p161givotolam israel syn pdfftp5.bizportal.co.il/web/giflib/extlinks/228435.pdf · kidod, zohar and...

7
Project Synopsis P161 Onshore Israel Meged Oil Field Production Lease I/11 Givot Olam Oil LP September 2008 (Energy Venture Opportunities International) E N V O I

Upload: others

Post on 20-Jul-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Project Synopsis P161

Onshore Israel Meged Oil Field

Production Lease I/11

Givot Olam Oil LP

September 2008

(Energy Venture Opportunities International)

E N V O I

P161 – Israel (License I/11) E N V O I

Givot Olam Oil LP EEXXEECCUUTTIIVVEE SSUUMMMMAARRYY::

Introduction: Givot Olam Oil Exploration Limited Partnership, an Israel-based, Tel Aviv stock Exchange (TASE) listed exploration company, is seeking a partner to participate in the drilling of their next appraisal well, Meged-5. The well is designed to further delineate the Meged oil accumulation which Givot Olam discovered in 1994 on their 99%-owned and operated 243 km2 (60,000 acre) Rosh Ha’ayin Block when they drilled the Meged-2 discovery well within the Galil Rift Basin, onshore Israel (now Production Lease I/11). The Galil Rift is now recognised as an extension of the Triassic Palmyra-Sinjar rift system situated to the northeast. Significantly, the Galil rift has regionally been offset southwards by sinistral shear along the large N-S trending Dead Sea fault and is largely unexplored in comparison to the prolific, proven producing part of the Triassic play trend in Syria and Iraq (Ref: Montage).

Project Overview: Givot Olam drilled two subsequent appraisal wells (Meged-3 & Meged-4 in 2001 and 2003, respectively), both of which confirmed closure and oil saturated reservoirs. They also re-entered Meged-2 and flowed hydrocarbons on production test. More recently in 2005, a 25 km infill seismic survey acquired by Givot Olam not only further improved the resolution of the structure but also revealed that the three existing wells had all penetrated the structurally lower northern end of a much larger Triassic closure than had previously been mapped. The enlarged Meged structure now covers approximately 180 km2 (45,000 acres) and is now believed to be capable of hosting an estimated P50 resource of around 142 million bbls recoverable, with significantly bigger upside. The Meged closure remains undrilled on its central and southern part, including the crest of the closure where the next appraisal well is proposed, up dip of the three existing wells. A new depositional model also predicts that the next well could encounter a more porous carbonate facies that would be a much more prolific reservoir.

Over the last ten years Givot Olam has explored and appraised the vast potential of the Meged oilfield on their own but would now like to accelerate their appraisal, and hopefully development plans, by finding a suitably experienced drilling partner to join them in the next phase of their work programme.

Brief History: All three of the existing Meged wells drilled to date by Givot Olam were located by successive interpretation of seismic acquisitions between 1970 to 2005, which now total around 1,000 kms of 2D data. The Meged wells all encountered oil saturated Triassic aged Mohilla “A” reservoir, from which Meged-2 and 4 wells tested at up to 400 bopd 40° API crude over a short time, with large but unmeasured quantities of associated gas. The modest flow rates are now recognised to have been limited by locally tight reservoir and damage associated with outdated engineering techniques and mechanical failure. On 4th April 2004, the Israeli government recognised the Meged accumulation as a commercial oil discovery and awarded Givot Olam production lease I/11 which incorporated the original Rosh Ha’ayin exploration Block. The Meged Oil Field is situated approximately 15 kms east of Tel Aviv and could be tied into the coastal pipeline 20km away, which links into the refineries situated in Haifa and Ashdod. Prospectivity & Value Potential: Even if the next Meged appraisal well encounters only modest 4-6% porosity, similar to the earlier wells, a 300 bopd production rate can be expected with basic carbonate stimulation. If the higher (8%+) porosity grainstone facies is encountered in the next well, as expected, flow rates of up to 1,000 bopd per well are possible. Scoping economics indicate that if the Meged field is indeed confirmed to contain the 142 MMbo P50 recoverable resource estimate, it could generate an NPV10 in excess of US$ 2 billion, based on a flat US$ 100/bbl price deck over a 25 year field life. Discovery of any upside would obviously add to this value substantially. All production is available for both domestic use and/or export, with easy access to the existing refineries and large markets by tanker within the Mediterranean. Obligations & Work Programme: Givot Olam has, to date, fulfilled all its exploration obligations to maintain their production lease. There is a single requirement to have some level of production on stream following the completion of the next appraisal well being planned for Q1 2009. A rig has been contracted at an estimated cost of around US$ 8 million, including initial well testing. Provision is being built into the programme for fracture stimulation and additional testing, likely to cost an additional US$ 3 million if the well is successful. Deal: Givot Olam is offering a negotiable equity interest in their Meged discovery by funding all or part of the next appraisal well (Meged-5), with an ‘option’ to increase the interest by subsequent involvement in the development of the field. This equates to sub-ground floor earn in, as Givot Olam is not seeking reimbursement of any past costs of the 3 past wells, the acquisition of new seismic or associated costs already spent to advance the Meged opportunity to where it is today.

