Document:

EX-10.3

 Exhibit 10.3 

(Part 1 of 2) 
  

					
	

	  	 PRESIDENT. ROBERT C. BARG

 
 VICE
PRESIDENTs
 ALLEN E. EVANS, JR.

RANDOLPH K. GREEN

JOHN G. HATTNER

C. H (SCOTT) REES III

DANNY D. SIMMONS

DAN PAUL SMITH

ERIC J. STEVENS

 April 25, 2019 

Ing. Octavio Romero Oropeza 
 Petroleos Mexicanos 

Avenida Marina Nacional 329 
 Torre Ejecutiva, Piso 44 

Colonia Veronica Anzures 
 11300 Ciudad de México,
México 
 Dear Ing. Octavio Romero Oropeza: 
 We hereby
consent to all references to our firm as set forth in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Petróleos Mexicanos (“Pemex”) for the year ending December 31, 2018 (the “Form 20-F”), under the heading “Exploration and Production (Reserves),” and to the filing of our audit letter dated April 16, 2019, as an exhibit to the Form
20-F. We have audited the estimates of Pemex’s proved oil, condensate, natural gas, and oil equivalent reserves, as of January 1, 2019, for 18 fields located in the Cantarell and Ku Maloob Zaap
business units in the Marine regions of Mexico. These estimates were prepared by Pemex Exploración y Produccion in accordance with the reserves definitions of Regulation S-X Rule 4-10(a) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 
  

			
	Sincerely,
	
	NETHERLAND, SEWELL INTERNATIONAL, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ ROBERT C. BARG, P.E.

		 	Robert C. Barg, P.E.
		 	President

 RCB:LMS 
  

2100 ROSS AVENUE. SUITE 2200 • DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-2737 •
PH: 214-969-5401 • FAX: 214-969-5411 

 Exhibit 10.3 

(Part 2 of 2) 
  

					
	

	  	 PRESIDENT. ROBERT C. BARG

 
 VICE
PRESIDENTs
 ALLEN E. EVANS, JR.

RANDOLPH K. GREEN

JOHN G. HATTNER

C. H. (SCOTT) REES III

DANNY D. SIMMONS

DAN PAUL SMITH

ERIC J. STEVENS

 April 25, 2019 

Ing. Octavio Romero Oropeza 
 Petroleos Mexicanos 

Avenida Marina Nacional 329 
 Torre Ejecutiva, Piso 44 

Colonia Veronica Anzures 
 11300 Ciudad de México,
México 
 Dear Ing. Octavio Romero Oropeza: 
 We hereby
consent to all references to our firm as set forth in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Petroleos Mexicanos (“Pemex”) for the year ending December 31, 2018 (the “Form 20-F”), under the heading “Exploration and Production (Reserves),” and to the filing of our audit letter dated April 16, 2019, as an exhibit to the Form
20-F. We have audited the estimates of Pemex’s proved oil, condensate, natural gas, and oil equivalent reserves, as of January 1, 2019, for 46 fields located in the Cinco Presidentes and Macuspana
Muspac business units in the Southern region of Mexico. These estimates were prepared by Pemex Exploración y Producción in accordance with the reserves definitions of Regulation S-X Rule 4-10(a) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 
  

			
	Sincerely,
	
	NETHERLAND, SEWELL INTERNATIONAL, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ ROBERT C. BARG, P.E.

		 	Robert C. Barg, P.E.
		 	President

 RCB:LMS 

2100 ROSS AVENUE. SUITE 2200 • DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-2737 •
PH: 214-969-5401 • FAX: 214-969-5411EX-10.4

 Exhibit 10.4 

(Part 1 of 2) 
  

					
	

	  	 PRESIDENT-ROBERT C. BARG

 
 VICE
PRESIDENTs
 ALLEN E. EVANS, JR.

