Dunmore Consulting

Petroleum and Reservoir Engineering Specialist

43 Pentland View, EDINBURGH EH10 6PY.
E-mail : [email protected]

7th July 2016

Andreas Forssell
CEO
Crown Energy AB
Norrlandsgatan 18
SE-111-43 Stockholm
Sweden

The undersigned independent Competent Person, registered by the Society of Petroleum Engineers
(SPE) No 0357319, has read the Competent Persons Report (CPR) attached particularly the companys
resource statements and confirms that they are in accordance with the internationally recognized
standards definitions and guidelines set forth in the 2007 Petroleum Resources Management System
(PRMS) approved by the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE). In compliance with these standards the
reader should note that no hydrocarbon volumes referenced in this CPR can be categorised at the time
of writing as reserves. Dunmore Consulting (DC or ourselves) has not been tasked with nor attempted
to verify the mathematical correctness of any calculations executed by Crown Energy AB (Crown or the
Company) or any third parties on its behalf and cited in this CPR.

William Dunmore

Chairman, Dunmore Consulting

Dunmore Consulting page 1 Crown Energy AB

The estimates of resources presented in this report have been prepared in accordance with the
internationally recognized standards in accordance with the definitions and guidelines set forth in the
2007 Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS) approved by the Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE); to assist the reader certain extracts of the PRMS and definitions are included at the
end of this report.

In accordance with your instructions to us we confirm that we:

are professionally qualified and a member in good standing of the self-regulatory

organisation of engineers SPE;
have more than five years relevant experience in the estimation, assessment and
evaluation of oil and gas assets;
are independent of Crown Energy AB (Crown or the Company), its directors, senior
management and advisers;
will be remunerated by way of a time-based fee and not by way of a fee that is linked the
drilling success or value of the Company;
that Crown is not a major client or source of revenue for us;
have the relevant and appropriate qualifications, experience and technical knowledge to
appraise professionally and independently the Assets owned by the Company;
consider that the scope of this Competent Persons Report (CPR) is appropriate and includes
and discloses all information required and was prepared to a standard expected.

Data Source and Reliance

This review is based on data and reports provided by Crown. The content of this CPR and the estimates
of potential resources, unrisked and risked values are based on seismic, exploration and test well data,
and other geological data provided to us by the Company including valuable work by Peter Mikkelsen
- Exploration Manger Crown Energy AB and by ERC Equipoise and Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc.
(NSAI). The Company provided us with all relevant and available data at the time of the drafting of this
CPR. We have accepted, without independent verification, the accuracy and completeness of this data
and that it has been provided in good faith by the relevant organisations.

As part of our work we did not undertake a site visit to inspect the Companys exploration assets, as
we did not consider that such an inspection would reveal information or data that would be material
in the preparation of this CPR. This statement does not apply to the Iraqi PSC where a site visit could
be very relevant but unfortunately is not possible given the current security situation.

All interpretations and conclusions presented herein are opinions based on inferences from geological,
geophysical, engineering or other data. The report represents Dunmore Consultings best professional
judgement and should not be considered a guarantee of results. Our liability is limited solely to the
Company as set out in the letter of engagement.

Dunmore Consulting have not conducted any legal due diligence as to the Companys title to the
properties, hydrocarbons, or revenues discussed in this CPR; nor whether or not the various production
and exploration contracts, licences or permits have been properly granted or accepted by the relevant
authorities. Dunmore Consulting provides no warranty as to the veracity of the contents of this report.
Dunmore Consulting has undertaken this work in good faith however any party wishing to take further
interest in these properties should carry out its own due diligence.

Dunmore Consulting page 2 Crown Energy AB

Qualifications

Dunmore Consulting is an independent consultancy specialising in petroleum reservoir evaluation and

economic analysis. Those involved in this report were:

Mr William John Dunmore has a B.Sc in Physics/Chemistry from University College London (1969-72)
and a M.Sc. in Petroleum Reservoir Engineering from Imperial College London (1976-77). He has been
constantly been engaged in multiple aspects of the oil industry from exploration to development and
production since 1972. He is qualified in reserves estimation and classification, petrophysics and audit
techniques using both deterministic and probabilistic methods and economic analysis. He has been an
independent petroleum engineering consultant since 1986 with particular emphasis on reserves
assessment and commerciality since 1992. He has been a full and active member of the SPE since 1976.

Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. was established in 1961 and has offices in Dallas and Houston,
Texas. They provide high quality reliable services to the worldwide petroleum industry that include
reserves reports and audits, acquisition and divestiture evaluations, simulation studies, exploration
resources assessments, equity determinations, and management and advisory services.

ERC Equipoise (ERCE) is a well reputed independent consultancy specialising in geoscience evaluation,
reservoir engineering and economics assessment. Headquartered in London and with an Asia-Pacific
office based in Singapore the in-house team comprises of Geoscience, Engineering, Petrophysics and
Economics professionals. ERCE supports E&P companies, the finance community and legal institutions
in their technical projects, reserves and resource audits, commercial studies and dispute processes
worldwide.

Dunmore Consulting page 3 Crown Energy AB

 Preamble

The reader should note that this document is split into geographical areas. Each section follows a
similar (but non-identical format). This format matches that recommended by ESMA (European
Securities and Markets Authority). A brief summary of the resource estimates for the Companys
properties are as follows (all volumes are Estimated Ultimate Recoveries - EUR in MMbbls for the mid
or P50 oil (rather than gas) case):

EUR Net EUR Net

EUR EUR -
Working WI WI
Gross Gross
Region Interest Maturity Contingent Prospective
Contingent Prospective
(WI) Resources Resources
Resources Resources
*** ***
Equatorial
Guinea - 5% Pre-Development 18 142 0.9 7.1
Block P
Madagascar
- Manja 100% Exploration 1071 1071
Block 3108
South
Africa - 10%* Exploration/Appraisal 37 355 3.7 35.5
Block 2B
Iraq 60%** Exploration/Appraisal 174 2683 104 1610

* At time of writing Crown equity in Block 2B is 40.5% but will reduce to 10% on approval from the
South African authorities of a commercial transaction undertaken in 2015. This summary table shows
the expected outturn. Full details of the current and expected positions can be found in sections 9.1
& 9.2 of this CPR.

** Crown has stated to Dunmore Consulting that this CPR reflects the latest legal interpretations of
the existing PSC and includes what is believed to be the correct commercial split with the Salah ad-
Din Regional Governorate. In the definitions of the PSC, it is stated that the Regional Governorate
may have up to 40% working interest depending on contractual obligations. Crown's working interest
(WI) in the license is therefore now believed to be 60%, with the Regional Governorate having the
remaining 40% interest. Previously (May 2015 CPR) it was understood that Crown had a 100%
working interest. These terms are under discussion with the Salah ad-Din Governorate as part of the
ongoing work to clarify certain aspects of the existing PSC. A 7% royalty payment is understood to be
payable and has NOT been deducted from the net WI volumes shown for the Iraqi EUR volumes
above. A summary of these terms is provided in section 10.1 of this document.

These WI volumes do not represent Crowns entitlement to hydrocarbons due to the effect of the
various fiscal and contractual terms and any royalties which might be payable see N.B. below.

Dunmore Consulting page 4 Crown Energy AB

*** Important Note - the reader should be totally clear that no hydrocarbon volumes referenced in
this CPR can or should be categorised at the time of writing as reserves in the judgement of Dunmore
Consulting. Dunmore Consulting has not been tasked with nor attempted to verify the mathematical
correctness of any calculations executed by Crown or its associates and advisors and cited in this CPR.

N.B. Entitlement to oil and gas field revenues is not on a simple pro rata basis to the WI in many
jurisdictions. It may thus be misleading to sum EURs from separate blocks and regions using the
respective working interests.

This is the fifth CPR to be released by Crown. It is prepared to support a revised corporate Prospectus
to be issued in 2Q 2016. The first was prepared by Dunmore Consulting and published on 15th June
2012 and addressed three geographical areas. The second by NSAI was dated 5th June 2012 and was
published by Crown on 14th September 2012 on Block 2B alone. The third was prepared by Dunmore
Consulting and published on 19th March 2013. The fourth prepared by Dunmore Consulting was
published on May 12th 2015.

Dunmore Consulting page 5 Crown Energy AB

Equatorial Guinea - Block P (Provisional Discovery Area)

1. Legal Overview
1.1. Production Sharing Contract (PSC)
In the 4th qtr 2012 Crown purchased the 5% participating interest previously held by DNO
ASA in the Block P Production Sharing Contract, Equatorial Guinea. The PSC effective date
was 17 April 2003. In the first two sub periods of the Initial Exploration Period of 4 years the
joint venture, operated by Devon Energy Corp. (as Ocean Energy) purchased 940 km of 3D
seismic data and drilled 5 exploration wells (including one sidetrack) satisfying the
exploration commitments. Exploration and appraisal drilling and the 3D seismic served to
define the Venus oilfield accumulation which was declared commercial in August 2007. At
that point GEPetrol purchased Ocean's Equatorial Guinea's 38% interest and became the
group Operator. Subsequent work has focussed on refining the definition of exploration
leads and prospects, extending the Venus Provisional Development Area to cover leads and
prospects outside the Venus area and designing a revised Venus development plan with the
flexibility to incorporate any future resources that may be defined by future exploration
drilling. An amendment to the PSC was signed in 2011 recognising the commercial status of
the field and providing the parties with time extensions to the PSC to allow for the ongoing
development planning and approval processes. In May 2013 the Ministry agreed to the
Provisional Discovery Area (PDA) including the Venus accumulation and additional leads and
prospects (Second Amendment to the PSC). The PDA will be held as a Development
Concession with a 25 year duration.

