UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MEMORANDUM

To: Public Information (MS 5030)

Plans Section, Office of Field Operations (MS 5231)

Public Information copy of DOCD

Control # - S-07556

Type - Supplemental Development Operations Coordinations Document

Lease(s) - OCS-G15563 Block - 237 Green Canyon Area

Operator - Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc.

Well No. 6

DP SEMISUBMERSIBLE

Attached is a copy of the subject plan for public comments on issues that

should be addressed in an Environmental Assessment.

It has been deemed submitted as of this date and is under review for approval.

Chiquita Hill

Plan Coordinator

G15563/GC/237 2130 FNL, 4408 FEL G15563/GC/237 WELL/NO. 006 Botm Lse/Area/Blk Surface Location Surf Lse/Area/Blk Site Type/Name Description -

Rig Type - Subject: From: July 16, 2012

## P UBLIC INFORMATION COPY

April 1, 2012



## SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT OPERATIONS

COORDINATION DOCUMENT

Lease Number: OCS

- G 15563

Area/Block: Green Canyon Block 237

Prospect Name: Head & Neck Prospect

Offshore: Louisiana

Submitted by: Energy Resource Technology GO M, Inc. 

### 400 N. Sam Houston Parkway East

Suite 400
Houston, Texas 77060

Wendy Braddock (281) 618

- 0551 wbraddock@helixesg.com

Estimated start

- up date: June 15, 20 12

Authorized Representative: No. Copies Being Submitted:
Cathy Thornton Proprietary: 1 + 1 CD J. Connor Consulting, Inc. Public Info: 1 + 1 CD
16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700
Houston, Texas 77084 For

BOEM RE : (281) 705

- 8020 Plan No. cathy.thornton @jccteam.com Assigned to:Record of Changes

Date Appendix Revision

04/ 20 /2012 B Amended information regarding:

1. Measures to enhance ability to preven t a blowout

2. Measures to reduce the likelihood of a blowout

3. Measures to enhance ability to conduct effective and early

intervention in the event of a blowout

4. Arrangements for drilling relief wells

05/0 3 /2012 G Amended T able 1 to provide a more detailed composition for water

based drilling fluid.

05/0 3 /2012 M Added Ta ble 2 “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of

Onshore”.

05/1 5 /2012 F I ncluded the statement in Appendix F that E RT would like to retain the option o f moving the proposed location less than 500 feet without having to submit a revised plan. Accordingly, based on the complete report prepared by C&C Technologies (including the Seafloor Amplitude and Seafloor Features Maps), “No high negative or high posi tive amplitude seafloor anomalies associated with fluid expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential chemosynthetic or coral communities were noted within 2000 feet surrounding the proposed site”(p.2). In terms of shallow gas potential, “No high amplitude subsurface amplitude anomalies are noted at the location of the proposed well bore (p.3).

05/1 6 /2012 F Provided additional copies of the Color Shaded Bathymetry Map, Seafloor Amplitude Map, Seafloor Features Map and the Subsurface Features Map included in C&C’s report

.ENERGY RESOURCE TECHNOLOGY GOM, INC.

REVISED

DEVELOPMENT OPERATIONS COORDINATON DOCUMENT

L EASE OCS

- G 15563

GREEN CANYON BLOCK 237

APPENDIX A Plan Contents

APPENDIX B General Information

APPENDIX C Geological, Geophysical Information

APPENDIX D H2S Information

APPENDIX E Mineral Resources Conservation Information

APPENDIX F Biological

, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

APPENDIX G Wastes and Discharge Information

APPENDIX H Air Emissions Information

APPENDIX I Oil Spill s Inf ormation

APPENDIX J Environmental Monitoring Information

APPENDIX K Lease Stipulations Information

APPEND IX L Environmental Mitigation Measures Information

APPENDIX M Related Facilities and Operations Information

APPENDIX N Support Vessels and Aircraft Information

APPENDIX O Onshore Support Facilities Information

APPENDIX P Coastal Zone Management Act (CZ MA) Information

APPENDIX Q Environmental Impact Analysis

APPENDIX R Administrative InformationEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page A

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX A

PLAN CONTENTS

( A ) PLAN INFORMATION FORM

Under this Supplemental DOCD , ERT proposes to drill, complete and produce Subsea Well No.

006. Well Loc ation E ( SS Well No. 00 6 ) will be drilled and completed with a DP

semisubmersible and then tied back to the existing Helix Producer 1 (HP1) FPU located in Green Canyon Block 237.

The Green Canyon Block 237 A

- Typhoon TLP was destroyed by Hurricane Rita in 2005. Prior to the hurricane, Lease OCS

- G 15563, Green Canyon Block 237, had four wells and Lease OCS

G 16727, Green Canyon Block 282, had two wells that produced through the TLP. Effective August 23, 2006, ERT was designated operator of Leases OCS

- G 15 562, 15563 and 16727, Green Canyon Blocks 236, 237 and 282, respectively. The field was renamed the Phoenix Field.

ERT re

- established production from the Phoenix Field utilizing a ship

- shaped FPU, designated as the Helix Producer 1 (HP1), which is able t o disconnect and move to safe harbor in the event

of future hurricanes. The HP1 first arrived on location in March, 2010. Production from Lease

OCS

- G 15563 ( Well Nos. 00 3 and 004 ) and Lease OCS

- G 16727 (Well Nos. 001 and 002) was commenced on October 19, 2010. By letter dated March 8, 2012, BOEM approved ERT's Revised DOCD (Control No. R

- 5300) providing for the drilling, completion and commencement of production of SSWell No. 005.

ERT plans to drill and complete Well No. 005 and move the rig to drill Well No. 006. Therefore, we hereby request an expedited approval for this Plan.

See attached OCS Plan I nformation Form

– Form BOEMRE

- 137 , included as Attachment A

- 1

.

( B ) LOCATION

Included as Attachment A

- 2 is a location map depicting the existing s urface location and water depth of the proposed well.

( C ) SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES

E RT will utilize a semi

- submersible drilling unit utilizing a subsea BOP stack to conduct the proposed drilling and completion operations. A description o f the drilling un it is included on the OCS Plan Information form. Rig specifications will be made part of the Application for Permit to Drill. A 15K FMC horizontal subsea tree will be installed utilizing an Anchor Handling Vessel (AHV) using Delmar’s Hea ve Compensated Landing System. Mooring will not be required for the subsea tree installation. The subsea tree installation will commence upon completion of the drilling operation. A schematic of the subsea tree is included in Attachment

A

- 3.

Safety features on the drilling unit will include well control, pollution prevention, and blowout prevention equipment as described in Title 30 CFR Part 250, Subparts C, D, E, and F ; and asEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page A

- 2

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) further clarified by BOEMRE Notices to Lessees, and current policy making invoked by the

BOEMRE , Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard. Appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc., will be maintained on the facility at all times.

Pollution prevention measures include installation of curbs, gutter s, drip pans, and drains on drilling deck areas to collect all contaminants and debris.

( D ) STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS All facility t anks with a capacity of 25 bbls or more.

Type of Storage Tank Type of

Facility Tank Capacity

(bbls) Number

o f Tanks Total Capacity

(bbls) Fluid Gravity

(API) Fuel Oil (Marine Diesel) DP MODU 5000 6 30,000 32.4

Production NA

( E ) ADDITIONAL MEASURES

ERT does not propose additional safety, pollution prevention, or early spill detection measures beyond thos e required by 30 CFR 250.U.S. Department of the Interior OMB Control Number: 1010

- 0151

Bureau of Ocean Energy M anagement OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14

OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM

General Information

Type of OCS Plan: Exploration Plan (EP) X Development Operations Coordination Document

Company Name: Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. BOEM Operator Number: 02899

Address: 400 N. Sam Houston Parkway E. Contact Person: Cathy Thornton

Houston, Texas 77060 Phone Number: 713

- 705

- 8020

Email Address:

If a service fee is required under 30 CFR 550.125(a), provide the Amount paid Receipt No.

Project and Worst Case Discharge (WCD)Information

Lease(s): OCS

- G 15563 Area: GC Block(s): 237 Project Name (if applicable): Head & Neck

Objective(s): X Oil Gas Sulphur Salt Onshore Support Base(s):

Platform/Well Name: 006 Total Volume of WCD: 65,750 API Gravity: 33

Distance to Close s t Land (Miles): Volume from uncontrolled blowout:

Have you previously provided information to verify the calculations and assumptions for your WCD? Yes X No

If so, provide the Control Number of the EP or DOCD with which this information was provided.

Do you propose to use new or unusual technology to conduct your activities? Yes X No

Do you propose to use a vessel with anchors to install or modify a structure? Yes X No

Do you propose any facility that will serve as a host facility for deepwater subsea development? Yes X No

Description of Proposed Activities and Tentative Schedule (Mark all that apply)
Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days

Exploration drilling

Development drilling 06 / 15 /2012 08/01 /2012 48

Well completion 08/02 /2012 0 8/27/2012 26
Well test flaring (for more than 48

- hours)

Installation or modification of structure

Installation of production facilities

Installation of subsea wellheads and/or manifolds

Installation of lease term pipelines 0 9 / 01 /2013 0 9 / 15 /2013 15
Commence production Other (Specify and attach description)

Description of Drilling Rig Description of Structure

Jackup Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform

Gorilla Jackup Platform Rig Fixed platform Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Spar Guyed tower

X DP Semisubmersible Other (attach description) Floating production

system Other (Attach Description)

Drilling Rig Name (if known): Noble Jim Day

Description of Lease Term Pipelines

From (Facility/Area/Block) To (Facility/Area/Block) Diameter (Inches) Length (Feet)

SSWell No. 006 Plet 4.5" 56'

Plet Plet 4.5" 2000'

Plet Plet 4.5" 70'

Manifold Plet 4.5" 250'

FORM BOEM

- 0137 ( Decem ber 2011

- Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used. Page 1 of 4OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED) Include one copy of this page for each proposed well/structure

Proposed Well/Structure Location

Well or Structure Name / Number (if renaming well or structure, reference previous name) Previously reviewed under an approved EP or

DOCD? Yes X No

Is this an existing well or

structure? Yes X No If this is an existing well or structure, list the Complex ID or API No. Do you plan to use a subsea BOP or a surface BOP on a floating facility to conduct your proposed activities? X Yes No

WCD info For wells, volume of uncontrolled

blowout (Bbls/day) 65,750 For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines (Bbls) API Gravity of

fluid 33 °

Surface Location Bottom

- Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter separate lines)

Lease No. OCS

- G 15563

Area Name GC

Block No. 237

Block Line Departures (in feet) N/S Departure: F____L

2130' FNL

E/W Departure: F____L

4408' FEL

Lambert X

- Y

coordinates X: 2,260,712.00'

Y: 10,072,110.00'

Latitude / Longitude Latitude: 27°44'33,179" N

Longitude: 91°04'54. 698"

Water Depth (Feet):

1970' Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet:

Anchor Locations for Drilling Rig or Construction Barge (If anchor radius supplied above, not necessary)

Anchor Name

or No. Area Block X Coordinate Y Coordinate Length of Anchor Chain on Seafloor

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

X= Y=

FORM BOEM

- 0137 ( Decemb er 2011

- Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED)

Provide the following information for the well with the highest Worst Case Discharge volume:

Worst Case Discharge (WCD) Well Information

WCD Well

Name Surface

Lease Surface

Area/Block Bottom

Lease Bottom

Area/ Block Product

Type MD TVD

GC237 #006 G15563 GC237 G15563 GC237 Oil 15,094' 14,802'

Analog Well(s)

Area/Block OCS Lease Well No. API No.

