3.0. Acquisition of hydrogeological and related petroleum engineering data

Transcription

1 3.0 Acquisition of hydrogeological and related petroleum engineering data 11

2 The acquisition of hydrogeological and related petroleum engineering data # Department Condition Description Completion date Status Pre-Dec 2012 Post-Dec c i 53B d 2 52c i Completion of Stage 2 onitoring Bore and VWP conversion programs (as outlined in this Plan) Incorporation of potential additional UWIR groundwater monitoring requirements into Stage 2 Bore Construction Program arch 2014 February c i 53B d Construction of additional UWIR monitoring bores arch c iv 53B d Completion of bore baseline assessments and data analysis October c 53B d Completion of interim Groundwater onitoring Plan. April f Collation and reporting of groundwater monitoring results 15 52ci 16 52ci Collection and analysis of six-monthly groundwater quality samples Implementation of the telemetry system for continuous groundwater level monitoring April 2014 and annually thereafter Biannually April c and d, 52di I and II; 52d ii 53B d, 53B E Confirmation of early warning and threshold monitoring bore construction October c i Implementation of landholder bore monitoring land access negotiations October f Commencement of monitoring of Landholder bores April 2014 Commitments completed Commitments work in progress Evergreen Commitments Firm deliverables for that month 3.1 INTRODUCTION The integrity of a water management strategy rests primarily on assembling quality data and on taking a longterm view in establishing an effective monitoring network. QGC has initiated a number of hydrogeological data collection programs augmented by the application of petroleum-related data to hydrogeological workflows. The result is a growing body of information as the foundation for improving our understanding of the Surat Basin. Accurate and robust data are central to the understanding of the Surat Basin, monitoring changes and managing groundwater and QGC utilises a number of data streams as part of its hydrogeological conceptualisation. These streams include a range of background and pre-existing information as well as project specific data acquisition. The objectives of the data acquisition process can be summarised as: To provide the geological and hydrogeological data to characterise the groundwater system, and to enable ongoing hydrogeological data collection; To generate ongoing data streams for analysis of any groundwater level and chemistry changes due to naturally occurring processes (e.g. rainfall recharge, barometric and earth tide fluctuations), CSG activities and/or other groundwater usage; To define the baseline and establish ongoing groundwater level and quality monitoring; To monitor any potential impacts from CSG activities on aquifers and NES; To provide timely early warning on potential impacts to NES and water users so that an appropriate response plan can be initiated;

3 13 To provide targeted monitoring at planned CSG appraisal pilot trials, (CSG water pumping tests) in support of aquifer connectivity studies prior, during and after testing in order to identify possible hydraulic connection between adjacent formations; To monitor aquifer injection trials (near-field and far-field monitoring of potential response); To support reservoir development activities; and To inform other programs and research as required. A key innovation in the ongoing interpretation of the Surat Basin is integration of petroleum and hydrogeological data and workflows. This Chapter describes the ongoing data acquisition streams that are bridging the boundaries between petroleum engineering and hydrogeology, including: Downhole pressure and temperature monitoring through wireline tools such as FT; Drill string conveyed testing such as drill stem tests (DSTs) and DFITs; Advanced geological and hydrogeological unit characterisation through seismic interpretation and wireline logging; Petrophysical characterisation of aquifers from: Detailed sedimentological logging, petrography and flow analysis of cores from complete sections of Surat Basin sediments; and Petroleum industry standard petrophysical logging. 3.2 DATA ANAGEENT INTRODUCTION Data security and access are fundamental to successful analysis and interpretation of QGC s groundwater information. Very large volumes of baseline and time-series data are being collected as part of the groundwater management and monitoring strategy. These data will be securely stored and provide efficient access for internal and external users. An appropriate data security model is used, derived from the BG Group corporate data management system. Due to the specialised data types, it is not practical to store all the data using one database solution. The QGC data management strategy consists, therefore, of a number of fit-for-purpose solutions with database communications interfaces and an appropriate data access security model. Selected data streams are required to deliver information to the regulatory bodies for compliance and to make information available to the community via a web-based user portal. The data is regularly and routinely updated into the relevant databases immediately following collection and QA/QC. The systems are designed to allow users to interrogate data in a variety of ways to suit their needs (i.e. by aquifer, by locality and field). The system is also intended to provide for reporting to OGIA and the Department as required to demonstrate compliance with relevant approval conditions. Figure 3-1 illustrates the data management process, the various data stores and the route by which data are validated and published externally. The system is described in the following sections INTEGRATED CORPORATE DATA ANAGEENT KEYSTONE The Keystone solution was conceived by BG Group to provide subsurface professionals a complete set of quality assured, approved reference and interpretive data through a single point of access. Roll out of the solution commenced in 2010 and was completed in The ultimate objective of the Keystone platform is to provide the BG Group with a global subsurface data management and access tool. All data stored within Keystone conforms to specified quality standards and is accessed through a single interface.

4 14 Groundwater monitoring wells Water level time series data Baseline assessments Wellview Data loggers anual measurements SharePoint internal data distribution Envirosys environmental database Well construction details Well construction performance analysis Telemetry Legacy spreadsheets Keystone Subsurface data PDS PI historian Data QA/QC Data analysis spreadsheets Geochemist s Workbench Data analysis spreadsheets Hydrograph interpretation Geochemical modelling GIS Trend analysis Understanding of basin groundwater dynamics Web portal public access (Data and published reports/ research findings) Spatial analysis Existing processes/architecture Corporate database Planned upgrade/automation *Note Production Delivery anagement System (PDS) Figure 3-1 Data management and storage process GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL DATA PETREL ASTER DATABASE The Petrel master database is an integral component of the Keystone solution. The Schlumberger Software Petrel models form the basis of both the CSG field development plan and the GEN3 groundwater model. The geophysical, petrophysical and geological data stored within Keystone are linked to the Petrel master database, which is itself interrogated to produce static geological models at various scales. New geological, petrophysical and geophysical data is continuously added to the Keystone data store as exploration and appraisal drilling takes place. This new data is interpreted and used periodically to update the Petrel static models. Both the static geological model foundation and the dynamic groundwater model datasets are stored and managed within the Keystone architecture. This provides a robust data management solution for reference and future enhancement when further data becomes available. Additional data required for model calibration is stored within a range of software tools in secure corporate network locations.

5 INTERNAL DATA DISTRIBUTION SHAREPOINT The SharePoint database provides the secure platform for the QGC intranet document storage and distribution system. The software also includes proficient scheduling functionality and, on this basis, it was selected to store information gathered from the groundwater bore baseline program conducted for the QCLNG project area SPATIAL DATA GEOGRAPHIC INFORATION SYSTES All spatial data is stored and managed centrally. The GIS system is linked into a number of databases and is used to combine spatial datasets for: comparative analysis, land access planning, risk analysis, site location planning, infrastructure planning and management and spatial visualisation. The wells management database is a key element of the business control and development process and the relevant spatial datasets are updated daily. This data store has recently been upgraded to include a daily update of the proposed wells schedule in addition to the drilled wells inventory. Groundwater monitoring bores are incorporated within the same spatial datasets as the CSG wells and drilling progress can be tracked on a daily basis WELL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION WELLVIEW The Wellview system is used to manage well drilling implementation and has the capacity to store information from the planning to abandonment stages of the well lifecycle. The system also includes a number of tools to track drilling, development and completion progress. Wellview has historically been used as a component of the CSG well drilling management process and has been adapted to accommodate the different requirements for groundwater monitoring bore drilling PRODUCTION DELIVERY ANAGEENT SYSTE (PDS) The PDS is the global BG Group standard for managing operations. Data is captured and delivered to PDS from data historian tools such as PI. PI forms one of the two main components of PDS, the other being the production database. The PI package is used to capture and store information on asset operation, wells and facilities, which is used to provide input for validation, calculations and processes and subsequent reporting and outputs from the production database. The PDS outputs inform the business with regard to production performance for the purposes of optimisation and commercial management FORATION PRESSURE TIE-SERIES DATA THE PI SYSTE The PI system forms the historian component of the PDS and provides a scalable interface for real time infrastructure management. The software has the capacity to interface with a number of front end products that capture a range of data types (e.g. real-time operations data such as temperature, pressure and flow rates from production wells). Data from the PI system is accessed through both a proprietary interface (the PI Process Book) and by using a icrosoft Excel add-in tool. The system provides functionality for the storage of large time series datasets collected using telemetry systems (e.g. formation pressure time series datasets from groundwater bores). However, data storage and retrieval are the only functions applied to the groundwater bores. The PI system has the capacity for real time monitoring and remote systems management. It is intended that various tools will be used to provide notification of gauge system failure and formation pressure perturbations indicative of specified trigger levels to monitor potential production drawdown impacts.

