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes Entrance
Formation
Gurnard Fm.
Depth
GR
GAPI
200
(mRT)
s/m
40 1.95
1200
1300
Kingfish
Formation
1400
Kate Shale
1500
Volador Fm.
Kipper Shale
g/cm
terrestrial
MARL
Open
Marine
glauc SLT
Open Marine
interbedded
SST, SLT, CST,
coal
SLT
SST, SLT, CST, coal
1600
marine
2.95
Interbedded SST,
VOLCANICS, CST
Lower
Coastal Plain
Open Marine
Lower
Coastal Plain
volcanics
1700
1800
SLT, CST, sst
Lacustrine
interbedded
SST, SLT,
CST
Alluvial to
Fluvial
interbedded
SST, SLT,
CST,
VOLCANICS
Alluvial to
Fluvial
1900
2000
Admiral Formation
Emperor Subgroup
LATROBE
GROUP
unnamed Volcanics
SBD2
BA
140
V/V
2100
2200
2300
2400
Palynological analysis confidential
TD: 2422 mRT

RT: 21.5 m
Manta-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
0
GAPI 200
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes Entrance
Formation
Kt Shale
M. diversus
Upper
L. balmei
140
s/ft
0.45
V/V -0.15
terrestrial
40 1.95
3
g/cm 2.95
CST (glauc)
2000
SST, SLT
(glauc)
2100
marine
RHOB
1900
SST, slt, cst

(glauc)
Open
Marine
Submarine Channel
Shallow Marine/
Shoreface
2200
Lower
L. balmei
Lower Paleocene
Marker (2313 mKB)
F. longus
Volador Formation
(mKB)
SLT (glauc)
2300
interbedded SLT,
CST, SST, coal
2400
Maastrichtian
Marker (2445 mKB)
SST grading to
SLT (glauc)
Shallow to
Open Marine
Back Barrier/
Lagoonal
Coastal Barrier
2500
interbedded SST,
SLT, CST, coal
2700
interbedded
SST, SLT
CST, COAL
Lower
Coastal
Plain
VOLCANICS
Volcanics
Back Barrier/
Lagoonal
Intra-Campanian
Marker (2590 mKB)
F. longus/
T. lilliei
2800
T. lilliei
2900
3000
Chimaera Formation
Goelden Beach Subgroup
LATROBE
GROUP
Halibut Subgroup
Kingfish
Formation
Flounder
Fm.
Depth
GR
T. lilliei/
N. senectus
3100
3200
N. senectus
3400
3500
J. van Niel, 1984
Seismic Markers based on interpretations by Shell
TD: 3572 mKB

KB: 25 m
VOLCANIC
horizons with
interbedded
SST, SLT,
cst
Alluvial/
Fluvial
Moby-1
Stratigraphy
STRZELECKI
GAPI 650
(mRT)
180
RM
CNC
ZDEN
m 2000 0.45 V/V-0.15
terrestrial
marine
s/m 80 1.95g/cm2.95
540
MARL,
glauc, tr. forams,
tr. pyrite
Open
Marine
560
Gurnard
Formation
Cobia Subgroup
GROUP
Halibut
Undifferentiated
Subgroup
LATROBE GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Depth
GR
0.2
SST, SLT,
common
glauc
580
Shallow
Marine
SST, slt, clay matrix,

trace lithics
Lower
Coastal Plain
undiff.
600
620
640
TD: 660 mRT

RT: 21.5 m
Interpreted data remains confidential until 17/11/2009
SST, clay
matrix,
common
lithics,
green colour
Non Marine,
Fluvial
Northright-1
P28H
Stratigraphy
GR
undifferentiated
Kingfish Formation
Halibut Subgroup
LATROBE GROUP
SEASPRAY GP.
Depth
0.2
P1
m 2000
P40H
terrestrial
marine
GAPI 200 (mRT) 0.2 m 2000 0.2 m 2000
300
MARL, CST,
SST
320
CST, slt,
sst, coal,
rare glauc,
trace litthics
Shallow
to Open
Marine
Lower
Coastal
Plain
F. wonthaggiensis
undifferentiated
STREZLECKI
GROUP
340

by Partridge, 2003
360
380
TD: 391 mRT

RT: 25 m
CST, SLT,
SST, coal,
rare glauc,
trace litthics
Alluvial,
Fluvial
Scallop-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Kingfish
Formation
RHOZ
P. asperopolus
terrestrial
1700
MARL
1900
2000
Open
Marine
SLT
CST
1800
L. balmei
marine
GAPI 180 (mRT) 500 s/m 100 1.95g/cm2.95
1600
interbedded
SST, SLT,
CST, coal
Submarine
Channel
Lower
Coastal
Plain
2100
2200
Kt Shale
Volador
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
V/V-0.15
Upper
F. longus
Shoreface
SLT
Open Marine
2300
2400
Lower
F. longus
SST
interbedded
SST, SLT,
CST
Lower
Coastal
Plain
2500
Chimaera Formation
2600
LATROBE
GROUP
Flounder
Fm.
Depth
0.45
T. lillei
Upper
N. senectus
2700
2800
2900
Lower
N. senectus
Picks based on palynological

analysis, basic WCR, 2003
3000
3100
TD: 3174 mRT
RT: 25.9 m
Interpreted data remains confidential until 4th April 2008
interbedded
VOLCANICS,
SLT, SST
Fluvial to
Alluvial
Shark-1
Stratigraphy
0
Depth
100
Upper
L. balmei
1800
Lower
L. balmei
1900
2000
Lower
F. longus
NPHI
RHOB
mV 250 0.45 V/V-0.15
terrestrial
marine
3
GAPI 200 (mKB) 500 s/m 0 1.95g/cm 2.95
1700
Fm.
Flounder
Volador
Fm.
Formation Mackerel
LATROBE GROUP
Emperor Subgroup Golden Beach
Subgroup
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Halibut Subgroup
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
GR
SP
2100
2200
T. lilliei
MARL
SLT, sst near base
SST, glauc, trc. pyr.
SST, trace pyr.

glauc, grading
down into SLT,
SHALE and
COAL, trace
lithics, glauc, pyr.
Open
Marine
Submarine
Channel
Nearshore
Marine
Nearshore
Marine to
Lower
Coastal
Plain
2300
Chimaera
Lower
Fm. T. apoxyexinus
2400
SST, slt, shale,

cst, coal
Fluvial/
Deltaic
Curlip Formation
2500
2600
2700
SST, SLT, CST,

shale, coal,
in part
carbonaceous
Fluvial/
Deltaic
SLT, sst, shale

carboanceous,
coal, trace
lithics
Lacustrine
2800
2900
Kipper Shale
P. mawsonii
3000
3100
3200
3300
3400
3500

by M. MacPhail, 1990; revised by
A. Partridge, 2003
TD: 3518 mKB

RT: 28.4 m
Sole-1
0
Stratigraphy
GR
NPHI
RHOB
mV 80 0.45 V/V -0.15
terrestrial
marine
GAPI 200 (mRT) 700 s/m 100 1.95g/cm2.95
750
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
MARL
Open
Marine
Kingfish Formation
SST, slt,
pyr decreases
with depth
Lower
L.Balmei
Shoreface
to Lower
Coastal Plain
900
SLT
950
F. Longus
SST, SLT
1000
C. distocarinatus
Curlip Formation
Emperor Subgroup
850
Kate
Shale
Volador
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
800
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Depth
SP

Open
Marine
Lower
Coastal
Plain
1050
1100
TD: 1129 mRT

RT: 10 m
CST, SLT,
sst, trace lithics,
trace glauc
Lacustrine
Sweep-1
NPHI
Stratigraphy
GR
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Gurnard
Fm.
Kingfish
Formation
Halibut Subgroup
Cobia
Subg.
P. tuberculatus
Volador
Fm.
GAPI 200
Depth
(mKB)
180
750
s/ft
0.6
V/V 0.01
RHOB
60 1.5
terrestrial
marine
g/cm 2.95
MARL
Open
Marine
SST, SLT
(glauc)
Open
Marine
Mid N. asperus
Open
Marine
SST, SLT
(glauc)
Lower
N. asperus
Lower
L. balmei
SST, slt
(minor glauc)
Shoreface/
Shallow Marine
800
SST,
shale,
coal
Lower
Coastal
Plain
F. longus
850
Unfifferentiated
STRZLEC KI GROUP
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPRAY
GROUP

A. Partridge & H. Stacey, 1978
SST,
cst
900
TD: 900 mKB
KB: 25 m
Fluvial
Wahoo-1
GR
0
Gurnard
Fm.
Kingfish Formation
Volador
Fm.
Halibut Subgroup
Cobia
Subgr.
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
GAPI 200
Depth
(mRT)
700
400
Lower
N. asperus
450
RHOB
terrestrial
marine
s/m 100 1.50 g/cm 2.95

calcareous
MARL
Open
Marine
sandy SLT
(glauc)
Open
Marine
Upper L. balmei
500
interbedded SST,
SLT, SHALE,
coal
Lower
Coastal
Plain
550
F. longus
C. hughesii
Undifferentiated
STRZELECKI GROUP
LATROBE
GROUP
SEASPR.
GROUP
Stratigraphy

A. Partridge, 1975
600
650
700
TD: 745.5 mRT

RT: 9.45 m
fine lithic
feldspathic
SST, shale,
coal, mst
Fluvial
Whale-1
SEASPR.
GROUP
Stratigraphy
GR
0
GAPI 280
Depth
(mRT)
SP
NPHI
RHOB
mV 100 0.45 V/V-0.15
Kingfish
Formation
LATROBE
GROUP
Halibut
Subgroup
terrestrial
MARL
Middle
N. asperus
marine
s/m 0 1.95g/cm2.95
800
Lakes
Entrance
Formation
Cobia Gurnard
Subg. Fm.
450
SST, slt, glauc
Lower N. as.
SST, cgl, slt

interbeds, coal
C. striatus
Open
Marine
Lower Coastal
Plain
Lower
Coastal Plain
500
600
undifferentiated
STRZELECKI GROUP
550
650
700
750
800
by A. 0Partridge, 2000
TD: 810 mRT

RT: 9.45 m
Interbedded
SST, CST,
SLT, minor
coal
Alluvial to
Fluvial
Whaleshark-1
Stratigraphy
GR
Depth
SP
NPHI
RHOB
40 mV 80 0.45 V/V-0.15
terrestrial
marine
GAPI 150 (mRT) 500 s/m 0 1.95g/cm2.95

3
P. tuberculatus
MARL
Open
Marine
2700
P. asperopolus
STL, sst,
glauc, pyr
Upper M.
diversus
Submarine
Channel
2750
Volodor
Formation
Mackerel
Formation
Lower M. di.
Halibut Subgroup
LATROBE
GROUP
Flounder
Formation
Lakes Entrance
Formation
SEASPRAY GROUP
2650
SST, stl
glauc, trace
pyr
Upper
L. balmei
Lower
L. balmei
2800
Upper
F. longus
Picks based on palynological

analysis by A. Partridge, 1993
Nearshore
to Shallow
Marine
Undifferentiated
SST, rare coal,
glauc
2850
TD: 2870 mRT

RT: 22 m
Shoreface to
Nearshore
Marine
Appendix 3
Biostrata Palynology Report 2003/4
122
Early Oligocene age for top of Latrobe reservoirs

in Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1,
southwest Gippsland Basin.
by
Alan D. Partridge
Biostrata Pty Ltd
A.B.N. 39 053 800 945
Biostrata Report 2003/4

