UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MEMORANDUM

To: Public Information (MS 5030)

Plans Section, Office of Field 

Operations (MS 5231)

Public Information copy of Exploration Plan

Control # - N-09666

Type - Initial Exploration Plan

Lease(s) - OCS-G32954 Block - 380 Alaminos Canyon Area

Operator - Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC

SS Wells A, B, and C

DRILLSHIP

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

should be addressed in an Environmental Assessment.

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

Karen Dunlap

Plan Coordinator

Description -

Rig Type -

Subject:

From:

October 31, 2012

1

Erin Rachal

From: paygovadmin@mail.doc.twai.gov

Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 11:20 AM

To: Erin Rachal

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

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

payment, please contact Pay.gov Customer Service by phone at (800) 624-1373 or by email at pay.gov.clev@clev.frb.org.

Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF Pay.gov Tracking ID: 257UB8ST Agency Tracking ID: 74354893726 

Account Holder Name: Statoil USA E&P Inc Transaction Type: ACH Debit Transaction Amount: $10,326.00 Payment 

Date: Sep 11, 2012 Account Type: Business Checking Routing Number: 021000021 Account Number: ************6038 

Transaction Date: Sep 10, 2012 12:20:23 PM Total Payments Scheduled: 1 

Frequency: OneTime 

Region: Gulf of Mexico 

Contact: Erin Rachal 713-485-2555 

Company Name/No: Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC, 02748 Lease Number(s): 32954, , , , 

Area-Block: Alaminos Canyon AC, 380: , : , : , : , Surface Locations: 3 

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Initial Exploration Plan 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

Lease OCS-G 32954 

September 11, 2012 

Table of Contents 

1 Contents of Plan 

2 General Information 

3 Geological and Geophysical Information 

4 H2S Information 

5 Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information 

6 Waste and Discharge Information 

7 Air Emissions Information 

8 Oil Spill Information 

9 Environmental Monitoring Information 

10 Lease Stipulations Information 

11 Environmental Mitigation Measures Information 

12 Decommissioning Information 

13 Related Facilities and Operations Information 

14 Support Vessels and Aircraft Information 

15 Onshore Support Facilities Information 

16 Sulphur Operations Information 

17 Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information 

18 Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) 

19 Administrative Information 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 2 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

Appendices 

Appendix A Plan Information Form 

Appendix B Well Location Map 

Appendix C Bathymetry Map 

Appendix D Shallow Hazards Assessment 

Appendix E Air Quality Review 

Appendix F Worst Case Discharge, NTL 2010-N06 

Appendix G Vicinity Plat 

Appendix H Consistency Certification 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 3 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

CONTENTS OF PLAN 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC proposes to drill and temporarily or permanently abandon three (3) 

well locations( A, B and C) in Alaminos Canyon Block 380, Lease OCS-G 32954. 

(a) Plan Information Form 

 

An OCS Plan Information Form, BOEM-0137, with details of the proposed drilling operations as 

provided for in this Plan along with a tentative schedule is included as Appendix A. 

(b) Bathymetry Map and Location Plat 

A Well Location Plat and a Bathymetry Map are included as Appendices B and C. 

These wells will be drilled with a dynamically positioned drillship utilizing a subsea BOP stack. 

There are no anchors associated with the proposed operations. 

(c) Safety and Pollution Prevention Features

Safety features on the MODU will include well control, pollution prevention, welding procedure, 

and blowout prevention equipment as described in Title 30 CFR Parts 250 and 550, Subparts C 

and Title 30 CFR Part 250 subparts D, E, G and O; and as further clarified by BOEM and BSEE 

Notice to Lessees, and current policy making invoked by the BSEE, BOEM, Environmental 

Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard. The appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, 

etc., as prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard will be maintained on the facility at all times. 

In accordance with Title 30 CFR Part 250, Subpart 0, an operator is to ensure Well Control 

Training is provided for lessee and contractor personnel engaged in oil and gas operations in 

the OCS Gulf of Mexico. Further, the operator is charged with the responsibility to not create 

conditions that will pose unreasonable risk to the public health, life, property, aquatic life, 

wildlife, recreation, navigation, commercial fishing, or other uses of the ocean. 

Supervisory and certain designated personnel on-board the facility are to be familiar with the 

effluent limitations and guidelines for overboard discharges into the receiving waters, as outlined 

in the NPDES General Permit GMG290000. Some of these pollution prevention measures 

include installation of curbs, gutters, drip pans, and drains on drilling deck areas to collect all 

contaminants and debris. 

The BSEE is required to conduct onsite inspections of offshore facilities to confirm operators are 

complying with lease stipulations, operating regulations, approved plans, and other conditions; 

as well as to assure safety and pollution prevention requirements are being met. The National 

Potential Incident of Noncompliance (PINC) List serves as the baseline for these inspections. 

The BSEE also inspects the stockpiles of equipment listed in the operator's approved Oil Spill 

Response Plan that would be used for the containment and cleanup of hydrocarbon spills. 

(d) Storage Tanks and Production Vessels 

Tanks with a capacity of 25 bbls or more of oil as defined at 30 CFR 254.6 are listed below:
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 4 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

Type of Storage 

Tank Type of Facility 

Tank 

Capacity 

(bbls) 

Number of 

Tanks 

Total 

Capacity 

(bbls) 

Fluid 

Gravity 

(API)

Fuel Oil DP Drill Ship 16271 2 32542 28.0° 

Fuel Oil DP Drill Ship 677 2 1354 28.0°

Fuel Oil DP Drill Ship 1354 2 2708 28.0°

Port Process Tanks DP Drill Ship 56 5 280 28.0°

Stbd Process Tanks DP Drill Ship 56 5 280 28.0°

Mdo over tk DP Drill Ship 819 1 819 28.0°

Crude Storage DP Drill Ship 24526 4 98104 26.6° 

Crude Storage DP Drill Ship 2299 2 4598 26.6° 

Lube Oil Tank DP Drill Ship 185 1 185 32.0° 

Thrstr Lube Oil st DP Drill Ship 186 1 433 32.0° 

Thrstr Lube Oil pt DP Drill Ship 247 1 32.0° 

Riser tens fluid 1 DP Drill Ship 106 1 205 NA 

Riser tens fluid 2 DP Drill Ship 99 1 NA 

Fwd Hydraulic fluid DP Drill Ship 99 1 205 NA 

Aft Hydraulic fluid DP Drill Ship 106 1 NA 

BOP Fluid DP Drill Ship 87 2 174 NA 

Glycol DP Drill Ship 151 2 302 NA 

Dirty Oil DP Drill Ship 43 1 43 32.0° 

Fwd Waste Oil DP Drill Ship 221 1 608 32.0° 

Aft Waste Oil DP Drill Ship 387 1 32.0° 

Sludge tank 1 DP Drill Ship 89 1 168 NA Sludge tank 2 DP Drill Ship 79 1 

Base Oil DP Drill Ship 11055 2 22110 32.0° 

Port Process tanks DP Drill Ship 56 5 280 32.0° 

Stbd Process tanks DP Drill Ship 56 5 280 32.0° 

Thermal oil stor tk DP Drill Ship 137 1 137 32.0° 

Dirty oil tank emcy DP Drill Ship 97 1 97 32.0° 

Slop tk DP Drill Ship 2299* 2 4598* 26.6° 

*Note: 75% BSW, 25% oil. Actual capacity = 2 tanks @ 9,198 bbls equaling 18,396 bbls 

(e) Service Fee 

A Pay.Gov receipt in the amount of $10326.00 is enclosed to cover the cost of the fees 

associated with the proposed operations. 

(f) Pollution Prevention Measures 

This information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(g) Additional Measures 

Statoil has installed early kick detection equipment (mass flow meters) in the flowline on the rig, 

whose readings are interpreted by software capable of detecting a change in flow parameters 

more quickly than a person. This is in addition to the safety, pollution prevention, and early spill 

detection required by 30 CFR part 250. 




!.

!.

!.

AC 380

OCS-G-32954

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC

AC380-B

AC 380-A

AC 380-C

1,125,000

1,130,000

1,135,000

1,140,000

9,650,0009,655,0009,660,000

94°34'0"W

94°33'0"W

94°32'0"W

26°37'0"N26°36'0"N26°35'0"N

Location Call N/S Call E/W X Coordinate Y Coordinate Latitude Longitude WD 

Proposed Locations- AC380

AC380-A SL 3,853' FNL 7,099' FWL 1,131,739.00' 9,658,547.00' 26° 36' 33.15"N 94° 33' 26.01"W 4,544'AC380-C SL 5,558' FNL 3,168' FEL 1,137,312.00' 9,656,842.00' 26° 36' 16.93"N 94° 32' 24.39"W 4,963'AC380-B SL 2,781' FNL 6,662' FEL 1,133,818.00' 9,659,619.00' 26° 36' 44.02"N 94° 33' 03.25"W 4,428'
!.

!.

!.