It should be stated that there is uncertainty as to the exact status of the licence governing
the PDA area and if and when the Development and Production Period has commenced.
This 25 year period is believed by Crown to probably have commenced on 14 May 2013.
Discussions are ongoing between the JV and the authorities (Ministry of Mines, Industry and
Energy (MMIE)) at time of writing to clarify the situation. For clarity, Crown only has an
interest in the Block P PDA area.

The Ministry is now considering a Co-Operatorship between our Licence Partners Vaalco
Energy and GEpetrol. Subsequent to this being implemented it is expected that the JV will
submit a development and production plan for the Venus field to the Ministry.
Abandonment provisions require the establishment of a fund sourced from production
revenues to cover the field abandonment operations.

The commercial terms comprise a sliding scale Royalty based on gross production rates
(10%-16%), Cost Recovery from 70% of the remaining production, a sliding scale Profit Oil
allocation based on total cumulative production (90% to Contractor up to 25 MMBO) and a
25% Corporate Income Tax. Annual rentals and training costs are payable in addition to
modest ($US2MM-$US10MM) bonus payments triggered by sustained production rate
milestones.

Dunmore Consulting page 6 Crown Energy AB

 1.2. Joint Operating Agreement (JOA)
The Block P Joint Venture comprises GEPetrol (38.4%) Operator, GEPetrol 20% (Carried
through exploration), Vaalco (31%), Atlas Petroleum (Int.) Ltd. (5.6%) and Crown Energy
Ventures (5%). Vaalco acquired a 31% interest in the Block in 2012. The MInistry of MInes,
Industry and Energy (MMIE) and GEPetrol are currently reviewing a revised JOA which is
expected to result in Vaalco being named operator going forward. Little activity has taken
place since 2013 as these discussions proceed slowly.

Past costs to date are reported by GEPetrol to have been audited and approved by GEPetrol
at $US144.5 million. The GEPetrol 20% carried interest portion has made no contribution to
these expenditures to date and the PSC and JOA allow the parties to recover the costs they
funded on GEPetrol's behalf after GEPetrol 20% Interest have recovered their development
costs.

2. Geological Overview
The block is located in the Rio Muni offshore basin in the south-central portion of the West
Africa passive margin to the north and on trend with the Hess Ceiba and Okume field
complex (500-600 MMBORec). The main Africa/South America rifting began in this zone in
the latest Aptian/earliest Albian periods with subsidence, basinward tilting and marine
incursion from the south. Pulses of uplift and transform fault activation punctuated the post
rift passive margin drift stages of the Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary periods. During these
periods submarine canyons and fans eroded and built out from the coastal margins
depositing turbidite sandstone systems along the continental margin.

The Venus wells defined a 550 acre, fan-shaped, stratigraphically trapped, Campanian aged
(Upper Cretaceous) sandstone reservoir section deposited in a submarine canyon or turbidite
system with a maximum gross thickness of the order of 200 feet with a net to gross ratio of
around 85%. The accumulation has a clear direct hydrocarbon indicator anomaly (Class 2
AVO) visible on the 3D seismic data recorded over the field. Although not tested the electric
log data combined with pressure measurement and fluid sampling and the seismic AVO
mapping provide a relatively high level of confidence in the likely range of reservoir
properties and in-place hydrocarbon resources. Fluid samples from wireline formation tests
confirmed high quality 30o API oil with low paraffins and asphaltenes. Average effective
porosity above the oil/water contact is estimated to be 25%, oil saturation 70% and
permeabilities based on MDT transient analyses range between 10 and 6000 millidarcies.
The water depth in the area of the field is of the order of 800 feet. The Venus reservoir has
been determined to be of excellent quality, capable of high flow rates.

3. Resources and Reserves

3.1. Contingent and Prospective Resources

Parameters derived from the independent mapping of the Venus oil accumulation by the
Operator and the joint venture parties were combined in a Monte Carlo simulation yielding

Dunmore Consulting page 7 Crown Energy AB

 Stochastic P90, P50 and P10 recoverable volumes which are respectively 13.7 MMBO, 17.5
MMBO and 22.3 MMBO.

These volumes in the absence of well testing and in the absence of an approved
development plan represent an estimated range of Contingent Resources within the
approved Venus Provisional Discovery Area ("PDA")

Further leads and prospects have been defined by the Operator. The joint venture has
requested that the PDA be extended to include certain of these features which when
promoted to prospect status may provide locations for future exploration, appraisal and
development projects potentially augmenting and extending the field life of the planned
Venus development facilities.

3.2. Reserve and Resource statement

The absence of an approved development plan categorises the Venus resources as
Contingent and the most likely recoverable Contingent Resource volume for the Venus field
is currently assessed at 17.5 million barrels.

3.3. Reconciliation with previous statements

This is the fourth CPR statement to be released on this asset by Crown and the reported
volumes are identical to those published in May 2015.

3.4. Statement regarding visit to property

The property is located offshore Equatorial Guinea in approximately 800 feet of water.
Although large volumes of seismic and well survey data are available in the area of the
licence the area has not been visited by Crown personnel.

3.5. Production Plans for Proved and Probable Resources

The joint venture parties are working to conclude a Plan of Development for the Venus Field
which is to be submitted to the Ministry.

3.6. Valuation of Resources

3.6.1. Net present Value
Development project economics are being re-evaluated by the Operator to take
account of the continued low oil price. Large uncertainty surrounds the likely
development costs in the new low price environment and the potential development
scheme. Crown, together with the Joint Venture partners consider it premature to
discuss the potential value of the project at this time. The May 2015 CPR discussed
likely project economics under a $100 oil price scenario - this is no longer considered
appropriate.

It should be noted that the value of production from PSC regimes is generally impacted
less by oil price fluctuations than that originating from tax and royalty areas due to the
inverse relation of the entitlement volume and oil price.

Dunmore Consulting page 8 Crown Energy AB

 3.6.2.
Under the terms of the acquisition of the DNO equity by Crown, staged payments
become due to DNO on key milestone events pursuant to the Asset Sale and Purchase
Agreement (October 2011). These are:
JOA Plan of Development Payment - $800,000, payable on approval by the
parties to the JOA of a plan of development
Development Payment - $1,600,000, payable on approval of the development
plan by the Ministry.
Production Payment - 3,200,000, payable on first production.

The maximum exposure of these Contingent payments totals $5.6 million.

N.B. there is also a Contingent payment of $4 million in the event that the oil
price is greater than $150 for a consecutive period of 90 days within the first
three years of production.

3.7. Exploration

The current operator carries has documented six exploration prospects/leads within the PDA
area, the largest of which are - Marte and SW Grande (GEPetrol, June 2014) . The gross total
P50 unrisked volumes associated with these prospects/leads adds to 142 mmbo.
Crown has done no independent work on these assets and the Prospective Resources
quoted are Operator figures.

3.8. Historic Production and Expenditure

Prior exploration costs are assessed by GEPetrol to total $US144.5 million expended over the
period 2003-2012 yielding an average annual expenditure of $US16 million per year by the
joint venture.

3.9. Infrastructure

There are now several major offshore oil development projects in Equatorial Guinea
including Hess's Ceiba and Okume Complex, Exxon's Zafiro Complex, Marathons Alba Field,
and Noble's Aseng, Belinda and Benita complex. All field facilities will be located offshore
and onshore support facilities can therefore be relatively easily established.

Dunmore Consulting page 9 Crown Energy AB

 3.10. Maps Plans and Diagrams

Block P - Primary Prospect Map

Dunmore Consulting page 10 Crown Energy AB

 VENUS
SCHEMATIC
DEVELOPMENT
INFRASTRUCTU
RE

3.11. Special Factors

The availability of appropriate drilling and FPSO equipment may have an impact on the
timing of development and first oil production.