GC237 G15563 002 60

- 811

- 40241

- 00

GC237 G15563 001 60

- 811

- 40231

- 02

Geologic Data for WCD

Open Hole Interval for WCD Top (TVD in feet) Base (TVD in feet)

14, 332 ' 14, 36 7 '

Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 Sand 4 Sand 5

Formation Data

Sand Name

Estimated Top TVD

Estimated Base TVD

Estimated Net Sand Height MD (Net Pay if hydrocarbon) Estimated Net Sand Height TVT (net Pay if hydrocarbon) Fluid Type Used in WCD? (Yes/No) Yes

Seismic Survey Used

Western GECO Green Canyon Phase 4 PSTM

Engineering Data for WCD

WCD Engineering Items

WCD (STB/Day) 65,850 stb/day

WCD Calculated at Mudline X Yes No Atmosphere Yes No

Flow Correlation Hagedorn & Brown Outlet Pressure (Psia) 880 psia

Gas Turbulence Factor

Software Model Used WellFlo 2011

Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 Sand 4 Sand 5

Formation Data

Sand Name B4 Permeability (mD) 200 Initial Pressure (PSIA) 10120

FORM BOEM

- 0137 (December 2011

- Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 3 of 4OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED)

Sand 1 Sand 2 Sand 3 Sand 4 Sand 5

Formation Data
Reservoir Temperature (F) 190

P orosity (0.00) 29% Water Saturation (0.00) 17%

Rock Compressi bility (microsips) 3.13 x 10

- 6

Water Salinity (ppm) 130,000

Drive Mechanism Water Drive Drainage Area (acres) 156

Oil Reservoir Data
Bubble Point Pressure (PSIA) +/

- 6000 psia Initial Bo (RB/STB) 1.7 Bo (RB/STB) @ Bubble Point 1.8 Rsi (SCF/STB) 1550 Initial Oil Viscosity (Cp) .51 Oil Viscosity (CP) @ Bubble

Point NA

Oil Compressibility (1/PSIA ) 9.1 x 10

- 6 Oil API Gravity (API) 33 Specific Gas Gravity (0.00) .65

Gas Reservoir Data
Condensate API Gravity (API) Specific Gas Gravity (0.00)
Yield (STB/MMCF)

Source of Permeability Used

Permeability from MDT Permeability from Core Analysis Percussion core Rotary sidewall core Conventional core Pressure Transient Analysis Permeability from CMR or NMR log analysis Permeability from other source Permeability determined from nodal analysis match of offset producers

Provide Model Input Values for Relative Permeability:

Residual Oil to Gas fraction (=1

- Slc

- Swc) Residual Oil to Water fraction (=Soc) .3 Critical Gas fraction (Sgc, Gas/Oil

- Water Systems) Residual Gas to Water fraction (Sgc, Gas/Gas

- Water Systems) Kro Oil Curve Endpoint (fraction of absolute permeability ) 1 Krg Gas Curve Endpoint (fraction of absolute permeability ) Oil well above bubble point throughout well life Krw Water Curve Endpoint (fraction of absolute permeability ) .4

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Statement: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) requires us to inform you that BOEM collects this information as part of an applicant’s Exploration Plan or Development Operations Coordinat ion Document submitted for BOEM approval. We use the inform ation to facilitate our review and data entry for OCS plans. We will protect proprietary data according to the Freedom of Information Act and 30 CFR 550.197. An agency may not conduct or sponsor

, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget Control Number. Responses are mandatory (43 U.S.C. 1334). The public reporting burden for this form is included in the burden for preparing Exploration Plans and Development O perations Coordination Documents. We estimate that burden to average 600 hours with an accompanying EP, or 700 hours with an accompanying DPP or DOCD, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewi ng the forms associated with subpart B. Direct comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this form to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, Bureau of Oce an Energy Management, 381 Elden Street, Herndon, VA 20170.

FORM BOEM

- 0137 (December 2011

- Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 4 of 4Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### A PPENDIX B

GENERAL INFORMATION

( A ) APPLICATION

S AND PERMITS Following is a table of the additional applications/permits which will require approval prior to conducting the operations as proposed in this plan.

Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status

APD BOEMRE Pending

( B ) DRILLING FLUIDS

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be Used per Well (BBLS)

Water

- based (Seawater, freshwater, barite) 10,000

Oil

- based (diesel, minerals, oil) 0 Synthetic

- based (internal olefin, ester) 6,000

( C ) PRODUCTION Anticipated Production:

Type Average Production Rate Peak Production Rate Life of Reservoir

Oil

Gas

( D ) OIL CHARACTERISTICS On June 7, 2011, a sample was taken from the OCS

- G

- 26302 Well No. 1 (Boris No. 3)

, B4 Sand

, 16,448 Ft.

- 16,474 Ft. MD Perforations; 13,978 Ft.

- 14,002 Ft. TVD

, 16,492 Ft.

- 16,507 Ft. MD Perforations; 14,018 Ft.

- 14,032 Ft. TVD

.

I n the laboratory, the recombined reservoir fluid sample exhibited a bubble point of 6,356 psia at

156 °F and the reservoir fluid exists as an under saturated oil at current reservoir conditions (9,820 psia at 156 °F). On July 27, 2011, ASTM analyses were performed ( flash point, boiling point distribution, and SARA analysis )

.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 2

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) R esults of the analyses are shown in the following table :

Characteristics Analytical Methodologies Should Be Compatible With:
1) Gravity (API) 33 ° ASTM D4052
2) Flash Point (°C) <

- 1 5° C ASTM D93/IP34
3) Pour Point (°C)

- 11° ASTM D97
4) Viscosity (Centipoise @ 25° C) 5.41 ASTM D445
5) Wax Content (wt %)

3.0 Precipitate with 2

- butanon/dichloromethane (1 to 1 volume) at

- 10° C
6) Asphaltene Content (wt %) 0.3 IP Method 143/84
7) Resin Content (wt %) 11.43 Jokuty et al. (1996)
8) Boiling point distribution including for each fraction, the percent volume or weight and the boiling point range in

°C 49 ° C ASTM D2892 (TBP DISTILLATION), or

ASTM D2887/5307

9) Sulphur (wt %) 1.32 ASTM D4294

NOTE: For the distillation information in item No. 8 above, the BOEMRE may accept the following information in lieu pf ote,s mps. 5,6,7, and 8: weight percent total of saturates, aromatics, waxes, asphaltenes, and resins; and total BTEX (ppm) using analytical methods compatible with the Hydrocarbon Groups methodology from Jokuty et al. (1996)

( E ) NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY

ERT does not propose to use any new or unusual technology to carry out the proposed development activities.

( F ) BONDING STATEMENT The bond requirements for the activities and facilities proposed in this DOCD are satisfied by a $3,000,000.00 areawide devel opment bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR 256, subpart I; NTL No. 2000

- G16, "Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds;" and a current

BOEMRE

- approved deferment from providing additional security under 30 CFR 256.53(d) and

National NTL No. 2003

- N06, “Supplemental Bond Procedures”. If, at any point, ERT will no longer qualify for a supplemental bon d ing deferment, ERT will either provide the required additional security or a third party guarantee within 60 days after such disqualification

.

( G ) OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)

ERT

, BOEMRE company number 02899

, has demonstrated oil spill financial responsibility for

the facilities proposed in th is DOCD according to 30 CFR Part 253; and NTL No. 99

- N01, "Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for Covered Facilities".

( H ) DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT ERT (BOEMRE company number 02899) has the financial capability to drill a relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 3

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) ( I ) SUSPENSION OF PRODUCTION Green Canyon Block 237 is currently held by ongoing production.

( J ) BLOWOUT SCENARIO

Blowout Scenario

The blowout scenario assumes the rig has sunk and is displaced from the wellhead. The well is flowing uncontrolled at the mud line.

A 13

- 5 /8" casing string has been set at ~11,1 00' TVD . O pen hole is present from 1 1,100'

– 14,802 TVD (3,702 ’ of open hole). No drill pipe is in the wellbore.

Worst Case Discharge

The uncontrolled flow rate is 65,750 BOPD and 101 MMSCFD . Seismic a n d o ffset well interpretation indicates the target reservoir is they only producible rese rvoir in the open hole section. No water sands or other hydrocarbon bearing sands are anticipated in the hole section.

Duration of Uncontrolled Flow

– Base Case

The duration of uncontrolled flow during the blow out scenario is 4 days with a total discharge

volume of 263 ,000 bbls of oil

.

The duration assumes the BOP’s can be closed with an ROV at the subsea ROV intervention panel on the BOP stack . This assumes the initial site assessment indicates an ROV vessel can operate close enou gh to the well to remotely close the BOP.

Surface Intervention In the Event of a Blowout

Energy Resource Technology, Inc. will immediately initiate and mobilize the Helix Well Containment Group’s vessels and equipment to be utilized to shut

- in and contai n the well. Equipment to be mobilized includes vessels to remotely close the blind shear rams, vessels to begin subsea dispersant operations, and vessels to initiate debris removal / salvage operations. The Helix Q

- 4000 will also be immediately mobilized to assist in the response.

In the event the blind shear ram cannot be remotely closed with the ROV, the LMRP will be removed from the BOP, and the HWCG 13

- 5/8” 10K capping stack will be deployed by the Q

4000 or other suitable vessel and installed on th e BOP. The blind rams in the capping stack

would then be closed to contain the well.

A top kill operation would then be initiated to kill and control the well. The proposed well design

will be able to withstand the anticipated shut in pressure at the BO P, as well as additional

p ressure exerted on the casing during the top kill operation. The estimated shut in pressure of the

well at the BOP is 9,100 psi, and the burst rating of the 13

- 5/8” casing is 10,030 psi. In addition,Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 4

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Energy Resource Technology wou ld employ the expertise of Wild Well Control, Inc., to assist with any early intervention options.

The estimated duration for surface intervention that would require the deployment of the capping

stack is 15 days. The contingency case assumes the H WCG vessels and equipment w ill be

utilized to shut

- in and contain the well. Energy Resource Technology, Inc. is a member of the

Clean Gulf Associates / Helix Well Containment Group and is guaranteed this equipment in the

event of a blow out.

Potential of Open Hole to Bridg e Over

Due to the slight geopressured nature of the reservoir (1 4 .0 ppg), the age of the reservoir (Pliocene), and the depth below the mud line wh ere the reservoir exists (+/

- 14,33 0’ TVD), it is highly likely that the sandst one is somewhat unconsolidated and friable. Because the blow out

scenario creates

~ 6,800 psi of drawdown at the reservoir face, considerable sand production is anticipated. In addition, the shale sequences in the open hole will likely e xperience tensile fa ilure
at 6,8 00 psi drawdown. It is reasonable to assume that the sandstones and shale intervals in the open hole will experience tensile failure and will collapse. I t is safe to assume that the sand and shale sequences will experience tensile failure if 6, 8 00 psi drawdown is achieved.

Availability of R ig to B egin D rilling R e lief W ell

Energy Resource Technology, Inc. has a Mutual Aide agreement in place with other members of the Helix Well Containment Group that requires other operators to make available an y equipment necessary to respond to an uncontrolled blowout. Energy Resource Technology, Inc. has a history of working with the major drilling contractors that provide MODU’s. The re are currently 3 6 rigs in the GOM capable of drilling the relief well, if required.

Relief Well Rig Package Constraints

No rig package constraints are anticipated for the rig which would drill the relief well. All 3 rd

, 4 th , and 5 th generation rigs in the Gulf of Mexico would be suitable to drill the relief well. Hook

loads are minimal, and 10,000 psi BOP’s are required.

Drilling a Relief Well from a Nearby Platform

No platforms are close enough to the proposed exploration well to drill a relief well.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 5

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Estimated T ime to Drill a Relief Well

The estimated time to drill a relief well is summarized in the below table:

Description Planned D ays Cumulative Days

Site Assessment 3 3 Contract/Mobilize Rig to Location 14 17

Jet 36” 2.5 19.5 Drill and set 20” casing 3 22.5

Run BOP 3.5 26 Drill and set 16” casing 5.5 31.5

Drill and set 13

- 5/8” casing 10 41.5

Drill and set 9

- 5/8” liner 11.5 53.0 Intercept well 8 61.0

Measures to Prevent or Reduce the Likelihood of a Blowout Energy Resource Technology GOM , Inc. proposes the following to enhance our ability to prevent and reduce the likelihood of a blowout.

1. Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. utilizes real time pore pressure prediction at the rigsite to better estimate pore pressure.

2. Drilling Supervisors, Completion Supervi sors, MODU OIM’s, Drillers, and Tool Pushers, (including all personnel that may be acting in these capacities) must hold a valid well control certificate from an accredited IWCF or WellCAP organization.

3. The working pressure and temperature rating of the BO PE and wellhead will exceed the maximum anticipated surface pressure and temperature. (Note: MASP to be based on Modified Chevron Method of calculating gas hydrostatic unless an alternative method is approved through risk assessment.)

4. BOPE rubber goods, studs, and nuts, will be inspected prior to initial rig up. API ring gaskets will be inspected anytime API flanged connections are “broken” on onshore operations and always will be replaced with new gaskets on offshore operations.

5. Hole

- filling and pit monitoring procedures will be established by site supervision for every rig operation. The established procedures will be documented and approved by

ERT and the Contractor.

6. Circulating trip tanks are required for all drilling operations

. 7. R ams must be installed to fit all sizes of drill pipe and work strings in use.

8. All critical pressure test charts (i.e. negative tests, casing tests, FIT/LOT) will be reviewed by Drilling Engineer/Drilling Supervisor prior to continuing with operations.

9. A drill string float valve (ported acceptable) will be installed in all drilling bottom hole assemblies. (BHA’s).Similar valves will be considered for well intervention and completion operations when reverse circulating is not required.

10. A pressure tested ful ly opening safety valve (FOSV) and opening/closing wrench with appropriate threads or crossover subs for all connections will be available on the rig floor

at all times.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page B

- 6

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 11. Accumulator controls will always be left in the power position (i.e. opened/closed; n ot neutral).

12. The “hard shut

- in procedure” shall be used on all kicks (other than diverter installations).