6 GEOCHEICAL DATA ENVIROSYS QGC s groundwater group uses analyses of samples collected from both CSG production and pilot wells and groundwater monitoring and private landholder bores. This covers the range of processes for associated water produced as a consequence of CSG production, naturally occurring surface water accumulations (e.g. springs discharge) and groundwater. The Envirosys database solution is used to capture and store the water analysis results and also provides some rudimentary data interpretation tools. The interface allows for multiple criteria interrogation of the database and has a data export facility. All water analysis data is stored in Envirosys to provide a central data store. The Production Chemistry group within QGC manages the data flow into Envirosys and conducts preliminary quality assurance and quality control prior to releasing the data for general access. The data is exported from Envirosys, subjected to a second phase of QA/QC and used for geochemical modelling and interpretation PUBLIC ACCESS QGC has commenced development of an interactive web-based GIS system that will enable information on water production, aquifer and bore status conditions to be accessed by the community, including landholders on QGC tenements (via a secure web interface). This transparent approach provides greater clarity on groundwater levels within aquifers, including seasonal trends and changes to groundwater levels as influenced by existing water users and CSG operations. This project is scheduled for completion by mid It is intended that both water level and water chemistry data from designated monitoring bores be made available via technical reports (such as bore completion reports) and other reporting media as required. This same data form an integral part of annual aquifer reporting requirements to Australian and Queensland government agencies. Annual reporting of all groundwater level and quality data commenced from April It is planned that raw data will be provided in annual reports, along with relevant interpretive graphs, diagrams and figures. 3.3 BORE BASELINE ASSESSENTS INTRODUCTION The assessment of landholder bores in the QCLNG project area was completed in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Environment and Resource anagement (DEHP) (now Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP)) Baseline Assessment Guidelines (ay 2011) and the Bore Baseline Assessment Plan for QGC s Northern, Central and Southern Development Areas, Surat Basin (the Plan), which was approved by DEHP in August The program was completed seven months ahead of the Plan's schedule. First field assessments commenced in ay 2011 and the last assessment was completed in November During the program, a total of 388 bore assessments were completed at 250 properties. The data collection phase of the program is now complete and data evaluation is ongoing.

7 17 Overall, a total of 2,659 private properties were approached as part of the bore baseline assessment with: 1,015 properties offering 'no response'; and 1,272 properties found to have no bore. Figure 3-2 illustrates the process from initial landholder communications through to final data assessment. Appendix C contains details of the assessments and results. Bore inventory field work scheduling Scheduling Contractor site visits Field work and quality assurance Data review of field forms and associated documents Upload data Submission of WQ samples and field parameter measurements to labs by contractors Laboratory analysis and quality assurance Receipt of lab results Upload data QGC review of lab results Reporting Submission to landowners and QWC Well integrity assessment Prioritise monitoring locations and implement Well and data evaluation Data interpretation levels and hydrochemistry Figure 3-2 Bore baseline flowchart

8 COUNICATIONS PROCESS The landowner communication process identified in the Plan was as follows: Landowners were contacted by mail and phone according to the bore baseline priority schedule identified in the Plan, to identify if bore(s) exist on the property. At least one letter and one phone call attempt was made for each landholder (with the exception of 'do not call' landholders). If no contact was established after the initial attempts, one to two letters would have been sent in total and up to three phone calls; If bore(s) exist, a site visit was scheduled based on the availability of landowners or other interviewees; Site access rules were reviewed and field schedules created for assessment contractors; A 10-day notification letter was sent for site access and a courtesy call was made to the landholder 48 to 74 hours prior to site assessment; and Following the receipt and review of contractor assessment forms and documentation and any laboratory results, a report was sent to the landowner incorporating the baseline assessment results. Assessments were completed in approximately six field phases between ay 2011 and October 2012, allowing efficient management of scheduling, field work and data review, processing and reporting based on available resources. Landowners who did not respond to an initial letter or repeated subsequent attempts to contact them by telephone were sent a close-out letter advising that QGC had made numerous attempts at contact and requesting they advise of any water bores. No responses were received. A final letter was mailed to all landholders who had indicated there were no bores on their property, confirming this status and requesting that they contact QGC if this information was incorrectly recorded. No responses were received LANDOWNER REPORTS On receipt and review of laboratory results and field forms, documents were collated for mailing to landowners. The bound results packet included: The final field form (early in the program DEHP indicated that field forms had to be signed by landowners and so both an original signed and revised form were provided. When this requirement changed, only a revised form was provided); Laboratory certificates where a water sample was collected; Copies of scanned documents provided by interviewees; and Copies of all photographs collected during the site visit. The date that results were mailed to the landowner was recorded in QGC s communications database LANDOWNER CONTACT RESPONSE AND BORE ASSESSENT COPLETIONS ultiple attempts were made to contact landowners for more than 2,500 properties within the QCLNG project area. No response was received from 1,015 of these properties. A total of 1,272 properties were identified as not having bores, either through communication with the landowner or assessment team site visits to other properties owned by the same landowner. A total of 388 bores were assessed in this baseline program. Figure 3-3 shows the contact status of each property within the project area and a list of completed bores is provided in Appendix C. There were 82 bores assessed outside QGC tenements and the project area. In summary: 48% of properties were identified as not having bores; 10% of properties had completed assessments; and 38% of properties had no contact response.

9 19 Bore Baseline Assessment Contact Status by Property Bore baseline assessment contact status by property Town/City WANDOAN Principal Road Property Boundary QGC Owned Town Land / City QCLNG Project Principal AreaRoad Assessment Property StatusBoundary Access Denied QGC Owned Land Completed No BoresNorthern Development Area No Contact Central DetailsDevelopment Area Southern Development Area No Response - Closed Assessment Status YULEBA DULACCA ILES CHINCHILLA JANDOWAE Access Denied Completed No Bores No Contact Details No Response Closed DATE: 8/07/2013 AP NO: _25640_01 Kilometres CREATED BY: T REV NO: C CHECKED BY: JG AP TYPE: v4other PLAN REF: ± DALBY Kilometers ap Projection: GDA 94 SCALE: 1:700,000 (A3) TARA DATA SOURCE: Towns - GA Roads - StreetPro DCDB - DNR Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource anagement) In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." CECIL PLAINS Figure 3-3 Bore baseline contact status by property FIELD SURVEYING The field component of the program involved 356 field days for the assessment teams. The bore assessments involved an interview with the landowner or property contact, if available, to obtain information and any available documentation about bore construction and maintenance, capacity and use, and previous water samples and water level measurements. An interviewee was present for 87% of the assessments. If there was access to the bore and the water level tape was unlikely to become entangled with downhole pumping equipment, assessors obtained a total depth and water level measurement. Water level measurements were obtained for 42% of the bores assessed. If a bore had an operational pump, it was purged and field and laboratory water quality samples were collected. A water quality sample was obtained for 46% of the bores assessed. In order to avoid possible damage to the bore or pumping equipment, the field team as a rule did not undertake any manipulation of the bore headworks. If access into the bore casing to obtain water level and gas readings was restricted, the landowner was asked to assist if simple manipulation was required. Where a lengthy effort, excessive or potentially damaging modification was required, access was typically not obtained.

