### PUBLIC COPY



# RECORD OF CHANGES

Operator: Apache Deepwater LLC



## Lease: OCS-G 34468



## Area/Block: Mississippi Canyon 983 

## Plan Type: Initial Exploration Plan



## Plan Control No.: N-9678 

## Complete Copy Submitted: April 23, 2013



## BOEM Coordinator: Tonya Jez



## Date Appendix Page/Attachment Revision
1/3/13 A BOEM-0137 Revised Location B
B B-4 Advised BOEM to refer to this section
for the statement “whether the possibility of using a nearby platform
was considered.
E E-1 Refer to Section C, Attachment C-4 for
the Site Clearance Letters for the
locations for G All Advise if the spreadsheets are feasible. H All Attach the nodal analysis files. Provide
the WCD once it has been verified. K Update NTL 1/4/13 G Attachment Attach the calculation spreadsheets K All Update all NTLs in this section
2/5/13 A BOEM-0137 Revise the Anchor radius
C C-4 Revise anchor radius on the Site
Clearance Letters
2/12/13 F & L F-1 & L-1 Revise the Waste & Discharge tables with the ones provided on the BOEM
website. Revise th e data to reflect.
2/20/13 F & L F-1 & L-1 Revise th e Waste & Discharge tables to be in compliance with BOEM 3/18/13 H H-1 OSRP Approval 4/18/13

# INITIAL EXPLORATION PLAN

PUBLIC COPY

April 23, 2013

Area/Block: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 Lease Number(s): OCS-G 34468 Prospect Name: San Marcos
Offshore: Louisiana

Prepared By:

Ms. Terri Young Apache Deepwater LLC 2000 W. Sam Houston Pkwy. S., Suite 1600 Houston, Texas 77042 (713) 296-7456 Terri.young@apachecorp.com

Plan No.: N-9678 Assigned to: Tonya Jez 

## Date of Submittal: April 23, 2013 Estimated Start-up Date: August 17, 2013

### INITIAL EXPLORATION PLAN DOCUMENT
LEASE OCS-G 34468
MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 983

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION A Plan Contents

SECTION B General Information

SECTION C Geological, Geophysical Information

SECTION D H2S Information

SECTION E Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

SECTION F Wastes and Discharge Information

SECTION G Air Emissions Information

SECTION H Oil Spills Information

SECTION I Environmental Monitoring Information

SECTION J Lease Stipulations Information

SECTION K Environmental Mitigation Measures Information

SECTION L Support Vessels and Aircraft Information

SECTION M Onshore Support Facilities Information

SECTION N Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information

SECTION O Environmental Impact Analysis

SECTION P Administrative Information

### LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

A-1 OCS Plan Information Form

A-2 Well Location Plat

A-3 Bathymetry Map

A-4 Pay.Gov Receipt

C-4 Shallow Hazard Assessment

F-1 Projected Generated Wastes

H-1 Spill Response Discussion for NEPA Analysis

L-1 Solid and Liquid Waste Transportation

L-2 Vicinity Map

N-1 Coastal Zone Management Consistency Certification

O-1 Environmental Impact Analysis

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page A

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION A
PLAN CONTENTS (30 CFR 550.211 and 550.241)

A. PLAN INFORMATION FORM Apache Deepwater LLC submits this Exploration Plan to propose the drill and completion of three (3) well locations, Mississippi Canyon Block 983. Tentative schedules from start to finish of the drilling and completion ac tivities and information regard ing the proposed locations are included on the OCS Plan Information Form BOEM-0137, included as Attachment A-1.

B. LOCATION A Well Location Map depicting the proposed surface locations for the proposed wells is included

as Attachment A-2 . A Bathymetry Map showing the wate r depths across the lease block is
included as Attachment A-3 . These attachments are in accorda nce with the Notice to Lessees (NTL) 2008-G04.

C. SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES A description of the drilling unit is included on the OCS Plan Information Form. Rig specifications will be made part of each Application for Permit to Drill (APD).

Safety features on the drilling unit will include well control, pollution prevention and blowout prevention equipment as described in Title 30 CF R Part 550, Subparts C, D, E and F; and as further clarified by BOEM Notices to Lessees and current policy making invoked by the BOEM Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard.

Appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc., will be maintained on th e facility at all times as mandated by the U.S. Coast Guard regulations contained in Title 33 CFR.

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

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page A

‐ 2
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### D. STORAGE TANKS AND/OR PRODUCTION VESSELS The Mississippi Canyon Block 9 83 wells will be drilled with a Semisubmersible or DP Semisubmersible unit. All facility tanks of 25 barrels or more.

Type of Storage Tank Type of Facility (Rig) Tank Capacity

(bbls) Number
of
Tanks Total Capacity

(bbls) Fluid Gravity

(APIDegree) Fuel Oil (Marine Diesel) Semisubmersible 104.7 1 104.7 35 o 

### Fuel Oil Day Semisubmersible 97.6 1 97.6 35 o 

### Emergency Generator Semisubmersible 5.5 1 5.5 35 o



### Forward Hull – Fuel Oil Semisubmersible 3416 1 3416 35 o



### Lower AFT Hull – Fuel Oil Semisubmersible 3416 1 3416 35 o



### Lube Oil Services Semisubmersible 61.3 7 429.1 26 o 

### Dirty Lube Oil Semisubmersible 30.1 1 30.1 26 o 

### Dirty Bilge Semisubmersible N/A N/A N/A N/A Fuel Oil (Marine Diesel) DP Semisubmersible 164 1 164 35 o 

### Fuel Oil Day DP Semisubmersible 262 1 262 35 o 

### Emergency Generator DP Semisubmersible 30.76 1 30.76 35 o



### Forward Hull – Fuel Oil DP Semisubmersible 4540.9 2 9081.8 35 o


### Lower AFT Hull – Fuel Oil DP Semisubmersible 6790 2 13,580 35 o



### Lube Oil Services DP Semisubmersible 115 1 115 26 o 

### Dirty Lube Oil DP Semisubmersible 38/28 2 66 26 o 

### Dirty Bilge DP Semisubmersible 30.7 4 123 N/A

E. ADDITIONAL MEASURES Apache Deepwater does not prop ose additional safety, polluti on prevention or early spill detection measures beyond t hose required by 30 CFR 550.

F. COST RECOVERY FEE A Pay.Gov receipt in the amount of $10,326.00 for the cost recover fees associ ated with this plan
is included as Attachment A-4.

# 983

15 984

16 MISSISSIPPI CANYON
A TW A TER V ALLEY



### Surface Location Map

10/22/12 1" = 4000' 

### AP ACHE DEEPW

A TER, LLC “San Marcos” Prospect Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468X = 918,720.00' Y = 10,169,280.00'

Y = 10,153,440.00'

Y = 10,137,600.00'X = 934,560.00'X = 950,400.00' Shell #1ST2 APC #1 APC

#1 BP2 APC

#1 BP1

Apache Loc. MC 983 B Surface Location Apache Loc. MC 983 C Surface Location 2,766’ FSL

& 3,351’ FEL

of MC 983 X = 931,209'
Y = 10,156,206' Lat. = 27.9696868 27 58'10.872" Long. = -89.1975888 -89 1 1'51.320" 2,107’ FSL & 5,056’ FEL

of MC 983 X = 929,504'
Y = 10,155,547' Lat. = 27.9677903 27 58'04.045" Long. = -89.2028320 -89 12'10.195" 3,351' FEL (B)

5,056' FEL (C) Prop. Loc. B Prop. Loc. C Prop.

Loc. A2,107'FSL(C)2,766'FSL(B) SL SL

SL

Apache Loc. MC 983 A Surface Location
1,590’ FSL

& 1,360’ FEL

of MC 983 X = 933,200'
Y = 10,155,030' Lat. = 27.9665516 27 57'59.586" Long. = -89.1913577 -89 1 1'28.888" 1,360' FEL (A)1,590'FSL(A)

# 983

15 984

16 MISSISSIPPI CANYON
A TW A TER V ALLEY



### Bathymetry Plat

1" = 4000' 

### AP ACHE DEEPW

A TER, LLC “San Marcos” Prospect Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468X = 918,720.00' Y = 10,169,280.00'

Y = 10,153,440.00'

Y = 10,137,600.00'X = 934,560.00'X = 950,400.00' Shell #1ST2 APC

#1 APC

#1 BP2 APC

#1 BP1

Prop. Loc. B

Prop. Loc. C Prop. Loc. A

SL SL

SL

-4,300'

-4,300' -4,200' -4,100' -4,000'

-4,400'

-4,400' -4,500'

-4,500' -4,600'

-4,600' -4,400'

-4,400'

C.I. = 25'

10/22/12

### Online Payment 

### Step 3: Confirm Payment 1 | 2 | 3

Thank you.
Y our transaction has been successfully completed.

Pay.gov Tracking Information
Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF Pay.gov Tracking ID: 258UU7KA Agency Tracking ID: 74389069451

Transaction Date and Time: 12/17/2012 15:46 EST
Payment Summary

Address Information

Account Holder Name: Mariner Energy, Inc.

Billing Address: 2000 W. Sam Houston Pkwy, S., Suite 1600 Billing Address 2: City: Houston

State / Province: TX

Zip / Postal Code: 77042

Country: USA Account Information Card Type: American Express

Card
Number: ************4008

Region: Gulf of Mexico

Contact: Terri Young 713-296-
7456 Company Name/No: Apache Deepwater LLC, 03165

Lease Number(s): 34468, , , ,

Area-Block: Mississippi Canyon MC, 983: , : , : , : ,

Surface Locations: 3 Payment Information
Payment Amount: $10,326.00

Transaction Date and Time: 12/17/2012 15:46 EST 

### Pa g e 1 of 1 Pa y

. g ov - Online Pa y ment

12/17/2012 htt p s://www. p a y

. g ov/ p a yg ov/ p a y ments/authorizePlasticCardPa y ment.html

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION B
GENERAL INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.213 and 550.243)

A. APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS The table below lists the additional permits/applications to be filed before operations can
commence under this EP: Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status Application for Permit to Drill (APD) BSEE To be submitted

B. DRILLING FLUIDS

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be Used per Well Water-based (seawater, freshwater , barite) 40,000 bbl / well total Oil-based (diesel, minerals, oil) 0 bbl / well total
M-I Bar 6,424,708 lbs / well total
Synthetic B 825,665 gal / well total

Suremul 16,330 gal / well total
Surewet 8,250 gal / well total
Rheflat 2,560 gal / well total
Rhethik 2,006 gal / well total

Lime 76,440 lbs / well total
Calcium Chloride 247,366 lbs / well total Synthetic-based (internal olefin , ester) 14,000 bbls / well total

C. NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY Apache Deepwater does not propose to use an y new or unusual technology to carry out the proposed exploration activities.

D. BONDING STATEMENT The bond requirements for the activities and facili ties proposed in this EP are satisfied by a $3,000,000.00 areawide development bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR 256 subpart I; NTL No. 2000-G16 - “Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds”; and additional security under 30 CFR 256.53(d) and Natio nal NTL No. 2008-N07 - “Supplemental Bond
Procedures”.

E. OIL SPILL FINANCE RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR) Apache Deepwater LLC, (company number 03165) has demonstrated oil spill financial responsibility for this EP according to 30 CF R Part 253 and NTL No. 2008-N05 - “Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibil ity for Covered Facilities”.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 2
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### F. DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT Apache Deepwater LLC, (company number 03165) has the financial capabil ity to drill a relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations.

G. BLOWOUT SCENARIO
Estimated maximum flow rate

The estimated maximum flow rate would occur in the objective section, if a kick were taken and
the well blew out. The maximum Worst Ca se Discharge (WCD) modeled for this scenario is 475,731 BOPD.

Maximum duration of blowout (days)

The duration of the blowout will be a function of the well bridging over, the ability of surface
intervention to shut or contain the well or, as a last resort, dr illing a relief well to kill the blowout. The expected maximum time frames fo r uncontrolled flow in each of the different operational outcomes would be as follows:

 Bridging Over in 2 Days,

 Surface Intervention in 15 Days,

 A Relief Well in 99 Days.

Maximum discharge volume
The following table is a linear estimate of th e maximum discharge volume for each of the aforementioned operational outcomes.

Operational

Outcome Maximum Discharge Rate (bbl/day) Discharge
Duration

(days) Maximum Discharge Volume (bbl)

Bridging Over 475,731 2 951,462

Surface
Intervention 475,731 15 7,135,965

Relief Well 475,731 99 47,097,369

Potential of wellbore to bridge over during a blowout

There is significant potential for the wellbore to bridge over during the WCD blowout. Bridging is likely to occur due to the extreme drawdow n calculated between the formation and the open
hole section. A Merlin reservoir simulation mode l was used to investigate the well conditions during the WCD blowout scenario. The estimated reservoir pressure is 21,111 psi. The reservoir model estimates bottom hole flowing pressures, ba sed upon reservoir properties and flow rates. The calculated drawdown is modeled to be 9,306 psi.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 3
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### In our experience in the deepwater GOM, we stri ve to limit the estimated total drawdown on a producing interval to reduce the risk of wellbore collapse and sand/fines migration into a well.
We limit the drawdown to less th an 1,000 psi by reducing the ra tes the wells produce and by completing each well with a cased hole, frac-pack completion.

There is a strong likelihood of wellbore bridging over:

 Drawdown is estimated to be 9.3 times or greater than our operating practices,

 The blowout occurs in a long open hole s ection of the well, with no benefit of casing or a frac-pack completion,

 If any water zones are exposed this will accelerate wellbore collapse and bridging,

 Wellbore collapse and bridge-over, under th e conditions cited are estimated not to exceed 2 days.

Surface intervention to stop the blowout

In the event of a blowout and assuming the blow out prevention equipment is still intact; the
subsea BOP will be used for succes sful shut-in of the well. The well would then be killed and
re-entered to either abandon or return to norm al operations. Surface intervention would be the
first line of defense after a blowout occurs. The specific intervention technique chosen will depend on actual conditions and abil ity to access the existing well.

In the event that the subsea BOP is inoperable, the surface intervention would employ the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) containment sy stem to achieve successful containment of the well. The system will be employed, while simultaneously initiating relief well planning and operations. Specifics will be submitted within Well Containment Plan.

Typically blowouts can be controlled with surf ace intervention, with a good likelihood of success and in a relatively short time frame, as long as, the subsea casing, wellhead and BOP’s are not damaged beyond use. The intervention technique chosen will depend on actual conditions and ability to access the existing well. There can be simple solutions such as rig up and bullhead kill mud or more complex solutions, but the solution will depend on wellbore conditions.

Surface intervention time estimate

The assumption is that the well has an uncont rolled blowout and the MODU has sunk with displacement from the wellhead. Additionally, it assu mes that debris removal will be required to gain access to the subsea BOP system. The ROV has been deployed and was unsuccessful in shutting in the well, using the existing subsea BOP control panel. The scenario employs one of the aforementioned containment system’s capping BOP.

The table on the next page describes the estimated time required to shut in and secure the well using the containment system or capping stack. Note that these operations all basically start at the same point in time and are performed in para llel. The entire operation is estimated to take 15 days from start of site assessment until the capping stack has been deployed and the well shut in.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 4
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### Duration of a well capping operation

Operation Incremental
Duration

(days) Cumulative Time Since
Event Start (days)
Assess wellbore conditions for surface intervention requirements. Conduct
notifications to the regulatory agencies and primary contractors. 2 2

Site Preparation which includes mobilizing and deployment of the IWOCS system and Dispersant
system. 5 5

Debris removal including mobilization of ROV boat and construction support
vessel and execution of debris removal plan. 7 7

Well capping and/or cap and flow operations which include mobilization, deployment, and installation of the well containment system. 15 15

Relief Well

It is preferred to drill relief wells from an open water location, rather than a platform location. Open water locations provide the best option on designing a simpler intercept well and allow a greater choice on rig availability. There are not a ny platforms in the vicinity, therefore it is not
feasible to consider as a relief well location.

Relief well location and drilling strategy

Proprietary Information

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 5
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### Relief well rig availability

The rigs listed below could be ava ilable for relief well operations:

Rig Name Contractor Rated
Water Depth MODU Type Rig Status

Ensco 8500 Ensco 8,500’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

Ensco 8501 Ensco 8,500’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

Ensco 8502 Ensco 8,500’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

West Sirius Seadrill 10,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

Maersk Developer Maersk 10,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

Danny Adkins Noble 12,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted GOM

Discoverer Americas Transocean 12,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted GOM

C.R. Luigs Transocean 10,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted GOM

Discoverer Deep Seas Transocean 10, 000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted GOM

Relief well package constraints

The proposed rigs for relief well operations ha ve suitable drilling packages with sufficient capabilities to work in the subject water depths and drill to the required relief well depth. The BOP systems have met the BSEE certification require ments and will be re-inspected in transit, prior to drilling a relief well to th e required true vertical depth.

Relief well rig contract and mobilization timing

A suitable rig could be selected and a contra ct finalized in 48 hours after undertaking the decision to begin relief well ope rations. Backup tubulars and wellh ead systems are maintained in stock for each well. Mobilization of equipment and services to the rig for the relief well could be completed while operations required to suspend the rig’s current activity we re taking place. The time required to contract, mobilize, drill a relief well and kill the blowout well is estimated at 95 days and is summarized below. The MC 983 Locati on B relief well was used for this example.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 6
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### Duration of relief well

Description Days Cumulative Days

Well Control Assessment. Identify suitable MODU for relief well operations 2 2

MODU suspends operations from current well. Contract to be executed and Well Spud Equipment is mobilized 14 16

Mobilize Rig and install 36” Structural Casing 8 24

Spud and drill to the top of the zone of interest and set casing. 65 89

Mag-Range relief well into intersecting position. 5 94

R/U pumping equipment and kill well. 5 99

R/D Pumping Equipment, PA Wellbore, Pull Riser, and Demobilize 15 114

Blowout Prevention and Intervention

Summary of prevention measures

Apache has maintained a safe track record of prudent operations in the GOM deepwater environment. It will continue to implement its safe operating practices to enhance its operating risk reduction program. In addition to the safe operating practices, the following measures will be implemented into well design, dr illing and completi on operations.