13. During drilling operations, slow circulating rates (SCR) should be obtained and recorded for each mud pump at least after BHA or mud weight changes an d 500 feet of formation

drilled.

14. Drilling BOP space

- out and tool joint space

- out diagrams shall be posted on the rig floor

at all times.

15. Flow checks shall be conducted after drilling breaks, prior to tripping, after or during lost circulation events, pump ing out, prior to nippling down BOP’s, and any other time when anomalous pit volume readings are observed. Minimum flow check duration shall be 5

minutes

. Enclosed with the Proprietary copy and CD is the NTL 2010

- N06 Worst Case Discharge Analysis.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page D

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX C

G EOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

( A ) GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION Information removed from PI Copy

(B) STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS

C urrent structure contour maps drawn on the top of each productive hydrocarbon sand, showing

the en tire lease block, the location of the proposed well, and the locations of geological cross

sections are included as Attachments C

- 1 and C

- 2

.

( B) INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINES Attached to one Proprietary Information copy of this plan, Attachments C

- 3 , are in terpreted seismic lines. These lines are migrated, annotated with depth scale, and are within 500’ of the surface location of the proposed well.

(D) GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS

- SECTION An interpreted geological structure cross

- section showing the locatio n and depth of the proposed well and at least one key horizon and the objective sands labeled using standard biostratigraphic

terms is included as Attachment C

- 4

.

( E ) SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT

ERT contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. to conduct a shallow ha zards survey across a portion

of Green Canyon Block 237

. One diskette and one hard copy of this report are being submitted on this date under separate cover.

(F) SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT Utilizing the 3D seismic exploration data, a shallow hazards assessment was prepared for the proposed surface locations, and is included as Attachment C

- 5

.

( G ) HIGH

- RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES In accordance with the criteria set forth in Notice to Lessees (NTL) 2008

- G05, included as

Attachment C

- 6 is 3

- D survey da ta including swath bathymetry/seafloor rendering/edge detection (fault scarp trends) overl ain with the seafloor amplitude.

( H ) STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN A generalized biostratigraphic/lithostratigraphic column depicting each well from the seafloor to

total d epth , with each objective horizon labeled, is included as Attachment s C

- 7

.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page D

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) (I ) TIME VS DEPTH TABLES Appropriate tables providing seismic travel time versus depth for the proposed well location in

areas where there is no well control is included as Atta chment s C

- 8.1

GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kali ste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508 Job No. 110728 March 27, 2012

Helix ERT 8401 N. Central Expressway, Suite 550 Dallas, TX 75225

ATTN: Mr. Luke Pierce

Site Clearance Letter Proposed Well “E” Block 237 (OCS-G-15563), Green Canyon Area

INTRODUCTION C & C Technologies, Inc. was contracted by Helix ER T to prepare a well site clearance letter for the proposed Well “E” location in Block 237 (OCS-G-1556 3), Green Canyon (GC) Area. This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis from 3D seism ic data and addresses seafloor conditions within a 2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. A dynamically positioned rig will be used for the well drilling and therefore anchor spreads will not be a ddressed. The depth limit of the investigation is r oughly one and half seconds of two-way traveltime below mu dline (BML). The assessment is based on the geohazard interpretation of WesternGeco (WGC) and C GG 3D seismic data sets that were provided to C & C Technologies, Inc. by Helix ERT. In addition, Williamson and Associates conducted a side scan sonar and ROV survey around the previous location o f the Typhoon Platform for a Debris Assessment. The results of the Debris Assessment were provided by Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. (GEMS) and the location of the damaged flowlines, u mbilicals, and scattered debris were added to the seafloor hazards portion of the main report and use d for well clearance where applicable.

The WGC survey was performed prior to the construct ion of the Typhoon Platform that was destroyed by Hurricane Rita in 2005. The CGG survey was perform ed after construction of the Typhoon Platform resulting in poor near-trace data where the platfor m existed. The WGC data provides data coverage for a gap in proximity to the platform location. C&C com pleted the report titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Study of Phoenix Prospect in Blocks 236, 237, and 2 38, Green Canyon Area” in October 2007. This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and ad dresses seafloor conditions within a 2,000-foot rad ius of the proposed well location. The assessment and enc losures presented with this letter comply with U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Mana gement (BOEM) and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) Notice To Lessees (NTL) No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program) and NTL No. 2009-G40 (Deepwater Benthic Co mmunities). A deep-tow high resolution geophysical survey was conducted by Tesla Offshore in February 2012. The results from that survey have been reviewed by Tesla Offshore’s staff Marine Archaeologist for compliance with the Pre-Seabed Disturbance Mitigation Policy issued on March 25, 2 011.

METHODS The WGC and CGG 3D seismic data used were provided in SEG-Y format via download from a file transfer protocol (ftp) site provided by Helix ERT. The data were loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. Th e inlines of the WGC data volume run north south and are spaced at 65.62-foot (20-meter) intervals w ith the crosslines spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter )

intervals. The inlines of the CGG data volume run east west and are spaced at 65.62-foot (20-meter) intervals with the crosslines spaced at 82.02-foot (25-meter) intervals.2

GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kali ste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508 Job No. 110728 WELL LOCATION The coordinates of the proposed surface location fo r Well “E” and calls from GC237 are tabulated below :

Well Coordinates Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 237 Green Canyon Area X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate

Surface 2,260,712.00’ 10,072,110.00’ 27° 44’ 33.129”N 91° 04’ 54.698”W 2,130’ FNL 4,408’ FEL

Units are in U.S. Survey Feet. The geodetic datum used to generate the study maps is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) on the Clarke 1866 e llipsoid, and projected to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 15 North (15N). The location of the proposed Well “E” and a 2,000- foot radius are displayed on the Color Shaded Bathy metry Map, Seafloor Amplitude Map, Seafloor Features Map, Subsurface Features Map and Figures 1 and 2.

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS The water depth at the proposed Well “E” location i s 1,981 feet below sea level (BSL) (Figure 1). The seafloor at the proposed well site slopes to the so uth-southeast at a gradient of 1.1°. Water depths range from 1,940 feet in the northwest to 2,200 feet in t he northeast within the 2,000-foot radius. The s eafloor surrounding the well site is smooth and featureless . A seafloor fault is located 300 feet to the east having 190 feet of seafloor offset, sloping east at a grad ient of 10.9° (Figure 1).

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The seafloor reflector exhibits low to moderate sei smic amplitude throughout the 2,000-foot radius, suggesting fine textured seafloor sediments consist ing mainly of hemipelagic clay (Figure 2). Three

seafloor faults are located within 985 feet of the proposed surface location. These faults are downth rown to the northeast and do not pose a hazard to drilli ng activities. The seafloor is smooth and free of any significant geohazards created from natural process es.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES No high negative or high positive amplitude seafloo r anomalies associated with fluid expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential chemosynt hetic or coral communities were noted within 2,000 feet surrounding the proposed well site (Figures 3 and 4). Areas of low return identified on the faul t scarp faces are attributed to the high angle of seabed wh ere signal reflection is low. This lower amplitude likely results from the seismic signal being deflected awa y from the hydrophones by the high angle of inciden t of the fault scarp face.

Side scan sonar data collected by Tesla Offshore di splays several areas of high-reflectivity indicatin g outcrops on the seafloor. Subbottom profiler data was reviewed and features related to outcrops are t he result of eroded and exposed strata at the seafloor . No indication of fluid/gas migration or chemosynthetic or coral community growth is evident in the subbottom profiler data (Figure 5).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS A review of company and BOEM/BSEE data indicates tw o pipelines, one umbilical and two wells exist within the 2,000-foot radius of the proposed well s ite (Figure 5).3

GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kali ste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508 Job No. 110728 SUBSURFACE FEATURES Five stratigraphic units of distinct seismic charac ter were assessed (Figures 4-6). A detailed descri ption of the sequence units can be found in the 3D Seismi c Shallow Hazard Study Report. Subsurface deposition in the upper 511 feet (Unit A) of the we llbore is mostly parallel-stratified sediment inter preted as fine-grained hemipelagic clay sediment.

Continuous to semi continuous, highly parallel, hig hly faulted reflectors, indicative of alternating hemipelagic clays, coarser sediments, and slumps, t hat remain uniform throughout the study area characterize the Unit B sequence identified between 2,492 and 2,818 feet (0.916 to 1.030 seconds) BSL. These reflectors record high to moderate amplitudes likely of coarser sediments with intermixed fine grained sediments having lower reflectors. A high amplitude reflector is found at the base of the uni t with properties of a sand sheet.

Unit C consists of low amplitude, continuous to sem i-continuous, parallel to semi-parallel reflectors at the top of the unit that transition into highly channel ized and slumped sediments. Unit C is located 2,81 8 to 3,847 feet (1.030 to 1.381 seconds) BSL. Moderate to low parallel reflectors indicative of turbidites

characterize the base of this unit. Two faults int ersect the wellbore within this unit.

Unit D is located 3,847 to 4,399 feet (1.381 to 1.5 64 seconds) BSL. The top of the unit is characteri zed by highly channelized and slumped deposits with mod erate reflectors. The base of the unit contains parallel to semi-parallel, low reflectors indicativ e of turbidite deposits. This unit is highly fault ed and is indistinguishable to the east and west where it enc ounters salt intrusion.

Unit E is greatly characterized by a highly channel ized sequence with moderate to high amplitude reflectors occurring throughout the middle of the u nit. The top of this unit has parallel to semi par allel reflectors with low amplitudes which become extreme ly chaotic with depth. One fault will intersect th e wellbore within this unit. This unit is identified 4,399 feet BSL to the end of the data.

SHALLOW GAS POTENTIAL Very high amplitude anomalies, commonly termed brig ht spots, are interpreted as potential regions of fluid/gas saturation usually associated with porous sands. Shallow gas is interpreted with amplitude levels and the gas risk is assessed as being at on of four levels. These are:

• Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators p resent.

• Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2-3x background level) and phase reversal. This may also include d iffuse areas of gas blanking.

• Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3-4x backg round level) and phase reversal.

• High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4x background level), phase reversal, and a combinatio n of other attributes indicative of the presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-dow n and masking of underlying sediments. Stratigraphic and structural settings m ay also be taken into account.

No high amplitude subsurface amplitude anomalies ar e noted at the location of the proposed well bore (Sheet 4; Figure No. 6). The nearest amplitude ano maly is located 1,570 feet to the northwest of the drilling location and is likely a sand sheet. A lo w to negligible risk of shallow gas exists along th e wellbore for the proposed Well “E” drilling site.4

GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kali ste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508 Job No. 110728 SHALLOW WATER FLOWS Shallow Water Flows (SWF) are over-pressured, uncon solidated sands that are encountered in the tophole sections of some wells drilled in the deepwater are as of the Gulf of Mexico. Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after deposition and form in unconsolidated and over-pressured sands. The press ure rises with overburden causing a potentially disastrous hazard for drilling operations.

Block GC237 is classified as shallow water up flow area by the BOEM. The BOEM website reports a low severity of shallow water flows from Well No. 3 (OCS-G-15563) in GC237 at a depth of 720 feet BML. The Well No. 3 (OCS-G-15563) is 7,350 feet so utheast of the proposed Well “E” location.

The assessment of seismic profiles and pre-existing shallow water flow events suggests overall the ris k of SWF potential is a low to negligible chance of occu rrence at the well location. Salt encroachment to the east and west has likely negated any overpressure w ithin the units along the proposed well bore. A tophole prognosis chart showing subsurface conditio ns and shallow water flow potential is summarized i n Figure 6.

CONCLUSIONS The water depth at the proposed GC237 Well “E” surf ace location is 1,981 feet BSL. The proposed surface well site location is clear of geological c onstraints. The seafloor within a 985-foot radius of the drill location contains 3 seafloor fault scarps.

No high or low seafloor amplitudes that may indicat e the occurrence of hardground, carbonates, or potential expulsion, are found within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “E” surface location.

Two pipelines, one umbilical and two wells are loca ted within 2,000-feet of the surface location.

A low to negligible risk of shallow gas exists alon g the majority of the well bore for the proposed We ll “E” drilling site.

A shallow water flow did occur approximately 7,350 feet southwest of the proposed well location. The assessment of seismic profiles and pre-existing sha llow water flow events suggests that no potential S WF intervals exist along the proposed well bore.

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. P lease contact us if you have any questions concerni ng this assessment.

Sincerely,

Hallie Graves Marine Geologist

(Project No. 110728)5

GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kali ste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508 Job No. 110728 Figures: Figure 1. A Fledermaus 3D seafloor perspective view looking to the north across the well location. Figure 2. Seafloor amplitudes evident at the well l ocation. Figure 3. 3D seismic profile of inline 2128 from WG C data. Figure 4. 3D seismic profile of crossline 4909 from WGC data. Figure 5. Subbottom profiler data in areas of incre ased reflectivity on the seafloor. Figure 6. Tophole prognosis chart for the proposed Well “E” in GC237. Figure 7. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at P roposed Well “E”.