AC 380

OCS-G-32954

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC

AC380-B

AC 380-C

AC 380-A

-6000

-5500

-4500

-5000

-6500

-6500

1,125,000

1,130,000

1,135,000

1,140,000

9,650,0009,655,0009,660,000

94°34'0"W

94°33'0"W

94°32'0"W

26°37'0"N26°36'0"N26°35'0"N

AC380-AEasting: 1,131,739.00' ENorthing: 9,658,547.00' NFWL of AC380: 7,099'FNL of AC380: 3,853'

AC380-BEasting: 1,133,818.00' ENorthing: 9,659,619.00' NFEL of AC380: 6,662'FNL of AC380: 2,781'

AC380-CEasting: 1,137,312.00' ENorthing: 9,656,842.00' NFEL of AC380: 3,168'FNL of AC380: 5,558'
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 5 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

(a) Applications and Permits 

The following applications and permits are required for the activities proposed herein: 

Application / Permit Issuing Agency Status 

APD BSEE District To be Submitted 

Well Containment Plan BSEE District To be Submitted 

TX CZM Consistency 

Certification TX CZM To be Submitted 

LA CZM Consistency 

Certification LA CZM To be Submitted 

NPDES Permit EPA To be Submitted 

(b) Drilling Fluids 

Statoil will use the following types and amounts of drilling fluids for the proposed operations: 

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling 

Fluid to be Used per well 

Water-based (SW, FW, Barite) See “Waste and Discharge Tables” 

Oil-based (diesel, mineral oil) NA 

Synthetic-based (internal olefin, ester, etc) See “Waste and Discharge Tables” 

(c) Peak Production Rates / Life of Reserves 

Not applicable for exploration plans. 

(d) Oil Characteristics 

Fluid Type Oil 

Oil Gravity (API) 40.8° 

Viscosity at Coral reservoir conditions (cp) 0.52 

B0 at Coral reservoir conditions (rb/stb) 1.92 

GOR (scf/stb) 2498 

Analytical Methodologies Standard PVT Analysis 

Oil Identification AC903 #1 (Tribent) 

(e) New or Unusual Technology 

Statoil does not propose the use of any new or unusual technology in the activities proposed 

under this plan. 

(f) Bonding Information 

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

an $3,000,000 area-wide bond furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR Part 256, 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 6 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

Subpart I; NTL No. 2000-G16, “Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds”; and National NTL 

No. 2008-N07, “Supplemental Bond Procedures”. 

(g) Oil Spill Financial Responsibility (OSFR) 

Statoil (BOEM Operator No. 02748) will demonstrate oil spill financial responsibility for the 

facilities proposed in this Supplemental EP according to 30 CFR Part 253, and NTL No. 2008-

N05, “Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for Covered Facilities”. 

(h) Deepwater Well Control Statement 

Statoil (MMS Operator No. 02748) has the financial capability to drill a relief well and conduct 

other emergency well control operations. Statoil has two dynamically positioned drilling rigs 

under long term contract in the OCS GOM region, both of which are capable of drilling a relief 

well. 

(i) Suspension of Production 

Not applicable for exploration plans. 

(j) Blowout Scenario 

Upon analysis of the wellbore and test results, it is determined that the worst case discharge 

would occur at the 12-1/4” hole section at a rate of 50,251 BOPD with a total spill volume of 

4,422,088 bbls. 

It is estimated that it will take a total of 88 days to drill the relief well and kill the well. This 

includes 21 days for a second dynamically positioned drillship to demob from its current location 

and mobilize to the AC380 (Coral) well location, 60 days to drill to the top of the reservoir and 7 

days for well kill operations. Statoil currently has two dynamically positioned drillships (Maersk 

Developer & T.O. Discoverer Americas) under contract, both of which are capable of drilling a 

relief well. There are no rig package constraints with the two referenced rigs. The Maersk 

Developer is designed to drill in water depths up to 10,000’ with a rated drilling depth capacity of 

40,000’. The T.O. Discoverer Americas is designed to drill in water depths up to 12,000’ with a 

rated drilling depth capacity of 40,000’. Drilling a relief well from a neighboring platform or 

onshore location is not feasible for the wells being proposed in this EP. 

In reference to the likelihood of a surface intervention and after review of detailed analyses on 

dynamic well kill procedures and the drilling of relief wells, it has been confirmed that the well 

will be killed dynamically. There is little to no evidence of bridging in the area, therefore it is not 

likely that the well will bridge over. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 7 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION 

In accordance with 43 CFR Part 2, Appendix E Sections (4) and (9), those items considered 

proprietary have been omitted from the Public Information copy and have been referenced 

accordingly. 

(a) Geological Description 

Proprietary Data. 

(b) Structure Contour Maps 

Enclosed as proprietary data are current structure maps drawn to the top of the proposed 

hydrocarbon zone(s). The surface and bottom hole location(s) along with the locations of the 

geologic cross-sections of the well(s) to be drilled under this plan are included. 

(c) Interpreted 2-D or 3-D Seismic Lines 

Enclosed as proprietary data are copies of the migrated and annotated deep seismic line 

within 500 feet of the proposed surface location(s). 

(d) Geological Structure Cross-Sections 

An interpreted geological cross-section showing the location and depth of each of the proposed 

well(s) with at least one key horizon and the objective sand labeled is enclosed as proprietary 

data. 

(e) Shallow Hazards Report 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC to provide a 3D Geohazard review study in the Alaminos Canyon area of the Gulf of Mexico 

to investigate seabed and sub-seabed geohazards across Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424, 

Offshore, Texas in August 2012. The purpose of the study was for the identification of potential 

shallow drilling hazards and problems which may impact the siting or drilling of proposed 

exploratory wells.

Copies of the Geohazard Study will be submitted under separate cover.

(f) Site Specific Shallow Hazards Assessment 

GEMS was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC to prepare site clearance letters for each of 

the proposed drill sites in Block 380, Alaminos Canyon Area, Offshore, Texas in August 2012. 

The purpose of the assessment was to address seafloor and shallow geologic conditions that 

may impact exploratory drilling operations within 1500 feet of the proposed wellsite. This site 

clearance is based on the interpretation of 3D seismic data.

Copies of the site clearance are included with this plan as Appendix '. 

(g) High Resolution Seismic Lines 

Fugro GeoServices, Inc. was contracted by Statoil USA E&P Inc. to perform an Archaeological 

survey and prepare an Archaeological Assessment for the proposed drill sites in all of the 

Blocks AC380 and AC424 and the western half of Block AC381 in June 2012. The purpose of 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 8 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

the assessment was to address seafloor conditions that may impact exploratory drilling 

operations within 2000 feet of the proposed well sites. The site clearance is based on the 

interpretation of 3D seismic data and the Archaeological survey referenced above. 

High resolution seismic lines are included as proprietary data. 

(h) Stratigraphic Column 

A generalized biostratigraphic/lithostratigraphic column from the seafloor to the total depth of 

each of the proposed well(s) is included as proprietary data.

(i) Time Versus Depth Tables 

A time versus depth table is considered proprietary data. 

 

(j) Geochemical Information 

This information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(k) Future G&G Activities

This information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200 

Fax: 713-918-8290 

Attachment G

Public Shallow Hazards Statement – AC380-A 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Shallow Hazards Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

OCS-G 32954 

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-A location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 ft of the 

proposed site. The depth limit of this well clearance is -6,544 ft (-1,995 m) below sea surface 

which is 1,999 ft (609 m) below seabed. 

This hazards summary letter is issued as a supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 

entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos 

Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated August 31, 2012. 

Seabed Hazards. The proposed AC380-A is situated along the outer continental slope, 

approximately 900 ft north of the Alaminos Canyon headscarp. The seafloor is relatively 

smooth and featureless at the proposed site; however, steep slopes and highly irregular 

conditions from slumps and fault scarps dominate the seafloor along the Alaminos Canyon 

margin to the south. A surficial drape of soft, high water content silty clays likely covers the 

seafloor near the proposed wellsite. Overconsolidated materials may be exposed at or very 

near the seafloor along Alaminos Canyon and at the escarpment base. 

Seafloor stability should not be an issue at the proposed location. The seafloor slopes to the 

south-southwest at about 4.0o. 
Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The nearest known 

potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed location lies over nine 

miles to the south in AC 601. This area will not impact the proposed AC380-A location. 

There are no known obstructions to exploration drilling within AC 380. Additionally, no manmade infrastructure exists within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. 

Sub-Seabed Hazards. Possible gas hazards occur around the proposed well location between 

the seabed and the depth limit of this study (i.e., the top of salt). No significant gas hazards 

directly impact the proposed location. A low potential for shallow gas is assigned within the 

interval between 228 ft and 1,999 ft bml within potential thin sand deposits. 

No seafloor faults appear to be intersected by the proposed AC380-A location between the 

seafloor and the limit of study (1,999 ft bml). A possible buried fault may be intersected at a 

subsea depth of -5,051 ft (506 ft bml). The fault has been considered when designing the 

casing program. 

Shallow water flow risk is considered to be negligible to low within the shallow section. 

Proposed AC380-A Location (Surface) 

Location Coordinates 

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West 

Latitude 26o 36' 33.14779" North Easting 1,131,739 US ft E 

Longitude 94o 33' 26.01201" West Northing 9,658,547 US ft N 

FWL of Alaminos Canyon 380 7,099 US ft Inline 2912 

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,853 US ft Crossline 2855 

Water Depth: -4,544 ft Slope: 4.0o south-southwest 

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W 

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E 

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover Spar, AC 25 25 miles N 19o 23' 46.62"W 

Conclusions and Recommendations: There are no sites with a potential for chemosynthetic 

or other deepwater benthic community development evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of 

the proposed AC380-A well location. Significant sub-seabed gas hazards have been avoided. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200

Fax: 713-918-8290

 

Chemosynthetic and Deepwater Benthic Community Statement – AC380-A 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Benthic Community Summary 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380

OCS-G 32954

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-A location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses the location proximity to 

potential chemosynthetic or other benthic community sites. 