 BOP Certification, BOP Drills, Pit Dril l’s and all other required BSEE testing requirements,

 Current Well Control Certification for all Drilling and Completion Rig Site Supervisors,

 Taking Slow Pump Rate measurements during all open hole operations and critical cased hole operations,

 Updating Kill Sheets during each tour and posting the same on the rig floor,

 Maintain a current BOP to RKB spaceout Chart,

 Monitoring wellbore fill-ups and displacements during trips, by the Well Site Supervisor,

 Maintain the necessary circulating swages, TI W Valves and IBOP on the rig floor at all times during operations and function test these valves during each tour.

The utilization of Pre-Job Safety meetings will continue to be implemented prior to each operation with all of the rig crew s. These are intended to create a behavior based safety program and promote an atmosphere within the Apache and rig crew interface, such that a “Stop the Job” mentality is promoted across the rig contractor’s crew, empowering every crew member to question the safety of each operation.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page B

‐ 7
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### Early well control intervention

In the event of a blowout situation, due to fa iled BOP equipment and uncontrolled flow at the seafloor or at surface, assuming all other surface controlled actuation measures have failed or are inaccessible, a ROV will fly into position at the BOP subsea actuation panel and actuate the shear ram or pipe rams to establish containment.

If the riser system and rig have been compromised, then debris removal will be initiated to obtain clear access to the BOP. A Capping Stack will be employed to achieve successful containment of the well. Once containment is established and wellbore pressure testing and assessment is completed by Apache and Well Control Specialist, we ll kill operations can be initiated through the existing wellbore.

Well control engineering services

Apache will have service agreements in pla ce with Wild Well Control and Boots and Coots International Well Control prior to commencement of well operations. In the event of a blowout situation, these companies will be contacted to assist in the detailed design and implementation of well control and/or relief well operations.

Additional prevention & mitigation techniques

Pursuant to wellbore cementing and zonal isolat ion techniques, all cementing operations will be modeled and designed under the gu idelines set forth in API R ecommended Practice 65 Part 1 & 2. Operations will be dictated by the rules and requirements set forth in Federal Regulations, under the wellbore cementing requirements.

API RP 53 Recommended Practices for Blowout Prevention Equipment Systems for Drilling Wells and Recommended Practice 16Q for Marine Dr illing Risers will be used as the guidelines for installation, testing and maintenance of th e surface and subsea Ma rine Risers and BOP systems. The purpose of these recommended practices is to provide information that can serve as a guide for installation and test ing of blowout prevention system s Apache has contracted for floating marine drilling rigs.

The goal of using these recommended practices is to assist Apache operations in promoting personnel safety, public safety, an d integrity of the drilling equi pment and preservation of the environment for floating marine drilling opera tions. These recommended practices help to facilitate the broad availability of prove n, sound engineering and operating practices.

These practices are considered acceptable for accomplishing BOP and Marine Riser associated operations. However, equivalent alternative inst allations and practices may be utilized to accomplish the same objectives. When using these recommended practices or other alternatives, Apache will insure that operations comply with requirements of Federal Regulations.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page C

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION C
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.214 and 550.244)

A. GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION Proprietary Information

B. STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS Proprietary Information

C. INTERPRETED 3-D SEISMIC LINE Proprietary Information

D. GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS SECTIONS Proprietary Information

E. SHALLOW HAZARDS A Shallow Hazard Survey was conducted ove r Mississippi Canyon Block 983 by Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. (GEMS). The Shallow Hazard Report is being submitted to the BOEM in conjunction with this plan.

F. SITE-SPECIFIC SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT A Shallow Hazards Assessment was prepared for th e proposed surface locatio ns utilizing the 3-D seismic exploration data and is located in Appe ndix B as part of the Archaeological Assessment.
The Site Clearance Letters are included as Attachment C-4.

G. HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES Proprietary Information

H. STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN Proprietary Information

I. TIME VS DEPTH TABLES Proprietary Information10615 Shadow Wood Drive, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77043 713.468.1410[o] 713.468.1438 [f]

www.gemsinc.com

January 28, 2013 Project No. 07 12 -2115b

Apache Deepwater LLC 2000 W. Sam Houston Parkway South Suite 1600 Houston, TX 77042

Attention: Mr. John Worthen



### Site Clearance Letter for San Marcos Site A Well Location Block 983 (OCS-G-34468) Mississippi Canyon Area
Gulf of Mexico

Apache Deepwater LLC (Apache) contracted Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® , (GEMS) to prepare a Site Clearance Letter for the proposed well location in Block 983 (OCS G-3 4468 ), Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. This letter addresses specific seafloor and subsurface geologic conditions around the proposed location to the limit of investigation, 5,1 93 ft below the mudline (bml). Federal lease Block MC 983 is approximately 98 miles southeast of Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

This letter provides details specific to Site A. For a regional assessment of the area see GEMS report

“ Geohazard Assessment, San Marcos Prospect, Block 983 (OCS-G-34468), Mississippi Canyon Area

, Gulf of Mexico ” (GEMS, 2012). The proposed Site A surface location lies in southeastern MC 983

. Apache provided the following coordinates:

Proposed Site A Well Location

Spheroid & Datum: Clarke 1866, NAD27 Projecti on: UTM Zone 16 North Line Reference Block Calls (MC 983 )

X: 93 3

, 200 ft Latitude: 2 7 o 57 ’ 59

. 5858 ” N Inline 78 51 1, 360 ft FE L

Y: 10, 15 5

, 030 ft Longitude: 89 o 1 1 ’ 28

. 8877 ” W Crossline 171 61 1, 590 ft F S L

Apache will drill Site A with a semi-submersible or dynamically positioned semi submersible. The maximum anchor radius is displayed on the maps as a 9,750 ft circle surrounding the proposed location to satisfy seabed disturbance guidelines (Map No. A-1 through A-4).

Apache provided exploration 3-D seismic time data covering an approximate 81 square-mile "Survey Area" centered on MC 983 , which includes all of Federal lease blocks MC 938 -940

, 982-984, and Atwater Valley (AT) Area Blocks 14- 16 (Figure A- 1) . The primary area of investigation, the MC 983 Study Area, is located on the upper to middle continental slope in the southern portion of the Mississippi Canyon
Protraction Area. Apache also provided high-resolution AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle) data in MC 983 and portions of the surrounding blocks (Figure A- 1) with subbottom profiler, side-scan sonar, and multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data

.Proposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 2 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Attachments

The page

- size map s, figures , and illustrations accompanying this letter have been extracted from the 3

- D
seismic volume supplied by Apache for the geohazard site assessment. These attachments are centered on and identify the proposed well location, Site A, in the San Marcos MC 983 P rospect

. Map No. A

- 1 : Bathymetry Map Map No. A

- 2 : Seafloor Features Map Map No. A

- 3 : Side

- Scan Sonar Mosaic Map No. A

- 4 : Geologic Features Map Figure A

- 1 : Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey Area Figure A

- 2 : Power Spectrum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site A Well Location
Illustration A

- 1 : Portions of Inline 7851 and Crossline 17161 Showing Conditions Beneath

Proposed Site A Well Location
Illustration A

- 2: Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site A Well Location, Mississippi Canyon,

Block 983
Illustration A

- 3: Portion of SBP Line 119 Showing Conditions Near Propose d Well A

Figure A

- 1 . Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey AreaProposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 3 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### NTL Requirements

The following report complies with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM; formerly the MMS) Notice to Lessees (NTL’s) 2008

- G04, 2008

- G05

, 2009

- G40 (MMS, 2008a, b

, and 2010 ) for geohazard

assessments . The proposed wellsite must follow NTL 2008

- G06 with respect to pre

- and post

- spud ROV

surveys because MC 983 lies within environmental assessment grid 1 4 , which h as in adequate ROV

survey covera ge (MMS, 2008c).

NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 lists Federal lease B lock MC 983 as an arc haeologically significant block (BOEM,
2011 ); therefore, survey requirements for archaeological assessments as set forth in NTL 2005

- G07 (M MS, 2005) and NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 are necessary. GEMS completed a n archaeological assessment for the San Marcos survey area (GEMS, 2012 ).

Power Spectrum. As specified in NTL 2008

- G05 (MMS, 2008b), GEMS extracted the power spectrum diagram ( Figure A

- 2 ) from the 3

- D seismic data cube provided by Apache at the proposed wellsite. The extraction was generated within a 500

- ft radius of the intersection of the inline and crossline at the proposed wellsite, over a time interval from the seafloor to approxima tely one

- second below the mudline ( Illustration A

- 1 ). We converted the amplitude vs. frequency spectrum, generated by the SMT software, to power vs. frequency by squaring the amplitude values as described by J. A. Coffeen, 1978.

Figure A

- 2 . Power Spect rum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site A Well Location



### M an
- Made Features

MC 984 #1, t he nearest existing well to the proposed location, lies approximately three miles northeast of Site A (BOEM, 2012a), see Figure A

- 1.

The nearest platform, ATP Oil & Gas Corporation’s Titan floating platform, and associated pipelines are greater than seven miles to the northeast (Figure A

- 1).

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Power (Amp 2 )

Frequency (Hz) POWER SPECTRUMProposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 4 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. T able 1 lists the side

- scan sonar contacts located within the 9,750 ft anchor radius of the proposed location.
All twelve contacts are interpreted to be modern debris from shipping, lease, ordnance, or storm activities. None of these contacts, or any other contact in the San Marcos AUV area, are recommended for archaeological avoidance or investigation (GEMS, 2012). Care s hould be taken near these contacts as the Survey Area is just southeast of a discontinued military dumping area.

Side

- Scan Sonar Contact No. 38 lies approximately 823 ft northwest of the proposed location. The other
eleven other contacts (No’s

. 33, 34, 35 , 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, and 4 6 ) lie within the 9,750 ft anchor radius (Map No. A

- 4).

Table 1 . Sonar Contacts Located Within the 9,750 ft Anchor Radius

No. Block Area Length (Feet) Width

(Feet) Height

(Feet) Shape X
NAD27 (Feet) Y

NAD27 (Feet)

33 

### 98 4 MC 16.09 3.01 0.00 Linear 937124.64 10163272.80

34 

### 983 MC 22.09 7.02 0.00 Irregular 925094.25 10159926.31

35 

### 983 MC 8.03 5.04 0.00 Irregular 930038.28 10157676.04

36 

### 984 MC 12.59 3.01 0.00 Linear 936887.60 10157246.16

37 

### 984 MC 24.16 1.00 0.00 Linear 936244.43 10156707.26

38 

### 983 MC 13.56 2.51 0.00 Linear 932735.03 10155709.25

39 

### 984 MC 16.94 2.56 0.00 Linear 939907.62 10154940.65

40 

### 984 MC 52.19 19.32 0.00 Irregular 939530.76 10154208.30

41 

### 983 MC 23.09 8.66 0.00 Irregular 924281.73 10153443.95

43 

### 16 AT 12.05 9.53 0.00 Irregular 936828.27 10152017.60

44 

### 16 AT 17.69 3.51 0.00 Linear 941942.44 10151930.35

46 

### 16 AT 11.59 7.59 0.00 Irregular 938846.74 10149175.45

Wellsite Conditions

The proposed surface location is clear of any constraining geologic conditions as defined by the 3

- D
seismic volume.

Water Depth and Seafloor Conditions

. Seafloor conditions are favorable at the proposed well location. The water depth at the proposed surface location is approximately

- 4,326 ft and the seafloor slopes southwest at about 1.1° (Map No. A

- 1). The proposed well location lies along a gently sloping ramp dipping to the southwest (Maps No. A

- 1 and A

- 2). A surficial drape of normally consolidated very soft clays likely
covers the seaf loor at the location (Illustration A

- 3).

Deepwater Benthic Communities . The side

- scan sonar mosaic shows a homogenous seabed in the vicinity of the proposed location, suggesting normal Gulf of Mexico surficial sediments (Map No. A

- 3).
There is no evidenc e of highly reflective seabed or potential hardgrounds within 2,000 ft of the proposed location; therefore, the potential for high

- density benthic communities is negligible within 2,000 ft of the proposed location.

Stratigraphy

. Stratigraphic conditions a re shown on Illustrations A

- 1 and A

- 2. Inline 7851 and Crossline 17161 are the closest seismic lines to the proposed location (Illustration A

- 1). The Tophole Prognosis Chart (Illustration A

- 2) shows a portion of Inline 7851, annotated with calculated dep ths to the various horizons and predicted sequence lithology, along with their shallow water flow and shallow gas potential

. The seafloor and near surface sediments at the proposed well location are expected to be a thin 5 ft pelagic clay drape overlying a thick unit of clay

- rich mass

- transport deposits (Illustration A

- 3). The stratigraphy in the upper 24 5 ft bml, above Horizon 10, is dominated by a drape

- type facies interbedded
with fine

- grained mass

- transport deposits (Illu strations A

- 2 and A

- 3)

.Proposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 5 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The interval between Horizon 10 and Horizon 20 (24 5 ft to 1, 039 ft bml) contains interl ayered sediments that are likely hemipelagic clays and silts, mud rich turbidites, and clay and silt rich mass

- transport deposits. Thick, contin uous sand layers are not expected.

The Horizon 20 to Horizon 30 interval (1,0 3 9 ft to 2,3 93 ft bml) consists of a thin unit of layered deposits overlying a thick chaotic unit, which overlies another sequence of layered deposits (Illustrations A

- 1 and
A

- 2) . The transition from layered to chaotic is located along a prominent peak reflector at 1, 182 ft bml.
Beneath the peak reflector, rotated beds are likely and may be sand

- prone. The base of the chaotic zone

occurs at 2

, 066 ft bml. Thin sand

- prone layers may be encountered below 2

, 066 ft bml to Horizon 30 at 2,3 93 ft bml.

The reflectors between Horizon 30 (2,3 93 ft bml) and 2

, 50 7 ft bml are well layered and have slightly elevated amplitudes (Illustration A

- 2). Sand

- prone turbidites may be encountered in this unit. A thick unit
of mass

- transport deposits containing clays, silts, and sands occurs between 2,5 0 7 ft and 3,1 18 ft bml. A thick package of possible sand

- prone turbidites is located between 3 ,1 18 ft bml and Horizon 40 (3, 431 ft bml). Continuous sand layers may be encountered in this interval.

The sediments between Horizon 40 (3, 431 ft bml) and the limit of investigation (5, 193 ft bml) consist of a thick package of mass

- transport deposits overlying layered, continuous to semi

- continuous beds (Illu stration A

- 2). Rotated beds are apparent within the mass

- transport deposits in the upper portion of
the unit. Thin , continuous sand layers may be encountered in the lower portion of the unit.

Faults

. The nearest seafloor fault is located approximately 1

, 222 ft east

- southeast of the proposed location (Map Nos. A

- 2 and A

- 4). There are several near

- surface faults located approximately 350 ft
south and 590 ft east of the proposed location (Map No. A

- 2). These faults are buried by about 5 ft of normally deposited sediment suggesting the faults have been inactive in the recent geologic past.

A vertical borehole at the proposed location is not interpreted to intersect any seafloor or buried faults in the upper 5, 193 ft bml (Illustrations A

- 1 th rough A

- 3 ).

Shallow Gas and Shallow Water Flow. There is negligible to moderate potential for shallow gas and shallow water flow at this well location (Illustration A

- 2).

Shallow Gas. There are no direct hydrocarbon indicators or apparent subsurface hig h

- amplitude anomalies directly below the proposed location (Map No. A

- 4). The nearest amplitude anomaly is located approximately 600 ft southe a st between Horizon 20 (1,039 ft bml) and Horizon 30 (2,393 ft bml) . We rate the sand

- prone intervals from 1, 182 ft to 2, 066 ft bml , 2,393 ft to 2,507 ft bml, and 3,1 18 ft to 3, 431 ft bml as having moderate potential for shallow gas (Illustration A

- 2). These intervals
are sand prone and may contain biogenic gas at pressures greater than hydrostatic.

A low potential for shallow gas accumulation occurs from 2,066 ft to 2, 393 ft bml , 2,507 ft to 3,118 ft bml, and from 3, 431 ft bml to the limit of investigation at 5, 193 ft bml (Illustration A

- 2). Thin sands may be
encountered in these units. The potential for shallow gas accumulation is considered negligible in the clay

- rich sediments between the seafloor and 1, 182 ft bml.

Shallow Water Flow. The potential for encountering shallow water flow at this well location is negligible to moderate (Illustration A

- 2). The following table lists nearby wells that have and have not had
shallow water flow issues (BOEM, 2012b).

Table 2

. Shallow Water Flow in Nearby Wells

Well Block Flow

Strength Depth

bml (ft) Well

Integrity Distance / Direction from

Proposed Location

#1 

### MC 984 No SWF N/A N/A 3.0 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 940 No SWF N/A N/A 3.4 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 941 Low 991 Yes 6.8 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 937 Strong 2,424 Lost 8.0 miles northwestProposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 6 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The sand

- prone sediments from 1, 182 ft to 2, 066 ft bml, 2,393 ft to 2,507 ft bml, and 3,1 18 ft to 3, 431 ft bml have moderate potential for shallow water flow (Illustration A

- 2). Continuous, overpressured sand layers may be encountered within these units. As a result of numerous mass

- wasting events in the region’s geologic past , it is likely these sand

- prone sediments were rapidly buried and sealed by clay

- rich
overburden. The intervals from 2,066 ft to 2,393 ft bml, 2, 507 ft to 3,1 18 ft bml

, and 3, 431 ft bml to the limit of investigation ( 5

, 193 ft bml) have low potential for s hallow water flow. Thin sands may be
encountered in these units. The remaining clay

- rich section between the seafloor and 1, 182 ft bml has negligible potential for shallow water flow.



### Anchoring Considerations

The 9,750

- ft radius outlined on Map Nos

. A

- 1 through A

- 4 represent s the area of potential effect for anchoring . The radius is the basis for clearance of seafloor conditions related to anchoring considerations. An additional 1,000

- ft buffer zone is also included.

Water depths within the potential m ooring area range from about

- 4

, 1 45 ft to

- 4

, 605 ft (Map No. A

- 1). The shallowest water depths are located along the northeastern portion of the mooring radius

. The deepest water depths occur within the southeastern portion of the mooring radius

. In general, the seafloor slopes
southwest within the anchor radius

. Gradients are generally less than 5° within the mooring radius (GEMS, 2012). Steep gradients, up to 77°, occur locally along faults in the eastern and southeastern portions of the mooring radius. Gradients up to 10° to 15° are evident within an area hummocky seafloor in the western and southern portions of the mooring radius.

