CE_WC_testSAMPLEdigitalbooklet_FINAL_MAG_

Company Profile Operating Team

2 3 8

Matapédia Valley History Cunningham Energy of Canada

10

Opportunity Previous Well Work

11 14 15 17 22 28 29 30

Neighbouring Leasehold

Potential Hydrocarbon Reserves

Geologic Overview

Work Program

Joint Venture Summary Operating Environment Projections and Estimates

Economics & Risk 35 Forillion / Indian Cove vs. Eagle Ford Shale 36 AFE 46 Aeromagnetic & Gravimetric Survey 49 AeroGrav Table of Contents 50 AeroGrav List of Figure 51

Company Profile

Operating Team

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

4

5

Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. has been chosen as the operator of the property. Mr. Ryan Cunningham, CEO of Cunningham Energy and Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc., will oversee the drilling and production activities of Marzcorp Oil & Gas Inc. Cunningham Energy has drilled over 350,000 feet of new Appalachian well footage in the past 5 calendar years. A Speedstar 185 Top Drive Drilling rig has been procured by Cunningham Energy for use in the Marzcorp’s Drilling Program. Operations in the Gaspé region will include Cunningham Energy’s West Virginia contract drilling personnel. Marzcorp is a private Canadian oil and natural gas exploration company in the Gaspé Peninsula in Quebec. The Company’s permits cover 378,579 hectares (935,090 acres) in the Matapédia Valley, Gaspesie, Quebec, with half the land located in the Taconic belt and half in the Gaspé belt. Marzcorp received a geological evaluation of prospective resources dated March 31st, 2011, effective April 1st 2011 (the “Chapman Report”), prepared by Chapman Petroleum Engineering Ltd. in accordance with standards set out in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook and National Instrument 51- 101, Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities. Based on exploration work including 2D seismic and other exploration activity in the area, the report focused on four identified prospects for oil. Further exploration and development work is proposed to delineate the prospective resources including 3D seismic and two exploration wells.

Cunningham energy of canada inc. operat ing team

Ryan E. M. Cunningham, Principal & Operating Partner Cunningham Energy of Canada’s president and operational partner is a West Virginia native with extensive oil & gas experience. Ryan began his petroleum production and exploration career in Clay County, West Virginia working for D & A Oil and Gas Corporation in 1990. Since that time, Ryan has had an array of work experiences including working for the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, as well as, holding various positions with Wall Street investment firms. Ryan holds a B.A. in Environmental Policy from Rollins College. Mr. Cunningham’s family has over 170 years of history in West Virginia and many years of involvement in the oil and gas industry in West Virginia and Texas. Before taking his position with Cunningham Energy, Ryan had been concentrating on real estate development projects through several family and strategic partnerships. In 2008, Ryan founded Cunningham Energy as a true independent oil and gas production firm concentrating on tight conventional reservoir production in proven areas of development. In 2015, Ryan also founded Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. as an exploration company in conjunction with Marzcorp Inc. Previously, Ryan served as the operating partner of Black Crow Oil LLC. In 2008, under Ryan’s direction, Black Crow Oil LLC drilled a discovery Berea Oil and Gas well in the Rock Creek Field near Walton, West Virginia. The West Virginia State Geological Survey has recently recognized this discovery as official exploratory footage in the Rock Creek Field. The discovery well has resulted in the need for a gas pipeline to be constructed into the Rock Creek area where infrastructure for natural gas markets did not previously exist, and will afford operators in the Walton area the ability to further develop oil and gas reserves. Ryan Cunningham has been elected to the WVONGA Board of Directors for 2015-2016. Barry A. R. Cunningham, Director of Finance and Risk Assessment Barry A. R. Cunningham is a native of Charleston, West Virginia, and has been involved in the oil and gas industry since an early age. He started his

Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. is an independent exploration and production firm based in British Columbia. The company was organized for the sole purpose of exploring a 935,000 acre leasehold farm-out from Marzcorp Inc in 2015. Since its inception in the United States, Cunningham Energy/Cunningham Energy Oilfield Services (COS) have relied on past experience in conjunction with the application of new technologies to succeed in the ever changing field of efficient energy production. Cunningham Energy and it’s affiliates own interests in approximately 600 wells. In addition, Cunningham Energy has thousands of acres worth of leases and prospects ready to be developed. Cunningham Energy’s drilling and service arm, Cunningham Oilfield Services (COS), was the first rig operator in West Virginia to successfully drill and complete a shallow horizontal Big Injun Oil Well in 2014. The company was also the most active shallow horizontal driller in the Appalachian Basin during 2014-2015. Cunningham Energy drilled over 60 horizontal Berea Oil Wells in Eastern Kentucky for multiple operators as well as drilling internally owned shallow horizontal oil wells in West Virginia.

Operating Team

Operating Team

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

6

7

oil and gas career working for D & A Oil and Gas Corporation under the supervision of his grandfather in Clay County, West Virginia in 1990. Barry’s understanding of the industry has become a valuable asset in managing the complex financial challenges of today’s changing operating environment. Barry graduated from Bucknell University with a degree in Economics and Spanish. Barry began his career in finance as an investment banker for Crews & Associates in Charleston, WV, serving as a municipal underwriter for higher education, water and sewer, and senior housing municipal bond issuances. After serving 8 years in the finan- cial industry as an investment banker and a financial advisor, Barry joined Cunningham Energy to facilitate financial transactions, gauge and manage financial risk, and manage the back office operations of the company. Jim Lockhart, Managing Director of Investor Relations Jim Lockhart has an extensive background in the petroleum industry dating back to the late 1970s. He has worked for several majors, including Marathon Oil, Shell, and Teledyne Movible Offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. He has also been a principle of several companies in the tech sector, including Advance Systems, Sunbelt Systems, and former president of Virtual Technologies. He returned to the oil sector and has been with Cunningham Energy for 5 years as a senior account executive. Jim is currently Managing Director of Investor Relations for Cunningham Energy in the Fort Worth office. Douglas Hardwick, Director of Compliance Mr. Douglas Hardwick has over 14 years of valuable experience in the oil and gas industry and has held several leadership positions in local, regional and state governmental volunteer associations. He served four years as the elected Vice Chairman for a Texas State Federation and then two years as the elected State Chairman and then as Chairman Emeritus, he was awarded the Inaugural Man of the Year Award. Mr. Hardwick was called upon to serve in numerous volunteer positions by elected officials including the budget and construction of a new County Courthouse, Property Development Rules and Regulations and Crime Stoppers. Doug also understands the importance of giving back to the community by volunteering in a homeless shelter, Hearts and Hammers Dallas, local charity fundraisers and his community church. He began his career in the Oil and Gas Industry in 2001, and has been a part of the drilling and completion of over 250 wells, contributed to pipeline right-of-ways, gas sales and lease contracts. He has vast experience in Exploration and Production projects in the Barnett Shale, as well as numerous other productive fields in New York, North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma and several other fields here in the State of Texas. Douglas also has working knowledge in Water Flood projects and Commercial Salt Water Disposal wells.