Dunmore Consulting page 11 Crown Energy AB

Block 3108 (Manja), Onshore Madagascar

4. Legal Overview

4.1. Production Sharing Contract (PSC)

The project is based on a Production Sharing Contract with sliding scale royalties and profit
share depending on the level of daily oil production. At <50mbopd, the maximum royalty is
10% and contractor profit share is 55-70%. Cost recovery is available from 60% of revenues
after royalty. There is no corporation tax liable. The PSC also stipulates annual training fees
of $US50,000 and Administration Fees of $US100,000. Production bonuses are payable on
achievement of 25,000 BOPD ($US1MM), 50,000 BOPD ($US 1.5MM) and 100,000 BOPD
$US2.5MM,

On 2-Mar-16, Crown signed "Avenant No.5 with OMNIS (the regulating oil & gas authority).
This extended the Manja Licence 3108 for a 4 year period until 14-Nov-2019. In the first
two years of this period (until 14-Nov-2017), the work programme was agreed to comprise
the acquisition of an FTG (full tensor gravity) and aeromagnetic survey, followed by an
optional 2D seismic programme. In the second two year phase (14-Nov-17 to 14-Nov-19) a
further work programme was agreed to comprise the drilling of one firm well plus two
optional wells.
The Financial Commitment for the first two year extension is set at $2 million and if the
second extension is entered, the financial commitment is renewed also for $2 million.
Current Activity: on 17-Mar-16 three companies were invited to tender for the FTG survey,
with bids requested for 15-Apr-16. Three bids have been received and Crown will make a
decision on the bids during May, with the aim of acquiring the data during July/August.
5. Geological Overview

The Morondava Basin is best known for the large, exhumed oil fields of heavy, shallow
crude at Tsimiroro and Bemolanga that lie at the northern edge of the basin. The reservoir
for these accumulations is the Permo-Triassic Isalo sandstones, a fluvial deposit within the
regional Karroo system. Rich, lacustrine source rocks of the Middle Sakamena (Permian)
underlie the reservoir and probably generated most of the oil during deepest burial in the
late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous. Subsequent uplift, culminating in the Mid Tertiary,
unroofed the covering strata, leaving these fields within a few hundred metres of the
surface.
Within the main part of the Morondava Basin, the Karroo system underlies a relatively
thick, preserved cover of the Cretaceous and Jurassic, such that the Sakamena source rock
is generally over-mature and the overlying Isalo reservoirs often tight and deeper than most
wells have drilled (only 4 wells have penetrated the Upper Isalo, mostly in structurally
doubtful locations). However, several wells have encountered the younger Liassic shales of
the Andafia Formation, which have good TOCs (2-5%) and are currently in the wet to dry gas
window.
In the Manja Block, burial is less deep, particularly over the North Manja horst trend, while
a significant unconformity in the earliest Jurassic appears to have removed much of the less
prospective Upper Isalo section. Therefore, the better Lower Isalo (I) sands are expected to
underlie and be sealed and sourced by Andafia Shales, lying within the late oil to early gas

Dunmore Consulting page 12 Crown Energy AB

 window. Additional sourcing potential could be contributed by the Sakamena, which should
still lie within the gas window, while a further seal over the Andafia could be present as
later Liassic aged salt (the latter is prevalent in the Majunga Basin to the north and also
outcrops to the SE of the Manja Block).
Significant tectonic movement, uplift and erosion took place in the Aptian and again in the
Tertiary, resulting in tilting, fault rejuvenation and the flushing of much of the section down
to the Mid Jurassic. However, the seismic suggests that the North Manja structure has been
less affected by these events and shallower faulting appears to hade out in the Liassic seal.

6. Resources and Reserves

6.1. Contingent and Prospective Resources

Prospective Resources:

The seismic database comprises 2D data from three campaigns. About 2,000 km is old 1970s
data, used original processing and was mostly of poor quality, a further 2,000 km is of 1980s
vintage vibroseis, reprocessed in 2007; the data quality is fair to good. The final 218 km is
dynamite sourced, acquired in 2007 and processed in 2008; the quality is fair.

Prior to Crown acquiring the Amicoh holding, only a basic interpretation had been made,
together with some regional work. To properly understand the source rock potential and
timing of hydrocarbon generation and migration Crown undertook a full geophysical
interpretation, including depth conversion, together with the requisite basin modelling.

The depth conversion was achieved by gridding up average velocities then multiplying the
TWT map and then flexed to tie the wells using the previous miss-tie map. An inherent
problem with this approach onshore is the lack of knowledge of the thickness and velocity of
the sediments overlying the seismic datum. There was also an absence of knowledge of
seismic processing employed for the various 2D surveys. After considering a layer cake
method, it was deemed that this was likely to introduce too many errors, since there was
limited time/depth velocity data from the wells. Therefore a single depth average function
was used fitted to the well control points.

The risking indicates that for the Ambatalova prospect, reservoir quality is the prime risk, due
to current depth of burial (3300m to 4160m). Source (due to lack of detailed regional
analysis available) and seal (due to absence of well penetrations pre-Mid Jurassic) are the
main secondary risks. The quality of the two seismic lines near the proposed well location
means that there is a good confidence in the structure and the timing relative to hydrocarbon
migration. Sifaka is now interpreted to consist of both a substantial thickness of Isalo section
over an extensive area. However it is a higher risk prospect, because of seal and timing of the
hydrocarbon migration which probably occurred when there was little cover over the
structure to form an effective trap. The risks have been quantified by Crown and are
tabulated below. Sub Kazo is a much smaller lower relief structure which is mainly mapped
on the top Isalo. As such it displays less of the "buried hill" aspect compared to Ambatolava,

Dunmore Consulting page 13 Crown Energy AB

 which means more lower grade Isalo II reservoir should be preserved on-structure - hence
the greater reservoir risk. Conversely, the seal should be better (the Andafia Shale), although
this is also expected to be the principal seal at Ambatolava.

The Prospective Resources shown have been estimated using probabilistic methods and are
dependent on a petroleum discovery being made. If a discovery is made and development is
undertaken, the probability that the recoverable volumes will equal or exceed the unrisked
estimated amounts is 90% for the low estimate, 50% for the best estimate, and 10% for the
high estimate. As recommended in the PRMS and tabulated below, the low, best, and high
estimate prospective resources have been aggregated by arithmetic summation; therefore,
these totals may be considered conservative as they do not include the portfolio effect that
might result from statistical aggregation.

The remapping of Ambatalova (previously N Manja) and Sub Kazo and the mapping of Sifaka
was undertaken by Crown staff and their associates during late 2012. The Isalo prospects
previously carried in the Betsimba area were considerably smaller post this reinterpretation
and depth conversion cycle. While closures still existed they were deep and not on
favourable migration paths and hence have been removed as viable prospects. Dunmore
Consulting has reviewed this work without conducting a full technical audit of it. Dunmore
Consulting considers that Crown and its associates have made significant progress in their
understanding of the area from this work since the previous CPR was issued. No additional
work has taken place since the May 2015 CPR was issued.The prospective resource volumes
were calculated for the prospects at 100% gross ownership unrisked as follows:

MANJA BLOCK - PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES

OIL CASE (mmbo) GAS CASE (bcf)
MIN MID MAX MIN MID MAX
Ambatolava 97 350 1271 859 2897 10117
Sifaka 129 660 3421 583 2911 14633
Sub-Kazo 15 61 257 126 494 1971
Arithmetic Sum 241 1071 4949 1568 6302 26721

Crown assigned the following geologic risk factors (decimal) to these structures:

Geologic Risk Assessment - Manja Block

Prospect Reservoir Structure Seal Source Timing Total

Ambatolava 0.60 0.90 0.60 0.70 0.70 0.16
Sifaka 0.50 1.00 0.40 0.70 0.50 0.07
Sub-Kazo 0.50 0.70 0.60 0.70 0.70 0.10

Dunmore Consulting page 14 Crown Energy AB

 6.2. Reserve and Resource statement
All volumes cited for this property are yet to be discovered and as such are categorised as
Prospective Resources.

6.3. Reconciliation with previous statements

This is the fourth CPR statement to be released on this asset by the Company and the
reported volumes are identical to those published in May 2015.

6.4. Statement regarding visit to property

Several site visits have been made and documented associated with the seismic acquisition
programme and route logistics and site surveying in 2012 in preparation for drilling by
competent engineering personnel.

6.5. Production Plans for Proved and Probable Resources

As no discovery has been made at this time this is not applicable

6.6. Valuation of Resources

6.6.1. Net present Value
The May 2015 CPR documented likely project economics for a 100mmbo onshore oil
field oil under a $100 oil prIce scenario using the fiscal terms for Madagascar - this is no
longer considered appropriate given the current oil price environment and the large
uncertainty in potential development costs

Crown considers it premature to estimate potential value of the project at this time.

6.7. Environmental and Facilities

Not applicable to an exploration block.

6.8. Historic Production and Expenditure

Not applicable to an exploration block.

6.9. Infrastructure
Not applicable to an exploration block.

Dunmore Consulting page 15 Crown Energy AB

 6.10. Maps Plans and Diagrams

General Location Map for the Manja Block

Dunmore Consulting page 16 Crown Energy AB

 Manja Prospect and Lead Location Map.

Crown Energy has warranted to Dunmore Consulting that the closing contours of all accumulations
used to estimate all volumes quoted in this CPR lie within the Block 3108 boundary shown in black on
the map above. There is a less than 10% chance that the ultimate largest possible area of the Sifaka
prospect may lie outwith the Block boundary. The hydrocarbon volumes associated with such a case
would be in excess of the Max case tabulated earlier.

Crown Energy have identified certain potential structures (known as leads which are delineated in royal
blue) of Jurassic age and which have not been assigned any resources.