10th March 2003
Page 2
Early Oligocene age for top of Latrobe reservoirs in

Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, southwest Gippsland Basin.
by Alan D. Partridge
INTERPRETATIVE DATA
Summary
Palynological analysis of new cuttings samples from across the top of Latrobe Group in the
offshore Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1 wells has found the Fromea leos microplankton Zone at
the base of the marine carbonates in both wells and the Upper Nothofagidites asperus Zone from
the shallowest coal seam within the Latrobe Group in Wyrallah-1. Unfortunately, the sample at
the equivalent stratigraphic level in Tommyruff-1 was too badly contaminated by downhole
cavings to provide a reliable zone determination. Comparison of these results with the nearby
Kyarra-1A well and those onshore wells in which there are comparable palynological analyses
indicates that in Wyrallah-1 and probably Tommyruff-1 the youngest Latrobe Group reservoirs
are basal Early Oligocene in age. As the sandstones of this age apparently pinch out seaward into
the basal marls and calcareous claystones of the Seaspray Group they potentially create a
stratigraphic component to any top-of-Latrobe structures in the most western part of the offshore
Gippsland Basin.
Introduction
The study was performed at the initiative of Dr Tom Bernecker for the Minerals & Petroleum
Division of the Department of Primary Industries as part of their review of open exploration
acreage. The primary objective was to investigate the age of uppermost Latrobe Group because the
available palynological reports suggested that the reservoir sandstones could extend into the Early
Oligocene. Unfortunately, the analyses had to be performed on cuttings because neither the original
palynological slides nor any remaining sidewall core material could be located in time for this
review. Cutting samples were also collected and analysed from the base of the overlying Seaspray
Group to gain some control on the assemblages that were likely to be caving from the overlying
carbonates. Results from the samples analysed are provided in Table 1, while the key identification
criteria and calibration between the spore-pollen and microplankton zonal schemes are summarised
in Figure 1.
The materials analysed consist of two new cuttings samples from each well collected from the
Department of Primary Industries Minerals & Petroleum Core Library at Werribee, on Friday 29th
November 2002. Laboratory processing of the new cuttings samples and preparation of new slides
from the residues was performed by Laola Pty Ltd in Perth. Between 13 and 15 grams of the
cuttings were processed to give mostly low organic residue yields containing moderate to high
palynomorph concentrations (Tables 2 & 3). Palynomorph preservation varied from poor to good,
and the samples contained an average diversity of 29+ spore-pollen species, and 12+ species of
microplankton per sample. The species recorded during the microscope examination are listed in
Tables 4 and 5. Author citations for spore-pollen species can be sourced from Stover & Partridge
(1973, 1982), and for the microplankton from indexes compiled by Fensome et al. (1990) and
Williams et al. (1998). Manuscript species are indicated by either ms or after their binomial.
In the following sections the assemblages recovered from the new samples are discussed first and
this is followed by a comparison between the new results and the previous palynological studies
and a discussion of how both relate to the interpretation of the stratigraphy encountered in the
wells.
Page 4
to the P. tuberculatus Zone based on presence of Cyatheacidites annulatus. This spore could be
caved however because where there is detailed sidewall core sampling other wells the FAD1 of
C. annulatus occurs within the F. leos Zone (Figure 1). None of the other spore-pollen species
recorded are restricted to the zone.
The deeper cuttings sample in Tommyruff-1 at 928m, which on the electric logs should be below
the top of the Latrobe Group, unfortunately contained an essentially identical assemblage and is
therefore interpreted to be substantially caved. Macphail (1990) encountered similar problems of
downhole contamination (described as bioturbation) and uphole reworking in his examination of the
sidewall cores from Tommyruff-1. Examples are his anomalous deep record of Cyatheacidites
annulatus in the sidewall core at 922.4m, and the unusually shallow record of the Late Eocene
species Triorites magnificus in the sidewall core at 897m and Gippslandica extensa even shallower
in the sidewall core at 852m. The former species does not overlap with the latter two species in the
standard zonation schemes illustrated in Figure 1. A number of other typical Late Eocene index
species were also recorded in sidewall cores above the top-of-Latrobe by Macphail (1990).
However, as equivalent species overlaps were not found in this study, the earlier results from the
sidewall cores must be considered suspect until the original palynological samples can be checked.
Upper Nothofagidites asperus spore-pollen Zone
Wyrallah-1 at 884-87 metres
Age: basal Early Oligocene.
The deeper sample examined in Wyrallah-1 contains a spore-pollen dominated assemblage with
abundant Nothofagidites pollen (>50%), and the common occurrence of Phyllocladidites mawsonii
and Haloragacidites harrisii (both >10%). When combined with the frequent occurrence of
Proteacidites stipplatus and presence of Aglaoreidia qualumis, without associated older or younger
index species, the overall character of the assemblage is considered typical of the Upper N. asperus
Zone as originally defined by Stover & Partridge (1973; p.243). The associated microplankton are
rare (est. <5% of total SP + MP), dominated by Spiniferites spp. and are all considered to be caved
from the Seaspray Group. The gross composition of the spore-pollen assemblage is also consistent
with the sample being a coal and coming from shallowest and thickest coal in Wyrallah-1, which is
identified between 877.5 and 887.5m on the electric logs.
Geological Discussion
The wells Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, located in the westernmost offshore Gippsland Basin, are
unusual in that they lack any clear manifestation of the Middle to Late Eocene Gurnard Formation
at the top of the Latrobe Group. Instead, the palynological assemblages reported in the previous
studies by Martin (1984a) and Macphail (1990) suggest the shallowest reservoir sandstones of the
Latrobe Group were either younger or equivalent in age to the Gurnard Formation. A similar
relationship is known to occur in the onshore Gippsland Basin in the St Margaret Island-1 well to
the west, and the Burong-1 and Darriman-1 wells to the north. In these wells the age of the
youngest Latrobe Group is Early Oligocene (= Upper N. asperus Zone) and there is no obvious
Gurnard Formation developed (Partridge & Stover, 1971; Partridge, 1978; Partridge & Macphail,
1996). In this study of new cuttings samples, the evidence from the Tommyruff-1 well proved to
be equivocal, but a confident Early Oligocene Upper N. asperus Zone age was obtained for the
shallowest coal penetrated in Wyrallah-1. A review of the previous palynological studies from
Kyarra-1A, and log correlations to this well, are interpreted to show how the shallowest coal and
associated sandstones in Wyrallah-1 pinch out and are a lateral facies of the basal carbonate
sediments in Kyarra-1A (Figure 2).
1
FAD = First Appearance Datum
Page 6
Tommyruff-1.
In Tommyruff-1 the top of the Latrobe Group is placed at 900mMDKB on the well completion
log, where on the cuttings descriptions dark grey to olive green marl with only a trace of glauconite
is recorded as overlying white to translucent quartz sandstones with some grains showing orangebrown staining. A slightly elevated gamma ray response does occur from 896 to 900m, but
SWC 49 at 897m is described as a olive grey marl with common pelletoidal glauconite, which the
author would place in the basal Seaspray Group because of the high carbonate content. The
Gurnard Formation in contrast is typically either not calcareous or only slightly calcareous
(Partridge, 1999). The overlying SWCs 50 to 53 are also marls, but with only minor to trace
amounts of glauconite, while the next deeper sample SWC 48 at 900m lies on the lithological
boundary. This samples is described as composed of dark brown claystone, white translucent
sandstone and dark green pelletoidal glauconite. Unfortunately, the proportions between these
three lithological components was not specified. In the authors opinion only this sample is
lithologically similar to the Gurnard Formation. The next group of sidewall cores between 902 and
917.1m are all described as sandstones without any recorded glauconite.
Macphail (1990) provisionally assigned the sidewall cores at 897m and 900m in Tommyruff-1 to
the Upper N. asperus Zone based on the higher proportion of spore-pollen to microplankton, but
also noted the presence of anomalous species due to either uphole reworking or downhole
contamination (bioturbation). He placed the top of the older Middle N. asperus Zone in SWC 42 at
922.4m based on the presence of Triorites magnificus in a spore-pollen dominated microflora. The
intervening sidewall cores between 902 and 917.1m were not analysed for palynology because of
their unfavourable lithologies.
The two new cuttings analysed from Tommyruff-1 are dominated by microplankton and therefore
relative to the spore-pollen dominated assemblages reported from the equivalent sidewall cores by
Macphail (1990), they are probably substantially caved. The assemblages do however confirm that
the Early Oligocene Fromea leos microplankton Zone lies near the base of the Seaspray Group in
the well (Figure 1). Notably absence from the cuttings was any evidence of mixing of species
ranges or reworking of Late Eocene fossils into the basal Seaspray Group as was apparent in the
sidewall cores. Amalgamating the data from both palynological studies the authors preferred
interpretation is that the interval 896 to 900m belongs to the Upper N. asperus Zone as might the
uppermost sandstone unit between 900 and 921m. In contrast, the typical Gurnard Formation of
Middle N. asperus Zone age is not present, but is instead represented by the age equivalent
sandstones and underlying interbedded shales between 921 and 1062m.
Wyrallah-1.
The top of the Latrobe Group in Wyrallah-1 is placed at 874m on the well completion log, where
on the cuttings descriptions light to medium grey calcareous claystone with very common
glauconite overlies first, a 10 metre thick medium grey to light brown sandstone bed, and then, a 10
metre thick lignitic coal seam. Although the interval 838 to 874m shows an elevated gamma ray
response it cannot be assigned to the Gurnard Formation because it is highly calcareous and also
contains Early Oligocene and Early Miocene foraminiferal faunas (Taylor, 1984).
In the original palynological study by Martin (1984a) the age of the youngest Latrobe Group is
poorly constrained as the shallowest four sidewall cores analysed at 870m, 878m, 880m and 887m
contain very limited assemblages that cannot be reliably assigned to any zone. However, the next
deepest sidewall core analysed at 918m can be confidently assigned to the Late Eocene Middle
Page 7
N. asperus Zone based on the LAD 2 of Triorites magnificus. The two new cuttings analysed from
Wyrallah-1 yielded good assemblages which provide a Fromea leos Zone assignment for the base
of the carbonates and an Upper N. asperus Zone assignment for the shallowest coal, and thus
clearly place the top of the Latrobe Group within the Early Oligocene (Figure 1).
The significance of the above zone assignments is illustrated by palynological and log correlations
between Wyrallah-1 and Kyarra-1A located 9 km due east (Figure 2). In the latter well the Gurnard
Formation is clearly represented between 1013 and 1028m by a high gamma ray signature and the
glauconitic-rich lithologies described from both the cuttings and sidewall cores. The identification is
confirmed by the recovery of good Late Eocene palynomorph assemblages belonging to both the
Middle N. asperus and G. extensa Zones (Harris, 1983; Martin 1984b). These two zones also
extend through ~100 metres of the underlying coarse clastic facies of the Latrobe Group down to at
least 1122m (Figure 2). The palynological equivalent interval in Wyrallah-1 is identified in sidewall
cores between 918 and 1020m but is entirely within the Latrobe Group. This is supported by the
log correlations suggested in Figure 2. As a consequence of these latter correlations the thick coal
and sandstone between 874 and 914m at the top of the Latrobe Group in Wyrallah-1 is interpreted
to correlate with just the interval 1006 to 1013m in Kyarra-1A. The thinning of the interval from
40 metres to <8 metres between the two wells is constrained below by the palynology and above
by micropalaeontology (Taylor, 1983). In Taylors report Early Miocene foram zone H-1 was
confidently identified 995.5m based on the planktonic forams, but was interpreted to extends
down to 1005.5m based on the benthic forams. Unfortunately the palynological analysis from the
base of the Seaspray Group in Kyarra-1A is unhelpful as Harris (1983) did not record the index
species of either the P. comatum Acme Zone or younger F. leos Zone.
Conclusion
The analysis of new samples and review of previous palynological studies has identified reservoir
sandstones of Early Oligocene age at the top of the Latrobe Group in Wyrallah-1, and their
probable presence in Tommyruff-1. As these sandstone can also be shown to thin and pinch out
into the basal marls and calcareous claystones of the Seaspray Group in a seaward direction they
create a stratigraphic component to any top-of-Latrobe structures in the most western part of the
offshore Gippsland Basin.
References
FENSOME, R.A., WILLIAMS, G.L., B ARSS , M.S., F REEMAN, J.M. & HILL, J.M., 1990. Acritarchs and
fossil Prasinophytes: An index to genera, species and infraspecific taxa. AASP Contribution
Series No. 25, p.1-771.
HARRIS , W.K., 1983. Kyarra No.1 well Gippsland Basin. Palynological examination and kerogen
typing of sidewall cores. Report prepared for Australian Aquitaine Petroleum Pty Ltd, 9p.
(1 September).
MACPHAIL, M.K., 1990. Palynological analysis, Tommyruff1, Gippsland Basin. Palynological report
prepared for BHP Petroleum Pty Ltd, 20p. [PE990605].
MARTIN, H.A., 1984a. The stratigraphic palynology of Wyrallah No.1, Gippsland Basin. Report
prepared for Australian Aquitaine Petroleum Pty Ltd, 8p. (19 June) [PE990660].
MARTIN, H.A., 1984b. A reappraisal of the stratigraphic palynology of Kyarra No.1, (Eocene
N. asperus Zones, 1013m to 1166m) Gippsland Basin. Report prepared for Australian
Aquitaine Petroleum Pty Ltd, 10p. (5 July) [PE990662].
P ARTRIDGE, A.D., 1978. Tertiary Palynology of wells and bores in Corner Inlet Sector, Onshore
Gippsland Basin. Esso Australia Ltd Palaeontological Report 1978/8A, (31 March).
2
LAD = Last Appearance Datum
Page 8
P ARTRIDGE, A.D., 1999. Late Cretaceous to Tertiary geological evolution of the Gippsland Basin,
Victoria. PhD thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, p.i-xxix, p.1-439, 165 figs, 9
pls (unpubl.).
P ARTRIDGE, A.D. & MACPHAIL, M.K., 1996. Palynological age dating of the Latrobe Group in
Avon1, Burong1, Comley1, South West Bairnsdale1, West Seacombe1 and Wonga
Binda1 from the onshore Gippsland Basin. Biostrata Report 1996/7, p.137 (unpubl.).
P ARTRIDGE, A.D. & S TOVER, L.E., 1971. Palynological determinations, onshore Gippsland Basin
wells Darriman-1, Woodside South-1, Woodside-2, St. Margaret Island-1. Esso Australia Ltd
Palaeontological Report 1971/4 (April).
STOVER, L.E. & P ARTRIDGE, A.D., 1973. Tertiary and late Cretaceous spores and pollen from the
Gippsland Basin, southeastern Australia. Proceedings Royal Society of Victoria, vol.85, pt.2,
p.237-286.
STOVER, L.E. & P ARTRIDGE, A.D., 1982. Eocene spore-pollen from the Werillup Formation,
Western Australia. Palynology 6, p.69-95.
T AYLOR, D., 1983. Foraminiferal sequence in Kyarra #1, Gippsland Basin. Report prepared for
Australian Aquitaine Petroleum Pty Ltd, 5p. (14 March).
T AYLOR, D., 1984. Foraminiferal sequence and correlation of Wyrallah #1, Gippsland Basin. Report
prepared for Australian Aquitaine Petroleum Pty Ltd, 6p. (21 June) [PE990661].
W ILLIAMS, G.L., LENTIN, J.K. & FENSOME, R.A., 1998. The Lentin and Williams index of fossil
dinoflagellates 1998 edition. American Association of Stratigraphic Palynologists,
Contributions Series, no. 34, p.1-817.
Page 9
INTERPRETATIVE DATA
Table 1: Interpretative data for Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, offshore Gippsland Basin.
Sample
Type
Palynology Zones
STAGE/AGE
Depth
CR*
Comments and
Key Species Present
Tommyruff-1
Cuttings
Cuttings
898m
928m
P. tuberculatus SP Zone &