Mr. Hardwick is a well-known and respected Oil and Gas Industry Professional being called upon to help with Mergers, Acquisitions and Funding prior to Cunningham Energy. Mr. Hardwick has dedicated his career to gaining knowledge through research and evaluation, studying alternative energy, green energy inventions and prospects that include; bio diesel, wind, algae, coal gasification and waste to energy. Before his experience in the Oil & Gas sector, Douglas enjoyed nearly 20 successful years of leadership in the Technology Sector. Danielle Boggs, Operations Manager Danielle Boggs, Operations Manager, at Cunningham Energy’s Eastern Division, comes from an extensive legal and business background. After studying Business at Fairmont State University, Danielle spent 8 years as a paralegal in both the private and public sector handling various types of legal issues at all levels of the judicial system. She became a part of the Cunningham team in 2011 and has worked extensively with all branches of the company as well as outside vendors and state and federal regulating agencies. H.Steven Rhodes, Director of Engineering and Infrastructure H. Steven “Steve” Rhodes is a highly accomplished engineering professional and senior executive with over 30 years of advanced experience in the geotechnical, geostructural and environmental engineering disciplines combined with extensive construction management and project quality control. He holds a B.S. in Mechanical and Civil Engineering from the University of South Carolina. Mr. Rhodes was CEO, principal and co-founder of a large international consulting engineering practice that participated in numerous significant, large scaled commercial, industrial and government developments totaling over $10 billion in expenditure, while personally managing over 5000 engineering and construction projects during his tenure. Over the last three years, Mr. Rhodes has been a consultant to Cunningham Energy providing engineering and field construction engineering services and oversite for drilling pads, roadways and related infrastructure. In 2013, Mr. Rhodes became a member of the Cunningham Energy organization and is involved intimately in all the planning and field construction activities that are crucial to our well drilling programs. Joseph M. Menas, Landman Joseph “Joe“ M. Menas is a native West Virginian, and a graduate of North Marion High School. Joe is a veteran, having served over 8 years in the U.S. Marine Corps Infantry and a recipient of the Purple Heart Medal. Joe joined Cunningham Energy in 2011 with duties including efforts focusing on leasing and oversight of security. Joe also oversees pipeline right of way issues and land owner relations

Operating Team

Operating Team

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

8

9

marzcorp operat ing team

Jon Pereira, Vice President Mr. Pereira founded and developed a Canadian electronics manufacturing business which was sold to a US publicly traded company in 2001 and then later sold again in June 2012. Starting in 2001, Mr. Pereira served as Vice President of this Canadian division, a leading global provider of complex multi-layer printed circuit boards. The operation currently is a $75M factory with over 500 employees. Mr. Pereira currently holds the title of President and CEO at BE Resources, a public junior mining corporation with former assets in New Mexico and current assets in Quebec focused on the graphite and graphene business. Since 2010, Mr. Pereira serves as Vice President of Marzcorp Oil and Gas and as a Board Member of James Bay Resources, a public exploration company with oil and gas assets in Nigeria. Mr. Pereira has previously held senior positions at Healthcare, Life Science and Industrial companies. Mr. Pereira was responsible for developing the North American Industrial division of the multinational LSE traded Healthcare and Medical Company. From 2005 to 2007, Mr. Pereira served as Director and Vice President of Health Anywhere, a privately held Canadian TeleHealth and Telemedicine company specializing in real time patient vital sign monitoring, which was later sold to a larger public company. Mr. Pereira holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Toronto. Sheldon Kasper, Engineer, P. Eng Mr. Kasper has been a consulting Engineer to Tudor Corporation since July 2001. He has extensive experience working in the oil fields starting as a rig hand . Mr. Kasper worked Fletcher Challenge Energy Canada starting as Senior Exploration Engineer and working his way up to Chief Engineer when he left to open his own consulting business in 2001. Chapman Petroleum Engineers Marzcorp retained Chapman Petroleum Engineers to complete the 51-101 report. Chapman’s team includes Geologists, Geophysicists and Engineers. Marzcorp’s technical staff will be working with Chapman’s team on a consulting basis for projects both in Alberta and Quebec. Cunningham Energy of Canada also retained Chapman Petroleum Engineers to update the 51-101 report reflecting horizontal well design.