6.11. Special Factors

There are no special factors considered applicable.

Dunmore Consulting page 17 Crown Energy AB

Block 2B, Offshore South Africa

7. Legal Overview
7.1. Exploration Right & Joint Operating Agreement (JOA)
Block 2B comprises an area of 4358.8 km2 in water depths ranging up to in excess of 250m.
The project is subject an Exploration Right contract awarded in April 2011 based on the Tax
and Royalty regime of South Africa. Royalty is based on profits and ranges from 0.5% to 5%.
Corporation tax is levied at 29%. A capital uplift is applied allowing 200% of exploration costs
and 150% of production costs to be expensed for tax calculations. Operating expenditures are
expensed for tax calculations. State participation terms provide a 10% participating interest
to PetroSA which is carried through the exploration phase. A Black Economic Empowerment
equity is provided to PetroSA.

Thombo, formerly Q venture Development (South Africa) Ltd, is the Operator of and owns a
34.5% working interest (WI) in Block 2B and Afren through its wholly owned subsidiary Main
Street 840 (Pty) Limited owns a 25% working interest. Afren farmed in to Block 2B in October
2011 and joined the Thombo Exploration Right (9 year exploration period). To earn its 25%
working interest, Afren agreed to pay past costs up to $US 0.75 million and to acquire a 600
km2 3D seismic survey over the A-J1 Prospect. Crown currently holds a 40.5% WI.

In 2015 several transactions were initiated that has resulted in Africa Energy Corp. ("Africa
Energy") entering the Licence. The net result is that going forward the Joint Venture will
comprise Africa Energy (90% Operator) and Crown (10%). These transactions are awaiting final
approval from the South African authorities, which is expected in 2016. On 17th December
2015, Crown announced the signing of a farm-out agreement with Africa Energy. Crown will
retain a 10% interest with the costs of drilling and, if applicable, testing of the next exploration
well to be funded by Africa Energy.

The 9 year exploration phase of the Exploration Right is divided into a first period of 3 years
in which 684 km2 of 3D seismic data has been recorded, processed and interpreted, a second
period of 2 years with a technical assessment work programme and provision for a further
two year extension, subject to an agreed work programme. The current status is that
following acreage relinquishment the second period of two years exploration rights was
granted commencing on 13th March 2015 with a total 2 year JV budget of US$1.04 million.

8. Geological Overview
Block 2B is located in the Orange Basin, offshore South Africa which comprises a series of Late
Jurassic to Early Cretaceous age synrift depositional sequences overlain by Early Cretaceous
to present postrift depositional sequences in a passive, divergent margin setting. The Orange
basin extends from the Kudu Arch in the north to the Columbine-Agulhas Arch in the south
and was filled by sediments sourced from the paleo-Orange and Olifants rivers. This basin is
considered underexplored because of limited well control (only 30 wells in an approximately
130,000 km2 basin) and only two significant hydrocarbon discoveries to date (Kudu and
Ibhubesi gas fields) and the unappraised, oil discovery (A-J1Prospect) located in Block 2B. The

Dunmore Consulting page 18 Crown Energy AB

 original A-J1 well drilled in 1989 by Soekor flowed 190 BOPD of 36o API oil from a 46m net pay
sandstone section exhibiting a 10% porosity.

9. Resources and Reserves

In April 2012, NSAI compiled an independent CPR documenting the resource potential for
Block 2B offshore South Africa. These prospects and volumes have been previously published
by Crown on 14th September 2012. This work was based on 2D seisimic data and pre-dated
the 3D seismic data acquired in 2013.

Work to recalculate the potential of this block was commissioned by the JV following a 3D
seismic survey completed in April 2013 and initially interpreted by November 2013;
significant further technical work has been carried out by the operator during 2014 and 2015.
The work was independently reviewed by ERC Equipoise ("ERCE") and this resulted in the
publication of a comprehensive independent audit report in June 2015 that covered the
resources associated with the A-J1 oil discovery and adjacent exploration potential.
Additional exploration potential is recognised within the 3D area but evaluation of this is not
complete and is considered as work in progress.

The leads/prospects quantified by NSAI outwith the 3D area, in the northern part of the block
are retained as Prospective Resources

9.1. Contingent Resources

The ERCE report has classified the resources associated with the A-J1 discovery as Contingent
Resources. These are summarised as follows - these volumes and the completion of the report
were announced by Crown in a press release dated 4th June 2015.

Gross Contingent Resources Crown Net Crown Energy Contingent

STOIIP (MMbo)
(MMbo) Energy Resources (MMbo)
Interest
Low Mid High Mean 1C 2C 3C Mean (%) 1C 2C 3C Mean

65 184 524 257 11 37 118 56 40.5% 4.5 15 48 23

As stated above in the future Crown expect to have a 10% equity interest in the licence and
thus the net volumes would be reduced accordingly from a 40.5% to a 10% share as shown
below.

Gross Contingent Resources Crown Net Crown Energy Contingent

STOIIP (MMbo)
(MMbo) Energy Resources (MMbo)
Interest
Low Mid High Mean 1C 2C 3C Mean (%) 1C 2C 3C Mean

65 184 524 257 11 37 118 56 10.0% 1.1 3.7 11.8 5.6

9.2. Prospective Resources

Dunmore Consulting page 19 Crown Energy AB

 The Prospective Resources shown have been estimated using a combination of deterministic
and probabilistic methods and are dependent on a petroleum discovery being made. If a
discovery is made and development is undertaken, the probability that the recoverable
volumes will equal or exceed the unrisked estimated amounts is 90 percent for the low
estimate, 50 percent for the best estimate, and 10 percent for the high estimate. As
recommended in the SPE PRMS, the low, best, and high estimate prospective resources have
been aggregated by arithmetic summation; therefore, these totals do not include the
portfolio effect that might result from statistical aggregation. Unrisked prospective resources
are estimated ranges of recoverable oil and gas volumes assuming their discovery and
development and are based on estimated ranges of undiscovered in-place volumes.

It should be understood that the Prospective Resources discussed and shown herein are
those undiscovered, speculative resources estimated beyond reserves or Contingent
Resources where geological and geophysical data suggest the potential for discovery of
petroleum but where the level of proof is insufficient for classification as reserves or
Contingent Resources. The unrisked Prospective Resources shown in this report are the
range of volumes that could reasonably be expected to be recovered in the event of the
discovery and development of these prospects and leads.

The work undertaken by Thombo & ERCE has documented four prospects with Prospective
Resource potential.

The estimated oil in place and resources volumes for these prospects 438-430, S2C, S2A & S1
are tabulated below together with the 3 North Graben prospects as documented in the
previous CPR.

ESTIMATES OF UNDISCOVERED OOIP AND UNRISKED GROSS (100 PERCENT) PROSPECTIVE OIL
RESOURCES
BLOCK 2B, OFFSHORE SOUTH AFRICA

Unrisked Gross (100 Percent)

Undiscovered OOIP (MMBBL) Prospective Oil Resources (MMBBL)
Prospect or Lead/ Low Best High Low Best High
Reservoir Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
438430 49.0 88.0 158.0 8.0 18.0 38.0
S2C 61.0 148.0 332.0 10.0 31.0 82.0
S2A 116.0 233.0 435.0 17.0 49.0 111.0
S1 90.0 211.0 460.0 14.0 44.0 112.0
N. Graben L-1 223.5 323.7 463.3 48.4 69.8 100.8
N. Graben L-2 187.8 273.6 396.1 40.7 59.5 86.3
N. Graben L-3 271.6 386.9 551.5 58.4 83.6 119.5
Total 998.9 1664.2 2795.9 196.5 354.9 649.6

Dunmore Consulting page 20 Crown Energy AB

 ESTIMATES OF UNDISCOVERED UNRISKED NET (CURRENT & EXPECTED) PROSPECTIVE OIL RESOURCES
BLOCK 2B, OFFSHORE SOUTH AFRICA

Current Crown Energy @ W.I. of 40.5% Expected Crown Energy @ W.I. of 10.0%
Prospective Oil Resources (MMBBL) Prospective Oil Resources (MMBBL)
Prospect or Lead/ Low Best High Low Best High
Reservoir Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate
438430 3.2 7.3 15.4 0.8 1.8 3.8
S2C 4.1 12.6 33.2 1.0 3.1 8.2
S2A 6.9 19.8 45.0 1.7 4.9 11.1
S1 5.7 17.8 45.4 1.4 4.4 11.2
N. Graben L-1 19.6 28.3 40.8 4.8 7.0 10.1
N. Graben L-2 16.5 24.1 35.0 4.1 6.0 8.6
N. Graben L-3 23.7 33.9 48.4 5.8 8.4 12.0
Total 79.6 143.7 263.1 19.7 35.5 65.0

As already stated in the future Crown expect to have a 10% equity interest in the licence and
thus the net volumes would be reduced accordingly from a 40.5% to a 10% share as shown
above.

