UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MEMORANDUM

To: Public Information (MS 5030)

Plans Section, Office of Field 

Operations (MS 5231)

Public Information copy of Exploration Plan

Control # - S-07724

Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan

Lease(s) - OCS-G08484 Block - 84 Mississippi Canyon Area

OCS-G08797 Block - 85 Mississippi Canyon Area

OCS-G10977 Block - 129 Mississippi Canyon Area

Operator - Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

Drill,complete,test,flare and install subsea wells C,D,E,F,G

Not Found

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.

Tommy Hoke

Plan Coordinator

Description -

Rig Type -

Subject:

From:

March 3, 2015
Record of Changes-PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY

S-7724, Exploration Plan, Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas LLC, (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977, Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129)

Date Section Page Remarks

12/16/2014 All All Plan received by BOEM

12/29/2014 1 p. 2 Storage tank table line 7 total capacity amended to 640.4 bbl.

1/6/2015 1 p. 2 Storage tank table line 6 total capacity amended to 890.6 BBLS.

1/6/2015 6 Attachment 6-A Water-based drilling fluid amended to 50,000 BBLS/WELL at discharge rate of 7,143 

BBLS/DAY.

1/6/2015 12 Attachment 12-A Synthetic-based drilling fluid amended to 24,500 BLS/SWELL transported in tanks in 

support vessels to MI-Swaco in Fourchon, LA and Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based 

fluid amended to 1,700 BBLS/WELL transported in cuttings boxes on supply boat to 

Newpark Environmental Services in Fourchon, LA. 

1/14/2015 1 p. 1 Amended Plan Information section to use of "two dynamically positioned drillships, both 

similar to Transocean Deepwater Champion". 

1/14/2015 7 Attachment 7-A Amended to show horsepower for two drillships.

2/19/2015 1 p. 1 Plan Information amended to two drillships, both similar to Noble Sam Croft. 

2/19/2015 1 Attachment 1-A Drilling Rig Names amended to two drillships, both similar to Noble Sam Croft. 

2/19/2015 7 Attachment 7-A Amended to two drillships, both similar to Noble Sam Croft with Noble Sam Croft actual 

horsepower and highest monthly average fuel use (including transit from Korea to GOM). 

Noble Sam Croft and sister ship, Noble Tom Madden, both under contract 2015-2020 by 

FM O&G. 
PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY

December 15, 2014

SUPPLEMENTAL UNIT

EXPLORATION PLAN

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129

OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977

Mississippi Canyon Block 84 Unit (Unit Agreement # 754396002)

King Prospect

Affected State: Alabama

Estimated Startup Date: September 24, 2015

SUBMITTED BY:

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

400 E. Kaliste Saloom, Suite 1100

Lafayette, Louisiana 70508

Paul Landry

Office: (337) 354-5065

Mobile: (337) 349-7781

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE:

Jean Martin 

J. Connor Consulting, Inc.

16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700

Houston, Texas 77084

(281) 698-8544

jean.martin@jccteam.com
TOC Pg 1 of 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 PLAN CONTENTS.................................................................................................1

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 1

1.2 LOCATION....................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES .................................................. 1

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS......................................................... 2

1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES ........................................................................ 2

1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES ............................................................................................... 2

1.7 COST RECOVERY FEE................................................................................................... 3

SECTION 2 GENERAL INFORMATION....................................................................................4

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS ...................................................................................... 4

2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS ........................................................................................................... 4

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY............................................................................... 4

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT .................................................................................................. 4

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR) .......................................................... 4

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT................................................................ 4

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS................. 5

SECTION 3 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION..........................................8

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION......................................................................................... 8

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS...................................................................................... 8

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINES ..................................................................................... 8

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS-SECTIONS .......................................................... 8

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT ...................................................................................... 8

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENTS........................................................................... 8

3.7 HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES ............................................................................. 8

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN ............................................................................................ 8

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLE........................................................................................ 8

SECTION 4 HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION ................................................................9

4.1 CONCENTRATION .......................................................................................................... 9

4.2 CLASSIFICATION............................................................................................................ 9
TOC Pg 2 of 3

4.3 H2S CONTINGENCY PLAN............................................................................................. 9

4.4 MODELING REPORT....................................................................................................... 9

SECTION 5 BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION.................10

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES .......................................................................10

5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)...........................................................................10

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING)..............................................10

5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES) ........................................................10

5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) .....................................................................................10

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP..........................................10

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS ...................................................10

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND MARINE 

MAMMAL INFORMATION ..............................................................................................11

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT........................................................................................12

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION ................................................................12

SECTION 6 WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION...................................................13

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES............................................................................13

6.2 MODELING REPORT......................................................................................................13

SECTION 7 AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION ........................................................................14

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS ......................................14

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION ............................................................................................14

SECTION 8 OIL SPILL INFORMATION ..................................................................................15

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING ................................................................................15

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES...............................................................................................15

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION....................................................................................................15

8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION...............................................................15

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION ............................................................................16

8.6 MODELING REPORT......................................................................................................16

SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION ............................................17

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS ...............................................................................................17

9.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES.......................................................................................................17

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY....................................17

SECTION 10 LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION ..........................................................18

10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA) .............................................................................18
TOC Pg 3 of 3

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES .................................................................................18

10.3 PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES................................................19

SECTION 11 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION .......................20

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS ......................20

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES.....................................................................................................20

SECTION 12 SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION ...................................21

12.1 GENERAL .....................................................................................................................21

2.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS.....................................................................................21

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION .........................................................................21

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION .......................................................21

12.5 VICINITY MAP...............................................................................................................21

SECTION 13 ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION.........................................22

13.1 GENERAL .....................................................................................................................22

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION .................................................22

13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE.............................22

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL.......................................................................................................22

SECTION 14 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION.....................23

SECTION 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS...........................................................25

SECTION 16 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION...................................................................26

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION................................................................26

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................26
Attachments Pg 1 of 1

SECTION ATTACHMENTS

Section 1 Plan Contents

1-A OCS Plan Information Form

1-B Well Location Plat

1-C Bathymetry Map

1-E Pay.gov Receipt

Section 3 Geological, Geophysical Information

3-D Shallow Hazard Assessment

Section 5 Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

5-A Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas Map

Section 6 Wastes and Discharges Information

6-A Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to 

the GOM 

Section 7 Air Emissions Information

7-A Emissions Worksheets

Section 8 Oil Spill Information

8-A Oil Spill Response Discussion

Section 12 Support Vessels and Aircraft Information

12-A Waste You Will Transport and/or Dispose Onshore 

12-B Vicinity Map

Section 14 Coastal Zone Management Act Information

14-A Coastal Zone Consistency Certification, Alabama

Section 15 Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA)

15-A Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA)
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 1 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 1

PLAN CONTENTS

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION

The drilling of four wells in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 127 and 129 was approved in Initial 

EP (Control No. N-4208) on January 24, 1992. The drilling of one well in Mississippi Canyon 

Block 84 was approved in Supplemental EP (Control No. S-3630) on May 31, 1995. The drilling, 

completion and installation of subsea trees for two wells was approved in Supplemental EP 

(Control No. S-7638) on June 11, 2014. Three exploratory wells have been drilled. Two were 

plugged and abandoned and one was completed and is producing. Currently, Well Location B, 

provided for in EP (Control No. S-7638), is being drilled. 

Mississippi Canyon Block 84 Unit (King), Unit Agreement No. 754396002, was amended on 

April 1, 2003 to include portions of Mississippi Canyon Block 84 (OCS-G 08484), Mississippi 

Canyon Block 85 (OCS-G 08797) and Mississippi Canyon Block 129 (OCS-G 10977). All three 

King Unit blocks have been placed on continuous production. On November 29, 2013, FreeportMcMoran Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G), Operator No. 03280, was designated Operator of 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129. 

Under this Supplemental EP, FM O&G proposes to drill, complete, test, flare and install subsea 

wellheads for five additional well locations in 5,365 feet of water in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 

84, 85 and 129 (OCS-G Leases 08484, 08797 and 10977) using two dynamically positioned 

drillships, both similar to the Noble Sam Croft, with a subsea BOP.

The OCS Plan Information Form BOEM-137 is included as Attachment 1-A.

1.2 LOCATION

A Well Location Plat depicting the proposed surface and bottomhole locations of the proposed 

wells, measured depth/true vertical depth and water depth for each location is included as 

Attachment 1-B.

No anchors are associated with the proposed activities in this plan.

A Bathymetry Map depicting the proposed surface locations and water depth of each proposed 

well is included as Attachment 1-C.

1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES

FM O&G proposes to drill the wells with a dynamically positioned drillship which is equipped 

with a Subsea BOP. Once a rig is determined, BOP information and schematics will be 

included as a part of the Application for Permit to Drill.

The rig will be equipped with safety and fire-fighting equipment required to comply with United 

States Coast Guard (USCG) regulations. Appropriate life saving equipment such as life rafts, life 

jackets, ring buoys, etc. as prescribed by the USCG, will be maintained on the rig at all times. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 2 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

Safety features on the drilling unit will include well control, pollution prevention, and blowout 

prevention equipment as described in BSEE regulations 30 CFR 250 C, D, E, O, Q and S; and

as further clarified by BSEE Notices to Lessees, and current policy making invoked by the 

BSEE, Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). 

Pollution prevention measures include installation of curbs, gutters, drip pans, and drains on 

drilling deck areas to collect all contaminants and debris. Compliance will be maintained with the 

EPA NPDES Permit. The rig will be monitored daily and any waste or fuel resulting in pollution 

of the Gulf waters will be reported to the representative in charge for immediate isolation and 

correction of the problem. Any spill will be reported to the appropriate governmental agencies. 

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS

The table below provides storage tanks with capacity of 25 barrels or more that will store fuels, 

oil and lubricants.

Type of

Storage Tank

Type of

Facility

Tank 

Capacity 

(bbl)

Number

of Tanks

Total 

Capacity 

(bbl)

Fluid 

Gravity

(API)

Fuel oil DPDS 4,135.6 2 8,271.2 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 9,340.4 2 18,680.8 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 9,048.5 1 9,048.5 33  ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 9,043.5 1 9,043.5 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 445.3 2 890.6 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 320.2 2 640.4 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 359.8 1 359.8 33 ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 435.3 1 435.3 33  ̊

Fuel oil DPDS 59.8 1 59.8 33 ̊

Base oil DPDS 3,683.9 1 3,683.9 31 ̊

Base oil DPDS 3,687.1 1 3,687.1 31 ̊

Lube oil DPDS 429.6 1 429.6 22.3 ̊

Waste oil DPDS 132.1 1 132.1 20  ̊

Waste oil DPDS 44 1 44.0 20  ̊

Waste oil DPDS 143.4 1 143.4 20 ̊

Waste oil DPDS 1,366.2 1 1,366.2 6.5 ̊

1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES

These operations do not propose activities for which the State of Florida is an affected state.

1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES

FM O&G does not propose any additional safety, pollution prevention, or early spill detection 

measures beyond those required by 30 CFR 250.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 3 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

1.7 COST RECOVERY FEE

Documentation of the $7346 cost recovery fee payment is included as Attachment 1-D.
U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

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

Well Loc. C: Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellhead 9/24/2016 1/13/2016 111

Well Loc. D: Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellhead 1/13/2016 4/17/2016 95

Well Loc. E: Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellhead 10/18/2016 1/21/2016 95

Well Loc. G: Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellhead 1/21/2017 4/26/2017 95

Well Loc. F: Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellhead 12/28/2016 4/18/2017 111

Description of Drilling Rig Description of Structure

Jackup X Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform

Gorilla Jackup Platform rig Fixed platform Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Spar Guyed tower

DP Semisubmersible Other (Attach description) Floating production 

system Other (Attach description)

Drilling Rig Name (If known): Two dp drillships, both similar to Noble Sam Croft

Description of Lease Term Pipelines

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

NA NA NA NA

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 1 of 4

General Information

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

Company Name: Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC BOEM Operator Number: 03280

Address: 400 E. Kaliste Saloom Road, Suite 1100 Contact Person: Paul Landry

 Lafayette, LA 70508 Phone Number: (Office) 37-354-5065. (Mobile) 337-349-7781

E-Mail Address: paul_landry@fmi.com

If a service fee is required under 30 CFR 550.125(a), provide the Amount paid $7,346 Receipt No. 25IQMIBN

Project and Worst Case Discharge (WCD) Information

Leases: OCS-G 08484/08797/10977 Area: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84/85/129 Project Name (If Applicable): King

Objective(s) X Oil X Gas Sulphur Salt Onshore Support Bases: Fourchon, LA; Houma, LA

Platform / Well Name: Well Location C Total Volume of WCD: 54,570,025 bbl API Gravity: 32.8o

Distance to Closest Land (Miles): 67 mi. Volume from uncontrolled blowout: 376,345 bbl/day

OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM

OMB Control Number: 1010-0151

OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14
OCS 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): Well Location C 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. NA

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):

376,345 bbl/day

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 32.8 o

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter 

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 08484 OCS-G 08484 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon 

Block No. 84 84

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 697’ FSL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 4,809’ FEL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,325,751.24’ X:

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,486,776.42’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28o 53’ 35.531” N Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 59’ 01.142” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,403’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA TVD (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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4
OCS 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): Well Location D 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):

376,345 bbl/day

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 32.8 o

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter 

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 08484 OCS-G 08484 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon 

Block No. 84 84

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 619’ FSL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 4,886’ FEL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,325,673.45’ X: 

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,486,698.63’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28 o 53’ 34.754” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 59’ 02.010” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,404’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA TVD (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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4
OCS 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): Well Location E 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):

376,345 bbl/day

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 32.8 o

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter 

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 10977 OCS-G 08797 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon 

Block No. 129 85

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 820’ FNL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 7,480’ FEL E/W Departure

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,338,920.00” X: 

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,485,260.00’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28 o 53’ 21.573” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 56’ 32.826” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,304’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA TVD (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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4
OCS 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): Well Location F 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. Is this an existing well or structure?

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):

376,345 bbl/day

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 32.8 o

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter 

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 08484 OCS-G 08484 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon 

Block No. 84 84

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 591’ FSL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 4,774’ FEL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,325,786.59’ X: 

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,486,670.35’ Y: 

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28 o 53’ 34.483” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 59’ 00.734” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,409’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA TVD (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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4

OCS 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): Well Location G 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):

376,345 bbl/day

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 32.8 o

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter 

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 10977 OCS-G 10977 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon 

Block No. 129 129

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 820’ FNL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 7,480’ FEL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,338,920.00’ X: 

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,485,260.00’ Y: 

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28 o 53’ 21.573” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 56’ 32.826” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,304’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA TVD (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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4
OCS-G-08484 FM O&G SHEET 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G-08484 BLOCK 84, MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA 

JOB No: REVISED: DATE: FILENAME: 140310 Oct. 15, 2014 PREPARED BY: 730 E. KALISTE SALOOM RD. LAFAYETTE, LA 70508 (337) 210-0000 LA Reg. No. 330 OCS-G-08484 FM O&G MC128

MC83 MC84

MC85 

OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1 OCS-G-08484 Well No. 1 WELL "C" OCS-G-08484 2000 0 2000 SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET 
OCS-G-08484 FM O&G SHEET 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G-08484 BLOCK 84, MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA 

JOB No: REVISED: DATE: FILENAME: 140310 Oct. 15, 2014 PREPARED BY: 730 E. KALISTE SALOOM RD. LAFAYETTE, LA 70508 (337) 210-0000 LA Reg. No. 330 OCS-G-08484 FM O&G MC128

MC83 MC84

MC85 

OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1 OCS-G-08484 Well No. 1 WELL "D" OCS-G-08484 2000 0 2000 SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET 
SHEET 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G-08797 BLOCK 129, MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA 

JOB No: REVISED: DATE: FILENAME: 140310 Oct. 15, 2014 PREPARED BY: 730 E. KALISTE SALOOM RD. LAFAYETTE, LA 70508 (337) 210-0000 LA Reg. No. 330 WELL "E" OCS-G-087972000 0 2000 SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET 

OCS-G-08797 FM O&G OCS-G-10977 FM O&G MC129

MC84 MC85

DC45 OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-3 OCS-G-08797 Well No. 1 OCS-G-10977 Well No. 1 

OCS-G-10977 Well No. 3 
OCS-G-08484 FM O&G SHEET 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G-08484 BLOCK 84, MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA 

JOB No: REVISED: DATE: FILENAME: 140310 Oct. 15, 2014 PREPARED BY: 730 E. KALISTE SALOOM RD. LAFAYETTE, LA 70508 (337) 210-0000 LA Reg. No. 330 OCS-G-08484 FM O&G MC128

MC83 MC84

MC85 

OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1 OCS-G-08484 Well No. 1 WELL "F" OCS-G-08484 2000 0 2000 SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET 
SHEET 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN OCS-G-10977 BLOCK 129, MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA 

JOB No: REVISED: DATE: FILENAME: 140310 Oct. 15, 2014 PREPARED BY: 730 E. KALISTE SALOOM RD. LAFAYETTE, LA 70508 (337) 210-0000 LA Reg. No. 330 

2000 0 2000 SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET 

OCS-G-10977 FM O&G MC173

MC128 MC129

DC89 

1

Favaloro, Katharine

From: pay.gov.clev@clev.frb.org

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 9:44 AM

To: Favaloro, Katharine

Subject: Pay.gov Payment Confirmation: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF

Your payment has been submitted to Pay.gov and the details are below. If you have any questions regarding this 

payment, please contact Brenda Dickerson at (703) 787-1617 or by email at BseeAccountsReceivable@bsee.gov. 

 Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF 

 Pay.gov Tracking ID: 25IQMIBN 

 Agency Tracking ID: 74720178818 

 Transaction Type: Sale 

 Transaction Date: 12/10/2014 10:43:53 AM EST 

 

 Account Holder Name: Paul Landry 

 Transaction Amount: $7,346.00 

 Billing Address: 700 Milam, Suite 3100 

 City: Houston 

 State/Province: TX 

 Zip/Postal Code: 77002 

 Country: USA 

 Card Type: MasterCard 

 Card Number: ************4211 

 Region: Gulf of Mexico 

 Contact: Paul Landry 337-354-5065 

 Company Name/No: Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas LLC, 03280 

 Lease Number(s): 08484, 08797, 10977, , 

 Area-Block: Mississippi Canyon MC, 84: Mississippi Canyon MC, 85: Mississippi Canyon MC, 129: , : , 

 Surface Locations: 2 

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 4 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 2

GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS

The table below provides all additional applications to be filed covering operations proposed in 

this EP.

Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status

Applications for Permit to Drill BSEE To be submitted

Applications for Permit to Modify BSEE To be submitted

Emergency Evacuation Plans USCG To be submitted

2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS 

The table below provides the types and estimated volumes of the drilling fluids FM O&G plans

to use to drill the proposed wells. 

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be

Used per Well (bbl)

Water-based (seawater, freshwater, barite) 50,000

Oil-based (diesel, mineral oil) 0

Synthetic-based (internal olefin, ester) 31,000

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY

[PROPRIETARY]

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT

The bond requirements for the activities and facilities proposed in this EP are satisfied by an 

area-wide bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR 556, Subpart I; NTL No. 2000-

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

from providing additional security under 30 CFR 556.53(d) and National NTL No. 2008-N07, 

“Supplemental Bond Procedures.” If at any point Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC no longer 

qualifies for a supplemental bonding deferment, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC will either 

provide the required additional security or a third party guarantee within 60 days after such 

disqualification.

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Company No. 03280) will demonstrate oil spill financial 

responsibility for the facilities proposed in this EP according to 30 CFR 553; and NTL No. 2008-

N05, "Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for Covered Facilities" prior to conducting 

operations covered in this EP.

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT 

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Company No. 03280) has the financial capability to drill a 

relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 5 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS

The Worst Case Discharge is defined as an uncontrolled blowout through the drilling string 

during drilling operations.

The highest Worst Case Discharge in this Exploration Plan is for MC 84 Well Location C. 

Estimated Initial Flow Rate (bbls/day): 376,345 bbl/day

Maximum duration of potential blowout (days): 145 days

Total Volume (bbls) (flow rate x duration): 54,570,025 bbl

Discussion of potential for well to bridge over: While the sands to be encountered by the 

wells in this EP are expected to be slightly consolidated, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM 

O&G) does NOT assume that the proposed well would bridge over in a blowout scenario. The 

basis for this assumption comes from work done in association with Society of Petroleum 

Engineers (SPE) Paper # 163438 on the analysis of potential bridging scenarios during blowout 

events in the deepwater GOM. FM O&G agrees with the conclusions of this SPE paper that the 

only instances in which a deepwater well could potentially bridge over is a complete loss of the 

marine riser hydrostatic column resulting in a sharp pressure reduction downhole leading to 

wellbore collapse before a blowout can fully develop. This bridging would occur quickly before 

large volumes of hydrocarbons could escape. As FM O&G does not consider this bridging 

method to cover all potential blowout scenarios in the proposed well all Worst Case Discharge 

calculations will be based upon a well blowing out unimpeded until a relief well can be 

completed.