This chemosynthetic and deepwater benthic community summary letter is issued as a 

supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment 

Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated 

August 31, 2012. 

Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically positioned drilling vessel; 

therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

A Biological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Map for the proposed AC380-A is included at the 

end of this summary letter illustrating the area surrounding the proposed well location (Chart 

AC 380-A).

Potential Chemosynthetic and other Deepwater Benthic Communities. 

Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of the proposed location. 
Proposed Well Location 22 for Alaminos Canyon Block 380: 

Proposed AC380-A Location (Surface)

Location Coordinates

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West

Latitude 26o 36' 33.14779" North Easting 1,131,739 US ft E

Longitude 94o 33' 26.01201" West Northing 9,658,547 US ft N

FWL of Alaminos Canyon 380 7,099 US ft Inline 2912

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,853 US ft Crossline 2855

Water Depth: -4,544 ft Slope: 4.0o south-southwest

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover Spar, AC 25 25 miles N 19o 23' 46.62"W

No features or areas were identified on the 3D dataset that could support high-density 

chemosynthetic or other benthic communities within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The 

nearest known potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed 

location lies over nine miles to the south in AC 601. 

Conclusions and Recommendations: No sites with the potential for chemosynthetic or other 

deepwater benthic community development were identified within 2,000 ft of the proposed 

AC380-A well location. Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically 

positioned drilling vessel; therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200 

Fax: 713-918-8290 

Attachment G

Public Shallow Hazards Statement – AC380-B 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Shallow Hazards Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

OCS-G 32954 

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-B location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 ft of the 

proposed site. The depth limit of this well clearance is -6,574 ft (-2,004 m) below sea surface 

which is 2,146 ft (654 m) below seabed. 

This hazards summary letter is issued as a supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 

entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos 

Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated August 31, 2012. 

Seabed Hazards. The proposed AC380-B is situated along the outer continental slope, 

approximately 1,600 ft north of the Alaminos Canyon Escarpment. The seafloor is relatively 

smooth and featureless at the proposed site; however, along the headscarp of Alaminos 

Canyon, the seafloor is steeply sloping and highly irregular with seafloor expression of slumps 

and fault scarps. A surficial drape of soft, high water content silty clays likely covers the 

seafloor near the proposed wellsite. Overconsolidated materials may be exposed at or very 

near the seafloor along the Alaminos Canyon and at the escarpment base. 

Seafloor stability should not be an issue at the proposed location. The seafloor slopes to the 

west-southwest at about 3.6o. 
Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The nearest known 

potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed location lies over nine 

miles to the south in AC 601. This area will not impact the proposed AC380-B location. 

There are no known obstructions to exploration drilling within AC 380. Additionally, no manmade infrastructure exists within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. 

Sub-Seabed Hazards. Possible gas hazards occur around the proposed well location between 

the seabed and the depth limit of this study (i.e., the top of salt). No significant gas hazards 

directly impact the proposed location. A low potential for shallow gas is assigned to a possible 

sand-prone interval beneath the well location. This interval is at 492 - 2,146 ft below the mudline. 

No fault planes appear to be intersected by the proposed AC380-B location between the 

seafloor and the limit of study (2,146 ft bml). 

Shallow water flow risk is considered to be negligible to low within the shallow section. 

Proposed AC380-B Location (Surface) 

Location Coordinates 

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West 

Latitude 26o 36' 44.01534" North Easting 1,133,818 US ft E 

Longitude 94o 33' 03.24985" West Northing 9,659,619 US ft N 

FEL of Alaminos Canyon 380 6,662 US ft Inline 2925 

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 2,781 US ft Crossline 2805 

Water Depth: -4,428 ft Slope:3.6o west-southwest 

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W 

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E 

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover, AC 25 25 miles N 20o 18' 04.12"W 

Conclusions and Recommendations: There are no sites with a potential for chemosynthetic 

or other deepwater benthic community development evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of 

the proposed AC380-B well location. Significant sub-seabed gas hazards have been avoided. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200

Fax: 713-918-8290

Chemosynthetic and Deepwater Benthic Community Statement – AC380-B 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Benthic Community Summary 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380

OCS-G 32954

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-B location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses the location proximity to 

potential chemosynthetic or other benthic community sites. 

This chemosynthetic and deepwater benthic community summary letter is issued as a 

supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment 

Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated 

August 31, 2012. 

Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically positioned drilling vessel; 

therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

A Biological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Map for the proposed AC380-B is included at the 

end of this summary letter illustrating the area surrounding the proposed well location (Chart 

AC 380-B).

Potential Chemosynthetic and other Deepwater Benthic Communities. 

Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of the proposed location. 
Proposed Well Location B for Alaminos Canyon Block 380: 

Proposed AC380-B Location (Surface)

Location Coordinates

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West

Latitude 26o 36' 44.01534" North Easting 1,133,818 US ft E

Longitude 94o 33' 03.24985" West Northing 9,659,619 US ft N

FEL of Alaminos Canyon 380 6,662 US ft Inline 2925

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 2,781 US ft Crossline 2805

Water Depth: -4,428 ft Slope:3.6o west-southwest

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover, AC 25 25 miles N 20o 18' 04.12"W

No features or areas were identified on the 3D dataset that could support high-density 

chemosynthetic or other benthic communities within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The 

nearest known potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed 

location lies over nine miles to the south in AC 601. 

Conclusions and Recommendations: No sites with the potential for chemosynthetic or other 

deepwater benthic community development were identified within 2,000 ft of the proposed 

AC380-B well location. Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically 

positioned drilling vessel; therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200 

Fax: 713-918-8290 

Attachment G

Public Shallow Hazards Statement – AC380-C 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Shallow Hazards Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

OCS-G 32954 

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-C location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses seafloor and shallow 

geologic conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 ft of the 

proposed site. The depth limit of this well clearance is -7,054 ft (-2,150 m) below sea surface 

which is 2,091 ft (637 m) below seabed. 

This hazards summary letter is issued as a supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 

entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos 

Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated August 31, 2012. 

Seabed Hazards. The proposed AC380-C wellsite is situated on a relatively flat bench location 

along the Alaminos Canyon Escarpment. The Escarpment represents a complex geological 

setting where the large-scale effects of salt movement and sediment deformation have caused 

slope failures resulting in major sediment slump features. Although there is evidence of 

previous slope failure along the steeply sloping Alaminos Canyon Escarpment, conditions are 

considered stable at present time over the life of an appraisal well. Overconsolidated materials 

may be encountered within the shallow section along this Alaminos Canyon Escarpment 

location. 
Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The nearest known 

potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed location lies over nine 

miles to the south in AC 601. This area will not impact the proposed AC 380-14 location. 

There are no known obstructions to exploration drilling within AC 380. Additionally, no manmade infrastructure exists within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. 

Sub-Seabed Hazards. Possible gas hazards occur around the proposed well location between 

the seabed and the depth limit of this study (i.e., the top of salt). A moderate potential for 

encountering shallow gas occurs within possible sand layers between 466 ft bml and 695 ft bml. 

Elevated amplitude events observed on the 3D dataset within this section occur along a fault, 

suggesting possible gas and/or fluid migration along the fault plane. A low potential for shallow 

gas is assigned within the interval from 236 ft to 466 ft bml and 695 ft to 2,091 ft bml within 

potential thin sand deposits. 

Two fault planes will be intersected by the proposed AC380-C location between the seafloor 

and the limit of study (2,091 ft bml). These faults will be penetrated at depths of 607 ft and 

1,482 ft bml (-5,570 ft and -6,445 ft bsl, respectively). The shallowest fault appears to offset the 

seafloor at the resolution of the 3D dataset, while the deeper fault is buried. 

Shallow water flow risk is considered to be negligible to low within the shallow section. 

Proposed AC380-C Location (Surface) 

Location Coordinates 

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West 

Latitude 26o 36' 16.92941" North Easting 1,137,312 US ft E 

Longitude 94o 32' 24.38506" West Northing 9,656,842 US ft N 

FEL of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,168 US ft Inline 2892 

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 5,558 US ft Crossline 2720 

Water Depth: -4,963 ft Slope: 2.3o south 

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W 

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E 

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover Spar, AC 25 25 miles N 18o 02' 00.16"W 

Conclusions and Recommendations: There are no sites with a potential for chemosynthetic 

or other deepwater benthic community development evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of 

the proposed AC380-C well location. A moderate potential for encountering shallow gas exists 

within possible sand layers between 466 ft and 695 ft bml. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

2103 CityWest Boulevard 

Suite 800 

Houston, Texas 77042 

Main:713-918-8200

Fax: 713-918-8290

Chemosynthetic and Deepwater Benthic Community Statement – AC380-C 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

September 7, 2012 

US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70213 

Reference: Benthic Community Summary 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380

OCS-G 32954

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc.® (GEMS) was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico 

LLC, (Statoil) to prepare a Wellsite Clearance Letter for the proposed AC380-C location in Block 

380, Alaminos Canyon Area (OCS G-32954). This letter addresses the location proximity to 

potential chemosynthetic or other benthic community sites. 

This chemosynthetic and deepwater benthic community summary letter is issued as a 

supplement to GEMS Report No. 0509-1644 entitled: "Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment 

Blocks 379, 380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico" Volume 1" dated 

August 31, 2012. 

Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically positioned drilling vessel; 

therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

A Biological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Map for the proposed AC380-C is included at the 

end of this summary letter illustrating the area surrounding the proposed well location (Chart 

AC 380-C).

Potential Chemosynthetic and other Deepwater Benthic Communities. 

Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other benthic communities 

are not evident on the 3D dataset within 2,000 ft of the proposed location. 
Proposed Well Location C for Alaminos Canyon Block 380: 

Proposed AC380-C Location (Surface)

Location Coordinates

NAD 27 Datum -Clarke 1866 Ellipsoid UTM Zone 15 - CM 93o West

Latitude 26o 36' 16.92941" North Easting 1,137,312 US ft E

Longitude 94o 32' 24.38506" West Northing 9,656,842 US ft N

FEL of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,168 US ft Inline 2892

FNL of Alaminos Canyon 380 5,558 US ft Crossline 2720

Water Depth: -4,963 ft Slope: 2.3o south

Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W

Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56o 47' 28.07"E

Nearest Manned Platform A-Hoover Spar, AC 25 25 miles N 18o 02' 00.16"W

No features or areas were identified on the 3D dataset that could support high-density 

chemosynthetic or other benthic communities within AC 380 or the surrounding blocks. The 

nearest known potential chemosynthetic/deepwater benthic community to the proposed 

location lies over nine miles to the south in AC 601. 

Conclusions and Recommendations: No sites with the potential for chemosynthetic or other 

deepwater benthic community development were identified within 2,000 ft of the proposed 

AC380-C well location. Statoil plans to drill the proposed exploration well from a dynamically 

positioned drilling vessel; therefore, an anchoring assessment is not required or provided. 

Sincerely, 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

Frederick Palumbo, Jr. 

Lead Operations Geologist 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 9 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION 

(a) Concentration 

Statoil does not anticipate encountering H2S while conducting our proposed exploratory 

activities. 

(b) Classification Request 

In accordance with Title 30 CFR 250.490(c), Statoil requests Alaminos Canyon Block 380, 

Lease OCS-G 32954, respectively be classified by the BOEM as an area where hydrogen 

sulfide is absent. 

(c) Contingency Plan 

Statoil does not anticipate encountering H2S while conducting our proposed exploratory 

activities therefore a contingency plan is not required at this time. 

(d) Modeling Report 

Statoil does not anticipate encountering H2S while conducting our proposed exploratory 

activities therefore a modeling report is not required at this time.
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 10 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

MINERAL AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION INFORMATION 

(a) Technology and Reservoir Engineering Practices and Procedures 

Not required for exploration plans. 

(b) Technology and Recovery Practices and Procedures 

Not required for exploration plans. 

(c) Reservoir Development 

Not required for exploration plans.
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 11 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION 

(a) High-Density Deepwater Benthic Communities Information 

Although the proposed activities will take place in water depths 300 meters or greater, there are 

no seafloor features or high-density deepwater benthic communities located within 2000 feet of 

the surface location of the proposed well(s). The placement of anchors, anchor chains, or wire 

ropes will not disturb any seafloor feature or high-density deepwater benthic communities within 

500 feet of any of these seafloor-disturbing areas. There are no anomalous seabed amplitudes 

indicative of deepwater benthic communities observed within a 2000ft radius of the proposed 

location(s). 

GEMS was contracted by Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC to prepare site clearance letters for each of 

the proposed drill sites in Block 380, Alaminos Canyon Area, Offshore, Texas in August 2012. 

Each of the well locations were assessed for proximity to deepwater benthic communities. The 

site clearance letters are included in Appendix '.

(b) Topographic Features Information 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 is located outside any topographic features. 

(c) Topographic Features Statement 

Statoil does not propose to drill more than two wells from the same surface location which is 

outside the 1-mile Zone but within the Protective Zone of an identified topographic feature; 

therefore a statement for shunting as described in Attachment 2, Section A, Item No. 2 of NTL 

No. 2009-G39 “Biologically-Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas” of the Gulf of Mexico is 

not required 

(d) Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Map 

The activities proposed in this plan are not affected by a live bottom (pinnacle trend) stipulation 

attached to the lease. 

(e) Live Bottom (Low Relief) Map 

The activities proposed in this plan are not affected by a live bottom (low relief) stipulation 

attached to the lease. 

(f) Potentially Sensitive Biological Features 

Statoil does not propose bottom-disturbing activities within 30 meters (100 feet) of potentially 

sensitive biological features; therefore the map the map described in Attachment 8, Section A, 

of NTL No. 2009-G39 “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas” of the Gulf of 

Mexico” is not required. 

(g) ROV Monitoring Survey Plan 

Statoil is familiar with the ROV survey and reporting provisions of NTL 2008-G06. The wells 

proposed to be drilled in this EP will be drilled and temporarily abandoned. The Alaminos 

Canyon Block 380 subsea wells are located in Grid 5. Grid 5 has been identified by the BOEM 

as an area with inadequate ROV survey coverage. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 12 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

Pursuant to NTL 2008-G06, “Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys in Deepwater,” a survey will 

be conducted immediately prior and upon completion of drilling operations at each wellsite. The 

ROV will be run along at least six transects, at a minimum of 100 meters from the launch point. 

At least one transect will pass directly over or very near the well site, and video imaging will run 

continuously during the entire survey. 

Biological and physical observations as described in the subject NTL and Form MMS-141 will 

be made prior to commencing drilling operations and also following the completion of drilling 

operations, but prior to moving the rig off location. The observations will be documented using 

Form MMS-141 and submitted to the MMS within 60 days after the second survey is completed. 

 

(h) Threatened and Endangered Species Information 

The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPS) of 1972 was written to establish American federal 

responsibility to conserve marine mammals. Some species were in immediate danger of 

extinction while other populations were becoming severely depleted. Five marine mammal 

species (sea otters, manatees, dugong, walrus and polar bear) fall under the jurisdiction of the 

Department of the Interior and its US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The cetaceans 

(whales, porpoises and dolphins) and all pinnipeds (seals and sea lions – except for walrus) are 

managed by the Department of Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides for the conservation of species that are 

endangered or threatened throughout all of a significant portion of their range, and the 

conservation of the ecosystems / critical habitat on which they depend. 

The bottlenose dolphin is a common inhabitant of the continental shelf and upper slope waters 

of the northern GOM. Five baleen whales (the northern right, blue, fin, sei, and humpback), one 

toothed whale (the sperm whale), and one sirenian (the West Indian manatee) occur in the 

GOM and are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The sperm 

whale is common in oceanic waters of the northern GOM and appears to be a resident species, 

while the baleen whales are considered rare or extralimital in the Gulf (Würsig et al., 2000). The 

West Indian manatee typically inhabits only coastal marine, brackish, and freshwater areas. 

Statoil is aware of the above referenced federal acts and will ensure that all offshore personnel, 

including contractors and other support services-related personnel have an understanding of the 

need to conserve marine mammals and the conservation of their ecosystems. 

(i) Archaeological Report 

Pursuant to those regulations contained in NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS 

Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports,” and the conditional mitigation 

for OCS lease blocks deeper than 200 meters, enclosed is an Archaeological Survey Report 

prepared in accordance with NTL 2005-G07. 

(j) Air and Water Quality Information 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(k) Socioeconomic Information 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 13 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

WASTE AND DISCHARGE INFORMATION 

(a) Projected Generated Wastes

Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount 

Contaminated WBM /cuttings /wash water WBM/Cuttings/Seawater 17,000 bbls / well 

Spent drilling OBM /cuttings /wash water OBM/Cuttings/Seawater NA 

Contaminated SBM /cuttings /wash water SBM / Cuttings /Seawater 15,000 bbls / well 

Well treatment, workover or completion 

fluids Fluids generated from completion NA 

Cement Portland Cement plus additives 1,000 bbls / well 

Sanitary wastes Sanitary wastes 640,000 gal/day (Max POB # persons) 

Domestic waste Domestic waste 960,000 gal/day (Max POB # persons) 

Deck drainage Water / rainfall 1,315 bbl/year 

Based on 65” / year rainfall average 

Uncontaminated fresh or seawater Fresh or Seawater 7,500 bbls/day 

Desalinization unit water Seawater 16,500 bbl/day (max unit capacity) 

Uncontaminated bilge water Seawater 1,950 bbls/day 

Uncontaminated ballast water Seawater 7,500 bbls/day 

Fire Water Pump Water Seawater 22,500 bbls/day 

Cooling Water Seawater 173,100,000 bbls 

BOP Control Fluid ECO-F BOP Fluid 4,500 bbls 

Waste Oil Waste Oil & Filters 96 bbls / day 

Trash and Debris Refuse generated by personnel on board 

MODU 73.5 tons/year 

Statoil does not propose to treat, store or downhole dispose of any wastes at the facility 

location. 