Enclosures: Sheet 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry Map Sheet 2. Seafloor Amplitude Map Sheet 3. Seafloor Features Map Sheet 4. Subsurface Features Map6GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 1. A Fledermaus 3D seafloor perspective viewlooking to the north across the well location.7GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 2. Seafloor amplitudes evident at the well location.8GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 3. Profile of inline 2128 from WGC data.9GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 4. Profile of crossline 4909 from WGC data.10GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 5. Subbottom profiler data in areas of increased reflectivity on the seafloor.11GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 6. Tophole prognosis chart for the proposedWell “E” in GC237.12GC237 Well “E” Site Clearance Letter 730 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd., Lafayette, LA 70508Job No. 110728Figure 7. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at Proposed Well “E”.BIOSTRATIGRAPHIC / LITHOSTRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

SEQUENCE AGE

MYA DEPTH

TVDSS LITHOLOGIC

DESCRIPTION LITHOLOGIC

COLUMN BIOSTRATIGRAPHIC

ZONES WITH ECOZONES OBJECTIVE

SECTION

-2000

-4000 SAND &

SHALE



## Attachment F Green Canyon 237

-5000

-10000PLEISTOCENE 0.2

SAND &

SHALE Trimosina A Outer Shelf Upper Slope

0.58 SAND &

SHALE -3000

-6000

Angulogerina B -7000

-8000

-11000

-12000

-13000

-14000

SAND

-9000 Sangamon Fauna

Middle Slope

Lower Slope SAND

-15000

-16000

-17000

-18000PLIOCENE Upper Pliocene

B-4 sand (oil)

Primary Target

Location E SAND &

SHALE

Outer Shelf Upper Slope

Middle Shelf 1.4

2.2Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page E

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX D

HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

( A ) C ONCENTRATION

ERT does not anticipate encountering any H 2 S during the proposed operations.

( B ) C LASSIFICATION

In accordance with Title 30 CFR 250. 490 ( c )

, ERT requests that Green Canyon Block 237 be

classified by the BOEMRE as H 2 S absent.

The basis for this determination is the evaluation of he Green Canyon Block 237 offset wells which were drilled to the stratigraphic equivalent of the B4 Sand Series as proposed in this

DOCD.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page F

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX E

MI NERAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION INFORMATION

( A ) TECHNOLOGY & RESERVOIR ENGINEERING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES Information removed from PI Copy

( B ) TECHNOLOGY AND RECOVERY PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES Information removed from PI Copy

(C) R ESERVOIR DEVELOPMEN T (D) Information removed from PI CopyEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page F

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012

Green Can yon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX F BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

The biological, physical an d socioeconomic information provided and approved in the Supplemental DOCD (Control No. S

- 7156).

ERT's proposed operations have the potential to impact submerged archaeological resources that could be in the area of potential effect (APE), which encompasses all portions of the seafloor

where bottom

- disturbing activities are to occur. Before cond ucting any authorized, bottom disturbing activities, ERT will follow the guidance provided at

http://www.gomr.boemre.gov/homepg/regul ate/environ/archaeological/Conditional

- Archaeological

- Mitigation.pdf

, which includes minimum survey recommendations, requisite certification submittals, and post

activity reporting standards needed to ensure compliance with the regulations under 30 CFR §5 50.194.

( A ) DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES Activities proposed in this DOCD will disturb seafloor areas in water depths greater than 300 meters (984 feet); therefore, information as outlined in Attachment A of NTL No. 2009

- G40, "Deepwater Benthic Commu nities", is provided below. ERT will avoid all high

- density deepwater benthic communities by 2000 feet from each proposed mud and cuttings discharge

location and 250 feet from the location of all other seafloor disturbances.

ERT would like to retain the option of moving the proposed location less than 500 feet without having to submit a revised plan. Accordingly, based on the comple te report prepared by C&C Technologies (including the Seafloor Amplitude and Seafloor Features Maps), “No high negative or high positive amplitude seafloor anomalies associated with fluid expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential chemosyntheti c or coral communities were noted within 2000 feet surrounding the proposed site”(p.2). In terms of shallow gas potential, “No high amplitude subsurface amplitude anomalies are noted at the location of the proposed well bore (p.3).

MAPS

Attached to this DOCD ar e maps prepared using 3

- D seismic data depicting seafloor and shallow geological features and areas, and the surface locations of the proposed wells with a radius circle

of 2000 feet around the well

.

ANALYSIS Using 3

- D seismic information, all seafloor f eatures and areas that could be disturbed by the activities proposed in this plan have been identified. The likelihood of these proposed activities disturbing these seafloor and shallow geologic features is discussed in the following summary:

Well Locati on E : Features or areas that could support high

- density deepwater benthic communities are not located within 2000 feet of any proposed muds and cuttings discharge

location.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page F

- 2

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012

Green Can yon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) ( B ) T OPOGRAPHIC FEATURES MAP Activities proposed in this DOCD do not fall wit hin 305 meters (1000 feet) of a topographic “no activity zone”.

(C) TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING) All activities proposed under this DOCD will be conducted outside all Topographic Feature Protective Zones, therefore shunting of drill cutting s and drilling fluids is not required

(D) LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND) MAP Green Canyon Block 237 is not located within 61 meters (200 feet) of any pinnacle trend feature; therefore a separate bathymetric map is not required.

(E) LIVE BOTTOMS (LO W RELIEF) STIPULATION Green Canyon Block 237 is not located within 100 feet of any pinnacle trend feature with vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live bottom (low relief) maps are not required.

( F ) POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGI CAL FEATURES Green Canyon Block 237 is not located with in 30 meters ( 1 00 feet) of potentially sensitive biological features; therefore, biologically sensi tive area maps are not required.

(G) REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (R OV ) SURVEYS

BOEM has determined t here is enough data gathered in this grid area, therefore, we will not be conducting any ROV surveys either pre

- spudding or post

- drilling operations.

(H)THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES , CRITICAL HABITAT, AND MARINE

MAMMAL INFORMATION

Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) all federal agencies must ensure that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species, or destroy or adversely modify its designated critical habitat.

In accordance with the 30 CFR 250, Subpart B, effective May 14, 2007, and further outlined in Notice to Lessees (NTL) 2008

- G04, lessees/operators are required to address site

- specific information on the presence of federally listed threatened or endangere d species and critical habitat designated under the ESA and marine mammals protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in the area of proposes activities under this plan.

NOAA Fisheries currently lists the Sperm Whale, Leatherback Turtle, Gree n Turtle, Hawksbill Turtle, and the Kemp’s Ridley Turtle as endangered and the Loggerhead Turtle and Gulf Sturgeon as threatened. Currently there are no designated critical habitats for the listed species in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf, how ever, it is possible that one or more of these species could be seen in the area of our operations.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page F

- 3

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012

Green Can yon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) (I) A RCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT Green Canyon Block 237 is not located in an area determined to have any historic or prehistoric

cultural resources.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page G

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX G

W ASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

(A) PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES Table 1, “ Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to the GOM”

is included in th e following Table.

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC) 12153 Revision Date: 05/30/2006 MSDS NO.


### 1. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC) Chemical Family: Mixture

Product Use: Oil well drilling fluid additive. Emergency Telephone (24 hr.): 281-561-1600

Supplied by: M-I L.L.C.
P.O. Box 42842 Houston, TX 77242

www.miswaco.com Telephone Number: 281-561-1512
Contact Person: Joanne Galvan, Sr. Produc t Safety Specialist

Revision Number: 1

HMIS Rating

HMIS Key: 4=Severe, 3=Serious, 2=Moderate, 1= Slight, 0=Minimal Hazard. *Chronic effects - See Section 11. See Section 8 for Personal Protective Equipment recommendations.



### 2. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

Emergency Overview: Caution! May cause eye, skin, and respirat ory tract irritation. Cancer hazard. Contains crystalline silica which may cause cancer.

Canadian Classification:

Potential Health Effects:

Acute Effects

Eye Contact: May irritate eyes.
Skin Contact: May be irritating to the skin. Long term contact can cause skin dryness.

Inhalation: Not expected to be an inhalation hazard. Prolonged inhalation of vapors or mists, however, may cause irritation. Ingestion: May cause gastric distress, nausea and vomiting if ingested.

Carcinogenicity & Chronic

Effects: See Section 11 - Toxicological Information.

Routes of Exposure: Eyes. Dermal (skin) contact. Inhalation. Target Organs/Medical Conditions Aggravated by Overexposure: Eyes. Skin. Respiratory System. Not regulated. WHMIS Class: D2A D2B Health: 1*

Physical
State: Liquid Flammability: 1

Odor: Mud Color: Tan to grey Physical Hazard: 0 PPE: J

UN PIN No:

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC)

MSDS NO. 12153 Page 2/6 Revision Date: 05/30/2006


### 3. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

Ingredient CAS No. Wt. % Comments:

Water 7732-18-5 30 - 60 No comments.

Barite 7727-43-7 10 - 30 No comments.

Bentonite 1302-78-9 10 - 30 No comments.

Sodium chloride 7647-14-5 5 - 10 No comments. Silica, crystalline, quartz 14808-60-7 1 - 5 No comments. Sodium hydroxide 1310-73-2 0.1 - 1 No comments. Silica, crystalline, Tridymite 15468-32-3 0.1 - 1 No comments.



### 4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Eye Contact: Promptly wash eyes with lots of water while lifting eye lids. Continue to rinse for at least 15 minutes. Get medical attention if any discomfort continues.

Skin Contact: Wash skin thoroughly with soap and water. Remove contaminated clothing and
launder before reuse. Get medical attent ion if any discomfort continues.

Inhalation: Move person to fresh air. If not breathing, gi ve artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Get medical attention.

Ingestion: Dilute with 2 - 3 glasses of water or milk, if conscious. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. If signs of irri tation or toxicity occur seek medical

attention.

General Notes: Persons seeking medical attention should ca rry a copy of this MSDS with them.



### 5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Flammable Properties

Flash Point: F (C): >200F (93C)

Flash Point Method: Estimated

Flammable Limits in Air - Lower (%): ND Flammable Limits in Air - Upper (%): ND Autoignition Temperature: F (C): ND Flammability Class: IIIB Other Flammable Properties: ND Extinguishing Media: This material is not combustible. Use extinguishing media appropriate for surrounding fire.

Protection Of Fire-Fighters:

Special Fire-Fighting Procedures: Do not enter fire area without proper personal protective equipment, including NIOSH/MSHA approved self-cont ained breathing apparatus. Evacuate area and fight fire from a safe distance. Water spray may be used to keep fire-exposed containers cool . Keep water run off out of sewers and waterways.

Hazardous Combustion Products: Oxides of: Carbon.



### 6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Personal Precautions: Use personal protective equipment identified in Section 8.

Spill Procedures: Evacuate surrounding area, if necessary. Sp illed product is very slippery. Contain spilled material. Absorb in vermiculite, dr y sand or earth. Place into containers for disposal.

Environmental Precautions: Do not allow to enter sewer or surface and subsurface waters. Waste must be disposed of in accordance with federal, state and local laws.

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC)

MSDS NO. 12153 Page 3/6 Revision Date: 05/30/2006


### 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Handling: Put on appropriate personal protective equipm ent. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. Avoid breathing vapors or spray mists. Use only in a well ventilated area. Wash thoroughly after handling.

Storage: Store in dry, well-ventilated area. K eep container closed. Store away from incompatibles. Follow safe warehousing practices regarding palletizing, banding, shrink-wrapping and/or stacking.



### 8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION

Exposure Limits (TLV & PEL - 8H TWA):

Ingredient CAS No. Wt. % ACGIH TLV OSHA PEL Other Notes

Water 7732-18-5 30 - 60 NA NA NA None

Barite 7727-43-7 10 - 30 10 mg/m 3 15 mg/m 3 (total); 5 mg/m 3 (resp) NA None

Bentonite 1302-78-9 10 - 30 NA NA NA (1)

Sodium chloride 7647-14-5 5 - 10 NA NA NA (1) Silica, crystalline, quartz 14808-60-7 1 - 5 0.05 mg/m 3 see Table Z-3 NIOSH: 0.05 mg/m 3 TWA (10H day/40H wk) (R)

Sodium hydroxide 1310-73-2 0.1 - 1 2 mg/m 3 (C) 2 mg/m 3 NA None Silica, crystalline, Tridymite 15468-32-3 0.1 - 1 0.05 mg/m 3 see Table Z-3 NA (R)

Notes (1) Control as an ACGIH particulate not otherwise specified (PNOS): 10 mg/m 3 (Inhalable); 3 mg/m 3 (Respirable) and an OSHA particulate not otherwise regulated (PNOR): 15 mg/m 3 (Total); 5 mg/m 3 (Respirable). (R) Respirable fraction (ACGIH);

Table Z-3: PEL for Mineral Dusts containing crystalline silica are 10 mg/m 3 / (%SiO2+2) for quartz and 1/2 the calculated quartz value for cristobalite and tridymite.