RANDOLPH K. GREEN

JOHN G. HATTNER

C. H. (SCOTT) REES III

DANNY D. SIMMONS

DAN PAUL SMITH

ERIC J. STEVENS

 April 16, 2019 

Dr. Ulises Hernández Romano 
 S.P.A. de la
Dirección General 
 Pemex Exploración y Producción 

Avenida Marina Nacional 329 
 Torre Ejecutiva, Piso 41 

Col. Verónica Anzures, C.P. 11300 
 Del. Miguel Hidalgo,
Ciudad de México 
 México 
 Dear Dr.
Hernández: 
 In accordance with your request, we have audited the estimates prepared by Pemex Exploración y Producción (PEP), as of
January 1, 2019, of the gross (100 percent) proved reserves and net gas reserves in 18 fields located in Activo Integral de Producción Bloques (AIPB) AS01-01 and
AS01-02 in Subdirección AS01 located in the Bay of Campeche, offshore west of the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. PEP is a subsidiary entity of Petróleos Mexicanos. The scope of our work did not
include auditing the future net revenue associated with these reserves. The Political Constitution of the United Mexican States provides that the Mexican nation owns all petroleum and other hydrocarbon reserves for these fields; however, these
fields have been assigned to and are currently operated by PEP. In accordance with the Energy Reform of 2014, the estimates in this report represent the gross (100 percent) proved reserves to be produced within the economic life of the properties.
We have examined the estimates with respect to reserves quantities, reserves categorization, future producing rates, and economic producibility, using the definitions set forth in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation S-X Rule 4-10(a). Economic analysis was performed by PEP only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. The estimates of reserves
have been prepared in accordance with the definitions and regulations of the SEC and conform to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification Topic 932, Extractive Activities—Oil and Gas. We completed our audit on February 15, 2019. PEP has
represented that these properties account for 51.2 percent on a net oil equivalent barrel basis of PEP’s net proved reserves as of January 1, 2019. This report has been prepared for PEP’s and Petróleos Mexicanos’ use
internally and in filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies. In our opinion the assumptions, data, methods, and procedures used in the preparation of this report are appropriate for such purpose; there is no guarantee or warranty, implied or
expressed, by Netherland, Sewell International, S. de R.L. de C.V. (NSI) for any other use of this report. 
 The following table sets forth PEP’s
estimates of the gross (100 percent) reserves and net gas reserves to the combined interest of PEP and the Mexican State, as of January 1, 2019, for the audited AIPB AS01-01 and AS01-02 properties: 
 2100 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 2200
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-2737 PH: 214-969-5411 -FAX: 214-969-5411 

 

 
  

																													
	 	  	Gross (100%) Reserves	 
	 	  	 	 	  	Liquid Components and Dry Gas	 	  	 	 	  	 	 	  	 	 
	 Category
	  	Wellhead
Oil(1)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Condensate(2)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Plant
Liquids(3)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Dry 
Gas(4)
(MMBOE)	 	  	BOE(5)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Wellhead
Gas(6)
(BCF)	 	  	Net
Gas(7)
(BCF)	 
	 Proved Developed Producing
	  	 	1,294.9	 	  	 	6.9	 	  	 	50.3	 	  	 	79.7	 	  	 	1,431.8	 	  	 	727.4	 	  	 	545.9	 
	 Proved Developed Non-Producing
	  	 	1,043.6	 	  	 	4.4	 	  	 	61.3	 	  	 	97.0	 	  	 	1,206.3	 	  	 	884.0	 	  	 	664.7	 
	 Proved Undeveloped
	  	 	914.8	 	  	 	2.0	 	  	 	13.5	 	  	 	21.4	 	  	 	951.8	 	  	 	196.3	 	  	 	147.0	 
		  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 
	 Total Proved
	  	 	3,253.3	 	  	 	13.3	 	  	 	125.2	 	  	 	198.1	 	  	 	3,589.9	 	  	 	1,807.7	 	  	 	1,357.5	 

 Totals may not add because of rounding. 
  

	(1)	 Oil reserves include oil plus liquids from the produced gas stream separated in the field.

	(2)	 Condensate reserves are the liquids volumes recovered from the produced gas stream during the compression and
dehydration stages of processing. 

	(3)	 Plant liquids reserves are the liquids volumes recovered from the gas stream through the processing plants.

	(4)	 Dry gas reserves are the dry gas available for sale by Pemex Transformacion Industrial (PTRI) at the tailgate
of the processing plants. 