The seabed topography is generally smooth in the northern and northeastern portions of the mooring radius (Map No. A

- 2). The seabed is hummocky in the western to southern portions of the anchor circle.
Numerous seafloor faults are evident within the southeastern quadrant of the mooring radius (Map Nos.
A

- 2 and A

- 4).

There are no areas of high ly reflective seafloor i dentified on the side

- scan sonar data within the 9,750 ft mooring radius , suggesting the potential for encountering hardgrounds and high

- density benthic
communities is negligible (Map No. A

- 3). There are area s of possible hardground interpreted to have a low potential for supporting high

- density benthic communities along a fault in the eastern portion of the mooring radius and at the extreme southern margin of the radius (Map No. A

- 3). The 3

- D seismic data
sho w areas of elevated seabed amplitude in the western portion of the anchor circle (Map No. A

- 4). There is no evidence of fluid migration on the 3

- D seismic data associated with these amplitudes. The subbottom profiler data along similar nearby features su ggest intact sediment blocks within the shallow

mass

- transport deposits are creating the amplitude increase in the 3

- D seismic data. The sonar data show no evidence of hardgrounds associated with the features. There is negligible potential for
encounteri ng high

- density benthic communities associated with these amplitude anomal ies , as the sonar data show there is no hard substrate for any such communities to attach (Map No. A

- 3 and Illustration A

3).Proposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 7 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Closing

The proposed Site A well location in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 appears suitable for drilling operations. We advise using caution while drilling through the sand

- prone intervals from 1, 182 ft to 2,066 ft bml, 2, 393 ft to 2,507 ft bml

, and 3,1 18 ft to 3, 431 ft bml, as overpressures may occur within

coarse

- grain sediments within these intervals.

Care should be taken near the sonar contacts within the mooring radius as the Survey Area is just southeast of a discontinued military dumping area.

We appreciate the op portunity to be of service to Apache Deepwater LLC and look forward to working
with Apache on future projects.

Sincerely,

GEOSCIENCE EARTH & MARINE SERVICES, INC. ®

Christopher Madere Daniel Lanier Senior Geoscientist Vice President

- Geosciences

Ki mberly L. Faulk Senior Marine Geolo gist

Attachments ( 4 Map s and 3 Illustrations )

Distribution:
M r

. John Worthen

, Apache Deepwater LLC ( 5 copies )Proposed Well Site A Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 8 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. REFERENCES

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 , ASCII Data Files, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage,

< http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Progr am/Mapping_and_Data/visual1.pdf >, Accessed September, 2012

. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 b

, Safety performance review

– shallow water flows can pose significant hazards to deepwater d rilling , published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region website

,
< www.boem.gov/uploadeFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program_Resource_Evaluation/Geological_and_Geophysical_ Reviews/SWF2011.pdf >, Accessed October , 2012.

BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management), 2011 , Notice to lessees and operators (NTL) of federal oil and gas leases and pipeline right

- of

- way (ROW) holders on the outer continental shelf (OCS), Revisions to the list of OCS lease blocks requiring archaeological resource s urveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR), NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G01. Effective Date December 29, 2011.

Coffeen, J. A., 1978, Seismic Exploration Fundamentals: Tulsa, the Petroleum Publishing Co., p. 125.

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® (GEMS), 2012, Geohazard assessment, San Marcos Prospect, block 983 (OCS

G

- 34468), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Project No. 0712

- 211 5b.

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, Archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005

- G07.

Minerals Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental sh elf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans and development operations coordination documents: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G04.

Minerals Management Service, 2008 b, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow hazards requirements: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Serv ice, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G05.

Minerals Management Service, 2008c, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region; remotely operated vehicle surveys in deepwater, U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G06.

Minerals Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil and gas leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater ben thic communities: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2009

- G40. Effective Date January 27, 2010.30000 35000 40000

1.600

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300 40000 45000 50000

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300

3.400

MC
983 AT 15

STUDY AREA MC
984 NORTHWEST SOUTHEAST Project No. 0712-2115b Filename: 122115b_Illustration_A-1.cdr



### Illustration A-1. Portions of Inline 7851 and Crossline 17161 Showing Conditions Beneath Proposed Site A Well Location INLINE 7851

SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST PROPOSED WELLSITE A TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC)

TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE A

Horizontal Distance (ft):

Horizontal Distance (ft):

CROSSLINE 17161 Seafloor

CHAOTIC ZONE Horizon 1 Horizon 10

Horizon 2 Horizon 20

Horizon 3 Horizon 30

Horizon 4 Horizon 40

Seafloor

Horizon 1 Horizon 10

Horizon 3 Horizon 30

Horizon 4 Horizon 40 Horizon 20

CHAOTIC ZONE RELATIVE AMPLITUDE Peak

Trough MC
983 AT 16 MC
984

CHAOTIC ZONE STUDY AREA

CHAOTIC ZONEMC983AT15STUDY AREA40000450001.7001.8001.9002.0002.1002.2002.3002.4002.5002.6002.7002.8002.9003.0003.1003.2003.3003.400WATERFLOW ANDGASPOTENTIALShallow Water Flow and Gas PotentialHIGH01 230 = NEGLIGIBLE1 = LOW2 = MODERATE3 = HIGHNEGLIGIBLEHorizonLithology/StratigraphyIllustration A-2. Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site A Well Location, Mississippi Canyon, Block 983Potential DrillingConstraintsFilename: 122115b_Illustration_A_2.cdrProject No. 0712-2115bWaterFlowGas3-D Seismic Section ThroughProposed Wellsite AX = 933,200 ftY = 10,155,030 ftNW SEHorizonTWT(sec, bsl)Depth(ft, bml)Depth(ft, bsl)*INLINE 7851

TWO-WAY TIME TRAVEL (SEC)3.4582.938ProposedWellsite ADistance (ft):HorizontalLow potential for shallow water flow and gas.SEAFLOOR-4,326Negligible potential for shallow water flow and gas.2.6102,393-6,719HORIZON 10HORIZON 20INTERFACEINTERFACEHORIZON 40HORIZON 30LIMIT OFINVESTIGATION1.8392.1442.1962.3521.744-4,571-5,365-5,508-5,950-7,757-9,5192451,0391,1821,6243,4315,193Pelagic clay drape overlying bedded hemipelagic clay andfine grained muddy turbidites or mud flows.Layered hemipelagic clays and silts and mud rich turbiditesinterbedded with clay and silt rich mass-transport deposits.Clay and silt-rich mass-transport deposits between 417 ftand 560 ft below mudline.Layered hemipelagic clay-rich section.Bedded hemipelagic clay-rich interval with fine grainedturbidite and mass-transport deposits at base of unit. Thinsands possible.Interface marks top of sand-prone unit. Beds in middle ofsection appear slightly rotated.Chaotic and discontinuous hemipelagic clay interval withmuddy turbidites interbedded with clay, silt, and sand masstransport deposits.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.INTERFACE2.841-7,4443,118Low potential for shallow water flow and gas.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Interface marks top of elevated amplitude reflectors,suggesting an increase in sand content.Thick package of elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Clay, silt, and sand prone mass-transport deposits. Rotatedbeds appear probable.Generally clay-rich, layered deposits with some thin sandseams possible.* Depth bsl is based off of multibeambathymetry data. Seafloor on multibeamdata is 42 ft deeper than seafloor on 3-D data.INTERFACE2.502-6,392 2,066INTERFACE2.647-6,833 2,507Package of slightly elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Low potential for shallow water flow and gas.16000 17000 18000 19000 20000 21000

1.750

1.760

1.770

1.780

1.790

1.800

1.810

1.820



### Illustration A-3. Portion of SBP Line 119 Showing Conditions Near Proposed Well A Filename: 122115b_Illustration_A_3.cdr Project No. 0712-2115b

PORTION OF SBP LINE 119 WEST EAST TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE A (~260 FT TO NORTH) MC
983

WELL B

WELL A WELL C

3-D SEABED

ANOMALY SIDE-SCAN SONAR DATA SHOW NO EVIDENCE OF HARDGROUNDS WITHIN 2,000 FT OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION MTD SEAFLOOR

MASS-TRANSPORT DEPOSITS APPEAR CLAY-RICH NEAR PROPOSED WELLSITE

MC
983 N

SBP LINE 119

0 FT 500 FT 1,000 FT 1,500 FT PORTION OF SIDE-SCAN SONAR MOSAIC MTD

~25 FT

AT 16 MC
984

AT 15 MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA

ATWATER VALLEY AREA10615 Shadow Wood Drive, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77043 713.468.1410[o] 713.468.1438 [f]

www.gemsinc.com

January 28, 2013 Project No. 07 12 -2115b

Apache Deepwater LLC 2000 W. Sam Houston Parkway South Suite 1600 Houston, TX 77042

Attention: Mr. John Worthen



### Site Clearance Letter for San Marcos Site B Well Location Block 983 (OCS-G-34468) Mississippi Canyon Area
Gulf of Mexico

Apache Deepwater LLC (Apache) contracted Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® , (GEMS) to prepare a Site Clearance Letter for the proposed well location in Block 983 (OCS G-3 4468 ), Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. This letter addresses specific seafloor and subsurface geologic conditions around the proposed location to the limit of investigation, 5,231 ft below the mudline (bml). Federal lease Block MC 983 is approximately 98 miles southeast of Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

This letter provides details specific to Site B. For a regional assessment of the area see GEMS report “Geohazard Assessment, San Marcos Prospect, Block 983 (OCS -G-34468), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico” (GEMS, 2012). The proposed Site B surface location lies in southeastern MC 983

. Apache provided the following coordinates:

Proposed Site B Well Location

Spheroid & Datum: Clarke 1866, NAD27 Projecti on: UTM Zone 16 North Line Reference Block Calls (MC 983 )

X: 93 1

, 209 ft Latitude: 2 7 o 5 8 ’ 10

. 8724 ” N Inline 7845 3

, 351 ft FE L

Y: 10, 15 6

, 206 ft Longitude: 89 o 1 1 ’ 51

. 3196 ” W Crossline 17 269 2

, 766 ft F S L

Apache will drill Site B with a semi-submersible or dynamically positioned semi submersible. The maximum anchor radius is displayed on the maps as a 9,750 ft circle surrounding the proposed location to satisfy seabed disturbance guidelines (Map No. B-1 through B-4).

Apache provided exploration 3-D seismic time data covering an approximate 81 square-mile "Survey Area" centered on MC 983 , which includes all of Federal lease blocks MC 938 -940

, 982-984, and Atwater Valley (AT) Area Blocks 14- 16 (Figure B- 1) . The primary area of investigation, the MC 983 Study Area, is located on the upper to middle continental slope in the southern portion of the Mississippi Canyon
Protraction Area. Apache also provided high-resolution AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle) data covering MC 983 and portions of the surrounding blocks (Figure B- 1) with subbottom profiler, side-scan sonar, and multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data.



### Attachments

The page-size map s, figures, and illustrations accompanying this letter have been extracted from the 3- D seismic volume supplied by Apache for the geohazard site assessment. These attachments are centered on and identify the proposed well location, Site B, in the San Marcos MC 983 Prospect.

Map No. B-1 : Bathymetry Map Map No. B-2 : Seafloor Features MapProposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 2 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Map No. B

- 3 : Side

- Scan Sonar Mosaic Map No. B

- 4 : Geologic Features Map Figure B

- 1 : Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey Area Figure B

- 2 : Power Spectrum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site B Well Location
Illustration B

- 1 : Portions of Inline 7845 and Crossline 17 269 Showing Conditions Beneath

Proposed Site B Well Location
Illustration B

- 2: Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site B Well Location, Mississippi Canyon,

Block 983
Illustration B

- 3: Portion of SBP Line 121 Showing Conditions Near Proposed Well B

F igure B

- 1 . Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey Area



### NTL Requirements

The following report complies with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM; formerly the MMS) Notice to Lessees (NTL’s) 2008

- G04, 2008

- G05, 2009

- G40 (MMS, 2008a, b, and 2010) for geohazard

assessments . The proposed wellsite must follow NTL 2008

- G06 with respect to pre

- and post

- spud ROV

surveys because MC 983 lies within environmental assessment grid 14, which has inadequate ROV survey coverage (MMS, 2008c).Proposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 3 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 lists Federal lease B lock MC 983 as an archaeologically significant block (BOEM, 2011); therefore, survey requirements for archaeological assessments as set forth in NTL 2005

- G07 (MMS, 2005) and NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 are necessary

. GEMS completed an archaeological assessment for the San Marcos survey area (GEMS, 2012).

Power Spectrum. As specified in NTL 2008

- G05 (MMS, 2008b), GEMS extracted the power spectrum diagram ( Figure B

- 2 ) from the 3

- D seismic data cube provided by Apache at the proposed wellsite. The extraction was generated within a 500

- ft radius of the intersection of the inline and crossline at the proposed wellsite, over a time interval from the seafloor to approximately one

- second below the mudline ( Illustration B

- 1 ). We converted the amplitude vs. frequency spectrum, generated by the SMT software, to power vs. frequency by squaring the amplitude values as described by J. A. Coffeen, 1978.

Figure B

- 2 . Power Spectrum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site B Well Location



### M an
- Made Features

MC 984 #1, t he nearest existing well to the proposed location, lies approximately three miles northeast of Site B ( BOEM, 2012 a ), see Figure B

- 1

. The nearest platform, ATP Oil & Gas Corporation’s Titan floating platform, and associated pipelines are greater than seven miles to the northeast (Figure B

- 1).

Table 1 lists the side

- scan sonar contacts located within the 9,750 ft anchor radius of the proposed location.
All eleven contacts are interpreted to be modern debris from shipping, lea se, ordnance, or storm activities. None of these contacts, or any other contact in the San Marcos AUV area, are recommended for archaeological avoidance or investigation (GEMS, 2012). Care should be taken near these contacts as the Survey Area is just so utheast of a discontinued military dumping area.

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Power (Amp 2 )

Frequency (Hz) POWER SPECTRUMProposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 4 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Side

- Scan Sonar Contact No ’s

. 35 and 38 lie approximately 1,879 ft northwest and 1,605 ft east

- southeast of the proposed location , respectively

. The other nine contacts (No.’s 33, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43

, and 4 6 )
lie within the 9,750 ft anchor radius (Map No. B

- 4).

Table 1 . Sonar Contacts Located Within the 9,750 ft Anchor Radius

No. Block Area Length (Feet) Width

(Feet) Height

(Feet) Shape X
NAD27 (Feet) Y

NAD27 (Feet)

33 

### 984 MC 16.09 3.01 0.00 Irregular 937124.64 10163272.80

34 

### 983 MC 22.09 7.02 0.00 Irregular 925094.25 10159926.31

35 

### 983 MC 8.03 5.04 0.00 Irregular 930038.28 10157676.04

36 

### 984 MC 12.59 3.01 0.00 Linear 936887.60 10157246.16

37 

### 984 MC 24.16 1.00 0.00 Linear 936244.43 10156707.26

38 

### 983 MC 13.56 2.51 0.00 Linear 932735.03 10155709.25

39 

### 984 MC 16.94 2.56 0.00 Linear 939907.62 10154940.65

41 

### 983 MC 23.09 8.66 0.00 Irregular 924281.73 10153443.95

40 

### 984 MC 52.9 19.32 0.00 Irregular 939530.76 10154208.30

43 

### 16 AT 12.05 9.53 0.00 Irregular 936828.27 10152017.60

46 

### 16 AT 11.59 7.59 0.00 Irregular 938846.74 10149175.45

Wellsite Conditions

The proposed surface location is clear of any constraining geologic conditions as defined by the 3

- D
seismic volume and the supplemental AUV data

. Water Depth and Seafloor Conditions

. Seafloor conditions are favorable at the proposed well location. The water depth at the proposed surface location is approximately

- 4

, 342 ft and the seafloor slopes
southwest at about 0.8 ° (Map No. B

- 1 ). The p roposed well location lies along a gently sloping ramp dipping
to the southwest (Maps No. B

- 1 and B

- 2 ). A surficial drape of normally consolidated very soft clays likely

covers the seafloor at the location (Illustration B

- 3).

Deepwater Benthic Communities

. The side

- scan sonar mosaic shows a homogenous seabed in the vicinity of the proposed location, suggestive of normal Gulf of Mexico surficial sediments (Map No. B

- 3).
There is no evidence of highly reflective seabed or potential hardgrounds within 2,000 ft of the proposed
location ; therefore, t he potential for high

- density benthic communities is negligible within 2,000 ft of the proposed location.

The 3

- D seismic data show an isolated area of elevated seabed amplitud e along the southwestern portion of the 2,000 ft circle surrounding the proposed location (Map No. B

- 4). There is no evidence of fluid migration on the 3

- D seismic data associated with this amplitude. The subbottom profiler data along similar nearby feat ures suggest intact blocks of sediment within the shallow mass

- transport deposits are creating the amplitude increase in the 3

- D seismic data (Illustration B

- 3). The sonar data show no evidence of hardgrounds associated with the feature. There is a negli gible potential for encountering high

- density benthic communities associated with this amplitude anomaly, as the sonar data show there is no hard substrate for any such communities to attach.

Stratigraphy

. Stratigraphic conditions are shown on Illustrations B

- 1 and B

- 2

. Inline 7845 and Crossline
17269 are the closest seismic lines to the proposed location (Illustration B

- 1 ). The Tophole Prognosis Chart (Illustration B

- 2 ) sho ws a portion of I nline 7845 , annotated with c alculated depths to the various horizons and predicted sequence lithology, along with their shallow water flow and shallow gas potential

. The seafloor and near surface sediments at the p roposed well location are expected to be a thin 5 ft pelagic clay drape overlying a thick unit of clay

- rich mass

- transport deposits ( Illustration B

- 3 )

. TheProposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 5 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. stratigraphy in the upper 240 ft bml

, above Horizon 10, is dominated by a drape

- type facies interbedded
with fine

- grained mass

- transport deposits (Illustrations B

- 2 and B

- 3)

.
The interval between Horizon 10 and Horizon 20 (2 4 0 ft to 1,099 ft bml) contains inter l ayered sediments that are likely hemipelagic clays and silts , mud rich turbidites, and clay and silt rich mass

- transport deposits

. Thick, continuous sand layers are not expected.