OOppppoorrttuunniittyy ttoo jjooiinn oonnggooiinngg aapppprraaiissaall && ppootteennttiiaall ddeevveellooppmmeenntt,, ffoolllloowwiinngg nneeww sseeiissmmiicc ddaattaa && aawwaarrdd ooff ccoommmmeerrcciiaall pprroodduuccttiioonn lliicceennssee,, ooff vveerryy llaarrggee MMeeggeedd ooiill ffiieelldd ((EEsstt.. 114422 mmmmbboo rreessoouurrccee wwiitthh 440000++ mmmmbboo uuppssiiddee))..

P161 – Israel (License I/11) E N V O I

Exploration History: A total of around 400+ wells have been drilled in Israel to date, mostly in the 1950s, 60s and early 70s by the old national Israeli Oil Company and located mainly on the basis of surface geological mapping. Most are also now recognised to have been drilled in less prospective areas such as the Negev platform (Ref: Montage). Only twenty five or so of these old wells were targeted within the four main prospective basin play areas now recognised in Israel. These include the Dead Sea Basin (which contains the Kidod, Zohar and Hakanaim gas fields), the Coastal Plain (containing the Ashod and Heletz oil fields along with the Shiqma gas field) and Offshore Deepwater (more recent discovery of the Mary-B field in the year 2000). The highly prospective Galil Rift area, which contains Givot Olam’s Meged oilfield discovery, is the least explored of these play areas. Rosh Ha’ayin Block: Givot Olam has owned and operated the Rosh Ha’ayin License 100% since 1992, when it was granted for an initial 18 month period. Since then the License has been extended and renewed several times following progressive technical work, including a total of around 150 km of modern 2D seismic locally infilling the 850+ km of pre-existing data, which Givot Olam initially reprocessed between 1992 and 1994 and added to in 2005 Givot Olam has also drilled 3 wells, which resulted in the first successful flow tests of hydrocarbons from the play area in Israel in 1994 and defined the Meged oilfield. Givot Olam’s work ultimately resulted in the Israeli Government recognising the Meged oil discovery as a commercial oil discovery in 2004 and they were consequently granted the 30 year I/11 Production Lease. Meged-2 was the first well drilled by Givot Olam in 1994 which encountered oil in the Triassic, dolomitic Mohilla “A” Formation reservoir below 4,000 metres. The limited amount of the porous grainstone facies and the presence of anhydrite in the pore space of the reservoir section limited the ability of the well to produce oil in initial tests, which yielded only a small amount of oil at surface, with no formation water, recovered via reverse circulation using traditional techniques. It was also later confirmed that the test was not conducted over the optimal pay zone. As a result, and after re-interpretation, a second test was later conducted during a re-entry in 1998 over the