10 Kathleen PL 276 Ross ATP 651 Cam PL 277 Woleebee Creek Cassio Acrux PLA 399 PL 398 Polaris amdal DULACCA Paradise Downs Lawton PL 171 Alex Carla PLA 393 Peebs arcus 150 E ACKAY 26 S 26 S WANDOAN Pinelands Connor CONDAINE ILES Bellevue Berwyndale Berwyndale South atilda-john Avon Downs cnulty Lauren Codie PL 229 Argyle PL 179 PL 263 PL 180 ATP 676 PLA S 27 S PL 257 KOGAN PL ap Projection: GDA 94 DATA SOURCE: Kilometers Towns, Railways, Roads - GA Tenements - DE SCALE: 1:600,000 ATP E (A3) PLA 392 ATP 632 ajor Roads Railway QCLNG Project Area QGC Fields in QCLNG Project Area PL 212 PL 247 PL 211 PL 201 ATP 632 ATP 620 PLA 461 ATP 676 PLA 472 ATP 676 PLA 459 PLA 458 Environmental Authority Areas Avon Downs and cnulty EA Berwyndale South EA Bellevue EA Jordan EA Kenya EA Kenya Kate TARA Kenya East PL 278 Ruby EA Wolleebee Creek EA QGC Development Areas Central Gas Fields Northern Gas Fields Southern Gas Fields Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource anagement) In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." Owen Jammat argaret ichelle Will yrtle Teviot CHINCHILLA PLA 261 ATP 621 PLA 262 Jordan PL 442 Sean David Celeste Poppy RubyJo Isabella Ridgewood Aberdeen aire Rae DATE: CREATED BY: CAIRNS ATP 648 Barney PL 474 Cougals TOWNSVILLE CLERONT PL /09/2012 PL 273 Clunie T ROA PL 275 GLADSTONE Jen Glendower AP NO: REV NO: 151 E CHINCHILLA BRISBANE PL 279 Broadwater ATP 648 PL E Harry _11152_01 F JANDOWAE 20 Status Facility type Facility purpose Presence of gas Potential for contamination Other Abandoned and destroyed: 6% Abandoned and usable: 23% Pump Installed: 59% Pump not installed: 12% Artesian ceased flow: <1% Artesian condition unknown: <1% Artesian controlled flow: 2% Artesian uncontrolled flow: <1% Sub-Artesian: 6% Agriculture: 5% Irrigation: <1% Stock intensive: 1% Stock: 32% Stock and domestic: 16% Domestic: 4% Town water supply: <1% Other (mostly unused): 40% ± No gas according to interviewee: 49% Environmental Authority Applications No gas during Town assessment: 2% Unknown/ interviewee not present: 26% Gas present according to interviewee: 16% Gas present during assessment: 7% Fuel staining or fuel source nearby: 2% Interaquifer connectivity likely due to corrosion or ingress of surface water: 55% Both of above: 3% No or minimal potential: 36% Not specified: 4% Interviewee present: 87% Bore construction details provided: 22% Bores matched with DNR RN: 57% Water quality sample collected: 46% Figure 3-4 Bore assessment data summary Aquifer confidence Static water level confidence Bore integrity Suitability for water level monitoring Suitability for water quality monitoring Formations identified agree with QGC geological model: 70% No aquifer information provided: 46% Anecdotal information only provided: 13% Water level measurement obtained: 42% No water level measurement obtained: 58% Water level obtained not considered static: 11% Possibly static: 5% High bore integrity: 17% Likelihood of corrosion/failure unknown: 13% Corrosion/failure possible: 19% Corrosion/failure likely: 51% Not recommended: 63% Unknown: 2% Possibly suitable: 31% Likely suitable: 4% Not recommended: 64% Unknown: 2% Possibly suitable: 29% Likely suitable: 5% Documentation provided: 41% Likely static: 11% Considered static: 19% Figure 3-5 Assessment data evaluation

11 21 Laboratory samples, including duplicates, triplicates and field blanks, along with laboratory method blanks, spikes, duplicates and surrogates were scrutinised by QGC s production chemists to assess the traceability and confidence in the precision, accuracy and representativeness of reported results. On receipt and review of laboratory results and field forms, documents were printed and bound for mailing to landowners. The bound results included the final assessment field form, laboratory certificates where a water sample was collected, copies of scanned documents provided by the interviewee and copies of photographs collected during the field visit. Results have been reported according to OGIA (and its predecessor QWC) requirements BORE ASSESSENTS DATA SUARY Figure 3-4 and Figure 3-5 summarise the information obtained from assessment field forms. ore detailed information is provided in Appendix C. A key outcome from the bore baseline exercise was to identify bores which QGC can monitor to enhance its understanding of the hydrogeological and hydrochemistry of the Surat Basin and patterns of water use. An evaluation is underway into bore integrity so that only bores where QGC has confidence in the data are included in the network. Identified high quality bores will be equipped with pressure transducers and loggers and sampled for water quality. 3.4 THE GROUNDWATER ONITORING BORE PROGRA INTRODUCTION The foundation of the hydrogeological conceptualisation is the construction of the groundwater monitoring bore network. As of July 2013, the network is approximately 80% complete. The aim is to complete the network by the end of 2013, ahead of major depressurisation of the Walloon Coal easures associated with LNG production. The objectives of the monitoring bore network are: To provide geological and hydrogeological data to characterise the groundwater system, provide a baseline dataset and enable ongoing hydrogeological data collection; To generate ongoing data streams for analysis of any groundwater level and chemistry changes due to naturally occurring or anthropogenic processes (e.g. rainfall recharge, barometric and earth tide fluctuations), CSG activities and/or other groundwater usage; To define the baseline and ongoing groundwater level and quality monitoring; To monitor any potential impacts from CSG activities on aquifers, EPBC listed springs and private landholder bores; To provide timely early warning or potential impacts to NES and water users for the appropriate response plan to be initiated; To provide targeted monitoring at planned appraisal pilot trials (CSG water pumping tests) in support of aquifer connectivity studies prior, during and after testing in order to identify possible hydraulic connection between adjacent formations; To monitor aquifer injection trials (near and far-field monitoring of potential response); To ensure this network has been designed to comply fully with federal and Queensland state regulatory requirements (in particular, OGIA and Queensland environmental authorities); To support reservoir development activities; and To inform other programs and research as required. Appendix D has a full description of the network along with monitoring procedures.

12 22 A formal review of the adequacy of the groundwater monitoring network will be implemented in This exercise will be informed by the first two years of operational data and the results of the GEN3 modelling, which will provide groundwater drawdown results. Also, at this time, the second UWIR will be implemented. The results of this will be incorporated along with the review and agreement of the monitoring network implementation reports. Included in that review will be EPBC requirements and the adequacy of the network to address monitoring of NES. Once there is confidence that good quality groundwater drawdown projections are available, an evaluation of the use of statistical methods will be considered as part of the ongoing network review TECHNICAL GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A number of key guidelines and standards provide the framework around the network design and implementation including drilling, monitoring, sampling and water quality. Table 3-1 shows the relevant guidelines and standards. Area Description Legislation Australian Government EPBC Act Queensland Government Water Act (2000) Queensland Government Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act (2004) Queensland Government Environmental Protection Act (1994) (including amendments) Guidelines and policies Queensland Government CSG Water anagement Policy (2012) Queensland Government Baseline Assessment Guideline (2011) Queensland Government Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (2009) Queensland Government onitoring and Sampling anual 2009 Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009, V2 (2010) Standards National Uniform Drillers Licensing Committee: 2012 inimum Construction Requirements for Water Bores in Australia Edition 3 Queensland Department of Environment and Resource anagement: 2010 inimum Standards for the Construction and Reconditioning of Water Bores that intersect the Sediments of the Artesian Basin in Queensland, State of Queensland Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS :1998 ISO :1993 Water Quality Sampling Part 11: Guidance on sampling of groundwaters US EPA: 1996 Low-Flow (inimal Drawdown) Groundwater Sampling Procedures US EPA Region 1: 2010 Low-Stress (Low Flow) Purging and Sampling Procedure for the Collection of Groundwater Samples from onitoring Wells. American Public Health Association Standard ethods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater Reports Queensland Government Underground Water Impact Report for the Surat Cumulative anagement Area 2012 Table 3-1 Applicable legislative and regulatory guidance