Operculodinium Superzone
and F. leos MP Zone
Early Oligocene
D2
D2
Microplankton est. >70% dominated by

dinocysts belonging to Spiniferites spp. but
including FADs of acritarch Fromea leos ms
and spore Cyatheacidites annulatus.
P. tuberculatus SP Zone & D2

Operculodinium Superzone D2
Early Oligocene
Assemblage is considered to be largely

CAVED as it is dominated by dinocysts est.
>50% and lacks any spore-pollen diagnostic
of older zones.
P. tuberculatus SP Zone &

Operculodinium Superzone
and F. leos MP Zone
Early Oligocene
D2
Microplankton est. >70% overwhelmingly

dominated by Spiniferites spp. but including
FADs of acritarch Fromea leos ms and spore
Cyatheacidites annulatus.
Upper N. asperus SP Zone

Early Oligocene
D2
Wyrallah-1
Cuttings
Cuttings
872875m
884887m
D2
Diverse SP flora dominated by Nothofagidites

pollen with frequent Proteacidites stipplatus
but notably lacking index species of Middle
N. asperus Zone.
FAD & LAD = First & Last Appearance Datums
ms = manuscript species
MP = Microplankton
SP = Spore-pollen
*CR = Confidence Ratings used in STRATDAT database and applied to Table 1.

Alpha codes:
Numeric codes:
Linked to sample
Linked to fossil assemblage
Core
Excellent confidence:
High diversity assemblage recorded with key zone species.
Sidewall core 2
Good confidence:
Moderately diverse assemblage with key zone species.
Coal cuttings
Fair confidence:
Low diversity assemblage recorded with key zone species.
Ditch
cuttings
Poor confidence:
Moderate to high diversity assemblage without key zone

species.
Junk basket
Very low confidence:
Low diversity assemblage without key zone species.
Page 10
BASIC DATA
Table 2: Basic sample data for Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, offshore Gippsland Basin.
Sample
Type
Depth
Lithology
Wt.
(grams)
VOM
(cc)
O/Yield
Tommyruff-1
Cuttings
898m
Light-medium grey marl (clumped)
15.0
1.2
0.080
Cuttings
928m
80% medium grey mudstone/marl;

20% medium-coarse quartz sand
15.2
0.4
0.026
Wyrallah-1
Cuttings
872-875m
100% light grey marl?
13.0
0.2
0.015
Cuttings
884-887m
55% black-dark grey carbonaceous

shale; 40% quartz sand; 5% marl
15.2
2.5
0.164
Average:
14.6
Wt = Weight of sample processed in grams.

VOM = Volume of wet organic residues in cubic centimetres recovered from sample.
O/Yield = Organic Yield (VOM divided by Wt.)
Table 3: Basic assemblage data for Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, Gippsland Basin.
Sample
Type
Depth
Visual
Yield
Palynomorph
Concentration
Preservation
No. SP
Species*
No. MP
Species*
Tommyruff-1
Cuttings
898m
Low
Moderate
Poor-Fair
28+
16+
Cuttings
928m
Low
High
Fair-Good
35+
15+
Cuttings
872-875m
Low
Very low to High
Poor-Fair
22+
16+
Cuttings
884-887m
High
High
Good
34+
4+
Averages:
29+
12+
Wyrallah-1
Page 11
Table 4: Species occurrences for Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, offshore Gippsland Basin.
Tommyruff-1
Spore-Pollen
Aglaoreidia qualumis
Araucariacites australis
Bluffopollis scabratus
Camarozonosporites heskermensis
Cupressacites sp.
Cyatheacidites annulatus
Cyathidites paleospora
Cyathidites splendens
Dacrycarpites australiensis
Dictyophyllidites sp.
Dilwynites granulatus
Ericipites crassiexinus
Gleicheniidites circinidites
Haloragacidites harrisii
Herkosporites elliottii
Ischyosporites irregularis ms
Laevigatosporites major
Laevigatosporites ovatus
Latrobosporites marginatus
Lygistepollenites florinii
Malvacipollis subtilis
Microalatidites paleogenicus
Microcachryidites antarcticus
Nothofagidites asperus
Nothofagidites brachyspinulosus
Nothofagidites deminutus
Nothofagidites emarcidus/heterus
Nothofagidites falcatus
Nothofagidites flemingii
Nothofagidites goniatus
Nothofagidites vansteenisii
Periporopollenites demarcatus
Phyllocladidites mawsonii
Podocarpidites spp.
Polypodiidites spp.
Proteacidites spp.
Proteacidites annularis
Proteacidites carobelindiae/marginatus
Proteacidites obscurus
Proteacidites stipplatus
Wyrallah-1
898m
928m
872-75m
884-87m
Cuttings
Cuttings
Cuttings
Cuttings
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A
X
X
X
X
C
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
A
X
X
X
X
X
C
F
X
X
X
X
F
Page 12
Table 4: Species occurrences for Tommyruff-1 and Wyrallah-1, offshore Gippsland Basin.
Tommyruff-1
Spore-Pollen
Reticuloidosporites escharus ms
Stereisporites antiquisporites
Trichotomosulcites subgranulatus
Tricolporites spp.
Tricolporites adelaidensis
Tricolporites leuros
Tricolporites paenestriatus
Verrucosisporites kopukuensis
Microplankton
Apteodinium australiense
Cooksonidium capricornum
Cyclopsiella vieta
Dapsilidinium pseudocolligerum
Deflandrea phosphoritica
Fromea leos ms
Hystrichokolpoma rigaudiae
Impagidinium spp.
Lingulodinium machaerophorum
Lingulodinium solarum
Operculodinium centrocarpum
Paralecaniella indentata
Pentadinium laticinctum
Protoellipsodinium mamilatus ms
Protoellipsodinium simplex ms
Reticulatosphaera stellata
Schematophora speciosus
Spiniferites spp.
Systematophora placacanthum
Tectatodinium pellitum
Other Palynomorphs
Microforaminiferal liners
Scolecodonts
Fungal spores & hyphae
Abbreviations: X
F
C
A
CV
cf.
=
=
=
=
=
=
898m
928m
872-75m
884-87m
Cuttings
Cuttings
Cuttings
Cuttings
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
A
X
X
X
Present
Frequent
Common
Abundant
Caved
Compare with
Wyrallah-1
X
X
X
F
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
A
X
cf.
X
X
X
Appendix 4
Relevant open-file seismic surveys in, and adjacent to,

the gazetted blocks
123
SURVEY ID
1000002715136
1000002428064
1000003068393
1000002993635
200001083625
200001083664
200001082072
200001081824
200001081373
200001083733
200000979313
1000002994299
1000002873286
1000001637919
1000001775320
200003059188
200001105573
200001803006
200001803182
1000003240879
1000002772532
200004442283
200000996204
200002247616
200003179715
200001083484
200001085963
200001081683
200001083725
200000517848
200000295045
1000002609131
1000001996836
200000996521
SURVEY NAME
BMR-82
BMR1989B
BMR40
BMR68
G66B
G68A
G69A
G69B
G71A
G77A
G80A
G85A
G88A
G89A
G92A-REGIONAL
GBS02
GDW99
GEBR01
GEBR99
GGSI85A
GH88A
GISN05
GMG68B
GPC01A
GS02
GS65A
GS67A
GS70A
GS73A
GS81A
GS82A
GS88B
GS91A
PETREL
TYPE
2D
2D_SEIS_GRAV
2D
2D_SEI_GR_MG
2D
2D
2D_SEIS_MAG
2D_SEIS_MAG
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D_OFF_SPA
2D
2D
2D_SEIS_MAG
2D_SEI_GR_MG
2D
2D
2D
2D_SEIS_MAG
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D
2D_SEI_GR_MG
PERMIT
REGIONAL
REGIONAL
REGIONAL
REGIONAL
PEP39
PEP39
VIC/P1
VIC/P1
VIC/P1
VIC/P1
VIC/P1
VIC/P19
VARIOUS
VIC/P41
VIC/P41
VIC/P41
VIC/P24
VIC/P55
PEP63A
VIC/P48,P49
VIC/RL3
PEP57
VIC/P1
VIC/P9
VIC/P9
VIC/P19
VIC/P19
VIC/P22
VIC/P22
START DATE
9-Nov-88
17-Mar-89
10-Mar-82
21-Mar-87
1-Feb-66
1-May-68
24-Dec-68
14-Oct-69
7-Jan-71
21-Dec-77
11-Mar-80
30-Nov-85
7-May-88
19-Mar-90
20-Feb-92
1-Jan-03
6-Mar-99
12-Jun-01
28-Feb-99
9-Apr-85
18-Jan-88
22-Jan-05
4-Dec-68
19-Dec-01
5-Jan-03
8-Nov-65
14-Sep-67
28-Feb-70
28-Oct-73
20-Dec-81
6-Dec-82
10-Jul-88
26-Jul-91
19-Dec-72
COMPLETION
DATE
8-Dec-88
3-Apr-89
30-Apr-82
15-Apr-87
30-Oct-66
8-Jul-68
21-Mar-69
19-Feb-70
28-Jan-71
26-Jan-78
31-May-80
13-Dec-85
26-Jun-88
23-Jun-90
27-Mar-92
5-Jan-03
19-Mar-99
20-Jun-01
3-Mar-99
18-Apr-85
3-Feb-88
23-Jan-05
20-Dec-68
6-Jan-02
10-Jan-03
10-Dec-65
21-Sep-67
3-Mar-70
1-Nov-73
8-Mar-82
13-Dec-82
18-Jul-88
30-Jul-91
18-Apr-73
CLIENT
BMR
BMR
BMR
BMR
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
Esso Australia Ltd
SANTOS Ltd
Seismic Australia
Eagle Bay Resources N.L.
Eagle Bay Resources N.L.
GSI
BHP Petroleum (Australia) Pty
SANTOS
Magellan Petroleum
Pancanadian Petroleum Limited
SANTOS Ltd
Shell Development (Aust)
Shell Australia
Shell Australia
Shell Australia
Total KMs
1,436
1,606
3,278
1,816
1,837
1,139
2,776
1,801
1,445
2,749
2,492
860
2,033
1,106
2,237
270
987
452
190
1,087
981
359
1,086
831
223
989
323
744
481
1,769
745
980
200
29,376
Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum (VIMP) Report Series

Petroleum Reports in bold typeface
1
BUCKLEY, R.W., BUSH, M.D., O'SHEA, P.J., WHITEHEAD, M. &

VANDENBERG, A.H.M., 1994. The geology and prospectivity of the Orbost Survey
area.
VANDENBERG, A.H.M., WILLMAN, C., HENDRICKX, M., BUSH, M.D. &

SANDSTONES, B.C., 1995. The geology and prospectivity of the 1993 Mount
Wellington Airborne survey area.
HOLDGATE, G., 1995. The exploration potential of the Permian Numurkah

Trough and Ovens Graben, Victoria.
BUSH, M.D., CAYLEY, R.A., ROONEY, R., SLATER, K. & WHITEHEAD M.L.,
1995. The geology and prospectivity of the southern margin of the Murray Basin.
ROONEY, R., 1995. Mineral exploration history of the North West VIMP area.
WILLOCKS, A.J., 1995. An appraisal of the new airborne surveys over the North West
VIMP area.
WHITEHEAD, M.L., 1995. Geological interpretation of geophysical data over the