Engineering Controls: Use appropriate engineering controls such as, exhaust ventilation and process enclosure, to ensure air contamination and keep worker s exposure below the applicable limits.

Personal Protection Equipment

All chemical Personal Protective E quipment (PPE) should be selected based on an assessment of both the chemical hazards present and the risk of exposure to those haz ards. The PPE recommendations below are based on our
assessment of the chemical hazards associated with th is product. The risk of exposure and need for respiratory protection will vary from workplace to work place and should be assessed by the user.

Eye/Face Protection: Wear chemical safety goggles.

Skin Protection: Wear appropriate clothing to prevent r epeated or prolonged skin contact. Chemical resistant gloves recommended for prolonged or repeated contact. Use protective gloves made of: Neoprene. Nitrile.

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC)

MSDS NO. 12153 Page 4/6 Revision Date: 05/30/2006

Respiratory Protection: All respiratory protection equipment should be used within a comprehensive respiratory protection program that meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134 (U.S. OSHA Respiratory Protecti on Standard) or local equivalent.

If exposed to airborne mist/aerosol of th is product, use at least a NIOSH-approved N95 half-mask disposable or re-usable particu late respirator. In work environments containing oil mist/aerosol, use at leas t a NIOSH-approved P95 half-mask disposable or reuseable particulate respirator.

If exposed to vapors from this product use a NIOSH/MSHA-approved respirator with an Organic Vapor cartridge.

General Hygiene Considerations: Work clothes should be washed separately at the end of each work day. Disposable clothing should be discarded, if contaminated with product.



### 9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Color: Tan to grey

Odor: Mud Physical State: Liquid pH: ND Specific Gravity (H2O = 1): ND Solubility (Water): Dispersible Flash Point: F (C): >200F (93C) Melting/Freezing Point: ND Boiling Point: ND Vapor Pressure: ND Vapor Density (Air=1): ND Evaporation Rate: ND Odor Threshold(s): ND



### 10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Chemical Stability: Stable
Conditions to Avoid: Keep away from heat, sparks and flame.

Materials to Avoid: Oxidizers. Hazardous Decomposition

Products: For thermal decomposition products, see Section 5.

Hazardous Polymerization: Will not occur



### 11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Component Toxicological Data: Any adverse component toxicological effects are listed below. If no effects are listed,

no such data were found.

Ingredient CAS No. Acute Data

Sodium chloride 7647-14-5 Oral LD50: 3 g/kg (rat); Dermal LD50: >10 g/kg (rabbit); Inhalation LC50: >42 g/m 3 /1H (rat) Sodium hydroxide 1310-73-2 Oral LDLo: 500 mg/kg (rabbit)

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC)

MSDS NO. 12153 Page 5/6 Revision Date: 05/30/2006

Ingredient Component Toxicological Summary Silica, crystalline, quartz Crystalline silica is the most widely occurring of a ll minerals. The most common form of silica is sand. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has des ignated crystalline silica in the form of quartz or cristobalite a Group 1 (carcinogenic to humans). This designation was based on an increased risk of lung cancer among crys talline silica exposed workers. IARC did note that carcinogenicity of crystalline silica in humans was not detected in all industrial circumstances studied. Further, carcinogeni city of crystalline silica may be dependent on inherent characteristics of the crys talline silica or external factors a ffecting its biological activity or distribution of polymorphs. (IARC Vol. 68, 1997, p. 41). The National Toxicology Program (NTP) classifi es crystalline silica as "reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans" (6th Annual Repor t on Carcinogens, 1991). Long term inhalation of crystalline silica can also result in the lung diseas e, silicosis. Symptoms of this disease include coughing and shortness of breath. (NJ HSFS, January 1996)

Product Toxicological Information: No toxicological data is available for this product.



### 12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Component Ecotoxicity Data: No data available.

Ingredient CAS No. Data Sodium hydroxide 1310-73-2 LC50: 160 mg/l (goldfish) 24H, LC50 48H: 99 mg/l (bluegill sunfish), LC50 96H: 125 mg/l (m osquito fish), LC100 24H : 180 mg/l (carp), Lethal 48H : 100 mg/l (water flea), Lethal 48H: 700 mg/l (midge)

Product Ecotoxicity Data: Contact M-I Environmental Affairs Departm ent for available product ecotoxicity data.

Biodegration: ND

Bioaccumulation: ND
Octanol/Water Partition
Coefficient: ND



### 13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Waste Classification: ND

Waste Management: Under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA), it is the responsibility of the user to determine at the time of disposal, whether the product meets RCRA crit eria for the hazardous waste. This is because product uses, transform ations, mixtures, processe s, etc., may render the resulting materials hazardous. Empty containers retain residues. All labeled precautions must be observed.

Disposal Method: Recover and reclaim or recycle, if practi cal. Should this product become a waste, dispose of in a permitted industrial landfill. Ensure that the containers are empty by the RCRA criteria prior to disposal in a permitted industrial landfill.



### 14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

U.S. DOT Shipping Description: Not regulated for transportation by DOT, TDG, IMDG,
ICAO/IATA.

Canada TDG Shipping Description: Not regulated.

UN PIN No: Not regulated.

IMDG Shipping Description: Not regulated.

### MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Trade Name: WATER BASED MUD (GENERIC)

MSDS NO. 12153 Page 6/6 Revision Date: 05/30/2006

ICAO/IATA Shipping Description: Not regulated.



### 15. REGULATORY INFORMATION

U.S. Federal and State Regulations

SARA 311/312 Hazard Catagories: Immediate (acute) health hazard. Delayed (chronic) health hazard.

SARA 302/304, 313; CERCLA RQ, California Proposition 65: Note: If no components are listed below, this product is not subject to the referenced SARA and CERCLA regulations and is not k nown to contain a Proposition 65 listed chemical at a level that is expected to pose a significant risk under anticipated use

conditions.

Ingredient SARA 302
/ TPQs SARA 313 CERCLA
RQ CA 65
Cancer CA 65

Dev. Tox. CA 65 Repro. F CA 65 Repro. M Silica, crystalline, quartz

--- --- --- X

--- --- --- Sodium hydroxide

--- --- 1000 lb (454 kg) --- --- --- ---

Silica, crystalline, Tridymite

--- --- --- X

--- --- ---

International Chemical Inventories

Australia AICS - Components are lis ted or exempt from listing. Canada DSL - Components are list ed or exempt from listing. China Inventory - Contains a component that is not listed. European Union EINECS - Contains a component(s) that is not listed. Japan METI ENCS - Contains a component that is not listed. Korea TCCL ECL - Contains a component that is not listed. Philippine PICCS - Contains a component that is not listed. U.S. TSCA - Components are lis ted or exempt from listing. U.S. TSCA - No components are subject to TSCA 12(b) export notif ication requirements.

Canadian Classification:

Controlled Products Regulations Statement: This product has been classified in accor dance with the hazard criteria of the
CPR and the MSDS contains all the information required by the CPR.

WHMIS Class: D2A D2B



### 16. OTHER INFORMATION

The following sections have been revised: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

NA - Not Applicable, ND - Not Determined.

Disclaimer:
MSDS furnished independent of product sale. While every effort has been made to accurately describe this product, some of the data are obtained from sources beyond our direct supervision. We can not make any assert ions as to its reliability or co mpleteness; therefore, user m ay rely on it only at user ́s

risk. We have made no effort to censor or conceal deleterious aspects of this product. Since we cannot anticipate or control the conditions under which this information and product may be used, we make no guartantee that the precautions we hav e suggested will be adequate for all individuals and/or situations. It is the obligation of each us er of this product to comply with the requirements of all applicable laws regarding use and disposal of this product. Additional information will be furn ished upon request to assist the user; however , no warranty, either expressed or i mplied, nor liability of any nature with respect to this product or to t he data herein is made or incurred hereunder.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page H

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX H

AI R EMISSIONS INFORMATION

(2) Screening Questions

Screen Procedures for DOCD’s Yes No Is any calculated Complex Total (CT ) Emission amount (tons) associated with your proposed development activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated using the following formulas: CT = 3400D 2/3 for CO, and CT = 33.3D for the other air pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles)? X

Do your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures or modified

emission factors? X

Does or will the facility complex associated with your proposed development and production activities process production from eight or more wells? X

Do you expect to encounter H 2 S at concentrations greater than 20 parts per million (ppm)? X Do you propose to flare or vent natural gas in excess or criteria set for the under 250.1105(a)(2) and (3)? X

Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liqui ds? X Are your proposed development and production activities located within 25 miles (40 kilometers) from shore? X

Are your proposed development and production activities located within 124 miles (200 kilometers) of the Breton Wilderness Area? X

Th ere are no existing facilities or activities co

- located with the currently proposed activities, therefore the Complex Total Emissions are the same as the Plan Emissions and are provided in

the table below.

Air Pollutant Plan

Emission

Amounts 1

(tons) Calcu lated

Exemption

Amounts 2

(tons) Calculated

Complex Total

Emission

Amounts 3

(tons) Carbon Monoxide (CO) 66.00 3030.30 66.00 Particular matter (PM) 302.87 3030.30 302.87 Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) 3020.99 3030.30 3020.99 Nitrogen oxides (NO

x ) 78.0 3030.30 78.0 Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 1142.10 68,787.02 1142.10

1 For activities proposed in you r DOCD , list the projected emissions calculated from the worksheets.

2 List the exemption amounts for your proposed activities calculated by using the formulas in 30 CFR 250.303(d).

3 List the complex total emissions associated with your proposed activities calculated from the worksheets.

This information was calculated by: Cathy Thornton (281) 578

- 3388

c athy.thornton @jccteam.comEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX I

OIL SPILL S INFORMATION

( A ) OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. ’s (MMS Operator Number 0 2899 ) Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) was submitted in April, 20 10 with the latest modification received on February 15, 2012 and the Regional OSRP was approved on February 16, 2012. The next

Biennial O il Spill Response Plan is due by April 30, 2012. The a ctivities proposed in this

DOCD will be covered by the Regional OSRP in accordance with 30 CFR 254

. The WCD for

this block was reviewed under Plan R

- 5300 on October 26, 2011.

(B) SPILL RESPONSE SITES

Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location
Houma, Louisiana Fourchon, Louisiana

( C) OSRO INFORMATION

ERT ’s primary equipment provider is Clean Gulf Associates (CGA). The Marine Spill Response Corporation’s (MSRC) STARS network will provide closest available personnel, as well as an MSRC supervisor to operate the equipment.

(D) WORST

- CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION

Category Drilling Production

Regional
OSRP
WCD DOCD

WCD Regional

OSRP
WCD DOCD

WCD

Type of Activity Dri l ling Drilling >10 mile

Production >10 mile

Production
Facility Location (Area/Block) GC237 GC237 GC 282 GC237

Facility Designation SS Well No. 00 5 SS Well No. 00 5 SS Well No. 1 (ST03BP01) SSWell No. 00 6

Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) 91 91 91 91

Volume
S torage tanks & flowlines Lease term pipelines

Uncontrolled blowout
Total Volume (bbls) 2 12,891 212,891 212,891

212,891 43,280

43,280 325

2 2,960
23

, 28 5
Type of Oil(s) (crude, condensate, diesel) C rude Crude Crude Crude

API Gravity 33 ° 33 ° 32° 33 °Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 2

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) ERT has determined that the worst

- case scenario from the activities proposed in this DOCD does

not supersede the worst

- case scenario from our approved regional OSRP (for far

- shore drilling activities).

(E) SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Man agement Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well blowout during drilling operations,

estimated to be 2 1 2

, 8 9 1 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 33 °.

Land Segment and Resource Identification

Tra jectories of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing information in the BOEM Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and

Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BOEM website

. The results are sh own in Figure 1. The

BOEM OSRAM identifies a 7 % probability of impact to the shorelines of Cameron Parish,

Louisiana within 30 days. Cameron Parish includes the east side of Sabine Lake, Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Calcasieu Lake, Lacassine National W ildlife Refuge (inland) and Grand Lake. Cameron Parish also includes the area along the coastline from Sabine Pass to Big Constance Lake in Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge. This region is composed of open public beaches, marshlands and swamps. It serves as a habitat for numerous birds, finfish and other animals, including several rare, threatened and endangered species

.

Response

ERT will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as practicable. A description of the response eq uipment under contract to contain and recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical characteristics of crude oil , an ADIOS weathering model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil database. The re sults indicate 18 % or approximately 20,280 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with approximately 135,720 barrels remaining.