9.3. Reserve and Resource statement

The discovery on the block (A-J1) which produced oil to surface which constitutes a
discovered Contingent Resource. The volumes associated with the four undrilled exploration
prospects within the 3D area close to the A-J1 discovery are categorised as Prospective
Resources. Similarly the volumes associated with the undrilled North Graben prospects are
also categorised as Prospective Resources.

9.4. Reconciliation with previous statements

This is the fifth CPR statement to be released on this asset by Crown and the reported
Contingent Resources volumes are updated from the May 2015 statement due to the
completion of the evaluation of the 3D data in the area of the A-J1 discovery by ERCE in
2015. Overall the gross Best Estimate 100% Contingent Resource volume in Block 2B has
increased from zero to 37 MMbbls (in the previous CPR A-J1 was booked as Prospective
Resources). Four structures generated as result of the 3D seismic interpretation are now
included in the prospect inventory and six structures previously identified have been
omitted. The 3 North Graben prospects continue to be included unchanged from the
previous CPR. The gross Best Estimate 100% Prospective Resource volume in Block 2B has
decreased from 451 MMbbls in the May 2015 CPR to 355 MMbbls.

9.5. Statement regarding visit to property

The property is located offshore South Africa from the shoreline to water depths up to 250

Dunmore Consulting page 21 Crown Energy AB

 metres. Although large volumes of seismic and well survey data are available in the area of
the licence the area has not been visited by Crown personnel.

9.6. Production Plans for Proved and Probable Resources

Development planning will follow the A-J1 appraisal and other exploration and appraisal
operations.

9.7. Valuation of Resources

May 2015 CPR documents likely project economics for a 90mmbo offshore oil field oil under
a $100 oil price scenario using the fiscal terms for South Africa. This is no longer considered
appropriate, given the current oil price environment and the large uncertainty in potential
development costs. In addition, the A-J1 discovery appears to be somewhat smaller than this
and would require a different development scenario - no work has been undertaken on a
revised development scheme and Crown considers it premature to estimate potential value
of the project at this time.

9.8. Environmental and Facilities

Not applicable to an exploration block.

9.9. Historic Production and Expenditure

Not applicable to an exploration block.

9.10. Infrastructure
Not applicable to an exploration block.

9.11. Maps Plans and Diagrams

Dunmore Consulting page 22 Crown Energy AB

General Location Map for Block 2B showing the Relinquished Area

Dunmore Consulting page 23 Crown Energy AB

Block 2B Prospect Location Map - showing the AJ Graben and the recently identified leads and
prospects. There are three other prospects not shown on this map located in the North Graben
(Source: Thombo)

9.12. Special Factors

There are no special factors considered applicable.

Dunmore Consulting page 24 Crown Energy AB

Iraq - The Salah-ad-Din Production Sharing Contract

10. Legal Overview

10.1. Production Sharing Contract (PSC)
In November 2013 Crown Energy AB acquired Tigris Oil i Sverige AB ("Tigris") which holds the
PSC for the area of Salah ad-Din in northern Iraq. Tigris has subsequently been re-named
Crown Energy Iraq AB. The licence covers the entire area of the Salah ad- Din governorate in
northern Iraq, an area of approximately 24,000 square kilometres. The license contains a
number of existing discovered oil fields, with multi-billion barrel potential. Despite the
apparent large and commercial discoveries, only limited production has occurred from just
one field. Activities over the last 20 years have naturally been limited due to the political
instability.

The PSC terms are very similar to many functioning within the industry worldwide, in
particular in the adjacent Kurdistan area. There are certain aspects of the wording of the
current PSC that require clarification and perhaps modification to reflect the recent and
current market conditions. Discussions are ongoing with the Regional Government to try to
resolve these. For example, in the definitions of the PSC, it is stated that the Regional
Governorate may have up to 40% working interest depending on contractual obligations.
This reflects the Companys legal interpretations of the existing PSC and includes what is
believed to be the commercial split with the Salah ad-Din Regional Governorate when taking
into account the likely Regional Governorate interest. The commercial split is an example of
the terms that are under discussion with the Salah ad-Din Governorate as part of the
ongoing work to clarify certain aspects of the existing PSC. This CPR reflects Crowns best
understanding of the split between the contractor, i.e. Crown Energy and the Salah ad-Din
Governorate. Crown's working interest (WI) in the license is now believed to be 60%, with
the Regional Governorate having the remaining 40% interest. Previously (May 2015 CPR) it
was understood that Crown had a 100% working interest.

In brief overview Crown believes the commercial terms comprise a Royalty based on gross
production rates (7%) of crude oil and non associated gas. Cost Recovery is from 60% of the
remaining Available Petroleum. A sliding scale of Profit Oil allocation is based on total
cumulative production and costs. Annual environmental and training costs are payable (US$
150,000 each during the exploration period) in addition to bonus payments ($US7.5MM-
$US20MM) triggered by cumulative oil and gas production milestones.

The first sub-period of the PSC runs from 29th September 2011 until 29th September 2018
and has a 70km 2D seismic (US$2m) and 1 exploration well (US$7m) work obligation. The
second sub-period of the PSC runs until 29th September 2021 and has an optional 2D or 3D
seismic and 1 exploration well (US$7m) obligation.

Whilst technical and historic data available to the Company and ourselves is very limited it is
clear that significant hydrocarbon deposits are present within the PSC area.

Dunmore Consulting page 25 Crown Energy AB

 The geological section below summarises what is known of the proven fields and discoveries
on Salah ad-Din. Crown is aware of the following riders applicable to some of these fields:

Ajeel Field: the central Iraq government oil company is known to have been operating and
producing hydrocarbons at the Ajeel Field until June-14. Since then we understand that
operations ceased and that the current position of the central government is that the
province is entitled to jurisdiction over the field.

East Baghdad Field: this field straddles the border with the Baghdad province, where the
central government has previously engaged in various service contract negotiations to
produce the reserves. It is understood these were not concluded, but that production has
been taking place, operated by the central government oil company. Crown has no
knowledge of whether these activities have extended into the area of the field lying within
Salah ad-Din.

Hamrin Field: this field straddles the border with Ta'mim (Kirkuk) province. Crown believes
that the boundary is defined by the crest of a prominent limestone ridge, which can be
clearly seen on Google Earth and is corroborated by a UN map. However, we have also seen
maps which place the border slightly to the south of this. Whichever is correct, the majority
of the field and most of the wells drilled lie within Salah ad-Din. Crown is not aware of any
production activities having taken place in Hamrin since its licence award.

Pulkhana Field: this field lies close to the border with Sulaimaniyah province, which is part of
autonomous Kurdistan. There appears to be some dispute regarding the actual border and
Crown is aware that the Kurdistan government (KRG) had previously issued a field appraisal
licence for Pulkhana to Shamarran Corp. They drilled and tested a well during 2011/12, but
were unable to agree terms with the KRG to progress to development. The licence has since
been rescinded and reports that a new one may have been issued to TPAO have not been
substantiated.

11. Geological Overview

The Salah ad-Din PSC is located in central Iraq and stretches from north of Bagdad in the
south to south west of Kurdistan in the north. The cities of Samarra and Tikrit lie at its
centre. It is shown in outline in section 12.10. It mostly in the Mesopotamian Plain Region
which is a geological depression filled with river sediments which covers the central and
southern parts of Iraq. It is a plain of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The northern part
extending between Samarra and Deltwa consists of three distinct river terraces which are
about 5 to 15 metres higher than the present river level. These old river terraces thus form
high plains which are never flooded by the river.

The Mesopotamian Sub-basin (sometimes known as the central Iraq Sub-basin) lies between
the Ahu Jir Zone lo the southwest and the Makhul Zone to the northeast. It is formed by

Dunmore Consulting page 26 Crown Energy AB

 depression of the margin of the Arabian Plate, which was overthrust by the Eurasian Plate
during the course of the Alpine Orogeny. The sedimentary history was complicated by a
series of transgressions, regressions, flysch sedimentation, evaporitic sedimentation and
even igneous activities. The stratigraphic section from the Cambrian to the present is almost
complete. Gravimetric measurements indicate that at its deepest part the basement has
sunk to more than 12,000 m (39,360 ft), Pliocene sediments up to 3,000 m (9,840 ft) thick
have been intersected in drill holes. Breaks are minor, and thickness exceeds thousands of
meters of various sediments. Evaporites including salt occurred several times from the
Cambrian to the Miocene. Salt tectonics may be responsible for some of the local anomalies.

Typically for the region the identified fields within the PSC have multiple source rocks
(Paleocene, Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic) and multiple reservoirs (Miocene to Jurassic). They
consist mainly of fractured carbonates with often excellent evaporite and shale top seals.

Five of Iraq's seven so-called super-giant oil fields holding proven reserves greater than 5
billion barrels are located in the south of Iraq, accounting for 60 percent of the country's
total proven reserves and the bulk of production. Fields are typically smaller in the central
and northern parts of Iraq, with the exception of the East Baghdad field in the central region
and the Kirkuk field in the north of the country.

The PSC is extremely underexplored with very few exploration wells drilled.

