Biloxi Marsh Lands Corporation
Contact Information

NAPE 2008 PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL
Biloxi Marsh Lands Corporation – B & L Exploration, LLC

As part of our effort to promote two Tuscaloosa prospects, along with other various technical displays, the following promotional information was presented during the NAPE EXPO (www.napeexpo.com) held on February 7th and 8th, 2008 at the GRB Convention Center in Houston, Texas:
_____________________________________________________________________

Prospect Area “Alpha”

1. 170 BCF of Natural Gas Reserve Potential
2. 3D seismic Amplitude Anomalies including a classic “Gator-Mouth” Anomaly conforming to Structure
3. Multiple Fault Blocks covering +/- 1,500 acres
4. Average net sand thickness 150’
5. +/- 2,000 acres controlled
6. Multiple well development potential

Prospect Area “Beta”

1. 300 BCF of Natural Gas Reserve Potential
2. +/- 5,000 acre structure shown on 3D seismic
3. Documentation of sand and hydrocarbons present in original well
4. Original well failed upon flow test due to improper completion
5. Baker Hughes completion analysis indicates deeper perforations and gravel pack will aid in sand control
6. Average sand thickness 40’ net over +/- 5,000 acre structure
7. +/- 5,200 acres controlled
8. Multiple well development potential

_____________________________________________________________________

NAPE 2008
Potential Tuscaloosa Prospects
Biloxi Marsh Area
St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana

The Tuscaloosa formation is productive in the False River, Profit Island, Irene, Port Hudson, Comite, Watson, Lockhart Crossing, Livingston, Moncrief, Morganza, Moore Sams, and Judge Digby Fields located within the five parish area of St. Landry, Pointe Coupee, West Baton Rouge, East Baton Rouge and Livingston Parishes, Louisiana (Baton Rouge Area fields).  These fields are underlain by deep seated salt domes, creating the anticlinal and other geological features that trapped productive hydrocarbons.  The first discovery in these fields by Chevron dates back to 1975.  To date these fields have produced over 2.5 trillion cubic feet of gas. 
The Lower Cretaceous Shelf Margin which is present north of the Baton Rouge Area fields continues in a southeasterly direction and lies just north of the Fort Pike and Rigolets Tuscaloosa fields.  The Fort Pike and Rigoletes fields lie just north of the Biloxi Marsh Area which is located in St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana.  No productive Tuscaloosa Fields have been found to date between the Baton Rouge Area fields and the Fort Pike and Rigoletes fields.  We surmise that during the Tuscaloosa age or possibly slightly earlier, there were active and transitioning deltas.  One located in the Baton Rouge Area, probably an ancestral Mississippi River deltaic complex, and another ancestral Mississippi River/Pearl River in the St. Bernard area.  The later depositing sands into the Gulf basin on the flanks of and on top of an earlier Lower Cretaceous/Jurassic reef.  This reef is clearly identifiable on seismic data.
The Cretaceous shoreline zone is north of the Lower Cretaceous Carbonate Shelf Margin (Harrison 1980). While the Shorezone and nearshore exhibit some marine depositional environments, the Lower Tuscaloosa south of the Cretaceous Carbonate Shelf Margin are dominated entirely by marine facies, especially delta front and delta fan deposits (Corcoran, Cameron, Meylan).
Deep seated salt structures created the geological expressions that trapped the Tuscaloosa hydrocarbons in the Baton Rouge Area, while an uplifted Cretaceous/Jurassic Reef combined with a depositional deltaic front and a transgressive and regressive marine environment gives the Biloxi Marsh Area the tremendous hydrocarbon potential.  As seen on 3-D seismic, a very steep drop off on a narrow slope area in the area of interest allowed for sediments to be deposited as slope fans on top of the Cretaceous/Jurassic reef.
During one of the transgressive/regressive periods there were major sedimentation flows into the Gulf basin depositing expanded Tuscaloosa age sands and shales on the top of and on the slopes of a large regional reef.  Sandstones in this trend are highly geopressured and may play an important role in preserving primary porosity (Martin, 1988).  Based on our analysis using well control and 3D seismic on the northern end of the Biloxi Marsh Area massive sand packages can be expected.  On the southern end of the Biloxi Marsh Area, where the Cretaceous/Jurassic reef was present thinner sand pods of several hundred if not thousand acres, not necessarily connecting to each other, will more than likely be the reservoirs from which wells will produce.