Discussion of likelihood for surface intervention to stop blowout: Prior to any surface 

intervention operations a team of specialists would be mobilized immediately to assess the 

situation and determine a corrective course of action to control the blowout. Well control 

specialists would perform either a fly‐by via helicopter and/or surface vessel to assess 

conditions at the site. FM O&G has Master Service Agreements with both Wild Well Control (a 

Superior Energy Services company) and Boots and Coots (a Halliburton company). Additionally

an ROV capable of manipulating the rig’s BOP hot‐stab functions would be mobilized to location 

and, if appropriate, an attempt would be made to shut in the well by closing the blind shear rams 

if not done previously. These actions would take place within 24 ‐ 48 hours of the incident. Initial 

assessment activities are projected to take 3 – 5 days. During this period, the well control team 

would analyze the blowout situation, devise an intervention strategy and mobilize additional 

service company specialists, supplies and equipment. FM O&G would establish a field support 

base and secondary command center in the company owned shore base facility in Fourchon, 

LA. Communication would simultaneously be established with the support base and command 

center.

Surface intervention would be the preferred method of intervention pending an uncontrolled 

blowout; however, the technique used would be contingent upon the condition of the rig, marine 

riser system and BOP equipment. Surface intervention is a quicker solution than drilling a relief 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 6 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

well, but actual methodology of controlling the blowout would have to be determined pending an 

analysis of the site-specific conditions at the location. 

Relief Well

Discussion of Drilling a Relief Well: FM O&G has the financial capability to drill a relief well 

and conduct other emergency well control operations. Should a relief well be necessary, there 

are deepwater rigs rated and equipped to drill in water depth of 10,000 feet or greater actively 

working in the Gulf of Mexico. Since all rigs proposed for drilling a relief well are dynamically 

positioned MODUs the time necessary to mobilize the rig to location is minimal. The time 

required to drill the relief well is dependent on many factors, chief among them is the required 

depth of the relief well. The deepest anticipated depth of the relief well would be when an 

intersection is required with the blown‐out well at its final target depth (TD). The total days 

estimated to drill an example well to potential target depth (PTD) is 95 days. The probably 

directional nature of the relief well could nominally increase its measured depth compared to the 

blowout well. In order to intersect the blowout well, numerous ranging runs would be required 

which will add approximately three weeks to the drilling program. The steps and time required to 

accomplish the dynamic kill are also dependent on the particular circumstances of the blowout 

well. 

Rig type capable of drilling relief well at water depth and to TD: There are more than 10 

drilling rigs currently working or slated to begin work in the Gulf of Mexico that are capable of 

drilling a relief well at these locations.

Rig package constraints: The rig chosen to drill the relief well must:

• Be rated and equipped to work in water depths of 10,000’ due to Mississippi Canyon

Blocks 84, 85 and 129 deepwater locations.

• Dynamically‐positioned to eliminate anchoring issues due to nearby subsea 

infrastructure. 

• Have a BOP package acceptable and certified under current BSEE regulations.

Time to acquire rig, move onsite and drill relief well (days): 

Activity Duration (days)

Assess the situation and obtain the optimum MODU 5

Secure the well at current location of MODU 14

Mobilization time to relief well location 3

Drill relief well 95

Wellbore intersection (of blown out well) 21

Dynamic kill operations 7

Total Anticipated Time 145

Statement whether possibility of using nearby platform was considered: There are no 

facilities within the surrounding blocks of Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 that could 

be used to drill a relief well. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 7 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

Other Measures to enhance ability to prevent a blowout: 

• FM O&G will verify with the contractor that all BOPs have been certified, maintained and 

are capable of operating in the anticipated conditions required for operations.

• FM O&G representatives will review and witness the installation, testing, function testing 

and operation of the diverter system and diverter outlets. 

• Key personnel on the rig will have a valid well control certificate.

• Wiper trips will be performed as hole conditions dictate in order to quantify the stability of 

the wellbore and to determine whether sufficient mud weights are being utilized.

• Connections will be simulated as needed while drilling into pressure transition areas in 

order to properly assess the current wellbore conditions.

Measures to reduce the likelihood of a blowout: 

• A liner top packer or equivalent expandable will be run on all liner laps as an additional 

barrier for well safety.

• Lost circulation material will be added to the mud system in order to assist the mud 

system’s ability to prevent lost circulation. Sweeps and concentrated pills will be used to 

prevent uncontrolled mud losses.

• Every effort will be made to review all offset and seismic data in order to prepare a mud 

weight schedule that will allow for safe drilling margin without putting excess hydrostatics 

pressures on known zones previously encountered.

• Mudloggers may be utilized during critical drilling operations to monitor gas content of 

mud returns, formation characteristics and abnormalities of cuttings and to estimate 

paleo aging of cuttings.

• Logging While Drilling (LWD) tools will be utilized as much as possible to evaluate 

formations, formation pressures and fluid content in the critical sections of the well.

• Log data will be continuously reviewed by FM O&G’s drilling and geological 

departments.

Measures to enhance ability to conduct effective and early intervention in event of a 

blowout: FM O&G is a member of the Helix Well Containment Group (HWCG) and has full 

access to a subsea capping stack and a complete suite of oil recovery equipment as required. 

This subsea capping stack has been deployed successfully to a well location with cooperation 

from BSEE.

Arrangements for drilling relief wells: FM O&G has Master Service Agreements with both 

Wild Well Control (a Superior Energy Services company) and Boots and Coots (a Halliburton 

company) who would assist in detailed relief well planning including the identification of required 

equipment and services. 

Any other measures: No
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 3 – Pg. 8 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 3

GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

[PROPRIETARY] 

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS

[PROPRIETARY]

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINES

[PROPRIETARY]

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS-SECTIONS 

[PROPRIETARY]

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT

Shallow hazards surveys were conducted over Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129.

In accordance with NTL No. 2008-G05, “Shallow Hazards Program” (Extended by NTL No. 

2014-G05, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”), shallow hazards surveys evaluating 

seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions that may adversely 

affect drilling operations, were conducted by C&C Technologies. The shallow hazards report for 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 were provided with EP (Control No. S-7638) approved 

June 11, 2014 and for Mississippi Canyon Block 129 with EP (Control No. S-7147) approved 

September 24, 2009. 

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENTS

In accordance with NTL No. 2008-G05, “Shallow Hazards Program,” (Extended by NTL No. 

2014-G05, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”), a shallow hazards assessment has been 

prepared for each proposed surface location evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and 

manmade features and conditions that may adversely affect drilling operations. The shallow 

hazards assessments are included as Attachment 3-D.

3.7 HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES

[PROPRIETARY]

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

[PROPRIETARY]

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLE 

[PROPRIETARY]
Project No. 140310

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

July 23, 2014

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “EP C”

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to prepare 

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “EP C” location in Block 84 (OCS-G-08484), 

Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on the 

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG and a highresolution geophysical dataset collected with C&C’s Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) 

C-Surveyor IIITM. C&C completed three assessments which were utilized for this letter. The 

first, titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi

Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. The second, titled “Archaeological and Hazard 

Study, Blocks 85 and 129, Mississippi Canyon Area, Blocks 45 and 89, Desoto Canyon Area,” 

was completed in October 2007. The third, titled “Archaeological Assessment Report, King 

Field, Blocks 84 and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. This site 

clearance letter is based on the findings provided within those reports. 

This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and addresses seafloor conditions within a 

2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. The depth limit of the investigation is 

approximately 1.6 seconds of two-way traveltime (~4,000 feet) below the mud line (BML). The 

reporting and mapping presented in this letter comply with the BOEM/BSEE guidelines provided 

in NTL No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program), No. 2008-G20 (Revisions to the List of OCS 

Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports) and No. 2009-G40 

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

AUV Survey Data

C&C’s C-Surveyor IIITM AUV provided multibeam bathymetric mapping, high-resolution side 

scan sonar imagery, and subbottom profiles. The AUV remote-sensing instruments include a 

Simrad EM2000 Swath Bathymetric System (200 kHz), an EdgeTech DF4500 Side Scan Sonar 

(230 kHz with dynamic focusing), and an EdgeTech Chirp DW106 Subbottom Profiler (1.5–4.5 

kHz). All the raw digital data were logged utilizing proprietary software developed by C&C. 
Project No. 140310

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The multibeam system delivered a 3-meter gridded dataset with relative vertical accuracies 

within 20 centimeters.

The survey grid consisted of 50 north-south primary survey lines with 200 meter line spacing 

(Lines BPUSAUV07KS-0101-0150) and ten east-west tie lines spaced at 900 meters (Lines 

BPUSAUV07KS-0201-0210). Navigation fixes (event marks) were recorded continuously and 

annotated at 125-meter (410 foot) intervals along all survey lines. The survey grid was designed 

to provide a representative sampling with the subbottom profiler system and overlapping 

coverage with side scan sonar and multibeam echosounder systems.

3D Seismic Data

The 3D seismic data used for this assessment was provided in SEG-Y format. The data were 

loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. The seismic data 

volume starts at 0 seconds and extends to 5.0 seconds of two-way traveltime. The inlines of the 

3D data volume run northwest to southeast while the crosslines run southwest to northeast, 

respectively. The inlines and crosslines are both spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter) intervals. 

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

The 3D seismic data are zero phase, and the seafloor reflector is represented by a strong, positive 

amplitude peak flanked by troughs with absolute amplitude values of less than one-half of the 

peak value. The seismic data provided adequate screening of the regional seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions, and large scale geohazards (faults, salt, high acoustic impedance, 

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)

WELL LOCATION

The coordinates and calls for the proposed Well “EP C” surface location are tabulated below:

Table 1. Proposed Well “EP C”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 84,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“EP C” 1,325,751.24 10,486,776.42 28 53’ 35.531” N 87 59’ 01.142” W 697’ FSL 4,809’ FEL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is required for assessing deepwater benthic communities for 

proposed Well “EP C” (Sheet 1, Figure 2).

The geodetic datum used for this project is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) with 

the Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid. The datum is projected using the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16 North (16N) with a central meridian at 93 00’W, a false easting of 

1,640,416.67 feet at the central meridian, and a false northing of 0.00 feet at 00 00’N. All 

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study map (Sheet 

1). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 
Project No. 140310

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The study area is located in the northeastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico within the 

northeastern corner of the Mississippi Canyon Area (designated by the BOEM), on the upper 

continental slope offshore Mississippi-Louisiana. MC84 is situated on the northern most portion 

of the Mississippi Fan, 134 miles east-southeast of Fourchon, Louisiana. This area of the fan 

consists of basin-like topography, with undulating seafloor, mass wasting depositional 

sequences, channel flow systems, canyons, and salt diapiric uplift. Two types of depositional 

sequences are identified in the region, referred to as condensed and expanded sections. 

Condensed sections are deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated 

hemipelagic clays. The expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of 

rapidly accumulated, coarse-grained clastic deposits (sands and gravels) of variable thickness. 

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP C” surface location is 5,403 feet below sea level 

(BSL). Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “EP C” location, the 

seafloor depth ranges from 5,360 feet in the north to 5,432 feet in the south (Sheet 1, Panel 1, 

Color Shaded Bathymetry Map). The seafloor is smooth to slightly undulating in the vicinity of 

the proposed well location (Figure 2), and slopes southeast at a gradient of less than 1°.

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 1, Panel 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range 

of low to moderate acoustic amplitudes within the 2,000-foot radius area. These low to moderate 

seafloor amplitudes indicate finely textured seafloor sediments that are likely comprised of 

hemipelagic clay. The side scan sonar mosaic and multibeam backscatter images agree with 

these findings (Sheet 1, Panel 2). 

One sonar contact was identified 1,042 feet southeast of the proposed well location, and 

measures 10 feet long, 3 feet wide, and has no measurable height off the seafloor.

There were no other naturally occurring potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well 

location or within the 2,000-foot radius area.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

High-amplitude seismic seafloor anomalies are a potential indicator of carbonates and benthic 

community habitats. The seafloor at the proposed Well “EP C” and surrounding 2,000-foot 

radius contains no high or low positive seafloor amplitude anomalies associated with fluid 

expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 1, Panel 3).

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 28 miles 

north of the proposed Well “EP C” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-

G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows one well and 2 pipelines within 2,000 

feet of the proposed well. The S-14089 BP 6” with S-14090 BP 10” Casing and S-14091 BP 4”
Project No. 140310

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

Umbilical are located 43 feet and 137 feet to the northwest, respectively. Well No. SS-1 is 

located 146 feet northwest of the proposed Well “EP C.” A PLET and UTA exist in proximity to 

the proposed drill center as well (See Detail, Sheet 1, Panel 4).

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

Six (6) stratigraphic units (Units A to F), each consisting of one or more distinctive sequences, 

were assessed (Figures 3-5). Six horizons mark the upper and / or lower contacts of each of the 

successive units. Two (2) buried faults intersect the proposed wellbore at approximately 1,500 

feet and 4,600 feet BML.

FMOG provided C&C with a check shot dataset of time-depth pairs for the sediment column. 

The following polynomial equation was derived from Total Vertical Depth (TVD) (feet) and the 

corresponding two-way traveltime (seconds) using the time-depth values to calculate depths 

below the seafloor:

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

where D = depth below seafloor in feet and T = time below seafloor in seconds.

A detailed description of the sequence units, beginning at the seafloor, can be found in the 2013

Geohazard Report. The Top-Hole Prognosis Chart (Figure 5) summarizes the stratigraphy.

Unit A (Seafloor to Horizon 1): Unit A consists predominantly of low to moderate amplitude, 

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 220 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP C” location. 

These reflection patterns are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay laid down as a drape deposit.

Unit B (Horizon 1 to Horizon 2): Unit B consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous 

reflectors overlying low to moderate semi-continuous to chaotic reflectors. The center of the 

unit is characterized by a moderate to high amplitude continuous reflector indicative of a 

possible sand sheet. The unit is 701 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

patterns at the top of Unit B are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay, laid down as a drape 

deposit, while the bottom of the unit is comprised of thick interbedded mud-prone mass 

movement deposits and sandy channel fill. The coarser-grained possible sand sheet overlaying 

the low-amplitude mass movement deposits may indicate a risk of shallow water flow.

Unit C (Horizon 2 to Horizon 3): Unit C consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous

chaotic reflectors and is 406 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP C” location. Unit C is 

interpreted as mostly channel fill with some interbedded channel/overbank deposits of varying 

acoustic impedance.

Unit D (Horizon 3 to Horizon 4): Unit D consists of variable amplitude, semi-continuous to 

chaotic reflectors and is 981 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP C” location. These reflection 

patterns are interpreted as clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded sandy channel 

fill. High amplitude anomalies indicative of shallow gas were identified throughout Unit D, with 

the nearest anomaly located 330 feet south of the proposed wellbore. The coarser-grained 
Project No. 140310

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

channel fills occurring within Unit D may also represent possible shallow water flow hazards. A 

fault intersects the proposed Well “EP C” location 1,500 feet BML. 

Unit E (Horizon 4 to Horizon 5): Unit E consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,257 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP C” location. The sediments in 

Unit E are interpreted as interbedded channel fills and clay-prone mass transport deposits.

Unit F (Horizon 5 to Horizon 6): Unit F consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,054 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP C” location. The sediments 

within the unit are interpreted as mostly clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded 

channel fills. A fault intersects the proposed Well “EP C” location 4,600 feet BML. 

SHALLOW GAS

Anomalies of very high amplitude, commonly termed bright spots, are interpreted as potential 

areas 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 one of four levels. These are:

 Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators present.

 Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2 – 3 background level) 

and phase reversal. This may also include diffuse areas of gas blanking.

 Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3 – 4 background level) 

and phase reversal.

 High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4

background level), phase reversal, and a combination of other attributes indicative of the 

presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-down and masking of underlying sediments. 

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

Gas seeping from depth can be hazardous by significantly reducing the shear strength of 

sediment that may undermine seabed installations. Unit A has a negligible risk of gas. Units B, 

C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas. A moderate risk of gas was identified 

within Unit D, with the nearest anomaly located 330 feet south of the proposed well. 

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 53

miles southeast of the study area within Block 177, Desoto Canyon Area. The shallow water 

flow occurred at 1,915 feet below mudline and was classified as a low severity flow.

Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after 

deposition and form in unconsolidated and overpressured sands. The pressure rises with 

overburden causing a potentially hazardous condition for drilling operations. Some SWF 

intervals have proven difficult or impossible to detect on seismic profiles.

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “EP C” location suggests that medium 

to high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within portions of Units B, C, and D exhibit 

a moderate risk of SWF. Units E and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a 
Project No. 140310

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

negligible risk of SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be 

executed for any drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

Gas hydrates are an ice crystalline form of gas hydrocarbons in deepwater marine environments 

where the conditions of pressure and temperature are favorable. The hydrate stability zone is the 

depth interval between the seafloor and the point where the hydrate is no longer stable in form. 

The thermal gradient of the seabed soils determines the depth of the hydrate stability zone base. 

The acoustic impedance contrast caused between the hydrate and free gas trapped at the base of 

the hydrate stability zone forms a Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR) on seismic profiles. This 

BSR reflector cross cuts the normal seismic stratigraphy, much like a bottom multiple.

The areas where seafloor gas hydrates accumulate in the near-surface sediments of the Gulf of 

Mexico are generally unfavorable sites for drilling operations. Irregular seafloor topography, gas 

seeps, gas chimneys, seafloor hydrates and benthic communities may all be found in close 

association. There was no indication of gas hydrates, associated geologic features, or any 

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Well “EP C” surface location is clear of geological constraints. No significant 

seafloor features are located at or within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP C” location that 

could interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP C” surface location is 5,403 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes less than 1° to the southeast.

No high or low seafloor amplitudes anomalies that may indicate the occurrence of hardgrounds, 

carbonates, benthic communities or potential expulsions are found within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP C” surface location. 

Two pipelines (S-14091 BP 4” Umbilical and S-14089 BP 6” with S-14090 BP10” Casing) and 

one well (OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1) exist within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP C”

location.

The assessment of seismic profiles suggests coarser, sand-prone channel fills occur in Units B,

C, and D. The information from the BOEM/BSEE in conjunction with the presence of the sandprone units infers a moderate risk of shallow water flow in these sand-prone units. Potential of 

shallow water flow in Units E and F is considered low while Unit A is negligible.

Interval amplitude anomalies which portray a moderate risk of shallow gas were observed within 

Unit D (1,327 – 2,308 feet BML). The closest anomaly is located 330 feet south of the proposed 

borehole location. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while Unit A is 

assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 
Project No. 140310

7

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please contact us if you have any questions 

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at the proposed Well “EP C”.

Figure 2. 3D seafloor bathymetry surrounding the proposed Well “EP C”.

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7392 through the proposed Well “EP C”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6420 through the proposed Well “EP C”.

Figure 5. Top-Hole Prognosis Chart for the proposed Well “EP C”.

Sheet 1. Well Site Clearance Map

Panel 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry

Panel 2. Side Scan Sonar Mosaic

Panel 3. Seafloor Amplitude

Panel 4. Seafloor and Subsurface Hazard
Project No. 140310

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

July 23, 2014

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “EP D”

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to prepare 

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “EP D” location in Block 84 (OCS-G-08484), 

Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on the 

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG and a highresolution geophysical dataset collected with C&C’s Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) 

C-Surveyor IIITM. C&C completed three assessments which were utilized for this letter. The 

first, titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi

Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. The second, titled “Archaeological and Hazard 

Study, Blocks 85 and 129, Mississippi Canyon Area, Blocks 45 and 89, Desoto Canyon Area,” 

was completed in October 2007. The third, titled “Archaeological Assessment Report, King 

Field, Blocks 84 and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. This site 

clearance letter is based on the findings provided within those reports. 

This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and addresses seafloor conditions within a 

2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. The depth limit of the investigation is 

approximately 1.6 seconds of two-way traveltime (~4,000 feet) below the mud line (BML). The 

reporting and mapping presented in this letter comply with the BOEM/BSEE guidelines provided 

in NTL No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program), No. 2008-G20 (Revisions to the List of OCS 

Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports) and No. 2009-G40 

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

AUV Survey Data

C&C’s C-Surveyor IIITM AUV provided multibeam bathymetric mapping, high-resolution side 

scan sonar imagery, and subbottom profiles. The AUV remote-sensing instruments include a 

Simrad EM2000 Swath Bathymetric System (200 kHz), an EdgeTech DF4500 Side Scan Sonar 

(230 kHz with dynamic focusing), and an EdgeTech Chirp DW106 Subbottom Profiler (1.5–4.5 

kHz). All the raw digital data were logged utilizing proprietary software developed by C&C. 
Project No. 140310

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The multibeam system delivered a 3-meter gridded dataset with relative vertical accuracies 

within 20 centimeters.

The survey grid consisted of 50 north-south primary survey lines with 200 meter line spacing 

(Lines BPUSAUV07KS-0101-0150) and ten east-west tie lines spaced at 900 meters (Lines 

BPUSAUV07KS-0201-0210). Navigation fixes (event marks) were recorded continuously and 

annotated at 125-meter (410 foot) intervals along all survey lines. The survey grid was designed 

to provide a representative sampling with the subbottom profiler system and overlapping 

coverage with side scan sonar and multibeam echosounder systems.

3D Seismic Data

The 3D seismic data used for this assessment was provided in SEG-Y format. The data were 

loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. The seismic data 

volume starts at 0 seconds and extends to 5.0 seconds of two-way traveltime. The inlines of the 

3D data volume run northwest to southeast while the crosslines run southwest to northeast, 

respectively. The inlines and crosslines are both spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter) intervals. 

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

The 3D seismic data are zero phase, and the seafloor reflector is represented by a strong, positive 

amplitude peak flanked by troughs with absolute amplitude values of less than one-half of the 

peak value. The seismic data provided adequate screening of the regional seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions, and large scale geohazards (faults, salt, high acoustic impedance, 

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)

WELL LOCATION

The coordinates and calls for the proposed Well “EP D” surface location are tabulated below:

Table 1. Proposed Well “EP D”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 84,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“EP D” 1,325,673.45 10,486,698.63 28 53’ 34.754” N 87 59’ 02.010” W 619’ FSL 4,886’ FEL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is required for assessing deepwater benthic communities for 

proposed Well “EP D” (Sheet 1, Figure 2).