Ajeel

The structure is an anticline immediately in front (southwest) of the main Hamrin North
thrust and is illustrated as such by Al-Naqib (1960) albeit at the time undrilled. Al-Naqib's
maps show the anticlinal axis as an arcuate feature around 20km in length from surface
mapping. The central parts of the structure are gas bearing to the base of the reservoir, with
oil reservoired around the rim. Drill sites evident in Google Earth suggest the main structure
is approx. 20x5km in size and the distribution of drill-sites indicate development is focussed
on the oil rim. A northwest culmination although less well-defined is evident from a string of
5 drill sites which appears to be approx. 10km long. The main reservoirs are in the Jeribe
and Euphrates.

Production actually commenced in 1998 with 4 million barrels produced during that year
(approximately 10,950 BOPD). A redevelopment programme reported to be in progress in
2009 (Al-Obeidi, DG, NOC, Iraq Oil Forum interview 2009) had resulted in production rates of
25,000 bopd by early 2012, (Hamid Abdelrizak al-Saadi, GM, NOC, Iraq Business News, Feb
2012) with rates of 35,000 anticipated in 2013. A subsequent development phase is planned
to raise production to 70,000b/d. Drive mechanism is reported to be gas cap expansion and
solution gas drive with no significant water drive detected.

Balad

Dunmore Consulting page 27 Crown Energy AB

 This field is a northwest-southeast trending folded and faulted structure which is proven oil-
bearing over approx 15km, although some sources show its extent as around 30km. Sadooni
(2004) and Schafer & George (2008) report that the structure is complex, with flower
structures and horst and graben subdivisions. Graben formation and structural growth
occurred primarily in the Late Cretaceous - the graben faults do not affect the Tertiary -
regional tilting, down to the east, and slight tightening of the structure occurred with
development of the Zagros foredeep in the Neogene. Muhsin (2012) shows various
historical maps as well as detailed maps and sections derived from interpretation of the 3D
data. The dominant faults define a NW-SE trending graben about 4 km wide which is offset,
right laterally, by a roughly east-west orientated strike slip fault, according to the 3D data
interpretation of Muhsin. The main accumulation defined to date (by 5 wells) is in the
eastern flank of the southern graben. Oil is also present within the southern graben (3
wells), and one well has found oil in the northern graben. No dry wells have been drilled.
Closure on the eastern flank of the northern graben appears to be untested. Regional dip
implies no closure beyond the bounding fault on the western flank of the structure. It seems
likely that the accumulation is compartmentalised with different gas-oil-water contacts on
the eastern flank and in the graben. It is unclear whether the three main reservoirs, the
Hartha, Sa'di and Khasib represent distinct accumulations or are in communication. The
regional fault trend continues northward to the Samarra area, and with slight offset to Tikrit
and Beiji.

Initial production in 1988 was less than 10,000 BOPD according to Al-Qayim (2010).
According to Anaz (2012) pilot production from four wells in the 1980s was only between
1000 and 2000 bopd.

East Baghdad

The structure is a NW trending anticline with three culminations over a block faulted
basement feature 65km long. At least 10 fault block compartments are present. There are
reports that some fault blocks" are flower structures suggesting strike slip faulting. The
structure was defined by seismic with good reflectors from the Lower Fars, Shiranish,
Ahmadi and Shu'aiba.

The field is complex. The Jeribe-Euphrates Formations contain heavy oil. Main production is
from the fractured Khasib and the Zubair Formations. Individual wells in the Khasib have
produced at over 30,000 BOPD. The initial production rate, established in 1989 was 20,000
BOPD, the ultimate capacity is estimated to be 160,000 to 200,000 BOPD. This initial rate
was the result of a pilot project on part of the field near Baghdad where 14 directional wells
were drilled in 1989. The pilot project was aimed at gathering basic data for planning the
development of this complex accumulation. The second phase of development envisaged
production of between 40,000 and 80,000 BOPD of mostly 22API crude to feed a refinery
under construction in the late 1990s in central Iraq. The current status of the field and the
refinery is not known.

Dunmore Consulting page 28 Crown Energy AB

 Hamrin

The Jebel Hamrin range comprises two long anticlinal folds which extend en-echelon,
termed Jebel Hamrin North and South. The Hamrin Field occurs beneath Jebel Hamrin
North, a sharp whale back surface anticline trending NW-SE. It is asymmetrical, with a
slightly steeper southwest flank, and has at least 3 separate structural culminations which
are termed, from NW to SE, the Fadhul (Al-Buti), Nukhaila Khan and Allas Domes, separated
by the Darb al Milh and Ain Nukhaila saddles. Commercial accumulations are present in the
main Lower Miocene reservoir in the Allas Dome and oil in the Nukhail Khan dome, with
approximately 37 and 12 wells drilled on these domes respectively to date. Most maps of
the field also show the accumulation extending below the northwest Fadhul dome but Anaz
reports only uncommercial oil in this area, with probably only 3 wells drilled to date.

Ajeel Field (also known as Saddam) forms a separate en-echelon structure immediately to
the southwest of the Nukhaila Khan Dome. The well Khasab-1 appears to be a test of the
southeasterly extension of the Hamrin North structure. The core of the exposed structure,
which marks a physiographic high, is composed of Lower Fars. The structure attains its
maximum development in the Fadhul Dome. From the crest of Nukhaila Dome to the Ain
Nukhaila Saddle dips increase to 60-70 on the northern flank with oblique faulting down-
throwing towards the anticlinal axis. The Allas Dome has steeper dips on its northeast flank
which is also cut by high angle reverse faults. The main fault through the Allas Dome is a
reverse strike fault down throwing to the southwest, as its throw diminishes to the
southeast it turns into an overfold. Oil seeps occur where the River Tigris cuts through the
northwestern end of the structure.

Producing 20-25,000 bopd in early 2012 according to Hamid Abdelrizak al-Saadi, general
manager of the North Oil Company (the operator) reported in Iraq Business News (Feb
2012).

Makhul

Surface anticline of Jebel Makhul with two culminations. Well 2 encountered an overturned
fold.

No significant production has been reported to date.

Pulkhana

The pre-seismic interpretation by the IPC was of a long, sinuous, asymmetric anticlinal fold
with a more steeply dipping SW flank. At the surface, deformation is greatest towards the
centre of the structure where the southwest flank is overturned. The NE flank is variably
thrust over the southwest flank. The one seismic line that has been shown in Shamaran
presentations indicates seismic quality within the Pulkhana structure itself beneath the top

Dunmore Consulting page 29 Crown Energy AB

 Lower Fars is very poor and must remain speculative at this stage if all the seismic is of the
same quality.

Tikrit

The Tikrit structure is developed on a NW-SE fault zone extending northwest towards Beiji
and southeast, en-echelon, to Samarra and Balad. In the Tikrit area a weak, NW-SE trending
surface feature approximately 27km in length is evident and the Tikrit wells are located on
the southeastern part, spaced over a distance of 6km. Sadooni (2004) reports that the
structure is complex, with flower structures and horst and graben subdivisions. Anaz reports
that the Tikrit wells test four separate blocks, only one of which has proven oilbearing.

The main reservoir is the Zubair Formation at a depth of 2500m. Oil density 0.916g/cm3,
Sulphur content - 1.85% (wt) according to Sovgeoinfo 2009. Jassim & Goff (2006) report the
Mishrif, Mauddud, Nahr Umr and Zubair to contain 23API oil and gas. Al-Qayim (2010)
states the Khasib is an important reservoir'. He also states that reservoirs occur in the Nahr
Umr and Mauddud. A long term production test in 1989 was conducted with two wells tied
in, each producing " wet (sic) crude" of 27 API oil at 200 to 300 b/d; from around 2500
metres, according to Anaz (2012).

12. Resources and Reserves

12.1. Contingent and Prospective Resources

The absence of any approved development plans by the JV means that all hydrocarbons are
classed as resources rather than reserves. Those fields where reported test or production
data could be used to estimate recoverable volumes these have been classed as Contingent.
All other volumes have been classed as Prospective Resources as little or no evidence is
available to verify the quoted figures. Where possible we have undertaken audit style
calculations to ensure that the structures described are capable of hosting the volumes
assigned to them.
The following sources were available when compiling the tables below:

PGA Regional database and specific well and field data for Salah ad-Din
IHS Edin services
Norsk Hydro Hamrin report
Sonoro Corp (North Salah-e-Din project)
Google Earth

All volumes are quoted before royalty and PSC contract terms are applied and as such do
NOT represent the Company's entitlement volumes. The Unit % parameter is intended to
represent what could be the on block portion of a structure which straddles the PSC
boundary. This % has been assigned by Dunmore Consulting and is for indicative purposes
only and has no legal standing whatsoever and does not represent the Companys position

Dunmore Consulting page 30 Crown Energy AB

 or assertion. The Companys WI of 60% is then applied to the Unit share to calculate the Net
Volume tabulated below.

Note some fields listed are reported to be in production by rival groups.