	(5)	 BOE includes wellhead oil, condensate, plant liquids, and dry gas. 

	(6)	 Gas reserves are the measured wellhead gas before shrinkage from fuel usage, flare, and processing.

	(7)	 Net gas reserves are the volume of wet gas available for sale to PTRI at the inlet of the processing plants.

 Oil, condensate, plant liquids, and barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) volumes are expressed in millions of barrels (MMBBL); a barrel is
equivalent to 42 United States gallons. Dry gas volumes are expressed in millions of barrels of oil equivalent (MMBOE), determined using dry gas conversion factors provided by PEP. Gas volumes are expressed in billions of cubic feet (BCF) at
standard temperature and pressure bases.     
 When compared on a
field-by-field basis, some of the estimates of PEP are greater and some are less than the estimates of NSI. However, in our opinion the estimates of reserves prepared by
PEP shown herein are reasonable when aggregated at the total proved level and have been prepared in accordance with the Standards Pertaining to the Estimating and Auditing of Oil and Gas Reserves Information promulgated by the Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE Standards). Additionally, these estimates are within the recommended 10 percent tolerance threshold set forth in the SPE Standards. We are satisfied with the methods and procedures used by PEP in preparing the January 1,
2019, estimates of reserves, and we saw nothing of an unusual nature that would cause us to take exception with the estimates, in the aggregate, as prepared by PEP. 

Reserves categorization conveys the relative degree of certainty; reserves subcategorization is based on development and production status. The estimates of
reserves included herein have not been adjusted for risk. PEP’s estimates do not include probable or possible reserves that exist for these properties.     

Oil and gas prices were used only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. It is our understanding that prices used
by PEP are representative of the 12-month average for the period January through December 2018. NSI accepted the prices provided without independent review or verification. All prices are held constant
throughout the lives of the properties. 
 Costs were used only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. It is
our understanding that operating costs used by PEP are representative of the 12-month average for the period January through December 2018. These costs include district and regional overhead expenses along
with costs to be incurred at the field level. Operating costs for certain undeveloped fields are based on PEP’s analogy to a 

 

 
 similar type of producing field. Operating costs have been divided into field-level costs,
per-well costs, and per-unit-of-production costs. No headquarters general and
administrative overhead expenses are included. Capital costs used by PEP are based on authorizations for expenditure and actual costs from recent activity. Capital costs are included as required for workovers, new development wells, and production
equipment. Abandonment costs used are PEP’s estimates of the costs to abandon the wells, platforms, and production facilities, net of any salvage value. NSI accepted the operating cost parameters and the capital and abandonment costs provided
without independent review or verification. Operating, capital, and abandonment costs are not escalated for inflation. 
 The reserves shown in this report
are estimates only and should not be construed as exact quantities. Proved reserves are those quantities of oil and gas which, by analysis of engineering and geoscience data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible;
probable and possible reserves are those additional reserves which are sequentially less certain to be recovered than proved reserves. Estimates of reserves may increase or decrease as a result of market conditions, future operations, changes in
regulations, or actual reservoir performance. In addition to the primary economic assumptions discussed herein, estimates of PEP and NSI are based on certain assumptions including, but not limited to, that the properties will be developed consistent
with current development plans as provided to us by PEP, that the properties will be operated in a prudent manner, that no governmental regulations or controls will be put in place that would impact the ability of PEP to produce and recover the
reserves, and that projections of future production will prove consistent with actual performance. If the reserves are recovered, the revenues therefrom and the costs related thereto could be more or less than the estimated amounts used to confirm
economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. Because of governmental policies and uncertainties of supply and demand, the sales rates, prices received for the reserves, and costs incurred in recovering such reserves may
vary from assumptions made while preparing these estimates. 
 It should be understood that our audit does not constitute a complete reserves study of the
audited oil and gas properties. Our audit consisted primarily of substantive testing, wherein we conducted a detailed review of all properties making up the total proved reserves. In the conduct of our audit, we have not independently verified the
accuracy and completeness of information and data furnished by PEP with respect to oil and gas production, well test data, historical costs of operation and development, product prices, or any agreements relating to current and future operations of
the properties and sales of production. Our audit did not include a review of PEP’s overall reserves management processes and practices. 
 We used
standard engineering and geoscience methods, or a combination of methods, including performance analysis, volumetric analysis, analogy, and reservoir modeling, that we considered to be appropriate and necessary to establish the conclusions set forth
herein. As in all aspects of oil and gas evaluation, there are uncertainties inherent in the interpretation of engineering and geoscience data; therefore, our conclusions necessarily represent only informed professional judgment. 