The geodetic datum used for this project is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) with 

the Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid. The datum is projected using the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16 North (16N) with a central meridian at 93 00’W, a false easting of 

1,640,416.67 feet at the central meridian, and a false northing of 0.00 feet at 00 00’N. All 

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study map (Sheet 

1). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 
Project No. 140310

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The study area is located in the northeastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico within the 

northeastern corner of the Mississippi Canyon Area (designated by the BOEM), on the upper 

continental slope offshore Mississippi-Louisiana. MC84 is situated on the northern most portion 

of the Mississippi Fan, 134 miles east-southeast of Fourchon, Louisiana. This area of the fan 

consists of basin-like topography, with undulating seafloor, mass wasting depositional 

sequences, channel flow systems, canyons, and salt diapiric uplift. Two types of depositional 

sequences are identified in the region, referred to as condensed and expanded sections. 

Condensed sections are deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated 

hemipelagic clays. The expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of 

rapidly accumulated, coarse-grained clastic deposits (sands and gravels) of variable thickness. 

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP D” surface location is 5,404 feet below sea level 

(BSL). Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “EP D” location, the 

seafloor depth ranges from 5,361 feet in the north to 5,433 feet in the south (Sheet 1, Panel 1, 

Color Shaded Bathymetry Map). The seafloor is smooth to slightly undulating in the vicinity of 

the proposed well location (Figure 2), and slopes southeast at a gradient of less than 1°.

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 1, Panel 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range 

of low to moderate acoustic amplitudes within the 2,000-foot radius area. These low to moderate 

seafloor amplitudes indicate finely textured seafloor sediments that are likely comprised of 

hemipelagic clay. The side scan sonar mosaic and multibeam backscatter images agree with 

these findings (Sheet 1, Panel 2). 

One sonar contact was identified 1,103 feet southeast of the proposed well location, and 

measures 10 feet long, 3 feet wide, and has no measurable height off the seafloor.

There were no other naturally occurring potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well 

location or within the 2,000-foot radius area.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

High-amplitude seismic seafloor anomalies are a potential indicator of carbonates and benthic 

community habitats. The seafloor at the proposed Well “EP D” and surrounding 2,000-foot 

radius contains no high or low positive seafloor amplitude anomalies associated with fluid 

expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 1, Panel 3).

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 28 miles 

north of the proposed Well “EP D” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-

G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows one well and 2 pipelines within 2,000 

feet of the proposed well. The S-14089 BP 6” with S-14090 BP 10” Casing and S-14091 BP 4”
Project No. 140310

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

Umbilical are located 65 feet and 183 feet to the north, respectively. Well No. SS-1 is located 

132 feet north of the proposed Well “EP D.” A PLET and UTA exist in proximity to the 

proposed drill center as well (See Detail, Sheet 1, Panel 4).

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

Six (6) stratigraphic units (Units A to F), each consisting of one or more distinctive sequences, 

were assessed (Figures 3-5). Six horizons mark the upper and / or lower contacts of each of the 

successive units. Two (2) buried faults intersect the proposed wellbore at approximately 1,500 

feet and 4,100 feet BML.

FMOG provided C&C with a check shot dataset of time-depth pairs for the sediment column. 

The following polynomial equation was derived from Total Vertical Depth (TVD) (feet) and the 

corresponding two-way traveltime (seconds) using the time-depth values to calculate depths 

below the seafloor:

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

where D = depth below seafloor in feet and T = time below seafloor in seconds.

A detailed description of the sequence units, beginning at the seafloor, can be found in the 2013

Geohazard Report. The Top-Hole Prognosis Chart (Figure 5) summarizes the stratigraphy.

Unit A (Seafloor to Horizon 1): Unit A consists predominantly of low to moderate amplitude, 

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 220 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP D” location. 

These reflection patterns are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay laid down as a drape deposit.

Unit B (Horizon 1 to Horizon 2): Unit B consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous 

reflectors overlying low to moderate semi-continuous to chaotic reflectors. The center of the 

unit is characterized by a moderate to high amplitude continuous reflector indicative of a 

possible sand sheet. The unit is 704 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

patterns at the top of Unit B are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay, laid down as a drape 

deposit, while the bottom of the unit is comprised of thick interbedded mud-prone mass 

movement deposits and sandy channel fill. The coarser-grained possible sand sheet overlaying 

the low-amplitude mass movement deposits may indicate a risk of shallow water flow.

Unit C (Horizon 2 to Horizon 3): Unit C consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous

chaotic reflectors and is 410 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP D” location. Unit C is 

interpreted as mostly channel fill with some interbedded channel/overbank deposits of varying 

acoustic impedance.

Unit D (Horizon 3 to Horizon 4): Unit D consists of variable amplitude, semi-continuous to 

chaotic reflectors and is 995 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP D” location. These reflection 

patterns are interpreted as clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded sandy channel 

fill. High amplitude anomalies indicative of shallow gas were identified throughout Unit D, with 

the nearest anomaly located 266 feet south of the proposed wellbore. The coarser-grained 
Project No. 140310

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

channel fills occurring within Unit D may also represent possible shallow water flow hazards. A 

fault intersects the proposed Well “EP D” location 1,500 feet BML. 

Unit E (Horizon 4 to Horizon 5): Unit E consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,233 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP D” location. The sediments in 

Unit E are interpreted as interbedded channel fills and clay-prone mass transport deposits.

Unit F (Horizon 5 to Horizon 6): Unit F consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 973 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP D” location. The sediments 

within the unit are interpreted as mostly clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded 

channel fills. A fault intersects the proposed Well “EP D” location 4,530 feet BML. 

SHALLOW GAS

Anomalies of very high amplitude, commonly termed bright spots, are interpreted as potential 

areas 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 one of four levels. These are:

 Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators present.

 Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2 – 3 background level) 

and phase reversal. This may also include diffuse areas of gas blanking.

 Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3 – 4 background level) 

and phase reversal.

 High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4

background level), phase reversal, and a combination of other attributes indicative of the 

presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-down and masking of underlying sediments. 

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

Gas seeping from depth can be hazardous by significantly reducing the shear strength of 

sediment that may undermine seabed installations. Unit A has a negligible risk of gas. Units B, 

C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas. A moderate risk of gas was identified 

within Unit D, with the nearest anomaly located 266 feet south of the proposed well.

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 53

miles southeast of the study area within Block 177, Desoto Canyon Area. The shallow water 

flow occurred at 1,915 feet below mudline and was classified as a low severity flow.

Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after 

deposition and form in unconsolidated and overpressured sands. The pressure rises with 

overburden causing a potentially hazardous condition for drilling operations. Some SWF 

intervals have proven difficult or impossible to detect on seismic profiles.

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “EP D” location suggests that medium 

to high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within portions of Units B, C, and D exhibit 

a moderate risk of SWF. Units E and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a 
Project No. 140310

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

negligible risk of SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be 

executed for any drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

Gas hydrates are an ice crystalline form of gas hydrocarbons in deepwater marine environments 

where the conditions of pressure and temperature are favorable. The hydrate stability zone is the 

depth interval between the seafloor and the point where the hydrate is no longer stable in form. 

The thermal gradient of the seabed soils determines the depth of the hydrate stability zone base. 

The acoustic impedance contrast caused between the hydrate and free gas trapped at the base of 

the hydrate stability zone forms a Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR) on seismic profiles. This 

BSR reflector cross cuts the normal seismic stratigraphy, much like a bottom multiple.

The areas where seafloor gas hydrates accumulate in the near-surface sediments of the Gulf of 

Mexico are generally unfavorable sites for drilling operations. Irregular seafloor topography, gas 

seeps, gas chimneys, seafloor hydrates and benthic communities may all be found in close 

association. There was no indication of gas hydrates, associated geologic features, or any 

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Well “EP D” surface location is clear of geological constraints. No significant 

seafloor features are located at or within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP D” location that 

could interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP D” surface location is 5,404 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes less than 1° to the southeast.

No high or low seafloor amplitudes anomalies that may indicate the occurrence of hardgrounds, 

carbonates, benthic communities or potential expulsions are found within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP D” surface location. 

Two pipelines (S-14091 BP 4” Umbilical and S-14089 BP 6” with S-14090 BP10” Casing) and 

one well (OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1) exist within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP D”

location.

The assessment of seismic profiles suggests coarser, sand-prone channel fills occur in Units B,

C, and D. The information from the BOEM/BSEE in conjunction with the presence of the sandprone units infers a moderate risk of shallow water flow in these sand-prone units. Potential of 

shallow water flow in Units E and F is considered low while Unit A is negligible.

Interval amplitude anomalies which portray a moderate risk of shallow gas were observed within 

Unit D (1,334 – 2,329 feet BML). The closest anomaly is located 266 feet south of the proposed 

borehole location. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while Unit A is 

assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 
Project No. 140310

7

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please contact us if you have any questions 

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at the proposed Well “EP D”.

Figure 2. 3D seafloor bathymetry surrounding the proposed Well “EP D”.

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7390 through the proposed Well “EP D”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6420 through the proposed Well “EP D”.

Figure 5. Top-Hole Prognosis Chart for the proposed Well “EP D”.

Sheet 1. Well Site Clearance Map

Panel 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry

Panel 2. Side Scan Sonar Mosaic

Panel 3. Seafloor Amplitude

Panel 4. Seafloor and Subsurface Hazard
Project No. 140310

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

July 23, 2014

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “EP E”

Block 129 (OCS-G-10977)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to prepare 

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “EP E” location in Block 129 (OCS-G-10977), 

Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on the 

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG and a highresolution geophysical dataset collected with C&C’s Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) 

C-Surveyor IIITM. C&C completed three assessments which were utilized for this letter. The 

first, titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi

Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. The second, titled “Archaeological and Hazard 

Study, Blocks 85 and 129, Mississippi Canyon Area, Blocks 45 and 89, Desoto Canyon Area,” 

was completed in October 2007. The third, titled “Archaeological Assessment Report, King 

Field, Blocks 84 and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. This site 

clearance letter is based on the findings provided within those reports. 

This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and addresses seafloor conditions within a 

2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. The depth limit of the investigation is 

approximately 1.6 seconds of two-way traveltime (~4,000 feet) below the mud line (BML). The 

reporting and mapping presented in this letter comply with the BOEM/BSEE guidelines provided 

in NTL No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program), No. 2008-G20 (Revisions to the List of OCS 

Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports) and No. 2009-G40 

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

AUV Survey Data

C&C’s C-Surveyor IIITM AUV provided multibeam bathymetric mapping, high-resolution side 

scan sonar imagery, and subbottom profiles. The AUV remote-sensing instruments include a 

Simrad EM2000 Swath Bathymetric System (200 kHz), an EdgeTech DF4500 Side Scan Sonar 

(230 kHz with dynamic focusing), and an EdgeTech Chirp DW106 Subbottom Profiler (1.5–4.5 

kHz). All the raw digital data were logged utilizing proprietary software developed by C&C. 
Project No. 140310

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The multibeam system delivered a 3-meter gridded dataset with relative vertical accuracies 

within 20 centimeters.

The survey grid consisted of 50 north-south primary survey lines with 200 meter line spacing 

(Lines BPUSAUV07KS-0101-0150) and ten east-west tie lines spaced at 900 meters (Lines 

BPUSAUV07KS-0201-0210). Navigation fixes (event marks) were recorded continuously and 

annotated at 125-meter (410 foot) intervals along all survey lines. The survey grid was designed 

to provide a representative sampling with the subbottom profiler system and overlapping 

coverage with side scan sonar and multibeam echosounder systems.

3D Seismic Data

The 3D seismic data used for this assessment was provided in SEG-Y format. The data were 

loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. The seismic data 

volume starts at 0 seconds and extends to 5.0 seconds of two-way traveltime. The inlines of the 

3D data volume run northwest to southeast while the crosslines run southwest to northeast, 

respectively. The inlines and crosslines are both spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter) intervals. 

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

The 3D seismic data are zero phase, and the seafloor reflector is represented by a strong, positive 

amplitude peak flanked by troughs with absolute amplitude values of less than one-half of the 

peak value. The seismic data provided adequate screening of the regional seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions, and large scale geohazards (faults, salt, high acoustic impedance, 

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)

WELL LOCATION

The coordinates and calls for the proposed Well “EP E” surface location are tabulated below:

Table 1. Proposed Well “EP E”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 129,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“EP E” 1,338,920.00 10,485,260.00 28 53’ 21.573” N 87 56’ 32.826” W 820’ FNL 7,480’ FEL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is required for assessing deepwater benthic communities for 

proposed Well “EP E” (Sheet 1, Figure 2).

The geodetic datum used for this project is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) with 

the Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid. The datum is projected using the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16 North (16N) with a central meridian at 93 00’W, a false easting of 

1,640,416.67 feet at the central meridian, and a false northing of 0.00 feet at 00 00’N. All 

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study map (Sheet 

1). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 
Project No. 140310

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The study area is located in the northeastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico within the 

northeastern corner of the Mississippi Canyon Area (designated by the BOEM), on the upper 

continental slope offshore Mississippi-Louisiana. MC129 is situated on the northern most 

portion of the Mississippi Fan, 134 miles east-southeast of Fourchon, Louisiana. This area of the 

fan consists of basin-like topography, with undulating seafloor, mass wasting depositional 

sequences, channel flow systems, canyons, and salt diapiric uplift. Two types of depositional 

sequences are identified in the region, referred to as condensed and expanded sections. 

Condensed sections are deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated 

hemipelagic clays. The expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of 

rapidly accumulated, coarse-grained clastic deposits (sands and gravels) of variable thickness. 

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP E” surface location is 5,304 feet below sea level 

(BSL). Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “EP E” location, the 

seafloor depth ranges from 4,980 feet in the south to 5,415 feet in the northeast (Sheet 1, Panel 1, 

Color Shaded Bathymetry Map). The seafloor is smooth in the vicinity of the proposed well 

location (Figure 2), and slopes northeast at a gradient of 4°. The drill center lies 1,000 feet north 

of a 400-foot high escarpment which marks the bounds of a shallow salt body.

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 1, Panel 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range 

of low to moderate acoustic amplitudes within the 2,000-foot radius area. These low to moderate 

seafloor amplitudes indicate finely textured seafloor sediments that are likely comprised of 

hemipelagic clay. The side scan sonar mosaic and multibeam backscatter images agree with 

these findings (Sheet 1, Panel 2). 

Two sonar contacts were identified near the proposed well location. Contact No. 26 is located 

603 feet to the south, and Contact No. 24 is located 1,797 feet to the northwest. Both contacts 

measure 3 feet in length, 3 feet wide, and have no measurable height off the seafloor.

The base of an escarpment is located 930 feet southwest of the proposed well location. This 

escarpment occurs along the edge of the Uchupi Salt Dome located south-southwest of the 

wellsite. 

There were no other naturally occurring potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well 

location or within the 2,000-foot radius area.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

High-amplitude seismic seafloor anomalies are a potential indicator of carbonates and benthic 

community habitats. The seafloor at the proposed Well “EP E” and surrounding 2,000-foot 

radius contains no high or low positive seafloor amplitude anomalies associated with fluid 

expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 1, Panel 3).
Project No. 140310

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 28 miles 

north of the proposed Well “EP E” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-

G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows one well and 7 pipelines within 2,000 

feet of the proposed well. A list of pipeline segments which occur in the vicinity can be found in 

Table 1. OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-3 is located 98 feet northwest of the proposed Well “EP 

E.” PLETs and other infrastructure associated with the Well No. SS-3 exist in proximity to the 

proposed drill center as well (Sheet 1, Panel 4).

Table 1. Existing pipelines near the proposed Well “EP E.”

Segment Distance from proposed Well “EP 

E”

S-13388 FMOG 4” Umbilical with 

S-13387 FMOG 12” Casing 112 feet northwest

S-13386 FMOG 8” 134 feet northwest

S-16086 FMOG 5” Umbilical 271 feet northwest

S-13384 FMOG 8” 134 feet northwest

S-13385 PXP 12” 134 feet northwest

S-16168 FMOG 4” Umbilical 311 feet northwest

S-16166 FMOG 6” with

S-16167 FMOG 10” Casing 161 feet northwest

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

Six (6) stratigraphic units (Units A to F), each consisting of one or more distinctive sequences, 

were assessed (Figures 3-5). Six horizons mark the upper and / or lower contacts of each of the 

successive units. 

The proposed wellbore intersects two shallow buried mass transport deposits identified in the 

subbottom profiler data. These deposits are located 9 feet and 55 feet below the seafloor and 

represent a periodic downslope transportation of unstable slope sediments by gravity flows. 

These acoustically amorphous units are composed of chaotic and mixed sequences of primarily 

soft clay with occasional coarser components. No blocks of intact material were observed within 

these sediment gravity flows. 

FMOG provided C&C with a check shot dataset of time-depth pairs for the sediment column. 

The following polynomial equation was derived from Total Vertical Depth (TVD) (feet) and the 

corresponding two-way traveltime (seconds) using the time-depth values to calculate depths 

below the seafloor:

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

where D = depth below seafloor in feet and T = time below seafloor in seconds.
Project No. 140310

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

A detailed description of the sequence units, beginning at the seafloor, can be found in the 2013

Geohazard Report. The Top-Hole Prognosis Chart (Figure 5) summarizes the stratigraphy.

Unit A (Seafloor to Horizon 1): Unit A consists predominantly of low to moderate amplitude, 

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 224 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP E” location. 

These reflection patterns are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay laid down as a drape deposit.

Unit B (Horizon 1 to Horizon 2): Unit B consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous 

reflectors overlying low to moderate semi-continuous to chaotic reflectors. The center of the 

unit is characterized by a moderate to high amplitude continuous reflector indicative of a 

possible sand sheet. The unit is 417 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

patterns at the top of Unit B are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay, laid down as a drape 

deposit, while the bottom of the unit is comprised of thick interbedded mud-prone mass 

movement deposits and sandy channel fill. The coarser-grained possible sand sheet overlaying 

the low-amplitude mass movement deposits may indicate a risk of shallow water flow.

Unit C (Horizon 2 to Horizon 3): Unit C consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous

chaotic reflectors and is 269 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP E” location. Unit C is 

interpreted as mostly channel fill with some interbedded channel/overbank deposits of varying 

acoustic impedance.

Unit D (Horizon 3 to Horizon 4): Unit D consists of variable amplitude, semi-continuous to 

chaotic reflectors and is 880 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP E” location. These reflection 

patterns are interpreted as clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded sandy channel 

fill. High amplitude anomalies indicative of shallow gas were identified throughout Unit D, with 

the nearest anomaly located 926 feet northeast of the proposed wellbore. The coarser-grained 

channel fills occurring within Unit D may also represent possible shallow water flow hazards.

Unit E (Horizon 4 to Horizon 5): Unit E consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,234 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP E” location. The sediments in 

Unit E are interpreted as interbedded channel fills and clay-prone mass transport deposits.

Unit F (Horizon 5 to Horizon 6): Unit F consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,355 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP E” location. The sediments 

within the unit are interpreted as mostly clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded 

channel fills.

SHALLOW GAS

Anomalies of very high amplitude, commonly termed bright spots, are interpreted as potential 

areas 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 one of four levels. These are:

 Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators present.

 Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2 – 3 background level) 

and phase reversal. This may also include diffuse areas of gas blanking.
Project No. 140310

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

 Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3 – 4 background level) 

and phase reversal.

 High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4

background level), phase reversal, and a combination of other attributes indicative of the 

presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-down and masking of underlying sediments. 

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

Gas seeping from depth can be hazardous by significantly reducing the shear strength of 

sediment that may undermine seabed installations. Unit A has a negligible risk of gas. Units B, 

C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas. A moderate risk of gas was identified 

within Unit D, with the nearest anomaly located 926 feet northeast of the proposed well.

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 53

miles southeast of the study area within Block 177, Desoto Canyon Area. The shallow water 

flow occurred at 1,915 feet below mudline and was classified as a low severity flow.

Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after 

deposition and form in unconsolidated and overpressured sands. The pressure rises with 

overburden causing a potentially hazardous condition for drilling operations. Some SWF 

intervals have proven difficult or impossible to detect on seismic profiles.

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “EP E” location suggests that medium 

to high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within portions of Units B, D, and E exhibit 

a moderate risk of SWF. Units C and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a 

negligible risk of SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be 

executed for any drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

Gas hydrates are an ice crystalline form of gas hydrocarbons in deepwater marine environments

where the conditions of pressure and temperature are favorable. The hydrate stability zone is the 

depth interval between the seafloor and the point where the hydrate is no longer stable in form. 

The thermal gradient of the seabed soils determines the depth of the hydrate stability zone base. 

The acoustic impedance contrast caused between the hydrate and free gas trapped at the base of 

the hydrate stability zone forms a Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR) on seismic profiles. This 

BSR reflector cross cuts the normal seismic stratigraphy, much like a bottom multiple.

The areas where seafloor gas hydrates accumulate in the near-surface sediments of the Gulf of 

Mexico are generally unfavorable sites for drilling operations. Irregular seafloor topography, gas 

seeps, gas chimneys, seafloor hydrates and benthic communities may all be found in close 

association. There was no indication of gas hydrates, associated geologic features, or any 

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 
Project No. 140310

7

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Well “EP E” surface location is clear of geological constraints. No significant 

natural seafloor features are located at or within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP E” location 

that could interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP E” surface location is 5,304 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes 4° to the northeast.