Spill Response GC 237, SS Well No. 005 Barrels of Oil

WCD Volume 212,891

Less 18 % natural evap oration/dispersion 38,320

Remaining volume 174,571

Daily dispersant capability 7,540

Oil addressed by in

- situ burning 8,728

Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary storage equipment available to r espond to a spill of 174,571 barrels. The volume accounts for the amount remaining after evaporation/dispersion at 24 hours

. The list estimates individual times needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure 2 also indicat es how operations will be supported.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 3

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) ERT ’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies such as dispersants

and in

- situ burn. Strategies will be decided by Unified Command based on size of the spill, weather and potential impacts. If aerial dispersants are utilized, 8 sorties (9,600 gallons) from

two of the DC

- 3 aircrafts and 4 sorties (8,000 gallons) from the Basler aircraft would provide a daily dispersant capability of 7,540 barrels . If the conditions are favorable for in

- situ bu rning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is in place, in

- situ burning of oil may be attempted. Using estimates based on the Deepwater Horizon spill of 2010, up to 5% or approximately 6,786 barrels of the total daily Worst Case Discharge volume could be burned. Slick containment boom would be immediately called out and on

- scene as soon as possible. Offshore response strategies may include attempting to skim utilizing the HOSS barge, nine Fast Response Units, eleven sets of Koseq skimming arms, and two Aqua Guard Triton RBS

skimmers , with a total derated skimming capacity of 318,609 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 31,700 barrels. If additional storage is needed, a
47,000 barrel storage barge

, a 25,000 barrel storage barge , three 23,000 barrel storage barge s, an 80,000 barrel storage barge, and a n 83,937 barrel storage barge may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible

. Safety is first priority. Air monitoring will be accomplished and operations deemed safe prior to any containment/skimming attempts.

If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact in Cameron Parish, Louisiana would depend upon

exist ing environmental conditions. Shoreline protection would include the use of CGA’s near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 54,753 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 1,761 b arrels. I f additional storage is needed, three 20,000 barrel storage barge s may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible. Onshore response may include the deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protection and sorbent boom on vegetated areas. A Letter of Intent from Oil Mop will ensure

access to 30,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom. Figure 2 outlines individual times needed for procurement, load out, tr avel time to the site and deployment. Strategies would be based upon surveillance and real time trajectories that depict areas of potential impact given actual sea and weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan for

Cameron Parish and Unified Command would be consulted to ensure that environmental and special economic resources would be correctly identified and prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shoreline protection strategies depict the protection response modes appli cable for oil spill clean

- up operations. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it describes necessary action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetla nds, based on the assumption that removal of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to fragile coastal ecosystems if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervisory personnel have the option to modify the deployment

and operation of equipment allowing a more effective response to site

- specific circumstances.

ERT’s contract Spill Management Team holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 4

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, ERT can b e onsite with contracted oil spill recovery equipment with adequate response capacity to contain and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable , within an estimated

41 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)). ERT will

continue to commit additional on

- water mechanical recovery resources as well as apply dispersants and in

- situ burning needed and as approved, under the supervision of the USCG Captain of the Port (COTP) and the Reg ional Response Team (RRT).

Initial Response Considerations Actual actions taken during an oil spill response will be based on many factors to include but not

be limited to:

 Weather

 Equipment and materials availability

 Ocean currents and tides

 Location of the spill

 Product spilled

 Amount spilled

 Environmental risk assessments

 Trajectory and product analysis

 Well status, i.e., shut in or continual release

ERT will take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much of the

sp illed oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response actions will be designed to provide an “in

- depth” protection strategy meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as pos sible. Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations.

Upon notification of a spill, the following actions will be taken:

 Information will be confirmed

 An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

 OSROs and app ropriate agencies will be notified

 ICS 201, Initial Report Form completed

 Initial Safety plan will be written and published

 Unified Command will be established

o Overall safety plan developed to reflect the operational situation and coordinated objectives

o Areas of responsibility established for Source Control and each surface operational

site

o On

- site command and control establishedEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 5

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

 Surveillance Aircraft: within two hours of QI notification, or at first light

 Provide trained observer to provide on site status reports

 Provide command and control platform at the site if needed

 Continual surveillance of oil movement by remote sensing systems, aerial photography

and visual confirmation

 Continual mon itoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems

Dispersant application assets

 Put ASI on standby

 With the FOSC, conduct analysis to determine appropriateness of dispersant application

 Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface

 Depl oy aircraft in accordance with a plan developed for the actual situation

 Coordinate movement of dispersants, aircraft, and support equipment and personnel

 Confirm dispersant availability for current and long range operations

 Start ordering dispersant stoc ks required for expected operations

Containment boom

 Call out early and expedite deployment to be on scene ASAP

 Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom

 Provide continuing reports to vessels to expedite their arrival at sites tha t will provide for

their most effective containment

 Use Vessels of Opportunity (VOO) to deploy and maintain boom

Dedicated off

- shore skimming systems

General

 Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

 Assets deployed at safe distance from aerial dispe rsant and in

- situ burn operations

CGA HOSS Barge

 Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

 Consider for use in areas of known debris (seaweed, and other floating materials)

CGA FRUs

 To the area of the thickest oil

 Use as far off

- shore as allowed

T&T Koseq Skimming Systems

 To the area of the thickest oil

 Use as far off

- shore as allowedEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 6

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 )  VOOs with a minimum of 2,000 bbls storage capacity

Storage Vessels

 Establish availability of CGA contracted assets

 Early call out (to allow for tug boat acquisition an d deployment speeds)

 Phase mobilization to allow storage vessels to arrive at the same time as skimming

systems

 Position as closely as possible to skimming assets to minimize offloading time

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

 Use ERT ’s contracted resources as a pplicable

 Industry vessels are usually best for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

 Acquire additional resources as needed

 Consider use of local assets, i.e. fishing and pleasure craft

 Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

 Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

In

- situ Burn assets

 Determine appropriateness of in

- situ burn operation in coordination with the FOSC and

affected SOSC

 Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

 Star t ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

 Contact boom manufacturer to provide training if required

 Determine assets to perform on water operation

 Build operations into safety plan

 Conduct operations in accordance with an approved planEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 7

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

 Put near shore assets on standby and deployment in accordance with planning based on the actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets

 VOO identification and training in advance of spill nearing shoreline if poss ible

 Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions

 Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil

Considerations

 Water depth, vessel draft

 Shoreline gradient

 State of the oil

 Use of VOOs

 Distance of surf zone from shoreline

Equipment Deployment

Surve illance

 Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations

 Continual surveillance of oil movement by remote sensing systems, aerial photography

and visual confirmation

 Continual monitoring of vessel assets

Dispersant Use

 Generally will not be approv ed within 3 miles of shore or with less than 10 meters of water depth

 Approval would be at Regional Response Team level (Region 6)

Vessel Deployment Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

 FRVs

 Egmopol and Marco SWS

 Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks

VOO

 Use ERT ’s contracted resources as applicable

 Industry vessels are usually best for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

 Acquire additional resources as needed

 Consider use of local assets, i.e. f ishing and pleasure craft

 Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

 Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

 Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patchesEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 8

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Shoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Consid erations

 Environmental risk assessments (ERA) to determine priorities for area protection

 Time to acquire personnel and equipment and their availability

 Previous contingency planning contained in the appropriate Area Contingency Plan, and currently for Lou isiana, The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan, Deep Water Horizon, dated 2 May 2010

Actions

Placement of boom

 Position boom in accordance with the ERA based on the actual situation or the appropriate ACP

 Assess timing of booming operati ons to ensure it is where it needs to be at time of impact. Consider:

o Trajectories

o Weather forecast

o Oil Impact forecast

o Verified spill movement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

o Near shore boom and support material, (stakes, anchors, line)

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

 Use of a 10 mile go/no go line to determine timing of beach cleaning

 Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

 Determination of Archeological sites and gaining authority to enter

 Monitoring of tide tables and weather to determine extent of high tides

 Pre cleaning of beaches by moving waste above high time lines to minimize waste

 Staging of equipment and housing of response personnel as close to the job site as possible to maximize on

- site work time

 Boom tending, repair, replacement and security (use of local assets may be advantageous)

 Constant awareness of weather and oil movement for resource redeployment as necessary

 In

- situ burn may be considered when marshes have been impact ed

 Passive clean up of marshes should considered and appropriate stocks of sorbent boom and/or sweep obtained

 Earthen berms and shoreline protection boom may be considered to protect sensitive

inland areasEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 9

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Decanting Strategy

Recovered oil and water mix tures will typically separate into distinct phases when left in a quiescent state. When separation occurs, the relatively clean water phase can be siphoned or decanted back to the recovery point with minimal, if any, impact. Decanting therefore increases

t he effective on

- site oil storage capacity and equipment operating time. FOSC/SOSC approval will be requested prior to decanting operations. This practice is routinely used for oil spill

recovery.

CGA Equipment Limitations The capability for any spill resp onse equipment, whether a dedicated or portable system, to operate in differing weather conditions will be directly in relation to the capabilities of the vessel the system in placed on. Most importantly, however, the decision to operate will be based on the judgment of the Unified Command and/or the Captain of the vessel, who will ultimately have the final say in terminating operations. Skimming equipment listed below may have operational limits which exceed those safety thresholds. As was seen in the Dee pwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill response, vessel skimming operations ceased when seas reached 5

- 6 feet and vessels were often recalled to port when those conditions were exceeded. Systems below are some of the

most up

- to

- date systems available and were emp loyed during the DWH spill.

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots

Visibility less than 3 nautical miles Ceiling less than 1,000 feet.

FRU 8 foot seas HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas Koseq Arms 8 foot seas

OSRV 4 foot seasEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 10

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) \

Environmental Conditions in the GOM Louisiana is situated between the easterly and westerly wind belts, and therefore, experiences westerly winds during the winter and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is generally 14

- 15 mph along the coast. Wave heights average 4 and 5 feet. However, during hurricane season, Louisiana has recorded wave heights ranging from 40 to 50 feet high and winds reaching speeds of 100 mph. Because much of southern Louisiana lies below sea level, flooding is promi nent.

Surface water temperature ranges between 70 and 80  ̊ F during the summer months. During the winter, the average temperature will range from 50 and 60  ̊ F.

The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico hurricane season is officially from 1 June to 30 November.

97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The Atlantic basin shows a very peaked season from August through October, with 78% of the tropical storm days, 87% of the minor (Saffir

- Simpson Scale categories 1 and 2) hurricane days, and 96% of the ma jor (Saffir

- Simpson categories 3, 4 and 5) hurricane days occurring then. Maximum activity is in early to mid September. Once in a few years there may be a hurricane occurring "out of season"

- primarily in May or December. Globally, September is the most active month and May is the least active n month.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 11

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) FIGURE 1

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing ERT’s WCD and information in the BOEM Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BOEM website using 30 day impact. The results are tabulated below.

Area/Block OCS

- G Launch

Area Land Segment and/or

Resource Conditional

Probability (%)

within 30 days

Green Can yon 237,

SS Well No. 005

91 miles from shore G15563 C43 Matagorda County, TX Brazoria County, TX Galveston County, TX Jefferson County, TX Cameron Parish, LA Vermilion Parish, LA Iberia Parish, LA Terrebonne Parish, LA Lafourche Parish, LA Plaquemine s Parish, LA 2

1

3

2

7

3

1

3

1

2Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 13 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) WCD Scenario

– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (91 miles from shore) 174,571 bbls of crude oil (volume considering natural weathering) API Gravity 33 ° FIGURE 2

– Equipment Response Time to GC 237, SS W ell No. 005 Dispersants/Surveillance

Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant Capacity (gal) Storage

Capacity Persons

Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

site Total Hrs

CGA

Basler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.7 2.7

ASI

DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9

DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9

Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.7 2.7

Offshore Response

Offshore Equipment No Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Hrs to

GOM Travel to

Spill Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 8 H arvey 7 0 5 11.3 1 24.3

T&T Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

Koseq Skimming Arms (3) 53487 6000 3 Utility 18 Leeville 4 12 2 9.2 2 29.2

Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Venice 4 12 2 10.8 2 30.8

Koseq Skimming Arms (1) 17829 2000 1 Utility 6 Fourchon 4 12 2 9.2 2 29.2

Koseq Skimming Arms (5) 89145 10000 5 Utility 30 Galveston 4 12 2 20.8 2 40.8

Recovered Oil Storage No Staging EDRC Storage Capacity V OO Persons Required From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Hrs to

GOM Travel to

Spill Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs
Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

K

- Sea Operating (available through contract with C GA)

PACIFIC 996165 NA 80000 1 Tug 6 Houma 4 12 4 11.25 1 32.25

DBL 76 1212984 NA 83937 1 Tug 6 Houma 4 12 4 11.25 1 32.25Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 14 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 )Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 15 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Staging Area: Fourchon

Offshore Equipment With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

Staging Travel to

Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Belle Chasse 1 2 2.5 9.2 1 15.7

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 7 9.2 1 20.2

FRU (3) + 100 bbl Tank ( 5) 11310 500 1 Utility 6 Houma 1 2 1 9.2 1 14.2

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 9.5 9.2 1 22.7

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 4 9.2 1 17.2

FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 7540 400 1 Utility 6 Ve nice 1 2 4 9.2 1 17.2