13 23 CHAR1290 CHAR1291 CHAR1294 CHAR1295 BRIS1226 Coconut 150 E Tardrum Croker Gully 151 E CHAR1290 CHAR1291 CHAR1294 CHAR1295 BRIS1226 olle Coconut TAROO Bickley Sophie 150 E Tardrum Croker Gully 151 E Suomi!)!)!) )!!)!)!)!)!) Frizzle!)!) TAROO Coochiemudlo GW1 Coochiemudlo GW2 TOWNSVILLE Leghorn Suomi Coochiemudlo Owlman Frizzle CAIRNS Coochiemudlo GW1 ACKAY Coochiemudlo GW2!)!) TOWNSVILLE CLERONT Botany Charlotte Friendship Scarborough LeghornPleiades Coochiemudlo Owlman Queensland Cassio GW1 Bowen Basin GLADSTONE Charlotte GW1 ACKAY!)!) Cassio GW2 Charlotte GW2 CLERONT Golden Botany Charlotte Fishburn Borrowdale Bloodworth!)!) )! Friendship Scarborough Pleiades Queensland Grove Cassio 6 ROA CHINCHILLA Cassio Cassio GW1 Bowen Basin GLADSTONE BRISBANE Charlotte GW1 26 S!)!) Cassio GW2 26 S Charlie 1 Charlie GW1 Charlotte GW2 Thackery Penrhyn )! Charlie GW2 Golden South Australia Fishburn!)!) Borrowdale Bloodworth!)!) )! Charlie Portsmouth AcruxGrove Cassio 6 ROA Surat Basin CHINCHILLA Cassio New South Wales BRISBANE )! Thackery 6 26 S 26 S Charlie 1 Charlie GW1 Polaris GW23 Thackery Penrhyn WANDOAN Arthur Phillip Cameron!) )! Charlie GW2 South Australia!)!) Charlie Portsmouth Acrux Surat Basin Polaris New South Wales )! Thackery 6 Polaris 22 )! Polaris GW23 Kathleen WANDOAN Paradise Arthur Phillip Cameron Woleebee Creek GW11 Cam Downs Alex!) Polaris Woleebee Creek GW10 Polaris 22 Woleebee Creek GW1 - GW4, Woleebee Creek GW7 - GW9 olle Ross Paradise amdal Kathleen Lawton Cam Carla Downs Woleebee Creek 17 Woleebee Creek GW10, GW11 Creek Lawton 9)!!)!) Ross amdal Lawton Woleebee Peebs Creek GW16, 17GW17, )!!)!)!)!)!) GW18 Woleebee Peebs!)!)!) Woleebee Creek GW1 - GW4, Creek Lawton 9 Woleebee Creek GW7 - GW9 )! )! Alex Carla Peebs GW16, GW17, GW18 Peebs arcus Pinelands!)!)!) Bickley Sophie CAIRNS Connor arcus Pinelands CHAR2729 Overston Dunk Lion Utopia Langer DULACCA Parker Quartz Kimberlite Parker Quartz Kimberlite Chalk Pemberton Anesbury Bambi Chalk Pemberton Anesbury Bambi Bookers Fantome Copper Bookers Justin Lila Havannah ekah CONDAINE Fantome ILES )!)! Bellevue GW2 Bellevue 1 Andrew Berwyndale!) urdock Acheron Acheron Elly Tanna Elly Tanna Argyle 6 )!!) Argyle Berwyndale Owen!)!)!) South Kenya GW2 Argyle 6 Kenya Kenya East Kenya East GW3, GW4, Lauren )! 1 Lauren GW1 GW5, GW6, GW8 Owen )! Kenya GW2 atilda-john!)!)!) Kenya East GW32 Kenya East GW1 - GW2!)!)!)!) )! Kenya Kenya East 1 Lauren Lauren GW2 East GW7 Kenya Sean East GW3, 15 GW4, Codie Kate Kenya East Jammat )! GW5, GW6, Sean GW8, 17 GW32 Lauren GW4 Kenya East GW1 - GW2!)!)!) Kenya East GW7!) )! Sean 15 Codie Kate Kenya East Sean Jammat David 6 Sean 17 argaret Jordan David )! )! Sean 19 )! Poppy GW1 )! RubyJo Sean GW2, GW3, David 6 argaret!)!)!)!)!) Jordan GW4, GW5 David Poppy GW2 )! RubyJo )! Isabella Sean 19 Poppy GW1 ichelle Celeste Poppy Broadwater GW1, GW4, Celeste 6 )! )! Poppy 13)! )!!)!)!)!)!) GW4, GW5 Poppy GW2 GW11, GW15 RubyJo Isabella ichelle Celeste Poppy Jen 1 Will RubyJo 1 )! Ridgewood Celeste 6 )! Poppy Broadwater 13 GW7!)!)!) Barney )! )! Clunie TARA Broadwater 14!) Will GW1 Will Jen RubyJo Broadwater 1 Jen 1 Ridgewood Barney )! Clunie TARA!) Will GW1 Jen Cougals GW13 yrtle Aberdeen Cougals!) Glendower )! Harry Cougals GW13 yrtle Aberdeen Cougals!) Glendower Orpheus Kanowna urdock 27 S 27 S Overston Utopia Orpheus Kanowna Daydream DULACCA Bellevue GW2 Bellevue 1 Kinkabilla assie Connor Bellevue Avon Downs Avon Downs ILES cnulty Berwyndale South Justin GW1 Andrew Berwyndale Argyle Berwyndale South GW2 Berwyndale South Berwyndale South GW1 Berwyndale South GW2 Copper Lila Lauren GW1 CONDAINE atilda-john Lauren GW2 27 S 27 S Havannah ekah Lauren GW4 CHAR2729 Dunk Langer Daydream Bathurst Dora Lion Bathurst Dora Hinchinbrook Shanus erryfull Arlington Hinchinbrook Shanus erryfull Arlington Teviot GW1 Serenity Teviot GW4 Serenity )!)! Bellevue cnulty CHINCHILLA CHINCHILLA Teviot aire Rae Teviot GW1 Teviot GW4!)!) Teviot!)!) Harry 6 RubyJo GW2, GW3, Broadwater GW1, GW4, GW11, GW15 Harry 6 aire Rae )! )!!)!)!)!)!) Broadwater GW7 Broadwater 14 Broadwater Harry Sandstone Jasperoid Kinkabilla 150 E Sandstone Jasperoid 150 E Boyle Existing and proposed groundwater monitoring Existing/Proposed Groundwater wells and converted onitoring pressure Wells monitoring & Converted wells Pressure onitoring Wells Spofforth Bannerman Existing/Proposed Groundwater onitoring Wells & Converted Pressure onitoring Wells Existing Groundwater onitoring Well!) ± Town / City Spofforth Bannerman Kilometres Town / City Principal Road Proposed Groundwater!)!) Existing Groundwater onitoring Well onitoring Well Town / City Principal Road QGC Block Principal Road ± Proposed Groundwater onitoring Well )! QGC Field Existing Walloon Coal!) easures Pressure onitoring Well QGC Field Kilometers ap Projection: GDA 94 SCALE: (A3) Proposed Walloon Coal )! )! Existing Walloon Coal easures Pressure onitoring Well 1:650,000 easures Pressure onitoring Well Kilometers Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. Tenements - DE, Roads, Towns - StreetPro DATA SOURCE: ap Projection: GDA 94 SCALE: (A3) The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location. )! 1:650,000 Proposed Walloon Coal easures Pressure onitoring Well DATE: 4/11/2013 AP NO: _33551_01 "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and ines) In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no Note: warranty Every in effort Tenements - DE, Roads, Towns - StreetPro relation has to been the made data (including to ensure this accuracy, information reliability, is spatially accurate. completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs PLAN REF: DATA SOURCE: The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location. Preliminary ap (including consequential damage) relating to any use "Based of the on data. or contains Data must data not provided be used by for the direct State marketing of Queensland or be used (Department in breach of of Natural the privacy Resources laws." and ines) In consideration CREATED of the State BY: TDATE: AP TYPE: 15/10/2013 v4other REV AP NO: NO: B _33551_01 permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs PLAN REF: Preliminary ap (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." CREATED BY: T AP TYPE: v4other REV NO: A Boyle assie 151 E 151 E Figure 3-6 Groundwater monitoring bore locations

14 LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER ONITORING POINTS Figure 3-6 illustrates the extent of the groundwater monitoring network across the QCLNG development area. In realising the monitoring bore network, meeting the key objectives involved considering a range of technical elements namely: Element 1 Aquifer Connection to atters of National Environmental Significance (NES)/Sensitive Receptors/Current Use; Element 2 Development of Baseline Datasets, Establishing Trends; Element 3 Ongoing onitoring, Assessing Impacts; Element 4 Supporting Connectivity Studies; Element 5 Field Development and Tenement Coverage; Element 6 Bore Located to Verify and Validate Groundwater Conceptual and Numerical odels; and Element 7 Geological and Hydrogeological Data Acquisition to assist in conceptual and numerical model reconciliation across a number of disciplines. Statistically-based methods for the design of groundwater monitoring networks have been considered. Examples discussed in errick, 1998, and Theodossiou and Latinopoulos, 2006 were evaluated. However, in this context these are of limited applicability as there are many different factors (as discussed below in detail) which determine monitoring bore locations. A review of the adequacy of the groundwater monitoring network is proposed once the (UWIR) requirements are finalised and the results of the GEN3 modelling are providing history matched groundwater drawdown results. OGIA requirements call for a second phase of monitoring wells in 2016, the locations of which will be optimised following the second UWIR (due in 2015) and the first two years of operational data. Once there is confidence that good quality groundwater drawdown projections are available, an evaluation of the use of statistical methods will be considered as part of the ongoing network review RELATION TO OGIA UWIR REQUIREENTS The OGIA s 2012 Underground Water Impact Report (UWIR) provided details of the Water onitoring Strategy (WS) for the Surat Cumulative anagement Area (CA). In response to this strategy, a onitoring Network Implementation Plan (NIP) (QGC 2013) was prepared to meet the WS obligations (submitted to the Department as Commitment 2) which incorporates the Stage 2 outline. Considering these objectives, the NIP document presents: Bore design and construction guidelines and design and drilling procedures for the current and proposed network; Existing network details, including relevant location data; Installation details to meet OGIA requirements; Installation details additional to OGIA requirements in support of the network rationale defined above; and Spring monitoring information. Appendix E presents the plans prepared to meet OGIA requirements. As of October 2013, there are 51 monitoring bores required in the UWIR monitoring network, out of a total QGC monitoring program of 64 bores. 49 onitoring Bores have been endorsed by OGIA. The two outstanding non-endorsements relate to timing of access to existing landholder bores. Of these, one location has now been visited to assess suitability for monitoring. Access has been refused by the second landholder and DNR is facilitating negotiations.