(b) Projected Ocean Discharges: 

Type of Waste Amount to be Discharged Discharge Rate Discharge Method

Spent drilling fluids and associated 

cuttings -WBM 17,000 bbls / well 1,000 bbls/hr Max Rate overboard 

Spent drilling fluids / mud-OBM NA NA NA 

Drill cuttings with adhered SBM 15,000 bbls / well 500 bbls/day overboard 

Circulated / Excess Cement 1,000 bbls Cement –100 bbls/day overboard 

Well treatment, workover or 

completion fluids NA NA NA 

Sanitary wastes 640,000 gal/person/day 4,000 gal/day (Max POB 

200 persons) chlorinate and discharge 

Domestic waste 960,000 gal/person/day 6,000 gal/day (Max POB 

200 persons) 

remove floating solids and 

discharge overboard 

Deck drainage 

1,315 bbl/year 

Based on 65” / year rainfall 

average 

102 bbl/day 

Based on 2” / hour of 

rainfall 

filter oil and grease and 

discharge overboard 

Uncontaminated fresh or seawater 7,500 bbls/day 47 bbls/day overboard 

Desalinization unit water 16,500 bbl/day (max unit 

capacity) 

103 bbl/day (max unit 

capacity) overboard 

Uncontaminated bilge water 1,950 bbls/day 14 bbls/day overboard 

Uncontaminated ballast water 7,500 bbls/day 47 bbls/day overboard 

Fire Water Pump Water 22,500 bbls/day 141 bbls/day overboard 

Cooling Water 173,100,000 bbls 1,081,875 bbls/day overboard 

BOP Control Fluid 4,500 bbls 28 bbls/day Seafloor 

(c) Modeling Report 

Not required by the EPA under the OCS General Permit. 

(d) NPDES Permits 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 14 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

(e) Cooling Water Intakes 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 15 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION 

(a) Screening Checklist 

Included in this section, (if applicable) is the Projected Air Emissions Worksheet prepared in 

accordance with NTL No. 2008-G04. 

For this plan, there are no existing facilities or activities co-located with the current proposed 

activities; therefore, the Complex Total Emissions are the same as the Plan Emissions. 

Screening Questions for EP Yes No 

Is any calculated Complex Total (CT) Emission amount (in tons) associated with 

your proposed exploration activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated 

using the following formulas: CT = 3400D2/3 for CO, and CT = 33.3D for other air 

pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles)? 

X 

Do your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures or 

modified emission factors? 

X 

Are your proposed exploration activities located east of 87.5o W longitude? X 

Do you expect to encounter H2S at concentrations greater than 20 parts per 

million (ppm)? X 

Do you propose to flare or vent natural gas for more than 48 continuous hours 

from any proposed well? X 

Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liquids? X 

The following information was prepared by: 

 Erin Rachal 

 Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

 Phone: 713-485-2555 

 Email: erra@statoil.com 

(a) Summary Table of Emissions 

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL 

Statoil Alaminos Canyon 380 OCS-G 32954 T.O. Americas A, B, C 

 Emitted Substance 

Year 

 

 PM SOx NOx VOC CO 

2013 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03 

2014 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03 

2015 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03 

Allowable 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97 

(c) Spreadsheets

The AQR spreadsheets are included as Appendix E. 
EXPLORATION PLAN (EP)

AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLIST

OMB 

COMPANY Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC

AREA Alaminos Canyon

BLOCK 380

LEASE OCS-G 32954PLATFORMWELL A, B, C

COMPANY CONTACT Erin RachalTELEPHONE NO. 713-485-2555

REMARKS Drill and TA or PA three well locations

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 1 of 8
EMISSIONS FACTORS

Fuel Usage Conversion Factors Natural Gas Turbines Natural Gas Engines Diesel Recip. Engine RE

SCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483 AP42 

Equipment/Emission Factors units PM SOx NOx VOC CO RENG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83 AP42 3.2-NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5 AP42 NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6 AP42 NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6 AP42 Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03 AP42 Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4 AP42 Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21 AP42 1.3NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84 P42 1.4-1, 1NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5 AP42 1Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21 AP42 1.3-Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03 E&P FFugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005 API SGlycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6 La. DGas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034

Sulphur Content Source Value Units

Fuel Gas 3.33 ppm

Diesel Fuel 0.4 % weight

Produced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppm

Produced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weight

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 2 of 8
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEAR

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon 380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, C Erin Rachal 713-485-2555 

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR 

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM 

DRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24 142 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1 20 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4 101 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12 61 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2013 YEAR TOTAL 61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 5394.60 

162.0

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 3 of 8
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 2ND YEAR

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon 380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, C Erin Rachal 713-485-2555 

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR 

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM S

DRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24.00 142.00 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 34

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1.00 20.00 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 0VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4.00 101.00 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 4VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12.00 61.00 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 1VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

2014 YEAR TOTAL 61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 35

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 5394.60 53

162.0

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 4 of 8
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 3RD YEAR

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon 380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, C Erin Rachal 713-485-2555 

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR 

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM S

DRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24 142 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 34

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1 20 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 0VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4 101 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 4VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12 61 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 1VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNT

TANK- 0 0 0 0.00 

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

2015 YEAR TOTAL 61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 35

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 5394.60 53

162.0

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 5 of 8
SUMMARY

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL

Statoil Gulf of MeAlaminos Canyon 380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, C

Emitted Substance

Year

 PM SOx NOx VOC CO

2013 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2014 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2015 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2016 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2017 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2018 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2019 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2020 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2021 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

2022 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03

Allowable 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97

FORM BOEM-0138 (December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used). Page 8 of 8
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 16 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

OIL SPILL INFORMATION 

(a) Oil Spill Response Planning 

 (1) Site-Specific OSRP

Lease OCS-G 32954 is not located in the Eastern GOM, therefore a site-specific OSRP is not 

required. 

 (2)(i) Regional or Subregional OSRP Information 

All proposed activities and facilities in this EP will be covered by the Regional OSRP filed 

by Statoil USA E&P Inc., Qualification Number 02528, in accordance with 30 CFR 254 

and approved on June 14, 2012. 

 (ii) Spill Response Sites 

Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location(s) 

Port Fourchon, LA Port Fourchon, LA 

 (iii) OSRO Information 

Statoil’s primary equipment providers are Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) and Marine Spill 

Response Corporation, MSRC. The Marine Spill Response Corporation's (MSRC) STARS 

network will provide the closest available personnel, as well as an MSRC supervisor to operate 

the equipment. 

(iv) Worst Case Scenario Determination 

Category Regional OSRP Initial EP 

Type of Activity Exploratory Drilling Exploratory Drilling 

Facility Location (area/block) GC404 AC380 

Facility Designation2 SS001 C 

Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) 111 162 

Volume3

Storage tanks (total) 

Flowlines (on facility) 

Lease term pipelines 

Uncontrolled blowout (volume per day) 

Total Volume

NA 

NA 

NA 

211,849 

211,849 

NA 

NA 

NA 

50,251 

50,251 

Type of Oil(s) (crude oil, condensate, diesel) Crude Crude 

API Gravity(s)4 31.3° 40.8° 

1 Types of activities include pipeline, platform, caisson, subsea completion or manifold, and mobile drilling rig. 2 E.g., Well No. 2, Platform JA, Pipeline Segment No. 6373. 3

 Take your regional OSRP worst-case scenario volume from the appropriate section of your regional OSRP. For EP’s, the 

worst-case scenario volume is the daily volume possible from an uncontrolled blowout. Determine this volume using the 

provisions of 30 CFR 254.47(b). For DOCD’s, determine the volume of your worst-case scenario using the provisions of 30 

CFR 254.47(a), (b), and (c), as appropriate. 4

 Provide API gravity of all oils given under “Type of Oil(s)” above. Estimate for EP’s. 

The calculations and assumptions for the worst case discharge in Statoil’s Regional OSRP can 

be found in previously submitted Plan Conrol No. R-5150. Since Statoil has the capability to 

respond to the appropriate worst-case spill scenario included in our regional OSRP, and since 

the worst-case scenario determined for our EP does not replace the appropriate worst-case 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 17 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

scenario in our Regional OSRP, I hereby certify that Statoil has the capability to respond, to the 

maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a 

discharge, resulting from the activities proposed in this EP. 

In accordance with those regulations contained in NTL 2010-N06, “Information Requirements 

for Exploration Plans, Development and Production Plans, and Development Operations 

Coordination Documents on the OCS”, included as Appendix F are the assumptions and 

calculations used to determine the volume of the worst-case scenario. 

(b) Oil Spill Response Discussion 

Pursuant to Title 30 CFR 254.26(b), (c), and (e), included below is a spill response discussion 

should an oil spill result from the activities proposed in this plan. 
SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION 

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Management Act analysis, the largest spill volume 

originating from the proposed activity would be a well blowout during drilling operations, 

estimated to be 50,251 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 40.8°. 

Land Segment and Resource Identification

Trajectories of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected 

utilizing information in the BSEE 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 an 8% probability of impact to the shorelines of Matagorda County, 

Texas within 30 days. Matagorda County stretches from Matagorda Bay, across the Colorado 

River and up to the border of San Bernard Wildlife Refuge (immediately west of the San Bernard 

River). The county includes Matagorda Peninsula on the Gulf coast and Matagorda Bay. This 

area is primarily open beach. However, marshland exists along the east side of Matagorda Bay. 

Several bird rookeries are present around the peninsula. Seagrass is present off of Matagorda 

Peninsula on the bay side. 

Response

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as 

effectively as practicable. A description of the response equipment under contract to contain and 

recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical characteristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering 

model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil database. The results indicate 35% or 

approximately 17,588 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with 

approximately 32,663 barrels remaining. 