Surface conductor jetting operations should encounter low resistance at the soils within the mass 

movement bodies at 9 and 55 feet below the mudline. 

No high or low seafloor amplitudes anomalies that may indicate the occurrence of hardgrounds, 

carbonates, benthic communities or potential expulsions are found within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP E” surface location. 

Seven pipelines and one well (OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-3) exist within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP E” location.

The assessment of seismic profiles suggests coarser, sand-prone channel fills occur in Units B,

D, and E. The information from the BOEM/BSEE in conjunction with the presence of the sandprone units infers a moderate risk of shallow water flow in these sand-prone units. Potential of 

shallow water flow in Units C and F is considered low while Unit A is negligible.

Interval amplitude anomalies which portray a moderate risk of shallow gas were observed within 

Unit D (910 – 1,789 feet BML). The closest anomaly is located 926 feet northeast of the 

proposed borehole location. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while 

Unit A is assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please contact us if you have any questions 

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist
Project No. 140310

8

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at the proposed Well “EP E”.

Figure 2. 3D seafloor bathymetry surrounding the proposed Well “EP E”.

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7593 through the proposed Well “EP E”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6166 through the proposed Well “EP E”.

Figure 5. Top-Hole Prognosis Chart for the proposed Well “EP E”.

Sheet 1. Well Site Clearance Map

Panel 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry

Panel 2. Side Scan Sonar Mosaic

Panel 3. Seafloor Amplitude

Panel 4. Seafloor and Subsurface Hazard
Project No. 140310

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

July 23, 2014

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “EP F”

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to prepare 

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “EP F” location in Block 84 (OCS-G-08484), 

Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on the 

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG and a highresolution geophysical dataset collected with C&C’s Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) 

C-Surveyor IIITM. C&C completed three assessments which were utilized for this letter. The 

first, titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi

Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. The second, titled “Archaeological and Hazard 

Study, Blocks 85 and 129, Mississippi Canyon Area, Blocks 45 and 89, Desoto Canyon Area,” 

was completed in October 2007. The third, titled “Archaeological Assessment Report, King 

Field, Blocks 84 and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. This site 

clearance letter is based on the findings provided within those reports. 

This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and addresses seafloor conditions within a 

2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. The depth limit of the investigation is 

approximately 1.6 seconds of two-way traveltime (~4,000 feet) below the mud line (BML). The 

reporting and mapping presented in this letter comply with the BOEM/BSEE guidelines provided 

in NTL No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program), No. 2008-G20 (Revisions to the List of OCS 

Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports) and No. 2009-G40 

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

AUV Survey Data

C&C’s C-Surveyor IIITM AUV provided multibeam bathymetric mapping, high-resolution side 

scan sonar imagery, and subbottom profiles. The AUV remote-sensing instruments include a 

Simrad EM2000 Swath Bathymetric System (200 kHz), an EdgeTech DF4500 Side Scan Sonar 

(230 kHz with dynamic focusing), and an EdgeTech Chirp DW106 Subbottom Profiler (1.5–4.5 

kHz). All the raw digital data were logged utilizing proprietary software developed by C&C. 
Project No. 140310

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The multibeam system delivered a 3-meter gridded dataset with relative vertical accuracies 

within 20 centimeters.

The survey grid consisted of 50 north-south primary survey lines with 200 meter line spacing 

(Lines BPUSAUV07KS-0101-0150) and ten east-west tie lines spaced at 900 meters (Lines 

BPUSAUV07KS-0201-0210). Navigation fixes (event marks) were recorded continuously and 

annotated at 125-meter (410 foot) intervals along all survey lines. The survey grid was designed 

to provide a representative sampling with the subbottom profiler system and overlapping 

coverage with side scan sonar and multibeam echosounder systems.

3D Seismic Data

The 3D seismic data used for this assessment was provided in SEG-Y format. The data were 

loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. The seismic data 

volume starts at 0 seconds and extends to 5.0 seconds of two-way traveltime. The inlines of the 

3D data volume run northwest to southeast while the crosslines run southwest to northeast, 

respectively. The inlines and crosslines are both spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter) intervals. 

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

The 3D seismic data are zero phase, and the seafloor reflector is represented by a strong, positive 

amplitude peak flanked by troughs with absolute amplitude values of less than one-half of the 

peak value. The seismic data provided adequate screening of the regional seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions, and large scale geohazards (faults, salt, high acoustic impedance, 

stratigraphic horizons, etc.).

WELL LOCATION

The coordinates and calls for the proposed Well “EP F” surface location are tabulated below:

Table 1. Proposed Well “EP F”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 84,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“EP F” 1,325,786.59 10,486,670.35 28 53’ 34.483” N -87 59’ 00.734” W 591’ FSL 4,774’ FEL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is required for assessing deepwater benthic communities for 

proposed Well “EP F” (Sheet 1, Figure 2).

The geodetic datum used for this project is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) with 

the Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid. The datum is projected using the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16 North (16N) with a central meridian at 93 00’W, a false easting of 

1,640,416.67 feet at the central meridian, and a false northing of 0.00 feet at 00 00’N. All 

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study map (Sheet 

1). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 
Project No. 140310

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The study area is located in the northeastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico within the 

northeastern corner of the Mississippi Canyon Area (designated by the BOEM), on the upper 

continental slope offshore Mississippi-Louisiana. MC84 is situated on the northern most portion 

of the Mississippi Fan, 134 miles east-southeast of Fourchon, Louisiana. This area of the fan 

consists of basin-like topography, with undulating seafloor, mass wasting depositional 

sequences, channel flow systems, canyons, and salt diapiric uplift. Two types of depositional 

sequences are identified in the region, referred to as condensed and expanded sections. 

Condensed sections are deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated 

hemipelagic clays. The expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of 

rapidly accumulated, coarse-grained clastic deposits (sands and gravels) of variable thickness. 

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP F” surface location is 5,409 feet below sea level 

(BSL). Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “EP F” location, the 

seafloor depth ranges from 5,360 feet in the north to 5,433 feet in the south (Sheet 1, Panel 1, 

Color Shaded Bathymetry Map). The seafloor is smooth to slightly undulating in the vicinity of 

the proposed well location (Figure 2), and slopes southeast at a gradient of less than 1°.

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 1, Panel 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range 

of low to moderate acoustic amplitudes within the 2,000-foot radius area. These low to moderate 

seafloor amplitudes indicate finely textured seafloor sediments that are likely comprised of 

hemipelagic clay. The side scan sonar mosaic and multibeam backscatter images agree with 

these findings (Sheet 1, Panel 2).

One sonar contact was identified 992 feet southeast of the proposed well location, and measures 

10 feet long, 3 feet wide, and has no measurable height off the seafloor.

There were no other naturally occurring potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well 

location or within the 2,000-foot radius area.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

High-amplitude seismic seafloor anomalies are a potential indicator of carbonates and benthic 

community habitats. The seafloor at the proposed Well “EP F” and surrounding 2,000-foot 

radius contains no high or low positive seafloor amplitude anomalies associated with fluid 

expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 1, Panel 3).

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 28 miles 

north of the proposed Well “EP F” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-

G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows one well and 2 pipelines within 2,000 

feet of the proposed well. The S-14089 Freeport-McMoran 6” with S-14090 Freeport-McMoran
Project No. 140310

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

10” Casing and S-14091 BP 4” Umbilical are located 169 feet and 251 feet to the northwest, 

respectively. Well No. SS-1 is located 196 feet northwest of the proposed Well “EP F.” A 

PLET and UTA exist in proximity to the proposed drill center as well (See Detail, Sheet 1, Panel 

4).

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

Six (6) stratigraphic units (Units A to F), each consisting of one or more distinctive sequences, 

were assessed (Figures 3-5). Six horizons mark the upper and / or lower contacts of each of the 

successive units. Two (2) buried faults intersect the proposed wellbore at approximately 1,500 

feet and 4,600 feet BML.

FMOG provided C&C with a check shot dataset of time-depth pairs for the sediment column. 

The following polynomial equation was derived from Total Vertical Depth (TVD) (feet) and the 

corresponding two-way traveltime (seconds) using the time-depth values to calculate depths 

below the seafloor:

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

where D = depth below seafloor in feet and T = time below seafloor in seconds.

A detailed description of the sequence units, beginning at the seafloor, can be found in the 2013

Geohazard Report. The Top-Hole Prognosis Chart (Figure 5) summarizes the stratigraphy.

Unit A (Seafloor to Horizon 1): Unit A consists predominantly of low to moderate amplitude, 

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 217 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP F” location. 

These reflection patterns are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay laid down as a drape deposit.

Unit B (Horizon 1 to Horizon 2): Unit B consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous 

reflectors overlying low to moderate semi-continuous to chaotic reflectors. The center of the 

unit is characterized by a moderate to high amplitude continuous reflector indicative of a 

possible sand sheet. The unit is 714 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

patterns at the top of Unit B are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay, laid down as a drape 

deposit, while the bottom of the unit is comprised of thick interbedded mud-prone mass 

movement deposits and sandy channel fill. The coarser-grained possible sand sheet overlaying 

the low-amplitude mass movement deposits may indicate a risk of shallow water flow.

Unit C (Horizon 2 to Horizon 3): Unit C consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous

chaotic reflectors and is 410 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP F” location. Unit C is 

interpreted as mostly channel fill with some interbedded channel/overbank deposits of varying 

acoustic impedance.

Unit D (Horizon 3 to Horizon 4): Unit D consists of variable amplitude, semi-continuous to 

chaotic reflectors and is 992 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP F” location. These reflection 

patterns are interpreted as clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded sandy channel 

fill. High amplitude anomalies indicative of shallow gas were identified throughout Unit D, with 
Project No. 140310

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

the nearest anomaly located 229 feet south of the proposed wellbore. The coarser-grained 

channel fills occurring within Unit D may also represent possible shallow water flow hazards. A 

fault intersects the proposed Well “EP F” location 1,450 feet BML.

Unit E (Horizon 4 to Horizon 5): Unit E consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,278 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP F” location. The sediments in 

Unit E are interpreted as interbedded channel fills and clay-prone mass transport deposits.

Unit F (Horizon 5 to Horizon 6): Unit F consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 623 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP F” location. The sediments 

within the unit are interpreted as mostly clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded 

channel fills. A fault intersects the proposed Well “EP F” location 4,230 feet BML.

SHALLOW GAS

Anomalies of very high amplitude, commonly termed bright spots, are interpreted as potential 

areas 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 one of four levels. These are:

 Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators present.

 Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2 – 3 background level) 

and phase reversal. This may also include diffuse areas of gas blanking.

 Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3 – 4 background level) 

and phase reversal.

 High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4

background level), phase reversal, and a combination of other attributes indicative of the 

presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-down and masking of underlying sediments. 

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

Gas seeping from depth can be hazardous by significantly reducing the shear strength of 

sediment that may undermine seabed installations. Unit A has a negligible risk of gas. Units B, 

C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas. A moderate risk of gas was identified 

within Unit D, with the nearest anomaly located 229 feet south of the proposed well. 

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 53

miles southeast of the study area within Block 177, Desoto Canyon Area. The shallow water 

flow occurred at 1,915 feet below mudline and was classified as a low severity flow.

Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after 

deposition and form in unconsolidated and overpressured sands. The pressure rises with 

overburden causing a potentially hazardous condition for drilling operations. Some SWF 

intervals have proven difficult or impossible to detect on seismic profiles.

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “EP F” location suggests that medium to 

high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within portions of Units B, C, and D exhibit a 
Project No. 140310

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

moderate risk of SWF. Units E and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a 

negligible risk of SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be 

executed for any drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

Gas hydrates are an ice crystalline form of gas hydrocarbons in deepwater marine environments 

where the conditions of pressure and temperature are favorable. The hydrate stability zone is the 

depth interval between the seafloor and the point where the hydrate is no longer stable in form. 

The thermal gradient of the seabed soils determines the depth of the hydrate stability zone base. 

The acoustic impedance contrast caused between the hydrate and free gas trapped at the base of 

the hydrate stability zone forms a Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR) on seismic profiles. This 

BSR reflector cross cuts the normal seismic stratigraphy, much like a bottom multiple.

The areas where seafloor gas hydrates accumulate in the near-surface sediments of the Gulf of 

Mexico are generally unfavorable sites for drilling operations. Irregular seafloor topography, gas 

seeps, gas chimneys, seafloor hydrates and benthic communities may all be found in close 

association. There was no indication of gas hydrates, associated geologic features, or any 

obvious BSRs at the drill center.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Well “EP F” surface location is clear of geological constraints. No significant 

seafloor features are located at or within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP F” location that 

could interfere with drilling activities.

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP F” surface location is 5,409 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes less than 1° to the southeast.

No high or low seafloor amplitudes anomalies that may indicate the occurrence of hardgrounds, 

carbonates, benthic communities or potential expulsions are found within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP F” surface location.

Two pipelines (S-14091 Freeport-McMoran 4” Umbilical and S-14089 Freeport-McMoran 6” 

with S-14090 Freeport-McMoran 10” Casing) and one well (OCS-G-08484 Well No. SS-1) exist 

within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP F” location.

The assessment of seismic profiles suggests coarser, sand-prone channel fills occur in Units B,

C, and D. The information from the BOEM/BSEE in conjunction with the presence of the sandprone units infers a moderate risk of shallow water flow in these sand-prone units. Potential of 

shallow water flow in Units E and F is considered low while Unit A is negligible.

Interval amplitude anomalies which portray a moderate risk of shallow gas were observed within 

Unit D (1,341 – 2,333 feet BML). The closest anomaly is located 229 feet south of the proposed 

borehole location. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while Unit A is 

assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 
Project No. 140310

7

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please contact us if you have any questions 

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at the proposed Well “EP F”.

Figure 2. 3D seafloor bathymetry surrounding the proposed Well “EP F”.

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7391 through the proposed Well “EP F”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6417 through the proposed Well “EP F”.

Figure 5. Top-Hole Prognosis Chart for the proposed Well “EP F”.

Sheet 1. Well Site Clearance Map

Panel 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry

Panel 2. Side Scan Sonar Mosaic

Panel 3. Seafloor Amplitude

Panel 4. Seafloor and Subsurface Hazard
Project No. 140310

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

October 14, 2014

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “EP G”

Block 129 (OCS-G-10977)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to prepare 

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “EP G” location in Block 129 (OCS-G-10977), 

Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on the 

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG and a highresolution geophysical dataset collected with C&C’s Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) 

C-Surveyor IIITM. C&C completed three assessments which were utilized for this letter. The 

first, titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi

Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. The second, titled “Archaeological and Hazard 

Study, Blocks 85 and 129, Mississippi Canyon Area, Blocks 45 and 89, Desoto Canyon Area,” 

was completed in October 2007. The third, titled “Archaeological Assessment Report, King 

Field, Blocks 84 and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area,” was completed in July 2013. This site 

clearance letter is based on the findings provided within those reports. 

This letter provides a tophole drilling prognosis and addresses seafloor conditions within a 

2,000-foot radius of the proposed surface location. The depth limit of the investigation is 

approximately 1.6 seconds of two-way traveltime (~4,000 feet) below the mud line (BML). The 

reporting and mapping presented in this letter comply with the BOEM/BSEE guidelines provided 

in NTL No. 2008-G05 (Shallow Hazards Program), No. 2008-G20 (Revisions to the List of OCS 

Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports) and No. 2009-G40 

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

AUV Survey Data

C&C’s C-Surveyor IIITM AUV provided multibeam bathymetric mapping, high-resolution side 

scan sonar imagery, and subbottom profiles. The AUV remote-sensing instruments include a 

Simrad EM2000 Swath Bathymetric System (200 kHz), an EdgeTech DF4500 Side Scan Sonar 

(230 kHz with dynamic focusing), and an EdgeTech Chirp DW106 Subbottom Profiler (1.5–4.5 

kHz). All the raw digital data were logged utilizing proprietary software developed by C&C. 
Project No. 140310

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The multibeam system delivered a 3-meter gridded dataset with relative vertical accuracies 

within 20 centimeters.

The survey grid consisted of 50 north-south primary survey lines with 200 meter line spacing 

(Lines BPUSAUV07KS-0101-0150) and ten east-west tie lines spaced at 900 meters (Lines 

BPUSAUV07KS-0201-0210). Navigation fixes (event marks) were recorded continuously and 

annotated at 125-meter (410 foot) intervals along all survey lines. The survey grid was designed 

to provide a representative sampling with the subbottom profiler system and overlapping 

coverage with side scan sonar and multibeam echosounder systems.

3D Seismic Data

The 3D seismic data used for this assessment was provided in SEG-Y format. The data were 

loaded into Seismic Micro Technology’s (SMT) 2d/3dPAK for interpretation. The seismic data 

volume starts at 0 seconds and extends to 5.0 seconds of two-way traveltime. The inlines of the 

3D data volume run northwest to southeast while the crosslines run southwest to northeast, 

respectively. The inlines and crosslines are both spaced at 41.01-foot (12.5-meter) intervals. 

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

The 3D seismic data are zero phase, and the seafloor reflector is represented by a strong, positive 

amplitude peak flanked by troughs with absolute amplitude values of less than one-half of the 

peak value. The seismic data provided adequate screening of the regional seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions, and large scale geohazards (faults, salt, high acoustic impedance, 

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)

WELL LOCATION

The coordinates and calls for the proposed Well “EP G” surface location are tabulated below:

Table 1. Proposed Well “EP G”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 129,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“EP G” 1,338,920.00 10,485,260.00 28 53’ 21.573” N 87 56’ 32.826” W 820’ FNL 7,480’ FEL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is required for assessing deepwater benthic communities for 

proposed Well “EP G” (Sheet 1, Figure 2).

The geodetic datum used for this project is the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) with 

the Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid. The datum is projected using the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16 North (16N) with a central meridian at 93 00’W, a false easting of 

1,640,416.67 feet at the central meridian, and a false northing of 0.00 feet at 00 00’N. All 

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study map (Sheet 

1). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 
Project No. 140310

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The study area is located in the northeastern portion of the Gulf of Mexico within the 

northeastern corner of the Mississippi Canyon Area (designated by the BOEM), on the upper 

continental slope offshore Mississippi-Louisiana. MC129 is situated on the northern most 

portion of the Mississippi Fan, 134 miles east-southeast of Fourchon, Louisiana. This area of the 

fan consists of basin-like topography, with undulating seafloor, mass wasting depositional 

sequences, channel flow systems, canyons, and salt diapiric uplift. Two types of depositional 

sequences are identified in the region, referred to as condensed and expanded sections. 

Condensed sections are deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated 

hemipelagic clays. The expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of 

rapidly accumulated, coarse-grained clastic deposits (sands and gravels) of variable thickness. 

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP G” surface location is 5,304 feet below sea level 

(BSL). Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “EP G” location, the 

seafloor depth ranges from 4,980 feet in the south to 5,415 feet in the northeast (Sheet 1, Panel 1, 

Color Shaded Bathymetry Map). The seafloor is smooth in the vicinity of the proposed well 

location (Figure 2), and slopes northeast at a gradient of 4°. The drill center lies 1,000 feet north 

of a 400-foot high escarpment which marks the bounds of a shallow salt body.

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 1, Panel 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range 

of low to moderate acoustic amplitudes within the 2,000-foot radius area. These low to moderate 

seafloor amplitudes indicate finely textured seafloor sediments that are likely comprised of 

hemipelagic clay. The side scan sonar mosaic and multibeam backscatter images agree with 

these findings (Sheet 1, Panel 2). 

Two sonar contacts were identified near the proposed well location. Contact No. 26 is located 

603 feet to the south, and Contact No. 24 is located 1,797 feet to the northwest. Both contacts 

measure 3 feet in length, 3 feet wide, and have no measurable height off the seafloor.

The base of an escarpment is located 930 feet southwest of the proposed well location. This 

escarpment occurs along the edge of the Uchupi Salt Dome located south-southwest of the 

wellsite. 

There were no other naturally occurring potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well 

location or within the 2,000-foot radius area.

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

High-amplitude seismic seafloor anomalies are a potential indicator of carbonates and benthic 

community habitats. The seafloor at the proposed Well “EP G” and surrounding 2,000-foot 

radius contains no high or low positive seafloor amplitude anomalies associated with fluid 

expulsion or mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 1, Panel 3).
Project No. 140310

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 28 miles 

north of the proposed Well “EP G” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-

G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows one well and 7 pipelines within 2,000 

feet of the proposed well. A list of pipeline segments which occur in the vicinity can be found in 

Table 1. OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-3 is located 98 feet northwest of the proposed Well “EP 

E.” PLETs and other infrastructure associated with the Well No. SS-3 exist in proximity to the 

proposed drill center as well (Sheet 1, Panel 4).

Table 1. Existing pipelines near the proposed Well “EP E.”

Segment Distance from proposed Well “EP G”

S-13388 FMOG 4” Umbilical with 

S-13387 FMOG 12” Casing 112 feet northwest

S-13386 FMOG 8” 134 feet northwest

S-16086 FMOG 5” Umbilical 271 feet northwest

S-13384 FMOG 8” 134 feet northwest

S-13385 PXP 12” 134 feet northwest

S-16168 FMOG 4” Umbilical 311 feet northwest

S-16166 FMOG 6” with

S-16167 FMOG 10” Casing 161 feet northwest

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

Six (6) stratigraphic units (Units A to F), each consisting of one or more distinctive sequences, 

were assessed (Figures 3-5). Six horizons mark the upper and / or lower contacts of each of the 

successive units. 