15 25 WC Flows and Hydrochemistry Pressures WC Cored wells converted into monitoring wells (WC andv) ultiple pressures Cored wells converted into monitoring wells (WC and Springbok andv) ultiple pressures NEW VWP onitoring wells (Top WC to surface) ultiple pressures NEW VWP onitoring wells (Eurombah to Precipice) Water level / quality NEW nested monitoring bores Deep nested bores Shallow nested bores Water level / quality Private bores converted into monitoring bores (after baseline assessment) Shallow Data loggers Gubberamunda Formation VWP Water level Gubberamunda water monitoring Water level Westbourne Formation VWP Westbourne water monitoring Springbok Sandstone PDHG VWP Springbok water monitoring Walloon Subgroup PDHG PDHG Aquifer / aquitard pressure monitoring Shallow aquifer monitoring pressure and water quality Eurombah Formation Reservoir performance pressure Reservoir and aquifer pressure monitoring VWP Eurombah water monitoring Hutton Sandstone VWP Hutton water monitoring Evergreen Formation VWP Precipice Sandstone VWP Precipice water monitoring Permo-triassic or basement Aquifer / aquitard pressure monitoring Aquifer monitoring pressure and water quality Figure 3-7 Schematic of monitoring bore types ONITORING BORE TYPES There are a range of different monitoring bore types, as illustrated in Figure 3-7. The network has been implemented in two phases, namely: Phase 1: 2011 Shallower bores to the Gubberamunda and Springbok aquifers; and Phase 2: Bores to deep and shallow aquifers and aquitards above and below the Walloon Group. The Phase 1 monitoring bore network consists of open standpipe type bores. Open standpipe simply means the bore is constructed to tap one formation only with cemented steel casing open to the atmosphere. It is completed with some form of fitted cap (typically lockable) that is easily opened or lifted off by hand. These open standpipe bores may be constructed in a wide variety of diameters depending on intended use (50 to 150 mm) and are used for both water level measurements and hydrochemical sampling.

16 26 Figure 3-8 Groundwater monitoring bore site various formations (Kenya East) The Phase 2 monitoring bore drilling program is currently underway. Some bores penetrate the reservoir and are designed to manage a potential gas kick of up to 3,000 psi. The bores are also designed to comply with the two barrier industry standard (i.e. P&G Act monitoring wells), where the first barrier to gas migration is the cemented casing and the second barrier is the wellhead. These bores are also used to collect water levels and hydrochemistry samples. QGC is liaising with DNR to amend the Code of Practice for water bores to enhance safety. Where pressure data must be collected from a number of formations a multi-level cemented pressure gauge well design is used. This technique involves installation of six to eight pressure gauges at a range of depths. Once the string of gauges has been lowered into their positions, cement is pumped and allowed to fill back to surface, effectively plugging the well. The gauges are then connected to a telemetry system and data is transmitted to central databases to be analysed regularly. A percentage of the bores in the long-term groundwater monitoring program will be bores owned and operated by third parties, particularly farm water supply bores. These bores are completed in a wide variety of styles depending on functional requirements. Some are equipped with windmills, others with electric submersible pumps and some will be artesian.

17 27 A number of sites have monitoring bores targeting multiple levels within the stratigraphic sequence and include the Walloon Subgroup. These nested sites are typically targeted at the location of CSG appraisal pilots where there is trial pumping from the Walloon Subgroup to determine porosity, permeability, etc. onitoring aquifers and aquitards during pumping is a powerful tool in establishing the degree of aquifer connectivity (see Chapter 7). Table 3-2 summarises the boreholes and monitoring points that have been drilled and/or planned. There may be multiple monitoring points within one borehole, hence the apparent discrepancy in numbers between boreholes and monitoring points. Boreholes Standpipe (hydrochemistry and pressure) Pressure only Conversions (Walloons only) Boreholes onitoring Points Formation Standpipe onitoring points pressure only Condamine Alluvium 2 Gubberamunda 6 7 Westbourne 2 2 Springbok Walloons 0 78 Eurombah 2 3 Hutton 8 6 Evergreen 4 Precipice 7 6 Total separate aquifer / aquitard pressure monitoring points, 39 water quality monitoring points Table 3-2 Summary of monitoring network In addition to the aquifer and aquitard monitoring network, there will be approximately 78 pressure monitoring points in the Walloon Subgroup to measure the groundwater pressure response of the reservoir to CSG water and gas extraction.

18 ESTABLISHING BASELINE CONDITIONS It is critical that a valid baseline be derived prior to active large-scale depressurisation activities, and this has driven the monitoring network implementation schedule. The drilling program has been structured so that bores are drilled ahead of field development to allow for baseline conditions (including any seasonal variability) to be defined. Baseline periods for each monitoring site are defined in Chapter 4. Once the bores are completed water level data is collected prior to CSG production this constitutes the baseline water level program. QGC calibrates its gauges by checking against manual dips every six months as part of its sampling regime. Representative baselines will be defined for each monitoring site and may include trend analysis. A trend analysis methodology has been prepared. It is included in Chapter 4. Considering the program plan as defined by the onitoring Network Implementation Plan submitted to OGIA and the current field development plan, the baseline data availability are defined for each development area, as shown in Figure GROUNDWATER ONITORING PROGRA REVIEW Groundwater level and hydrochemistry monitoring will be reviewed and optimised as more information becomes available and field development priorities change. The next review will be undertaken once the updated UWIR is published in Such evaluations may assess the optimal frequency of monitoring and spatial distribution of the monitoring locations. Additional factors include the monitoring criteria required in areas where cumulative impacts from neighbouring CSG operators could be observed. Also, a deviation in the monitoring results (from the predictions derived from modelling efforts) may trigger alternative monitoring requirements. In instances where monitoring frequencies are proposed to be altered, the alterations will be documented and administered through a formal change management process, including consultation with internal and external stakeholders prior to implementation. Typically changes to the monitoring program will be flagged and documented as part of the annual GWP update. Similarly the commissioning of new operational areas will require an update to the current Groundwater onitoring Plan. 3.5 PETROLEU WELL DATA A key enhancement to the current groundwater investigation in the Surat Basin is access to petroleum industry data and interpretive techniques. The relevance of key data types to the hydrogeological conceptualisation is outlined in the following sections GEOLOGY AND STRATIGRAPHY Seismic surveys form the initial component of hydrocarbon exploration work in central and southern Queensland. For example, Figure 3-10 shows a seismic line interpretation from west to east across the Basin. In parts, the Surat Basin overlies the Bowen Basin. However, on the flanks, the Surat Basin overlies crystalline basement rock. Also note the laterally continuous seismic-stratigraphic packages in the Surat Basin section (from Ryan et al., 2012). The relevance of this work is the provision of large scale, regional geological models which can be verified later by drilling results. Figure 3-11 illustrates the petroleum wells which have been used to verify the stratigraphy of the basin. The regional formation positions and layers are the basis of the geological model used in numerical modelling of groundwater flow in the basin.