higher quality pay interval. This test resulted in an initial flow rate of 400 bopd of 40° API crude and associated gas with an estimated maximum rate of 1 mmcf/d. Although the flow rate could not be sustained due to the tightness of the reservoir, 15 bbls of oil were recovered. Subsequent to Meged-2, detailed reconstruction of the regional depositional model of the Mohilla reservoir was carried out by Givot Olam and led to the drilling of Meged-3 in 2001. This well was drilled 4 km west of the Meged-2 well, where the reservoir quality was expected to improve towards the Basin’s bounding fault and a high porosity shoreface facies was interpreted in the new model. Although Meged-3 confirmed the facies transition as predicted, with an increase in porous grainstones and little to no anhydrite, the well was in a highly dolomitised part of the system, possibly near the evaporitc facies The Meged-4 well was drilled in 2003 between Meged-2 and Meged-3 and again encountered anhydrite, suggesting the same low porosity facies found in Meged-2. The Meged 4 well was, however, tested in 2003 and recovered 55 barrels of 40° API oil during swabbing. In 2005 Givot drilled a 270 meter horizontal side track off the original Meged-4 to increase deliverability and attain commerciality. Unfortunately, the horizontal section collapsed due to mechanical problems attributed to the outdated drilling technology in use. Irreparable damage to the wellbore resulted and no testing was possible to verify improved reservoir deliverability. New Focus: A modern 25 km infill seismic survey acquired by Givot Olam in 2005 confirmed that the three existing wells are all at the northern downdip end of a larger structural Meged closure than previously mapped. Substantial potential, therefore, still lies to the south on the crest of the structure updip from the existing three wells which confirmed producible oil on the flank of the structure. Recent study incorporating all the seismic data with the existing wells has been key to the reinterpretation the Mohilla facies model and enabled better prediction of the best reservoir facies trends. Although the basin deposits in the 4-6% porosity range observed in the existing Meged 2 and 4 wells are considered marginally economic on their own, the prediction is that this could improve to 8+% porosity in the shoreface grainstone facies encountered in the Meged-3 well, but more central to the shoreface facies where not dolomitised. An increase of only 2-3% porosity in the reservoir would significantly increase reservoir deliverability and can only be confirmed by an additional appraisal drilling. Independent reviews confirm potential commerciality of the existing wells in addition to the significant profitable development potential if, indeed, improved reservoir is encountered in the as yet undrilled crest of the Meged closure.

Modern data now unlocking potential of proven hydrocarbon plays successfully discovered onshore to date, albeit mostly by domestically funded companies.

P161 – Israel (License I/11) E N V O I

Regional Overview & Petroleum Geology: Tectonic setting: The earliest tectonic evolution of the Mediterranean / Middle East region began in early Palaeozoic times with the breakup of the ancient Gondwana Landmass. Palaeozoic Basins developed as part of proto-Tethys and subsequent Tethys openings progressively filled with sediments during the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian and Permian times. Some of these contain highly productive hydrocarbon sequences, particularly those basins in Saudi Arabia and North Africa which contain mature Silurian source rocks. Regional study and the existing well evidence clearly show that Israel fits in the regional model, supporting the idea that onshore, and particularly the Gailil Rift Play in the central and north eastern part of the country, was once the south-westerly extension of the Palymyra - Sinjar Rift System, which is highly productive to the north east in Syria and Iraq. Evidence suggests that this rift system began evolving in Palaeozoic through to the early Mesozoic times as Gondwanaland broke up, and has since been offset in Israel to the south by wrench movement along the Dead Sea fault zone. The present day coastline marks the geologic ‘Hinge Zone’ boundary between the Gailil Rift and the Levant Basin to the west, which formed in Mesozoic times and is now part of the Mediterranean. The boundary along the coast between these two rift systems is now a so- called Hinge zone, which is a N-S trending transform fault zone. The Levant Basin appears to have opened progressively from the west along what is now North Africa; it appears to have been halted when it reached the Hinge Zone during Triassic times and probably also prevented the older Galil rift from connecting with the Levant Basin. The Hinge Zone also appears to be a major present day barrier to migration onshore from the offshore, although there is stratigraphic evidence which suggests that the Hinge Zone may have been locally breached by Triassic aged deltas. These have subsequently acted as local migration conduits to structures immediately onshore, as evidenced by the Heletz and Ashod fields. The Galil Rift also contains a