The proposed wellbore intersects two shallow buried mass transport deposits identified in the 

subbottom profiler data. These deposits are located 9 feet and 55 feet below the seafloor and 

represent a periodic downslope transportation of unstable slope sediments by gravity flows. 

These acoustically amorphous units are composed of chaotic and mixed sequences of primarily 

soft clay with occasional coarser components. No blocks of intact material were observed within 

these sediment gravity flows. 

FMOG provided C&C with a check shot dataset of time-depth pairs for the sediment column. 

The following polynomial equation was derived from Total Vertical Depth (TVD) (feet) and the 

corresponding two-way traveltime (seconds) using the time-depth values to calculate depths 

below the seafloor:

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

where D = depth below seafloor in feet and T = time below seafloor in seconds.
Project No. 140310

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

A detailed description of the sequence units, beginning at the seafloor, can be found in the 2013

Geohazard Report. The Top-Hole Prognosis Chart (Figure 5) summarizes the stratigraphy.

Unit A (Seafloor to Horizon 1): Unit A consists predominantly of low to moderate amplitude, 

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 224 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP G” location. 

These reflection patterns are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay laid down as a drape deposit.

Unit B (Horizon 1 to Horizon 2): Unit B consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous 

reflectors overlying low to moderate semi-continuous to chaotic reflectors. The center of the 

unit is characterized by a moderate to high amplitude continuous reflector indicative of a 

possible sand sheet. The unit is 417 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

patterns at the top of Unit B are likely comprised of hemipelagic clay, laid down as a drape 

deposit, while the bottom of the unit is comprised of thick interbedded mud-prone mass 

movement deposits and sandy channel fill. The coarser-grained possible sand sheet overlaying 

the low-amplitude mass movement deposits may indicate a risk of shallow water flow.

Unit C (Horizon 2 to Horizon 3): Unit C consists of low to moderate amplitude, continuous

chaotic reflectors and is 269 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP G” location. Unit C is 

interpreted as mostly channel fill with some interbedded channel/overbank deposits of varying 

acoustic impedance.

Unit D (Horizon 3 to Horizon 4): Unit D consists of variable amplitude, semi-continuous to 

chaotic reflectors and is 880 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP G” location. These reflection 

patterns are interpreted as clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded sandy channel 

fill. High amplitude anomalies indicative of shallow gas were identified throughout Unit D, with 

the nearest anomaly located 926 feet northeast of the proposed wellbore. The coarser-grained 

channel fills occurring within Unit D may also represent possible shallow water flow hazards.

Unit E (Horizon 4 to Horizon 5): Unit E consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,234 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP G” location. The sediments in 

Unit E are interpreted as interbedded channel fills and clay-prone mass transport deposits.

Unit F (Horizon 5 to Horizon 6): Unit F consists of low to moderate amplitude, sub-parallel to 

chaotic reflectors and is 1,355 feet thick at the proposed Well “EP G” location. The sediments 

within the unit are interpreted as mostly clay-prone mass transport deposits with interbedded 

channel fills.

SHALLOW GAS

Anomalies of very high amplitude, commonly termed bright spots, are interpreted as potential 

areas 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 one of four levels. These are:

 Negligible – No amplitude anomalies or other gas indicators present.

 Low risk of gas – Generally indicated by increased amplitude (2 – 3 background level) 

and phase reversal. This may also include diffuse areas of gas blanking.
Project No. 140310

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

 Moderate risk of gas – Generally indicated by high amplitude (3 – 4 background level) 

and phase reversal.

 High risk of gas – Generally indicated by the highest amplitudes (in excess of 4

background level), phase reversal, and a combination of other attributes indicative of the 

presence of gas, particularly velocity pull-down and masking of underlying sediments. 

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

Gas seeping from depth can be hazardous by significantly reducing the shear strength of 

sediment that may undermine seabed installations. Unit A has a negligible risk of gas. Units B, 

C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas. A moderate risk of gas was identified 

within Unit D, with the nearest anomaly located 926 feet northeast of the proposed well.

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 53

miles southeast of the study area within Block 177, Desoto Canyon Area. The shallow water 

flow occurred at 1,915 feet below mudline and was classified as a low severity flow.

Sands with SWF potential often lie below a seal that prevents dewatering and compaction after 

deposition and form in unconsolidated and overpressured sands. The pressure rises with 

overburden causing a potentially hazardous condition for drilling operations. Some SWF 

intervals have proven difficult or impossible to detect on seismic profiles.

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “EP G” location suggests that medium 

to high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within portions of Units B, D, and E exhibit 

a moderate risk of SWF. Units C and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a 

negligible risk of SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be 

executed for any drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

Gas hydrates are an ice crystalline form of gas hydrocarbons in deepwater marine environments 

where the conditions of pressure and temperature are favorable. The hydrate stability zone is the 

depth interval between the seafloor and the point where the hydrate is no longer stable in form. 

The thermal gradient of the seabed soils determines the depth of the hydrate stability zone base. 

The acoustic impedance contrast caused between the hydrate and free gas trapped at the base of 

the hydrate stability zone forms a Bottom Simulating Reflector (BSR) on seismic profiles. This

BSR reflector cross cuts the normal seismic stratigraphy, much like a bottom multiple.

The areas where seafloor gas hydrates accumulate in the near-surface sediments of the Gulf of 

Mexico are generally unfavorable sites for drilling operations. Irregular seafloor topography, gas 

seeps, gas chimneys, seafloor hydrates and benthic communities may all be found in close 

association. There was no indication of gas hydrates, associated geologic features, or any 

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 
Project No. 140310

7

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Well “EP G” surface location is clear of geological constraints. No significant 

natural seafloor features are located at or within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “EP G” location 

that could interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “EP G” surface location is 5,304 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes 4° to the northeast.

Surface conductor jetting operations should encounter low resistance at the soils within the mass 

movement bodies at 9 and 55 feet below the mudline. 

No high or low seafloor amplitudes anomalies that may indicate the occurrence of hardgrounds, 

carbonates, benthic communities or potential expulsions are found within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP G” surface location. 

Seven pipelines and one well (OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-3) exist within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed Well “EP G” location.

The assessment of seismic profiles suggests coarser, sand-prone channel fills occur in Units B,

D, and E. The information from the BOEM/BSEE in conjunction with the presence of the sandprone units infers a moderate risk of shallow water flow in these sand-prone units. Potential of 

shallow water flow in Units C and F is considered low while Unit A is negligible.

Interval amplitude anomalies which portray a moderate risk of shallow gas were observed within 

Unit D (910 – 1,789 feet BML). The closest anomaly is located 926 feet northeast of the 

proposed borehole location. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while 

Unit A is assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 

Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please contact us if you have any questions 

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist
Project No. 140310

8

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

ENCLOSURES

Figure 1. Extracted wavelet and power spectrum at the proposed Well “EP G”.

Figure 2. 3D seafloor bathymetry surrounding the proposed Well “EP G”.

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7593 through the proposed Well “EP G”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6166 through the proposed Well “EP G”.

Figure 5. Top-Hole Prognosis Chart for the proposed Well “EP G”.

Sheet 1. Well Site Clearance Map

Panel 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry

Panel 2. Side Scan Sonar Mosaic

Panel 3. Seafloor Amplitude

Panel 4. Seafloor and Subsurface Hazard
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 4 – Pg. 9 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 4

HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

4.1 CONCENTRATION

FM O&G anticipates encountering 0 ppm H2S during the proposed operations.

4.2 CLASSIFICATION

In accordance with Title 30 CFR 250.490(c), FM O&G requests that the area of proposed 

operations be classified by the BOEM as H2S absent. 

4.3 H2S CONTINGENCY PLAN

An H2S Contingency Plan is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

4.4 MODELING REPORT 

Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 10 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 5

BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES 

The seafloor disturbing activities proposed in this plan are in water depths greater than 300 

meters (984’). C&C Technologies was contracted to provide an assessment of the shallow 

conditions at the proposed surface locations. The purpose of the assessment was to address 

seafloor conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 feet of the 

proposed well sites. FM O&G will avoid all high-density deepwater benthic communities by 

2,000 feet from each proposed mud and cuttings discharge location and 250 feet from the 

location of all other seafloor disturbances. As per NTL No. 2009-G40, “Deepwater Benthic 

Communities,” a map showing the 2,000 foot radius around the well site is included as 

Attachment 5-A.

5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)

Activities proposed in this EP do not fall within 305 meters (1000 feet) of a topographic “No 

Activity Zone;” therefore, no map is required per NTL No. 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive 

Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING)

All activities proposed under this EP will be conducted outside all Topographic Feature 

Protective Zones; therefore shunting of drill cuttings and drilling fluids is not required per NTL 

No. 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES)

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located within 61 meters (200 feet) of any 

pinnacle trend feature; therefore, a separate bathymetric map is not required per NTL No. 2009-

G39, “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of any live 

bottom (low relief) feature with vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live 

bottom (low relief) maps are not required per NTL No. 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive 

Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of 

potentially sensitive biological features; therefore, biologically sensitive area maps are not 

required.

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS 

BOEM has determined there is enough data gathered in Grid Area 16; therefore, FM O&G will 

not be conducting any ROV surveys either pre-spud or post-drill operations per NTL No. 2008-

G06, “Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys in Deepwater” (Extended by NTL No. 2014-N01, 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 11 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

“Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operators Pending Review 

and Reissuance”).

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND MARINE 

MAMMAL INFORMATION

The federally listed endangered and threatened species potentially occurring in the lease area 

and along the Gulf Coast are provided in the table below. 

Species Scientific Name Status Potential 

Presence

Critical Habitat Designated 

in the Gulf of Mexico

Lease 

Area

Coastal

Marine Mammals

Manatee, West 

Indian

Trichechus manatus latirostris E -- X Florida (peninsular)

Whale, Blue Balaenoptera masculus E X* -- None

Whale, Finback Balaenoptera physalus E X* -- None

Whale, 

Humpback

Megaptera novaeangliae E X* -- None

Whale, North 

Atlantic Right

Eubalaena glacialis E X* -- None

Whale, Sei Balaenopiera borealis E X* -- None

Whale, Sperm Physeter catodon 

(=macrocephalus)

E X -- None

Terrestrial Mammals

Mouse, Beach 

(Alabama, 

Choctawatchee, 

Perdido Key, St. 

Andrew)

Peromyscus polionotus E - X Alabama, Florida 

(panhandle) beaches

Birds

Plover, Piping Charadrius melodus T - X Coastal Texas, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Alabama and 

Florida (panhandle)

Crane, Whooping Grus Americana E - X Coastal Texas

Reptiles

Sea Turtle, 

Green 

Chelonia mydas T,E** X X None

Sea Turtle, 

Hawksbill 

Eretmochelys imbricata E X X None

Sea Turtle, 

Kemp’s Ridley 

Lepidochelys kempli E X X None

Sea Turtle, 

Leatherback 

Dermochelys coriacea E X X None

Sea Turtle, 

Loggerhead

Caretta caretta T X X Texas, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Alabama, 

Florida

Fish

Sturgeon, Gulf Acipenser oxyrinchus 

(=oxyrhynchus) desotoi

T X X Coastal Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Alabama and 

Florida (p panhandle)

Corals

Coral, Elkhorn Acopora palmate T - X Florida Keys and Dry 

Tortugas

Coral, Staghorn Acopora cervicornis T - X Florida
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 12 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

Abbreviations: E = Endangered; T = Threatened

* The Blue Fin, Humpback, North Atlantic Right, and Sei Whales are rare or extralimital in the Gulf of Mexico and are 

unlikely to be present in the lease area. ** Green Sea turtle is threatened, except for the Florida breeding population, which is listed as endangered.

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 have been determined to have a high potential for 

containing archaeological resources. In accordance with NTL No. 2005-G07 “Archaeological 

Surveys and Reports,” and NTL No. 2011-JOINT-G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease 

Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports,” archaeological survey reports

were provided for Mississippi Canyon Block 84 with EP (Control No. S-7638) approved on June 

11, 2014 and for Mississippi Canyon Blocks 85 and 129 with EP (Control No. S-7147) approved 

on September 24, 2009.

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION

Air and water quality information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL No. 2008-

G04, “Information requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations 

Coordination Documents” (Extended by NTL No. BOEM 2014-G05, “Extension of Prior Notices 

to Lessees”).

5.11 SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

Socioeconomic Information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL No. 2008-G04, 

“Information Requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations Coordination 

Documents” (Extended by NTL No. BOEM 2014-G05, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”).
Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 072372)

Inline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 40 meters (131.20 feet)

Crossline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 25 meters

(82.01 feet)

Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 130270)

-50'

-110'

Salt diapir

Fault scarp with seafloor displacement (Hachures on downthrown

side)

Subsurface fault with depth of burial (Hachures on downthrown side) -750'

Amplitude anomaly within Unit B (2.102 to 2.652 sec/BSL)

5-1,080 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit C (2.258 to 2.766 sec/BSL)

287-1,408 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Escarpment boundary

First generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

Second generation mass movement deposits with depth below

seafloor

Sonar contact & reference number

SONAR CONTACTS

NUM. DESCRIPTION X COORDINATE Y COORDINATE

22 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,326,763' 10,486,529'

23 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,615' 10,486,721'

25 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,535' 10,485,069'

HAZARD MAP

PROPOSED WELL EP C LOCATION

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

All infrastructure shown is from company file information only.

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

140310 Aug. 14, 2014

1,000' 0' 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET
Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 072372)

Inline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 40 meters (131.20 feet)

Crossline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 25 meters

(82.01 feet)

Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 130270)

-50'

-110'

Salt diapir

Fault scarp with seafloor displacement (Hachures on downthrown

side)

Subsurface fault with depth of burial (Hachures on downthrown side) -750'

Amplitude anomaly within Unit B (2.102 to 2.652 sec/BSL)

5-1,080 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit C (2.258 to 2.766 sec/BSL)

287-1,408 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Escarpment boundary

First generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

Second generation mass movement deposits with depth below

seafloor

Sonar contact & reference number

SONAR CONTACTS

NUM. DESCRIPTION X COORDINATE Y COORDINATE

22 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,326,763' 10,486,529'

23 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,615' 10,486,721'

25 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,535' 10,485,069'

HAZARD MAP

PROPOSED WELL EP D LOCATION

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

All infrastructure shown is from company file information only.

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

140310 Aug. 14, 2014

1,000' 0' 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET
Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number (Job

No. 072372)

Inline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 40 meters

(131.20 feet)

Crossline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 25 meters

(82.01 feet)

-50'

-110'

Salt diapir

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Escarpment boundary

First generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

Second generation mass movement deposits with depth below

seafloor

Sonar contact & reference number

SONAR CONTACTS

NUM. DESCRIPTION X COORDINATE Y COORDINATE

All infrastructure shown is from company file information only.

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

140310 Aug. 14, 2014

1,000' 0' 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Expulsion features with 250' avoidance area

Multiple fault zone

-10' Fifth generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

21 7.0'x7.0'x0.0' 1,335,475' 10,487,746'

24 3.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,337,768' 10,486,633'

26 3.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,338,713' 10,484,691'

HAZARD MAP

PROPOSED WELL EP E LOCATION

Block 129 (OCS-G-10977)

Mississippi Canyon Area
Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 072372)

Inline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 40 meters (131.20 feet)

Crossline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 25 meters

(82.01 feet)

Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number

(Job No. 130270)

-50'

-110'

Salt diapir

Fault scarp with seafloor displacement (Hachures on downthrown

side)

Subsurface fault with depth of burial (Hachures on downthrown side) -750'

Amplitude anomaly within Unit B (2.102 to 2.652 sec/BSL)

5-1,080 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit C (2.258 to 2.766 sec/BSL)

287-1,408 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Escarpment boundary

First generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

Second generation mass movement deposits with depth below

seafloor

Sonar contact & reference number

SONAR CONTACTS

NUM. DESCRIPTION X COORDINATE Y COORDINATE

22 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,326,763' 10,486,529'

23 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,615' 10,486,721'

25 10.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,329,535' 10,485,069'

HAZARD MAP

PROPOSED WELL EP F LOCATION

Block 84 (OCS-G-08484)

Mississippi Canyon Area

All infrastructure shown is from company file information only.

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

140310 Aug. 14, 2014

1,000' 0' 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET
Navigation trackline with name, direction run, fix, and fix number (Job

No. 072372)

Inline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 40 meters

(131.20 feet)

Crossline number for 3D seismic data Spacing = 25 meters

(82.01 feet)

-50'

-110'

Salt diapir

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Escarpment boundary

First generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

Second generation mass movement deposits with depth below

seafloor

Sonar contact & reference number

SONAR CONTACTS

NUM. DESCRIPTION X COORDINATE Y COORDINATE

HAZARD MAP

PROPOSED WELL EP G LOCATION

Block 129 (OCS-G-10977)

Mississippi Canyon Area

All infrastructure shown is from company file information only.

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

140310 Sep. 29, 2014

1,000' 0' 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Expulsion features with 250' avoidance area

Multiple fault zone

-10' Fifth generation mass movement deposits with depth below seafloor

21 7.0'x7.0'x0.0' 1,335,475' 10,487,746'

24 3.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,337,768' 10,486,633'

26 3.0'x3.0'x0.0' 1,338,713' 10,484,691'
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 6 – Pg. 13 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 6

WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES

“Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to the Gulf of Mexico” is 

included as Attachment 6-A.

6.2 MODELING REPORT 

Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
 Attachment 6-A. WASTES YOU WILL GENERATE, TREAT AND DOWNHOLE DISPOSE OR DISCHARGE TO THE GOM

Projected

Projected generated waste Projected ocean discharges Downhole Disposal

Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge Rate Discharge Method

Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings coated while drilling with WBM 2,200 BBLS/WELL 314 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharged to mudline prior to riser installation. Based on seven total 

days of drilling with WBM. No

Answer yes or no

Will drilling occur? If yes, you should list muds and cuttings

Water-based drilling fluid Water, NaCI (salt), PHPA polymer and Barium

Sulfate (Barite) 50,000 BBLS/WELL 7,143 BBLS/DAY/WELL

Discharge at the mudline prior to the riser installation.

Nominal amount of unused fluid may be discharged at the

surface. Based on seven days of drilling with WBM.

No

Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste

30,020 BBLS/WELL 158 BBLS/DAY/WELL USCG approved MSD with chlorination

Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Cuttings coated with synthetic drilling fluids,

including drilled out cement 7,500 BBLS/WELL 77 BBLS/DAY/WELL

Discharged to surface. Treated cutting will be discharged

overboard during drilling of the SBM intervals. Discharge rate is based 

upon 98 days of drilling. Cuttings will

be processed through a cuttings dryer, substantially reducing

the ROC percentage.

No

Domestic waste

Sanitary

Gray water from living quarters 65,740 BBLS/WELL 346 BBLS/DAY/WELL Chlorinate and discharge overboard No

Sanitary waste from living quarters, control 

rooms and change rooms.

Will you conduct well treatment, completion, or workover?

Miscellaneous discharges. If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity.

Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in for produced water.

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage

Deck Drainage Deck drainage from drilling floor 950 BBLS/WELL 5 BBLS/DAY/WELL No drill floor drainage routed to sea. All retained on board and 

processed to <15ppm or sent to shore for disposal No

No

Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2

Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit? General NPDES Permit # GMG290534

Well treatment fluids

Well completion fluids

Workover fluids

Desalinization unit discharge

Blowout prevent fluid

Ballast water

Bilge water

Excess cement at seafloor

Fire water 

Cooling water Sea Water with no additional chemicals 112,546,310 BBLS/WELL 592,349 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

No

No

N/A

Rejected water from the watermaker. 286,900 BBLS/WELL 1,510 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

333 BBLS/DAY/WELL

833 BBLS/DAY/WELL

N/A

Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region 6 

GOM GMG 290000 regulations.

Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region 6 

GOM GMG 290000 regulations.

N/A

Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2

N/A

2,000 BBLS/WELL

5,000 BBLS/WELL

N/A

Sea Water with no additional chemicals 380 BBLS/WELL 2 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

Cement Slurry 495 BBLS/WELL 495 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharge at seafloor during riserless operations. Discharge rate based 

upon 1 day (22" cement returns) No

N/A N/A N/A N/A No

Potable Water with

4% Stack-Magic ECO-Fv2 1,200 BBLS/WELL 6 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharge at the seafloor or with deck drainage when testedat surface No

Uncontaminated seawater used to maintain 

proper draft 27,000 BBLS/WELL 142 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard. Based upon 5 major ballast operations, with rig at operating draft minimal ballast change is required No

ATTACHMENT 6-A
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 7 – Pg. 14 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 7

AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS

Screen Questions for EP’s Yes No

Is any calculated Complex Total (CT) Emission amount (tons) associated with 

your proposed exploration activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated 

using the following formulas: CT = 3400D2/3 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

Are your proposed exploration activities located east of 87.5° W longitude? X

Do you expect to encounter H2S at concentrations greater than 20 parts per 

million (ppm)?

X

Do you propose to flare or vent natural gas for more than 48 continuous hours 

from any proposed well? X

Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liquids? X

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION

There are no existing facilities or activities co-located with the proposed activities. The Plan 

Emissions are the same as the Complex Total Emissions and are included as Attachment 7-A.