Lower Cretaceous/Jurassic Reef
A large regional early Cretaceous/Jurassic reef probably within the Comanchean age series (Paluxy, Mooringsport, Rodessa, James Limestone) built up in a southeast-northwest direction.  This area is located on the southwestern edge of the Wiggins Arch.  The reef was uplifted for a tremendous period of geologic time and may have been reworked several times during transgressive and regressive seaward periods and could have created excellent porosity and permeability.
ARCO began its investigation in the area looking for deeper sands and 2-D seismic gave a strong indication of a large, deep structure, probably an early Lower Cretaceous/Jurassic reef.  The prospective area appears to be a twenty mile long, seven mile wide reef with good reflective events.
However, ARCO drilled only deep enough to test several Tuscaloosa Sands and found them to be productive.  By 1986 when the last wells were drilled for the Tuscaloosa Sand, the price of oil and gas was beginning to plummet and there have been no new wells drilled to date for the Tuscaloosa Sands or for the early Cretaceous/Jurassic reef which was ARCO’s initial concept.
It is believed that, the Biloxi Marsh Area contains the largest Louisiana Gulf Coast regional uplift and may hold some major world class carbonate reserves, early Cretaceous to possibly Late Jurassic that have yet to be discovered.  Sand porosity should have been preserved by the infiltration of gas on this regional high as this area remained high through a long geologic time frame followed by rapid deposition of sediments on top of it.
The Meridian Resource Corporation (TMR) has identified and publicly announced its ARCHTOP prospect, a Cretaceous/Jurassic Reef play, which TMR claims could hold 2-3 TCF of gas.  We believe Meridian has assembled a 5,000 acre tract in order to drill this 30,000’ well.