marine facies, although well evidence suggests it was a more restricted basin. The best reservoir is developed on the western margins of the basin and becomes a more restricted facies eastwards, as evidenced by the evaporite sequence encountered in the Meged 2 and 3 wells and also by the Ramalla-1 well, which was drilled in the now inverted depocentre of the Galil Rift. Significantly, oil recovered in the initial Meged-2 well drilled by Givot Olam was, for the first time, conclusively tied by bio-marker analysis to a Silurian source similar to the Palmyra-Sinjar extension offset to the north west and which is unlike almost all the other oils found the Israeli plays to the south in the Dead Sea, Negev Desert and Hinge Zone fields and offshore wells and fields. The new Givot Olam ‘Play Model’ therefore suggests that the Gailil Rift contains a Palaeozoic Silurian source capable of charging the primary reservoirs in Lower Mesozoic limestones and dolomites, including the Mohilla formation in the Meged field, further supporting the theory that the Galil rift is an extension of the producing Palmyra-Sinjar Rift System.

Summary of Petroleum Geology: There are six prospective reservoir horizons over the License area which could independently trap hydrocarbons. The most prolific of these is the Mohilla formation, which is itself divided into three different ‘members’, from oldest to youngest, Mohilla “A”, “B”, and “C” Reservoir: Three reservoirs are considered the primary targets in the Galil Rift and Givot Olam’s block:

• Mohilla ‘A’: In the Meged closure, the main reservoir is the Mohilla ‘A’ member, which consists of a porous carbonate grainstone facies with porosities ranging between 3% to 12% and permeabilities ranging between 0.5 to 5mD. This is encountered below 4,000m in the Meged closure, covering an area of around 180 sq km which lies entirely within Givot Olam’s I/11 License. • Saharonim: This potential reservoir unit is a secondary Triassic dolomite which has been encountered with porosities of around 8% below 4,600m TVD, directly beneath the Mohilla formation. • Raaf: The deeper Raaf unit is also a potential reservoir horizon consisting of a porous dolomite 4-6% with moderate permeability of several millidarcies.

Massive production capable structure awaiting further delineation for optimal field development plan.

Regional & tectonic evolution confirms onshore Israel is linked to Middle East’s prolific proven/ producing Palmira-Sinjar rift play trends

P161 – Israel (License I/11) E N V O I Source & Seal: Hydrocarbons in the area are sourced from the regionally present Silurian shales, as typed by oil recovered from the Meged-2 and 4 wells. Significantly, this highly organic shale is responsible for generating most of the hydrocarbons trapped throughout the Middle East. Overlying anhydritic mudstones of the Mohilla “B” and “C” members provide the top trapping seal over the structure. Reserve Potential & Secondary Prospects: These can be summarised: • The Meged Discovery: The 180 sq km closure now mapped inside the Lease is estimated by Givot Olam to contain an upside of 2.8 Billion barrels of Oil in Place, with a P90 of 58 Million barrels recoverable and a P10 upside of around 558 Million barrels of recoverable oil and 0.4 Tcf associated gas. A number of reputable international oil and gas consultants (including Chapman Assoc., Forest Garb & Assoc., Miller & Lents and Fracture Technologies Ltd) have all confirmed the Meged log and test interpretations, but before the new interpretation of the Meged closure. The modest deliverability of the reservoir encountered in the existing wells will be significantly surpassed if further appraisal drilling confirms better reservoir. In addition to the Meged discovery there are also several other independent closures (prospects) associated with the primary Meged closure which remain undrilled: Secondary Targets Potential: These include the Saharonim horizon, which is mapped as an independent closure directly below the Mohilla formation. The zone was penetrated off structure in the David-1 well and was water wet (ref. montage). The Saharonim is expected to be oil-bearing updip at Meged-5 with estimated reserve potential of 14 million bbls recoverable. Four way closure is mapped at the Raaf reservoir level, where the zone is predicted to be around 20m thick and prognosed to be encountered at around 4,800 m at the Meged-5 location. Possible reserve potential is estimated likely to be 30 million bbls recoverable. Independent four way closure is also mapped at the Permian aged Khuff and Unayzah reservoirs below the Meged structure. These Permian reservoirs are proven productive elsewhere in the Middle-East and are expected to contain around 0.8 Tcf of gas.