Spill Response AC 380, Well Location C Barrels of Oil 

WCD Volume 50,251 

Less 35% natural evaporation/dispersion 17,588 

Remaining volume 32,663 

Daily dispersant capability 7,540 

Oil addressed by in-situ burning 1,633 

Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary 

storage equipment available to respond to a spill of approximately 32,663 barrels. The volume 

accounts for the amount remaining after evaporation/dispersion at 24 hours. The list estimates 

individual times needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure 

2 also indicates how operations will be supported. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies 

such as dispersants and in-situ burn. Strategies will be decided by Unified Command based on 

the size of the spill, weather and potential impacts. If aerial dispersants are utilized, 8 sorties 

(9,600 gallons) from two of the DC-3 aircrafts and 4 sorties (8,000 gallons) from the Basler 

aircraft would provide a daily dispersant capability of 7,540 barrels. If the conditions are 

favorable for in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is 

in place, in-situ burning of oil may be attempted. Using estimates based on the Deepwater 

Horizon spill of 2010, up to 5% or approximately 1,633 barrels of the total daily Worst Case 

Discharge volume could be burned. Slick containment boom would be immediately called out 

and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore response strategies may include attempting to skim 

utilizing the HOSS Barge and nine Fast Response Units (FRUs), with a total derated skimming 

capacity of 81,259 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 5,700 

barrels. If additional storage is needed, a 25,000 barrel storage barge and three 20,000 barrel 

storage barges may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the 

skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible. Safety is first priority. Air 

monitoring will be accomplished and operations deemed safe prior to any 

containment/skimming attempts. 

If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact in Matagorda County, Texas would depend upon 

existing environmental conditions. Shoreline protection would include the use of CGA’s near 

shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 21,126 barrels. 

Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 725 barrels. If additional storage 

is needed, a 23,000 barrel storage barge may be mobilized and centrally located to provide 

temporary storage allowing the skimmers to stay in the area of operations as much as possible. 

Onshore response may include the deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protection 

and sorbent boom on vegetated areas. A Letter of Intent from OMI Environmental will ensure 

access to 85,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom. Figure 2 outlines individual times 

needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Strategies would be 

based upon surveillance and real time trajectories that depict areas of potential impact given 

actual sea and weather conditions. The One-Gulf Plan (Area Contingency Plan) 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. Each 

response mode is schematically represented to show optimum deployment and operation of the 

equipment in areas of environmental concern. Supervisory personnel have the option to modify 

the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more effective response to site-specific 

circumstances. Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s contract Spill Management Team holds a copy of 

the One-Gulf Plan. 

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC can be 

onsite with contracted oil spill recovery equipment with adequate response capacity to contain 

and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, 

within an estimated 54 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity 

(EDRC)). 
Initial Response Considerations 

Actual actions taken during an oil spill response will be based on many factors 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 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC will take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and 

recover as much of the spilled oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the 

environment, response actions will be designed to provide an “in-depth” protection strategy 

meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. 

Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations. 

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

• Information will be confirmed 

• An assessment will be made and initial objectives set 

• OSROs and appropriate agencies will be notified 

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form 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 situation and coordinated 

objectives 

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

site 

o On-site command and control established 

Offshore Response Actions 

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance 

• Surveillance Aircraft will be deployed within two hours of Qualified Individual (QI) 

notification, or at first light

• Provide trained observer to provide on site status reports 

• Provide command and control platform at the site if needed 

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

and visual confirmation 

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems 
Dispersant application assets 

• Put 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, aircraft, and support equipment and personnel 

• Confirm dispersant availability for current and long range operations 

• Start ordering dispersant stocks required for expected operations 

Containment boom 

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

• Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom 

• Provide continuing reports to vessels to expedite their arrival at sites that will provide for 

their most effective containment 

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

Dedicated off-shore skimming systems 

General 

• Deployed to the highest concentration of oil 

• Assets deployed at safe distance from aerial dispersant and in-situ burn operations 

CGA HOSS Barge 

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations 

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

CGA 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 

Storage Vessels 

• Establish availability of CGA contracted assets 

• Early call out (to allow for tug boat acquisition and deployment speeds) 

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

systems 

• Position as closely as possible to skimming assets to minimize offloading time 
Vessels of Opportunity (VOO) 

• Use Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s contracted resources as applicable 

• Industry vessels are usually best for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming 

Systems (VOSS) 

• Acquire additional resources as needed 

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required 

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections 

In-situ Burn assets 

• Determine appropriateness of in-situ burn operation in coordination with the FOSC and 

affected 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 deploy in accordance with planning based on the 

actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets 

• VOO identification and training in advance of spill nearing shoreline if possible 

• Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions 

• Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil 

Considerations 

• Water depth, vessel draft 

• Shoreline gradient 

• State of the oil 

• Use of VOOs 

• Distance of surf zone from shoreline 

Equipment Deployment 

Surveillance 

• Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations 

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

and visual confirmation 

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets 

Dispersant Use 

• Generally will not be approved within 3 miles of shore or with less than 10 meters of 

water depth 

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

Vessel Deployment 

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems 

• Fast Response Vessels (FRV) 

• Egmopol and Marco Shallow Water Skimmer (SWS) 

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks 

VOO 

• Use Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s contracted resources as applicable 

• Industry vessels are usually best for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming 

Systems (VOSS) 

• Acquire additional resources as needed 

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required 

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections 

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches 
Shoreline Protection Operations 

Response Planning Considerations 

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

• Time to acquire personnel and equipment and their availability 

• Previous contingency planning contained in the appropriate Area Contingency Plan, and 

currently for Louisiana, The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan, Deep 

Water Horizon, dated 2 May 2010 

Actions 

Placement of boom 

• Position boom in accordance with the ERA based on the actual situation or the 

appropriate ACP 

• Assess timing of booming operations to ensure it is where it needs to be at time of 

impact. Consider: 

o Trajectories 

o Weather forecast 

o Oil Impact forecast 

o Verified spill movement 

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability 

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

Beach Preparation 

Considerations and Actions 

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

• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations 

• Determination of Archeological sites and gaining authority to enter 

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

• Pre cleaning of beaches by moving waste above high tide lines to minimize waste 

• Staging of equipment and housing of response personnel as close to the job site as 

possible to maximize on-site work time 

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

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

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

• Passive clean up of marshes should be considered and appropriate stocks of sorbent boom 

and/or sweep obtained 

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

inland areas 
Decanting Strategy 

Recovered oil and water mixtures will typically separate into distinct phases when left in a 

quiescent state. When separation occurs, the relatively clean water phase can be siphoned or 

decanted back to the recovery point with minimal, if any, impact. Decanting therefore increases 

the effective on-site oil storage capacity and equipment operating time. FOSC/SOSC approval 

will be requested prior to decanting operations. This practice is routinely used for oil spill 

recovery. 

CGA Equipment Limitations 

The capability for any spill response equipment, whether a dedicated or portable system, to 

operate in differing weather conditions will be directly in relation to the capabilities of the vessel 

the system in placed on. Most importantly, however, the decision to operate will be based on the 

judgment of the Unified Command and/or the Captain of the vessel, who will ultimately have the 

final say in terminating operations. Skimming equipment listed below may have operational 

limits which exceed those safety thresholds. As was seen in the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil 

spill response, vessel skimming operations ceased when seas reached 5-6 feet and vessels were 

often recalled to port when those conditions were exceeded. Systems below are some of the 

most up-to-date systems available and were employed during the DWH spill. 

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds 

Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots 

Visibility less than 3 nautical miles 

Ceiling less than 1,000 feet. 

FRU 8 foot seas 

HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas 

Koseq Arms 8 foot seas 

OSRV 4 foot seas 
Environmental Conditions in the GOM

Prevailing winds, waves and currents along the Texas coast are from the southeast and northeast 

quadrants. Ten to 20 foot waves may occur during hurricanes. The combined effect of the 

winds, surface currents, and waves refracting shoreward produce the prevailing westerly 

longshore currents. 

Tides are semi-diurnal and diurnal, and range in height from less than 1 foot to 2.5 feet. The 

direction, force, and duration of the wind has a considerable effect on the tides and currents. 

Fifteen foot tides may be expected during severe hurricanes and very low tides may accompany 

strong northerlies of long duration. 

Surface water temperature averages slightly less than 90° F and ranges between 80 and 100° F 

during the late summer. During the winter the average is slightly less than 60° F and the range is 

between 35 and 80° F. 

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

97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The Atlantic basin shows a very peaked 

season from August through October, with 78% of the tropical storm days, 87% of the minor 

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

categories 3, 4 and 5) hurricane days occurring then. Maximum activity is in early to mid 

September. Once in a few years there may be a hurricane occurring "out of season" - primarily in 

May or December. Globally, September is the most active month and May is the least active 

month. 
FIGURE 1 

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT 

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected 

utilizing Statoil Gulf of Mexico 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. The results are tabulated below. 