This information was calculated by:

Jean Martin

281-698-8544

jean.martin@jccteam.com
EXPLORATION PLAN (EP)

AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLIST

OMB Control No. 1010-0151

OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/2011

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 1 of 8

COMPANY Freeport -McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

AREA Mississippi Canyon 

BLOCK 84/85/129

LEASE OCS-G 08484/08797/10977

PLATFORM NA

WELL Locations A, B, E, F, 001 ST, G, H, and I

COMPANY CONTACT Jean Martin 

TELEPHONE NO. 281-698-8544

REMARKS

Drill, complete, test, flare & install subsea wellheads using two drillships, 

both similar to the Noble Sam Croft. Emissions calculations use actual 

horsepower rating of 64,369 and highest monthly average of actual fuel 

consumed, 18,377 gal/day, based on Noble Sam Croft 2014 fuel 

consumption records. 
EMISSIONS FACTORS

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 2 of 8

Fuel Usage Conversion Factors Natural Gas Turbines Natural Gas Engines Diesel Recip. Engine REF. DATE

SCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483 AP42 3.2-1 4/76 & 8/84

Equipment/Emission Factors units PM SOx NOx VOC CO REF. DATE

NG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83 AP42 3.2-1& 3.1-1 10/96

NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03 AP42 3.3-1 10/96

Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4 AP42 3.4-1 10/96

Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21 AP42 1.3-12,14 9/98

NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84 P42 1.4-1, 14-2, & 14 7/98

NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5 AP42 11.5-1 9/91

Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21 AP42 1.3-1 & 1.3-3 9/98

Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03 E&P Forum 1/93

Fugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005 API Study 12/93

Glycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6 La. DEQ 1991

Gas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034

Sulphur Content Source Value Units

Fuel Gas 3.33 ppm

Diesel Fuel 0.4 % weight

Produced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppm

Produced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weight
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 3RD YEAR

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 5 of 8

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Freeport -McMoRan Oil & Green Canyon 599 / 643 OCS-G 34998 / NA Locations A, B, E, F, 001 ST, G, H, and I Jean Martin 281-698-8544

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONS

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CO

DRILLING

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 

(Drillship #1 similar to Noble Sam 

Croft)

64,369 3109.0227 18377.00 24 183 45.37 208.14 1559.60 46.79 340.28 24.54 112.57 843.50 25.31 184.04

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 

(Drillship #2 similar to Noble Sam 

Croft) 

64369 3109.0227 18377.00 24 4 45.37 208.14 1559.60 46.79 340.28 0.54 2.46 18.44 0.55 4.02

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 53 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.23 1.06 7.96 0.24 1.74

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 27 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.42 1.92 14.39 0.43 3.14

VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNT

TANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 208333.33 24 2 0.12 14.87 12.56 80.94 0.00 0.36 0.30 1.94

2016 YEAR TOTAL 95.30 437.30 3290.72 110.84 795.67 25.72 118.01 884.64 26.83 194.88

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 56086.99

67.0
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 4TH YEAR

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 6 of 8

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Freeport -McMoRan Oil & Green Canyon 599 / 643 OCS-G 34998 / NA Locations A, B, E, F, 001 ST, G, H, and I Jean Martin 281-698-8544

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONS

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CO

DRILLING

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 

(Drillship #2 similar to Noble Sam 

Croft)

64369 3109.0227 18377.00 24 116 45.37 208.14 1559.60 46.79 340.28 15.55 71.36 534.68 16.04 116.66

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 

(Drillship #2) 64369 3109.0227 18377.00 24 107 45.37 208.14 1559.60 46.79 340.28 14.35 65.82 493.19 14.80 107.61

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 64 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.28 1.28 9.61 0.29 2.10

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 32 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.50 2.28 17.06 0.51 3.72

VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNT

TANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 208333.33 24 2 0.12 14.87 12.56 80.94 0.00 0.36 0.30 1.94

2017 YEAR TOTAL 95.30 437.30 3290.72 110.84 795.67 30.68 140.74 1054.89 31.94 232.02

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 56086.99

67.0
SUMMARY

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 8 of 8

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL

Freeport -

McMoRan Oil 

& Gas LLC

Green Canyon 599 / 643 OCS-G 34998 / 35001 NA Locations A, B, E, F, 

001 ST, G, H, and I

Emitted Substance

Year

PM SOx NOx VOC CO

2016 25.72 118.01 884.64 26.83 194.88

2017 30.68 140.74 1054.89 31.94 232.02

Allowable 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 2231.10 56086.99
Fuel Consumption Noble Sam Croft (6 months)

7/1/2014-12/31/2014

Day Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

1 27,474 12,918 18,357 15,243 14,477 16,432

2 26,998 12,971 13,473 15,243 14,820 18,096

3 23,511 13,895 14,979 15,771 14,345 18,413

4 10,725 14,609 15,982 15,507 14,979 17,911

5 36,297 20,605 16,854 15,243 14,001 18,413

6 30,565 13,288 18,228 14,873 16,854 16,379

7 28,927 15,613 15,428 14,054 18,783 16,564

8 28,134 15,269 17,884 13,261 12,575 15,745

9 33,154 16,458 25,942 15,798 14,080 14,054

10 30,486 17,039 18,360 12,337 16,669 11,201

11 14,218 16,405 16,088 15,137 14,160 13,578

12 13,890 16,115 17,515 14,001 18,730 18,516

13 13,895 20,183 18,202 16,511 14,397 18,122

14 13,948 20,315 18,651 15,296 11,307 12,495

15 10,382 15,428 14,873 5,072 16,722 12,707

16 13,367 17,330 16,881 16,141 14,265 12,997

17 12,152 14,550 16,907 16,326 14,133 11,095

18 12,971 15,956 17,700 12,971 13,129 12,284

19 15,507 14,714 20,605 13,578 16,326 13,287

20 12,363 15,454 15,058 13,869 14,530 12,310

21 15,216 15,164 18,809 12,812 17,911 13,235

22 19,337 18,281 16,907 14,582 15,084 13,446

23 17,303 14,794 14,530 13,895 17,673 16,801

24 11,941 14,767 16,405 13,103 16,590 17,277

25 12,944 14,952 17,171 12,099 19,707 15,005

26 20,368 13,552 19,628 13,103 16,986 13,922

27 10,699 14,873 14,477 13,552 17,911 13,446

28 11,941 14,873 13,499 14,318 16,643 12,892

29 12,707 14,873 13,895 16,141 16,247 14,820

30 13,394 14,873 14,280 17,752 16,801 15,692

31 14,873 13,687 16,379 18,096

TOTAL FUEL 

CONSUMED 

(GAL/MONTH) 569,687 483,804 507,568 443,968 470,835 465,231

AVG FUEL 

CONSUMED 

(GAL/DAY) 18,377 15,607 16,919 14,322 15,695 15,007

Month

Transit Days
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8 – Pg. 15 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 8

OIL SPILL INFORMATION

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING

All the proposed activities and facilities in this EP will be covered by the Oil Spill Response Plan 

(OSRP) submitted by Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Company No. 03280) on January 10, 

2014, revised on January 31, 2014, and approved on February 4, 2014 (OSRP Control No. O713). 

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES

Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location

Houma, LA

Harvey, LA

Venice, LA

Houma, LA

Harvey, LA

Venice, LA

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION

FM O&G’s primary equipment providers are Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) and National 

Response Corporation (NRCC). Clean Gulf Associates Services, LLC (CGAS) will provide 

closest available personnel, as well as a CGAS supervisor to operate the equipment. Through 

its Independent Contractor Network (ICN), NRCC will also provide closest available personnel, 

as well as an NRCC ICN supervisor to operate the equipment. 

8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION 

Category Regional OSRP

WCD - Drilling

EP

WCD - Drilling

Type of activity Exploratory Drilling

> 10 miles

Exploratory Drilling

> 10 miles

Facility location (area/block) GC 393 MC 84

Facility designation Well Location B Well Location C

Distance to nearest shoreline (mi) 96.5 mi 67 mi

Storage tanks (bbl) 0 0

Uncontrolled blowout (bbl) 400,000 bbl 376,345

Total volume (bbl) 400,000 376,345

Type of oil(s)

(crude, condensate, diesel)

Crude Crude

API gravity 25 o 32.8 o

Calculations and Assumptions for the Regional OSRP WCD drilling scenario were submitted 

and found acceptable in Exploration Plan (Control No. N-9739).

FM O&G has determined that the worst-case scenario from the activities proposed in this EP 

does not supersede the worst-case scenario from our approved Regional OSRP.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8 – Pg. 16 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

Since Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC has the capability to respond to the worst-case spill 

scenario included in our Regional OSRP submitted on January 10, 2014, revised on January 

31, 2014, and approved on February 4, 2014 (OSRP Control No. O-713), and since the worstcase scenario determined for our EP does not replace the worst-case scenario in our Regional 

OSRP, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC hereby certifies that Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

LLC has the capability to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case 

discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge, resulting from the activities proposed in 

this EP.

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

The Oil Spill Response Discussion is included as Attachment 8-A.

8.6 MODELING REPORT

Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan.
SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Management Act analysis, the largest spill volume

originating from the proposed activity would be a well blowout during drilling operations, 

estimated to be 376,345 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 32.8°.

Land Segment and Resource Identification

Trajectories 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 shown in Figure 1.

The BOEM OSRAM identifies a 21% probability of impact to the shorelines of Plaquemines 

Parish, Louisiana within 30 days. Plaquemines Parish includes Barataria Bay, the Mississippi 

River Delta, Breton Sound and the affiliated islands and bays. This region is an extremely 

sensitive habitat and serves as a migratory, breeding, feeding and nursery habitat for numerous 

species of wildlife. Beaches in this area vary in grain particle size and can be classified as fine 

sand, shell or perched shell beaches. Sandy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant.

Response

FM O&G will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as

practicable. A description of the response equipment 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 results indicate 14% or 

approximately 52,688 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with 

approximately 323,657 barrels remaining.

Spill Response MC 84, Well Location C Barrels of Oil 

WCD Volume 376,345

Less 14% natural evaporation/dispersion 52,688

Remaining volume 323,657

Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary 

storage equipment available to respond to the worst case discharge. 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 indicates 

how operations will be supported. 

FM O&G’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 an 

operations safety analysis, the 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 burning, the proper approvals have been 

obtained and the proper planning is in place, in-situ burning of oil may be attempted. Slick 

containment boom would be immediately called out and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore 

response strategies may include attempting to skim utilizing CGA’s, MSRC’s, and NRCC’s spill 

response equipment, with a total derated skimming capacity of 1,022,754 barrels. Temporary 

storage associated with skimming equipment equals 296,795 barrels. If additional storage is 

needed, various tank barges with a total of 1.4 million+ barrels may be mobilized and centrally 

located to provide temporary storage and minimize off-loading time. 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 Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana would depend 

upon existing environmental conditions. Shoreline protection would include the use of CGA’s 

and NRCC’s near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 

147,605 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 2,393 barrels. If 

additional storage is needed, a 47,000 barrel storage barge, a 25,000 barrel storage barge, three 

20,000 barrel storage barges, and three 23,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and 

centrally located to provide temporary storage and minimize off-loading time. Onshore response

may include the deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protection and sorbent boom 

on vegetated areas. Master Service Agreements with AMPOL and OMI Environmental will 

ensure access to 147,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom. Figure 2 outlines individual 

times needed for procurement, load out, travel 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, 

applicable Area Contingency and Geographical Response Plans 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 applicable 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 wetlands, 

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. FM O&G’s contract Spill Management Team 

holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan.

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, FM O&G can be 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 

86 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).
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

FM O&G will take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much

of the spilled 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 possible. Safety will take 

precedence over all other considerations during these operations. 

Coordination of response assets will be supervised by the designation of a SIMOPS group as 

necessary for close quarter vessel response activities. Most often, this group will be used during 

source control events that require a significant number of large vessels operating independently, 

but in coordination to complete a common objective, in a small area and in close coordination 

and support of each other. This group must also monitor the subsurface activities of each vessel 

(ROV, dispersant application, well control support, etc.). The SIMOPS group leader reports to 

the Source Control Section Chief.

In addition, these activities will be monitored by the spill management team (SMT) and Unified 

Command via a structured Common Operating Picture (COP) established to track resource and 

slick movement in real time.

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 appropriate 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 established
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 monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems 

Dispersant application assets

• Put aerial dispersant providers on standby

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

(refer to Section 18)

• Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface

• Deploy 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 stocks 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 that 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 dispersant 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 95’ Fast Response Vessels (FRVs)

• Designed to be a first vessel on scene

• Capable of maintaining the initial Command and Control function for on water recovery 

operations

• 24 hour oil spill detection capability
• Highly mobile and efficient skimming capability

• Use as far off-shore as safely possible

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 allowed

MSRC PSV-VOO Skimming Systems

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as near-shore as allowed by draft of vessel

• Use as far off-shore as needed

• Expected 24-hour mobilization

• Expected length of 200 foot or greater

• PSV-VOO with deck space of 150’ x 40’ to provide space for skimmer, marine storage 

tanks and boom

• PSV-VOO with 2,000-20,000 bbl below deck storage supplemented with 2 or more 500 

bbl marine portable tanks, if necessary, depending on below deck storage

MSRC Oil Spill Response Vessels (OSRV)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

• Use as near-shore as allowed by draft of vessel

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

• Use as far off-shore as needed

MSRC Fast Response Vessels (FRV)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

MSRC Responders

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

NRCC Oil Spill Response Barge (OSRB)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

NRCC Oil Spill Response Vessel (OSRV)

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed
NRCC Vessel of Opportunity Skimming System (VOSS)

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

• VOOs minimum 110’ in length

• VOOs with minimum of 8x15 of optimum deck space

• VOOs with 200-400 ft of boom

• Storage tanks of 100 bbls or more

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of contracted assets (See Appendix E)

• Early call out (to allow for tug boat acquisition and 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 FM O&G’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are ideal 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/ABS for vessel inspections

• Place VOOs in Division or Groups as needed

• Use organic on-board storage if appropriate

• Maximize non-organic storage appropriate to vessel limitations

• Decant as appropriate after approval to do so has been granted

• Assign bulk storage barges to each Division/Group

• Position bulk storage barges as close to skimming units as possible

• Utilize large skimming vessel (e.g. barges) storage for smaller vessel offloading 

• Maximize skimming area (swath) to the optimum width given sea conditions and 

available equipment

• Maximize use of oleophilic skimmers in all operations, but especially offshore

• Nearshore, use shallow water barges and shuttle to skimming units to minimize 

offloading time

• Plan and equip to use all offloading capabilities of the storage vessel to minimize 

offloading time 

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

• Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

• Ensure VOO crew members are trained prior to operations
• Determine assets to perform on water operation

• Build operations into safety plan

• Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

• Initial test burn to ensure effectiveness

Adverse Weather Operations:

In adverse weather, when seas are > 3 feet, the use of larger recovery and storage vessels, 

oleophilic skimmers, and large offshore boom will be maximized. Safety will be the overriding 

factor in all operations and will cease at the order of the Unified Command, vessel captain, or in 

an emergency, ”stop work” may be directed by any crew member.
Surface Oil Recovery Considerations and Tactics 

(Offshore and Near-shore Operations)

Maximization of skimmer-oil encounter rate

• Place barges in skimming task forces, groups, etc., to reduce recovered oil offloading 

time

• Place barges alongside skimming systems for immediate offloading of recovered oil 

when practicable 

• Use two vessels, each with heavy sea boom, in an open-ended “V” configuration to 

funnel surface oil into a trailing skimming unit’s organic, V-shaped boom and skimmer 

(see page 7, CGA Equipment Guide Book and Tactic Manual (CGATM)

• Use secondary vessels and heavy sea boom to widen boom swath beyond normal 

skimming system limits (see page 15, CGATM)

• Consider night-time operations, first considering safety issues

• Utilize all available advanced technology systems ( IR, X-Band Radar, etc.) to determine 

the location of, and move to, recoverable oil

• Confirm the presence of recoverable oil prior to moving to a new location

Maximize skimmer system efficiency

• Place weir skimming systems in areas of calm seas and thick oil

• Maximize the use of oleophilic skimming systems in heavier seas

• Place less mobile, high EDRC skimming systems (e.g. HOSS Barge) in the largest 

pockets of the heaviest oil

• Maximize onboard recovered oil storage for vessels. 

• Obtain authorization for decanting of recovered water as soon as possible

• Use smaller, more agile skimming systems to recover streamers of oil normally found 

farther from the source. Place recovered oil barges nearby

Recovered Oil Storage

• Smaller barges in larger quantities will increase flexibility for multi-location skimming 

operations

• Place barges in skimming task forces, groups, etc., to reduce recovered oil offloading 

time

• Procure and deploy the maximum number of portable tanks to support Vessel of 

Opportunity Skimming Systems if onboard storage is not available

• Maximize use of the organic recovered oil storage capacity of the skimming vessel

Command, Control, and Communications (C3

)

• Publish, implement, and fully test an appropriate communications plan

• Design an operational scheme, maintaining a manageable span of control

• Designate and mark C3 vessels for easy aerial identification

• Designate and employ C3 aircraft for task forces, groups, etc.

• Use reconnaissance air craft and Rapid Response Teams (RAT) to confirm the presence 

of recoverable oil
On Water Recovery Group

When the first skimming vessel arrives on scene, a complete site assessment will be conducted 

before recovery operations begin. Once it is confirmed that the air monitoring readings for O2, 

LEL, H2S, CO, VOC, and Benzene are all within the permissible limits, oil recovery operations 

may begin.

As skimming vessels arrive, they will be organized to work in areas that allow for the most 

efficient vessel operation and free vessel movement in the recovery of oil. Vessel groups will 

vary in structure as determined by the Operations Section of the Unified Command, but will 

generally consist, at a minimum, of the following dedicated assets:

• 3 to 5 – Offshore skimming vessels (recovery)

• 1 – Tank barge (temporary storage)

• 1 – Air asset (tactical direction)

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility for supply)

• 6 to 10 – Boom vessels (enhanced booming )

Example (Note: Actual organization of TFs will be dependent on several factors including, asset 

availability, weather, spilled oil migration, currents, etc.) 

The 95’ FRV Breton Island out of Venice arrives on scene and conducts an initial site 

assessment. Air monitoring levels are acceptable and no other visual threats have been observed. 

The area is cleared for safe skimming operations. The Breton Island assumes command and 

control (CoC) of on-water recovery operations until a dedicated non-skimming vessel arrives to 

relieve it of those duties. 

A second 95’ FRV arrives and begins recovery operations alongside the Breton Island. Several 

more vessels begin to arrive, including a third 95’ FRV out of Galveston, the HOSS Barge (High 

Volume Open Sea Skimming System) out of Harvey, a boom barge (CGA 300) with 25,000’ of 

42” auto boom out of Leeville, and 9 Fast Response Units (FRUs) from the load-out location at 

C-Port in Port Fourchon. 

As these vessels set up and begin skimming, they are grouped into task forces (TFs) as directed 

by the Operations Section of the Unified Command located at the command post. 

Initial set-up and potential actions:

• A 1,000 meter safety zone has been established around the incident location for vessels 

involved in Source Control 

• The HOSS Barge is positioned facing the incident location just outside of this safety zone 

or at the point where the freshest oil is reaching the surface

• The HOSS Barge engages its Oil Spill Detection (OSD) system to locate the heaviest oil 

and maintains that ability for 24-hour operations 
• The HOSS Barge deploys 1,320’ of 67” Sea Sentry boom on each side, creating a swath 

width of 800’ 

• The Breton Island and H.I. Rich skim nearby, utilizing the same OSD systems as the 

HOSS Barge to locate and recover oil

• Two FRUs join this group and it becomes TF1

• The remaining 7 FRUs are split into a 2 and 3 vessel task force numbered TF2 and TF3

• A 95’ FRV is placed in each TF

• The boom barge (CGA 300) is positioned nearby and begins deploying auto boom in 

sections between two utility vessels (1,000’ to 3,000’ of boom, depending on conditions) 

with chain-link gates in the middle to funnel oil to the skimmers 

• The initial boom support vessels position in front of TF2 and TF3 

• A 100,000+ barrel offshore tank barge is placed with each task force as necessary to 

facilitate the immediate offload of skimming vessels

The initial task forces (36 hours in) may be structured as follows:

TF 1

• 1 – 95’ FRV 

• 1 – HOSS Barge with 3 tugs

• 2 – FRUs

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 8 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 8 – Boom-towing vessels 

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

TF 2

• 1 – 95’ FRV 

• 4 – FRUs

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 10 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 10 – Boom-towing vessels

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

TF 3

• 1 – 95’ FRV 

• 3 – FRUs

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 8 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 8 – Boom-towing vessels

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)
Offshore skimming equipment continues to arrive in accordance with the ETA data listed in 

figure H.3a; this equipment includes 2 AquaGuard skimmers and 11 sets of Koseq Rigid 

Skimming Arms. These high volume heavy weather capable systems will be divided into 

functional groups and assigned to specific areas by the Operations Section of the Unified 

Command. 

At this point of the response, the additional TFs may assume the following configurations:

TF 4 

• 2 – Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1 – AquaGuard Skimmer

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

• 6 – Boom-towing vessels

TF 5 

• 3 – Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1 – AquaGuard Skimmer

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 8 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

• 8 – Boom-towing vessels

TF 6 

• 3 – Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

• 6 – Boom-towing vessels

TF 7 

• 3 – Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 6 – Boom-towing vessels
CGA Minimum Acceptable Capabilities for Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

Minimum acceptable capabilities of Petroleum Industry Designed Vessels (PIDV) for conducting 

Vessel of Opportunity (VOO) skimming operations are shown in the table below. PIDVs are 

“purpose-built” to provide normal support to offshore oil and gas operators. They include but 

are not limited to utility boats, offshore supply vessels, etc. They become VOOs when tasked 

with oil spill response duties.