Reserves and Value Potential: Scoping economics indicate that if Meged is confirmed to contain a P50 resource estimate of 142 MMbbl, it could generate an NPV10 in excess of US$ 2 billion today, based on a flat US$100/bbl price deck over the estimated 25 year field life. When compared to the undiscounted CAPEX necessary to fully exploit the reservoir (US$ 600 million), the opportunity is clearly highly prospective with high value potential and only moderate risk appraisal. Single well reserves are expected to be in the range of 1.0 -3.0 million barrels. Based on expected operating costs in the range of US$5/bbl and 33% total royalties, and at a flat US$ 100/bbl oil price, wells could reach payout in only 1 year. The following chart depicts the full range of estimated reserve potential within the Meged closure:

Rec. Reserves Unrisked Risked Rec. Risked 

TYPE OF RESERVE (MM bbls) NPV10 (MM bbls) NPV10

P90 58 480 mil 52 402 milP50 (MEAN) 142 2,002 mil 94 1,261 mil

P10 558 4,672 mil 134 2, 204 mil

NPVs are discounted @ 10% over an estimated 25 year reserve life. (assuming US$100/bbl oil price with all applicable tax, royalties & op costs deducted).

Political Comment: The relatively limited amount of modern seismically driven exploration onshore Israel has historically been carried out by domestic companies, most of which have been funded in-country with private funds. Even with the perceived political risks of recent years, the appetite for opportunity in Israel has steadily increased, particularly offshore, but also now onshore with the realisation of its largely unexploited potential.

Favourable Fiscal Terms ensure low economic thresholds & early payback

Scoping Economics indicate that a P50 resource of 142 MMbo recoverable in Meged could have an NPV10 or US$ 2 Billion

P161 – Israel (License I/11) E N V O I Fiscal Summary: Israel’s fiscal regime is considered to be favourable in the light of the undrilled prospectivity identified in the country. On rankings of government take, Israel’s fiscal terms simply comprise a royalty regime such that 12.5% of wellhead values is taken at market prices for both oil and gas, together with a corporation tax that is charged on net profits from the sale of oil and gas production and which currently stands at 29%. All capital and operating expenses are deductible, together with a 27.5% depletion allowance. Obligations & Work Programme: All the exploration obligations required to maintain Givot Olam’s I/11 production lease have been fulfilled. There is, however, a requirement under the lease to have some level of established production on stream following the completion of the next appraisal well, Meged-5 which is being planned for Q1 2009. A rig has already been contracted with the well cots currently estimated likely to cost around US$ 8 million, including initial well testing. Provision is being built into the drilling programme for fracture stimulation and additional testing which is estimated likely to cost an additional US$ 3 million if the next well is successful.

Deal Terms: Givot Olam is offering a negotiable equity interest in the Meged field by funding all or part of at least the next appraisal well, Meged-5 planned for early 2009. Subsequent commitment by an incoming party to participate in the development of the field would include an option to extend the initial interest earned by drilling the next well. This equates to a sub-ground entry, since Givot Olam is not seeking reimbursement of any past costs involving over US$ 40 million spent on their 3 existing wells, the various new seismic surveys acquired, comprehensive geological, geochemical and related studies and associated operating costs already spent which has assessed the potential of the Meged opportunity.

Givot Olam would very much like to find a new partner with additional operating experience and funding to join them and accelerate the forward work programme involving Phase II appraisal and hopefully development of the Meged field’s vast potential.

Additional Information: Access to key project data will be available for download after execution of a Confidentiality Agreement. Seriously interested parties will be invited for a presentation and in-house review of ALL the data, including the seismic, on workstations in Givot Olam’s Israeli offices or, in certain circumstances, through visits to seriously interested parties own offices.