Dunolly 1:100 000 sheet.
VANDENBERG, A.H.M., CALUZZI, J., WILLOCKS, A.J. & O'SHEA, P.J., 1995.
The geology and prospectivity of the Mallacoota 1:250 000 sheet, Eastern Highlands
VIMP area.
SANDS, B.C., 1995. A geological interpretation of the geophysical data from the
Orbost 1994 airborne survey.
10
OPPY, I.D., CAYLEY, R.A. & CALUZZI, J., 1995. The geology and prospectivity of
the Tallangatta 1:250 000 sheet.
11
CALUZZI, J., 1995. Mineral exploration history of the Tallangatta 1:250 000 sheet.
12
SIMONS, B.A., 1995. An appraisal of new airborne geophysical data over the
Tallangatta 1:250 000 map area, Victoria.
13
BUSH, M.D., CAYLEY, R.A. & ROONEY, S., 1995. The geology and prospectivity
of the Glenelg region, North West VIMP area.
14
SLATER, K.R., 1995. An appraisal of new airborne geophysical data over the Glenelg
region, North West VIMP area, Victoria.
15
RYAN, S.M., KNIGHT, L.A. & PARKER, G.J., 1995. The stratigraphy and
structure of the Tyrendarra Embayment, Otway Basin, Victoria.
16
KNIGHT, L.A., McDONALD, P.A., FRANKEL, E. & MOORE, D.H., 1995. A

preliminary appraisal of the pre-Tertiary infrabasins beneath the Murray Basin,
Northwestern Victoria.
17
PERINCEK, D., SIMONS, B.A., PETTIFER, G.R. & GUNATILLAKE, K., 1995.
Seismic interpretation of the onshore Western Otway Basin, Victoria.
18
LAVIN, C.J. & NAIM, H.M., 1995. The structure, stratigraphy and petroleum
potential of the Portland Trough, Otway Basin, Victoria.
19
SIMPSON, C.J., SIMS, J.P. & ORANSKAIA, A., 1995. The geology and prospectivity
of the Mt Elizabeth area, Eastern Highlands VIMP area.
20
ORANSKAIA, A., 1995. A geological interpretation of geophysical data over the

Mallacoota 1:250 000 sheet, Eastern Highlands VIMP area. NOT RELEASED
21
SARMA, S., 1995. Seismic interpretation of the offshore Otway Basin, Victoria.
22
MEHIN, K. & LINK, A.G., 1995. Early Cretaceous source rocks of the Victorian
onshore Otway Basin.
23
PARKER, G.J., 1995. Early Cretaceous stratigraphy along the northern margin
of the Otway Basin, Victoria.
24
MOORE, D.H., 1996. A geological interpretation of the geophysical data of the

Horsham 1:250 000 map sheet area.
VANDENBERG, A.H.M., HENDRICKX, M.A., WILLMAN, C.E., MAGART,
A.P.M., ORANSKAIA, A.N., ROONEY, S. & WHITE, A.J.R., 1996. The geology and
prospectivity of the Orbost 1:100 000 map area, eastern Victoria.
25
26
HENDRICKX, M.A., WILLMAN, C.E., MAGART, A.P.M., ROONEY, S., VANDENBERG, A.H.M., ORANSKAIA, A. and WHITE, A.J.R. The geology and
prospectivity of the Murrungowar 1:100 000 map area, eastern Victoria.
27
BOYLE, R.J., 1996. Mineral exploration history of the Omeo 1:100 000 map area.
28
HAYDON, S.J., 1996. An appraisal of airborne geophysical data from the 1995 Omeo
survey, Victoria.
29
MAHER, S., 1996. Mineral resources of the Dunolly 1:100 000 map area.
30
CHIUPKA, J.W., 1996. Hydrocarbon Play Fairways of the Onshore Gippsland

Basin, Victoria.
31
MEHIN, K. & LINK, A.G., 1996. Early Cretaceous source rock evaluation for oil
and gas exploration, Victorian Otway Basin.
32
SLATER, K.R., 1996. An appraisal of new airborne geophysical data over the Dargo
region, Victoria.
33
McDONALD, P.A., 1996. An appraisal of new airborne geophysical data over the
Corryong region, northeastern Victoria.
34
TWYFORD, R., 1996. An appraisal of airborne geophysical data from the Murrindal
survey, Victoria.
35
HUTCHINSON, D.F., 1996. Mineral exploration history of the Dunolly 1:100 000 map
area.
36
BROOKES, D.J. & BOYLE, R.J., 1996. Mineral exploration history of the Bairnsdale
1:250 000 map area.
37
MAHER, S., HENDRICKX, M.A., BOYLE, R.J. & BROOKES, D.J., 1996. Geology
and prospectivity of the Bairnsdale 1:250 000 map sheet area.
38
McDONALD, P.A. & WHITEHEAD M.L., 1996. Geological interpretation of

geophysical data over the Ararat 1:100 000 map sheet.
39
MOORE D.H., 1996. A geological interpretation of the geophysical data of the Ouyen
1:250 000 map sheet area.
40
BROOKES, D.J., 1996. Mineral exploration history, Ararat and Grampians 1:100 000
map areas.
41
LAVIN, C.J., & MUSCATELLO, T., 1997. The petroleum prospectivity of the
Casterton Petroleum System in the Victorian Onshore Otway Basin.
42
CHIUPKA, J.W., MEGALLAA, M., JONASSON, K.E. & FRANKEL E., 1997.
Hydrocarbon plays and play fairways of four vacant offshore Gippsland Basin
areas, 1997 acreage release.
43
MEHIN, K. & LINK, A.G., 1997. Late Cretaceous source rocks offshore Otway
Basin, Victoria and South Australia.
44
WILLOCKS, A.J., 1997. An appraisal of airborne geophysical data from the

Castlemaine-Woodend survey, Victoria.
45
HUTCHINSON, D.F., 1997. Mineral exploration history of the Heathcote and

Nagambie 1:100 000 map areas.
46
MAHER, S., VANDENBERG, A.H.M., McDONALD, P.A. & SAPURMAS, P., 1997.
The Geology and prospectivity of the Wangaratta 1:250 000 map sheet area.
47
ORANSKAIA, A.N., 1997. Geological interpretation of geophysical features Bendoc

1:100 000 sheet.
48
ORANSKAIA, A.N., 1997. Geological interpretation of geophysical features Cann,

Mallacoota and Victorian part of Eden 1:100 000 sheets.
49
WILKIE, J.R. & BROOKES, D.J., 1997. Mineral exploration history of the Wangaratta
1:250 000 map area.
50
McDONALD, P.A., 1997. An appraisal of airborne geophysical data from the Yea
survey, Victoria.
51
EDWARDS, J.E., WILLMAN, C.E., McHAFFIE, I.W., OLSHINA, A. &

WILLOCKS, A.J., 1997. The geology and prospectivity of the Castlemaine, Woodend,
Yea and part of Bacchus Marsh 1:100 000 map sheets.
52
MAHER, S., MOORE, D.H., CRAWFORD, A.J., TWYFORD, R. & FANNING, F.M.,
1997. Test drilling on the southern margin of the Murray Basin.
53
LAVIN, C.J. & MUSCATELLO, T. 1998. The Casterton Group - Otway Basin
Victoria.
54
MEHIN, K. & BOCK, M.P., 1998. Cretaceous source rocks of the onshore
Gippsland Basin, Victoria.
55
GEARY, G. & REID, I., 1998. Geology and prospectivity of the offshore eastern
Otway Basin, Victoria, for the 1998 Acreage Release.
56
MEGALLAA, M., BERNECKER, T. & FRANKEL, E., 1998. Hydrocarbon

prospectivity of the Northern Terrace, offshore Gippsland Basin, for the 1998
Acreage Release.
57
LAVIN, C., 1998. Geology and prospectivity of the western Victorian Voluta
Trough - Otway Basin, for the 1998 Acreage Release.
58
EDWARDS, J., SLATER, K.R. & PARENZAN, M.A., 1998. Bendigo and part of
Mitiamo 1:100 000 map area geological report.
RADOJKOVIC, A., 1998. Mineral exploration history of the Ballarat and Creswick
1:100 000 map areas.
59
60
MESSENT, B.E., COLLINS, G.I.C. & WEST, B.G., 1999. Hydrocarbon

prospectivity of the offshore Torquay Sub-basin; Victoria: Gazettal Area V99-1.
61
SMITH, M.A., 1999. Petroleum systems, play fairways and prospectivity of the
Gazettal area V99-2, offshore southern Gippsland Basin, Victoria.
62
MEHIN, K., & CONSTANTINE, A.E., 1999. Hydrocarbon potential of the

western onshore Otway Basin in Victoria, 1999 acreage release.
63
HUTCHINSON, D.F., 1999. Mineral exploration history of the Castlemaine,

Woodend, Yea and part of Bacchus Marsh 1:100 000 map areas.
64
BATSON, R.A., 1999. Mineral exploration history of the Warburton 1:250 000 map
area.
65
SMITH, M.A., BERNECKER, T., LIBERMAN, N., MOORE, D.H. & WONG, D.,
2000. Petroleum prospectivity of the deep-water gazettal areas V00-3 and V00-4,
southeastern Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia.
66
CONSTANTINE, A.E., 2000. Petroleum systems, play fairways and prospectivity

of the Gazettal areas V00-1 and V00-2, offshore Otway Basin, Victoria.
67
WONG, D. & BERNECKER, T., 2001. Prospectivity and Hydrocarbon Potential

of Area VO1-4, Central Deep, Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia.
68
CONSTANTINE, A. E., GEARY, G. C. & REID, I. S. A., 2001. Hydrocarbon

Prospectivity of Areas VO1-1 to VO1-3, Offshore Western Otway Basin, Victoria,
Australia. 2001 Acreage Release.
69
MOORE, D. H. & WONG, D., 2001. Eastern and Central Gippsland Basin,
Southeastern Australia; Basement Interpretation and Basin Links.
70
CONSTANTINE, A. E. & LIBERMAN, N., 2001. Hydrocarbon Prospectivity

Package, Eastern Onshore Otway Basin: VIC/O-01, VIC/O-01 (2) and VIC/O-01
(3). 2001 Acreage Release.
71
KROKOWSKI DE VICKEROD, J., CUFFLEY, B. & EVANS, T., 2001. Tarnagulla

Goldfield, Central Victoria, 1:10000 map geological report.
72
EDWARDS, J., SLATER, K. R. & MCHAFFIE, I. W., 2001. Bendigo 1:250 map area
geological report.
73
MCHAFFIE, I. W. & RADOJKOVIC, A., 2001. Synthesis and evaluation of east

Victorian soil and drainage geochemistry.
74
BERNECKER, T., WONG, D., DRISCOLL, J. & LIBERMAN, N., 2001.

Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of Areas VO2-2, VO2-3 and VO2-4 in the Gippsland
Basin, Victoria, Australia. 2002 Acreage Release.
75
EBSWORTH, G. B. & KROKOWSKI DE VICKEROD, J., 2002. Central Maldon

Goldfield 1:5000 map area.
76
RADOJKOVIC, A. & LIBBY, L., 2003. The Regolith of the Ballarat 1:100 000 map
area.
77
KOTSONIS, A. & JOYCE, B.E., 2003. The Regolith of the Bendigo 1:100 000 map
area.
78
MOORE, D.H., 2002. Basement-Basin Relationships in the Otway Basin, Victoria,

Australia.
79
BERNECKER, T., THOMAS, H. & DRISCOLL, J., 2003. Hydrocarbon

Prospectivity of Areas VO3-1, VO3-2, O3-1(v) and O3-2(v) Offshore Gippsland
Basin, Victoria, Australia. 2003 Acreage Release.
80
THOMAS, H., BERNECKER, T., & DRISCOLL, J., 2003. Hydrocarbon

Prospectivity of Areas VO3-3 and VO3-4 Offshore Gippsland Basin, Victoria,
Australia. 2003 Acreage Release.
81
WILLIAMS, B. & RADOJKOVIC, A., 2004. The Regolith of the Ararat 1:100 000
Map Area.
82
MOORE, D.H., 2004. St Arnaud 1:250 000 Map Sheet. A Geological Interpretation of
the Geophysical Data.
83
BERNECKER, T., DRISCOLL, J., POWELL, A & THOMAS, H., 2004.

Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of the 2004 Acreage Release Areas, Victoria,
Australia.
84
MOORE, D.H., 2005. Swan Hill 1:250 000 and parts of Balranald and Deniliquin
1:250 000 map areas. A Geological Interpretation of the Geophysical Data.
85
DRISCOLL, J., 2006. Geothermal Prospectivity of Onshore Victoria, Australia.
86
MOORE, D.H., 2006. Bendigo 1:250 000 and part of Deniliquin 1:250 000 map areas.
A Geological Interpretation of the Geophysical Data.
87
OBRIEN, G., BERNECKER, T., THOMAS, H., DRISCOLL, J. & RIKUS, L.,
2006. An Assessment of the Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of Areas VIC/O-06(1),
VIC/O-06(2), VIC/O-06(3) and V06-1 Eastern Onshore and Offshore Otway
Basin, Victoria, Australia.
88
BERNECKER, T., THOMAS, H. & OBRIEN, G., 2006. Hydrocarbon

Prospectivity of Areas V06-2, V06-3 and V06-4, Southern Offshore Gippsland
Basin, Victoria, Australia.
89
WILLIAMS, B. & HOUSE, E.R., 2006. The regolith of the Rupanyup 1:100 000 map area.
Victorian Initiative for Minerals and Petroleum Report 89. Department of Primary
Industries, Victoria.
90.
OBRIEN, G.W. & THOMAS, J.H., 2007. A Technical Assessment of the Yet-ToFind Hydrocarbon Resource Inventory, Offshore and Onshore Otway Basin,
Victoria, Australia.
92
OBRIEN, G.W., BERNECKER, T., DRISCOLL, J., HARRISON. M. &

FRANKEL, E., 2006. Hydrocarbon Prospectivity of Areas V07-1, V07-2 and V073, Offshore Gippsland Basin, Victoria, Australia, 2007 Acreage Release.
Northern
Territory
Queensland
Western
Australia
South
Australia
Melbourne
New South
Wales
Gippsland
Basin
Victoria
0
Tasmania
Figure 1
Location map of the Gippsland Basin
200
Km
147E
148E
Legend
Gas Pipeline
GIPPSLAND BASIN
Gas Field
Oil Field
Oil & Other Pipeline

Proposed Gas Pipeline
Production Licence
Marine Sanctuary, National Park,

Special Interest Areas,
Aquaculture Zones, etc.
Retention Lease
2007 Acreage Release
STH WEST BAIRNSDALE1
50
FAIRHOPE 1
OIL SEARCH BENGW 2
PELICAN POINT 1
HOLLANDS LANDING 1
SPOON BAY 1
SEACOMBE 1
SALE
C
VI
EAST SEACOMBE 1
GALLOWAY 1
ALBATROSS 1
DUTSON 1
PROTEA 1
DEADMAN
HILL 1
TEXLAND
1
VIC/L10
MOONFISH
D
T.A
Nth SEASPRAY
SEAHORSE 2
VIC/L18
RL1
FLYING FISH 1
MERRIMAN 1
WOMBAT 1
WOMBAT 3
WOMBAT 2
MCCREESH 1
MACALISTER 1
BARRACOUTA 5
MULLOWAY MULLOWAY 1
SNOOK 1
BARRACOUTA 1
BARRACOUTA 4
BARRACOUTA 2
SNAPPER 6
VIC/L3
PEP166
DARRIMAN 1
VIC/
L15
SALT LAKE 1
DARRIMAN 4
DOLPHIN
AMBERJACK 1
SWORDFISH 1
TORSK 1
BREAM
DOLPHIN 1
DOLPHIN 2
PEP158
GIPPS. FROME LAKE 1

GIPPS. FROME LAKE 1A
WOODSIDE SOUTH 1
YORK 1
BROADBILL 1
WOODSIDE 1
PERCH 3,4
PERCH 1
GIPPS. FROME LAKE 3
BREAM 4A
VIC/L13
PALMER 1
PERCH 2
BULLSEYE 1
PERCH
OMEO 2A
OMEO 1
TOMMYRUFF 1
BREAM 5
NANNYGAI 1
GIPPS. FROME LAKE 2
VIC/L7
ZANE GREY 1,ST1,2

ORANGE ROUGHY 1
K7
K3
GURNARD 1
K'FISH 8
K4
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
TUKARI 1
MACKEREL
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
K2
K1
K6
ROUNDHEAD 1
WYRALLAH 1
WHALESHARK 1
GREAT WHITE 1
V07-3
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
VIC/P49
2000 m
SELENE 1
ANGLER
KINGFISH
WOODSIDE 4
GUDGEON 1
ALBACORE 1
TARRA 1
HEDLEY 1
CULVERIN 1
VOLADOR 1
BLACKBACK 3
KINGFISH 9
WOODSIDE 3
ST MARGARET ISLAND 1
BIGNOSE 1
VIC/P56
GUDGEON
MEGAMOUTH 1
HERMES 1
AYU 1
1000 m
BASKER
FLOUNDER
K'FISH 5
EAST K1
EDINA 1
SHARK 1
CHIMAERA 1
GRUNTER 1
VIC/ MANTA 2,2A MANTA 1 VIC/
VIC/L11
BASKER VIC/
2
GUMMY
1
L27BASKER
L28
FLOUNDER 4
1
GUMMY
FLOUNDER 3
L26
BASKER SOUTH 1
FLOUNDER 2
TREVALLY 1
FLOUNDER 6
BONITA 1,1A
VIC/P41
MANTA
STONEFISH 1
FORTESCUE 2
YELLOWTAIL
ZANE GREY
WOODSIDE 2
VIC/
L25
200 m
HAMMERHEAD 1
KIPPER
SCALLOP
38S
VIC/RL3
SCALLOP 1
VIC/PILOTFISH 1A
COBIA 1
L6
COBIA 2
ROCKLING 1
COBIA
VIC/
MACKEREL 3
DRUMMER 1
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
L20
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
BREAM 'B'
BREAM 3
BREAM 1
BREAM 2
DART 1
ADMIRAL 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
ANGELFISH 1
VIC/L5
FORTESCUE
VIC/L14
VIC/L16
BLENNY 1
SPEKE 1
YARRAM 1
VEILFIN 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
KIPPER 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
HALIBUT
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
SAWBELLY 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
VIC/P55
JUDITH 1
ANGELFISH
GRUNTER
FLOUNDER 5
VIC/L4 FLOUNDER
1
VIC/
L19
CONGER 1
COD 1
LUDERICK 1
STRINGY BARK 1
VIC/
L17
MARLIN
WRASSE 1
WHIPTAIL
TORSK
MARLIN 4
T2
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TURRUM
SALMON 1
WONGA BINDA 1
SOLE
LEATHERJACKET
BATFISH 1
MORWONG 1
MARLIN 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
MARLIN 2
VIC/L2
VIC/P53
SWEEP 1
PILCHARD
BATFISH
V07-2
WAHOO 1
MACLEAN 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
EAST
TUNA 4
TURRUM 1
SNAPPER 4
BARRACOUTA 3
TARWHINE 1
WHALE 1
MOBY 1
PATRICIA 1
PATRICIA
SPERM WHALE 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
GRAYLING
NORTH
TURRUM
SNAPPER 2
BARRACOUTA
WHIPTAIL 1A
WEST WHIPTAIL 1
SPERM
WHALE
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
FLATHEAD 1
VIC/L21
LONGTOM 3
VIC/ LONGTOM 2 LONGTOM 1
RL4SUNFISH
VIC/L9
VIC/
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
WEST
L29 TUNA TUNA
REMORA 1
REMORA
SNAPPER 1
SNAPPER 5
WHITING 1
WHITING
VIC/L1
TARWHINE
DARRIMAN 3
MOONFISH 2
WHITING 2
BEARDIE 1
GOLDEN
BEACH VIC/
CARR'S CREEK 1
NORTH
TRIFON
1 SEASPRAY 2
BURONG 11
GANGELL
SEASPRAY 1
LAKE REEVE 1
CROSS ROADS 1
NORTH SEASPRAY 1,3

TRIFON 2,2R
ECHIDNA HIGH 1
W SEAHORSE 2
SIGNAL HILL 1
GOLDEN BEACH WEST 1
GOLDEN BEACH 1,1A
TANJIL-PT.ADDIS 2
KEYSTONE 1
HARLEQUIN 1
L1
-P
WIRRAH 2
NORTH WIRRAH 1
WIRRAH 1
SNAPPER
WIRRAH 3
SNAPPER 3
SEAHORSEWIRRAH
1
JIL
SEAHORSE
W SEAHORSE 1
VI
PRL2
N
TA
(V
1
DIS MIDFIELD GLEN STH 1
BELLBIRD 1
LOY YANG 1A,2
COLLIERS HILL 1
DUTSON DOWNS 1
DULUNGALONG 1
LAKE WELLINGTON 1
MOBY
BALEEN
SWEETLIPS 1
MOONFISH 1
WEST MOONFISH 1
/R
SOUTH LONGFORD 1
VIC/P54
LONGTOM
SWEETLIPS
EMPEROR
NORTHRIGHT 1
GILBERT 1,1A
PATRICIA 2
BALEEN 2
EMPEROR 1
EAST REEVE 1
BOOLA BOOLA 1
LONGFORD
BOUNDARY CREEK 1A,2
VIC/P47
VIC/P57
WEST SEACOMBE 1
SEACOMBE SOUTH 1
WELLINGTON PARK 2
WELLINGTON PARK 1
GANNET 1
CUTTLEFISH 1
P3
NUNTIN 2
AVON 1
v
9(
V07-1
LAKES ENTRANCE
KALIMNA 1
SPERM WHALE HEAD 1
ROMAWI 1
GOON NURE 1
WRIXONDALE 1
GIPPS. FROME LAKE 4
ROSEDALE 1
100 m
EAST LAKE TYERS 1

BUNGA CREEK 2
LAKE BUNGA 1
COBDENS BORE 1
DUCK BAY 1
NUNTIN 1
km
SA OIL COLQ 1
PRL3
COMLEY 1
INVESTIGATOR 1
PAYNESVILLE 1
OIL SEARCH TOMS CR
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
DOME FROME L.T. 4
GIPPS 2
GIPPS 1
BAUDIN 1
POINT ADDIS 1
GIPPS. FROME LAKE 5
OIL SEARCH COONG 1

OIL SEARCH STEAM DRILL
OIL SEARCH BENGW 1
POINT ADDIS 2
PATTIES PIES 1
PATTIES PIES SOUTH 1/1A
GIPPS 3
BANJO 1
TILDESLEY EAST 3
COLQUHOUN EAST 6
EAST NOWA 1
COLQUHOUN NORTH 1
OIL SEARCH COONG 2
ORBOST
DOME FROME L.T. 3
DOME FROME L.T. 2

DOME FROME L.T. 1
Current Exploration Permit
38S
149E
ANGLER 1
BILLFISH 1
KYARRA 1A
MELVILLE 1
SUNDAY ISLAND 1
VIC/L8
HELIOS 1
COELACANTH 1
ARCHER
ARCHER 1
PIKE 1
VIC/P58
VIC/P42
DEVILFISH 1
VIC/P59
3000 m
ANEMONE 1A
1
ANEMONE
VIC/P45
VIC/P65
MORAY 1
MUDSKIPPER 1
GROPER 1
GROPER 2
VIC/P60
39S
VIC/P63
VIC/P64
39S
PISCES 1
3000 m
MULLET 1
4000 m
147E
Figure 2
2007 Permits and pipelines map, Gippsland Basin
148E
149E
148E
149E
GIPPSLAND BASIN
ORBOST
DOME FROME L.T. 3
DOME FROME L.T. 2
COLQUHOUN NORTH 1
POINT ADDIS 2
PATTIES PIES 1
PATTIES PIES SOUTH 1/1A
GIPPS 3
100 m
SA OIL COLQ 1 BUNGA CREEK 2 EAST LAKE TYERS 1
LAKE BUNGA 1
GANNET 1
VIC/P47
DUCK BAY 1
OIL SEARCH BENGW 2
v)
GOON NURE 1
(
9
3
WRIXONDALE 1
38S
PELICAN POINT 1
IC
EAST REEVE 1
MOONFISH
MOONFISH 1
WEST MOONFISH 1
SEAHORSE
SEAHORSEWIRRAH
1
HARLEQUIN 1
SEAHORSE 2
W SEAHORSE 2
VIC/L18
MOONFISH 2
WHITING
SNAPPER 6
BARRACOUTA 5
VIC/L2
VIC/L3
BARRACOUTA
BARRACOUTA 3
VIC/P53
VIC/L1
SPEKE 1
VEILFIN 1
BREAM 'B'
VIC/L13
BULLSEYE 1
OMEO 2A
OMEO 1
TARRA 1
BREAM 5
YELLOWTAIL
VIC/L7
NANNYGAI 1
ZANE GREY 1,ST1,2

ORANGE ROUGHY 1
K7
K3
GURNARD 1
K'FISH 8
K4
EDINA 1
VIC/
L25
VIC/
L27
VIC/L11
TUKARI 1
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
K2
K1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K6
CULVERIN 1
VIC/L8
KINGFISH
GUDGEON 1
ALBACORE 1
GREAT WHITE 1
BLACKBACK
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
VIC/P59
Legend
VIC/P49
Figure 3
Location map of Gippsland Basin key wells.
Gas Pipeline
Oil & Other Pipeline
ANGLER 1
BILLFISH 1
149E
Gas Field
Oil Field
Proposed Gas Pipeline
2000
m
Current Exploration Permit
MELVILLE 1
148E
V07-3
TERAKIHI 1
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
GUDGEON
MEGAMOUTH 1
HERMES 1
AYU 1
1000 m
BIGNOSE 1
K'FISH 5
EAST K1
SHARK 1
VIC/
L28
VIC/P56
BLACKBACK 3
BONITA 1,1A
VIC/P41
BASKER
FLOUNDER
MACKEREL
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
VIC/
L26
200 m
HAMMERHEAD 1
KIPPER
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
PILCHARD
KINGFISH 9
VIC/P42
DART 1
VIC/RL3
KIPPER 1
VIC/PILOTFISH 1A
COBIA 1
L6
COBIA 2
ROCKLING 1
COBIA
VIC/
MACKEREL 3
DRUMMER 1
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
L20
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
ZANE GREY
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
EAST
TUNA 4
FORTESCUE 2
FORTESCUE
BREAM 3
BREAM 1
BREAM 2
LEATHERJACKET 1
VIC/P55
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
HALIBUT
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
VIC/L14
BREAM 4A
LEATHERJACKET
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
VIC/L5
VIC/
L19
SWORDFISH 1
LUDERICK 1
BREAM
SOLE
SCALLOP 1
BATFISH 1
MORWONG 1
MARLIN 1
SCALLOP
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 4
T2
MARLIN 3
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
STONEFISH 1
MANTA
TURRUM 3
ANGELFISH
MARLIN 2
CHIMAERA 1
TURRUM 7
GRUNTER
GRUNTER 1
MANTA 1
TURRUM 4
MANTA 2,2A
TREVALLY 1
TURRUM
BASKER 2
GUMMY 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 5
MARLIN
BASKER 1
GUMMY
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 3
BASKER SOUTH 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
FLOUNDER 2
SAWBELLY 1
SALMON 1
SWEEP 1
VIC/L21
VIC/L4
V07-2
WAHOO 1
MACLEAN 1
PATRICIA
TURRUM 1
CONGER 1
COD 1
NORTHRIGHT 1
WHALE 1
MOBY 1
SPERM WHALE 1
BATFISH
WHITING 2
BEARDIE 1
BARRACOUTA 1
BARRACOUTA 4
BARRACOUTA 2
GRAYLING
NORTH
TURRUM
SNAPPER 1
SNAPPER 5
WHITING 1
PATRICIA 1
LONGTOM 3
SNAPPER 2
SNAPPER 4
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
FLATHEAD 1
VIC/ LONGTOM 2 LONGTOM 1