Capability FRU KOSEQ AquaGuard

Type of Vessel Utility Boat Offshore Supply 

Vessel Utility Boat

Operating parameters

Sea State 3-5 ft max 9.8 ft max 3-5 ft max

Skimming speed ≤1 kt ≤3 kts ≤1 kt

Vessel size

Minimum Length 100 ft 200 ft 100 ft

Deck space for:

• Tank(s)

• Crane(s)

• Boom Reels

• Hydraulic Power Units

• Equipment Boxes

18x32 ft 100x40 ft 18x32 ft

Communication Assets Marine Band 

Radio Marine Band Radio Marine Band Radio

Tactical use of Vessels of Opportunity (VOO): FM O&G will take all possible measures to 

maximize the oil-to-skimmer encounter rate of all skimming systems, to include VOOs, as 

discussed in this section. VOOs will normally be placed within an On-water recovery unit as 

shown in figures below.

Skimming Operations: PIDVs are the preferred VOO skimming platform. OSROs are more 

versed in operating on these platforms and the vessels are generally large enough with crews 

more likely versed in spill response operations. They also have a greater possibility of having 

on-board storage capacity and the most likely vessels to be under contract, and therefore more 

readily available to the operator. These vessels would normally be assigned to an on-water 

recovery group/division (see figure below) and outfitted with a VOSS suited for their size and 

capabilities. Specific tactics used for skimming operations would be dependent upon many 

parameters which include, but are not limited to, safety concerns, weather, type VOSS on board, 

product being recovered, and area of oil coverage. Planners would deploy these assets with the 

objective of safely maximizing oil- to-skimmer encounter rate by taking actions to minimize 

non-skimming time and maximizing boom swath. Specific tactical configurations are shown in 

figures below.

The Fast Response Unit (FRU): A self-contained, skid based, skimming system that is 

deployed from the right side of a vessel of opportunity (VOO). An outrigger holds a 75’ long 
section of air inflatable boom in place that directs oil to an apex for recovery via a Foilex 250 

weir skimmer. The outrigger creates roughly a 40’ swath width dependent on the VOO beam. 

The lip of the collection bowl on the skimmer is placed as close to the oil and water interface as 

possible to maximize oil recovery and minimize water retention. The skimmer then pumps all 

fluids recovered to the storage tank where it is allowed to settle, and with the approval of the 

Coast Guard, the water is decanted from the bottom of the tank back into the water ahead of the 

containment boom to be recycled through the system. Once the tank is full of as much pure 

recovered oil as possible it is offloaded to a storage barge for disposal in accordance with an 

approved disposal plan. A second 100 barrel storage tank can be added if the appropriate 

amount of deck space is available to use as secondary storage. 
Tactical Overview

Mechanical Recovery – The FRU is designed to provide fast response skimming capability in the 

offshore and nearshore environment in a stationary or advancing mode. It provides a rated daily 

recovery capacity of 4,100 barrels. An additional boom reel with 440’ of offshore boom can be 

deployed along with the FRU, and a second support vessel for boom towing, to extend the swath 

width when attached to the end of the fixed boom. The range and sustainability offshore is 

dependent on the VOO that the unit is placed on, but generally these can stay offshore for 

extended periods. The FRU works well independently or assigned with other on-water recovery 

assets in a task force. In either case, it is most effective when a designated aircraft is assigned to 

provide tactical direction to ensure the best placement in recoverable oil. 

Maximum Sea Conditions – Under most circumstances the FRU can maintain standard oil spill 

recovery operations in 2’ to 4’ seas. Ultimately, the Coast Guard licensed Captain in charge of 

the VOO (with input from the CGAS Supervisor assigned) will be responsible to determine when 

the sea conditions have surpassed the vessel’s safe operating capabilities. 

Possible Task Force Configuration (Multiple VOOs can be deployed in a task force)

1 – VOO (100’ to 165’ Utility or Supply Vessel) 

1 – Boom reel w/support vessel for towing

1 – Tank barge (offshore) for temporary storage

1 – Utility/Crewboat (supply)

1 – Designated spotter aircraft

The VOSS (yellow) is being deployed and connected to an out-rigged arm. This is 

suitable for collection in both large pockets of oil and for recovery of streaming oil. 

The oil-to-skimmer encounter rate is limited by the length of the arm. Skimming 

pace is < 1 knot.
Through the use of an additional VOO, and using extended sea boom, the swath of 

the VOSS is increased therefore maximizing the oil-to-skimmer encounter rate. 

Skimming pace is < 1 knot.
The Koseq Rigid Sweeping Arm: A skimming system deployed on a vessel of opportunity. It 

requires a large Offshore or Platform Supply Vessel (OSV/PSV), greater than 200’ with at least 

100’ x 50’ of free deck space. On each side of the vessel, a 50’ long rigid framed Arm is 

deployed that consists of pontoon chambers to provide buoyancy, a smooth nylon face, and a 

hydraulically adjustable mounted weir skimmer. The Arm floats independently of the vessel and 

is attached by a tow bridle and a lead line. The movement of the vessel forward draws the rubber 

end seal of the arm against the hull to create a collection point for free oil directed to the weir by 

the Arm face. The collection weir is adjusted to keep the lip as close to the oil water interface as 

possible to maximize oil recovery while attempting to minimize excess water collection. A 

transfer pump (combination of positive displacement, screw type and centrifuge suited for highly 

viscous oils) pump the recovered liquid to portable tanks and/or dedicated fixed storage tanks 

onboard the vessel. After being allowed to sit and separate, with approval from the Coast Guard, 

the water can be decanted (pumped off) in front of the collection arm to be reprocessed through 

the system. Once full with as much pure recovered oil as possible, the oil is transferred to a 

temporary storage barge where it can be disposed of in accordance with an approved disposal 

plan. 

Tactical Overview

Mechanical Recovery – Deployed on large vessels of opportunity (VOO) the Koseq Rigid 

Sweeping Arms are high volume surge capacity deployed to increase recovery capacity at the 

source of a large oil spill in the offshore and outer nearshore environment of the Gulf of Mexico. 

They are highly mobile and sustainable in rougher sea conditions than normal skimming vessels 

(9.8’ seas). The large Offshore Supply Vessels (OSV) required to deploy the Arms are able to 

remain on scene for extended periods, even when sea conditions pick up. Temporary storage on

deck in portable tanks usually provides between 1,000 and 3,000 bbls. In most cases, the OSV 

will be able to pump 20% of its deadweight into the liquid mud tanks in accordance with the 

vessels Certificate of Inspection (COI). All storage can be offloaded utilizing the vessels liquid 

transfer system. 

Maximum Sea Conditions - Under most circumstances the larger OSVs are capable of remaining 

on scene well past the Skimming Arms maximum sea state of 9.8’. Ultimately it will be the 

decision of the VOO Captain, with input from the T&T Supervisor onboard, to determine when 

the sea conditions have exceeded the safe operating conditions of the vessel. 

Command and Control – The large OSVs in many cases have state of the art communication and 

electronic systems, as well as the accommodations to support the function of directing all 

skimming operations offshore and reporting back to the command post. 

Possible Task Force Configuration (Multiple Koseq VOOs can be deployed in a task force)

1 – > 200’ Offshore Supply Vessels (OSV) with set of Koseq Arms 

2 to 4 portable storage tanks (500 bbl)

1 – Modular Crane Pedestal System set (MCPS) or 30 cherry picker (crane) for deployment

1 – Tank barge (offshore) for temporary storage

1 – Utility/Crewboat (supply)

1 – Designated spotter aircraft

4 – Personnel (4 T&T OSRO)
Scattered oil is “caught” by two VOO and collected at the apex of the towed sea 

boom. The oil moves thought a “gate” at that apex, forming a larger stream of oil 

which moves into the boom of the skimming vessel. Operations are paced at >1. A 

recovered oil barge stationed nearby to minimize time taken to offload recovered 

oil.

This is a depiction of the same operation as above but using KOSEQ Arms. In this 

configuration, the collecting boom speed dictates the operational pace at > 1 knot to 

minimize entrainment of the oil.
Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) Procedure for Accessing Member-Contracted and other 

Vessels of Opportunity (VOOs) for Spill Response

• CGA has procedures in place for CGA member companies to acquire vessels of 

opportunity (VOOs) from an existing CGA member’s contracted fleet or other sources 

for the deployment of CGA portable skimming equipment including Koseq Arms, Fast 

Response Units (FRUs) and any other portable skimming system(s) deemed appropriate 

for the response for a potential or actual oil spill, WCD oil spill or a Spill of National 

Significance (SONS). 

• CGA uses Port Vision, a web-based vessel and terminal interface that empowers CGA to 

track vessels through Automatic Identification System (AIS) and terminal activities using 

a Geographic Information System (GIS). It provides live AIS/GIS views of waterways 

showing current vessel positions, terminals, created vessel fleets, and points-of-interest. 

Through this system, CGA has the ability to get instant snapshots of the location and 

status of all vessels contracted to CGA members, day or night, from any web-enabled PC.
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 possible

• 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

Surveillance

• 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 approved within 3 miles of shore or with less than 10 meters of 

water depth 

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

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• FRVs 

• Egmopol and Marco SWS 

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks

VOO

• Use FM O&G’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessel 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

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches
Shoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Considerations

• 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 ACP, and currently for 

Louisiana, 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 operations 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 impacted 

• 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 areas 
Decanting Strategy

Recovered oil and water mixtures 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 

the 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 response 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 Deepwater 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 employed 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 seas
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 prominent. 

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 major (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 

month.
FIGURE 1

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected 

utilizing FM O&G’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

Well Locations C-G: 

Drill, complete, test, 

flare and install subsea 

wellheads using a 

dynamically 

positioned drillship

MC 84, 

Well Location C

67 miles from shore

G08484 C57 Cameron, LA

Vermilion, LA

Terrebonne, LA

Lafourche, LA

Plaquemines, LA

St. Bernard, LA

Hancock & Harrison, MS

Jackson, MS

Mobile, AL

Baldwin, AL

Escambia, AL

Okaloosa, FL

Walton, FL

Bay, FL

1

1

2

2

21

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1
WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (67 miles from shore)

323,657 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)

API Gravity 32.8°

FIGURE 2 – Equipment Response Time to MC 84, Well Location C

Dispersants/Surveillance

Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant 

Capacity (gal)

Persons 

Req. From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout Travel to site Total Hrs

ASI

Basler 67T 2000 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.8 4.8

DC 3 1200 2 Houma, LA 2 2 1.1 5.1

DC 3 1200 2 Houma, LA 2 2 1.1 5.1

Aero Commander NA 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.8 4.8

MSRC

C-130 Spray AC 3,250 2 Kiln, MS 3 0.2 0.4 3.6

King Air BE90 Spray AC 250 2 Kiln, MS 3 0.3 0.7 4

Offshore Response

Offshore Equipment 

Pre-Determined 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

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Venice, LA 2 2 1 4.25 1 6.25

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Leeville, LA 2 0 2 6.5 0 10.5

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Galveston, TX 2 0 1 20.5 0 23.5

HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 8 Harvey, LA 7 0 5 12 1 25

Boom Barge (CGA-300)

42” Auto Boom (25000’) NA NA 1 Tug50 Crew

4 (Barge)

2 (Per Crew) Leeville, LA 4 0 6 18.5 1.5 30
Recovered Oil Storage PreDetermined 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

Kirby Offshore (available through contract with CGA)

RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 110000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 130000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 140000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 150000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60

RO Barge NA 150000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60
Offshore Equipment 

Pre-determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Hrs to 

GOM

Travel to 

Spill Site

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

NRCC

OSRV Energy

Vikoma Sea 50 1509 300 NA

4-6 Grand Isle, LA221 14.51 20.5

OSRV Admiral

Marco Class XI AB

8 Band Rope Mop

24000

2283

300 NA4-6 Galveston, TX221 45.51 51.5

OSRB Defender

Marco Class XI AB

Vikoma Cascade

24000

5520

16500 2 Tugs4-6 Bayou La Batre, AL423 18.51 28.5

OSRB Valor N/A 19000 2 Tugs4-6 Tampa, FL427 571 71
Offshore Equipment 

Pre-determined 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

MSRC

Louisiana Responder 

Transrec 350 + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

10567 4000 NA 14 Fort Jackson, LA20 4.571 14.5

MSRC 452 Offshore Barge

1 Crucial Disk 88/30

1 Desmi Ocean

2,640‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

11122

3017 45000 3 Tugs

6 Fort Jackson, LA 2.506 131 22.5

Mississippi Responder 

Transrec 350 + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

10567 4000 NA 14 Pascagoula, MS20281 13

MSRC 402 Offshore Barge

2 Crucial Disk 88/30 2,640‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

22244 40300 3 Tugs6 Pascagoula, MS 2.503 141 20.5

Deep Blue Responder 

LFF 100 Brush + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

18086 4000 NA 14 Fourchon, LA201 101 14

Gulf Coast Responder 

Transrec 350 + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

10567 4000 NA 14 Lake Charles, LA204 251 32

Texas Responder 

Transrec 350 + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

10567 4000 NA 14 Galveston, TX201 321 36

MSRC 570 Offshore Barge

2 Crucial Disk 88/30

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

22244 56900 3 Tugs6 Galveston, TX 2.502 58.51 64

Southern Responder 

Transrec 350 + OSRV

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

10567 4000 NA 14 Ingleside, TX201 431 47

MSRC 403 Offshore Barge

1 Crucial Disk 88/30

2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom

11122 40300 3 Tugs6 Ingleside, TX 2.502 801 85.5
Staging Area: Venice

Offshore Equipment 

Preferred 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

T&T Marine (available through direct contract with CGA)

Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston, TX 4 12 13 7.5 2 38.5

Koseq Skimming Arms (6) 106974 12000 6 Utility 36 Galveston, TX 24 24 13 7.5 2 70.5

Koseq Skimming Arms (3) 53487 6000 3 Utility 18 Galliano, LA 24 24 1 7.5 2 58.5

Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Harvey, LA 24 24 2 7.5 2 59.5

CGA

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City, LA 2 2 5 7.5 1 17.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey, LA 2 2 2 7.5 1 14.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston, TX 2 2 13 7.5 1 25.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Aransas Pass, TX 2 2 18 7.5 1 30.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles, LA 2 2 8 7.5 1 20.5

FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville, LA 2 2 5 7.5 1 17.5

FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice, LA 2 2 0 7.5 1 12.5

Offshore Equipment Preferred 

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

MSRC

WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5

Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 

ili

6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5

Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 

ili

6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (2) 2742 400 2 

ili

12 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5

Walosep 4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5

Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 

ili

6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5

Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1

ili

6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Port Arthur, TX 1 2 10 7.5 1 21.5

Queensboro Skimmer (5) 4525 400 5 

ili

30 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

Desmi Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5
Offshore Equipment Preferred 

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

MSRC

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA128 7.51 19.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA1287.51 19.5

AardVac Skimmer (1) 3840 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA128 7.51 19.5

Transrec 350 Skimmer (1) 10567 400 1 

ili

6 Lake Charles, LA128 7.51 19.5

Crucial Disk 88/30 Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA

128 7.51 19.5

Crucial Disk 88/30 Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA

128 7.51 19.5

Transrec 350 Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA

128 7.5119.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Baton Rouge, LA125 7.51 16.5

Transrec 350 Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 400 1 PSV 14 Houma, LA

124 7.51 15.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Port Fourchon, LA125 7.51 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA

125 7.51 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA

125 7.51 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA

125 7.51 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1)

1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA

125 7.51 16.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400

1

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Walosep W4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Foilex 200 Skimmer (1) 1989 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 

ili

6 Belle Chasse, LA122 7.51 13.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5

GT-185 Skimmer (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5
Offshore Equipment Preferred 

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

MSRC

AardVac Skimmer (1) 3840 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5

WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5

Queensboro Skimmer (1)905 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5

Stress II Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Pascagoula, MS126 7.51 17.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Tampa, FL12 21 7.51 32.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

ili

6 Tampa, FL12 21 7.51 32.5

WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Tampa, FL12 21 7.51 32.5

Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 

ili

6 Tampa, FL12 21 7.51 32.5

GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 

U ili

6 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 

ili

6 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5

Walosep W4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

U ili

6 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5

AardVac Skimmer (2) 7680 400 2 

U ili

12 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5

WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

ili

6 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5

Desmi Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 

U ili

6 Miami, FL12 27 7.51 38.5
Offshore Equipment Preferred 

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

NRCC

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL44 26 17.21 52.2

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Belle Chasse, LA442 17.21 28.2

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 New Iberia, LA446 17.21 32.2

Action 48 Skimmer 2414 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Key West, FL44 31 17.21 57.2

Hoyle Disc Skimmer 1632 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Tampa, FL44 21 17.21 47.2

4-Band Rope Mop Skimmer 1509 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL44 26 17.21 52.2

4-Band Rope Mop Skimmer 1509 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Mobile, AL447 17.21 33.2

4-Band Rope Mop Skimmer (2) 3018 200 1 Offshore 

Vessel

8-16 New Iberia, LA446 17.21 32.2

4-Band Rope Mop Skimmer (2) 3018 200 1 Offshore 

Vessel

8-16 Corpus Christi, TX44 18 17.21 44.2

Vikoma Cascade Skimmer 5520 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Baytown, TX44 12 17.21 38.2

Vikoma Cascade Skimmer 5520 100 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Sulphur, LA449 17.21 35.2

VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 Port Arthur, TX44 10 17.21 36.2

VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Offshore 

Vessel

4-8 La Porte, TX44 12 17.21 38.2
Offshore Equipment Preferred 

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

1000’ Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey, LA 1 4 2.1 7.5 6 20.6

MSRC

67” Curtain Pressure Boom (18480’) NA NA 14* 7 Lake Charles 1 2 8 7.1 1 19.1

67” Curtain Pressure Boom (8895’) NA NA 12* 6 Pascagoula 1 2 5.5 7.1 1 16.6

2000’ Hydro Fire Boom NA NA 8* 8 Lake Charles 1 4 8 7.1 6 19.1

NRCC

42” Boom (1000’) NA NA 1 Offshore 

Vessel 4-8 Bayou La Batre, AL 4 4 6 7.5 1 22.5

42” Boom (3300’) NA NA 2 Offshore 

Vessels 8-16 Tampa, FL 4 4 21 7.5 1 37.5

42” Boom (2000’) NA NA 1 Offshore 

Vessel 4-8 Baytown, TX 4 4 12 7.5 1 28.5

42” Boom (1000’) NA NA 1 Offshore 

Vessel 4-8 Port Arthur, TX 4 4 10 7.5 1 26.5

42” Boom (4000’) NA NA 2 Offshore 

Vessels 8-16 Corpus Christi, TX 4 4 18 7.5 1 34.5

1000’ Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 6 Utility 20 New Iberia, LA 4 4 6 7.5 1 22.5

* Utility Boats, Crew Boats, Supply Boats, or Fishing Vessels
Nearshore Response

Nearshore Equipment 

Pre-determined 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

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Galveston 2 6 N/A 48 1 57

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Morgan City 2 6 N/A 48 1 57

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Leeville 2 6 N/A 48 1 57

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 2 6 N/A 48 1 57

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Aransas Pass 2 0 3 24 0 29

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Morgan City 2 0 3 6 0 11

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Lake Charles 2 0 3 12 0 17

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 2 0 3 3 0 8

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (Available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36
Staging Area: Venice

Nearshore Equipment With Staging EDRC Storage 

Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Load Out

Travel to 

Staging

Travel to 

Deployment

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 2 2 12.7 2 0 18.7

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 2 2 4.9 2 0 10.9

SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 2 0 14

SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 2 2 4.4 2 0 10.4

SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 2 2 0 2 0 6

Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Harvey 2 2 2.1 2 0 8.1

Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 2 0 14

Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Galveston 2 2 12.7 2 0 18.7

Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Harvey 2 2 2.1 2 0 8.1

4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 2 0 14

4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 2 2 2.1 2 0 8.1

2 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118) 240 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 2 0 14

2 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118) 240 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 2 2 2.1 2 0 8.1

NRCC

Action 24 Skimmer 823 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Baytown, TX 4 4 12 2 1 23

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Tampa, FL 4 4 21 2 1 32

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 4 4 26 2 1 37

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 New Iberia, LA 4 4 6 2 1 17

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Corpus Christi, TX 4 4 18 2 1 29

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 La Porte, TX 4 4 12 2 1 23

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Port Arthur, TX 4 4 10 2 1 21

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Cocoa, FL 4 4 22 2 1 33

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Pensacola, FL 4 4 8 2 1 19

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Belle Chasse, LA 4 4 2 2 1 13

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 New Iberia, LA 4 4 6 2 1 17

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Sulphur, LA 4 4 8 2 1 19

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore 

Vessel 4-8 Atlantic Beach, FL 4 4 18 2 1 29
Shoreline Protection

Staging Area: Venice

Shoreline 

Protection Boom VOO Persons Req. 

Storage/Warehouse

Location

Hrs to 

Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

Venice

Travel to 

Deployment Site

Hrs to 

Deploy Total Hrs

AMPOL (Available through MSA)

42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 6 2 12 24

20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2 2 6 14

OMI Environmental (Available through MSA)

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 6 2 3 13

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 12 2 3 19

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 9.6 2 3 16.6

20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 2 2 6 12

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 4.5 2 3 11.5

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 4 2 3 11

15,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 2 2 4 12

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 Harvey 2 2 2.1 1 2 9.1

Bird Scare Guns (48) NA NA NA 2 Harvey 2 2 2.1 1 2 9.1

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 2 2 12.7 1 2 19.7

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Aransas Pass 2 2 17.7 1 2 24.7

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 2 2 8 1 2 15

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Leeville 2 2 4.4 1 2 11.4

Response Asset Total

Offshore EDRC 1,022,754

Offshore Recovered Oil Capacity 1,696,795+

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 147,605

Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Capacity 203,393
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 9 – Pg. 17 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 9

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS

FM O&G will monitor loop currents per the requirements as set forth in NTL No. 2009-G02, 

“Ocean Current Monitoring” (Extended by NTL No. 2014-G05, “Extension of Prior Notices to 

Lessees”).