Frank Marzoli, President & Chief Executive Officer Mr. Marzoli has been the President, Chief Executive Officer and sole director of Marzcorp since July 4, 2008. Mr. Marzoli has also been the President of MARBAW since December 20, 2006. MARBAW held a 100% interest in the Dumont nickel deposit in the Val D’Or/Amos mining region of Quebec, which MARBAW sold to Royal Nickel Corporation, a public nickel development company, in February 2007. Mr. Marzoli has been a director and founding shareholder of Royal Nickel Corporation since February 2007. Mr. Marzoli has close to 30 years of business experience in importing from the Far East. In 2007, Mr. Marzoli left the import business to pursue the resource sector full time. Ryan Cunningham, Chief Operating Officer Mr. Cunningham is a West Virginia native with extensive Oil & Gas experience. Ryan began his petroleum production and exploration career in Clay County West Virginia working for D & A Oil and Gas Corporation in 1990. Since that time Ryan has had an array of working experience ranging from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection to various positions with Wall Street investment firms. Mr. Cunningham is charged with acquisitions as well as long term planning for exploration efforts. Ryan also oversees all daily operations in West Virginia and Kentucky. Ryan Cunningham is currently directing operations for Cunningham Energy, Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc., and Raven Ridge Energy LLC. Ryan has also served as operating partner of Black Crow Oil LLC. Recently, Ryan has been elected to the West Virginia Oil & Gas Association’s Board of Directors (WVONGA) for the 2015-2016 calendar year. Mr. Cunningham holds a B.A. in Environmental Policy from Rollins College. Andrew Boulanger, Chief Financial Officer Mr. Boulanger has been theChief FinancialOfficer of FirstOnSiteRestoration L.P., a Canadian emergency restoration firm, since April 2007. Prior thereto, Mr. Boulanger acted as Chief Financial Officer of Bennett Environmental Inc. (TSX-BEI) from 2004 to 2007 and held several positions with Co-Steel Inc. (TSX – CSI) from 1995 to 2003, including Chief Financial Officer from 2000 to 2003. Co-Steel Inc. amalgamated with Brazilian steelmaker Gerdau S.A. in October 2002 to formGerdau Ameristeel Corporation (TSX – GNA). Mr. Boulanger is a chartered accountant with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario since 1991 and holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from York University.

Matapédia Valley History

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

Matapédia Valley History

10

11

In 2005, a second hydrocarbon discovery was made in eastern Gaspé with the drilling of Petrolia Haldimand #1 which produced light oil from the York River Formation. After completing a 3D seismic survey in 2008, a successful step out well was drilled in 2009, Petrolia Haldimand #2. Completion and production tests are ongoing on these twowells. The independent petroleum engineering firm, Sproule Associates Ltd., have determined that their best estimate of contingent resources in this field is 7.7 million STB of oil. In 2015, Junex Inc. drilled a 1500’ horizontal well in the Forillon Limestone formation (Indian Cove) which produced 100-300 BOPD of light oil and 7200 bbls during its testing. Netherland Sewell estimated that 557 MMBO is in place from this discovery in the Galt Field.

interest in theGaspé area due to geological continuity between the two areas. Also in 1995, diamond core hole drilling near Lake Matapédia was carried out by the exploration company Prospection 2000 who drilled 15 core holes ranging in depth from 60 to 150 m. Light oil shows were noted in open fractures in a number of these shallow wells. Between 1996 and 2002, four stratigraphic slim hole wells were drilled to test these oil shows near Lake Matapédia. The wells were drilled to depths ranging from 305 to 1310 m. and two were reported to be suspended with oil and gas shows with the other two being dry holes. In 1999, Junex Inc. drilled a second well in the Galt Field and then placed both wells on commercial production using compressed natural gas technology to transport the gas to market. From 2000 to 2002, the Government of Québec commissioned almost 400 kilometers of seismic lines in the western Gaspé area which they released into the public domain. A significant part of this program was done in the Matapédia Valley.

Sir William E. Logan and field sketch from the 1844 Geological Survey of Canada.

in 1967 and in 1969 Sun et. al. Mitis C-088 was drilled to a total depth of 1931 m. In the 1970’s and early 1980’s, the new provincial public corporation SOQUIP, did extensive geological and geophysical studies in the Gaspé area which included a significant drilling program of six deep wells. The first significant hydrocarbon discovery was made in 1983 with the drilling of the SOQUIP Petro-Canada Imperial Galt #1 well and the discovery of the Galt Field with Devonian carbonate fractured reservoirs. Our petrophysical analysis of these zones confirms that they are reservoir quality rocks. At the time the accumulation was considered too small for commercial development and exploration efforts in the Gaspé area were diminished. However, a 1995 oil discovery in the lower Paleozoic carbonates of onshore Newfoundland at Port-au-Port revived

Hi story of MATAPÉD I A valley, Quebec

The founder of the Geological Survey of Canada, William Logan, first reported oil seeps in the Gaspé area in 1844. From 1860 to 1960, nearly 70 relatively shallow wells were drilled in this region of Québec. This included thefirstwell drilled in theMatapédia Valley, Associated Developments Causapscal C-002, drilled in 1958 to a total depth of 1437 m. None of these wells were commercial but a number recovered oil upon testing. The first deep modern drilling was done in the late 1960’s when Gulf drilled two wells, the second of which was continuously cored from 308 m. to the total depth of 3536 m. In the late 1960’s, Sun Oil Company drilled, and abandoned two exploration wells in the MatapédiaValley. Sun et. al. LaRedemption C-086 was drilled to a total depth of 1832 m

Opportunity

Previous Well Work

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

12

13

Potential 2000 BOPD per horizontal well, yielding a gross cash flow of $80,000/day/well. Cunningham Energy of Canada Opportuni ty o

Capital Structure The majority of financing to date has been provided by MARBAW International Nickel Corporation. MARBAW is a privately owned corporation. As of June 2016 a total of $13 million plus Dollars (US) has been spent on the property.

o

Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. is uniquely positioned to execute on developing billions of potential dollars of proven oil and gas reserves in an area of the Gaspé peninsula.

o

1 Million acres of prime oil land that falls within our corporate development plan.

o

Management has determined a CapEx budget of 18 million Dollars (US) for two exploratory Wildcat vertical well tests & two Wildcat horizontal production oil wells.

The three major shareholders are:

o

There is currently no production and the company currently has no revenue

* MARBAW International Corporation

* Prospection 2000 Inc.

The original technical analysis of this property was performed during the months of February and March 2009 and was updated in April 2011. A further update using results of Junex’s efforts along with horizontal estimates were completed in June of 2016. The purpose of this report was to independently determine the feasibility of the Company undertaking the exploration and development of the prospective resources in the Matapédia Valley, Gaspésie, Québec, and determine the magnitude of the prospective resources and the economic value before and after the consideration of risk. Mazcorp Inc. acquired 100% interest in the Prospection 2000 exploration permits located in the Matapédia Valley, Gaspésie, Quebec in 2009 for a cash value of $4.6 million and a credit against money spent on the property of $4.646 million thus issuing 11,000,000 shares to Prospection 2000 for the completion of the acquisition . This very large land package of 378,579 hectares (~1 million acres) is located 575 km east of Montreal. (Accessible by Highway 20 and Provincial Route 132.) To date, 3 exploratory wells and 15 core holes have been drilled since 1996 including well C123 (November 2000) that produced hydrocarbons to surface on production test. Marzcorp and Cunningham Energy of Canada have identified four leads and have selected (2) drill targets through varying factors along with seismic data to be drilled on the acreage as wildcat wells for the purpose of procuring commercial quantities of oil.

* Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc.

WELL 1969-C088 – SUN EXPLORATION ET AL MITIS NO.1

prev i ous well work on prospect i ve wi ldcat property

This well, drilled to 1924 metres, is located on seismic line MRN-2001-02 at about 8 kilometres north of the Mitis Property. It drilled through the Saint- Léon, the Sayabec and the Val-Brillant Formations before ending in shales of the Awantjish Formation. A seven (7) metre thick porous zone with salt water was encountered at a depth of 1802 metres in a limestone unit of the Sayabec Formation. The zone corresponds on the seismic to an important thrust fault zone. The measured porosity reached values between 20 to 25% (electrical logs indicate more conservative values of 5 to 6%) and the permeability of the zone was 5.49 millidarcys. Vertical micro fractures were observed. No indications of hydrocarbons were reported.

WELL 1967-C086 – SUN EXPLORATION ET AL LA RÉDEMPTION NO.1 Located near the northern border of the Synclinorium at about 8 kilometres to the northwest of the Matapédia property, the well reached a total depth of 1826 metres. It traversed 902 metres of Cap Bon Ami Formation and 924 metres of silty limestone from the Saint-Léon Formationwithout finding any indication of hydrocarbons. The well ended in interbeded units of serpentines which are believed to be part of the La Rédemption Ultramafic Complex.

Previous Well Work

Previous Well Work

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

14

15

WELL 2000C123 – SPPG PROSPECTION 2000 LAC MATAPÉDIA NO.1 Continuously core drilled to a total depth of 1247 metres through Lower Devonian Indian Cove Formation and Forillon Formation. Drill core from fractures reported oil showings on the core. Geologist core descriptions made long after the hole was drilled, indicated many fractures, oil smell on fresh break and no porosity on most of the core except at a depth of 1171 metres where a 5% porosity is described in a brecciate zone near an important fracture or fault. Drilled in 2000 to a depth of 4700 feet. A log was done up to 896.5 m (2941 ft) gas samples analyzed from 4200 ft. Oil indicated on core samples. 10% - 20% porosity based on previous reports Secondary porosity (fractures) noted on logs and cores. Hydrocarbon flowed to surface during 14 hour production test. This slim stratigraphic core hole was drilled to a depth of 753 metres near Well C-125. No stratigraphic description is available. It is reported that possible gel-like condensates (no analyses are available) were recuperated at the surface around the well head. These hydrocarbons are believed to come from the upper part of the hole. o o o o WELL 1999-C121 - PROSPECTION 2000 LAC MATAPÉDIA NO.1 o o

WELL 1996-C119 - CORRIDOR LAC MATAPÉDIA NO.1

WELL 2002-C125 – BARTECH LAC MATAPÉDIA NO.1

Slim-hole core drilling that reached 1036 metres, located a few metres from the C-121 and a couple hundred metres south of the C-123 in the northern part of the Matapédia Property. Numerous oil shows were reported by drillers while drilling the upper part of the hole and fresh break oil smell is reported on core (description made a few months after drilling). Many important fractures are observed all the way down to total depth where interbeded serpentines layers were encountered. No other hydrocarbon indication is described by the geologist on the core log. From electric logs interpretation however, different porous zones with possibilities for the presence of hydrocarbon are seen. Non- conclusive tests were conducted in the fall 2004 but packers and tools remained jammed in the hole.

This well was continuous core drilled to a depth of 305 metres and is located 3 Km north of the Matapédia Property near the northern limits of the Lac Mitis Syncline, just south of Val- Brillant. It drilled through the Indian Cove Formation and possibly part of the Forillon Formation. According to the seismic data, this well may be worth deepening. The well is suspended.

Descriptions of the C-121, C-123 and C-125 wells drilled by Prospection 2000 are from documents sent to the government and to Marzcorp Oil and Gas. Data difficult to relate to official well numbers, first, having very similar names and secondly, original field holes numbers were different, being part of a series of 19 boreholes. The C-125 well is the best documented and most accurate. Despite these difficulties, we consider from these

*

stratigraphic wells that, at least in the northern part of the Matapédia property (within a minimum 1Km2 square area), oil/condensates exist in near surface fractures in the Indian Cove, Forillon and Saint- Léon Formations and that little to no primary porosity was observed by geologists that described the cores. However, very good secondary porosities related to major fractures were observed on available electrical logs and noted by the geologist in the deeper part of the C-123. These results indicate that oil could be present in reservoirs located down dip from where the numerous fractures outcrop. Exploration will therefore be aimed at tracking these fractures used by hydrocarbons as migration paths and follow them down dip in hoping to locate along the way a possible trapped reservoir rock containing commercial hydrocarbons accumulations.

A 51-101 Reserve Report prepared by Chapman Petroleum Engineering indicates a high estimate case of 5.0088MMSTB recoverable reserves based on prior work (this report is based on vertical wells on only 3% of the property).

Actual picture from C123 flaring while core drilling.