The Horizon 20 to Horizon 30 interval (1,099 ft to 2,378 ft bml) consists of a thin unit of layered deposits overlying a thick chaotic unit, which overlies another sequenc e of layered deposits (Illustrations B

- 1 and
B

- 2)

. The transition from layered to chaotic is located along a prominent peak reflector at 1,260 ft bml.
Beneath the peak reflector, rotated beds are likely and may be sand

- prone. The base of the chaotic zone occurs at 1,952 ft bml. Thin sand

- prone layers may be encountered below 1,952 ft bml to Horizon 30 at 2,378 ft bml.

The reflectors between Horizon 30 (2,378 ft bml) and 2,588 ft bml are well layered and have slightly
elevated amplitudes (Illustration B

- 2). Sand

- prone turbidites may be encountered in this unit. A thick unit
of mass

- transport deposits containing clays, silts, and sands occurs between 2,588 ft and 3,153 ft bml. A thick package of possible sand

- prone turbidites is located between 3,153 ft bml and Horizon 40 (3,519 ft bml). Continuous sand layers may be encountered in this interval.

The sediments between Horizon 40 (3,519 ft bml) and the limit of investigation (5,231 ft bml) consist of a thick package of mass

- tra nsport deposits overlying layered, continuous to semi

- continuous beds (Illustration B

- 2). Rotated beds are apparent within the mass

- transport deposits in the upper portion of
the unit. Thin , continuous sand layers may be encountered in the lower portion of the unit.

Faults

. The nearest seafloor fault is located approximately 3,500 ft southeast of the proposed location (Map No s

. B

- 2 and B

- 4 ). There are several near

- surface faults located approximately 2,235 ft southeast of the proposed location (Map No. B

- 2). These faults are buried by about 5 ft of normally deposited sediment suggesting the faults have been inactive in the recent geologic past.

A vertical borehole at the proposed location is not interpreted t o intersect any seafloor or buried faults in the upper 5,231 ft bml (Illustrations B

- 1 through B

- 3 )

. Shal low Gas and Shallow Water Flow. The re is negligible to moderate potential for shallow gas and
shallow w ater flow at this well location ( Illustration B

- 2 ).

Shallow Gas. There are no direct hydrocarbon indicators or apparent subsurface high

- amplitude anomalies directly below the proposed location (Map No. B

- 4). The nearest amplitude anomaly is located approximately 600 ft southwest between Horizon 20 ( 1,099 ft bml) and Horizon 30 (2,378 ft bml)

. We rate the sand

- prone intervals from 1,260 ft to 1,952 ft bml, 2,378 ft to 2,588 ft bml

, and 3,153 ft to 3,519 ft bml as having moderate potential for shallow gas (Illustration B

- 2)

. These intervals are sand prone may contain biogenic gas at pressures greater than hydrostatic

. A low potential for shallow gas accumulation occurs from 1,952 ft to 2,378 ft bml, 2,588 ft to 3,153 ft bml

, and from 3,519 ft bml to the limit of investigation at 5,231 ft bml (Illustration B

- 2). Thin sands may be
encountered in these units. The potential for shallow gas accumulation is considered negligible in the clay

- rich sediments between the seafloor and 1,260 ft bml.

Shallow Water Flow. The potential for encountering s hallow water flow at this well location is negligible to moderate (Illustration B

- 2). The following table lists nearby wells that have and have not had shallow water flow issues (BOEM, 2012b).

Table 2

. Shallow Water Flow in Nearby Wells

Well Block Flow

Strength Depth

bml (ft) Well

Integrity Distance / Direction from

Proposed Location

#1 

### MC 984 No SWF N/A N/A 3.0 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 940 No SWF N/A N/A 3.4 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 941 Low 991 Yes 6.9 miles northeastProposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 6 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Well Block Flow

Strength Depth

bml (ft) Well

Integrity Distance / Direction from

Proposed Location

#1 

### MC 937 Strong 2,424 Lost 7.6 miles northwestProposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 7 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The sand

- prone sediments from 1,260 ft to 1,952 ft bml, 2,378 ft to 2,588 ft bml, and 3,153 ft to 3,519 ft bml have moderate potential for shallow water flow (Illustration B

- 2) . Continuous, overpressured sand layers may be encountered within these units. As a result of numerous mass

- wasting events in the region’s geologic past, it is likely these sand

- prone sediments were rapidly buried and sealed by clay

- rich
overburden. The intervals from 1,952 ft to 2,378 ft bml, 2,588 ft to 3,153 ft bml

, and 3,519 ft bml to the limit of investigation (5,231 ft bml) have low potential for shallow water flow. Thin sands may be
encountered in these units. The remaining clay

- rich section between the seafloor and 1,260 ft bml has negligible potential for sh allow water flow.



### Anchoring Considerations

The 9,750

- ft radius outlined on Map Nos

. B

- 1 through B

- 4 represent s the area of potential effect for anchoring . The radius is the basis for clearance of seafloor conditions related to anchoring
considerations. An additional 1,000

- ft buffer zone is also included.

Water depths within the potential mooring area range from about

- 4,1 50 ft to

- 4, 530 ft (Map No. B

- 1). The shallowest water depths are located along the northeastern portion of the mooring radius . The d eepest water depths occur within the southern portion of the mooring radius . In general, the seafloor slopes
southwest within the anchor radius.

Gradients are generally less than 5° within the mooring radius (GEMS, 2012). Steep gradients, up to 15 °,

occu r locally along faults in the eastern and southeastern portions of the mooring radius. Gradients up to
10° to 15° are evident locally along the flanks of hummocks within the mooring radius.

The seabed topography is generally smooth in the northeastern quadrant of the mooring radius (Map
No. B

- 2). The seabed is hummocky in the northern, northwestern, western, southwestern, and southern portions of the anchor circle. Numerous seafloor faults are evident within the southeastern portion of the mooring rad ius (Map Nos. B

- 2 and B

- 4).

There are no areas of high ly reflective seafloor identified on the side

- scan sonar data, suggesting the potential for encountering hardgrounds and high

- density benthic communities is negligible (Map No. B

- 3).
The 3

- D seismic da ta show areas of elevated seabed amplitude in the western portion of the anchor circle (Map No. B

- 4). There is no evidence of fluid migration on the 3

- D seismic data associated with these amplitudes. The subbottom profiler data along similar nearby featu res suggest intact sediment blocks
within the shallow mass

- transport deposits are creating the amplitude increase in the 3

- D seismic data (Illustration B

- 3) . The sonar data show no evidence of hardgrounds associated with the features. There is negligible potential for encountering high

- density benthic communities associated with these amplitude anomalies, as the sonar data show there is no hard substrate for any such communities to attach

. Patches with low

- potential of supporting communities exist at the eastern and southern limits of the 1,000
ft buffer zone (Map No. B

- 3 and Illustration B

- 3)

.Proposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 8 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Closing

The proposed Site B well location in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 appears suitable for drilling operations. We advise using caution while drilling through the sand

- prone intervals from 1,260 ft to 1,952 ft bml, 2,378 ft 2,588 ft bml

, and 3,153 ft to 3,519 ft bml, as overpressures may occur within coarse

grain sediments within these intervals.

Care should be take n near the sonar contacts within the mooring radius as the Survey Area is just southeast of a discontinued military dumping area.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Apache Deepwater LLC and look forward to working
with Apache on future proje cts.

Sincerely,

GEOSCIENCE EARTH & MARINE SERVICES, INC. ®

Christopher Madere Daniel Lanier Senior Geoscientist Vice President

- Geosciences

Attachments ( 4 Map s and 3 Illustrations )

Distribution:
M r

. John Worthen

, Apache Deepwater LLC ( 5 copies )Proposed Well Site B Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 9 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. REFERENCES

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 a , ASCII d ata f iles, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region website

,
< www. data. boem.gov/ homepg/data_center/mapping/geographic_mapping.asp >, Accessed September, 2012

. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 b

, Safety performance review

– shallow water flows can pose significant hazards to deepwater drilling , published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region website

,
< www.boem.gov/uploadeFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program_Resource_Evaluation/Geological_and_Geophysical_ Reviews/SWF2011.pdf >, Accessed October , 2012.

BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management), 2011 , Notice to lessees and operators (NTL) of federal oil and gas leases and pipeline right

- of

- way (ROW) holders on the outer continental shelf (OCS), Revisions to the list of OCS lease blocks requiring archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR), NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G01. Effective Date December 29, 2011.

Coffeen, J. A., 1978, Seismic Exploration Fundamentals: Tulsa, the Petroleum Publishing Co., p. 125.

Geoscience Earth & Mari ne Services, Inc. ® (GEMS), 2012, Geohazard assessment, San Marcos Prospect, block 983 (OCS

G

- 34468), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Project No. 0712

- 2115b.

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, an d sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, Archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005

- G07.

Mineral s Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans and development operations coordination documents: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G04.

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow hazards requirements: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G05.

Minerals Management Service, 2008c, Notice to lessees and o perators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region; remotely operated vehicle surveys in deepwater, U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G06.

Mineral s Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil and gas leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communities: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexic o, NTL 2009

- G40. Effective Date January 27, 2010.MC
983 AT 15

STUDY AREA MC
984

30000 35000 40000

1.600

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300 35000 40000 45000

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300

3.400 NORTHWEST SOUTHEAST Project No. 0712-2115b Filename: 122115b_Illustration_B-1.cdr



### Illustration B-1. Portions of Inline 7845 and Crossline 17269 Showing Conditions Beneath Proposed Site B Well Location INLINE 7845

SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST PROPOSED WELLSITE B TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC)

TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE B

Horizontal Distance (ft):

Horizontal Distance (ft):

CROSSLINE 17269 Seafloor

CHAOTIC ZONE Horizon 10

Horizon 2 Horizon 20

Horizon 3 Horizon 30

Horizon 4 Horizon 40

Seafloor

Horizon 1 Horizon 10

Horizon 3 Horizon 30

Horizon 40 Horizon 20

CHAOTIC ZONE RELATIVE AMPLITUDE Peak

Trough MC
983 AT 16 AT 15

CHAOTIC ZONE STUDY AREA

CHAOTIC ZONEMC983STUDY AREA400001.7001.8001.9002.0002.1002.2002.3002.4002.5002.6002.7002.8002.9003.0003.1003.2003.3003.40042500WATERFLOW ANDGASPOTENTIALShallow Water Flow and Gas PotentialHIGH01 23NEGLIGIBLEHorizonLithology/StratigraphyIllustration B-2. Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site B Well Location, Mississippi Canyon, Block 983Potential DrillingConstraintsFilename: 122115b_Illustration_B_2.cdrProject No. 0712-2115bWaterFlowGas3-D Seismic Section ThroughProposed Wellsite BX = 931,209 ftY = 10,156,206 ftNW SEHorizonTWT(sec, bsl)Depth(ft, bml)INLINE 7845

TWO-WAY TIME TRAVEL (SEC)3.4752.971ProposedWellsite BDistance (ft):HorizontalLow potential for shallow water flow and gas.SEAFLOOR-4,342Negligible potential for shallow water flow and gas.2.6112,378-6,720HORIZON 10HORIZON 20INTERFACEINTERFACEHORIZON 40HORIZON 30LIMIT OFINVESTIGATION1.8432.1722.2302.4701.750-4,582-5,441-5,602-6,294-7,861-9,5732401,0991,2601,9523,5195,231Pelagic clay drape overlying bedded hemipelagic clay andfine grained muddy turbidites or mud flows.Layered hemipelagic clay-rich section.Bedded hemipelagic clay-rich interval with fine grainedturbidite and mass-transport deposits at base of unit. Thinsands possible.Interface marks top of sand-prone unit. Beds in middle ofsection appear slightly rotated.Chaotic and discontinuous hemipelagic clay interval withmuddy turbidites interbedded with clay, silt, and sand masstransport deposits.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.INTERFACE2.858-7,4953,153Low potential for shallow water flow and gas.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Thick package of elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Clay, silt, and sand prone mass-transport deposits. Rotatedbeds appear probable.Generally clay-rich, layered deposits with some thin sandseams possible.0 = NEGLIGIBLE1 = LOW2 = MODERATE3 = HIGHDepth(ft, bsl)** Depth bsl is based off of multibeambathymetry data. Seafloor on multibeamdata is 44 ft deeper than seafloor on 3-D data.INTERFACE2.679-6,9302,588Package of slightly elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Low potential for shallow water flow and gas.Layered hemipelagic clays and silts and mud rich turbiditesinterbedded with clay and silt rich mass-transport deposits.Clay and silt-rich mass-transport deposits between 407 ftand 535 ft below mudline.13000 14000 15000 16000 17000 18000 Distance (ft):

1.760

1.770

1.780

1.790

1.800

1.810

1.820

1.830



### Illustration B-3. Portion of SBP Line 121 Showing Conditions Near Proposed Well B Filename: 122115b_Illustration_B_3.cdr Project No. 0712-2115b

PORTION OF SBP LINE 121 WEST EAST TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE B (~120 FT TO NORTH) MC
983

WELL B

WELL A WELL C

3-D SEABED

ANOMALY SIDE-SCAN SONAR DATA SHOW NO EVIDENCE OF HARDGROUNDS WITHIN 2,000 FT OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION MTD SEAFLOOR

INTACT BLOCKS ALIGN WITH 3-D SEABED ANOMALIES

{ { } }

MASS-TRANSPORT DEPOSITS APPEAR CLAY-RICH NEAR PROPOSED WELLSITE

MC
983

N

SBP LINE 121

0 FT 500 FT 1,000 FT 1,500 FT

PORTION OF SIDE-SCAN SONAR MOSAIC MTD

MTD ~25 FT10615 Shadow Wood Drive, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77043 713.468.1410[o] 713.468.1438 [f]

www.gemsinc.com

January 28, 2013 Project No. 07 12 -2115b

Apache Deepwater LLC 2000 W. Sam Houston Parkway South Suite 1600 Houston, TX 77042

Attention: Mr. John Worthen



### Site Clearance Letter for San Marcos Site C Well Location Block 983 (OCS-G-34468) Mississippi Canyon Area
Gulf of Mexico

Apache Deepwater LLC (Apache) contracted Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® , (GEMS) to prepare a Site Clearance Letter for the proposed well location in Block 983 (OCS G-3 4468 ), Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. This letter addresses specific seafloor and subsurface geologic conditions around the proposed location to the limit of investigation, 5,042 ft below the mudline (bml). Federal lease Block MC 983 is approximately 98 miles southeast of Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

This letter provides details specific to Site C. For a regional assessment of the area see GEMS report “Geohazard Assessment, San Marcos Prospect, Block 983 (OCS -G-34468), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico” (GEMS, 2012). The proposed Site C surface location lies in southeastern MC 983. Apache provided the following coordinates:

Proposed Site C Well Location

Spheroid & Datum: Clarke 1866, NAD27 Projecti on: UTM Zone 16 North Line Reference Block Calls (MC 983 )

X: 9 29

, 504 ft Latitude: 2 7 o 5 8 ’ 4

. 0451 ” N Inline 78 28 5

, 056 ft FE L

Y: 10, 155

, 547 ft Longitude: 89 o 1 2 ’ 10

. 1951 ” W Crossline 17305 2

, 107 ft F S L

Apache will drill Site C with a semi-submersible or dynamically positioned semi submersible. The maximum anchor radius is displayed on the maps as a 9,750 ft circle surrounding the proposed location to satisfy seabed disturbance guidelines (Map No. C-1 through C-4).

Apache provided exploration 3-D seismic time data covering an approximate 81 square-mile "Survey Area" centered on MC 983 , which includes all of Federal lease blocks MC 938 -940

, 982-984, and Atwater Valley (AT) Area Blocks 14- 16 (Figure C- 1) . The primary area of investigation, the MC 983 Study Area, is located on the upper to middle continental slope in the southern portion of the Mississippi Canyon
Protraction Area. Apache also provided high-resolution AUV (Autonomous Underwater Vehicle) data covering MC 983 and portions of the surrounding blocks (Figure C- 1) with subbottom profiler, side-scan sonar, and multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data.Proposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 2 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Attachments

The page

- size map s, figures , and illustrations accompanying this letter have been extracted from the 3

- D
seismic volume supplied by Apache for the geohazard sit e assessment. These attachments are centered on and identify the proposed well location, Site C

, in the San Marcos MC 983 P rospect

. Map No. C

- 1 : Bathymetry Map Map No. C

- 2 : Seafloor Features Map Map No. C

- 3 : Side

- Scan Sonar Mosaic Map No. C

- 4 : Geologic Features Map Figure C

- 1 : Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey Area Figure C

- 2 : Power Spectrum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site C Well Location
Illustration C

- 1 : Portions of Inline 78 2 8 and Crossline 17305 Showing Conditions Beneath

Proposed Site C Well Location
Illustration C

- 2: Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site C Well Location, Mississippi Canyon,

Block 983
Illustration C

- 3: Portion of SBP Line s 120 and 121 Showing Conditions Near Proposed Well C

Figure C

- 1 . Regional Rendering of Mississippi Canyon /Atwater Valley Survey AreaProposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 3 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### NTL Requirements

The following report complies with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM; formerly the MMS) Notice to Lessees (NTL’s) 2008

- G04, 2008

- G05, 2009

- G40 (MMS, 2008a, b, and 2010) for geohazard

assessments . The proposed wellsite must follow NTL 2008

- G06 with respect to pre

- and post

- spud ROV

surveys because MC 983 lies within environmental assessment grid 14, which has inadequate ROV survey coverage (MMS, 2008c).

NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 lists Federal lease B lock MC 983 as an archaeologically significant block (BOEM, 2011); therefore, survey requirements for archaeological assessments as set forth in NTL 2005

- G07 (MMS, 2005) and NTL 2011

- JOINT

- G07 are necessary

. GEMS completed an archaeological assessment for the San Marcos survey area (GEMS, 2012).

Power Spectrum. As specified in NTL 2008

- G05 (MMS, 2008b), GEMS extracted the power spectrum diagram ( Figure C

- 2 ) from the 3

- D seismic data cube provided by Apache at the proposed wellsite. The extraction was generated within a 500

- ft radius of the intersection of the inline and crossline at the proposed wellsite, over a time interval from the seafloor to approximately one

- second below the mudline ( Illustration C

- 1 ). We converted the amplitude vs. frequency spectrum, generated by the SMT software, to power vs. frequency by squaring the amplitude values as described by J. A. Coffeen, 1978.