9.2 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. 

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. 

FM O&G will adhere 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 Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL No. 2012-BSEE-G01, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected 

Species Reporting”

• NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and 

Protected Species Observer Program”

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located in the Flower Garden Banks National 

Marine Sanctuary; therefore, relevant information is not required in this EP. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 10 – Pg. 18 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 10

LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

Exploration activities are subject to the following stipulations attached to Mississippi Canyon

Blocks 84, 85 and 129 (OCS-G Leases 08484, 08797 and 10977).

10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA)

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are located within designated Military Warning Area 

W-155C. The Fleet Area Control and Surveillance in Pensacola, Florida, was contacted May 29, 

2014 in order to coordinate and control the electromagnetic emissions use of vessels and 

aircraft during the proposed operations.

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

In accordance with the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act, FM O&G will: 

(a) Collect and remove flotsam resulting from activities related to exploration, development, and 

production of this lease; 

(b) Post signs in prominent places on all vessels and platforms used as a result of activities 

related to exploration, development, and production of this lease detailing the reasons (legal 

and ecological) why release of debris must be eliminated; 

(c) Observe for marine mammals and sea turtles while on vessels, reduce vessel speed to 10 

knots or less when assemblages of cetaceans are observed, and maintain a distance of 90 

meters or greater from whales, and a distance of 45 meters or greater from small cetaceans and 

sea turtles; 

(d) Employ mitigation measures prescribed by BOEM/BSEE or the National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS) for all seismic surveys, including the use of an “exclusion zone” based upon the 

appropriate water depth, ramp-up and shutdown procedures, visual monitoring, and reporting; 

(e) Identify important habitats, including designated critical habitat, used by listed species (e.g., 

sea turtle nesting beaches, piping plover critical habitat), in oil spill contingency planning and 

require the strategic placement of spill cleanup equipment to be used only by personnel trained 

in less-intrusive cleanup techniques on beaches and bay shores; and 

(f) Immediately report all sightings and locations of injured or dead protected species (e.g., 

marine mammals and sea turtles) to the appropriate stranding network. If oil and gas industry 

activity is responsible for the injured or dead animal (e.g., because of a vessel strike), the 

responsible parties should remain available to assist the stranding network. If the injury or death 

was caused by a collision with the lessee’s vessel, the lessee must notify BOEM within 24 hours 

of the strike. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 10 – Pg. 19 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

BOEM and BSEE issue Notices to Lessees (NTLs), which more fully describe measures 

implemented in support of the above-mentioned implementing statutes and regulations, as well 

as measures identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS arising from, among 

others, conservation recommendations, rulemakings pursuant to the MMPA, or consultation. 

The lessee and its operators, personnel, and subcontractors, while undertaking activities 

authorized under this lease, must implement and comply with the specific mitigation measures 

outlined in NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected 

Species Reporting;” NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation 

Measures and Protected Species Observer Program;” and NTL No. 2012-BSEE-G01, “Marine 

Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination.” At the lessee’s option, the lessee, its operators, 

personnel, and contractors may comply with the most current measures to protect species in 

place at the time an activity is undertaken under this lease, including but not limited to new or 

updated versions of the NTLs identified in this paragraph. The lessee and its operators, 

personnel, and subcontractors will be required to comply with the mitigation measures, identified 

in the above referenced NTLs, and additional measures in the conditions of approvals for their 

plans or permits.

10.3 PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84,85 and 129 have been determined to be located in an area where 

archaeological resources may exist. In accordance with NTL 2005-G07, “Archaeological 

Surveys and Reports,” and NTL 2001-JOINT-G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks 

Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports,” archaeological survey reports were 

submitted for Mississippi Canyon Block 84 with EP (Control No. S-7638) approved June 11, 

2014 and for Mississippi Canyon Blocks 85 and 129 with EP (Control No. S-7147) approved on 

September 24, 2009. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 11 – Pg. 20 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 11

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located within Florida; therefore, mitigation

information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

FM O&G will adhere 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 Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL No. 2012-BSEE-G01, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected 

Species Reporting”

• NTL No. 2012-JOINT-G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and 

Protected Species Observer Program”
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 12 – Pg. 21 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 12

SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

12.1 GENERAL

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

conditions will be utilized. Information regarding the vessels and aircraft to be used to support 

the proposed activities is provided in the table below. 

Type Maximum Fuel 

Tank Capacity

Maximum Number 

in Area at Any 

Time

Trip Frequency or 

Duration

Crew boat 800 bbl 1 2/Week

Supply boat 2,000 bbl 1 1/Week

Helicopter 760 gal 1 10/week

2.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS

Information regarding vessels to be used to supply diesel oil for fuel and other purposes is 

provided in the table below.

Size of Fuel Supply 

Vessel (ft)

Capacity of Fuel 

Supply Vessel

Frequency of Fuel 

Transfers

Route Fuel Supply 

Vessel Will Take

300 ft 850,000 gal 1/Month Shortest route from 

Shorebase to block

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION 

Drilling fluid transportation information is not required to be submitted with this plan. 

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION

A table, “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore,” is included as Attachment 12-

A.

12.5 VICINITY MAP

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 routes of the 

support vessels and aircraft that will be used when traveling between the onshore support 

facilities and the drilling unit is included as Attachment 12-B.
Attachment 12-A. WASTE YOU WILL TRANSPORT AND/OR DISPOSE OF ONSHORE

Transport Method Name/Location of

Facility

Amount Disposal

Method

Solid and Liquid

Wastes

Transportation

Waste Disposal

Synthetic-based drilling fluid

Cuttings wetted with Water-based fluid

Re-used

N/A

N/A

SBM Tanks in Support Vessels MI-Swaco Fourchon, LA 24,500 BBLS/WELL

Will drilling occur? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings.

Composition

Projected Generated

Wastes

Oil-based drilling fluid or mud N/A N/A N/A N/A

Produced sand

Will you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge? If yes, fill in the appropriate rows.

Trash and debris

Used oil

N/A N/A

No production is proposed under this Initial Exploration Plan

Refuse generated during operations: 

paper, cardboard, metal, and glass

Compactor bags in storage bins on 

Supply/Crew Boat

Gulf Offshore Logistics

Fourchon, LA 350,000 LBS/WELL

Recycled if possible, 

transported to 

landfill otherwise

Used Engine Oil Proper DOT containers on supply boat Univar

Carencro, LA 115 BBLS/WELL

SBM/Cuttings

N/A

N/A

Cuttings wetted with oil-based fluids

Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in produced sand.

Cuttings wetted with Synthetic-based

fluid Cuttings Boxes on Supply Boat Newpark Environmental Services 

Fourchon, LA

N/A N/A

1,700 BBLS/Well

N/A

N/A

Recycled

N/A

Recycled or 

Incinerated

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Wash water

Chemical product wastes

ATTACHMENT 12-A
...\POE DOCD\MC\King\Vicinity.dgn
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 13 – Pg. 22 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 13

ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

13.1 GENERAL

The onshore facilities that will be used to provide supply and service support for the proposed 

activities is provided in the table below.

Name Location Existing/New/Modified

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & 

Gas LLC Shorebase

Fourchon, Louisiana Existing

MI-Swaco Mud Plants Fourchon, Louisiana Existing

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION

There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will FM O&G expand the 

existing shorebase as a result of the operations proposed in this EP.

13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE

A support base construction or expansion timetable is not required for the activities proposed in 

this plan. 

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL

The Table, “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore, “is included as Attachment 

12-A.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 14 – Pg. 23 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 14

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

Under direction of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), the state of Alabama developed 

a Coastal Zone Management Program (CZMP) to allow for the supervision of significant land 

and water use activities that take place within or that could significantly affect the Alabama 

coastal zone. 

Proposed activities are 92 miles from the Alabama shore. Measures will be taken to avoid or 

mitigate the probable impacts. FM O&G will operate in compliance with existing federal and 

state laws, regulations, and resultant enforceable program policies in Alabama’s Coastal Zone 

Management Program. 

The OCS related oil and gas exploratory and development activities having potential impact on 

the Alabama Coastal Zone are based on the location of the proposed facilities, access to those 

sites, best practical techniques for drilling locations, drilling equipment guidelines for the 

prevention of adverse environmental effects, effective environmental protection, emergency 

plans and contingency plans.

The policies and corresponding sections within this Exploration Plan identified by the State of 

Alabama Coastal Area Management Program (ACAMP) as being related to OCS Plans are 

provided in the table below.

Enforceable Program Policies of the Alabama Coastal Area Management Program 

(ACAMP) 

Policy Plan 

Section

Comments

Coastal Resource Use Policies

Coastal 

Development

Dock and port facilities in Louisiana will be used. There will 

be no new construction, dredging, or filling in Alabama state 

waters. There will be no new commercial development, 

capital improvements nor employment effects in Alabama’s 

coastal zone.

Mineral Resource 

Exploration and 

Extraction

Commercial Fishing 8

Hazard 

Management

3 Shallow Hazards Reports were prepared and submitted to 

BOEM for Mississippi Canyon Block 84 with EP (Control 

No. S-7638) approved June 11, 2014 and for Mississippi 

Canyon Blocks 85 and 129 with EP (Control No. S-7147) 

approved on September 24, 2009 in order to identify and 

assess the seafloor and shallow geologic conditions in 

these blocks.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 14 – Pg. 24 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

Policy Plan 

Section

Comments

Shoreline Erosion 8

Recreation 8

Transportation 12

Natural Resource Protection Policies

Biological 

Productivity

8

Water Quality 8

Water Resources 8

Air Quality 7

Wetlands and 

Submerged 

Grassbeds

8

Beach and Dune 

Protection

8

Wildlife Habitat 

Protection

8

Endangered Species 8

Cultural Resources 

Protection

5 Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129 are located in an 

area where historic shipwrecks may exist. Archaeological 

reports were prepared by C&C Technologies and it was 

determined that there are no known historic shipwrecks 

located in the block. The report for Mississippi Canyon 

Block 84 was submitted with EP (Control No. S-7638) 

approved June 11, 2014 and for Mississippi Canyon Blocks 

85 and 129 with EP (Control No. S-7147) approved on 

September 24, 2009.

A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Alabama is included as 

Attachment 14-A

. 

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 15 – Pg. 25 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 15

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 

The Environmental Impact Analysis is included as Attachment 15-A.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G)

Supplemental Exploration Plan

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129

OCS-G 08484, 08797, and 10977

(A) IMPACT PRODUCING FACTORS

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 

emplacements, 

etc.)

Wastes sent 

to shore for 

treatment 

or disposal

Accidents 

(e.g., oil 

spills, 

chemical 

spills, H2S 

releases)

Discarded

Trash &

Debris

Site-specific at Offshore 

Location

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

Pinnacle Trend area live bottoms (2) (2) (2)

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

Benthic communities X(4)

Water quality X X X

Fisheries X X X

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

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

Air quality X(9)

Shipwreck sites (known or 

potential)

(7)

Prehistoric archaeological sites X(7)

Vicinity of Offshore Location

Essential fish habitat X X X(6)

Marine and pelagic birds X X X

Public health and safety (5)

Coastal and Onshore

Beaches X(6) X

Wetlands X(6)

Shore birds and coastal nesting 

birds

X(6) X

Coastal wildlife refuges X

Wilderness areas X
Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

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

any anchors will be on the seafloor within the:

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 bank) 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 (LowRelief) 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 activities 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 action 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 having 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 distance 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 habitats.

9) Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle tankers or barges.
(B) ANALYSIS

Site-Specific at Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129

Proposed operations consist of the drilling, completion, testing, flaring and installation of subsea 

wellheads for 5 locations. For these operations, the following surface locations are proposed: 

Mississippi Canyon Block 84: C, D, and F; Mississippi Canyon Block 129: E and G.

(Mississippi Canyon Block 85 is the bottom-hole site for location E.)

Operations will be conducted with a Dynamically Positioned Drillship.

1. Designated Topographic Features

Potential IPFs on topographic features include physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents, 

and accidents. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are 

approximately 97 miles from the closest designated Topographic Features Stipulation Block

(Sackett Bank) and a Dynamically Positioned Drillship is being utilized for drilling operations; 

therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are approximately 97 miles from the 

closest designated Topographic Features Stipulation Block (Sackett 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 statistics 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 FM O&G’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions 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 pinnacle trend area live bottoms include physical disturbances to the seafloor, 

effluents, and accidents. 
Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are 

approximately 24 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area and a Dynamically 

Positioned Drillship is being utilized for drilling operations; therefore, no adverse impacts are 

expected. 

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are approximately 24 miles from the 

closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area; 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 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 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 organisms. 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 FM O&G’s

Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions 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 physical disturbances to the seafloor, 

effluents, and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are not 

located in areas characterized by the existence of live bottoms, and these leases do not contain 

Live-Bottom Stipulations requiring photo documentation surveys and survey reports.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are not located in an area characterized 

by the existence of live bottoms; 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 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 FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 
There are no other IPFs (including emissions and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the 

proposed activities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live bottom area. 

4. Benthic Communities 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are located in water depths 984 feet (300 meters) or 

greater. IPFs that could result in impacts to benthic communities from the proposed activities 

include physical disturbances to the seafloor. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are

approximately 18 miles from a known benthic community site (BenthicViosca Knoll Block 826), 

listed in NTL 2009-G40. This Supplemental Exploration Plan submittal includes the required 

maps, analyses, and statement(s). The proposed activities will be conducted in accordance with 

NTL 2009-G40, which will ensure that features or areas that could support high-density benthic 

communities will not be impacted. Additionally, a Dynamically Positioned Drillship is being 

utilized for drilling operations, which would minimize physical seafloor disturbances.

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for disposal, or 

accidents) from the proposed activities which could impact benthic communities.

5. Water Quality

IPFs that could result in water quality degradation from the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 include disturbances to the seafloor, effluents and accidents. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Bottom area disturbances resulting from the drilling of 

wells and the installation of subsea wellheads would be minimized by the use of a Dynamically 

Positioned Drillship, but could still increase water-column turbidity and re-suspension of any 

accumulated pollutants, such as trace metals and excess nutrients. This would cause short-lived 

impacts on water quality conditions in the immediate vicinity of the emplacement operations.

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 offshore 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 FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8).

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 Mississippi 

Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 include physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents and 

accidents. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: The emplacement of a structure results in minimal loss 

of bottom trawling area to commercial fishermen. Pipelines cause gear conflicts which result in 

losses of trawls and shrimp catch, business downtime and vessel damage. Most financial losses 

from gear conflicts are covered by the Fishermen’s Contingency Fund (FCF). The emplacement 

and removal of facilities are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to fisheries.

Additionally, a Dynamically Positioned Drillship is being utilized for drilling operations, which 

would minimize physical seafloor disturbances.

Effluents: Effluents such as drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain 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 downcurrent 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 extent 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 FM O&G’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 
There are no IPFs from emissions, or wastes sent to shore for disposal from the proposed 

activities which could cause impacts to fisheries.

7. Marine Mammals

GulfCet II studies 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 beaked 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 Mississippi Canyon 

Blocks 84, 85, and 129 include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, 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 vulnerable 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 items 

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 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).

FM O&G 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 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: 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 FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator 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 possible. 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 the 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 whether 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 

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@bsee.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 stress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not 

known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chemicals included in FM O&G’s OSRP is 

considered to be low when compared with the constituents and fractions of crude oils and diesel 

products. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s OSRP (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact 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 leatherback 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).

Deep 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 and 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 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 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 various agencies 

including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). FM O&G 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 

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: 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 FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

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 avoid 

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 encountered 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 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 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@bsee.gov. If the vessel is 

the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and 

stranding network as needed. 
All 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 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 the possibility of collisions with sea turtles. The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact sea turtles.

9. Air Quality

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are located approximately 83 miles from the Breton 

Wilderness Area and 67 miles from shore. Applicable emissions data is included in Section 7 of 

the Plan.

There would be a limited degree of air quality degradation in the immediate vicinity of the 

proposed activities. Plan Emissions for the proposed activities do not exceed the annual 

exemption levels as set forth by BOEM. 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, 

emission rates, and the distances of Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 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 would impact 

air quality.

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential)

IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a result of the proposed operations 

in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 include disturbances to the seafloor and accidents 

(oil spill). 

Physical Disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are not 

located in or adjacent to an OCS block designated by BOEM as having a high probability for 

occurrence of shipwrecks. FM O&G will report to BOEM the discovery of any evidence of a 

shipwreck and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. 

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects to 

shipwreck sites if the release were to occur subsea. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil 

spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8).
According to BOEM’s Grid EA and ROV Survey Status Report, Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 

85, and 129, which are located in Grid 16, have adequate ROV coverage and a complete EA. 

Additional surveys are not planned unless requested (per NTL 2008-G04). Should a resource be 

encountered, FM O&G 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, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or 

disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites

IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites as a result of the proposed 

operations in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are physical disturbances to the 

seafloor and accidents (oil spills). 

Physical Disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 are located 

inside the Archaeological Prehistoric high probability lines. FM O&G will report to BOEM the 

discovery of any object of prehistoric archaeological significance and make every reasonable 

effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. Additionally, a Dynamically Positioned 

Drillship is being utilized for drilling operations, which would minimize physical seafloor 

disturbances.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects to 

prehistoric archaeological sites if the release were to occur subsea. However, it is unlikely that 

an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). 

The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response 

Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section 8).

According to BOEM’s Grid EA and ROV Survey Status Report, Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 

85, and 129, which are located in Grid 16, have adequate ROV coverage and a complete EA. 

Additional surveys are not planned unless requested (per NTL 2008-G04). Should a resource be 

encountered, FM O&G 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 to shore for treatment or 

disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological 

sites.
Vicinity of Offshore Location

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

IPFs that could cause impacts to EFH as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 include physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents and 

accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and marine waters and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulation, 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 bottom 

disturbing activities (e.g., anchoring, structure emplacement and removal). Additionally, a 

Dynamically Positioned Drillship is being utilized for drilling operations, which would minimize 

physical seafloor disturbances.

Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulation, 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 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 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 FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information 

submitted in Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, or 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.
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 affected to that extent. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM 

O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8).

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

discarded trash and debris, or ingest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and 

death. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOLAnnex 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). FM O&G 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 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: 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 FM O&G

management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes 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 (including 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 H2S releases) 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 Section 4

to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H2S absent. 
Coastal and Onshore

1. Beaches

IPFs from the proposed activities that could 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 (67 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 FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 

Discarded trash and debris: 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 

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). FM O&G 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 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: 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 FM O&G 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 disturbances 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 discarded trash and debris. 
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 (67 miles) and the response capabilities that 

would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be 

covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

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) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G 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 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: 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 FM O&G 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 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 (67 miles) and the response capabilities that would be 

implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by 

FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

Discarded trash and debris: Coastal and marine birds are highly susceptible 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 regulations imposed by various agencies including the 

United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G

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 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 FM O&G 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 disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities 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 spill would occur from the proposed activities 

(refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (67 miles) and the response 

capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this 

plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 

8).

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). FM O&G 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 nonbiodegradable, 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 FM O&G 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 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 proposed activities (refer to 

Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area (83

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 FM O&G’s Regional OSRP 

(refer to information submitted in Section 8).

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). FM O&G 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 nonbiodegradable, 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 FM O&G 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 disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) 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–specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed 

activities. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site-specific environmental 

conditions.

(D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

During the hurricane season, June through November, 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, Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85, and 129 may 

experience hurricane and tropical storm force winds, 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 release 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 mitigate 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. Structure Installation

Operator will not conduct structure installation operations during Tropical Storm or 

Hurricane threat.

(E) ALTERNATIVES

No alternatives 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 resources. 
(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. 

(H) PREPARER(S)

Matt Harlan

J. Connor Consulting, Inc.

16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700

Houston, TX 77084

(281) 578-3388

matt.harlan@jccteam.com

(I) REFERENCES

Authors: 

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

water marine mammals: a literature review. Washington, 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 November 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 National 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. BLMYK-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): 387-397.

Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vauk-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 

Field-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. MMS 2000-001 

o GOM Central and Western Planning Areas Sales 166 and 168 Final Environmental 

Impact Statement. MMS 96-0058.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 16 – Pg. 26 of 26

Supplemental Unit EP December, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129 (OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977)

SECTION 16

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION

The proposed bottomhole locations of the planned wells have been removed from the Public 

Information copy of this EP as well as any discussions of the target objectives, geologic or 

geophysical data, and any interpreted geology.

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Archaeological Assessment Report King Field, 

Blocks 84 (OCS-G 08484) and 128 (OCS-G 08797) Mississippi Canyon Area, July 2013 

(C&C Project #130270). 

2. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Archaeological & Hazard Study, “King South,” 

Block 85 (OCS-G 08797) & Block 129 (OCS-G 10977) Mississippi Canyon Area, Block 

45 (Unleased) & Block 89 (OCS-G 10441) Desoto Canyon Area, October, 2007 (C&C 

Project #072372-073019). 

3. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Site Clearance Letters Proposed Wells EP C, EP 

D, & EP F Block 84 (OCS-G 08484) & Proposed Wells EP E & EP G Block 129 (OCS-G 

10977) Mississippi Canyon Area, November, 2014. (C&C Project #140310).

4. Initial Exploration Plan (Control No. N-4208). 

5. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control No. S-3630). 

6. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control No. S-7638).