All expressions of interest and requests for more information, including a copy of the CA for execution prior to access to the online data room, should be made through Envoi:

Envoi Limited 11 Cowper Road Hanwell London, W7 1EL United Kingdom

Tel : +44 (0)20 8566 1310 Fax : +44 (0)20 8566 1312 E : [email protected]

Contact: Mike Lakin

AN ACROBAT VERSION OF THIS SYNOPSIS IS ALSO AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW ON THE ‘ACTIVE PROJECTS’ PAGE OF ENVOIs WEB SITE

www.envoi.co.uk

Disclaimer: The information in this memorandum is for guidance only. Neither Envoi Limited (Envoi),Givot Olam Ltd (Givot Olam) nor any director, officer or employee of Envoi or Givot Olam accepts responsibility for or makes any representation or warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the information, estimates and opinions contained in this document. This document does not constitute an offer, and neither this document nor the information, estimates and opinions contained in it shall form the basis of any contract. Companies wishing to acquire an interest in the project will be expected to make their own review of all documents and form their own judgements entirely. ENVOI August 2008 Envoi/P161GivotOlam(Israel)Syn.doc

Presentation & project data room available for immediate review

Sub-Ground Floor entry terms with simple Promote through next well & no reimbursement of substantial past cost

�����

��

��

��������������������

� �

� �����

�����

� � ��� ������������������

�������������������� � �����

������� �

������������ �

��������� �������

����� !!

��""�������������������������� ����������������� �

��������#$%&'()$*��+,-+� !!��������� ����

�,(+�.�&/&-(�0��1

�#,2()*/�34��#,2($)5

�$�6)5+%�34�.�"7��,�)*

�+2�.��!8!� -#,+5

9���� ����

���������

����

���

���

���

���

���

��

��

��

������������� �����������

���� � ������

�� ��:���� �������

���������

���� ��

9���� �

�� �� �����������

������������ ����;��������; ����� ��:�"�� ����� ��

����"� ������������ ������:���������� ����

�������� � � ��� ��� ���<���

�����������.���� �����" �� ��

�����������"���������

����$-=��,�,4)*��5$'���#$%&'()$*��+,-+� !!�

�)5��)-'$�+#4� ��)+5%,-��)-'$�+#4� ��)+5%

�+2)*+#4

�;����������<� �� "���<� ��� ��� ��

�� �

"�������������

������ ����������

��������������

�� �� �9���� �

���" �

����<� �

���� ���� �:����������

�������� �����������

��#$6$-+%�

�,���+-(:0 �,���+-(:! �,��0

�>���(#&'(&#+�

�� �" ���"� ��

,,-=:!

�,�)%:! "+/�+%:0

�+55�$*��&#2,'+��(#&'(&#+%��#4 <$=,# �)%$%��)+5%-

�"�� �9���� �

������������

�"�� �

�����

� �

9+#&-,5+�

����

9�

��

���

�������

�+5��)�

,?,

�,)2,

��,*

��

���

���

��

��

��

������

����

��� �����

��!�"�����

��������

#�$

���������������������

���%�

��������

! �

������

���#�

&��

�������

���������

��!�������#

���#

�$

����'�������%

���#

���

�������

&��&

���

���������

-=$%

������� ����<��� ��������������������

���������

�������

������

�������

����&����&

���� ����������

��(����%

�����������&

(�&�&

���������%���

����%��(��%��

%���&����&

�)

� � � � � � � � � � � � �� � �

� � � �

9 � � � �

� � � � � � � � �

����

�������

-=$%

9+#&-,5+�

��������

�+5��)�

�,)2,

#�%�#���*+��������;��

������

�����*+� ������� ���� �� �

(�&�&����&

%���&*,�5$@+%�A��������A��%+/

� �B�!��'2/�$*�(+-(

����������&�+-�%%../�0 1�231�14�3$

���������&

��(���%�������&

����%�����������&

���5%�����&

��&�������&C�����

����%����&

��(����%����&

#�%�����*+������������

�++6+#�*%#)55+%�#$-6+'(-

&�'�&*+����������&�#&���������

������'��������&

������������D�� ���;���

�%���*+�������� �

���"��� �� �

�;��� ���

���� � ���

��������

���� � ���

��������

����������

�������������� ���� � ���

��� � �������

�� ����"� �����������������

����"� �� ������

��������"�����

�������������������������

��""��

�� ���� �������

" �����

��

��

��:

���

��

��

��

��

��

��

��������������

������ ���������������������

�� �����

������������ �������"�� �������������

���������

�"����:!