Supporting data documenting this audit, along with data provided by PEP, are on file in our office. The technical persons primarily responsible for conducting
this audit meet the requirements regarding qualifications, independence, objectivity, and confidentiality set forth in the SPE Standards. Eric J. Stevens, a Licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas, has been practicing consulting
petroleum engineering at Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. (NSAI), of which NSI is a subsidiary, since 2007 and has 5 years of prior industry experience. Ruurdjan (Rudi) de Zoeten, a Licensed Professional Geoscientist in the State of
Texas, has been practicing consulting petroleum geoscience at NSAI since 2008 and has 18 years of prior industry experience. We are independent petroleum engineers, geologists, geophysicists, and petrophysicists; we do not own an interest in these
properties nor are we employed on a contingent basis. 

					
	Sincerely,	  	
		
	NETHERLAND, SEWELL INTERNATIONAL, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.	  	
			
	By:	  	 /s/ ROBERT C. BARG, P.E.
	  	
		  	 Robert C. Barg, P.E.
 President
	  	

  
 

 

 Exhibit 10.4 

(Part 2 of 2) 
  

					
	

	  	 PRESIDENT. ROBERT C. BARG

 
 VICE
PRESIDENT
 ALLEN E. EVANS, JR.

RANDOLPH K. GREEN

JOHN G. HATTNER

C. H. (SCOTT) REES III

DANNY D. SIMMONS

DAN PAUL SMITH

ERIC J. STEVENS

 April 16, 2019 

Dr. Ulises Hernández Romano 
 S.P.A. de la
Dirección General 
 Pemex Exploración y Producción 

Avenida Marina Nacional 329 
 Torre Ejecutiva, Piso 41 

Col. Verónica Anzures, C.P. 11300 
 Del. Miguel Hidalgo,
Ciudad de México 
 México 
 Dear Dr.
Hernández: 
 In accordance with your request, we have audited the estimates prepared by Pemex Exploración y Producción (PEP), as of
January 1, 2019, of the gross (100 percent) proved reserves and net gas reserves in 46 fields in Activo Integral de Producción Bloques (AIPB) S01 and S04 in Subdirección de Producción Bloques Sur located in the states of
Chiapas, Tabasco, and Veracruz, in southern Mexico. PEP is a subsidiary entity of Petróleos Mexicanos. The scope of our work did not include auditing the future net revenue associated with these reserves. The Political Constitution of the
United Mexican States provides that the Mexican nation owns all petroleum and other hydrocarbon reserves for these fields; however, these fields have been assigned to and are currently operated by PEP. In accordance with the Energy Reform of 2014,
the estimates in this report represent the gross (100 percent) proved reserves to be produced within the economic life of the properties. We have examined the estimates with respect to reserves quantities, reserves categorization, future producing
rates, and economic producibility, using the definitions set forth in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation S-X Rule 4-10(a). Economic analysis was
performed by PEP only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. The estimates of reserves have been prepared in accordance with the definitions and regulations of the SEC and conform to the FASB Accounting
Standards Codification Topic 932, Extractive Activities—Oil and Gas. We completed our audit on February 15, 2019. PEP has represented that these properties account for 3.9 percent on a net oil equivalent barrel basis of PEPs net
proved reserves as of January 1, 2019. This report has been prepared for PEP’s and Petróleos Mexicanos’ use internally and in filings with the appropriate regulatory agencies. In our opinion the assumptions, data,
methods, and procedures used in the preparation of this report are appropriate for such purpose; there is no guarantee or warranty, implied or expressed, by Netherland, Sewell International, S. de R.L. de C.V. (NSI) for any other use of this report.

