88E Video Transcript, page-3

1) Paul B mentioned in his presentation who was quality-controlling the data analysis. Can you elaborate on that and tell us who those people are?

PaulB: Well we’ve got a lot of people involved. To the specific point of the question, I’ll give you an example. Like for instance on the geochemistry and the thermal maturity - this is an imperfect science. (We ended up getting a large number) of conflicting pieces of information. None of the data ever actually works perfectly because it’s imperfect.

00:32:01
So what we did was… we bought in, arguably the world’s expert in the thermal maturity of the North Slope, Ken Peters. He’s a professor at Stanford and USGS, he’s the most published guy, he’s an expert on the North Slope - and we had him independently evaluate it and he came back with the same interpretation.

We’ve used StimLab, we’ve used CoreLab, we’ve used the best people that we can find - but at the end of the day on the interpretation too… you’ve got to make sure. You can always find what you’re looking for… but if you can find people that can tear it apart and they still come up with the same answer, that’s the approach and that’s what we’re doing.

This is an example with Ken Peters. And the reason why Ken Peters is important is he’d come out with an analysis in 2007 that Great Bear used - they bought 500,000 acres based on his analysis - he was 25 miles off.

But when we drilled our well, we showed that it was wrong, and if anyone wanted to disprove what we had it would be him.

So that was the point. You've got to make sure - you're testing this with disparate people that are looking at it without an axe to grind - and he kinda did - but the data’s the data and the interpretation’s the interpretation so that’s kinda the philosophy.