Figure C

- 2 . Power Spectrum Analysis Curve, Proposed Site C Well Location



### M an
- Made Features

MC 984 #1, t he nearest existing well to the proposed location, lies approximately 3.4 miles northeast of Site C ( BOEM, 2012 a ), see Figure C

- 1

. The nearest platform, ATP Oil & Gas Corporation’s Titan floating platform, and associated pipelines are greater than seven miles to the northeast (Figure C

- 1).

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Power (Amp 2 )

Frequency (Hz) POWER SPECTRUMProposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 4 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Table 1 lists the side

- scan sonar contacts located within the 9,750 ft anchor radius of the proposed location.
All eight contacts are interpreted to be modern debris from shipping, leas e, ordnance, or storm activities. None of these contacts, or any other contact in the San Marcos AUV area, are recommended for archaeological avoidance or investigation (GEMS, 2012). Care should be taken near these contacts as the Survey Area is just sou theast of a discontinued military dumping area.

No s ide

- s can s onar c ontact s lie within 2,000 ft of the proposed location. Eight Side

- Scan Sonar C ontacts (No’s

. 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 4 1 , 43, and 45 ) lie within the 9,750 ft anchor radius (Map No. C

- 4).

Table 1 . Sonar Contacts Located Within the 9,750 ft Anchor Radius

No. Block Area Length (Feet) Width

(Feet) Height

(Feet) Shape X
NAD27 (Feet) Y

NAD27 (Feet)

34 

### 983 MC 22.09 7.02 0.00 Irregular 925094.25 10159926.31

35 

### 983 MC 8.03 5.04 0.00 Irregular 930038.28 10157676.04

36 

### 984 MC 12.59 3.01 0.00 Linear 936887.60 10157246.16

37 

### 984 MC 24.16 1.00 0.00 Linear 936244.43 10156707.26

38 

### 983 MC 13.56 2.51 0.00 Linear 932735.03 10155709.25

41 

### 983 MC 23.09 8.66 0.00 Irregular 924281.73 10153443.95

43 

### 16 AT 12..05 9.53 0.00 Irregular 936828.27 10152017.60

45 

### 15 AT 26.23 10.03 0.00 Irregular 922498.29 10149452.70

Wellsite Conditions

The proposed surface location is clear of any constraining geologic conditions as defined by the 3

- D
seismic volume and the supplemental AUV data

. Water Depth and Seafloor Conditions

. Seafloor conditions are favorable at the proposed well location. The water depth at the proposed surface location is approximately

- 4

, 3 66 ft and the seafloor slopes
southwest at about 0. 5 ° (Map No. C

- 1 ). The p roposed well location lies along a gently sloping ramp dipping
to the southwest (Maps No. C

- 1 and C

- 2 ). A surficial drape of normally consolidated very soft clays likely

covers the seafloor at the location (Illustration C

- 3).

Deepwater Benthic Communities

. The side

- scan sonar mosaic shows a homogenous seabed in the
eastern half of a 2,000 ft benthic avoidance radius around the proposed wellsite, suggesting normal Gulf
of Mexico surficial sediments (Map No. C

- 3). The western half of the 2,000 ft avoidance radius appears slightly hummocky in the sonar and multibeam data, indicative of buried mass

- transport deposits. There
is no evidence of highly reflective seabed or potential hardgrounds within 2,000 ft of the pro posed
location making t he potential for high

- density benthic communities negligible.

The 3

- D seismic data show elevated seabed amplitude s 726 ft northwest of and 395 ft south of the proposed location (Map No. C

- 4). 3

- D seismic data show no evidence of fluid migration associated with
th ese amplitude s . The subbottom profiler data along similar nearby features suggest intact sediment
blocks within the shallow mass

- transport deposits are creating the 3

- D seismic amplitude increase (Illu stration C

- 3). The sonar data show no evidence of hardgrounds associated with the elevated amplitudes

. There is negligible potential for encountering high

- density benthic communities associated
with th e 3

- D amplitude anomal ies , as the sonar data show no substrate for such communities to attach.

Stratigraphy

. Stratigraphic conditions are shown on Illustrations C

- 1 and C

- 2

. Inline 78 28 and Crossline
17 305 are the closest seismic lines to the proposed location (Illustration C

- 1 ). The Tophole Prognosis Chart (Illustration C

- 2 ) sho ws a portion of I nline 7828 , annotated with calculated depths to the various horizons and predicted sequence lithology, along with their shallow water flow and shallow gas potential

. The seafloor and near surface sediments at the p roposed well location are expected to be a thin 5 ft pelagic clay drape overlying a thick unit of clay

- rich mass

- transport deposits ( Illustration C

- 3 )

. TheProposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 5 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. stratigraphy in the upper 2 87 ft bml

, above Horizon 10, is dominated by a drape

- type facies interbedded
with fine

- grained mass

- transport deposits (Illustrations C

- 2 and C

- 3)

.
The interval between Horizon 10 and Horizon 20 (2 87 ft to 1,09 3 ft bml) contains inter l ayered sediments that are likely hemipelagic clays and silts , mud rich turbidites, and clay and silt rich mass

- transport deposits

. Thick, continuous sand layers are not expected.

The Horizon 20 to Horizon 30 interval (1,09 3 ft to 2,3 62 ft bml) consists of a thin unit of layered deposi ts overlying a thick chaotic unit, which overlies another sequence of layered deposits (Illustrations C

- 1 and C

- 2)

. The transition from layered to chaotic is located along a prominent peak reflector at 1,20 7 ft bml.
Beneath the peak reflector, rotated beds are likely and may be sand

- prone. A prominent peak and underlying trough occur at 1,543 ft bml (Illustration C

- 2). These reflections may represent an erosional
surface or a continuous sand

- prone layer within the mass

- transport deposits. The base of the chaotic

zone occurs at 2

, 069 ft bml. Thin sand

- prone layers may be encountered below 2

, 069 ft bml to Horizon 30 at 2,3 62 ft bml.

The seismic character between Horizon 30 (2,3 62 ft bml) and 3

, 063 ft bml consists of well layered reflections overlying a thick unit of mass

- transport deposits (Illustration C

- 2). Sand

- prone turbidites may
be encountered in the upper portion of this unit. A thick package of possible sand

- prone turbidites is located between 3, 063 ft bml and Horizon 40 (3, 493 ft bml). Continuous sand layers may be encountered
in this interval.

The sediments between Horizon 40 (3, 493 ft bml) and the limit of investigation (5, 042 ft bml) consist of a thick package of mass

- transport deposits overlying layered, continuous to semi

- continuous beds (Illustration C

- 2). Rotated beds are apparent within the mass

- transport deposits in the upper portion of
the unit. Thin , continuous sand lay ers may be encountered in the lower portion of the unit.

Faults

. The nearest seafloor fault is located approximately 4

, 945 ft southeast of the proposed location (Map No s

. C

- 2 and C

- 4 ). There are several near

- surface faults located approximately 3

, 200 ft southeast of the proposed location (Map No. C

- 2). These faults are buried by about 5 ft of normally deposited sediment suggesting the faults have been inactive in the recent geologic past.

A vertical borehole at the proposed location is not interpreted t o intersect any seafloor or buried faults in the upper 5, 042 ft bml (Illustrations C

- 1 through C

- 3 )

. Shal low Gas and Shallow Water Flow. The re is negligible to moderate potential for shallow gas and
shallow w ater flow at this well location ( Illustration C

- 2 ).

Shallow Gas. There are no direct hydrocarbon indicators or apparent subsurface high

- amplitude anomalies directly below the proposed location (Map No. C

- 4). The nearest amplitude anomaly is located approximately 2 00 ft south between Horizon 20 (1,09 3 ft bml) and Horizon 30 (2,3 62 ft bml)

. We rate the sand

- prone intervals from 1,20 7 ft to 2,069 ft bml, 2, 362 ft to 2,553 ft bml

, and 3, 063 ft to 3, 493 ft bml as having moderate potential for shallow gas (Illustration C

- 2)

. These intervals

are sand prone and may contain biogenic gas at pressures greater than hydrostatic

. A low potential for shallow gas accumulation occurs from 2,069 ft to 2, 362 ft bml, 2,553 ft to 3, 063 ft bml

, and from 3, 493 ft bml to the limit of investigation at 5, 042 ft bml (Illustration C

- 2). Thin sands may be
encountered in these units. The potential for shallow gas accumulation is considered negligible in the clay

- rich sediments between the seafloor and 1,20 7 ft bml.

Shallow Water Flow. The potential for encountering shallow water flow at this well location is negligible to moderate (Illustration C

- 2). The following table lists nearby wells that have and have not had shallow water flow issues (BOEM, 2012b).Proposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 6 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Table 2

. Shallow Water Flow in Nearby Wells

Well Block Flow

Strength Depth

bml (ft) Well

Integrity Distance / Direction from

Proposed Location

#1 

### MC 984 No SWF N/A N/A 3.4 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 940 No SWF N/A N/A 3.7 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 941 Low 991 Yes 7.2 miles northeast

#1 

### MC 937 Strong 2,424 Lost 7.3 miles northwest

The sand

- prone sediments from 1,20 7 ft to 2,069 ft bml, 2, 362 ft to 2,553 ft bml, and 3, 063 ft to 3, 493 ft bml have moderate potential for shallow water flow (Illustration C

- 2) . Continuous, overpressured sand layers may be encountered within these units. As a result of numerous mass

- wasting events in the region’s geologic past, it is likely these sand

- prone sediments were rapidly buried and sealed by clay

- rich

overburden. The intervals from 2,069 ft to 2, 362 ft bml, 2,553 ft to 3, 063 ft bml

, and 3, 493 ft bml to the limit of investigation (5, 042 ft bml) have low potential for shallow water flow. Thin sands may be

encountered in these units. The remaining clay

- rich section between the seafloor and 1, 207 ft bml has negligible potential for sh allow water flow.



### Anchoring Considerations

The 9,750 ft radius outlined on Map Nos . C

- 1 through C

- 4 represent s the area of potential effect for anchoring . The radius is the basis for clearance of seafloor conditions related to anchoring
considerations. An additional 1,000

- ft buffer zone is also included.

Water depths within the potential mooring area range from about

- 4, 170 ft to

- 4, 530 ft (Map No. C

- 1). The shallowest water depths are located along the northeastern portion of the mooring radius . The d eepest water depths occur within the southeastern portion of the mooring radius . In general, the seafloor slopes
southwest within the anchor radius.

Gradients are generally less than 5° within the mooring radius (GEMS, 2012). Steep gradients, up to 15°, occur locally along faults in the eastern portion of the mooring radius. Gradients up to 10° to 15° are evident within an area hummocky seafloor in the northwestern, central , and southern portions of the mooring radius.

The seabed topography is generally smooth in the northeastern quadrant of the mooring radius (Map
No. C

- 2). The seabed is hummocky in the northern, central , and southern portions of the anchor circle. Several seafloor faults are evident within the eastern portion of the mooring radius (Ma p Nos. C

- 2 and C

- 4).

There are no areas of high ly reflective seafloor identified on the side

- scan sonar data, suggesting the potential for encountering hardgrounds and high

- density benthic communities is negligible (Map No. C

- 3).
The 3

- D seismic data show areas of elevated seabed amplitude in the western portion of the anchor circle (Map No. C

- 4). There is no evidence of fluid migration on the 3

- D seismic data associated with these amplitudes. The subbottom profiler data along si milar nearby features suggest intact sediment blocks
within the shallow mass

- transport deposits are creating the amplitude increase in the 3

- D seismic data (Illustration C

- 3). The sonar data show no evidence of hardgrounds associated with the features. T here is negligible potential for encountering high

- density benthic communities associated with these amplitude
anomalies throughout the mooring area , as the sonar data show there is no hard substrate for any such
communities to attach

. Two patches with low potential of supporting high

- density communities exists at
the southern extreme of the 1,000 ft buffer zone (Map No. C

- 3 and Illustration C

- 3)

.Proposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 7 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Closing

The proposed Site C well location, in Mississippi Canyon Block 983, appears suitable for drilling

ope rations. We advise using caution while drilling through the sand

- prone intervals from 1,20 7 ft to 2,069 ft bml, 2, 362 ft to 2,553 ft bml

, and 3, 063 ft to 3, 493 ft bml, as overpressures may occur within

coarse

- grain sediments within these intervals.

Care should be taken near the sonar contacts within the mooring radius as the Survey Area is just southeast of a discontinued military dumping area.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Apache Deepwater LLC and look forward to working
with Apache o n future projects.

Sincerely,

GEOSCIENCE EARTH & MARINE SERVICES, INC. ®

Christopher Madere Daniel Lanier Senior Geoscientist Vice President

- Geosciences

Ki mberly L. Faulk Senior Marine Geolo gist

Attachments ( 4 Map s and 3 Illustrations )

Distribution:
M r

. John Worthen

, Apache Deepwater LLC ( 5 copies )Proposed Well Site C Clearance Letter

Apache Deepwater LLC // January 28 , 201 3

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® // 8 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. REFERENCES

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 a , ASCII d ata f iles, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region website

,
< www. data. boem.gov/ homepg/data_center/mapping/geographic_mapping.asp >, Accessed September, 2012

. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2012 b

, Safety performance review

– shallow water flows can pose significant hazards to deepwater drilling , published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region website

,
< www.boem.gov/uploadeFiles/BOEM/Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program_Resource_Evaluation/Geolo gical_and_Geophysical_ Reviews/SWF2011.pdf >, Accessed October , 2012.

BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management), 2011 , Notice to lessees and operators (NTL) of federal oil and gas leases and pipeline right

- of

- way (ROW) holders on the outer continental shelf ( OCS), Revisions to the list of OCS lease blocks requiring archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR), NTL 20 11

- JOINT

- G01. Effective Date December 29, 2011.

Coffeen, J. A., 1978, Seismic Exploration Fundamentals: Tulsa, the Petroleum Publishing Co., p. 125.

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. ® (GEMS), 2012, Geohazard assessment, San Marcos Prospect, block 983 (OCS

G

- 34468), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Project No. 0712

- 2115b.

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases a nd pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, Archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005

- G07.

Minerals Management Servi ce, 2008a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans and development operations coordi nation documents: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G04.

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right

- of

- way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow hazards requirements: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G05.

Minerals Management Service, 2008c, Notice to lessees and operators of federa l oil, gas, and sulphur leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region; remotely operated vehicle surveys in deepwater, U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008

- G06.

Minerals Management Servi ce, 2010, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil and gas leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communities: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2009

- G40. Effective Date January 27, 2010.MC
983 AT 15

STUDY AREA MC
984

25000 30000 35000

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300

3.400 35000 40000 45000

1.700

1.800

1.900

2.000

2.100

2.200

2.300

2.400

2.500

2.600

2.700

2.800

2.900

3.000

3.100

3.200

3.300

3.400 NORTHWEST SOUTHEAST Project No. 0712-2115b Filename: 122115b_Illustration_C-1.cdr



### Illustration C-1. Portions of Inline 7828 and Crossline 17305 Showing Conditions Beneath Proposed Site C Well Location INLINE 7828

SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST PROPOSED WELLSITE C TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC)

TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE C

Horizontal Distance (ft):

Horizontal Distance (ft):

CROSSLINE 17305 Seafloor

CHAOTIC ZONE Horizon 10

Horizon 2 Horizon 20

Horizon 3 Horizon 30

Horizon 4 Horizon 40

Seafloor

Horizon 1 Horizon 10

Horizon 30

Horizon 40 Horizon 2 Horizon 20

CHAOTIC ZONE RELATIVE AMPLITUDE Peak

Trough MC
983 AT 16 AT 15

CHAOTIC ZONE STUDY AREA

CHAOTIC ZONEMC983STUDY AREA37500 400001.7001.8001.9002.0002.1002.2002.3002.4002.5002.6002.7002.8002.9003.0003.1003.2003.3003.400WATERFLOW ANDGASPOTENTIALShallow Water Flow and Gas PotentialHIGH01 23NEGLIGIBLEHorizonLithology/StratigraphyIllustration C-2. Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Site C Well Location, Mississippi Canyon, Block 983Potential DrillingConstraintsFilename: 122115b_Illustration_C_2.cdrProject No. 0712-2115bWaterFlowGas3-D Seismic Section ThroughProposed Wellsite CX = 929,504 ftY = 10,155,547 ftNW SEHorizonTWT(sec, bsl)Depth(ft, bml)INLINE 7828

TWO-WAY TIME TRAVEL (SEC)3.4302.972ProposedWellsite CDistance (ft):HorizontalLow potential for shallow water flow and gas.SEAFLOOR-4,366Negligible potential for shallow water flow and gas.2.6152,362-6,728HORIZON 10HORIZON 20INTERFACEINTERFACEINTERFACEINTERFACEHORIZON 40HORIZON 30LIMIT OFINVESTIGATION1.8712.1792.2202.3392.5182.6771.759-4,653-5,459-5,573-5,909-6,435-6,919-7,859-9,4082871,0931,2071,5432,0692,5533,4935,042Pelagic clay drape overlying bedded hemipelagic clay andfine grained muddy turbidites or mud flows.Layered hemipelagic clay-rich section.Bedded hemipelagic clay-rich interval with fine grainedturbidite and mass-transport deposits at base of unit. Thinsands possible.Interface marks top of sand-prone unit. Beds in middle ofsection appear slightly rotated.Chaotic and discontinuous hemipelagic clay interval withmuddy turbidites interbedded with clay, silt, and sand masstransport deposits.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.INTERFACE2.839-7,4293,063Low potential for shallow water flow and gas.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Interface marks top of elevated amplitude reflectors,suggesting an increase in sand content.Thick package of elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Clay, silt, and sand prone mass-transport deposits. Rotatedbeds appear probable.Generally clay-rich, layered deposits with some thin sandseams possible.0 = NEGLIGIBLE1 = LOW2 = MODERATE3 = HIGHDepth(ft, bsl)** Depth bsl is based off of multibeambathymetry data. Seafloor on multibeamdata is 44 ft deeper than seafloor on 3-D data.Moderate potential for shallow water flow and gas.Package of slightly elevated amplitude reflectors, suggestingbedded, sand-prone turbidites.Layered hemipelagic clays and silts and mud rich turbiditesinterbedded with clay and silt rich mass-transport deposits.Clay and silt-rich mass-transport deposits between 445 ftand 584 ft below mudline.12000 13000 14000 15000 16000 17000

1.760

1.770

1.780

1.790

1.800

1.810

1.820

1.830 12000 13000 14000 15000 16000 17000

1.760

1.770

1.780

1.790

1.800

1.810

1.820

1.830

WELL B

WELL A WELL C

3-D SEABED

ANOMALY MC
983

N

SBP LINE 121

SBP LINE 120

0 FT 500 FT 1,000 FT 1,500 FT MISSISSIPPI CANYON AREA

ATWATER VALLEY AREA WEST EAST Project No. 0712-2115b Filename: 122115b_Illustration_C-1.cdr



### Illustration C-3. Portion of SBP Lines 120 and 121 Showing Conditions Near Proposed Well C PORTION OF SBP LINE 121

WEST EAST PROPOSED WELLSITE C (~115 FT TO SOUTH) TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC)

TWO-WAY TRAVEL TIME (SEC) PROPOSED WELLSITE C (~540 FT TO NORTH)

Distance (ft):

Distance (ft): SEAFLO OR SEAFLOOR

SEAFLOOR RELATIVE AMPLITUDE Peak

Trough MC
983

MC
983

SIDE-SCAN SONAR DATA SHOW NO EVIDENCE OF HARDGROUNDS WITHIN 2,000 FT OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION MTD INTACT BLOCKS ALIGN WITH 3-D SEABED ANOMALIES

{ { } }

MASS-TRANSPORT DEPOSITS APPEAR CLAY-RICH NEAR PROPOSED WELLSITE

PORTION OF SIDE-SCAN SONAR MOSAIC MTD

MTD

PORTION OF SBP LINE 120 { }

MTD INTACT BLOCKS ALIGN WITH 3-D SEABED ANOMALIES

{ }

MTD

MTD ~25 FT

~25 FT

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page D

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION D HYDROGEN SULFIDE (H 2 

### S) INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.215 and 550.245)

A. CONCENTRATION Apache Deewpater LLC does not anticipate encountering any H 2 

### S during the proposed operations.

The closest wells to the proposed locations and in the same mini-basin are the Anadarko/Shell OCS-G-22919 wells in MC 984 001, 001 BP01, 001 BP02 and 001 ST01 for which the surface location is about 3 miles from the proposed loca tions MC983 A, B and C. Anadarko/Shell did not report any occurrences of H2S. The closes t known occurrence of H2S is over 12 miles to the north in MC 807 where Shell reported 11ppm. Ther e have not been any reports of H2S from nearby closer wells nor as far south in Missi ssippi Canyon Block 983 and therefore Apache does not expect H2S at any of the proposed locations.