19 29!(!( Kathleen 18 #* Ross 6 #* DAWSON RIVER Charlotte (H, P) 26 30'S TAROO Cassio (H, P)!(!( Polaris (P)!( Peebs (G, W, S)!(!( WANDOAN Woleebee Creek (P)!( #*!(!(!(!(!( Woleebee Creek (G, W, S, E, H, P) Woleebee Creek 8 Peebs (P)!(!(!(!(!( 150 E Coochiemudlo (H, P) Legend Town 'E ajor Road ajor River Current Production Blocks QCLNG Project Area onitoring Bores AUBURN RIVER!( Existing, ore than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts!( Proposed, ore than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts!(!( Charlie (H, P) QCLNG Northern Gas Field production!( Proposed, Less than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts commences in October 26 S 26 S 2014!! Woleebee Creek P1 Pilot Test Area Vibrating Wire Piezometers #* Existing, ore than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts #* Proposed, ore than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts Data Availability by QGC Block ore than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts Less than 1 year of data before QCLNG Production Starts Other QGC Blocks Formation to be onitored A G W S E H P Alluvium Gubberamunda Westbourne Formation Springbok Sandstone Eurombah Sandstone Hutton Sandstone Precipice Sandstone 151 E 26 30'S YULEBA DULACCA 150 E CONDAINE ILES Bellevue 1 #*!( #* Bellevue (S) Bellevue 2 Berwyndale 1 Berwyndale 19 #* #* #* Berwyndale 4 Berwyndale 20 #* Berwyndale South (G, S)!( CONDAINE RIVER Argyle 6 #*!(!( #*!(!( Kenya 2 (S) atilda-john 1 Kenya East 1 Lauren (G, S) #* Kenya East (G, S, E, H, W) Lauren (P)!(!(!(!(!( Ruby Jo Kenya East (G, S)!( KOGAN P2 Pilot Kenya East (P) David 7 Sean 17 #* Kenya East Sean 19 P3 Pilot Test Area #* RubyJo (S, H, P) #* Poppy (S)!(!(!(!(!( Isabella 6 #* #* Celeste 6 Isabella 7 #* #* RubyJo 1 Jen 1 #*!(!(!( #* TARA #*!( Broadwater (A) Will (P) Broadwater (P) Cougals (G)!( Broadwater (A, S, P, H) OONIE RIVER 'E!(!( CHINCHILLA Depressuration commenced in 2005 for 27 S 27 S domestic gas production 27 30'S QCLNG Central Gas Field production commences in October 2014!! QCLNG Southern Gas Field production commences in October 2014! Teviot (S, P) Teviot (P) #*!! 151 E 27 30'S JANDOWAE DALBY CONDAINE RIVER CECIL PLAINS QCLNG Project QCLNG area stage Project 1 monitoring Area bore Stage data 1 onitoring availability Bore Data Availability ± Kilometres Kilometers ap Projection: GDA 94 SCALE: 1:600,000 (A3) DATA SOURCE: Towns, ajor Rivers - GA ajor Roads - StreetPro Tenements - DE Note: Every effort has been made to ensure this information is spatially accurate. The location of this information should not be relied on as the exact field location. "Based on or contains data provided by the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and ines) In consideration of the State permitting use of this data you acknowledge and agree that the State gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness, currency or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data. Data must not be used for direct marketing or be used in breach of the privacy laws." DATE: 18/07/2013 CREATED BY: T AP NO: REV NO: _30008_01 A Figure 3-9 QCLNG Project area stage 1 monitoring bore data availability

20 30 W Base Walloon Surat Basin Top Walloon 1,200 Two Way Time (ms) 1,600 2,000 2,400 Base Jurassic Basement 2,800 Top Permian 3,200 Bowen Basin Kilometres 440, , , , ,000 E Figure 3-10 Seismic line BR84-14 highlighting the structure of the Surat and Bowen Basins 25 0 S 26 0 S Roma Chinchilla 27 0 S GEN3 Stratigraphy Wells Cities and Towns QCLNG Project Area GEN3 odel Boundary Surat and Clarence-oreton Basins 28 0 S Kilometres E E E E E E Figure 3-11 Location of wells used in the stratigraphic interpretation

21 THE APPLICATION OF PETROPHYSICS TO THE SUBSURFACE UNDERSTANDING OF GROUNDWATER SYSTES Petrophysical interpretation of wireline log data has been used for several decades in the oil and gas industry to characterise the subsurface. The requirements for aquifer characterisation are not dissimilar to those necessary for establishing a hydrocarbon play concept. Advanced petrophysical techniques and the associated interpretations are now readily available to hydrogeologists working within the coal seam gas (CSG) industry. After a section of a bore or well has been drilled, geophysical logging tools are lowered into the uncased hole section to measure various properties of the formation as function of depth. Physical properties are measured from the rock and recorded at the surface in a process called wireline logging. In petrophysical log evaluation, the measured properties can be interpreted for lithology, porosity, fluid type and saturation, fluid volume and saturation, fracture presence, and permeability. The logs that are acquired from the groundwater bores are temperature, calliper, gamma ray, bulk density, neutron density, photoelectric factor, resistivity, compressional and shear sonic, and spontaneous potential. This information provides the basis for modelling rock property distributions in static geological models that are the foundation of dynamic fluid flow simulations. ultiple log response interpretations require calibration with drill core analysis data to ensure that the log output reflects the physical properties of the rock. For example, as a similar gamma ray response may be generated by both clay minerals and certain clastic components of the sandstone framework, it is important that the gamma log response is calibrated and interpreted correctly to identify low and high clay content zones. Once suitable calibration has been completed wireline log data from multiple wells can be interpreted with a high level of confidence without the need to acquire additional drill core. This equates to a significant cost saving and additionally facilitates a very rapid method of characterising subsurface geological properties. Specialist software packages have been developed to rapidly import, interpret and correlate geological properties spatially. Petrophysical flags of formation characteristics have been developed by QGC to provide an efficient and economic suite of tools that could be used to identify aquifers and aquitards and interpret their thickness and spatial distribution. The methods of calibration traditionally employed by the petroleum industry are being modified to facilitate the identification of hydrostratigraphic units. These informal subsurface units contribute to a scheme that forms the foundation of understanding the influence of heterogeneity and anisotropy on the bulk hydraulic properties of geological units at various scales. The distribution of porosity and permeability provide the starting point for understanding groundwater hydraulics. It is intended that a form of rock-typing will be developed whereby combinations of wireline log signatures can effectively be used for aquifer characterisation. Intrinsic permeability is an integral component of hydraulic conductivity (a value incorporating both the pore space distribution in the rock mass and the properties of the hosted fluids). Wireline log interpretations of intrinsic permeability distributions can be used as inputs in combination with other data to calculate the spatial distribution of hydraulic conductivity within a hydrostratigraphic unit. The availability of large, calibrated wireline log datasets will provide much tighter constraints for conceptual hydrogeological models. The appropriately interpreted signatures allow for more accurate interpretations of the geometry and spatial extent of hydrostratigraphic units and the internal distribution of hydraulic properties. Developing a reliable aquifer characterisation methodology using wireline log data will potentially provide a very rapid mechanism by which conceptual hydrogeological models can be formulated. Once identified the representative hydraulic properties can be assigned to aquifers and aquitards and an interpolation of the bulk property distributions between data points can be attempted. It is considered that this type of approach will provide a higher level of confidence in the interpretations used to understand groundwater behaviour as a consequence of coal seam gas production activities.

22 32 Tool Name easurement Units and range easuring Qualitative use Quantitative use Caliper CALI Bore hole radius Inches Radius Observing washout and under gauge borehole Gamma ray GR Gamma radiation from the formation API 0 to 150 Gamma radiation Shale versus nonshale correlation Depth control Shale content Bulk density DENS Impact of Gamma Rays on electrons in the formation g/cc 1.95 to 2.95 Total formation density Nature of fluid in pores Gas detection Porosity Density Seismic velocity Photoelectric factor PEF Impact of gamma rays on electrons in the formation PE B/E 1 to 4 Barns per electron Lithology Neutron density NEUT Impact of neutrons on NEUT PERC hydrogen atoms 45 to -15 Fluid filled porosity Lithology Gas detection Porosity Resistivity DEPRES EDRES FERES Electrical resistivity of the formation ohmm 0 to 2000 Electrical resistivity Observing Permeable zones Determine water saturation Sonic DTCO Propagation of sound through formation Us/ft 140 to 20 slowness Lithology Identifying fractures Porosity Seismic velocity Spontaneous Potential SP Electrical charge of well bore mv Electrical charge Detection of permeable zones Formation water salinity Bed thickness determination Table 3-3 Wireline log types and derived petrophysical rock properties FORATION TESTING Formation testing is a process of isolating and measuring the pressure and temperature, under dynamic conditions, of intervals within geological formations. Formation tests are typically local-scale tests but the large number of data points can reveal patterns in permeability and porosity. There are several testing options available depending on the formation's properties. The most appropriate testing method is chosen and planned based on geological assumptions and the required data acquisition: With pressure testing, drill pipe conveyed tools, DST (drill stem test) is considered to be the best option for high permeability (~>300 md) formations due to high inflow capacity; Wireline conveyed tools with in-built pumps, FRT (Flow Rate Tester) and DT (odular Formation Dynamic Tester) are more appropriate for low permeability formations. The FT (-Series Formation tester) is a wireline tool that pushes out a finger sized probe onto the borehole wall for a range of permeabilities. These methods provide pressure versus rate analysis data for calculating the zones productivity index (the ability of the well to produce or flow). FRT and DT wireline formation testing utilizes the dual packer interval isolation concept. A small pump in the tool string draws fluid from the formation and gauges measure the rate and pressure. The pump is stopped and the pressure build up is again monitored until it stabilises, thus giving the productivity potential; and