Crude Oil MMbbl Natural Gas Bscf

Contingent Resources Contingent Resources
Gross Net WI% Gross Net WI%
Field Low Base High Unit % * Low Base High Low Base High Unit % * Low Base High
Ajeel 63.9 100% 38.4 100%
Balad 2.9 100% 1.8 100%
E. Bagdad 438.0 15% 39.4 15%
Hamrin 82.1 50% 24.6 50%
Makhul 100% 100%
Pulkhana 50% 50%
Tikrit 0.4 100% 0.2 100%
PSC Total 104.4

Prospective Resources Prospective Resources

Gross Net WI% Gross Net WI%
Field Min Mid Max Unit % * Min Mid Max Min Mid Max Unit % * Min Mid Max
Ajeel 432.0 807.0 100% 259.2 484.2 3200.0 4600.0 100% 1920.0 2760.0
Balad 134.0 2318.0 100% 80.4 1390.8 67.0 3751.0 100% 40.2 2250.6
E. Bagdad 8108.0 15985.0 15% 729.7 1438.7 2498 15% 224.8
Hamrin 27.2 242.3 1004.1 50% 8.2 72.7 301.2 1925.0 50% 577.5
Makhul 30.0 100% 18.0 100%
Pulkhana 145.0 50% 43.5 50%
Tikrit 12.0 493.0 100% 7.2 295.8 3.6 143.0 100% 2.2 85.8
PSC Total 8.2 1149.2 3972.2 2764.7 5096.4

12.2. Reconciliation with previous statements

This is the second CPR statement to be released on this asset by Crown. No additional
technical information is available and thus the gross resource volumes are unchanged.
However, this CPR reflects a legal clarification of the wording in the PSC that has resulted in
a re-interpretation of Crown's initial working Interest to be 60% rather than the 100%
previously assumed. Crown has stated to Dunmore Consulting that to the best of its
knowledge its Working Interest (WI) in the Iraqi property is 60%.

12.3. Statement regarding visit to property

The property is located onshore central Iraq and the area has not been visited by Crown or
Dunmore Consultings personnel.

12.4. Production Plans for Proved and Probable Resources

The Company does not currently have any drilling or production plans for this PSC.

12.5. Valuation of Resources

Under the present circumstances on the ground in Iraq and given the sparse data available
to us we consider that an NPV calculation would not be credible. Given the onshore
location of the PSC and the nature of the hydrocarbon reservoirs we consider that any
reasonable size oil discovery would be commercial in a normal peacetime political and
social environment at oil prices in excess of US$ 40 per barrel. By contrast we consider that

Dunmore Consulting page 31 Crown Energy AB

 a gas discovery would likely be difficult to monetise until Iraqs industries have experienced
a reasonable period of stability.

12.6. Environmental and Facilities

The state of the existing wells, production facilities and pipelines within the area of the PSC
is not known. There are reports that the Ajeel and the Hamrin fields are producing.

12.7. Historic Production and Expenditure

Not available at present.

12.8. Infrastructure
There are several oil and gas pipelines, roads, and railways which traverse the governorate
as well as the major Tigris and Euphrates river systems. A major refinery is located at Baiji in
the north of the area. These are shown in section 12.9.

Dunmore Consulting page 32 Crown Energy AB

 12.9. Maps Plans and Diagrams

A general map showing certain major hydrocarbon accumulations and the outline of the PSC

Dunmore Consulting page 33 Crown Energy AB

A general map showing major hydrocarbon accumulations of the PSC

Dunmore Consulting page 34 Crown Energy AB

A general stratigraphic section through the major known hydrocarbon provinces of Iraq

Dunmore Consulting page 35 Crown Energy AB

A map showing major infrastructure elements of northern Iraq

12.10. Special Factors

The state of war that currently exists in the area is very likely to have an impact on the
timing of development and oil production.

Dunmore Consulting page 36 Crown Energy AB

Extract from

Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS)

Preamble
Petroleum resources are the estimated quantities of hydrocarbons naturally occurring on or within the
Earths crust. Resource assessments estimate total quantities in known and yet-to-be- discovered
accumulations; resources evaluations are focused on those quantities that can potentially be
recovered and marketed by commercial projects. A petroleum resources management system
provides a consistent approach to estimating petroleum quantities, evaluating development projects,
and presenting results within a comprehensive classification framework.

International efforts to standardize the definitions of petroleum resources and how they are estimated
began in the 1930s. Early guidance focused on Proved Reserves. Building on work initiated by the
Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers (SPEE), SPE published definitions for all Reserves
categories in 1987. In the same year, the World Petroleum Council (WPC, then known as the
World Petroleum Congress), working independently, published Reserves definitions that were
strikingly similar. In 1997, the two organizations jointly released a single set of definitions for
Reserves that could be used worldwide. In 2000, the American Association of Petroleum
Geologists (AAPG), SPE, and WPC jointly developed a classification system for all petroleum
resources. This was followed by additional supporting documents: supplemental application
evaluation guidelines (2001) and a glossary of terms utilized in resources definitions (2005). SPE also
published standards for estimating and auditing reserves information (revised
2007).

These definitions and the related classification system are now in common use internationally within
the petroleum industry. They provide a measure of comparability and reduce the subjective nature of
resources estimation. However, the technologies employed in petroleum exploration, development,
production, and processing continue to evolve and improve. The SPE Oil and Gas Reserves
Committee works closely with other organizations to maintain the definitions and issues periodic
revisions to keep current with evolving technologies and changing commercial opportunities.

This document consolidates, builds on, and replaces guidance previously contained in the 1997
Petroleum Reserves Definitions, the 2000 Petroleum Resources Classification and Definitions
publications, and the 2001 Guidelines for the Evaluation of Petroleum Reserves and Resources; the
latter document remains a valuable source of more detailed background information, and specific
chapters are referenced herein. Appendix A is a consolidated glossary of terms used in resources
evaluations and replaces those published in 2005.

These definitions and guidelines are designed to provide a common reference for the international
petroleum industry, including national reporting and regulatory disclosure agencies, and to support
petroleum project and portfolio management requirements. They are intended to improve clarity in
global communications regarding petroleum resources. It is expected that this document will be
supplemented with industry education programs and application guides addressing their
implementation in a wide spectrum of technical and/or commercial settings.

It is understood that these definitions and guidelines allow flexibility for users and agencies to
tailor application for their particular needs; however, any modifications to the guidance contained
herein should be clearly identified. The definitions and guidelines contained in this document
must not be construed as modifying the interpretation or application of any existing regulatory
reporting requirements.

This SPE/WPC/AAPG/SPEE Petroleum Resources Management System document, including its

Appendix, may be referred to by the abbreviated term SPE-PRMS with the caveat that the full title,
including clear recognition of the co-sponsoring organizations, has been initially stated.

Dunmore Consulting page 37 Crown Energy AB

1.0 Basic Principles and Definitions
The estimation of petroleum resource quantities involves the interpretation of volumes and values that
have an inherent degree of uncertainty. These quantities are associated with development projects at
various stages of design and implementation. Use of a consistent classification system enhances
comparisons between projects, groups of projects, and total company portfolios according to forecast
production profiles and recoveries. Such a system must consider both technical and commercial
factors that impact the projects economic feasibility, its productive life, and its related cash flows.

1.1 Petroleum Resources Classification Framework

Petroleum is defined as a naturally occurring mixture consisting of hydrocarbons in the gaseous,
liquid, or solid phase. Petroleum may also contain non-hydrocarbons, common examples of which
are carbon dioxide, nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide and sulfur. In rare cases, non-hydrocarbon
content could be greater than 50%.

The term resources as used herein is intended to encompass all quantities of petroleum naturally
occurring on or within the Earths crust, discovered and undiscovered (recoverable and
unrecoverable), plus those quantities already produced. Further, it includes all types of petroleum
whether currently considered conventional or unconventional.

Figure 1-1 is a graphical representation of the SPE/WPC/AAPG/SPEE resources classification

system. The system defines the major recoverable resources classes: Production, Reserves,
Contingent Resources, and Prospective Resources, as well as Unrecoverable petroleum.

PRODUCTION
COMMERCIAL

RESERVES
RESERVES
TOTAL PETROLEUM INITIALLY-IN-PLACE (PIIP)

1P 2P2P 3P
DISCOVERED PIIP

Proved Probable
Probable Possible

Increasing Chance of Commerciality

SUB-COMMERCIAL

CONTINGENT
RESOURCES

1C 2C 3C

UNRECOVERABLE
UNDISCOVERED PIIP

PROSPECTIVE
RESOURCES

Low
Low Best High
Estimate Estimate Estimate

UNRECOVERABLE

Range of Uncertainty
Not to scale

Figure 1-1: Resources Classification Framework.

Dunmore Consulting page 38 Crown Energy AB

The Range of Uncertainty reflects a range of estimated quantities potentially recoverable
from an accumulation by a project, while the vertical axis represents the Chance of
Commerciality, that is, the chance that the project that will be developed and reach
commercial producing status. The following definitions apply to the major subdivisions within
the resources classification:

TOTAL PETROLEUM INITIALLY-IN-PLACE is that quantity of petroleum that is

estimated to exist originally in naturally occurring accumulations. It includes that quantity
of petroleum that is estimated, as of a given date, to be contained in known accumulations
prior to production plus those estimated quantities in accumulations yet to be discovered
(equivalent to total resources).