B. CLASSIFICATION In accordance with Title 30 CFR 250.490(c), Ap ache Deepwater requests that Mississippi Canyon Block 983 be classified by the BOEM as H 2 

### S absent.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page E

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION E BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SO CIOECONOMIC INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.216 and 550.247)

A. DEEPWATER BENTHIC/ CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITIES This EP does propose activities that could disturb seafl oor areas in water depths of 300 meters (984 feet) or greater; theref ore in compliance with Attachment A of NTL No. 2009-G40, “Deepwater Benthic Communities”, information is included in the Site Clearance Letters and the Addendum to the Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment as submitted in conjunction with this plan. (Reference Section C, Attachment C-4)

Included in the Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessm ent submitted in conjunction with this plan, are Maps using 3-D seismic data depicting seafloor and shallow geological features and areas and an analysis regarding Mississippi Canyon Block 983 pertaining to this EP.

B. TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES MAP This EP’s proposed activities do not fall within 305 meters (1,000 feet) of a topographic “no activity zone”.

C. TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING) All activities proposed under this EP will be conducted outside all Topographic Feature Protective Zones, therefore shunt ing of drill cuttings and dril ling fluids is not required.

D. LIVE BOTTOMS (P INNACLE TREND) MAP Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located within 61 meters (200 feet) of any pinnacle trend feature; therefore a separate ba thymetric map is not required.

E. LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) STIPULATION Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of any pinnacle trend feature vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live bottom (low relief) maps are not required.

F. POTENTIAL SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of potentially sensitive biological features; therefor e, biologically sensitive area maps are not required.

G. REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS Based on the data acquired in the AUV Arch survey , BOEM has determined that there is enough data gathered in this grid area, therefore, we are not required to run any ROV surveys either prespudding or post-drilling operations.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page E

‐ 2
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### H. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT AND
MARINE MAMMAL INFORMATION Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) all federal agencies must ensure that any actions they authorize, fund or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species, destroy or adversely modi fy its designated critical habitat.

In accordance with the 30 CFR 250, Subpart B, e ffective May 14, 2007, and further outlined in Notice to Lessees (NTL) 2008-G04, lessees/opera tors are required to address site-specific information on the presence of federally listed threatened or endangere d species and critical habitat designated under the ESA and marine mammals protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in the area of proposed activities under this plan.

NOAA Fisheries currently lists the Sperm Whale, Leatherback Turtle, Green Turtle, Hawksbill, Turtle and the Kemp’s Ridley Turtle as en dangered and the Loggerhead Turtle and Gulf Sturgeon as threatened. Currently there are no de signated critical habitats for the listed species in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf; how ever, it is possible that one or more of these species could be seen in the area of our operations.

The Environmental Impact Analysis in “Section O” of this plan further discusses potential impacts and mitigation measures related to threatened and endangered species.

I. ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT As per NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, an Archaeological Report (AUV) is submitted to comply with NTL requirements. No potential submerged cultura l resources were discovered in the Mississippi Canyon Block 983 survey area. This area does not have any historic or prehistoric cultural

resources.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page F

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION F
WASTES AND DISCHARG ES INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.217 and 550.248)

A. PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES Wastes you will generate, treat and downhole dispose or discharg e to the GOM, are included in
this section as Attachment F-1

.ATTACHMENT F-1

Blowout prevent fluid Stackmagic 200/0/5% glycol

based on 2% mixture with potable water 143 bbls/well 12 bbls per week

with funtion test Discharged from BOP near mudline Miscellaneous discharges? If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity

Desalinization unit discharge Rejected water from water

maker unit 123,390 bbls/well 57 bbl/hr/well Cuttings chute

Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit:

General - NPDES ID GMG290388 NOTE: IF YOU WILL NOT HAVE A TYPE OF WASTE, ENTER “NA” IN THE ROW.

Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes, fill in for produced water

Produced water N/A N/A N/A N/A Cooling water Seawater with no addition of

chemicals 3,600,000 bbls/well 1,667 bbl/hr/well Discharged overboard Firewater Seawater with no addition of

chemicals N/A N/A Discharged overboard Excess cement at seafloor Cement slurry 900 bbls/well 19 bbl/hr/well Discharged at the mudline during cementing conductor casing Ballast water Uncontaminated seawater used to maintain proper draft 19,710 bbls/well 9 bbl/hr/well Discharged overboard

Bilge Water Bilge water 216 bbls/well 0.1 bbl/hr/well Discharged overboard N/A N/A Well completion fluids N/A N/A N/A N/A Will you conduct well treatment, completion or workover? If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity

Well treatment fluids N/A N/A N/A N/A

Workover fluids N/A N/A Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage Deck Drainage Platform washings and 214 bbls/well 0.1 bbl/hr/well Oily water is treated in Oily Water Domestic waste Gray water (laundry, galley, lavatory) 10,750 bbls/well 5 bbl/hr/well Discharged overboard. Any associated food waste will be processed using an

approved grinder

Sanitary waste Treated human body waste

from toilets 10,750 bbls/well 5 bbl/hr/well USCG approved MSD Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste

EXAMPLE: Sanitary waste water Sanitary waste from living
quarters X bbl/well X bbl/hr /well Chlorinate & discharge overboard Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Synthetic based drilling fluid 2,500 bbls/well 50 bbls/day/well Discharged thru shunt pipe to 25' below

water's surface Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings coated with water based drilling mud 1,000 bbls/well 250 bbls/day/well Water-based Drilling Fluids Water based drilling fluid 40,000 bbls/well 10,000 bbls/day/well Discharged at mudline prior to BOP and

riser installation

Discharged at mudline prior to BOP and

riser installation Waste you will generate, treat and downhole dispose or discharge to the GOM Projected Generated Waste Projected Ocean Discharges

Will drilling occur? If yes, you should list muds and cuttings

EXAMPLE: Cuttings wetted with synthetic based

fluid Cuttings generated while using synthetic based drilling

fluid X bbl/well X bbl/day /well Discharge overboard Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge Rate Discharge Method

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page G

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION G
AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.218 and 550.249)

A. SCREENING QUESTIONS
Screen Procedures for EP’s Yes No Is any calculated Complex Total (CT) Em ission amount (tons) associated with your proposed exploration activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated using the following formulas:
CT = 3400D 2/3 

### for CO, and CT = 33.3D for the other air pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles)? X

Do your emissions calculations include a ny emission reduction measures or modified
emission factors? X

Are your proposed explorati on 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 produ ced hydrocarbon liquids? X

A. EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS Air emission worksheets have been prepared us ing Semisubmersible and DP Semisubmersible drilling units. Air emission worksheets are avai lable upon request. Per NTL No. 2008-G04, if an operator answers “no” to all of the above sc reening questions from the appropriate table, provide the following: Summary information regarding the peak year emi ssions that will be generated by and associated with your Plan Emissions and Complex Total Emissions which is compiled on the summary
form of the two sets of worksheets or in the form at below. The entire set of worksheets does not
need to be included.

If drilled with a Semisubmersible:

Air Pollutant Plan Emission
Amounts 1 

### (tons) Calculated Exemption
Amounts 2 

### (tons) Carbon Monoxide (CO) 197.24 55527.51 Particular Matter (PM) 26.30 2197.80 Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 

### ) 120.64 2197.80 Nitrogen Oxides (NO
x 

### ) 904.00 2197.80 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 27.12 2197.80

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page G

‐ 2
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### If drilled with a DP Semisubmersible:

Air Pollutant Plan Emission
Amounts 1 

### (tons) Calculated Exemption
Amounts 2 

### (tons) Carbon Monoxide (CO) 453.31 55527.51 Particular Matter (PM) 60.44 2197.80 Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 

### ) 277.28 2197.80 Nitrogen Oxides (NO
x 

### ) 2077.69 2197.80 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 62.33 2197.80

1 For activities proposed in your EP, list the projected emissions calculated from the worksheets.

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

This information was calculated by:

Terri Young EH&S Specialist II – Regulatory (731) 296-7456 Terri.young@apachecorp.comEXPLORATION PLAN (EP)AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLISTOMB Control No. 1010-0151OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14COMPANYAPACHE DEEPWATER LLCAREAMississippi CanyonBLOCK983LEASEOCS-G 34468PLATFORMWELLA, B & CCOMPANY CONTACTTerri YoungTELEPHONE NO.713-296-7456REMARKSType of RigMax HPDrillship 61,800DP Semisubmersible 61,200Semisubmersible 26,400Submersible 6,064Jack-up 16,975Platform/Barge 6,635FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 1 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER LLC Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 26400 1275.12 30602.88 24 116 18.61 85.36 639.65 19.19 139.56 25.90 118.83 890.39 26.71 194.27PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 18 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002013 YEAR TOTAL21.52 98.72 739.71 22.19 161.39 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.24EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 3 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 2ND YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 26400 1275.12 30602.88 24.00 116.00 18.61 85.36 639.65 19.19 139.56 25.90 118.83 890.39 26.71 194.27PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6.00 34.00 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10.00 34.00 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002014 YEAR TOTAL21.52 98.72 739.71 22.19 161.39 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.24EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 4 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 3RD YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 26400 1275.12 30602.88 24 116 18.61 85.36 639.65 19.19 139.56 25.90 118.83 890.39 26.71 194.27PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 18 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002015 YEAR TOTAL21.52 98.72 739.71 22.19 161.39 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.24EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 5 of 8SUMMARYCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLAPACHE DEEPWATER LLC Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & CEmitted SubstanceYearPM SOx NOx VOC CO2013 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.242014 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.242015 26.30 120.64 904.00 27.12 197.24Allowable2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.51FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 8 of 8EXPLORATION PLAN (EP)AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLISTOMB Control No. 1010-0151OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14COMPANYAPACHE DEEPWATER LLCAREAMississippi CanyonBLOCK983LEASEOCS-G 34468PLATFORMWELLA, B & CCOMPANY CONTACTTerri YoungTELEPHONE NO.713-296-7456REMARKSType of RigMax HPDrillship 61,800DP Semisubmersible 61,200Semisubmersible 26,400Submersible 6,064Jack-up 16,975Platform/Barge 6,635FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 1 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER LLC Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61200 2955.96 70943.04 24 116 43.14 197.89 1482.82 44.48 323.52 60.05 275.46 2064.08 61.92 450.35PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 18 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002013 YEAR TOTAL46.05 211.24 1582.89 47.49 345.36 60.44 277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.31EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 3 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 2ND YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61200 2955.96 70943.04 24.00 116.00 43.14 197.89 1482.82 44.48 323.52 60.05 275.46 2064.08 61.92 450.35PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6.00 34.00 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10.00 34.00 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002014 YEAR TOTAL46.05 211.24 1582.89 47.49 345.36 60.44 277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.31EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 4 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 3RD YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSAPACHE DEEPWATER Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & C Terri Young 713-296-7456 Total DaysOPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61200 2955.96 70943.04 24 116 43.14 197.89 1482.82 44.48 323.52 60.05 275.46 2064.08 61.92 450.35PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.15 0.68 5.10 0.15 1.11VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 10 34 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.25 1.14 8.51 0.26 1.86VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 18 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002015 YEAR TOTAL46.05 211.24 1582.89 47.49 345.36 60.44 277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.31EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.5166.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 5 of 8SUMMARYCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLAPACHE DEEPWATER LLC Mississippi Canyon 983 OCS-G 34468 A, B & CEmitted SubstanceYearPM SOx NOx VOC CO2013 60.44 277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.31201460.44277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.312015 60.44 277.28 2077.69 62.33 453.31Allowable2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.51FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 8 of 8

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page H

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION H
OIL SPILLS INFORMATION (30 CFR 250.219 and 250.250)

A. OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING All proposed activities and facilities in this Revised EP will be covered by the Regional OSRP (0-685) filed by Apache Deepwater LLC, (company numb er 03165) in accordance 30 CFR 254, NTL 2006-G21,
NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17 and in cludes information required by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The initial OSRP and further m odifications were approve d as of April 18, 2013.

B. SPILL RESPONSE SITES Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location Houma, Louisiana Houma, Louisiana Venice, Louisiana Venice, Louisiana

C. OSRO INFORMATION Apache Deepwater’s primary equipment provider is Clean Gulf Associates (CGA). The Marine Spill Response Corporation’s (MSRC) STARS network will pr ovide closest available personnel, as well as an MSRC supervisor to operate the equipment.

In addition Apache Deepwater LLC has contracted with National Response Corporation (NRC), Marine Spill Response Corporation (MSRC) and Oil spill R esponse Limited (OSRL) for additional equipment and personnel. Apache Deepwater LLC is also a member of the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) and the Helix Well Containment Group (HWC G). These agreements a llow access to the subsea well containment and well shut-in equipment.

D. WORST-CASE SCENARIO COMPARISON Category Regional OSRP - WCD EP - WCD

Type of Activity Drilling Drilling
Facility Location (Area/Block) MC 983 MC 983
Facility Designation Well Location A Well Location A
Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) 66 66

Volume - Uncontrolled blowout - Total Volume 475,731 475,731
Type of Oil(s) (crude, condensate, diesel) Crude Crude
API Gravity 33 33

Apache Deepwater LLC has determined that the wo rst-case scenario from the activities in this EP does not supersede the worst-case scenario from our approved Regional OSRP. Apache Deepwater LLC hereby certifies it has the capability to respond, to the maximum extent practi cable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a disch arge, resulting from the activities proposed in our EP.

E. SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION FOR NEPA ANALYSIS Spill Response Discussion is included in this section as Attachment H-1

.

### SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Mana gement Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well bl owout during drilling operations, estimated to be 475,731 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 33°.

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 BS EE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and
Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website. The results are shown in Figure 1. The BSEE OSRAM identifies a 8% 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, feedi ng and nursery habitat for numerous species of wildlife. Beaches in this area vary in grain part icle size and can be classified as fine sand, shell or perched shell beaches. Sandy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant.

Response

Apache Deepwater LLC will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as practicable. A de scription of the response equipmen t under contract to contain and
recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical charact eristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering model was run on a similar product from the ADIO S oil database. The results indicate 14% or approximately 66,602 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed w ithin 24 hours, with approximately 409,129 barrels remaining.

Spill Response MC 983, Well Location A Barrels of Oil

WCD Volume 475,731

Less 14% natural evaporation/dispersion 66,602
Remaining volume 409,129



### Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary storage equipment available to respond to a sp ill of approximately 409,129 barrels. The volume accounts for the amount remaining after evaporatio n/dispersion at 24 hours. The list estimates individual times needed for proc urement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure
2 also indicates how operations will be supported.

Apache Deepwater LLC’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternativ e response technologies such as dispersants and in-situ burn. Strategi es will be decided by Unified Command based on 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 aircraft s and 4 sorties (8,000 gall ons) from the Basler

### aircraft would provide a daily dispersant ca pability 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 attempte d. Slick containment boom would be immediately
called out and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore response stra tegies may include attempting to skim utilizing a variety of CGA, MSRC, and NRCC equipment, with a total derated skimming capacity of 935,182 barrels. Temporary storage a ssociated with skimming equipment equals 348,944 barrels. If additional storage is neede d, an 80,000 barrel storage barge, an 83,937 barrel storage barge, and four 107,285 barr el storage barges may be mob ilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible. Safety is first priority. Air monito ring 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, MSRC’s, and NRCC’s near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 230,695 barrels. Temporary storage a ssociated with skimming equipment equals 6,890 barrels. If additional storage is neede d, an 86,948 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 allowi ng the skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible. On shore response may include the deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protecti on and sorbent boom on vegetated areas. Master Service Agreements with AMPOL and OMI Envir onmental will ensure acc ess 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. Stra tegies would be based upon surveillance and real time trajectories that depict areas of potentia l impact given actual se a and weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Respon se Plan for Plaquemines Parish and Unified
Command would be consulted to ensure that environmental and special economic resources would be correctly identified and prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shoreline protection strategies depict the protection response modes applicable for oil spill clean-up operations. The
State of Louisiana Initial O il Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it describes necessary action to k eep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, base d 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 pe rsonnel have the option to modify the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more effective res ponse to site-specific circumstances. Apache Deepwater LLC’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, Apache Deepwater LLC can be onsite with contracted oil spill recove ry equipment with adequate re sponse capacity to contain and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, within an estimated 83 hours (based on the equi pment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).