ARCO, Chevron, and Phillips Petroleum
During the late 1970s and early 1980s the primary objectives for Chevron and Phillips were the Tuscaloosa sands while the initial primary objective for ARCO was the deep early Cretaceous/Jurassic reef.  After finding the Tuscaloosa sands capable of producing hydrocarbons, ARCO decided to focus on the Tuscaloosa as their main objective (see paper by Marc Roberts).  In fact, four of the five Tuscaloosa wells have pay in them ranging from 6’ of net gas sands to 41’ of net gas sands.
Phillips Petroleum identified and drilled a potential Tuscaloosa prospect on 2-D seismic approximately 10 miles away from the Rigolets field in the late 1970’s.  The Fort Pike/Rigolet’s fields have produced to date approximately 80 BCFG and 500 MBO in several wells drilled by Chevron, and Natomas.
Phillips Petroleum subsequently drilled its first Tuscaloosa well in 1979.  This well ran into mechanical problems and was sidetracked and reached a total depth of 19,663’.  There was a significant gas show from 19,150’ to 19,175’ by mud log which corresponds to sand at 19,160’ to 19,185’ found on the electric log. 
ARCO drilled a total of five Tuscaloosa wells; all found some Tuscaloosa gas sands except one, the ARCO - State Lease 10707 #1 which was tight throughout the section.  The Lower Tuscaloosa “Bain” resistive marker was found at approximately 19,540’ in the ARCO “P”-2 well, as it was found in all of the other ARCO and Phillips Petroleum wells drilled in the area, and is also found in the Baton Rouge and West Baton Rouge Area  Tuscaloosa fields including False River, Judge Digby, Irene, Port Hudson, etc.
The ARCO-Biloxi Marsh Land “P”-2 well was the first well drilled in 1984 to a depth of 23,350’ and found two commercially productive Tuscaloosa sands.  The well’s primary objective was to test the early Lower Cretaceous/Jurassic reef, but after a year of mechanical trouble, ARCO decided to complete the well in the Tuscaloosa section. (There are several hundred feet of well developed sand in the “P”-2 original hole from 22,700’ to total depth at 23,350’).  The location of this well was selected based 2D seismic and purposely located on the flank of the structure where ARCO believe it could obtain its best first look at the entire stratigraphic section.  While the well was in progress, velocity data suggested that the very anomalous, deep “carbonate reflections” were deeper than originally thought probably below 24,000’.  This deep objective presented engineering issues during the early 1980s which precluded any of the ARCO wells from penetrating the deeper structure.
The 21,200’ Sand (now known as the P-2 sand) and the 21,470’ Sand (P-4 Sand) in the ARCO - Biloxi Marsh Lands “P”-2 well encountered a total of 14 feet of net pay within a 50’ gross sand section. Bottom hole pressure is estimated at 20,600 psi and temperatures are on the order of 410 degrees.  By log analysis, the P-2 sand (14’ net pay) has porosity of ranging from 18.7 % to 26% with 35md of permeability and 21.3 % critical water saturation.  By conventional core analysis, the P-2 sand had 20% porosity, 72 md of permeability and a critical water saturation of 57%.  The P-4 Sand (24’ net pay) by log analysis had 12 % to 29% porosity with a 35md of permeability and a critical water saturation of 39%. Core analysis shows similar porosity and permeability with 67% critical water saturation.  
The ARCO “P”-2 well had significant gas indications, including gas cut mud with maximum gas units of 1700 as well as mud log shows when drilling into the P-2 sand.  The well was later completed in the P-4 (21,427- 21,470’) Sand and safety devices were installed to shut the well in if the pressures were too severe.  Upon flow test the well flowed gas for a short amount of time before the safety devices shut the well in. Following this premature and abrupt shut-in ARCO attempted to resume the flow test but found sand as high as 3,000’ probably due to the abrupt shut-in.  ARCO snubbed into the well to clean it out but as the drill bit neared the perforations the sand was coming in below the tubing faster than they could clean it out causing them to almost get stuck numerous times.  The well also experienced numerous other mechanical problems (holes in the casing, etc.). We believe that due to these mechanical impediments combined with a sharp drop in the price of natural gas the decision was made to abandon the well and not drill additional wells in this vicinity.
In an “Exploration History & Results” paper by Marc Roberts, at the time a high ranking member ARCO’s project team, Marc Roberts estimates the P-2 and P-4 Sand combined would produce at a rate of approximately 30 MMCFG/day.  It should be noted that ARCO was not on the crest of the structure and even with only 38’ of pay sands because of the potential aerial extent of the reservoir it is probable that major reserves could be produced from this well.  Based on the analysis by Baker Hughes, that we commissioned the main issue with this well appears to be sand control and the completion techniques use by ARCO.  Baker Hughes believes that more frequent and deeper perforations combined with a gravel pack should solve the sand control issues experienced by ARCO.  We believe that had the well completion been designed for sand control, significant reserves may have been produced from it.
According to Marc Roberts, because of time constraints on the leases three wells were spud in January 1986 and a fourth well in March 1986.  These wells were hastily located, but none the less managed to discover some Tuscaloosa gas sands.  The “O”-1 well drilled to a total depth of 21,889’ and found 8’ of gas in the P-2 sand.  While ARCO thought they were drilling downdip to the “P”-2 well, hoping to get better quality sands, based on 3D in reality the “O”-1 well was slightly updip with less sand.  However, this well does appear to be in the same reservoir as the “P”-2 well and with a total closure of several thousand acres according to 3-D seismic.  Even using an average of 30’of net pay, a reserve calculation of several hundred BCF could be assigned to this reservoir.
Other Tuscaloosa wells show a diversity of sand quality and thickness and indicate a variety of sand conditions in the Biloxi Marsh Area.  It is similar in many ways to the Tuscaloosa sands found in the Baton Rouge Area.  The current geologic map depicts simple geologic structures, but it is anticipated that more faulting and more complex fault compartments will be found on these mega structures with additional drilling and reprocessing of the 3-D data.  Even more exciting is that the possibility of deltaic slope fans being deposited until they lapped up against a down-to-the-north fault probably created by the underlying early Lower Cretaceous reef.