DISCOVERED PETROLEUM INITIALLY-IN-PLACE is that quantity of petroleum that is

estimated, as of a given date, to be contained in known accumulations prior to production.

PRODUCTION is the cumulative quantity of petroleum that has been recovered

at a given date. While all recoverable resources are estimated and production is
measured in terms of the sales product specifications, raw production (sales plus
non-sales) quantities are also measured and required to support engineering
analyses based on reservoir voidage (see Production Measurement, section 3.2).

Multiple development projects may be applied to each known accumulation, and each project
will recover an estimated portion of the initially-in-place quantities. The projects shall be
subdivided into Commercial and Sub-Commercial, with the estimated recoverable quantities
being classified as Reserves and Contingent Resources respectively, as defined below.

RESERVES are those quantities of petroleum anticipated to be commercially

recoverable by application of development projects to known accumulations from a
given date forward under defined conditions. Reserves must further satisfy four
criteria: they must be discovered, recoverable, commercial, and remaining (as of the
evaluation date) based on the development project(s) applied. Reserves are further
categorized in accordance with the level of certainty associated with the estimates
and may be sub-classified based on project maturity and/or characterized by
development and production status.

CONTINGENT RESOURCES are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a

given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations, but the applied
project(s) are not yet considered mature enough for commercial development due to
one or more contingencies. Contingent Resources may include, for example, projects
for which there are currently no viable markets, or where commercial recovery is
dependent on technology under development, or where evaluation of the
accumulation is insufficient to clearly assess commerciality. Contingent Resources
are further categorized in accordance with the level of certainty associated with the
estimates and may be sub- classified based on project maturity and/or characterized
by their economic status.

UNDISCOVERED PETROLEUM INITIALLY-IN-PLACE is that quantity of petroleum

estimated, as of a given date, to be contained within accumulations yet to be discovered.

PROSPECTIVE RESOURCES are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a

given date, to be potentially recoverable from undiscovered accumulations by
application of future development projects. Prospective Resources have both an
associated chance of discovery and a chance of development. Prospective
Resources are further subdivided in accordance with the level of certainty associated
with recoverable estimates assuming their discovery and development and may be
sub-classified based on project maturity.

UNRECOVERABLE is that portion of Discovered or Undiscovered Petroleum Initially-

 in- Place quantities which is estimated, as of a given date, not to be recoverable by future
development projects. A portion of these quantities may become recoverable in the future
as commercial circumstances change or technological developments occur; the
remaining portion may never be recovered due to physical/chemical constraints
represented by subsurface interaction of fluids and reservoir rocks.

Estimated Ultimate Recovery (EUR) is not a resources category, but a term that may be
applied to any accumulation or group of accumulations (discovered or undiscovered) to
define those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially
recoverable under defined technical and commercial conditions plus those quantities already
produced (total of recoverable resources).

In specialized areas, such as basin potential studies, alternative terminology has been used;
the total resources may be referred to as Total Resource Base or Hydrocarbon Endowment.
Total recoverable or EUR may be termed Basin Potential. The sum of Reserves, Contingent
Resources, and Prospective Resources may be referred to as remaining recoverable
resources. When such terms are used, it is important that each classification component of
the summation also be provided. Moreover, these quantities should not be aggregated
without due consideration of the varying degrees of technical and commercial risk involved
with their classification.

Second Extract from the PRMS

2.2 Resources Categorization
The horizontal axis in the Resources Classification (Figure 1.1) defines the range of
uncertainty in estimates of the quantities of recoverable, or potentially recoverable, petroleum
associated with a project. These estimates include both technical and commercial uncertainty
components as follows:
The total petroleum remaining within the accumulation (in-place resources).
That portion of the in-place petroleum that can be recovered by applying a
defined development project or projects.
Variations in the commercial conditions that may impact the quantities recovered and
sold (e.g., market availability, contractual changes).

Where commercial uncertainties are such that there is significant risk that the complete
project (as initially defined) will not proceed, it is advised to create a separate project
classified as Contingent Resources with an appropriate chance of commerciality.

2.2.1 Range of Uncertainty

The range of uncertainty of the recoverable and/or potentially recoverable volumes may be
represented by either deterministic scenarios or by a probability distribution (see
Deterministic and Probabilistic Methods, section 4.2).

When the range of uncertainty is represented by a probability distribution, a low, best, and
high estimate shall be provided such that:

There should be at least a 90% probability (P90) that the quantities actually recovered
will equal or exceed the low estimate.
There should be at least a 50% probability (P50) that the quantities actually recovered
will equal or exceed the best estimate.
There should be at least a 10% probability (P10) that the quantities actually recovered
will equal or exceed the high estimate.

Dunmore Consulting page 40 Crown Energy AB

 When using the deterministic scenario method, typically there should also be low, best, and
high estimates, where such estimates are based on qualitative assessments of relative
uncertainty using consistent interpretation guidelines. Under the deterministic incremental
(risk-based) approach, quantities at each level of uncertainty are estimated discretely and
separately (see Category Definitions and Guidelines, section 2.2.2).

These same approaches to describing uncertainty may be applied to Reserves,

Contingent Resources, and Prospective Resources. While there may be significant risk that
sub-commercial and undiscovered accumulations will not achieve commercial production, it
useful to consider the range of potentially recoverable quantities independently of such a risk
or consideration of the resource class to which the quantities will be assigned.

2.2.2 Category Definitions and Guidelines

Evaluators may assess recoverable quantities and categorize results by uncertainty using
the deterministic incremental (risk-based) approach, the deterministic scenario
(cumulative) approach, or probabilistic methods. (see 2001 Supplemental Guidelines,
Chapter 2.5). In many cases, a combination of approaches is used.

Use of consistent terminology (Figure 1.1) promotes clarity in communication of

evaluation results. For Reserves, the general cumulative terms low/best/high estimates
are denoted as 1P/2P/3P, respectively. The associated incremental quantities are termed
Proved, Probable and Possible. Reserves are a subset of, and must be viewed within
context of, the complete resources classification system. While the categorization criteria
are proposed specifically for Reserves, in most cases, they can be equally applied to
Contingent and Prospective Resources conditional upon their satisfying the criteria for
discovery and/or development.

For Contingent Resources, the general cumulative terms low/best/high estimates are
denoted as 1C/2C/3C respectively. For Prospective Resources, the general cumulative terms
low/best/high estimates still apply. No specific terms are defined for incremental quantities
within Contingent and Prospective Resources.

Without new technical information, there should be no change in the distribution of technically
recoverable volumes and their categorization boundaries when conditions are satisfied
sufficiently to reclassify a project from Contingent Resources to Reserves. All evaluations
require application of a consistent set of forecast conditions, including assumed future costs
and prices, for both classification of projects and categorization of estimated quantities
recovered by each project (see Commercial Evaluations, section 3.1).

Table III presents category definitions and provides guidelines designed to promote
consistency in resource assessments. The following summarizes the definitions for each
Reserves category in terms of both the deterministic incremental approach and scenario
approach and also provides the probability criteria if probabilistic methods are applied.

Proved Reserves are those quantities of petroleum, which, by analysis of geoscience

and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be commercially
recoverable, from a given date forward, from known reservoirs and under defined
economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations. If deterministic
methods are used, the term reasonable certainty is intended to express a high degree
of confidence that the quantities

will be recovered. If probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 90%
probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the estimate.

Probable Reserves are those additional Reserves which analysis of geoscience

and engineering data indicate are less likely to be recovered than Proved Reserves but
more certain to be recovered than Possible Reserves. It is equally likely that actual
remaining quantities recovered will be greater than or less than the sum of the estimated

Dunmore Consulting page 41 Crown Energy AB

 Proved plus Probable Reserves (2P). In this context, when probabilistic methods are
used, there should be at least a 50% probability that the actual quantities recovered will
equal or exceed the 2P estimate.

Possible Reserves are those additional reserves which analysis of geoscience

and engineering data suggest are less likely to be recoverable than Probable Reserves.
The total quantities ultimately recovered from the project have a low probability to exceed
the sum of Proved plus Probable plus Possible (3P) Reserves, which is equivalent to the
high estimate scenario. In this context, when probabilistic methods are used, there should
be at least a 10% probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or exceed the
3P estimate.

Based on additional data and updated interpretations that indicate increased certainty,
portions of
Possible and Probable Reserves may be re-categorized as Probable and Proved
Reserves.

Uncertainty in resource estimates is best communicated by reporting a range of potential

results. However, if it is required to report a single representative result, the best estimate
is considered the most realistic assessment of recoverable quantities. It is generally
considered to represent the sum of Proved and Probable estimates (2P) when using the
deterministic scenario or the probabilistic assessment methods. It should be noted that under
the deterministic incremental (risk-based) approach, discrete estimates are made for each
category, and they should not be aggregated without due consideration of their associated
risk (see 2001 Supplemental Guidelines, Chapter 2.5).

Dunmore Consulting page 42 Crown Energy AB