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

Apache Deepwater LLC will take action to provid e a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much of the spilled oi l as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response actions wi ll 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.

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 agen cies will be notified

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form will be completed

• Initial Safety plan will be written and published

• Unified Command will be established

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

o Areas of responsibility esta blished for Source Control a nd each surface operational
site

o On-site command and control established

Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment
Surveillance

• Surveillance Aircraft will be deployed within two hours of Qu alified Individual (QI) notification, or at first light

• Provide trained observer to pr ovide on site status reports

• Provide command and control platfo rm at the site if needed

• Continual surveillance of oil movement by re mote sensing systems, aerial photography
and visual confirmation

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems

### Dispersant application assets

• Put Airborne Support Inc. (ASI) on standby

• With the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC), conduct analysis to determine appropriateness of dispersant application

• 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, ai rcraft, and support equipment and personnel

• Confirm dispersant availability fo r current and long range operations

• Start ordering dispersa nt 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 aer ial 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 FRUs

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

• VOOs 140’ – 180’ in length

• VOOs with minimum of 18’ x 38’ or 23’ x 50’ of optimum deck space

T&T Koseq Skimming Systems

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

• VOOs with a minimum of 2,000 bbls storage capacity

• VOOs at least 200’ in length

• VOOs with deck space of 100’ x 40’ to provide space for arms, tanks, and crane

MSRC Oil Spill Response Vessels (OSRV)

• 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)

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of CGA contracted assets

• Early call out (to allow for tug boa t 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 ski mming assets to minimize offloading time

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

• Use Apache Deepwater LLC’s contr acted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are usually best for depl oyment 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 sa fety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

In-situ Burn assets

• Determine appropriateness of in-situ burn ope ration in coordination with the FOSC and affected State On-Scene Coordinator (SOSC)

• Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

• Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

• Contact boom manufacturer to provide training if required

• Determine assets to perform on water operation

• Build operations into safety plan

• Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

### Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

• Place near shore assets on standby and depl oy in accordance with planning based on the actual situation, actual traj ectories and oil budgets

• VOO identification and training in advance of spill nearing sh oreline 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 re mote 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 Re sponse Team level (Region 6)

Vessel Deployment Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• Fast Response Vessels (FRV)

• Egmopol and Marco Shallow Water Skimmer (SWS)

• Operate with aerial spotter directi ng systems to observed oil slicks

VOO

• Use Apache Deepwater LLC’s contr acted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are usually best for depl oyment 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 sa fety 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 prioritie s for area protection

• Time to acquire personnel and eq uipment and their availability

• Previous contingency planning contained in the appropriate Area Contingency Plan, and currently for Louisiana, The State of Loui siana 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 site s 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 tide lines to minimize waste

• Staging of equipment and housing of respons e personnel as close to the job site as possible to maximize on-site work time

• Boom tending, repair, replacement and security (u se of local assets may be advantageous)

• Constant awareness of weather and oil moveme nt for resource redeployment as necessary

• In-situ burn may be considered when marshes have been impacted

• Passive clean up of marshes should be consider ed and appropriate stoc ks 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 se parate into distinct phases when left in a quiescent state. When separati on occurs, the relatively clean water phase can be siphoned or decanted back to the recovery point with minima l, if any, impact. Decan ting therefore increases the effective on-site oil storage capacity a nd 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 rela tion 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 a nd/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 opera tions ceased when seas reache d 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 wint er and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is generally 14-15 mph along the coast. Wave he ights 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 temperatur e will range from 50 and 60  ̊ F.

The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico hurricane seas on is officially from 1 June to 30 November. 97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The Atlant ic 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 occurri ng then. Maximum activity is in early to mid September. Once in a few years there may be a hurri cane occurring "out of season" - primarily in May or December. Globally, September is the mo st 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 Apache Deepwater LLC’s WCD and information in the BSEE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website using 30 day impact. Th e results are tabulated below.

Area/Block OCS-G Launch
Area Land Segment and/or

Resource Conditional Probability (%) within 30 days

Exploratory Drilling

MC 983,
Well Location A

66 miles from shore G34468 C58 Galveston, TX Jefferson, TX Cameron, LA Vermilion, LA Iberia, LA Terrebonne, LA Lafourche, LA Jefferson, LA Plaquemines, LA

St. Bernard, LA

Okaloosa, FL 1
1
3
2
1
3
3
1
8
1
1WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS(66 miles from shore)409,129 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)API Gravity 33°FIGURE 2 – Equipment ResponseTime to MC 983, Well Location ADispersants/SurveillanceDispersant/SurveillanceDispersantCapacity (gal)StorageCapacityPersonsReq.From Hrs to ProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel to site Total HrsCGABasler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.8 2.8ASIDC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1 3DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1 3Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.8 2.8Offshore ResponseOffshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs to GOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAHOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 8 Harvey 7 0 5 18.8 1 31.8T&T Marine (available throughdirect contract with CGA)Koseq Skimming Arms (5) 89145 10000 5 Utility 30 Galveston 24 24 1 31.8 2 82.8Koseq Skimming Arms (3) 53487 6000 3 Utility 18 Leeville 24 24 2 8.8 2 60.8Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Venice 24 24 2 5.1 2 57.1Koseq Skimming Arms (1) 17829 2000 1 Utility 6 Fourchon 24 24 1 8.8 2 59.8Recovered Oil Storage PreDetermined StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsK-Sea Operating (available through contract with CGA)PACIFIC 996165 NA 80000 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3DBL 76 1212984 NA 83937 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3DBL 101 1119760 NA 107285 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3DBL 102 1146491 NA 107285 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3DBL 103 1170633 NA 107285 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3DBL 104 1193787 NA 107285 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 9.3 1 28.3Offshore EquipmentPre-determined StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsMSRCLouisiana ResponderLFF 100 Brush + OSRV2,640’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom5,280’ 67” LAMOR18086 4000 NA 14 Fort Jackson 2 0 1 3.6 1 7.6MSRC 452 Offshore Barge1 Crucial Disk 88/301,980’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom660 ‘ 67” LAMOR11122 45000 3 Tugs 6 Fort Jackson 2 0 2 12.9 1 17.9Mississippi ResponderTransrec 350 + OSRV5,280’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom2,640’ 67” LAMOR10567 4000 NA 14 Pascagoula 2 0 1 6.4 1 10.4MSRC 402 Offshore Barge2 Crucial Disk 88/30660’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom1,980‘ 67” LAMOR22244 40300 3 Tugs 6 Pascagoula 2 0 2 22.9 1 27.9Deep Blue ResponderLFF 100 Brush + OSRV6,600’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom660’ 67” LAMOR18086 4000 NA 14 Fourchon 2 0 1 3.8 1 7.8PSV – HOS Centerline1 Crucial Disk 88/301,320’ EFC (cont inflate)11122 10626 NA 14 Fourchon 12 12 1 7.9 1 33.9PSV – HOS Strongline1 Crucial Disk 88/301,320’ EFC (cont inflate)11122 10626 NA 14 Fourchon 12 12 1 7.9 1 33.9PSV – C-Freedom1 LFF 100 Brush1,320’ EFC (cont inflate)18086 6000 NA 14 Fourchon 12 12 1 7.9 1 33.9PSV – C-Leader1 LFF 100 Brush1,320’ EFC (cont inflate)18086 6000 NA 14 Fourchon 12 12 1 7.9 1 33.9PSV – Allysa Chouest1 LFF 100 Brush1,320’ EFC (cont inflate)18086 6000 NA 14 Fourchon 12 12 1 7.9 1 33.9Offshore EquipmentPre-determined StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsMSRCMSRC Lightning2 LORI Brush Pack5000 50 3 Tugs 6 Tampa 2 0 2 16 1 21Gulf Coast ResponderTransrec 350 + OSRV5,280’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom2,640’ 67” LAMOR10567 4000 NA 14 Lake Charles 2 0 1 11 1 15Texas ResponderTransrec 350 + OSRV4,620’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom3,300’ 67” LAMOR10567 4000 NA 14 Galveston 2 0 1 14 1 18MSRC 570 Offshore Barge2 Crucial Disk 88/302,640’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom22244 56900 3 Tugs 6 Galveston 2 0 2 50 1 55Southern ResponderTransrec 350 + OSRV4,290’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom2,970’ 67” LAMOR10567 4000 NA 14 Ingleside 2 0 1 18.8 1 22.8MSRC 403 Offshore Barge1 Crucial Disk 88/30660’ 44” Sea Sentry II Boom660’ 67” LAMOR11122 40300 3 Tugs 6 Ingleside 2 0 2 67.1 1 72.1MSRC Quick Strike2 LORI Brush Pack5000 50 3 Tugs 6 Ingleside 2 0 1 18.8 1 22.8NRCCOSRV Energy(Marco Class XI AB)24000 300 NA 6 Morgan City 4 2 0 12.9 1 19.9OSRV Admiral(Marco Class XI AB)24000 300 NA 6 Galveston 4 2 0 29.2 1 36.2OSRB Defender(Marco Class XI AB)24000 16500 1 Tug 6 Bayou La Batre 4 2 0 24.3 1 31.3OSRB Valiant(Marco Class XI AB)24000 20892 1 Tug 6 Aransas Pass 4 2 067.11 74.1OSRB Valor(Marco Class XI AB)24000 19000 1 Tug 6 Tampa 4 2 0 57.1 1 64.1Staging Area: VeniceOffshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsT&T Marine (available throughdirect contract with CGA)Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston 4 12 7.5 5.1 2 30.6CGAFRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 1 2 3 5.1 1 12.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey 1 2 2 5.1 1 11.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 1 2 3.5 5.1 1 12.6FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 1 2 0 5.1 1 9.1Staging Area: VeniceOffshore EquipmentPreferred StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsMSRCWP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (2) 2742 400 2 Utility 12 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1Walosep 4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.1GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Port Arthur 1 2 6 5.1 1 15.1Queensboro Skimmer (4) 3620 400 4 Utility24 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6Desmi Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1) 18086 400 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6Transrec 350 Skimmer (1) 21134 400 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.6LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (2) 36172 400 2 Utility 12 Port Fourchon 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility 6 Port Fourchon 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1Crucial Disk 88/30 Skimmer (1) 11122 400 1 Utility 6 Port Fourchon 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Walosep W4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Staging Area: VeniceOffshore EquipmentPreferred StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsMSRCDesmi Ocean Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6Foilex 200 Skimmer (1) 1989 400 1 Utility 6 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.6GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Baton Rouge 1 2 3 5.1 1 12.1Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1GT-185 Skimmer (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1AardVac Skimmer (1) 3840 400 1 Utility 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 Utility 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1Stress II Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.1Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 Utility 6 Tampa 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1GT-185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 Utility 6 Tampa 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 Utility 6 Tampa 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.1Staging Area: VeniceOffshore Equipment PreferredStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGA42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.142” Auto Boom (10000’) NA NA 20 Crew 40 Harvey 1 2 2 5.1 1 11.142” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.142” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.642” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.11000’ Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey 1 4 2 5.1 6 18.1MSRC44” Sea Sentry II Boom (2860’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2 11 5.1 1 20.144” Sea Sentry II Boom (4290’) NA NA10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.144” Sea Sentry II Boom (6679’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 5.1 1 14.644” Sea Sentry II Boom (1980’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Fort Jackson 1 2 0.5 5.1 1 9.644” Sea Sentry II Boom (3190’) NA NA10 Crew 20 Pascagoula 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.12000’ Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 16 Utility 80 Lake Charles 1 4 5.5 5.1 6 21.6NRCC42” Auto Boom (200’) NA NA 3 Crew6 Belle Chasse 1 2 1.5 5.1 1 10.642” Auto Boom (1000’) NA NA 3 Crew 6 Bayou La Batre 1 2 4 5.1 1 13.142” Auto Boom (2100’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Morgan City 1 2 3 5.1 1 12.742” Auto Boom (2000’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Houston 1 2 7 5.1 1 16.142” Auto Boom (2200’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Galveston 1 2 8 5.1 1 17.142” Auto Boom (2700’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Aransas Pass 1 2 10 5.1 1 19.142” Auto Boom (4000’) NA NA 8 Crew 16 Corpus Christi 1 2 10 5.1 1 19.11000’ Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Morgan City 1 4 3 5.1 6 19.1Nearshore ResponseNearshore EquipmentPre-determined StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGATrinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Morgan City 1 2 2 4.8 1 10.8Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Leeville 1 2 2 2 1 8Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 1 2 2 2 1 846’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Leeville 1 0 2 2.8 0 5.846’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Lake Charles 1 0 1 9.8 0 11.846’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 1 0 1 2.0 0 4.0K-Sea Operating (Availablethrough contract with CGA)DBL 81 1132231 NA 86948 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 4 7.1 1 28.1Enterprise Marine Services LLC (Available through contract with CGA)CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15.63 1 36.63Staging Area: VeniceNearshore Equipment With Staging EDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoad OutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGASWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 8 2 0 13SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Houma 1 2 3 2 0 8SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 1 2 0 2 0 5SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Houma 1 2 3 2 0 8SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 2 0 10.5Nearshore Equipment PreferredStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsNRCC4-Band Rope Mop Skimmer 1509 100 1 Utility 3 Morgan City, LA 2 4 3 2 1 124-Band Rope Mop Skimmer 1509 100 1 Utility 3 Morgan City, LA 2 4 3 2 1 12Vikoma Cascade Skimmer 5520 100 1 Utility 3 Sulphur, LA 2 4 5 2 1 14VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Mobile, AL 2 4 4 2 1 13VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility3 Fort Lauderdale, FL 2 4 13.5 2 1 22.5VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility3 Fort Lauderdale, FL 2 4 13.5 2 1 22.5VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Tampa, FL 2 4 11 2 1 20VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility3 Panama City Beach, FL 2 4 7 2 1 16VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Morgan City, LA 2 4 3 2 1 12VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility3 Belle Chasse, LA 2 4 1.5 2 1 10.5VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Sulphur, LA 2 4 5 2 1 14VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Sulphur, LA 2 4 5 2 1 14VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Southaven, MS 2 4 7 2 1 16VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 La Porte, TX 2 4 7 2 1 16VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Port Arthur, TX 2 4 6 2 1 15VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Corpus Christi, TX 2 4 10 2 1 19VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Utility 3 Baytown, TX 2 4 6.5 2 1 15.5Staging Area: VeniceNearshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoad OutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsMSRCGT 185 with Adaptor (1) + StorageBladder1371 500 1 Utility 3 Port Arthur 2 .5 6.5 2 .5 11.5GT 185 with Adaptor (1) + StorageBladder1371 500 1 Utility 3 Baton Rouge 2 .5 3.5 2 .5 8.5GT 185 with Adaptor (1) + StorageBladder1371 500 1 Utility 3 Pascagoula 2 .5 4 2 .5 9Foilex 250 Skimmer+Storage Bladder3977 500 1 Crew 3 Fort Jackson 2 .5 .5 2 .5 5.5Foilex 250 Skimmer+Storage Bladder3977 500 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 2 .5 5.5 2 .5 10.5Foilex 250 Skimmer+Storage Bladder3977 500 1 Crew 3 Galveston 2 .5 8 2 .5 13Foilex 250 Skimmer+Storage Bladder3977 500 1 Crew 3 Ingleside 2 .5 11 2 .5 16WP-1 Skimmer+ Storage Bladder 3017 500 1 Utility 3 Ingleside 2 .5 11 2 .5 16WP-1 Skimmer+ Storage Bladder 3017 500 1 Utility 3 Pascagoula 2 .5 4 2 .5 9Aardvac 800 Skimmer+Storage Bladder3840 500 NA 3 Pascagoula 2 .5 4 2 .5 9Shoreline ProtectionStaging Area: VeniceShorelineProtection BoomVOOPersonsReq.Storage/WarehouseLocationHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toVeniceTravel toDeployment SiteHrs toDeployTotal HrsAMPOL (Available through MSA)42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 4 2 12 2220,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2 2 6 14OMI Environmental (Available through MSA)10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 4 2 3 1110,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 7.5 2 3 14.510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 6.25 2 3 13.2520,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 1.75 2 6 11.7510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.515,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 2 2 4 12Beach Boom EDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGABeach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Galveston 1 2 8 1 2 14Beach Boom (1000’) NA NA NA 4 Ingleside 1 2 11 1 2 17Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 1 2 10Staging Area: VeniceWildlife Response EDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAWildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 3 1 2 9Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Belle Chasse 1 2 2 1 2 8Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 2 8 1 2 14Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 3 1 2 9Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Ingleside 1 2 11 1 2 17Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 1 2 11.5Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Pascagoula 1 2 4 1 2 10Response Asset TotalOffshore EDRC 935,182Offshore Recovered Oil Capacity 942,021Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 230,695Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Capacity 247,838

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page I

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 13, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION I
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITO RING INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.221 and 550.252)

A. MONITORNING SYSTEMS There are no environmental monitoring systems currently in place or planned for the proposed
activities.

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

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

C. FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine sanctuary; therefore, the requested info rmation is not required for this EP.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page J

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION J
LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.222 and 550.253)

The Lease Stipulations Information for the exploration activities of this EP are subject to the following for Mississippi Canyon Block 983.

Military Warning Area (MWA) Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is no t located within Military Warning Area (MWA).

Marine Protected Species The Marine Protected Species St ipulation is meant to reduce th e potential taking of marine protected species. Apache Deepwater will operate in accordance with NTL 2007-G04, to
minimize the risk of vessel strike s to protected species and report ob servations of injured or dead protected species and the prevention of intentional and/or acci dental introduction of debris into
the marine environment.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page K

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION K
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.213 and 550.243)

A. MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE AND MITIGATE IMPACTS Not applicable for the operations proposed in this EP.