Tuscaloosa Prospects
                The Biloxi Marsh Area is a look alike to the Baton Rouge Area Tuscaloosa trend, with the same type of geologic traps and expanded Tuscaloosa section even thought created by two different underlying mechanisms; deep seated salt structures in the Baton Rouge Area and a reef in this area.  Both areas were being deposited by sedimentation from Tuscaloosa age rocks, possibly by an ancestral Mississippi River moving delta front or possibly by two different river deltas.
Using recently acquired 3D seismic data at least six significant Tuscaloosa prospects and several smaller prospects have been identified in the subject area.  Below the Tuscaloosa lies the main ARCO objective which has never been reached; an early Lower Cretaceous/Jurassic reef that may contain significant reserves.  While the Chalk and Tuscaloosa Marker shows up excellent on 3-D seismic, the Tuscaloosa Sand is good in some spots and fair to poor in others.
On the southern regional east-west uplifted reef area, several structures have been identified.  The ARCO “P”-2 well and the “O”-1 well both had pay in the P-2 sand and both appear to be in the same reservoir.  Sand quality will vary over the entire reservoir, but using an average pay thickness of 40’ net gas in two sands (P-2 & P-4 Sands) and with thousands of acres of closure, the entire reservoir could hold several hundred BCF of gas.  Engineers are currently evaluating the possibility of re-entering the ARCO “P”-2 well and attempting a completion in the P-2 sand.  As previously referenced Baker-Hughes’ recent engineering analysis recommends utilizing a gravel pack and deeper penetrating perforations to control the sand.
Another anomalous structure exists, upthrown to a major down-to-the-north fault, located in a horst block updip to another ARCO well which had the best Tuscaloosa sand development of the five ARCO wells.  This well has several thousand acres of closure with possible scattered thin zones of pay at 20,200’ to 20,300’ and 20,950’ to 21,160’.  This well is also 244’ structurally high to the “P”-2 well and sits on the lower part of the Cretaceous/Jurassic reef.  If the Tuscaloosa sand quality and thickness in this well continues updip on structure and the gas shows in this well are indicative of probable updip pay, the reservoir could hold several hundred BCF of gas.
In another prospective Tuscaloosa area which we control, we have identified a classic “Gator-Mouth” 3D seismic amplitude anomaly which is usually a clear hydrocarbon indicator with a  distinct Gas/Water contact. The amplitude also conforms to structure This combined with close proximity well control which demonstrates sand development and the presents of hydrocarbons (excellent mud log show) makes this prospect very interesting and should give it a reasonable probability of success.  Based on our research, we believe that this prospect area is clearly analogous to the Rigolets Field and if the initial test well is successful should lead to the drilling of multiple wells in adjacent fault blocks.
Another area which needs to be investigated and possibly drilled is what appears to be turbidite slope sand deposits.  Large sand masses may have traveled over 3,000’ of steep slope until they came to rest on a ledge that butted up against a down-to-the-north fault created by the large regional underlying reef, and could be trapped updip by a shale out.  This startigraphic play has bright continuous reflectors at the objective level and then dims to possible shale surrounding the bright areas.
_______________________________________________________________________

The preceding was developed in an effort to demonstrate possible exploration opportunities on acreage controlled by the company and/or B & L Exploration, LLC.  The information is promotional in nature and contains forward-looking statements regarding oil and gas discoveries, oil and gas exploration, development and production activities and reserves.  Accuracy of the forward-looking statements depends on assumptions about events that change over time and is thus susceptible to periodic change based on actual experience and new developments.  The Company cautions readers that it assumes no obligation to update or publicly release any revisions to the forward-looking statements in this report. Important factors that might cause future results to differ from these forward-looking statements include: variations in the market prices of oil and natural gas; drilling results; unanticipated fluctuations in flow rates of producing wells; oil and natural gas reserves expectations; the ability to satisfy future cash obligations and environmental costs; and general exploration and development risks and hazards.  Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of the Company.  Each such statement speaks only as of the day it was made.  The factors described above cannot be controlled by the Company.  When used in this report, the words “believes”, “estimates”, “plans”, “expects”, “should”, “hopeful”, “outlook”, and “anticipates” and similar expressions as they relate to the Company or its management are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

BILOXI MARSH LANDS CORPORATION – 2008
________________________________________________________________________

Paper by Marc D. Roberts – 11/17/1987
Leading member – Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) Exploration Group

March Roberts: Catfish Bayou – St. Bernard Parish –
Exploration History and Results