RL4SUNFISH
VIC/L9
VIC/
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
WEST
L29 TUNA TUNA
REMORA 1
REMORA
SWEETLIPS 1
EMPEROR 1
EMPEROR
WIRRAH 2
NORTH WIRRAH 1
WIRRAH 1
SNAPPER
WIRRAH 3
SNAPPER 3
SPERM
WHALE
LONGTOM
SWEETLIPS
km
MOBY
BALEEN
PATRICIA 2
BALEEN 2
VIC/L10
W SEAHORSE 1
VIC/P54
VIC/P57
25
GILBERT 1,1A
CUTTLEFISH 1
/P
EAST SEACOMBE 1
GALLOWAY 1
ALBATROSS 1
SPERM WHALE HEAD 1
ROMAWI 1
V07-1
COBDENS BORE 1
KALIMNA 1
PRL3
COMLEY 1
INVESTIGATOR 1
PAYNESVILLE 1
FAIRHOPE 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
DOME FROME L.T. 4
GIPPS 2
GIPPS 1
BAUDIN 1
POINT ADDIS 1
BANJO 1
TILDESLEY EAST 3
COLQUHOUN EAST 6
EAST NOWA 1
DOME FROME L.T. 1
Production Licence
Marine Sanctuary, National Park,

Special Interest Areas,
Aquaculture Zones, etc.
Retention Lease
38S
on
We l l i n g t
e
k
La
38S
Fa u l t S ys t e m
Norther
100 m
n Platfo
Northern Terrace
ys t e m
Ro se da l e Fa u l t S
rm
200 m
Sout
hern
Can
ys
yon
Terra
c
lt S
Bas
tem
0m
lt S
y st em
300
0m
au
y s t em
S
t
l
t e r Fa u
200
Ev
Ca
Southern Platform
pe
Basin Limit
39S
er
ar
Fo
s
Fa
u
dF
D ar r i m an
1000 m
Central Deep
50 km
147E
148E
Figure 4
Structural elements map showing topography and bathymetry, and surface expressions of the major fault systems, Gippsland Basin
149E
3000 m
147o E
148o E
149 o E
Approx. Limit
Preserved
Strzelecki Grp.
Northern Platform
ton
38o S
Lake
ng
Welli
Fault
ale
System
Faul
Northern Terrace
38 o S
200 m
System
Northern
Terrace
sed
Ro
Seaspray
Depression
m
ste
39o S
Early Cretaceous Extensional

Fault Systems
Palaeozoic Granite
Late Cretaceous Faults
Exposed Strzelecki Group
Major Anticlinal Trends

Early Miocene Basin Inversion
Tertiary - Recent Sediments

of the Gippsland Basin
Oil Field
Petroleum Wells
Gas Field
Figure 5
Structural elements map, Gippsland Basin
Approx. Limit
Preserved
Strzelecki Grp.
0
20
Pisces
Sub-basin
3000 m
Southern
Graben
39 o S
Southern
Strzelecki
High
Km
147 E
2000 m
Southern Terrace
Southern Platform
Palaeozoic Outcrop
psl
pe
lt
Fau
Terrace
Ca
Foster
System
Eastern Graben
Depocentre
era
Southern
rd
Fa
ult
Kingfish
Deep
Sy
ste
Da
Ris
Sy
Northern
Graben
and
Fault
Gip
a
rrim
1000 m
Deep
Central
Ev
Balook
Block
500 m
148o E
149o E
149E
14840'E
14820'E
14810'E
3740'S
14920'E
14940'E
150E
3740'S
V07-1
38S
38S
V07-2
V07-3
3820'S
3820'S
0
3840'S
60100
3845'S
14810'E
60400
nT
14820'E
10
20
UNIVERSAL TRANSVERSE MERCATOR PROJECTION

G.R.S. 1980 SPHEROID
CENTRAL MERIDIAN 147E
Mapsheet datum: "GDA94"
60700
14840'E
Figure 6
Total magnetic intensity image, Gippsland Basin (modified from Moore & Wong, 2002).
149E
14920'E
14940'E
3840'S
3845'S
150E
80
85
90
95
100
Lower F. longus
Tricolporites
lilliei
Nothofagidites
senectus
HALIBUT
SUBGROUP
Phyllocladidites
mawsonii
CENOMANIAN
Hoegisporis
uniforma
ALBIAN
P. pannosus
ics
EMPEROR
SUBGROUP
Coal
Glauconite
Shale
TURRUM
Critical
Moment
MACKEREL
FORMATION
Extension
Hapuku
Channel
KATE SHALE
Roundhead Member
ION
Bonita Sst Mbr
VOLADOR
FORMATION 9
CHIMAERA
FORMATION
ANEMONE
FORMATION
12
onformity
Unc
way
13
Alluvial
Fluvial
Marine
Clastics
Marine
Carbonates
Extension,
basin formation
Compression,
reverse faulting
KIPPER SHALE
ADMIRAL FM.
KERSOP ARKOSE
Extension
KORUMBURRA SUBGROUP
Gas Discovery
Basaltic Volcanics
Non-marine
Lacustrine
SOUTH
CURLIP FM.
Marl
Pervasive
NW-SE normal faulting
in Central Deep
10
anics
11
Ot
fast
Expulsion,
Accumulation
Trap
Formation
Anticline
Growth
Overburden
Seal
Reservoir
Latrobe Unconformity
TunaFounder
Channels
Longtom Unconformity
STRZELECKI
GROUP
Stability
Offshore basin deepens,

but faulting limited
FLOUNDER FM
n Volc
pania
Cam
NORTH
basin inversion,
reverse faulting,
folding
Grunter Mbr
GOLDEN
BEACH
SUBGROUP
Marlin
Channel
Stonefish Sst Mbr
Seahorse Unconformity
Siltstone
Fluvial-Deltaic
and Paralic
Mid Paleocene
"Early
Oligocene
Wedge"
Opah Channel
KINGFISH 6
FORMATION
OUT
A
MAT
Sandstones
Non-marine arkose
& volcanoclastics
RAC
lcan
FM
FOR
Tricolporites
apoxyexinus
TURONIAN
Opah Fm
g Vo
AR
Unconformity
BAR
ajun
RN
Marlin
Curr
GU
Compression
Southern Ocean
Spreading
Tasman Sea
Spreading
Upper F. longus
NG
RM
AT
IO
FO
Bream
Volcanics
Marshall
Paraconformity
EOW
RO
Mid M.diversus
GROUP
Lower
Lygistepollenites
balmei
Balook Fm.
LATROBE
VALLEY
SUBGP.
EARLY LATE
LATE
MIDDLE
EOCENE
SANTONIAN
CONIAC.
Upper L. balmei
BU
COBIA
SUBGROUP
Upper M. diversus
SWORDFISH
FORMATION
LAKES
ENTRANCE
FORMATION
Thorpdale
P. asperopolus
Lower M. diversus
OFFSHORE
Tectonics
Oil Discovery
1:
1 Patricia
2:
2 Barracouta, Bream, Dolphin, Moonfish, Perch, Seahorse, Snapper, Tarwhine
3: Moonfish
3
4
4: Barracouta, Marlin, Whiting
6
6: Fortescue/Cobia/Halibut, Sole, Turrum, Whiting
9:
9 Basker, Blackback, Flounder, Manta
Oil & Gas Discovery
Figure 7
Stratigraphic architecture, petroleum systems elements and hydrocarbon occurrences
slow
75
SEASPRAY
GROUP
Lower
Nothofagidites
asperus
Middle M. diversus
ONSHORE
Faulting
70
Lower
P. tuberculatus
MAJOR UNITS
LATROBE
65
PALEOCENE
60
CAMPANIAN MAAST.
55
EARLY
50
LATE
45
Middle
N. asperus
E. LATE EARLY
40
Middle
Proteacidites
tuberculatus
Upper N. asperus
LATE
35
EARLY
30
OLIGOCENE
Ma AGES SPORE-POLLEN
ZONES
Source
Gippsland Basin Stratigraphy and Petroleum Systems Elements
12 Angler, Archer, Gummy, Manta
5:
5 Blackback, Kingfish, Tuna
77: Mackerel
10 Archer
13 Longtom
8
8: Snapper, Tuna
11 Kipper
Figure 8a
Simple PetroMod buoyancy-driven petroleum migration model.
Plan view
Figure 8b
Simple PetroMod buoyancy-driven petroleum migration model.
3D perspective
149E
14840'E
14820'E
14810'E
3740'S
TILDESLEY EAST 3
14920'E
14940'E
150E
3740'S
BANJO 1,1A
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
100m
V07-1
VIC/P47
VIC/P54
NORTHRIGHT 1
GILBERT 1,1A
38S
BALEEN 3
FLATHEAD 1
WHALE 1
PATRICIA 2
PATRICIA 1MOBY 1
MACLEAN 1
SWEEP 1
SPERM WHALE 1
BALEEN 1
BALEEN 2
VIC/L21
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM
1
LONGTOM 2/ST1
VIC/
RL4
VIC/L9
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
TUNA 3
KAHAWAI 1
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
TURRUM 1
TURRUM 6
VIC/P55
VIC/RL3
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
200m
DART 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
VIC/
L25
STONEFISH 1
BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1 MORWONG 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
MARLIN 3
TURRUM 3
CHIMAERA 1
VIC/
TURRUM 7
GRUNTER 1
VIC/L11
MANTA 1
L26 MANTA
TURRUM 4
MARLIN 2
2,2A
VIC/
TREVALLY 1
BASKER
2
RL9
VIC/L4
GUMMY 1
FLOUNDER 4 BASKER 1
FLOUNDER 5
VIC/
FLOUNDER 1
RL10
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 6
FLOUNDER 2
BASKER SOUTH 1
WRASSE 1
3820'S
TUKARI 1
VIC/L5
BIGNOSE 1
VIC/
WEST FORTESCUE 1
L19
FORTESCUE 1 TERAGLIN 1
VIC/P56
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
CULVERIN 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
VOLADOR 1
FORTESCUE 2
PILOTFISH 1A
COBIA 1
ROCKLING 1
GREAT WHITE 1
COBIA 2
MACKEREL 3
DRUMMER 1 MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
TERAKIHI 1
MACKEREL 4
GUDGEON 1
VIC/L20
VIC/L6
OPAH 1 YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BLACKBACK 1
THREADFIN 1
HAPUKU
1
BLACKBACK 3
BONITA 1,1A
BLACKBACK 2
ALBACORE 1
K'FISH 5
EAST K1
K6 MEGAMOUTH 1
ATHENE 1
K2
K1
HERMES 1
AYU 1
SELENE
1
ROUNDHEAD 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
VIC/P41
SHARK 1
V07-3
1000m
3820'S
WHALESHARK 1
VIC/P49
2000m
VIC/P59
VIC/L7
ANGLER 1
3840'S
BILLFISH 1
3000m
HELIOS 1
VIC/L8
COELACANTH 1
14820'E
10
20
3840'S

VIC/P45
3845'S
14810'E
38S
V07-2
WAHOO 1
14840'E
Figure 9
Location of the 2007 gazettal blocks; together with well control and surrounding fields
149E
14920'E
14940'E
3845'S
150E
00
5 00
Contour Interval 100m
PATROBUS 1
20
250 0