 The following table sets forth PEP’s estimates of the gross (100 percent) reserves and net gas reserves to the combined interest of PEP and the
Mexican State, as of January 1, 2019, for the audited AIPB S01 and S04 properties: 
 2100 ROSS AVENUE,
SUITE 2200 • DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-2737 • PH: 214-969-5401 • FAX:214-969-5411 

 

 
  

																													
	 	  	Gross (100%) Reserves	 
	 	  	 	 	  	Liquid Components and Dry Gas	 	  	 	 	  	 	 	  	 	 
	 Category
	  	Wellhead
Oil(1)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Condensate(2)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Plant
Liquids(3)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Dry Gas(4)
(MMBOE)	 	  	BOE(5)
(MMBBL)	 	  	Wellhead
Gas(6)
(BCF)	 	  	Net
Gas(7)
(BCF)	 
	 Proved Developed Producing
	  	 	60.9	 	  	 	2.8	 	  	 	24.9	 	  	 	49.1	 	  	 	137.7	 	  	 	349.2	 	  	 	316.7	 
	 Proved Developed Non-Producing
	  	 	50.1	 	  	 	1.6	 	  	 	11.1	 	  	 	21.3	 	  	 	84.1	 	  	 	168.5	 	  	 	135.1	 
	 Proved Undeveloped
	  	 	20.3	 	  	 	0.7	 	  	 	10.9	 	  	 	20.2	 	  	 	52.1	 	  	 	143.3	 	  	 	132.5	 
		  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 	  	  
	  
	 
	 Total Proved
	  	 	131.3	 	  	 	5.1	 	  	 	46.9	 	  	 	90.5	 	  	 	273.9	 	  	 	661.0	 	  	 	584.3	 

 Totals may not add because of rounding. 
  

	(1)	 Oil reserves include oil plus liquids from the produced gas stream separated in the field.

	(2)	 Condensate reserves are the liquids volumes recovered from the produced gas stream during the compression and
dehydration stages of processing. 

	(3)	 Plant liquids reserves are the liquids volumes recovered from the gas stream through the processing plants.

	(4)	 Dry gas reserves are the dry gas available for sale by Pemex Transformacion Industrial (PTRI) at the tailgate
of the processing plants. 

	(5)	 BOE includes wellhead oil, condensate, plant liquids, and dry gas. 

	(6)	 Gas reserves are the measured wellhead gas before shrinkage from fuel usage, flare, and processing.

	(7)	 Net gas reserves are the volume of wet gas available for sale to PTRI at the inlet of the processing plants.

 Oil, condensate, plant liquids, and barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) volumes are expressed in millions of barrels (MMBBL); a barrel is
equivalent to 42 United States gallons. Dry gas volumes are expressed in millions of barrels of oil equivalent (MMBOE), determined using dry gas conversion factors provided by PEP. Gas volumes are expressed in billions of cubic feet (BCF) at
standard temperature and pressure bases. 
 When compared on a
field-by-field basis, some of the estimates of PEP are greater and some are less than the estimates of NSI. However, in our opinion the estimates of reserves prepared by
PEP shown herein are reasonable when aggregated at the total proved level and have been prepared in accordance with the Standards Pertaining to the Estimating and Auditing of Oil and Gas Reserves Information promulgated by the Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE Standards). Additionally, these estimates are within the recommended 10 percent tolerance threshold set forth in the SPE Standards. We are satisfied with the methods and procedures used by PEP in preparing the January 1,
2019, estimates of reserves, and we saw nothing of an unusual nature that would cause us to take exception with the estimates, in the aggregate, as prepared by PEP. 

Reserves categorization conveys the relative degree of certainty; reserves subcategorization is based on development and production status. The estimates of
reserves included herein have not been adjusted for risk. PEP’s estimates do not include probable or possible reserves that exist for these properties. 