T&T Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston 4 12 7 9.2 2 34.2

Offshore Equipment With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

Staging Travel to

Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Belle Chasse 1 2 2.5 9.2 1 15.7

42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2 7 9.2 1 20.2

42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Houma 1 2 1 9.2 1 14.2

42” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2 9.5 9.2 1 22.7

42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2 4 9.2 1 17.2

42” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Pascagoula 1 2 4 9.2 1 17.2

1000’ Hydro

- Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 20 Harvey 1 4 2.5 9.2 6 22.7Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 16 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Nearshore Response

Nearshore Equipment No Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Hrs to

GOM Travel to

Spill Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

C GA

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Galveston 1 0 0 3.2 0 4.2

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Houma 1 0 2 6 0 9

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Lake Charles 1 0 1 2 0 4

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 1 0 1 9 0 11

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Morgan City 1 2 2 4.4 1 10.4

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
Staging Area: Cameron

Nearshore and Inland Skimmers With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Load

Out Travel to

Staging Travel to

Deployment

Site Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 3.5 2 0 8.5

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Houma 1 2 4 2 0 9

SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Houma 1 2 4 2 0 9

SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 1 2 0 6

Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Belle Chasse 1 2 4.5 2 0 9.5

RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Galveston 1 2 3.5 2 0 8.5

RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Houm a 1 2 4 2 0 9

RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Lake Charles 1 2 1 2 0 6

RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Venice 1 2 6.5 2 0 11.5Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page I

- 17 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 )

Staging Area: Cameron Shoreline Protection

Shoreline

Protection Boom VOO Persons Req. Storage/Warehouse

Location Hrs t o Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

Staging Travel to

Deployment Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs

Oil Mop (available through Letter of Intent)

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 1 2 3 8

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 4 2 3 11

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 3 2 3 10

Beach Boom EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

Staging Travel to

Deployment Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Galveston 1 2 3.5 1 2 9.5

Beach Boom (1000’) NA NA NA 4 Ingleside 1 2 6 1 2 12

Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Pascagoula 1 2 5.5 1 2 11.5

Wildlife Response EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to

Procure Hrs to

Loadout Travel to

Staging Travel to

Deployment Hrs to

Deploy Total

Hrs

CGA

Wildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 4 1 2 10

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Belle Chasse 1 2 4.5 1 2 10.5

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 2 3.5 1 2 9.5

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 4 1 2 10

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Ingleside 1 2 6 1 2 12

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 2 1 1 2 7

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Pascagoula 1 2 5.5 1 2 11.5

Response Asset Total

Offshore EDRC 318,609

Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 336,637

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 54,753

Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 61,761Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page J

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX J

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

(A) MONITORING SYSTEMS There are no environmental monitoring systems currently in place or planned for the proposed

activities.

(B) INCIDENTAL TAKES There is no reason to believe that any of the endangered species or marine mammals as listed in the ESA will be “taken” as a result of the operations proposed under this plan.

To d ate, it has been documented that the use of explosives and/or seismic devices can affect marine life. Operations proposed in this plan will not be utilizing either of these devices.

(C ) FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY Green Canyon Block 23 7 is not located in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary; therefore, the requested information is not required in this DOCD.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page K

- 1 Supplemental DOC

D April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 

### APPENDIX K

LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

The BOEM did not invoke lease stipulations for Lease OCS

- G 15563

. Green Can yon Block 237

.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page L

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX L

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

(A) MITIGATION MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE IMPACT TO MARINE AND

COASTAL ENVIRONMENT Not applicable for the operations proposed in this Plan.

(B) INCIDENTAL TAKES

ERT will a dhere to the requirements as set forth in the following documents, as applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the ESA as a result of the operations

conducted herein:

 NTL 2007

- G04, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead P rotected Species Reporting

 NTL 2007

- G03, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

 NTL 2007

- G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program”Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page M

- 1

Supplemental D OCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) A PPENDIX M

RELATED FACILITIES AN D OPERATIONS INFORMA TION

(A) RELATED OCS FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS Full well stream production from the subject subsea well will flow to the existing Green Canyon Block 237 HP1 FPU platform via proposed 4

- inch lease term pipelines totaling approximately

2100 feet in length

. The maximum flow rate is approximately 6000 BOPD.

( B ) T RANSPORTATION SYSTEM The measured gas production will depart the Green Canyon Block 237 HP1 platform via the existing 08

- 12 pipeline (Segment No. 16124) to a subsea tie

- in point on the Enterpri se

- operated

18

- 20

- inch pipeline (Segment No. 12749) to the Ship Shoal Block 207 DWPF platform into the Manta Ray/Nautilus/Anacondo System (Operations System No. H00).

The liquid hydrocarbons from the Green Canyon Block 237 HP1 platform will be transport ed to

the Shell

- operated Green Canyon Block 19 A Boxer platform via the proposed 8

- inch oil pipeline (Segment No. 16123) where it will enter into the Phoenix Field dedicated LACT unit meter skid and be measured, for sales and royalty purposes. The measure d liquid hydrocarbons will depart the Green Canyon Block 19 A Boxer platform via the existing 12

- inch, 16

- inch or 20

- inch pipelines (Segment Nos. 11472, 7867 or 10610, respectively) for ultimate delivery to shore via Operations System No. 29.5 and/or Opera tions System No. 36.5.

No new nearshore or onshore pipelines or facilities will be constructed.

( C) PRODUCED LIQUID HYDROCARBONS TRANSPORTATION VESSELS

T here will not be any transfers of liquid hydrocarbons other than via pipeline.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page N

- 1 Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX N

SUPP ORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

( A ) GENERAL

Type Maximum Fuel

Tank Capacity Maximum

Number in Area at Any Time Trip

Frequency or

Duration

Tug Boats 100,000 gallons 3 2 trips/wk

Anchor Handling Boat NA NA NA

Crew Boat 27,000 gallons 1 Daily

Supp ly Boat 159,000 gallons 1 Daily

Helicopter 380 gallons 1 Daily

The most practical, direct route from the shorebase as permitted by weather and traffic

conditions will be utilized.

( B ) DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS Diesel oil supply vessels information is not required by BOEMRE to be included in this plan.

( C ) DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION Drilling fluid transportation information is not required by BOEMRE to be included in this plan.

( D ) S OLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION Solid and liquid was te transportation information is not required by BOEMRE to be included in this plan.

( E ) VICINITY MAP

Enclosed as Attachment N

- 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the activities proposed

herein relative to the shoreline with the distance of the proposed activities from the shoreline and the primary route(s) of the support vessels and aircraft that will be used when traveling between the onshore support facilities and the Green Canyon Block 237 SSWell No. 006.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page P

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX O

ONSHORE SUPPORT FACIL ITIES INFORMATION

( A ) GENERAL

Name Location Existing/New/Modified

Halliburton Dock F ourchon

, LA Existing

( B ) SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will we expand the existing

sh orebase as a result of the operations proposed in this DOCD.

( C ) SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will we expand the existing shorebase as a result of the operations propos ed in this DOCD.

( D) WASTE DISPOSALEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page P

- 1

Supplemental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX P

CO ASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT (CZMA) INFORMATION

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for Louisiana. A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of L ouisiana is enclosed as Attachment P

- 1

.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 1

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX Q

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (EIA)

(A) IMPACT PRODUCING FAC TORS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Environment

Resources Impact Producing Factors (IPFs) Categories and Examples Refer to recent GOM OCS Lease Sale EIS for a more complete list of IPFs

Emissions (air, noise, light, etc.) Effluents

(muds, cutting, other discharges to

the water

column or seafloor) Physical

disturbances to the seafloor (rig or

anchor emplace ments, etc.) Wastes sent

to shore for

treatment or disposal Accidents

(e.g., oil spills,

chemical spills, H 2 S releases) Discarded

Trash &

Debris

Site

- specific at Offshore

Location

Designated topographic features (1) (1) (1)

Pinnacle Tre nd area live bottoms (2) (2) (2)

Eastern Gulf live bottoms (3) (3) (3)

Benthic communities (4)

Water quality X X

Fisheries X X

Marine Mammals X(8) X X(8) X

Sea Turtles X(8) X X(8) X

Air quality X(9)

Shipwreck sites (know n or potential) (7)

Prehistoric archaeological sites (7)

Vicinity of Offshore Location

Essential fish habitat X X(6)

Marine and pelagic birds X X

Public health and safety (5)

Coastal and Onshore

Bea ches X(6) X

Wetlands X(6)

Shore birds and coastal nesting

birds X6)

Coastal wildlife refuges

Wilderness areas

Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

1) Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topog raphic feature. Specifically, if the well or platform site or any

anchors will be on the seafloor within the:Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 2

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) o 4

- mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks, or the 3

- mile zone of Stetson Bank;

o 1000

- m, 1

- mile or 3

- mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine b ank) protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease;

o Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 ft. from any no

- activity zone; or

o Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft. buffer zone) with relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease.

2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS lease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seafloor habitats are protected by the Live Bottom (Low

- Relief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 4) Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being in water depths 300 meters or greater. 5) Exploration or production activit ies where H2S concentrations greater than 500 ppm might be encountered. 6) All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydrocarbons or diesel fuel that you determine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed ac tion is located a sufficient distance from a resource that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 7) All activities that involve seafloor disturbances, including anchor emplacements, in any OCS block designated by the

BOEM as havin g high

- probability for the occurrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such blocks that will be affected that are adjacent to the lease block in which your planned activity will occur. If the proposed activities are

located a sufficient dista nce from a shipwreck or a prehistoric site that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in

a sentence or two. 8) All activities that you determine might have an adverse effect on endangered or threatened marine mammals or sea

turtles or their critical ha bitats. 9) Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle tankers or barges.

(B) A NALYSIS

Site

- Specific at Green Canyon Block 237

Proposed operations consist of the drilling, completion, and production of Subsea Well No.006.

The operations will be conducted with a dynamically positioned semisubmersible.

1. Designated Topographic Features
Potential IPFs on topographic features include effluents, and accidents.

Effluents: Green Canyon Block 237 is 164 miles from the closest designated Topographic Features Stipulation Block (Ewing

- 1 Bank); therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to stati stics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to benthic organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth , the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on corals. Because the crests of topographic features in the Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface spill could reach their sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a topographic area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 3

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities, which could impact topographic features.

2. Pinnacle Trend Area Live Bottoms
Potential IPFs on pi nnacle trend area live bottoms include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Green Canyon Block 237 is 189 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accident al surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spills have the potential to foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal effects on live bottom organisms. Oil from a su rface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on marine organ isms. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area.

3. Eastern Gulf Live Bottoms

Potential IPFs on Eastern Gulf live bottoms include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Green Canyon Block 237 is not located in an area characterized by the existence of live bottoms; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accide ntal surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to live bottom organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an

effect on marine invertebrates. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions , physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live bottom area.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 4

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) 4. Benthic Communities There are no IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to benthic communities.

A Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant a mount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible, ERT’s proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 would not cause impacts to benthic communities

.

5. Water Quality
IPFs that could result in water quality degradation from the proposed operations in Green Canyon

Block 237 include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Levels of contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced water discharges

, discharge

- rate restrictions and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to water quality.

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter offshore water quality; however, it is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities. Between 1980 and 2000, OCS operations produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and spilled only 0.001 percent of this oil, or 1 bbl for every 81,000 bbl produced. The spill risk related to a diesel spill from drilling operations is even less. Between 1976 and 1985, (years for which data were collected), there were 80 reported diesel spills greater than one barrel associated with drilling activities. Considering that there were 11,944 wells drilled, this is a 0.7 percent probability of an occurrence. If a spill were to occur, the water quality of marine waters would be temporarily affected by the dissolved components and small oil droplets. Dispersion by currents and microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column and dilute the constituents to background levels. Historically, changes in offshor e water quality from oil spills have only been detected during the life of the spill and up to several months afterwards. Most of the components of oil are insoluble in water and therefore float. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to water quality.

6. Fisheries
IPFs that could cause impacts to fisheries as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon

Block 237 include effluents and accidents.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 5

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Effluents: Effluents such as drilling fluids and cuttings discharges con tain components and properties which are detrimental to fishery resources. Moderate petroleum and metal contamination of sediments

and the water column can occur out to several hundred meters down

- current from the discharge point. Offshore discharges are expected to disperse and dilute to very near background levels in the water column or on the seafloor within 3,000 m of the discharge point, and are expected to have negligible

effect on fisheries.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on fisheries; however, it is unlikely that such an event would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). The effects of oil on mobile adult finfish or shellfish would likely be sublethal and the

ext ent of damage would be reduced to the capacity of adult fish and shellfish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydrocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (re fer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

There are no IPFs from emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor or wastes sent to shore for disposal from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to fisheries.