23 33 Woleebee Creek GW4 (D) Zones D SP RESDEP PEF DTCO 1: mv ohm.m 2, us/ft 50 CALI RESED DENS Colour fill 4 in ohm.m 2, g/cm GR Colour fill NEUT 0 gapi ft 3 /ft Hutton Sandstone 1,000 1,100 Hutton Sandstone 1,200 Evergreen Formation 1,298 Notes: Track 1 GR, Gamma Ray, measures the amount of radioactive elements; CALI, Caliper, measures the diameter of the borehole; SP, Spontaneous Potential, measures the natural electrical potential difference Track 2 Resistivity logs, measures the formation fluid resistivity at various depths of investigation. Track 3 PEF, photoelectric factor, measures photoelectric absorption properties for determining mineralogy; DENS, density, measures the density; NEUT, neutron porosity, measures the hydrogen index. Track 4 DTCO, compressional sonic log, measures the interval transit time. Figure 3-12 Example well section for Woleebee Creek

24 34 A DFIT (Diagnostic Formation Injection Testing) is conducted in very low permeability formations and when mechanical properties of the formation are necessary. It is a small volume, low rate water injection procedure followed by an extended shut-in period where pressure and temperature are measured for the entirety of the test. This type of testing is used in conjunction with fracture stimulation operations to help engineers determine both the dynamic and mechanical properties of the formation interval. The behaviour of the reservoir during the leak-off period enables pore pressure, permeability and any boundaries in the area surrounding the wellbore to be assessed. Similar to DSTs the DFIT interval is isolated using packers, thus the treatment area is constrained to a specific interval of interest. To April 2013, a total of 32 formation tests have been performed on groundwater monitoring bores. 3.6 PUPING TESTS AND TRIALS In contrast to formation tests, pumping tests provide information over a wider volume of material and can help characterise inter-formation relationships and the presence of hydraulic boundaries. A number of pumping tests have been implemented for the project, not only to look at testing of one aquifer but also to measure multiformation responses. 800 NW Woleebee Creek Bores SE 600 GW4 GW7 GW9 400 GW10 GW GW8 GW3 7 GW2 GW1 Orallo Formation 200 Gubberamunda Formation Westbourne Formation 0 Springbok Sandstone m AHD Walloon Subgroup -600 Eurombah Formation -800 Hutton Sandstone Evergreen Formation Injection Water production Water production Precipice Sandstone Bowen Basin etres Existing Walloon Subgroup monitoring Aquifer monitoring bore Production/injection well Existing Walloon Subgroup monitoring 4 WCK_WH004 5 WCK_WH005 6 WCK_WH006 7 WCK_WH007 Aquifer monitoring bore GW1 WCK_GW001 GW2 WCK_GW002 GW3 WCK_GW003 GW4 WCK_GW004 GW7 WCK_GW007 GW8 WCK_GW008 GW9 WCK_GW009 GW10 WCK_GW010 Figure 3-13 Woleebee Creek P1 pilot test monitoring bores

25 PHASE 1 AQUIFER TESTS A groundwater pumping test program was initiated for the Phase 1 monitoring bores. The pumping test program had several purposes: To allow estimates of aquifer hydraulic properties (transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity) to be calculated, to inform various groundwater studies both underway and being planned (e.g. GEN3 model); To assess aquifer response to pumping to gain a qualitative understanding of aquifer behaviour (e.g. identify leakage or boundaries); To allow groundwater quality sampling to satisfy the sampling commitments of the GWP; and To allow groundwater quality sampling for a range of parameters (including isotopes) to provide data for various groundwater studies being undertaken. The aquifer testing program involved: A multi-rate step test, typically three 30-minute steps, to assess well efficiency and identify a target rate for a longer term constant rate test; A constant rate pumping test typically of eight hours duration, to allow estimates of aquifer hydraulic properties to be calculated and to assess aquifer response to pumping to gain a qualitative understanding of aquifer behaviour; and A monitored recovery test to 95% of the pre-pumping water level, to allow estimates of aquifer hydraulic properties to be calculated to further gain a qualitative understanding of aquifer behaviour. Table 3-4 presents a summary of the results which have been used in analysis and modelling. 260 Groundwater elevation (m AHD) Oct 2012 Nov 2012 Dec 2012 Jan 2013 Feb 2014 Downhole pressure gauges WCK_GW004_PIT_001 WCK_GW004_PIT_002 Figure 3-14 Observed groundwater level at WCK_GW004

26 36 Formation Geometric mean T (m 2 /day) Geometric mean Kh (m/day) ax Kh (m/day) in Kh (m/day) Gubberamunda Springbok (all tests) Springbok (upper, 1 test) Springbok (mid, 2 tests) Springbok (lower, 5 tests) Table 3-4 Summary of permeability estimates from Phase 1 pumping tests Key findings of the Stage 1 aquifer testing program are: In general, the Gubberamunda Sandstone aquifer is up to an order of magnitude more permeable than the Springbok Sandstone; The middle Springbok Sandstone may be generally more permeable than the lower Springbok Sandstone; ost of the tests were subject to boundary conditions influencing the drawdown curves (either boundaries or recharge). These boundaries may be related to faulting or facies changes; and No leakage was detected in the Gubberamunda tests. Four of the seven Springbok tests detected leakage, which is likely to be derived from Springbok Formation strata immediately above or below the pumped sand unit APPRAISAL PILOTS AND CONNECTIVITY Three pilot production tests (shown in Figure 3-9) represent the core of the connectivity studies. These tests are designed to provide definitive evidence of the possible pressure effects in the adjacent formations due to up to six months of CSG development. The monitoring network is now in place and background data is being collected. Progress to date has been limited due to pumping problems. Three pilots are underway at: Woleebee Creek Northern Gas Fields; Kenya East Central and Southern Gas Fields; and Ruby Jo Southern Gas Fields. The status of the three tests are summarised below, locations are depicted on Figure 3-9. Woleebee Creek P1 A cross-section showing the Woleebee Creek P1 pilot test production wells and observation bores is shown in Figure Woleebee Creek P1 full dewatering commenced on 23 November The WCK pilot wells have all recently been shut in due to safety issues around high water gathering pressures downstream from the CSG wells. Testing is expected to restart in September 2013 with preliminary results available in April This will still be done before major depressurisation in the Northern Gas Fields commences in October Kenya East P3 Kenya East P3 began diagnostic testing on 12 arch KEE#27 and KEE#28 were shut in as scheduled. It is expected that the full dewatering is expected to commence in September Ruby Jo P2 Ruby Jo P2 started testing 9 October Full dewatering commenced on 17 January Wells #8 and #9 are flowing. RBY #10, #11 and #12 received work overs and are currently waiting on further work. It is expected that full dewatering will recommence in September 2013.

27 37 Figure 3-15 Combined water level plots at Woleebee Creek Potentiometric level (mahd) BWS GW2 Springbok Sandstone 268 BWS GW1 Gubberamunda Sandstone Sep 2011 Nov 2011 Jan 2012 ar 2012 ay 2012 Jul 2012 Sep 2012 Nov 2012 Jan 2013 Figure 3-16 Combined water level plots at Berwyndale South

28 WCK_GW4 LONG-TER PUPING TEST A long-term pumping test has been carried out on Woleebee Creek GW4 bore since 11 December 2012, see Figure This Precipice Sandstone bore will be pumped for a period of six months to determine transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity and storativity of the Precipice Sandstone aquifer, as an input to injection studies. Figure 3-15 illustrates the pumping well drawdown associated with this test. The monitoring bore GW10, which is located 3.28 km from the production well at Woleebee Creek, monitors the changes in the Precipice Sandstone pressure during the pumping test. The remaining aquifer monitoring bores will measure any changes due to leakage from overlying formations. 3.7 GROUNDWATER LEVEL AND PRESSURE RESULTS Groundwater level data is analysed as a series of time-series hydrographs that include the following: Hydrographs according to region or area of interest; Hydrographs according to formation(s) of interest across the tenement areas; and Hydrographs including rainfall and water abstraction (CSG abstraction and other use abstraction where available). On a routine basis, hydrographic data may be analysed to different levels of complexity. All hydrographs are subject to regular assessment and preliminary interpretation, and the graphs and interpretive works are included in the relevant reporting schedule. Bores at NES monitoring locations and selected other bores are subject to detailed trend analysis using the methods outlined in Chapter 4. Adjusted hydrographs (following trend analysis) of NES monitoring bores are then assessed against relevant threshold and trigger values, and any exceedances are examined in more detail, according to the relevant Response Plan (Chapter 13). Table 3-5 lists the types of water level data being collected and their frequency. Items monitored Infrastructure Frequency onitoring suite Groundwater level/aquifer pressure manual Nested wells Six-monthly Water level Groundwater level/aquifer pressure continuous (automated) Nested wells Daily transducer measurements and semi-annually manual measurements Water level Aquifer pressure continuous (automated) Private bores* Six-monthly Water level Aquifer pressure VWP (equipped with datalogger) Daily, six-monthly downloaded Water level *Planned to commence in 2014 Table 3-5 Summary of water level and pressure monitoring