Oil and gas prices were used only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. It is our understanding that prices used
by PEP are representative of the 12-month average for the period January through December 2018. NSI accepted the prices provided without independent review or verification. All prices are held constant
throughout the lives of the properties. 
 Costs were used only to confirm economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. It is
our understanding that operating costs used by PEP are representative of the 12-month average for the period January through December 2018. These costs include district and regional overhead expenses along
with costs to be incurred at the field level. Operating costs for certain undeveloped fields are based on PEP’s analogy to a 

 

 
 similar type of producing field. Operating costs have been divided into field-level costs,
per-well costs, and per-unit-of-production costs. No headquarters general and
administrative overhead expenses are included. Capital costs used by PEP are based on authorizations for expenditure and actual costs from recent activity. Capital costs are included as required for workovers, new development wells, and production
equipment. Abandonment costs used are PEP’s estimates of the costs to abandon the wells and production facilities, net of any salvage value. NSI accepted the operating cost parameters and the capital and abandonment costs provided without
independent review or verification. Operating, capital, and abandonment costs are not escalated for inflation. 
 The reserves shown in this report are
estimates only and should not be construed as exact quantities. Proved reserves are those quantities of oil and gas which, by analysis of engineering and geoscience data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible;
probable and possible reserves are those additional reserves which are sequentially less certain to be recovered than proved reserves. Estimates of reserves may increase or decrease as a result of market conditions, future operations, changes in
regulations, or actual reservoir performance. In addition to the primary economic assumptions discussed herein, estimates of PEP and NSI are based on certain assumptions including, but not limited to, that the properties will be developed consistent
with current development plans as provided to us by PEP, that the properties will be operated in a prudent manner, that no governmental regulations or controls will be put in place that would impact the ability of PEP to produce and recover the
reserves, and that projections of future production will prove consistent with actual performance. If the reserves are recovered, the revenues therefrom and the costs related thereto could be more or less than the estimated amounts used to confirm
economic producibility and determine economic limits for the properties. Because of governmental policies and uncertainties of supply and demand, the sales rates, prices received for the reserves, and costs incurred in recovering such reserves may
vary from assumptions made while preparing these estimates. 
 It should be understood that our audit does not constitute a complete reserves study of the
audited oil and gas properties. Our audit consisted primarily of substantive testing, wherein we conducted a detailed review of all properties making up the total proved reserves. In the conduct of our audit, we have not independently verified the
accuracy and completeness of information and data furnished by PEP with respect to oil and gas production, well test data, historical costs of operation and development, product prices, or any agreements relating to current and future operations of
the properties and sales of production. Our audit did not include a review of PEP’s overall reserves management processes and practices. 
 We used
standard engineering and geoscience methods, or a combination of methods, including performance analysis, volumetric analysis, and analogy, that we considered to be appropriate and necessary to establish the conclusions set forth herein. As in all
aspects of oil and gas evaluation, there are uncertainties inherent in the interpretation of engineering and geoscience data; therefore, our conclusions necessarily represent only informed professional judgment. 

Supporting data documenting this audit, along with data provided by PEP, are on file in our office. The technical persons primarily responsible for conducting
this audit meet the requirements regarding qualifications, independence, objectivity, and confidentiality set forth in the SPE Standards. Joseph M. Wolfe, a Licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas, has been practicing consulting
petroleum engineering at Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. (NSAI), of which NSI is a subsidiary, since 2013 and has over 5 years of prior industry experience. Dana D. Coryell, a Licensed Professional Geoscientist in the State of Texas,
has been practicing consulting petroleum geoscience at NSAI since 1999 and has over 12 years 

 

 
 of prior industry experience. We are independent petroleum engineers, geologists, geophysicists, and petrophysicists; we do
not own an interest in these properties nor are we employed on a contingent basis. 
  

					
	Sincerely,	  	
		
	NETHERLAND, SEWELL INTERNATIONAL, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.	  	
			
	By:	  	 /s/ ROBERT C. BARG, P.E.
	  	
		  	 Robert C. Barg, P.E.
 President

Source: [{"source": "alea-institute/alea-institute/kl3m-data-edgar-agreements/train-00295-of-00352.parquet"}, [{"source": "alea-institute/alea-institute/kl3m-data-edgar-agreements/train-00295-of-00352.parquet"}]]