Potential Hydrocarbon Reserves

Neighbouring Leasehold

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

16

17

POTENT I AL HYDROCARBON RESERVES

Dr. RaymondMarleau, M. Sc., D. Sc., Geologist: In May 2001, Marleau published a report on the Gas and Oil Potential of the Lac Matapédia Property. He states in his report that geophysicists from QC., and Calgary as well as MRNF’s personnel who realized the survey, have identified an anomaly “Flat Spot” or a seismic anomaly on top of the anticlinal of Lac Humqui (a cross section of an underground dome) which shows and interface of “liquid gas.” His interpretation of the whole seismic profile shows the existence of 5 or 6 other anomalies (“flat spots”) but are to be confirmed by further testing. He also states that the potential of Marzcorp’s property is even, if not, greater than Junex estimate (in 2001) at 10 billions of cubic feet and not counting the potential of light crude oil. Samuel Aboud, Engineer OIQ: In Aboud’s report of 2001, he concurs and makes reference toMarleau’s report. He agrees to the potential of the property and his estimate on the potential of natural gas is 7.3 billion cubic meters. M. Valeriy Martynets, Geologist: In Martynet’s report, the geologist confirms her estimate to be at 7 billion cubic metres of natural gas and more than 200 million barrels of light crude oil. M. Camille St-Hilaire M.Sc.A: Interpreted results from an Aeromagnetic and gravimetric survey on the property in 2011. In the report, he writes : “[…]the interpretation of seismic data clearly shows the signature of a Flat Spot […] Another structure that could indicate the presence of hydrocarbons is observed on the transect VB- 08 where a Rollover was found […] From studies done by Shell Canada in the East of the Gaspé Peninsula (Idiz et al., 1997), oil generated would probably come from an Ordovician bedrock.[…] Results allowed identifying a fairly accurate picture of the complex geology of the area. [...]This work showed that the Matapédia property represents an undeniable potential for hydrocarbons prospection and that this potential does require to be confirmed by drilling at least two very hot identified targets”.

PETROLIA INC. (CVE:PEA) Market Cap: 19.43M (92.47M Shares at $0.20)

JUNEX INC. (CVE:JNX ) Market Cap: 32.61M (79.54M Shares at $0.41)

QUESTERRE ENERGY CORP (TSE:QEC) Market Cap: 63.26M (291.32M Shares at $0.20)

PETROLYMPIC LTD (CVE:PCQ) Market Cap: 10.58M (105.51M Shares at $0.09)

A Rollover , Another Oil Indicator (Morin, Laliberté, 2002)

An Oil Indicator at Lac Humqui ( Flat Spot , VB-04C) (Morin, Laliberté, 2001)

Potential Hydrocarbon Reserves

Geologic Overview

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

18

19

geolog i c overv i ew

Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. / Marzcorp Inc. have completed extensive core drilling on many different areas of the property and a large portion of the lease hold has shown hydrocarbons present from interpreted core data. VUGULAR porosity being shown in one of the core samples drilled during testing.

The Gaspé area of Québec is geologically the northern portion of the Appalachian Mountains Orogen found along the eastern North American continent and illustrated in Figure 2a. The Appalachian Orogen consists of deformed Lower Paleozoic rocks and in the Gaspé area is subdivided into a number of northeast trending terrains also illustrated in Figure 2a. The oldest terrain is the Taconic Belt which crops out along the northern edge of the Gaspé Peninsula. Also known as the Humber Zone, it consists of Cambrian to Ordovician slope and rise deposits with an overlying Ordovician foreland basin succession emplaced during the Taconic Orogenic event of Upper Ordovician Age. Post-Laconic rocks in this area occur in the Gaspé Belt, a deformed Middle Paleozoic successor basin that overlies the Taconic Belt. A Table of Formations for both tectonic belts in the Gaspé area is illustrated in Figure 2b and a geological map of the Gaspé Belt with an accompanying regional cross section is illustrated in Figure 2c. Structurally, the Gaspé Belt is subdivided into three regionally extensive domains. Illustrated on Figure 2a as well as on the cross section on Figure 2c, from north to south they are the Connecticut Valley- Gaspé synclinorium (CVGS), the Aroostock- Perce anticlinorium (APA) and the Chaleurs Bay synclinorium (CBS). The structural style of the Gaspé Belt is dominated by regional northeast trending folds formed during the Acadian Orogenic event of Devonian Age. As illustrated in the Table of Formations (Figure 2b), stratigraphically the Gaspé Belt is comprised of four lithological assemblages. From oldest to youngest, the Matapédia Group consists of Upper Ordovician to

2a.

The pictures above were taken of various cores drilled during the work program.

2b.

Geologic Overview

Geologic Overview

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

20

21

lowermost Silurian deep water fine-grained clastic and carbonate facies. The Chaleurs Group consists of Silurian to lowermost Devonian shallow to deep water shelf facies while the Upper Gaspé Limestone and Fortin Groups consist of Lower Devonian mixed clastic and carbonate fine-grained deep shelf and basin facies. The uppermost assemblage is the Lower to Middle Devonian nearshore to terrestrial coarse-grained facies of the Gaspé Sandstone. During the Early Devonian, the Gaspé Belt successor basin evolved into a foreland basin that developed in front of the Acadian orogenic wedge and the two upper assemblages can be considered a foreland basin sequence. The Table of Formations also provides a schematic representation of the hydrocarbon system in the Gaspé Belt as currently understood. To date, hydrocarbon occurrences have been found only in the carbonates of the Forillon and Indian Cove formations of the Upper Gaspé Limestone Group and the overlying Gaspé Sandstone all of Devonian age. A number of possible source rocks are noted although a geochemical analysis of recovered Gaspé oils indicate that these oils belong to the same family as the Ordovician oil recovered in onshore Newfoundland at Port-au-Port. Of particular interest is the basal member of the Silurian-Devonian sequence, the Honorat Group. It contains a black shale unit of the same age as the Utica shale of the St. Lawrence Lowlands which has been identified as an excellent

2c.