7. Marine Mammals

GulfCet II s tudies revealed that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf

- edge were almost exclusively bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. Squid eaters, including dwarf and pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough

- toothed dolphin, and Cuvier’s beake d whale, occurred most frequently along the upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones. IPFs that could cause impacts to marine mammals as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and de bris, and accidents.

Emissions: Noises from drilling activities, support vessels and helicopters may elicit a startle reaction from marine mammals. This reaction may lead to disruption of marine mammals’ normal activities. Stress may make them more vu lnerable to parasites, disease, environmental contaminants, and/or predation (Majors and Myrick, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence for long

- term displacements and population trends for marine mammals relative to noise.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components which may be detrimental to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey i tems or possibly through ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989).

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of debris have caused the death or serious injury of marine mammals (Laist, 1997; MMC, 1999). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm marine mammals. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V andEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 6

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maint aining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and pa ckaging materials, particularly those

made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All off shore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think A bout It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease opera tor management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management

in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and cetaceans would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to marine mammals is p ossible. Contract vessel operators can avoid marine mammals and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for marine mammals and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to help identify th e twenty

- eight species of whales and dolphins, and the single species of manatee that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected marine mammal species immediately, regardless of whethe r the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404

- 3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824

- 5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862

- 2850. In addition, if the i njury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding

network as needed.

Oil spills have the potential to cause sublethal oil

- related injuries and spill

- related deaths to marine mammals. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic in the area, which could add to changes in cetacean behavior and/or distribution, thereby causing additional st ress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chemicals included in ERT’s OSRP is considered to be low when compared with the constituents and fractions of crude oils and diesel product s. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s OSRP (refer to information submitted in accordance with Appendix I ).Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 7

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impac t marine mammals.

8. Sea Turtles
IPFs that could cause impacts to sea turtles as a result of the proposed operations include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. GulfCet II studies sighted most loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and lea therback sea turtles over shelf waters. Historically these species have been sighted up to the shelf’s edge. They appear to be more abundant east of the Mississippi River than they are west of the river (Fritts et al., 1983b; Lohoefener et al., 1990). De ep waters may be used by all species as a transitory habitat.

Emissions: Noise from drilling activities, support vessels, and helicopters may elicit a startle reaction from sea turtles, but this is a temporary disturbance.

Effluents: Drilling fluids an d cuttings discharges are not known to be lethal to sea turtles. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items or possibly throu gh ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989).

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of, debris have caused the death or serious injury of sea turtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from

the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm sea turtles. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by variou s agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: Th e Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their co mmitment to waste management

in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 8

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and sea turtles would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to sea turtles is possible. Contract vessel operators can a void sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to help identify the five species of sea turtles that may be enco untered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected sea turtle species immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotlin e at (888) 404

- 3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824

- 5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862

- 2850. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding network as needed.

Al l sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerable to the harmful effects of oil through direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fatal, particularly to juveniles and hatchlings. However, it is unlikely that an accidental o il spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to

Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic in the area, which could add to the possibility of collisions with sea turtles. The activities proposed in this pl an will be covered by ERT’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Appendix I ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impact sea turt les.

9. Air Quality
The projected air emissions identified in Appendix H are not expected to affect the OCS air quality primarily due to distance to the shore or to any Prevention of Significant Deterioration Class I air quality area such as the Breton Wi lderness Area. Green Canyon Block 237 is beyond the 200 kilometer (124 mile) buffer for the Breton Wilderness Area and is 91 miles from the coastline. Therefore, no special mitigation, monitoring, or reporting requirements apply with respect to air

emiss ions.

Accidents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, these releases would not impact onshore air quality because of the prevailing atmospheric conditions, emission height, emissi on rates, and the distance of Green Canyon Block 237 from the coastline. There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a ir quality.

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential)
Potential IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 include disturbances to the seafloor.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 9

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Physical disturbances to the sea floor: A Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible, ERT’s proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 would not cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

Additionally, Green Canyon Block 237 is not located in or adjacent to an OCS block designated by BOEM as having a high probability for occurrence of shipwrecks, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

ERT will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencemen t of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine archaeologist and by ERT to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources, including historic shipwrecks. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, ERT will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent t o shore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites Potential IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 include disturbances to the seafloor.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of sea floor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a Dynamically Positioned Semisubmersible, ERT’s proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 237 would not cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological site s.

ERT will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized ma rine archaeologist and by ERT to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, ERT will contact the

BOEM immediatel y and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 10

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Additionally, Green Canyon Block 237 is located outside the Archaeological Prehistoric high probability line, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

There are no othe r IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities which could impact prehistoric archeological sites.

Vicinity of Offshore Location

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

IPFs t hat could cause impacts to EFH as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block

237 include effluents and accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and marine waters and substrates in the

Gulf of Mexico.

Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief St ipulation, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation, and the Eastern Gulf Pinnacle Trend Stipulation would prevent most of the potential impacts on live

bottom communities and EFH from operational waste discharges. Levels of contaminants in drilling

mu ds and cuttings and produced

- water discharges, discharge

- rate restrictions, and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are not exp ected to cause significant adverse impacts to EFH.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on EFH. Oil spills that contact coastal bays and estuaries, as well as OCS waters when pelagic eggs and larvae are present, have the greatest potential to affect fisheries. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refe r to information submitted in Appendix I ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact essential fish habitat.

2. Marine and Pelagic Birds
IPFs that could impact marine birds as a result of the proposed activities include air emissions, accidental oil spills, and discarded trash and debris from vessels and the facilities.

Emissions: Emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere from these activities are far below

concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 11

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Accidents: An oil spill would cause localized, low

- level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). Marine and pelagic birds feeding at the spill location may experience chronic, nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected that few, if any, coastal and marine birds would actually

be aff ected to that extent. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

Discarded trash and debris : Marine and pelagic birds could become entangled and snared in

discarded trash an d debris, or ingest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and death. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste manageme nt plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials,

pa rticularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, includ ing contractors and other support services

related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “A ll Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator management that emp hasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01. Debris, if any, from these proposed activities will seldom interact with marine and pelagic birds; therefore, the effects will be negligible.

There are no other IPFs (inclu ding effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact marine and pelagic

birds.

3. Public Health and Safety Due to Accidents.

There are no IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal or accidents, including an accidental H 2 S release) from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to public health and safety. In accordance with NTL No.’s 2008

- G04,

2009

- G27, and 2009

- G31, sufficient information is included in Appendix D to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H 2 S absent.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 12

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Coastal and Onshore

1. Beaches
IPFs from the proposed activities that coul d cause impacts to beaches include accidents (oil spills) and

discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: Oil spills contacting beaches would have impacts on the use of recreational beaches and associated resources. Due to the distance from shore (91 miles ) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

Discarded trash and debri s: Trash on the beach is recognized as a major threat to the enjoyment and use of beaches. There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debri s as mandated by

MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accorda nce with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of

solid waste . Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on wast e procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore person nel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management

in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturba nces to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact beaches.

2. Wetlands
IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil spills) and

discard ed trash and debris.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 13

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Accidents: It is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (91 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

Discarded trash and debris: There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) a nd the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent

materi als such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicop ter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will v iew the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management

in accordance with NTL No. 20 12

- G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact wetlands.

3. Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds

Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Given the distance from shore (91 miles) and the response capabi lities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

Discarded trash and debris: Coastal and marine birds are highly sus ceptible to entanglement in floating, submerged, and beached marine debris: specifically plastics. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and re gulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining

wast e management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such asEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 14

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging m aterials, particularly those made of non

biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore p ersonnel, including contractors and other support services

related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It ” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator man agement that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed ac tivities that could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds.

4. Coastal Wildlife Refuges

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges. However, it is unlikely that an oil s pill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (91 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be cove red by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Appendix I ).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining wa ste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the designated lease operator m anagement that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 15

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges.

5. Wilderness Areas

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to wilderness areas. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the pr oposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area (164 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. The activities proposed i n this plan will be covered by ERT’s Regional OSRP (refer to information

submitted in Appendix I).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Resea rch and Control Act and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ERT will operate in accordance with the regulations and

also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of s mall items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation cap abilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint pres entation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from ERT management or the des ignated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disp osal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wilderness

areas.

6. Other Environmental Resources Identified There are no other environmental resources identified for this impact assessment.

(C) IMPACTS ON PROPOSED ACTIVITIES

The site

– spe cific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed activities. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site

- specific environmental conditions.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 16

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) (D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD S During the hurricane season, June through N ovember, the Gulf of Mexico is impacted by an average of ten tropical storms (39

- 73 mph winds), of which six become hurricanes ( > 74 mph winds) . Due to its location in the gulf, Green Canyon Block 237 may experience hurricane and tropical storm force

wind s, and related sea currents. These factors can adversely impact the integrity of the operations covered by this plan. A significant storm may present physical hazards to operators and vessels, damage exploration or production equipment, or result in the re lease of hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Additionally, the displacement of equipment may disrupt the local benthic habitat and pose a threat to local species.

The following preventative measures included in this plan may be implemented to mi tigate these impacts:

1. Drilling & completion

a. Secure well

b. Secure rig / platform

c. Evacuate personnel Drilling activities will be conducted in accordance with NTL No.’s 2008

- G09, 2009

- G10, and 2010

- N10.

2. Platform / Strucure Installation Operator will not c onduct platform / structure installation operations during Tropical

Storm or Hurricane threat.

3. Pipeline Installation Operator will not conduct pipeline installation operations during Tropical Storm or

Hurricane threat.

(E) ALTERNATIVES

No alternat ives to the proposed activities were considered to reduce environmental impacts.

(F) MITIGATION MEASURES

No mitigation measures other than those required by regulation will be employed to avoid, diminish, or eliminate potential impacts on environmental re sources.

(G) CONSULTATION

No agencies or persons were consulted regarding potential impacts associated with the proposed activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided.Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 17

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) (H) PREPARER(S) Evan Connolly J. Connor Consulting, Inc.

162 25 Park Ten Place, Suite 700
Houston, TX 77084 (281) 578

- 3388 Evan.connolly@jccteam.com

(I) REFERENCES

Authors:

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1989. Effects of offshore petroleum operations on cold water

marine mammals: a literature review. Wash ington, DC: American Petroleum Institute. 385 pp.

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on marine turtles: entanglement and ingestion. In: Shomura, R.S. and H.O. Yoshida, eds. Proceedings, Workshop on the Fate and Impact of Marine Debris, 26

- 29 Novem ber 1984, Honolulu, HI. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA

- TM

NMFS

- SWFC

- 54. Pp 387

- 429.

Burke, C.J. and J.A. Veil. 1995. Potential benefits from regulatory consideration of synthetic drilling muds. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne Na tional Laboratory, ANL/EAD/TM

- 43.

Daly, J.M. 1997. Controlling the discharge of synthetic

- based drilling fluid contaminated cuttings in waters of the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Work Plan,
June 24, 1997.

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sensitivity of seabird populations in Alaska to oil pollution. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLM

- YK

- ES

- 81

- 006

- 1792.

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: entanglement of marine life in marine debris including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, J.M. and D.B. Rogers, eds. Marine debris: sources, impacts, and solutions. New York, NY: Springer

- Verlag. Pp.

99

- 139.

Majors, A. P. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. 1990. Effects of noise on animals: implications for dolphins exposed to seal bombs in the eastern tropical Pacific purse

- seine fishery

– an annotated bibliography. NOAA Administrative Report LJ

- 90

- 06.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. Annual report to Congress

– 1998.

Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler, M. Kendziorek, and D.R. Nysewander. 1990. Immediate impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on marine birds. The Auk. 107 (2): 387

- 397Energy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page Q

- 18

Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vau k

- Hentzelt. 1989. Losses of seabirds by oil pollution at the German North Sea coast. Topics in Marine Biology. Ros, J.D, ed. Scient. Mar. 53 (2

- 3): 749

- 754.

Vermeer, K. and R. Vermeer, 1975 Oil threat to birds on the Canadian west coast. The Canadian

Fi eld

- Naturalist. 89:278

- 298.

Although not cited, the following were utilized in preparing this EIA:

 Hazard Surveys

 BOEM EIS’s:

o GOM Deepwater Operations and Activities. Environmental Assessment. BOEM 2000

- 001

GOM Central and Western Planning Areas Sales 16 6 and 168 Final Environmental Impact Statement.

BOEMEnergy Resource Technology GOM, Inc. Page R

- 1 Supple mental DOCD April 1, 2012 Green Canyon Block 237 (OCS

- G 15563 ) APPENDIX R

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

( A ) EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION The proposed bottom

- hole locations of the planned well (s) have been removed from the public information copy of the DOCD as well as any discussions of the target objectives, geologic or geophysical data, and any interpreted geology.

(B) BIBLIOGRAPHY Not applicable.