29 39 DISPOSAL Ground level PRESSURE ANAGEENT VALVE Pre filter and sample release valve ph Eh EC T DO Water level easurement of goundwater physico-chemical parameters Low flow pump Reagent/blank phials Screen Test Well Field spectrophometer measurement of Fe 2+ /S 2- /NO 2- for redox couples Alkalinity titration Sample holding beaker Fluid discharge Dissolved cations syringe filter 0.1µm preserve with 2% ultrapure HNO 3 Total metals unfiltered preserve with 2% ultrapure HNO 3 Anions unfiltered preserve on ice Isotopes unfiltered no preservation required for 2 D 18 O and 13 C Figure 3-17 Groundwater quality field measurement and sampling system Appendix F presents the first annual monitoring report, with all data collected to date. Some examples are presented below: Figure 3-15 illustrates the range of data being collected in aquifers, aquitards and the Walloon Subgroup at the Woleebee Creek multi-level monitoring site prior to dewatering in A key feature of the plot is the slow decline in the low permeability Westbourne and Eurombah Formation and Springbok Sandstone following a standard variable head permeability test. Figure 3-16 shows the response in the Springbok Sandstone and Gubberamunda Sandstone aquifers over the Berwyndale South gas field which has been operating since The data indicates that there has been no downward trend in groundwater level in the Springbok Sandstone. The Berwyndale South plot also illustrates a common feature across the project area, which is the upward gradient from the Springbok Sandstone to the Gubberamunda Sandstone. 3.8 HYDROCHEISTRY DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Prior to a water sample being collected, the bore is developed to a standard where the water generated is considered representative of the target aquifer, with very minimal sediment, drill cuttings or drilling mud present. Processes to develop bores are varied, and depend on the type and age of the bore, along with construction and completion design. Hydrochemistry samples, in the medium- to long-term, will be collected using low flow techniques. Until then, samples are collected using a submersible pump to purge the bore and collect the sample. Table 3-5 presents the schedule and suites for hydrochemical sampling. This program is in line with the monitoring requirements for springs monitoring as per the Joint Industry Plan (see Chapter 8).

30 40 Item monitored Infrastructure Frequency onitoring suite Water quality Private bores* Six-monthly Field suite, GW suite** Water quality Aquifer monitoring Six-monthly Field suite, GW suite** Water quality CSG well Six-monthly CSG characterisation and CSG indicator suites* ** Private bore monitoring to commence in 2014 * Isotope suite to be applied as required. Table 3-6 Summary of hydrochemistry monitoring Sampling is carried out in accordance with DEHP onitoring and Sampling anual The low-flow continuous purging and sampling method uses a submerged air actuated bladder pump adjusted to deliver groundwater to the surface at very low flow rates. The system significantly reduces water volumes to be managed at surface and means that only water necessary for sampling is abstracted from the target aquifer. The principle behind the technique is to ensure the flow rate exerted by the pump is set to equal or less than the inflow from the target aquifer. Groundwater Analyses - Lauren Field SO % 20% Ca ++ 80% 80% Cl 50% J O 50% 80% J J I O O IO HCO 3 + CO TDS (mg/l) % 40% SO Cl 80% 60% 80% 60% Ca ++ + g ++ 40% 20% 50% 20% g ++ 20% 50% 80% Na + + K + ph JO O O J J IJ O I O J J O IO O I OI O J J J 8.0 O O J 9.0 I I OJ O 10.0 g ++ 40% 20% 80% 60% 80% 60% Ca ++ 20% 20% 40% 40% Na + + K + 60% 80% JO O I J O I J O J O IO 80% O 60% 20% 20% 40% HCO 3 + CO3 -- J 80% J J IO O I 40% 60% Cl O 60% 80% J SO % 20% Figure 3-18 Example of Piper and Durov plots

31 41 This results in the stratification of the water in the bore, with only fresh aquifer water flowing into the bore at the low-flow pump inlet depth. Following this theory the stagnant water column within the bore remains undisturbed, while the recovery of representative samples of the water in the target formation adjacent to the bore screen occurs. The other key benefit is a reduction in water abstraction from potentially thousands of litres per bore to tens of litres. The water abstracted is continually monitored for a number of chemical and physical parameters using a flow through cell and field instrumentation. Figure 3-17 illustrates how the sample is collected and managed at surface. Hydrochemistry data is reviewed and presented in the following formats: Piper Diagrams and Durov and expanded Durov plots for hydrochemical facies characterisation (e.g. Figure 3-18); ajor ion components and salinity are also plotted against depth to evaluate trends within each geological unit and through the sedimentary pile; apping of spatial hydrochemical facies distributions; Two and three dimensional visualisations of hydrochemical facies distributions; Isotopic trends are plotted to evaluate groundwater fingerprinting applications and the potential for determination of boundary fluxes between units spatially and with depth; and Evaluation of reversible and irreversible changes with time where temporal data are available. Durov plots of water analyses are used to establish hydrochemical facies types, visualise links between aqueous geochemical character and physico-chemical parameters such as dissolved solids and ph and to identify potential mixing trends in large data sets. When used in conjunction with spatial and sample depth data Durov plots provide a powerful component for the construction of conceptual groundwater geochemical models. The example shown was plotted using data from the Lauren CSG field in the QGC Central Development Area. The samples are from bores within the boundaries of the field and show a narrow range of compositions all plotting within the Na-HCO 3 hydrochemical facies zone of the diagram. Additionally the horizontal extension of the plot shows the relationship between compositional variation and salinity. The vertical extension of the plot shows the range of ph values, which shows that all the samples are alkaline. The multiple relationships displayed on a Durov plot can be used to identify systematic trends between salinity, groundwater compositional character and ph. These inter-relationships can also be used as part of a quality control exercise, e.g. ph values are intimately related to alkalinity, which is a function of bicarbonate and carbonate activity, therefore; a ph value below 4.7 cannot be associated with a Na-HCO 3 hydrochemical facies. The plot results can be used to assist with well engineering applications to identify the potential for corrosive subsurface conditions and the potential reactions with drilling fluids. This information also provides a basis for estimating environmental impacts as a consequence of exploration and development activities. Using these techniques, groundwater quality data are then applied to a hydrochemical model that aims to review and establish potential inter aquifer relationships. From a hydrochemical perspective hydrochemical facies are used to group the analyses. The facies groups are compared spatially and in relation to depth and geological unit. Analysis and interpretation of both major and selected minor ion ratios is conducted using cross plots of the relative molar concentrations. A preliminary hydrochemistry model is presented in Chapter 9.

32 DATA ACQUISITION CONCLUSIONS QGC has developed a robust data collection system to characterise the groundwater dynamics of the Surat Basin and to monitor future changes. Petroleum and hydrogeological data acquisition and interpretation tools are being integrated in innovative ways to inform further research and understanding. The status of the Commitments relevant to data acquisition is as follows: # Department Condition Description Completion date Status Pre-Dec 2012 Post-Dec c i 53B d 2 52c i Completion of Stage 2 onitoring Bore and VWP conversion programs (as outlined in this Plan) Incorporation of potential additional UWIR groundwater monitoring requirements into Stage 2 Bore Construction Program arch 2014 February c iv 53B d Completion of bore baseline assessments and data analysis October c 53B d Completion of interim Groundwater onitoring Plan. April f Collation and reporting of groundwater monitoring results 15 52ci 16 52ci Collection and analysis of six-monthly groundwater quality samples Implementation of the telemetry system for continuous groundwater level monitoring April 2014 and annually thereafter Biannually April c and d, 52di I and II; 52d ii 53B d, 53B E Confirmation of early warning and threshold monitoring bore construction October c i Implementation of landholder bore monitoring land access negotiations October f Commencement of monitoring of Landholder Bores April 2014 Commitments completed Commitments work in progress Evergreen Commitments Firm deliverables for that month Success depends on integrity, responsible environmental stewardship and the development of positive and enduring relationships.