2d.

source rock. The Table of Formations also highlights a number of additional other potential reservoir zones including Devonian reef plays in the Sayabec and West Point formations. A cross section through the Galt Field (Figure 2d) illustrates the structural style and stratigraphy of the first producing field in the Gaspé Belt. The Galt Field is located in the northern portion of the Connecticut Valley - Gaspé synclinorium and is located in a large anticlinorial structure. The structural geometry of the east- trending anticline allows for four-way structural closure with northwest trending strike-slip faults bordering to the west and east and thus forming a 6 by 5 mile domain structure. Numerous thrust faults cut the main structure and produce enhanced fracture porosity estimated to be 6%. Three reservoir zones are highlighted on the cross section. In the upper 500 m. of the structure, heavy oil occurs in the

Geologic Overview

Geologic Overview

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

22

23

York River Formation of the Gaspé Sandstone Group. From 500 to 1500 m. light oil has been recovered from the dolomitized mudstone of the Indian Cove Formation. The deepest reservoir in the gas-productive fractured limestones of the Forillon Formation between 1500 and 2500 m. The seal of the Forillon Formation gas trap is formed by the impermeable argillaceous limestones of the Shiphead Formation. The permits owned by the Company are located in the northern half of the Matapédia Valley with approximately half the land located in the Taconic belt and half in the Gaspé belt as shown on the geological map illustrated Figure 2c. Like the Galt Field, all the permits in the Gaspé Belt are part of the Connecticut Valley - Gaspé Synclinorium. The topographic map illustrated in Figure 2e locates all the permits being acquired, previous drilling on the permits and the interpreted seismic lines available to the Company.

This anticline is also shown on the schematic cross section of the same area illustrated in Figure 2g. This cross section was prepared by Government of Québec earth scientists and illustrates the structural style of the area as interpreted from the seismic lines commissioned by the government.

2g.

2e.

In 2001, Prospection 2000 commissioned the geophysical consulting firm HALTECH to interpret these recently acquired seismic lines. A comprehensive report was then prepared entitled “Classification des Structures Geologiques”. HAL TECH found 18 geophysical anomalies on the interpreted seismic lines and then used sophisticated point system to rank these anomalies. Six of these anomalies ranked particularly high and are identified on the map illustrated in Figure 2f, of which four of them fall on Company land. The point system used by HALTECH assigned points to each seismic lead based on the likely presence of favorable geological, structural and geophysical attributes with 22 being the highest possible score.

A detailed structural geology map of a portion of the Gaspé belt permits is illustrated in Figure 2f. As well as showing previous drilling in the area, six seismic leads are also identified. The map shows the broad northeast trending anticlines and synclines with some seismic leads located on undrilled surface anticlines including the Lake Humqui Anticline.

2f.

Work Program 24

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

25

2i.

work program

The Company expects to drill and test two vertical wells on targets #10 and #12 , each of which are shown in the Chapman Evaluation Report. Structure 12 had the highest point score with 20 of 22 possible points and is shown on the seismic line illustrated in Figure 2h. The geophysical consultant reported that the anticlinal structure was very well defined on the seismic line with excellent continuity of the seismic reflectors especially on the flanks. A possible zone of fracturing was also interpreted in the structure. Structure 10 scored 19 out of 22 possible points shown in figure 2i as a very well defined symmetrical anticline and is also located on the Lake Humqui surface anticline. Each vertical well will then be plugged back to an appropriate depth and drilled horizontally through the Forillon Limestone (Indian Cove) formation to a target measured depth of 10,000 MD.

Work Program

2h. Work Program 25

WILDCAT

26

Structure 10

Work Program

Work Program

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

28

29

structure 12

Operating Environment

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

30

31

Jo int Venture Summary

OPERAT ING ENV I RONMENT

Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. Gaspé Penninsula, Matapédia Valley, Quebec Wildcat 2-Well Horizontal 10,000’MD Forillion / Indian Cove Limestone formations Acid Stimulation High Risk-Wildcat $18,000,000 10%-Quebec Government Royalty 15%-Marzcorp Inc. 10%-Cunningham Energy of Canada Inc. 65%-Working Interest Owners

Operator:

This property is located in the Gaspésie Region of eastern Québec, south of St. Lawrence River in the Matapédia Valley. Oil and gas activity is limited in the immediate area where agriculture and forestry predominate. The area is well served by farm and logging roads which may require some upgrading for heavy traffic. A major highway, Route 132, is within about 20 km of most leads. The prospective area is close to a main rail line and less than 100 km from ports on the St. Lawrence River, making delivery of goods not available in the immediate area practical. Population density is low in the prospective area but there are substantial communities, such as Rimouski, within a two hour drive from the proposed development area. The area is a mix of rolling farmland and forest with no major mountains, rivers or wetlands in the proposed development areas. There is a mix of government owned and privately owned surface rights but no problems are anticipated in obtaining surface rights for drilling and production operations. There is considerable oil and gas activity to the west of the Company lands in St. Lawrence Lowlands and also to the east near the tip of the Gaspé Peninsula. There is also activity to the south, in Northern New Brunswick. Equipment and experienced personnel will be available when required for drilling or other activities.

Location:

Prospect:

Total Depth:

Objective Formation:

Method:

Risk:

Full Turnkey Cost:

Ownership Interest (NRI):

Connecticut Valley-Gasp é Synclinorium

Projections & Estimates

Projections & Estimates

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

32

33

Projections & Estimates

Projections & Estimates Projections & Estimates

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

34

35

* The production represented above is speculative and does not represent any guaranteed future production levels.

* The production represented above is speculative and does not represent any guaranteed future production levels.

dec i s i on tree analys i s

Projections & Estimates

Economics & Risk

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

36

37

operat ing costs Operating costs have been estimated to be $8,000 per well per month plus $7.00/STB of oil for treating and transportation to a terminal, based on limited information available from operators in the area. No value has been attributed to solution gas which is likely to be produced with the oil. It is probable the gas can be used to provide energy for the lease operations and may be marketable, if a gas gathering and distribution system is developed in this area, or if electricity can be produced using a wellhead generator. PRODUCT PR I CES Edmonton light crude oil and reported sales in the area.

cap i tal expend i tures In the dry hole case it is estimated that capital expenditures will be $6,000,000 ($5,322,000 net to the Company). Well abandonment and lease res- toration costs have been estimat- ed to be $800,000 ($800,000 net to the Company) in the Best Es- timate case, $200,000 ($200,000 net to the Company) in the Low Estimate case and $2,400,000 ($2,400,000 net to the Company) in the High Estimate case, as pre- sented in Table 3b.

economi cs and r i sk The overall project decision tree showing the logic and thought process to the development is shown in Figure 3b. An economic summary is presented in Table 4 (pg. 72 in Chapman Report) , showing the results of each potential decision tree case, the before and after risk resources and value added by each case, and the overall after risk resources and values. The economic model utilized is presented in Tables 4a through 4d (pg. 73 - 76 in Chapman Report) . Tables 4a and 4b show a successful development with the Company required to pay 100% cost on four wells, where Tables 4c and 4d show a successful development with the Company required to pay 100% cost on only one well. The results of the decision tree analysis show a positive after risk NPV, and thus this project is considered feasible as an exploration project based on the scoping study.