00
30
NORTHRIGHT 1
38S
WHALE 1
BY
O
M
MACLEAN 1
WAHOO 1
V07-2
SWEEP 1
40
00
38S
FL
AT
H
EA
D
V07-1
10
0 00
150E
14930'E
50
0
149E
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
JUDITH 1
ADMIRAL 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
FLOUNDER 4 BASKER 2
BASKER 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GUMMY 1
SHARK 1
350
0
STONEFISH 1
GRUNTER 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
VOLADOR 1
WHALESHARK 1
1000
4 500
V07-3
500
BASKER SOUTH 1
0
150
GREAT WHITE 1
3830'S
3830'S
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
BLACKBACK 3
00
20
00
250
0
BILLFISH 1
0
30
Figure 10
Bathymetry map, eastern Gippsland Basin
45
0
450
14830'E
00
25
150
0
1
00
149E
00
500
14930'E
40 0
150E
149E
14840'E
14820'E
14810'E
3740'S
TILDESLEY EAST 3
14920'E
14940'E
150E
3740'S
BANJO 1,1A
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
100m
V07-1
VIC/P47
VIC/P54
NORTHRIGHT 1
GILBERT 1,1A
38S
BALEEN 3
FLATHEAD 1
WHALE 1
PATRICIA 2
PATRICIA 1MOBY 1
MACLEAN 1
SWEEP 1
SPERM WHALE 1
BALEEN 1
BALEEN 2
VIC/L21
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM
1
LONGTOM 2/ST1
VIC/
RL4
VIC/L9
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
TUNA 3
KAHAWAI 1
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
TURRUM 1
TURRUM 6
VIC/P55
VIC/RL3
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
200m
DART 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
VIC/
L25
STONEFISH 1
BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1 MORWONG 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
MARLIN 3
TURRUM 3
CHIMAERA 1
VIC/
TURRUM 7
GRUNTER 1
VIC/L11
MANTA 1
L26 MANTA
TURRUM 4
MARLIN 2
2,2A
VIC/
TREVALLY 1
BASKER
2
RL9
VIC/L4
GUMMY 1
FLOUNDER 4 BASKER 1
FLOUNDER 5
VIC/
FLOUNDER 1
RL10
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 6
FLOUNDER 2
BASKER SOUTH 1
WRASSE 1
3820'S
TUKARI 1
VIC/L5
BIGNOSE 1
VIC/
WEST FORTESCUE 1
L19
VIC/P56
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
CULVERIN 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
VOLADOR 1
FORTESCUE 2
PILOTFISH 1A
COBIA 1
GREAT WHITE 1
ROCKLING 1
COBIA 2
MACKEREL 3
SMILER 1
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
TERAKIHI 1
MACKEREL 4
GUDGEON 1
VIC/L20
VIC/L6
OPAH 1 YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BLACKBACK 1
THREADFIN 1
HAPUKU
1
BLACKBACK 3
BONITA 1,1A
BLACKBACK 2
ALBACORE 1
K'FISH 5
EAST K1
K6 MEGAMOUTH 1
ATHENE 1
K2
K1
HERMES 1
AYU 1
SELENE
1
ROUNDHEAD 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
VIC/P41
(Remainder after
partial surrender)
SHARK 1
V07-3
1000m
3820'S
WHALESHARK 1
VIC/P49
2000m
VIC/P59
VIC/L7
ANGLER 1
3840'S
BILLFISH 1
3845'S
14810'E
20
3840'S

COELACANTH 1
VIC/P45
14820'E
10
3000m
HELIOS 1
VIC/L8
38S
V07-2
WAHOO 1
14840'E
149E
Figure 11
Selected seismic coverage within the vicinity of the acreage release blocks, eastern Gippsland Basin
14920'E
14940'E
3845'S
150E
149E
14930'E
150E
PATROBUS 1
V07-1
AT
H
EA
NORTHRIGHT 1
V07-2
FL
38S
WHALE 1
MACLEAN 1
WAHOO 1
38S
SWEEP 1
BY
1
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
JUDITH 1
ADMIRAL 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 4 BASKER 2
BASKER 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GUMMY 1
SHARK 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
VOLADOR 1
V07-3
WHALESHARK 1
GREAT WHITE 1
3830'S
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
BLACKBACK 3
GS65A
GS88B
GS67A
GS91A
G68B
GS92A
G69B
P1_P2
GS70A
GEBR99
GS71A
GDW99
GS73A
GP01
GS81A
GBS02
GH88A
Figure 12
Seismic surveys, eastern Gippsland Basin
20
BILLFISH 1
14830'E
10

149E
14930'E
150E
3D Seismic
3830'S
SW
Central Deep
Northern Terrace
4.2 km
Basker-1
Manta-1
NPHI
0.45
GR
0
GAPI
200
140
DT
US/F
V/V
G/C3
Hammerhead-1
NPHI
-0.15
2.95
0.45
GR
RHOB
40 1.95
14.6 km
GAPI
200
140
DT
US/F
V/V
G/C3
2.95
GR
0
GAPI
200
140
DT
US/F
PU
Northern Platform
9.9 km
Dart-1
NEUT
-0.15
RHOB
40 1.95
9.1 km
22.8 km
Sole-1
NPHI
80
GR
RHOB
40 1950 K/M3 2950
0.45
GAPI
200
140
DT
US/F
V/V
G/C3
Northright-1
NPHI
-0.15
2.95
0.45
GR
RHOB
40 1.95
NE
GAPI
200
140
DT
US/F
V/V
-0.15
ARC
RHOB
40 1.95
G/C3
2.95
GAPI
DT
200
500
US/M
P40H
100 0.2
OHMM 2000
1200
1900
900
2100
300
800
1300
2000
1000
2200
900
1400
2100
1100
2300
1000
1500
2200
1200
2400
1100
1600
2300
2500
1700
2400
2600
1800
2500
2700
1900
2600
2800
2000
2700
2900
2100
2800
3000
2900
3100
3000
3200
3100
3300
3200
We
Fa lling
ult ton
Sy
ste
m
3400
3300
3500
3400
3600
3800
Seaspray
Group
ke
Rosedale
Fault
System
La
3500
3700
Stratigraphy and Depositional Facies:

Seahorse Unconformity
Lakes Entrance Fm
and equivalent
distal marine
calcareous mudstones, marls
Campanian Volcanics
extrusive and intrusive basaltic rocks
Chimaera Formation
lower coastal plain

sandstones, mudstones, coal
Chimaera Formation
fluvial, upper-middle coastal plain

interbedded sandstones and mudstones
Chimaera Formation
alluvial fan, fluvial

conglomerates, sandstones, siltstones
Latrobe Unconformity
3900
Flounder Formation
submarine channel fill

sandstones, mudstones
Kingfish Formation
coastal transition zone

mudstones, sandstones
Kingfish Formation
nearshore - offshore marine

mudstones
Golden
Beach
Subgroup
Longtom Unconformity
Kingfish Formation
Kate Shale
0
10
km
V07-1
20
Halibut
Subgroup
Volador Formation
Northright 1
nearshore marine
sandstones , minor siltstones
offshore marine
mudstones, minor sandstones
Emperor
Subgroup
nearshore marine
sandstones , minor siltstones
Curlip Formation
fluvial, lacustrine
interbedded sandstones and mudstones,
minor coal
Kipper Shale
lacustrine, fluvial
mudstones with intercalated sandstones
Admiral Formation
alluvial fan, fluvial

conglomerates, sandstones, siltstones
Unnamed Volcanics
extrusive basaltic rocks
V07-2
Sole 1
Volador Formation
Dart 1
Hammerhead 1
coastal transition zone

mudstones, sandstones
Otway Unconformity
Manta 1
Basker 1
V07-3
Figure 13
Well correlation between Basker-1 and Northright-1; stratigraphy and depositional facies
Volador Formation
lower coastal plain

coal, mudstones, sandstones
Volador Formation
fluvial, middle coastal plain

interbedded sandstones and mudstones
Strzelecki
Group
Undifferentiated
fluvial
non-marine volcano- and siliciclastics,
coal
Unnamed Unconformity
Basement
Undifferentiated
Palaeozoic
metamorphic and igneous rocks
SW
Basker-1
Manta-1
Chimaera-1
Hammerhead-1
Dart-1
Sole-1
Northright-1
Seaspray Group
NE
1:
Basker-Manta Play Fairway
Halibut Subgroup petroleum system

with additional reservoirs in
2: Longtom-Kipper Play Fairway

1
Strzelecki
Group
Halibut
Subgroup
Emperor
Subgroup
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Golden Beach
Subgroup
Strzelecki
Group
Rosedale
Fault
System
Strzelecki/Emperor/Golden Beach
petroleum system. Deep Latrobe
Group reservoirs commonly sealed
by Late Cretaceous volcanics.
Migration and sealing capacities
controlled by Rosedale Fault System.
3: Top-Latrobe Play Fairway
Strzelecki/Halibut-Cobia petroleum
system. Top-Latrobe reservoirs
sealed by Seaspray Group (and
Gurnard Formation in the west).
4: Latrobe Pinch-out Play Fairway

Palaeozoic Basement
Lake Wellington
Fault System
Strzelecki-sourced hydrocarbons in
stratigraphic traps over shallow
basement on the Northern Platform.
Gas Occurrence
Oil Occurrence
10
km
Palaeozoic Basement
V07-1
V07-2
filtered-migration
G92A-3044
Figure 14
Well correlation between Basker-1 and Northright-1; stratigraphy and seismic facies
filtered-migration
G92A-3045
filtered-migration
G92A-3046
filtered-migration
G92A-3047
filtered-migration
BMR82-01-P2
V07-3
20
14830'E
149E
14930'E
150E
Modern Day Coastline
Lak
38S
Longtom
V07-1
Wel
ling
ton
38S
Lat
rob
e-p
ste
inc
m
Sole
hou
Top
t
-La
Fault
tro
Sy be
Fault
Rosedale
Kipper
Sy
st
Go
lde
Basker/Manta
nB
Central Deep
Intr
a-L
3830'S
V07-2
V07-3
em
eac
h-E
mp
ero
atr
3830'S
obe
Northern Platform
Northern Terrace
V
V
Basement Highs
Palaeo Bass Canyon
Present Day Bass Canyon
Eastern Graben
V
V
V
V
V
10
Volcanics
20
km
14830'E
Figure 15
Play fairways and structural elements map, Gippsland Basin
149E
14930'E
150E
Seismic line BMR68-21
NNW
V07-1
SP79 104
V07-3
BMR68-11
154
1054
11 0 4
11 5 4
1204
SSE
BMR68-13
1254
1354
1404
1504
1604
1654
1704
1754
1804
1854
1904
1954
2004
Water Replacement Velocity 3000 m/s

Seaspray
Group
La
tro
Basement
be
Gr
ou
Golden Beach
Subgroup
Golden Beach
Subgroup
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Fault
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Strzelecki
Group
llington
Lake We
Basement
Lakes Entrance
Formation
Basement
Strzelecki
Group
Northern
Graben
Strzelecki
Group
ault
le F
eda
Ros
Emperor
Subgroup
Basement
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20

V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
GILBERT 1,1A
EA
D
68_21
FL
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
TAILOR 1
OPAH 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
V07-3
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
BILLFISH 1
68_21
ANGLER 1
HELIOS 1
Figure 16
Seismic line BMR68-21 through V07-1 and V07-3
HAMMERHEAD 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
DRUMMER 1
ADMIRAL 1
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
V07-2
SWEEP 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
ROCKLING 1
MACLEAN 1
JUDITH 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
M2
WAHOO 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
T6
M3
WHALE 1
Seismic line BMR68-11P2
NW
Wahoo-1
V07-1
SE
V07-3
Sole-2 Sole-1
BMR68-21
BMR68-23
BMR68-25

Seaspray
Group
La
tro
Strzelecki
Group
be
Emperor
Subgroup
Gr
ou
Strzelecki
Group
Basement
Basement
Emperor
Subgroup
Strzelecki
Group
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Volcanics
Basement
Basement
ke
La
on
gt
lin
el
W
t
ul
Fa
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20
V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
68_
11P
2
EA
D
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
DRUMMER 1
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
CULVERIN 1
V07-3
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
HELIOS 1
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER 1
Figure 17
Seismic line BMR68-11P2 through V07-1 and V07-3
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
BIGNOSE 1
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
HAMMERHEAD 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
ROCKLING 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
SWEEP 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
V07-2
WAHOO 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
WHALE 1
MACLEAN 1
BILLFISH 1
68
_1
1P
2

NNW
V07-2
SSE
V07-3
BMR68-11
BMR68-13

Seaspray
Group
Basement
Latrobe Group
Emperor
Subgroup
Strzelecki
Group
Emperor
Subgroup
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Northern
Graben
Golden Beach
Subgroup
Strzelecki
Group
Basement
Basement
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20