B. INCIDENTAL TAKES Apache Deepwater will adhere to the requirements set forth in the following documents, as applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the ESA as a result of the operations conducted herein:

 NTL 2012-JOINT-G01: Vessel Strike Avoida nce and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting

 NTL 2012-BSEE-G01: Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination

 NTL 2012-JOINT-G02: Implementation of Se ismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page L

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION L
SUPPORT VESSELS AND AI RCRAFT INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.224 and 550.257)

A. GENERAL The most practical, direct route from the s horebase as permitted by weather and traffic
conditions will be utilized.

Type Maximum Fuel Tank Capacity Maximum
Number in Area at Any Time Trip Frequency
or Duration

Crew Boat 27,216 gals 1 2 Per week Marine Supply Vessel (MSV) 379,615 gals 2 2 Per week Helicopters 560 gals 1 6 Per week

B. DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS

Size of Fuel Supply Vessel Capacity of Fuel Supply Vessel Frequency of
Fuel Transfers Route Fuel Supply
Vessel Will Take Marine Supply Vessel (MSV) 379,615 gals 1 per week Dir ect to Fourchon
*Please note the actual vessels have not yet been contracted.

C. DRILLING FLUIDS TRANSPORTATION
N/A

D. SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore” is included in this section as
Attachment L-1

.

E. VICINITY MAP A vicinity map, include d in this section as Attachment L-2, is showing the location of the activities proposed herein relative to the shoreline with the distance of the proposed activities from the shoreline and the primar y route(s) of the support vessels and aircraft that will be used when traveling between the onshore s upport facilities and the drilling unit.ATTACHMENT L-1

Discharged at mudline prior to BOP and riser

installation Cuttings wetted with Water-based

fluid Cuttings generated while using

water based fluid N/A N/A 1,000 bbls/well

N/ACuttings wetted with Syntheticbased fluid Cuttings generated while using synthetic based fluid N/A N/A 2,500 bbls/well Discharged thru shunt pipe to 25' below water's

surface

Cuttings wetted with oil-based

fluids N/A N/A N/A N/A

NOTE: IF YOU WILL NOT HAVE A TYPE OF WASTE, ENTER “NA” IN THE ROW. Wash Water Wash water, sink drainage,

etc. N/A N/A 450,000 gals per well Discharged overboard Recycled

Chemical product wastes Paint, solvents, unused chemicals, etc Transport in DOT containers on supply boats to

shorebase Safety Kleen System Baton Rouge, LA 129 lbs per well Recycled Used Oil Used oil & glycol Transport in DOT containers on supply boats to

shorebase Safety Kleen System Baton Rouge, LA 386 gals per well Disposed in landfill Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in for produced sand.

Produced sand N/A Will you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge? If yes, fill in the appropriate rows.

EXAMPLE: Trash & debris (Recyclables) Plastic, Paper, Aluminum,

Glass Storage bins on supply boat or crew boat Waste Management 7170 Brannon Road, Sulphur,

LA X lb/well Recycled

Trash & debris (NonRecyclables) Non-hazardous trash and debris non- recyclables Transport in DOT containers on supply boats to

shorebase Progressive Waste Solutions of LA,
Houma, LA 643 lbs per well Recycled Oil-based drilling fluid or mud N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Synthetic-based drilling fluid

or mud Internal Olefin Below deck storage tanks on offshore support

vessels M-I Swaco Port Fourchon, La. 14,000 bbls/well Projected Generated Waste Solid and Liquid Wastes Transportation Waste Disposal

Type of Waste Composition Transport Method Name/Location of Facility Amount Disposal Method

Will drilling occur? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings.

EXAMPLE: Synthetic-based drilling fluid or mud Internal olefin, ester Below deck storage tanks on offshore support

vessels Newport Environmental Services Inc., Golden Meadow, LA X bbl/well Recycled

# Apache Deep w at er , LL C Vicinity Map

Mississippi Can y on 983
~99 Miles to Fouchon, LA

Shorebase ~66 Miles to Closest Shoreline Fouchon, LA V enice, LA

Grand Isle, LA

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page M

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION M
ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.225 and 550.258)

A. GENERAL Apache Deepwater will utilize the following onshore facility to provide supply and service for the proposed operations.
Name of Shorebase Location Existing/New/Modified Martin Fuel Docks Fourchon, LA Existing

B. SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION
There will be no new construction of an onshor e support base, nor will we expand the existing shorebase as a result of the operations proposed in this Exploration Plan.

C. WASTE DISPOSAL Information regarding Waste Disposal on the onshor e facilities that will be used to store and dispose of any solid and liquid wastes genera ted by the proposed activ ities is included in
Attachment L-1

.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page N

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION N
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMEN T (CZM) INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.213 and 550.243)

Under the direction of the Coastal Zone Mana gement Act (CZMA), the states of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississi ppi and Texas developed Coastal Zone Management Programs (CZMP) to allow for the supervision of the significant land and water use activities that take place within or that could significantly impact their respective coastal zones.

Any new or unusual technology will/will not be us ed by Apache Deepwater LLC in regards to spill control, cleanup, prevention, etc.

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for Louisiana.

A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consiste ncy for the state of Louisiana is enclosed as
Attachment N-1

.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page O

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION O ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (EIA) (30 CFR 550.227 and 550.261)

The Environmental Impact Analysis ha s been prepared and is included as Attachment O-1

.

# Apache Deepwater LLC

Initial Exploration Plan Mississippi Canyon Block 983
OCS-G 34468

(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, H 2 S 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 XFootnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

1) Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topographic feature. Specifically, if th e 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) w ith relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected by the Topographic Features Stipul ation attached to an OCS lease.
2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS l ease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seaflo or 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 hydr ocarbons or diesel fuel that you determine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed action is lo cated 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 leas e 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 trans portation of produced fluids to shor e using shuttle tankers or barges.

## (B) ANALYSIS

Site-Specific at Missis sippi Canyon Block 983
Proposed operations consist of drilling, installi ng subsea wellhead and completing of 3 (three)
well locations.
Operations will be conducted with a Se misubmersible or DP Semisubmersible.

1. Designated Topographic Features
Potential IPFs on topographic featur es include physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents,
and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is 48.2 miles from the closest designated Topographic Features Stipula tion Block (Sackett Bank); therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is 48.2 miles from the closest designated Topographic Features Stipulation Block (Sackett Bank); ther efore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace 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 organi sms. 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 ma gnitude lower than the
amount shown to have an effect on corals. Becau se the crests of topogr aphic features in the Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface sp ill could reach their sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not app licable due to the distance of these blocks from a topographic area. The activities proposed in th is plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng 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 disturba nces to the seafloor, effluents, and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is 96.7 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area; th erefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

### Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is 96.7 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area; therefore, no adve rse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spill s have the potential to foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal effects on live bottom organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be dr iven 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 a pplicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area. The activit ies proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng 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 in clude physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents, and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located in an area characterized by the existence of live bottoms, and this lease does not contain a Live-Bottom Stipulation requiring a photo documen tation survey and survey report.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located in an area characterized by the existence of live bottoms; therefor e, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace 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 organi sms. 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 ma gnitude lower than the
amount shown to have an effect on marine inve rtebrates. 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 Apache Deepwate r LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information
submitted in Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng 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 Block 983 is located in water de pths 984 feet (300 mete rs) or greater. IPFs that could result in impacts to benthic communitie s from the proposed activities include physical
disturbances to the seafloor.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Bloc k 983 is approximately 40.3 miles from a known benthic community site (Mississippi Canyon Block 969), listed in NTL 2009-G40. This Initial Exploratio n Plan submittal includes the required maps, analyses, and statement(s). The proposed act ivities 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.

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities wh ich could impact benthic communities.

5. Water Quality
IPFs that could result in water quality degrada tion from the proposed oper ations in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 include disturbances to th e seafloor, effluents and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: Bottom area disturban ces resulting from the emplacement of drill rigs, the drilling of wells and the installation of platforms and pipelines would increase water-column turbidity and re-sus pension of any accumulated pollutants, such as
trace metals and excess nutrients. This woul d 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 a nd monitoring and toxicity testin g are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significant bi ological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are not expected to cause si gnificant adverse impact s to water quality.

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter o ffshore water quality; how ever, it is unlikely
that an accidental surface or s ubsurface spill would occur from th e 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 da ta were collected), there were 80 reported diesel spil ls greater than one barrel associ ated with drilling activities. Considering that there were 11,944 wells drille d, this is a 0.7 percen t 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 seve ral months afterwards. Most of the components

### of oil are insoluble in water and therefore floa t. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information
submitted in Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng 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 pr oposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 include physical di sturbances to the seafloor, effluents and accidents.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: The emplacement of a structur e or drilling rig 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 c onflicts are covered by the Fishermen’s Contingency Fund (FCF). The emplacement and removal of faci lities are not expect ed to cause significant adverse impacts
to fisheries.

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 potent ial 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 woul d be reduced to the cap acity of adult fish and shellfish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydr ocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H ).

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 a nd Atlantic spotted dolphin. S quid eaters, including dwarf and pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough-toothed dolphin, a nd 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 Block 983 include emissions, effluents, discar ded 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 vul nerable to parasites, disease, environmental contaminants, and/or predation (Majors and Myri ck, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence for long-term displacements and population tren ds for marine mammals relative to noise.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cutti ngs discharges contain components which may be detrimental to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from drilling flui ds 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 inge stion 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 act ivities 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 Polluti on Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in accorda nce with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaini ng 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 w ill be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, par ticularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent material s such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 mamma l species immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is cau sed 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 Networ k at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding
network as needed.

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 Apache Deepwater LLC’s OSRP is considered to be low when compared w ith the constituents and fractions of crude oils and diesel products. The activitie s proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s OSRP (refer to informati on submitted in accordance with Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical di sturbances 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 tr ash and debris, and accidents. Gu lfCet II studies sighted most loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and le atherback sea turtles over shel f 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 sp ecies as a transitory habitat.

Emissions: Noise from drilling activi ties, support vessels, and heli copters may elicit a startle reaction from sea turtles, but th is is a temporary disturbance.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges are not k nown to be lethal to sea turtles. Most operational discharges are dilu ted 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 inges tion of, debris have caused the death or serious injury of sea tu rtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited am ount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activitie s is not expected to substantially harm sea turtles. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging de bris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the
Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Ac t, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USC G) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaini ng 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 w ill be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, par ticularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materi als such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt that emphasizes their commitment to waste management
in accordance with NTL No. 2012-G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and s ea turtles would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to sea turtles is possible. Cont ract vessel operators can avoid sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by main taining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighte d. 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 inju red or dead protecte d sea turtle species immediately, regardless of whethe r the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824-5312, or th e Marine Mammal Stranding Ne twork at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must
be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to rema in available to assist the respective salvage and stranding network as needed.

All sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerab le to the harmful e ffects of oil through direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fa tal, particularly to juveniles and hatchlings. However, it is un likely that an accidental oil sp ill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil sp ill response activities ma y 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 Apache Deepwater LLC ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical di sturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impact sea turtles.

9. Air Quality
Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is located 101.6 mile s from the Breton Wilderness Area and 68 miles from shore. Applicable emissions data is included in Section G of the Plan.

There would be a limited degree of air quality degradation in the immediate vicinity of the proposed activities. Plan Emissions for th e proposed activities do not exceed the annual exemption levels as set forth by BOEM. Acci dents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, th ese releases would not impact onshore air quality because of the prev ailing atmospheric cond itions, emission height, emission rates, and the distance of Mississippi Canyon Block 983 from the coastline. There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seaf loor, 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 re sult of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 include disturbances to the seafloor and accidents (oil spill). Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is not located in or adjacent to an OC S block designated by BOEM as having a high probability for occurre nce of shipwrecks. Apache Deepwater LLC will report to BOEM the discovery of any evidence of a shipwreck and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to s hore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities which could impact shipwreck sites.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potentia l to cause some detrimental effects to shipwreck sites if the re lease 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 Apache Deepwater LLC ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section H ).

Apache Deepwater LLC will perform an AUV/ROV su rvey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine archaeologist and by Apache Deepwater LLC to be clear of seafloor arch aeological resources, including historic shipwrecks. C opies of the certificati ons and a circle radius plat of the survey
area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, Apache Deepwater

### LLC will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, efflue nts, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed act ivities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites

IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological site s as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 are physical disturba nces to the seafloor and accidents (oil spills).

Physical Disturbances to the seafloor: Mississippi Canyon Block 983 is located inside the Archaeological Prehistoric high probability lines. Apache Deepwater LLC will report to BOEM the discovery of any object of prehistoric arch aeological significance and make every reasonable effort to preserve and prot ect that cultural resource.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potentia l 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 Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to inform ation submitted in accordance with Section H ).

Apache Deepwater LLC will perform an AUV/ROV su rvey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine archaeologist and by Apache Deepwater LLC to be cl ear of seafloor archae ological resources. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, Ap ache Deepwater LLC will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activ ities 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 resu lt of the proposed oper ations in Mississippi Canyon Block 983 include physical disturbances to the seafloor, effluents and accidents. EFH
includes all estuarine and mari ne waters and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico.

### Physical disturbances to the seafloor: The Live Bottom Low Re lief Stipulation, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation, and the Ea stern 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).

Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulati on, 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 a nd produced-water discha rges, discharge-rate restrictions, and monitoring a nd toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significa nt biological or ecol ogical effects. Operat ional 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 a ffect 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 Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to
information submitted in Section H ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which coul d 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 a nd debris from vessel s and the facilities.

Emissions: Emissions of pollutants into the atmo sphere from these activities are far below
concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds.

Accidents: An oil spill woul d cause localized, low-level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill woul d occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). Marine and pelagic birds feedi ng at the spill location may experience chronic, nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected th at few, if any, coastal and marine birds would actually be affected to that extent. The activitie s proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H ).

Discarded trash and debris : Marine and pelagic birds could become entangled and snared in discarded trash and debris, or in gest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and death. Operators are prohibited from deliberat ely discharging debris as mandated by MARPOLAnnex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Resear ch and Control Act, and regulations imposed by

### various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwate r LLC will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accide ntal loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and us ing 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 packagi ng materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent material s such as plastic or glass. Informational placards will be posted on all ve ssels and facilities having sl eeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore pers onnel, 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 Microsof t PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view
the marine trash and debris trai ning video annually. Offshore pe rsonnel will also receive an explanation from Apache Deepwater LLC ma nagement 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, th e 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 pr oposed 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 cau se impacts to public health and safety. In accordance with NTL No.’s 2008-G04, 2009-G27, and 2009-G31, suffi cient information is included in Section D to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H 2 

### S 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 beac hes would have impacts on the use of recreational beaches
and associated resources. Due to the distance fr om shore (68 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 Apache Deepwa ter LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information
submitted in Section H ).

### Discarded trash and debris: Trash on the beach is recogni zed 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 activ ities. Operators are prohibite d from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and th e Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by variou s agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protectio n Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities which could impact beaches.

2. Wetlands

IPFs from the proposed activities that could ca use impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil spills) and discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an oil spill would occu r from the proposed activities (refer to Item
5 , Water Quality). Due to the distance from shor e (68 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section

H ).

Discarded trash and debris: There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activ ities. Operators are prohibite d from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and th e Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by variou s agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protectio n Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will

### operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) fr om the proposed activities which could impact
wetlands.

3. Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds

Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore bird s 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 (68 mile s) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activ ities proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H ).

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 manda ted by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic
Pollution Research and Control Ac t, and regulations imposed by va rious agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Envi ronmental Protection Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in a ccordance 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 outsid e 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 personne l, including contract ors and other support

### services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e 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 di stance from shore (68 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts ar e expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information
submitted in Section H ).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from de liberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plas tic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various ag encies including the United St ates Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoi d accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to pr event accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent 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 personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e 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 (101.6 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. The activi ties proposed in this plan will be covered by Apache Deepwater LLC’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section H).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from de liberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plas tic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various ag encies including the United St ates Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Apache Deepwater LLC will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoi d accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to pr event accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent 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 personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation fr om Apache Deepwater LLC management or the designated lease operator manageme nt 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e 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 propos ed 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 si x become hurricanes ( > 74 mph winds). Due to its location in the gulf, Mississippi Canyon Bl ock 983 may experience hurricane and tropical storm force winds, and related sea cu rrents. These factors can adversely impact the integrity of the operations covered by this pla n. A significant storm may present physical hazards to operators and vessels, damage exploration or pr oduction equipment, or result in the release of hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Add itionally, the displacement of equipment may disrupt the local benthic habitat a nd 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 instal lation operations duri ng Tropical Storm or
Hurricane threat.

(E) ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives to the proposed activities were cons idered to reduce environmental impacts.

(F) MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation measures other than those requ ired by regulation will be employed to avoid, diminish, or eliminate potential im pacts on environmental resources.

(G) CONSULTATION
No agencies or persons were consulted regard ing potential impacts associ ated with the proposed activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided.

### (H) PREPARER(S)

Krystal Nava J. Connor Consulting, Inc. 16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700 Houston, TX 77084 (281) 578-3388 krystal.nava@jccteam.com

(I) REFERENCES

Authors:

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1989. Eff ects of offshore petroleum operations on cold
water marine mammals: a literature revi ew. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute. 385 pp.

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on mari ne 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, Honolu lu, 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 benef its from regulatory cons ideration of synthetic drilling muds. Environmental Assessmen t Division, Argonne Na tional Laboratory,
ANL/EAD/TM-43.

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

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sens itivity of seabird populations in Al aska to oil pollution. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Mana gement, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLMYK-ES-81-006-1792.

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: en tanglement 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: s ources, 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 tropi cal Pacific purse-sein e fishery–an annotated bibliography. NOAA Admini strative Report LJ-90-06.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. A nnual report to Congress – 1998.

### Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler, M. Ke ndziorek, 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. Topi cs in Marine Biology. Ro s, 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.

### Apache Deepwater LLC Page P

‐ 1
Initial Exploration Plan April 23, 2013 Mississippi Canyon Block 983 (OCS

‐ G 34468) 

### SECTION P
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION (30 CFR 550.228 and 550.262)

A. EXEMPTED INFO RMATION DESCRIPTION The proposed bottom-hole locations of the planned well have been removed from the public information copy of the EP as well as any di scussion of the target objectives, geologic or geophysical data and any interpreted geology.

B. BIBLIOGRAPHY
N/A