Area/Block OCS-G Launch 

Area 

Land Segment and/or 

Resource 

Conditional 

Probability (%) 

within 30 days 

Exploratory Drilling 

AC 380, 

Well Location C 

135 miles from shore 

G W24 Cameron, TX 

Willacy, TX 

Kenedy, TX 

Kleberg, TX 

Nueces, TX 

Aransas, TX 

Calhoun, TX 

Matagorda, TX 

Brazoria, TX 

Galveston, TX 

Jefferson, TX 

Cameron, LA 

Vermilion, LA 

3 

1 

4 

3 

3 

3 

4 

8 

2 

4 

2 

3 

1 
WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (162miles from sh

32,663 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering) API Gravity 40.8° 

FIGURE 2 – Equipment Response Time to AC 380, Well Location C 

Dispersants/Surveillance

Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant Capacity (gal) Storage Capacity Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Trave

site 

CGA 

Basler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.6 

ASI 

DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 2.1 DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 2.1 Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.6 

Offshore Response

Offshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

CGA 

HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 5 Harvey 7 0 5 

Recovered Oil Storage No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 
Staging Area: Galveston

Offshore Equipment With 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging 

CGA 

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 0 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey 1 2 6.5 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 4 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 3 FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 1 2 7 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 1 2 5.25 FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 1 2 8 

Offshore Equipment With 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging 

CGA 

42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2 0 42” Auto Boom (10000’) NA NA 20 Crew 40 Harvey 1 2 6.5 42” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2 4 42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2 3 42” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Pascagoula 1 2 7.5 Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey (HFB) 1 4 6.5 
Nearshore Response

Nearshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 

Staging Area: Galveston

Nearshore and Inland Skimmers 

With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Tra

Depl

CGA

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 0 SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 1 2 5.25 SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 3 SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 1 2 7 SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 1 2 8 Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Harvey 1 2 0 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 3 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 0 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Harvey 1 2 6.5 4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 2 3 4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 1 2 6.5 2 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118) 240 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 2 3 
Shoreline Protection 

Staging Area: Galveston 

Shoreline Protection 

Boom VOO Persons Req. Storage/Warehouse Location Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Galveston Travel to Deployment Site 

OMI Environmental (available through Letter of Intent) 

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 4.5 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 1 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 2 2 20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 6.5 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 5 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 5.75 2 15,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 6.5 2 

Beach Boom EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Trav

Deplo

CGA 

Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Galveston 1 2 0 Beach Boom (1000’) NA NA NA 4 Ingleside 1 2 4 Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Pascagoula 1 2 7.5 
Wildlife Response EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Trav

Deplo

CGA

Wildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 6 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Belle Chasse 1 2 6.5 Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 2 0 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 6 Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Ingleside 1 2 4 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 2 3 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Pascagoula 1 2 7.5 

Response Asset Total 

Offshore EDRC 81,259 

Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 90,700 

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 21,126 

Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 23,725 
Page 1 of 9 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 2 of 9 

Table of contents 

1 Management System Description ................................................................................................................ 3

2 Well Barrier Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 3

3 Well Construction Process ........................................................................................................................... 4

4 Risk Management .......................................................................................................................................... 5

5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Process ........................................................................................ 5

6 Management of Change ................................................................................................................................ 6

7 Relief Well Planning ...................................................................................................................................... 6

8 Blowout prevention during operations ........................................................................................................ 7

9 Early Intervention Response ........................................................................................................................ 7

App A Well Barrier Schematic .................................................................................................................................. 9
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 3 of 9 

Statoil submits this document in response to Notice to Lessees and Operators (“NTL”) No. 2010-N06 issued by the 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (“BOEMRE”) and effective on June 18, 2010. 

Specifically, this document fulfills the direction in NTL 2010-N06 that an operator “describe the measures you propose 

that would enhance your ability to prevent a blowout, to reduce the likelihood of a blowout, and conduct effective and 

early intervention in the event of a blowout, including your arrangements for drilling relief wells, and any other 

measures you propose.” 

1 Management System Description 

Statoil’s management system is the set of principles, policies, processes and requirements which support 

our organization in fulfilling the tasks required to achieve our objectives. 

Our management system shall: 

 Contribute to safe and efficient operations. 

 Reflect the valid requirements and methods for the process areas, the necessary technical 

requirements, and the description of the organization and decision-making authorities. 

 Ensure a definition of roles and responsibilities for developing and maintaining governing 

documentation. 

 Contribute to simplification and learning across the Statoil group. 

 Ensure coordinated monitoring and the necessary control requirements. 

The management system is continuously evaluated to ensure it is sufficiently updated, improved and 

capable of handling existing and new risks. Monitoring is conducted to reduce downside risk, ensure the 

quality and effectiveness of the management system, and the quality of processes and products. 

All work requirements related to well construction, operational execution and reporting is described in the 

Well Construction Process. This is a graphical process with work flow diagrams based on sound 

investment project development practices. It incorporates requirements and best practices for the design 

and execution of exploration and development wells. 

2 Well Barrier Requirements 

Statoil’s well barrier requirements are based on the following standard form; 

There shall be two well barriers available during all well activities and operations, including 

suspended or abandoned wells, where a pressure differential exists that may cause uncontrolled flow 

from the borehole/well to the external environment. The only exception is when drilling top holes 

before the BOP is installed on the wellhead. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 4 of 9 

In addition the following apply: 

 The well barrier(s) shall be defined prior to commencement of an activity or operation by describing 

the required well barrier elements (WBEs) to be in place and specific acceptance criteria. 

 Well barriers shall be installed as close to the potential source of inflow as practically possible. 

 If one barrier fails, no other actions shall be taken, other than to re-establish the lost barrier. 

 The two defined barriers shall to the extent possible be independent of each other without common 

barrier elements. 

The WBEs for a well are presented in Well Barrier Schematics (WBSs). Well-specific WBSs for any planned 

drilling or well operation, and for each operational phase with a change in the well barrier envelope, are 

prepared prior to commencing operations. The WBSs describe the planned position and method of 

verification for each WBE. 

Appendix A provides an example of a WBS, for illustration purposes only. This sample WBS is for a planned 

operation where the described activity is the drilling of new hole sections in the well. 

3 Well Construction Process 

The Well Construction Process (WCP) is used for the planning and execution of activities in drilling 

operations. The WCP has defined phases with corresponding Decision Gates (DG). At each Decision Gate, 

Management reviews and approves the work within the current phase and gives approval to continue the 

process into the next phase. The phases in the WCP are: 

 Phase 1: Feasibility Study leading to DG1. 

 Phase 2: Concept Selection leading to DG2. 

 Phase 3: Planning of the individual drilling program leading to DG3. 

 Phase 4: Execution of the operational activities. 

 Phase 5: Post well reporting. 

Every phase has defined deliverables and describes interactions between involved parties and their roles 

and responsibilities. It also incorporates required quality assurance measures, risk assessments and 

approval procedures for all deliverables in the process. 

For all operational activities, detailed operating procedures (DOP), which include risk assessment, are 

prepared by dedicated personnel. The final detailed operations procedures are approved by the drilling 

contractor's tool pusher and by the Statoil rig site supervisor. 

A key aspect of the risk mitigation process for ongoing operations is the involvement of the whole execution 

team. Prior to the execution of any activity the execution team will: 

• Ensure that the chosen method is satisfactory to limit the uncertainties involved. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 5 of 9 

• Identify and implement mitigating actions to address uncertainties. 

• Ensure learning from similar performed tasks. 

During the execution of the activity the execution team shall: 

• Ensure compliance with the agreed upon method. 

• Perform the task and continuously evaluate uncertainties involved – stop, check, think. 

• Secure necessary accuracy and quality. 

• When the task is done, evaluate and transfer lessons learned and experience. 

4 Risk Management 

Statoil’s functional requirements for drilling and well operations state that risk management shall be an 

integrated part of all phases in the WCP. A risk management system is established as the documented way 

of identifying, assessing and handling risks within each drilling and well project. 

A Risk Assessment (RA) document is continuously updated through all planning and operations stages. If 

any material changes are made to the drilling program or operational plans, the change must be reflected in 

the RA. Prior to commencing any operation, documented detailed risk evaluation of all activities is carried 

out. 

The WCP described above further ensures measures are implemented to prevent any single incident in one 

operation escalating into a more serious situation. 

5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Process 

Statoil is a matrix organization. This means that in addition to its business areas, Process Owners have 

been appointed for the significant process areas with a global reach, which affect a large number of people 

across the organization. Process Owners support business needs and standardization based on best 

practice. Our common process areas with functional requirements and process models ensure 

standardization and the deployment of best practices across the organization. One of these process areas is 

Drilling & Well Technology. Working across the organization, the process owner for Drilling & Well 

Technology ensures that we achieve high operational standards and excellence related to governing 

documentation, IT solutions, expertise and people deployment, improvement initiatives and monitoring 

activities. The role of the process owner is to deploy best practice, capture lessons learned, monitor 

compliance, and ensure improvement of the business processes. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 6 of 9 

Although the process owner is an important part of Statoil’s maintenance of its quality operations, formal 

Quality Assurance and Quality Control still remains the responsibility of the business areas. 

To exercise more robust Quality Assurance, Peer Assists (assistance within relevant disciplines) are used to 

improve and support the well planning process from early phase to draft drilling program, or prior to 

operations to ensure adherence to use of requirements, best practices and previous experiences. 

For Quality Control of more demanding projects, Peer Reviews (formal Quality Control hosted by discipline 

advisors) are used to challenge plans, programs and procedures and identify possible improvements. 

For the Quality Control of individual drilling programs, every part is subject to Quality Control by leading 

personnel per relevant discipline. The casing designs, cement programs and Temporary 

Abandonment/Permanent Abandonment programs are verified and certified by a Professional Engineer. 

6 Management of Change 

Management of change is an integral part of the WCP. A dedicated process model is developed describing 

how to handle changes to the well design and to operational procedures. 

Material changes are subject to risk assessment. The changes are registered in a change form and are 

recorded on a change log for the specific well project. 

Changes to the drilling program must be approved in accordance with the approval process for the original 

drilling program. 