"��� ���

�!�E�����������������

������� �����

����������

�; �:!<���� ��������<� ���

�":01������

��������� "������� ��� � �����9�

��

��

��

"�

��

<�

�������� ��� �����

�� �����"

<������"

����� "�"

"�� ���"

"���:01�������"���:C�D�A

���"�� �����"�� �� �������;� �

�; �:! ��������������

� �� ��"���:0�� F���D������

���� ��� �

��

�<

� �

���"

���

7��

;7��

��""������ ���������������"���������������������

�� ":!

� ����� ���

<����"�� ���

��" ��� ���

�;� "��"����"

��

����

����

��

� 0�31%3631*���24�7

���������#������(

�� 1�2�7��34�3��!++$

%���&*8�*'$&*(+#+%�/#,)*-($*+

2,')+-�3&(�@)(=�5$',5%$5$�)()-,()$*

#�%�*+���$$��=,55$@�#�%*,��1��������$*�(+-(�

����%�����

%�������&����������+"8��29$

�������

%���&*:�+'$�+#+%��������

A�%+/�� ��)5�G��$#)?$*(,5-+'()$*�'$55,6-+%�D

*+�+#��(+-(+%

",6�-=$@)*/�5$',()$*�D�=4%#$',#3$*6#$-6+'()�)(4�$2�(=+��$-=��,�,4)*���#$%&'()$*�+,-+� !!��)*�(=+�,5)5��)2(��*-=$#+� -#,+5

�7;���/4���7/���

%���&�����&

� ��(�

�)

�)

�) �� ����32�7����*�����2 ����<3�%3631��73/1

"���:C

"���:A

��3 0 3�31� ���4273�

�=3 0 �7�>�94273�

"���:0

� 0�31%3631*��24�7

�3=�%<7//4��4273��?��3�3 ;7 �5�4/7�>�%13/

�@7��76%3631�3//�

�76<� �7�>�4273�

����

���

� ��

� ��

� ��

��� ����

����

��

��

� �

���

����������

�7 ���

��

��� ��

� � � � � � � � � � � � �

9���

��

�F���

��"�

�"

��"� ��� ��

� � � � �

��

���������%�������������������������&�������������

� � � � � �� � �

����

(�#�7/� 74�� 23� 34

&4��4�2��

(������(����������$,AB������&

�%�����������$��B�������&

�������CB�����&���������$

��������������$+B������&+AD���

������E����'������F����������

���������'�����

(���������������$

���%�����������$8+D�������

��%���������������$���"G8�%%����88*8:D�������

��������

���(������������

�����

�� ��

������������

�������

������

��#��

���#��

��*����

� � � �� � � � � �

����#���

����

���%

#�������

� � � � � � � %

� � � � � � � %

�46141

�37 ��

��%��&�#��

��������

3 ��4/3�

��'��������

���������

���

��363;

$

C1HC8HCAHC0H

C8H

CAH

C0H

��

���

���

��

����

��������������#

���H�����&

����:����� ��"��)#',�0���"�

�" �:������������ � ��

(�#�#),--)'��)5��)+5%�#),--)'�,-��)+5%�,#3$*,(+��+,(&#+�� ��&)5%&6

A0HA�H

66#$I��)*+�$2��+'()$*

�+/)$*,5��(#&'(&#+

�+,5�+-+#�$)#�$&#'+��$'�-

���

,-� ��)5��)+5%

�#$-6+'(

,-�D��)5��)6+5)*+-

���������

� � � � �������������� ��������������������������