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

38

39

Forillion/Indian Cove vs. Eagle Ford

Forillion/Indian Cove vs. Eagle Ford

1122 - 4th Street S. W., Suite 700, Calgary, Alberta T2R 1M1 * Phone: (403) 266-4141 * Fax: (403) 266-4259 * www.chapeng.ab.ca

August 13, 2016

Based on this analysis, the prospects in Gaspesie have an overall chance of generating a commercial return (chance of commerciality) of 34.15%. The two well development in the Eagle Ford has an overall chance of generating a commercial return of between 23.7% and 34.1% depending on the county. The real difference between the two opportunities is in potential up-side. If the Company is at all successful after drilling four test wells (ie 34.15% chance), the prospects in Gaspesie have a 5% chance of being worth more than $1,000,000,000 USD , and have an overall expected value (probability weighted average) of being worth $200,000,000 USD ($97,000,000 at a 5% discount factor). The two well development program in the Eagle Ford has at best (DeWitt County) a 7.5% chance of making more than $12,000,000 USD (the original average investment). A summary of the Gaspesie project is presented in Attachment 1, and details of the Eagle Ford analysis are presented in Attachment 2. We consent to the distribution and dissemination of this letter to potential investors, as well as for other needs the Company requires.

Cunningham Energy of Canada / Soc i ete Energet i c Cunningham du Canada Inc. 700 West Georgia Street, 25th Floor Vancouver, BC V7Y 1B3

Attention: Mr. Ryan Cunningham

Dear Sir: Re: Evaluation of Prospective Resources - Supporting Information Cunningham Energy of Canada / Societe Energetic Cunningham du Canada Inc. Matapédia Valley, Gaspesie, Quebec - May 31, 2016 We have prepared a report titled “Evaluation of Prospective Resources Matapédia Valley Quebec Prepared for Cunningham Energy of Canada / Societe Energetic Cunningham du Canada Inc. May 31, 2016”, dated August 8, 2016, in order to determine the feasibility of the Company participating in the exploration and development of this prospect under the terms proposed and the value of the prospects after consideration of risk. The following letter explains some of the results of that report, as well as providing a comparison to investment in various areas of Eagle Ford development, as requested by the Company. For Clarity, we have considered the scenario of drilling four test wells in the Matapédia Valley, for a total cost of $12,000,000 USD, against drilling two development wells in the Eagle Ford. Since the Eagle Ford development spans across a wide area, and has a wide variability of performance and costs, we have run a statistical (Monte Carlo) model based on information provided by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) 1 , and a paper provided by the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) 2 . This was compared to the statistical model prepared for our report on Matapédia Valley prospects. For Eagle Ford production, a net-back of between $20-$30 USD was assumed, based on the corporate presentations of numerous major operators 3 . For the Matapédia Valley prospects, a detailed economic models was run using Chapman’s June 2016 Price Forecast (AB Synthetic equiv.) 4

Yours very truly, Chapman Petroleum Engineering Ltd.

[Original Signed By:] C.W. Chapman

C. W. Chapman, P.Eng., President

[Original Signed By:] Roy A. Collver

permi t to pract i ce Chapman petroleum engineering ltd. [Original Signed By:]

Roy A. Collver, P.Eng., Petroleum Engineer

C.W. Chapman

Signature

arc/lml/6240

August 16, 2016

Date

permi t number : p 4201 The Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta

1 “Trends In U.S. Oil And Natural Gas Upstream Costs”. Energy Information Administration. N.p., 2016 Web. 15 Aug. 2016. https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/drilling/pdf/upstream.pdf 2 SPE 158207 Eagle Ford Shale- An Early Look at Ultimate Recovery. Gary S. Swindell, SPE 3 Devon, Encana, Baytex 4 Included as attachment 3

Attachment 1 Summary of Gaspesie Project Resources

40

41

Summary Comparison of Matapédia Valley Prospects

Quebec: 34.4% chance of making a profit

The following shows the total distribution of potential project undiscounted values after drilling four exploration wells on the property.

This is the same distri- bution, but with the Net Present Value calculat- ed for a 5% discount rate per year: The net capital exposure of this project is $12,000,000 USD. This is the risk capital the Company must provide in order to test this play. If each test well was a failure, it would cost this much.

Best Eagle Ford Results (DeWitt County): 25.2% chance of making a profit

Attachment 2 Summary of Eagle Ford Comparative Areas

42

43

For each area, a distribution of potential single well recoveries was generated from the SPE paper “Eagle Ford Shale - An Early Look at Ultimate Recovery.”

44

45

Based on information published by numerous operators, an operating net-back of approximately $20 - $30 USD per BOE is very typical.

The cost of 2 development wells was estimated to be approximately $12,000,000 USD based on the information given in the I.H.S. Energy Information Administration cost study.

Using the preceding input distributions, distributions of potential profit that could be made from 2 Eagle Ford development wells were generated for each area:

46

47

AFE

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

48

49

AFE

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

50

51

WILDCAT

WILDCAT

52

53

LIST OF FIGURE

TABLE OF CONTENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 GEOLOGICAL CONTEXT .............................................................................................. 6 2.1 Regional Geology .................................................................................................. 6 2.2 The Gaspe Belt....................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Structural Geology of the Gaspe Belt .................................................................... 9 2.4 Magmatic Rocks .................................................................................................. 10 3.0 THE GRAVIMETRIC TECHNIQUE ............................................................................. 12 3.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Simple Shapes Modelling .................................................................................... 13 3.3 Inversion of Gravimetric Anomalies: 2.5-D Modelling ...................................... 13 3.4 Other Interpretation Techniques .......................................................................... 13 4.0 THE AEROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUE......................................................................... 14 4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Enhancement of Magnetic Grids ......................................................................... 15 4.3 The Aeromagnetic Prospection............................................................................ 16 4.4 Qualitative Data Interpretation ............................................................................ 16 4.5 Quantitative Data Interpretation .......................................................................... 20 4.5.1 Spectral Analysis ..................................................................................... 20 4.5.2 Depth Calculation of a Dike with Peters’s Technique............................. 23 4.5.3 2.5-D Modelling....................................................................................... 24 5.0 OTHER AVAILABLE DATA ........................................................................................ 24 5.1 Seismic Transects and Drill Holes ....................................................................... 24 5.2 Ground Gravimetric Data .................................................................................... 30 6.0 DATA INTERPRETATION ........................................................................................... 33 6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 33 6.2 Gravimetric Data Interpretation........................................................................... 33 6.2.1 Qualitative Data Interpretation ................................................................ 33 6.2.2 Quantitative Data Interpretation .............................................................. 34 52 57 57 57 60 61 62 62 64 64 64 65 65 66 7 7 6.2.2.1 Depth Calculation: Simple Geometric Model.............................. 34 6.2.2.2 Depth Calculation: Power Spectrum............................................ 35 6.2.2.3 2.5D Modelling ........................................................................... 38 6.3 Aeromagnetic Data Interpretation........................................................................ 40 6.3.1 Qualitative Data Interpretation ................................................................ 40 6.3.1.1 Magnetic Lineaments................................................................... 40 6.3.1.2 Geophysical Units ........................................................................ 40 6.3.2 Quantitative Data Interpretation .............................................................. 40 6.3.2.1 Depth Calculation: Peters’s Technique........................................ 40 6.3.2.2 Depth Calculation: Power Spectrum............................................ 42 6.3.2.3 2.5-D Modelling.......................................................................... 42 7.0 CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................. 45 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 47 91 91 91 91 91 91 93 93 96 98 71 71 74 75 75 75 81 84 84 84 84 85 85 86 9

Figure 1: Survey Locations ............................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2: Survey Area Topographic Relief..................................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Structural division of the segment of the Gaspé Peninsula (Malo et al., 2009) .............. 7 Figure 4: The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium............................................................... 11 Figure 5: Stratigraphic Legend of Figure 4 (Brisebois et al., 2000) ............................................. 12 Figure 6: The Earth’s Magnetic Field........................................................................................... 15 Figure 7: Total Magnetic Field Anomaly Shapes (Field Inclination: 90 o ) ................................... 18 Figure 8: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Fault, Dike, Intrusion)........................................ 19 Figure 9: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Faulted Geological Fold) ................................... 20 Figure 10: Example of Power Spectrum....................................................................................... 22 Figure 11: Seismic Transect and Drill Hole Locations................................................................. 26 Figure 12: Stratigraphic and Seismostratigraphic Charts (Morin, Laliberté, 2001) ..................... 27 Figure 13: Drill Holes 1969FC088 and 1967FC086 Logs (Morin, Laliberté, 2002) ................... 27 Figure 14: The Sayabec–Roncevaux Transect Interpretation (Morin, Laliberté, 2001)............... 28 Figure 15: A Flat Spot, an Oil Indicator (Flat Spot, VB-04C) (Morin, Laliberté, 2001) ............. 29 Figure 16: A Rollover, Another Oil Indicator (Morin, Laliberté, 2002) ...................................... 29 Figure 17: Ground Gravimetric Station Locations (Pinet et al., 2005)......................................... 31 Figure 18: Regional Bouguer Anomaly (Gravity Background from CGC) ................................. 32 Figure 19: Two Simple Models for Gravimetric Data Interpretation ........................................... 36 Figure 20: Gravimetric Profile A-A’ (Horizontal Cylinder Model Interpretation) ...................... 37 Figure 21: Power Spectrum of the Gravimetric Data ................................................................... 38 Figure 22: 2.5D Modelling of the A – A’ Gravimetric Profile.................................................... 39 Figure 23: RTP Aeromagnetic Profile A-A’, Peters’s Interpretation Technique ......................... 41 Figure 24: Power Spectrum of the Aeromagnetic Data ................................................................ 43 Figure 25: 2.5-D Modelling of the Aeromagnetic Profile A – A’ ............................................... 44 Figure 26: Bouguer Anomaly ....................................................................................................... 53 Figure 27: Vertical Gradient of the Bouguer Anomaly ................................................................ 54 Figure 28: Reduced to Pole Residual Magnetic Field .................................................................. 55 Figure 29: Vertical Gradient of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field .............................................. 56 Figure 30: Second Vertical Derivative of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field............................... 57 Figure 31: Analytic Signal of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field ................................................. 58 Figure 32: Automatic Gain Correction ......................................................................................... 59 Figure 33: Magnetic Tilt of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field .................................................... 60 Figure 34: Gravimetric Data Interpretation Map .......................................................................... 61 Figure 35: Magnetic Data Interpretation Map .............................................................................. 62 55 56 58 62 63 66 69 70 71 73 77 78 78 79 80 80 82 83 87 88 89 90 92 94 95 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 1 1 112

ANNEX A: Map in a 8.5” X 11” Reduced Format

ii

i

Page 1 Page 2-3 Page 4-5 Page 6-7 Page 8-9 Page 10-11 Page 12-13 Page 14-15 Page 16-17 Page 18-19 Page 20-21 Page 22-23 Page 24-25 Page 26-27 Page 28-29 Page 30-31 Page 32-33 Page 34-35 Page 36-37 Page 38-39 Page 40-41 Page 42-43 Page 44-45 Page 46-47 Page 48-49 Page 50-51 Page 52-53 Page 54-55 Page 56-57 Page 58-59 Page 60-61 Page 62-63 Page 64-65 Page 66-67 Page 68-69 Page 70-71 Page 72-73 Page 74-75 Page 76-77 Page 78-79 Page 80-81 Page 82-83 Page 84-85 Page 86-87 Page 88-89 Page 90-91 Page 92-93 Page 94-95 Page 96-97 Page 98-99 Page 100-101 Page 102-103 Page 104-105 Page 106-107 Page 108-109 Page 110-111 Page 112-113 Page 114-115 Page 116

Made with FlippingBook Online document