NORTHRIGHT 1
EA
D
68_23
V07-1
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
HAMMERHEAD 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GRUNTER 1
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
V07-3
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
OPAH 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
TAILOR 1
SWEEP 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
DRUMMER 1
MACLEAN 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
ROCKLING 1
WAHOO 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
WHALE 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
V07-2
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
BILLFISH 1
68_2
ANGLER 1
HELIOS 1
TERAKIHI 1
Figure 18
NNW
V07-3
V07-2
BMR68-11
Oligocene
Sandstone
Northern
Graben
Seaspray
Group
SSE
Latrobe/Strzelecki
Group ?
Lakes Entrance
Formation
Seaspray
Group
Strzelecki
Group
Basement
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Basement
Strzelecki
Group
Basement
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20
V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
AT
H
FL
SPERM WHALE 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
TAILOR 1
SCALLOP 1
OPAH 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
CULVERIN 1
V07-3
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
BILLFISH 1
68_25
ANGLER 1
HELIOS 1
Figure 19
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
BIGNOSE 1
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
HAMMERHEAD 1
STONEFISH 1
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
DRUMMER 1
ADMIRAL 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
V07-2
DART 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
ROCKLING 1
SWEEP 1
JUDITH 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
M2
WAHOO 1
MACLEAN 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
T6
M3
WHALE 1
25
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
68_
EA
D
GILBERT 1,1A
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
NW
Basker-1
Whaleshark-1
SE
V07-3
BMR68-21
BMR68-23
BMR68-25
Strzelecki
Group
Golden Beach
Subgroup
Emperor
Subgroup
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Latrobe Group
Basement
Emperor
Subgroup
Strzelecki
Group
Strzelecki
Group
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20

V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
EA
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GRUNTER 1
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
68_
BIGNOSE 1
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
13
CULVERIN 1
V07-3
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
HELIOS 1
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER 1
Figure 20
Seismic line BMR68-13 through V07-3
HAMMERHEAD 1
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
TAILOR 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
DRUMMER 1
SWEEP 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
ROCKLING 1
WAHOO 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
WHALE 1
MACLEAN 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
V07-2
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
BILLFISH 1
68_
13
149E
14840'E
14820'E
14810'E
3740'S
14920'E
P
NP
14940'E
V07-1
38S
150E
3740'S
38S
V07-2
So
V07-3
Tm
3820'S
3820'S
Outside Platform Terrace

Basin
Deep
Bl
K-T igneous
rocks
D-C sedimentary
rocks
Ki
3840'S
D igneous
rocks
Bc
14820'E
10
20
3840'S

O-S sedimentary
rocks
3845'S
14810'E
Ch
SE
P-J sedimentary
& igneous rocks
14840'E
149E
Figure 21
Structural Interpretation of magnetic data in the eastern Gippsland Basin; from Moore & Wong, 2002
14920'E
14940'E
3845'S
150E
14820'E
14840'E
149E
14920'E
14940'E
3740'S
3740'S
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
38S
AT
H
EA
D
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA A
ICICI
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
HAMMERHEAD 1
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
ROCKLING 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
3820'S
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
SWEEP 1
38S
LEATHERJACKET 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
V07-2
WAHOO 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
WHALE 1
MACLEAN 1
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
V07-3
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
3820'S
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
DRUMMER 1
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
EAST K1
K2
ALBACORE 1
K'FISH 5
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER 1
3840'S
TERAKIHI 1
BILLFISH 1
10
20
HELIOS 1
COELACANTH 1
14820'E
Figure 22
First vertical derivative map
3840'S

14840'E
149E
14920'E
14940'E
150E
SW
Seismic line G92A-3047

Sole-1
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Sole-2
NE
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
EAST NOWA 1
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
10
20

G
92
A30
47
V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
EA
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
KINGFISH 9
Figure 23
Seismic line through Sole-1, -2 across the Lake Wellington Fault System (G92A-3047)
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
7
04
-3
2A
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER 1
HELIOS 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
OPAH 1
THREADFIN 1
EAST K1
K2
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
DRUMMER 1
ADMIRAL 1
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
V07-2
LEATHERJACKET 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
ROCKLING 1
SWEEP 1
JUDITH 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
MACLEAN 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
WAHOO 1
G9
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
WHALE 1
BILLFISH 1
WHALESHARK 1
SHARK 1
V07-3
SW
Kipper-1
East Pilchard-1 Kipper-2
Admiral-1
NE
Wahoo-1
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Two Way Time

(seconds)
Stonefish-1
Seismic line G92A-3038
38
BANJO 1,1A
TILDESLEY EAST 3
PATROBUS 1
2A
EAST END 1
-30
EAST NOWA 1
10
G9
V07-1
NORTHRIGHT 1
EA
GILBERT 1,1A
FL
1
Y
B
O
M
21
IA
ICICIA
TRTR
PAPA
BALEEN 2
SPERM WHALE 1
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM 2/ST1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
GRUNTER 1
MACKEREL 4
YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BONITA 1,1A
K'FISH 5
ALBACORE 1
MEGAMOUTH 1
K6
HERMES 1
AYU 1
ROUNDHEAD 1
K1
VOLADOR 1
PILOTFISH 1A
GREAT WHITE 1
GUDGEON 1
BLACKBACK 3
SHARK 1
GUMMY 1
BASKER SOUTH 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
TERAKIHI 1
BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
ATHENE 1
SELENE 1
ANGLER 1
HELIOS 1
Figure 24
Seismic line through Stonefish-1, East Pilchard-1, Kipper-1, -2, Admiral-1 and Wahoo-1 (G92A-3038)
BASKER 2
BASKER 1
03
-3
G9
COBIA 1
COBIA 2
THREADFIN 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
MACKEREL 3
MACKEREL 1
SMILER 1
MACKEREL 2
OPAH 1
KINGFISH 9
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
2A
WEST FORTESCUE 1
FORTESCUE 1
TERAGLIN 1
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
TRUMPETER 1
FORTESCUE 2
WEST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
EAST K1
K2
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
FLOUNDER 4
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 2
TUKARI 1
FORTESCUE 3
TAILOR 1
SWEEP 1
DART 1
FLOUNDER 5
FLOUNDER 1
FLOUNDER 6
WRASSE 1
DRUMMER 1
MACLEAN 1
TUNA 3
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
E. PILCHARD 1
TURRUM 1
ROCKLING 1
WAHOO 1
LEATHERJACKET 1
MORWONG 1 BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
TURRUM 3
TURRUM 7
TURRUM 4
TREVALLY 1
MARLIN 2
WHALE 1
LONGTOM 1
FUR SEAL 1
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
KAHAWAI 1
TURRUM 6
MARLIN 3
V07-2
AT
H
BALEEN 3
BALEEN 1
BILLFISH 1
WHALESHARK 1
20

V07-3
149E
14840'E
14820'E
14810'E
3740'S
TILDESLEY EAST 3
14920'E
14940'E
150E
3740'S
BANJO 1,1A
PATROBUS 1
EAST END 1
100m
VIC/P47
VIC/P54
V07-1
GILBERT 1,1A
38S
BALEEN 3
FLATHEAD 1
WHALE 1
PATRICIA 2
PATRICIA 1MOBY 1
MACLEAN 1
SWEEP 1
SPERM WHALE 1
NORTHRIGHT 1
V07-2
BALEEN 1
BALEEN 2
VIC/L21
LONGTOM 3
LONGTOM
1
LONGTOM 2/ST1
VIC/
RL4
VIC/L9
SUNFISH 2
SUNFISH 1
REMORA 1
GRAYLING 1,1A
TUNA 3
KAHAWAI 1
TUNA 1
TUNA 2
TUNA 4
TURRUM 1
TURRUM 6
VIC/P55
WAHOO 1
VIC/RL3
LEATHERJACKET 1
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
200m
DART 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
VIC/
L25
STONEFISH 1
BATFISH 1
MARLIN 1 MORWONG 1
MARLIN 4
T2
ANGELFISH 1
TURRUM 5
MARLIN 3
TURRUM 3
CHIMAERA 1
VIC/
TURRUM 7
GRUNTER 1
VIC/L11
MANTA 1
L26 MANTA
TURRUM 4
MARLIN 2
2,2A
VIC/
TREVALLY 1
BASKER
2
RL9
VIC/L4
GUMMY 1
FLOUNDER
4
FLOUNDER 5
BASKER 1
VIC/
FLOUNDER 1
RL10
FLOUNDER 3
FLOUNDER 6
FLOUNDER 2
BASKER SOUTH 1
WRASSE 1
3820'S
TUKARI 1
VIC/L5
BIGNOSE 1
VIC/
WEST FORTESCUE 1
L19
VIC/P56
FORTESCUE 3
HALIBUT 2
HALIBUT 1
CULVERIN 1
WEST HALIBUT 1
EAST HALIBUT 1
FORTESCUE 4
TRUMPETER 1
VOLADOR 1
FORTESCUE 2
PILOTFISH 1A
COBIA 1
ROCKLING 1
GREAT WHITE 1
COBIA 2
MACKEREL 3
SMILER 1
TAILOR 1
MACKEREL 2
TERAKIHI 1
MACKEREL 4
GUDGEON 1
VIC/L20
VIC/L6
OPAH 1 YELLOWTAIL 1
YELLOWTAIL 2
BLACKBACK 1
THREADFIN 1
HAPUKU
1
BLACKBACK 3
BONITA 1,1A
BLACKBACK 2
ALBACORE 1
K'FISH 5
EAST K1
K6 MEGAMOUTH 1
ATHENE 1
K2
K1
HERMES 1
AYU 1
SELENE
1
ROUNDHEAD 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
VIC/P41
SHARK 1
V07-3
1000m
3820'S
WHALESHARK 1
VIC/P49
2000m
VIC/P59
VIC/L7
ANGLER 1
3840'S
BILLFISH 1
3000m
HELIOS 1
VIC/L8
3845'S
14810'E
38S
COELACANTH 1
VIC/P45
14820'E
Figure 25
Total magnetic intensity image
14840'E
149E
14920'E
10
20
3840'S

14940'E
3845'S
150E
149E
14930'E
150E
Depth Top Latrobe
-377
PATROBUS 1
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
NORTHRIGHT 1
3000
3500
AT
H
EA
V07-1
V07-2
FL
38S
WHALE 1
WAHOO 1
4500
SWEEP 1
BY
MACLEAN 1
38S
4000
5000
LEATHERJACKET 1
5500
5783
SOLE 2
SOLE 1
DART 1
ADMIRAL 1
JUDITH 1
HAMMERHEAD 1
KIPPER 1
KIPPER 2
EAST PILCHARD 1
SCALLOP 1
STONEFISH 1
GRUNTER 1
FLOUNDERBASKER
4BASKER1 2
SHARK 1
CHIMAERA 1
MANTA 1
MANTA 2,2A
GUMMY 1
V07-3
BASKER SOUTH 1
BIGNOSE 1
CULVERIN 1
WHALESHARK 1
VOLADOR 1
GREAT WHITE 1
0
3830'S
BILLFISH 1
Figure 26
Top Latrobe Group depth structure map
20

BLACKBACK 1
HAPUKU 1
BLACKBACK 2
BLACKBACK 3
14830'E
10
3830'S
TERAKIHI 1
149E
14930'E
150E
DEPARTMENT of PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

MINERALS and PETROLEUM DIVISION
GEOSCIENCE VICTORIA
G.P.O.BOX 4440
MELBOURNE 3001
VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA
WEB ADDRESS: www.dpi.vic.gov.au/minpet/

VIMP92-NortheastOffshore

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

VIMP92-NortheastOffshore

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEPARTMENT OF

NORTHEASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN,

Crown (State of Victoria) Copyright 2007

ISBN 978-1-74199-076-8 (DVD)

For further technical information contact:

Authorship and Acknowledgements:

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

EXPLORATION HISTORY OF THE GIPPSLAND BASIN....................................8

REGIONAL GEOLOGY OF THE GIPPSLAND BASIN ......................................12

3.2 Stratigraphy and Depositional History .................................................................... 13

PETROLEUM SYSTEMS AND OCCURRENCES ..............................................18

4.1 Petroleum systems elements ................................................................................... 19

PROSPECTIVITY OF THE 2007 GAZETTAL BLOCKS.....................................24

5.2 Previous Exploration ................................................................................................. 25

Aeromagnetic Data and Interpretation..................................................................... 31

Seismic Interpretation and Structural Framework of Release Blocks.................. 32

5.6 Prospects and Leads................................................................................................. 34

Click on an item above to open

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

OFFSET WELLS ................................................................................................ 38

APPENDIX 1: WELL AND FIELD SUMMARIES ..................................................... 56

Click on an item above to open

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Click on a Figure above to open

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Click on an Appendix above to open

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Exploration History of the Gippsland Basin

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Regional Geology of the Gippsland Basin

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Stratigraphy and Depositional History

3.2.1 Strzelecki Group (Early Cretaceous)

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

3.2.2 Latrobe Group (Late Cretaceous-Tertiary)

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Golden Beach Subgroup

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

3.2.3 Seaspray Group

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Petroleum Systems and Occurrences

It has been a matter of speculation as to why there is a concentration of gas accumulations in

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Petroleum systems elements

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

to its temporal equivalent, the proven gas-generating, Albian-Aptian Eumeralla Formation in

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

Maturity and Migration

4.2.1 Top Latrobe Group Plays

Source: Halibut and Golden Beach subgroups; ?Strzelecki Group.

Lakes Entrance Formation.

Burong, Barracouta, Kingfish, Flounder formations; Gurnard Formation

HYDROCARBON PROSPECTIVITY: NORTH-EASTERN OFFSHORE GIPPSLAND BASIN

4.2.2 Intra- and Deep-Latrobe Group Plays

Intra-Halibut/Golden Beach mudstones, Kipper Shale or younger volcanics.