7 Relief Well Planning 

Well incident and blowout response preparation is part of the WCP. The intention is to verify that essential 

elements in the response to a blowout or incident are logistically and technically feasible. 

Before the spud of every new well the following will be in place: 

 Blowout potential and needed kill rates estimated. 

 Potential relief well spud locations specified in the drilling activity program. 

 Well paths for the relief wells. 

 Rig position assessments for the simultaneous drilling of relief wells, including an assessment of 

positions in relation to subsea installations, old exploration wells, etc. 

 Shallow gas and subsea hazards assessments of the above relief wells. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 7 of 9 

Statoil is incorporating Worst Case Discharge (WCD) calculations into its dynamic kill calculations and 

simulations. Statoil currently has two deepwater dynamically positioned rigs under contract in the Gulf of 

Mexico, the Discoverer Americas and the Maersk Developer. Both are capable of drilling in the maximum 

water depths and to the total depth of Statoil’s lease portfolio. Both rigs are equipped with GE/Hydril 15,000 

psi BOPs, including ROV intervention capabilities. Both rigs have ROVs on board with 24 hour ROV crew 

coverage. It is Statoil’s intention to utilize one of the above mentioned rigs to drill any relief wells. The time 

to get the rig on location is dependent on the current drilling activity of the relief well rig at the time of 

deployment. 

8 Blowout prevention during operations 

Blowouts are prevented by managing risk. Blowout likelihood is diminished by reducing the occurrence of 

kicks, detecting kicks early, and training. While drilling exploration wells, Statoil employs onsite geologists 

who update the pore pressure prognosis frequently based on logging-while-drilling (LWD) downhole 

measurements, as well as changes in surface measured parameters. 

Statoil utilizes trending of parameters for early identification of abnormal well behavior. In such a procedure, 

normal well behavior is established so that one is able to respond to even slight deviations in trends from 

the normal base line. 

Each deepwater operation carries three Statoil drilling supervisors onboard. Two drilling supervisors are 

required to provide 24-hour operational coverage, with the third drilling supervisor increasing management 

presence during operations for interactions with contractor, vendors, and onshore Statoil resources. 

Statoil conducts safe behavior training with all rig-based personnel, service companies, drilling contractors, 

and operator personnel. Statoil also requires all drilling supervisors to renew their well control certification 

every two years. HSE training is required for drilling contractor rig-based management and supervisory 

personnel by Statoil. Any changes to key rig-based drilling contractor personnel (i.e., tool pusher, captain, 

etc.) must be approved by Statoil. 

9 Early Intervention Response 

Statoil has a Well Incident and Blowout Response Plan which defines the strategy to be employed by the 

company to provide the needed technical and operational support to regain control of a well incident 

situation with a high blowout escalation potential, or in case of a blowout. 

The objective of the plan is to provide an overview of the required actions to be taken in the event of a well 

incident with potential to escalate into a blowout, or in the event of a blowout. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 8 of 9 

The plan describes how to support the existing rig group/well project in an escalating phase, and the 

organization and scope of work for a Task Force in case of a blowout. This also includes the definition of the 

responsibilities and authority during mobilization and operation of a Task Force. 

Statoil has joined the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) and the Helix Well Containment Group 

(HWCG), and has access to early intervention equipment through these companies. 

Statoil personnel involved in the management of Emergency Response and Well Control operations are 

trained according to current regulations. Statoil personnel are participating in HWCG and MWCC joint 

industry well containment exercises. 
 

Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 

Blowout Prevention and Intervention Measures 

 

 

 

 

Page 9 of 9 

App A Well Barrier Schematic 

For illustration purposes, a well barrier schematic for a planned operation is included below. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 18 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION 

(a) Monitoring Systems 

Statoil is aware of the requirements of NTL No. 2009-G02 whereby BOEM established and 

implemented a program to monitor ocean currents and require operators to share the data for all 

floating MODU’s and production facilities operating or installed in water depths greater than 400 

meters (1,312 feet). Statoil will report ocean current data to the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) Internet website as 

required. 

(b) Incidental Takes

Statoil does not believe that protected species may be incidentally taken during the drilling 

activities proposed in this plan. 

Statoil will ensure that our contract vessel operators are aware of the requirement to report 

sightings of any injured or dead protected species immediately to the National Marine Fisheries 

Service’s (NMFS) stranding hotline (for marine mammals) and to the NMFS Southeast Regional 

Office (for sea turtles). 

Statoil will utilize the “Guide to Marine Mammals and Turtles of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of 

Mexico” by Kate Wynne and Malia Schwarts to aid in the identification of the 28 species of 

whales and dolphins, 5 species of sea turtles and the single species of manatee that might be 

encountered in the OCS GOM.

(b) Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary 

Statoil’s activities under this EP are not located within the Protective Zones of the Flower 

Garden Banks or Stetson Bank and therefore are not required to monitor the impacts of an oil 

spill. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 19 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380, Lease OCS-G 32954 is subject to the following lease stipulations: 

Stipulation No. 2 – Military Warning Area 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC, when operating or causing to be operated on its behalf, boat, ship, 

or aircraft traffic into the designated warning area, shall enter into an agreement with the 

commander of the individual designated warning area prior to commencing such traffic. Such 

an agreement will provide for positive control of boats, ships, and aircraft operating into the 

warning area at all times. 

Statoil will make notification to the following designated warning area: 

W-602 VQ-4 

 Operations Department 

 7791 Mercury Road 

 Tinker AFB, Oklahoma 73145-8704 

 (405) 739-5700/5702 

Stipulation No. 5 – Protected Species 

To reduce the potential taking of marine protected species. Statoil will operate in accordance 

with NTL 2012-JOINT-G01, to minimize the risk of vessel strikes to protected species and report 

observations of injured or dead protected species, and the prevention of intentional and/or 

accidental introduction of debris into the marine environment.
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 20 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION 

(a) Impacts to Marine and Coastal Environments and Habitats, Biota, and 

Threatened and Endangered Species

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(b) Incidental Takes

Statoil does not believe that protected species may be incidentally taken during the 

drilling activities proposed in this plan. 

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management issued JOINT NTL 2012-G01 pursuant to 30 

CFR 250.103, 550.103, 250.282 and 550.282 to explain how Operators must implement 

measures to minimize the risk of vessel strikes to protected species and report 

observations of injured or dead protected species effective January 1, 2012. Statoil will 

ensure that our contract vessel operators are aware of their requirement to avoid Marine 

Mammals and Sea Turtles and to report sightings of any injured or dead protected 

species immediately to the BOEMRE Protected Species Biologist by telephone. 

Statoil will utilize the “Guide to Marine Mammals and Turtles of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf 

of Mexico” by Kate Wynne and Malia Schwartz to aid in the identification of the 28 

species of whales and dolphins, 5 species of sea turtles and the single species of 

manatee that might be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 21 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

DECOMMISSIONING INFORMATION 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 22 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

RELATED FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS INFORMATION

(a) Related OCS Facilities and Operations

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(b) Transportation System 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(c) Produced Liquid Hydrocarbons Transportation Vessels

There will be no produced liquid hydrocarbons, including well test fluids, transported by means 

other than a pipeline for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 23 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

(a) General 

The following list provides information regarding the vessels and aircraft Statoil will use to 

support our proposed activities. 

Type of Vessel Maximum Fuel Tank 

Storage Capacity 

Maximum No. in 

Area at Any Time 

Trip Frequency or 

Duration 

Supply boat(s) 25,000 - 35,000 gals 2 3 times / week 

Service boat(s) 25,000 - 35,000 gals 0 NA 

Crew boat(s) 25,000 – 35,000 gals 1 5 times / week 

Helicopter 440 gals 1 2 times / week 

(b) Diesel Oil Supply Vessels 

Statoil will not use any vessels for the supply of diesel oil for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(c) Drilling Fluids Transportation 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(d) Solid and Liquid Wastes Transportation 

Type of Waste / 

approximate 

composition

Total 

Amount Name/Location of 

Disposal Facility Rate Transport Method

Spent oil-based 

drilling fluids and 

cuttings 

NA NA NA NA 

Contaminated 

synthetic-based 

drilling fluids and 

cuttings and wash 

water 

15,000 bbls/well 

Newpark Environmental 

Services 

Port Fourchon, LA 

125 bbls/day 

Transport in Tote Tanks on 

Supply or Crew boat to 

shore base - Picked up at 

shore base and trucked or 

barged to disposal facility 

Return Syntheticbased drilling fluids 5,000 bbls/well Baker Hughes 

Port Fourchon, LA 30 bbls/day 

Transport in Tote Tanks on 

Supply or Crew boat to 

shore base - Picked up at 

shore base and returned to 

mud contractor 

Waste Oil & Filters 96 bbls/well American Recovery 

Houma, LA 0.60 bbls/day 

Transport in Barrels on 

Supply or Crew boat to 

shore base - Picked up at 

shore base and trucked to 

incineration facility 

Chemical product 

wastes NA NA NA NA 

Trash and debris 73.5 tons Port & IESI-SWDI 

Port Fourchon, LA 0.46 tons/day Transport in bins on Supply or Crew boat to shore base. 

(e) Vicinity Map 

Alaminos Canyon is located approximately 162 statute miles from the nearest Texas shoreline 

and approximately 318 nautical miles from the onshore support base located in Port Fourchon, 

LA. 

A Vicinity Plat showing the location of Alaminos Canyon relative to the shoreline and the 

onshore base is included as Appendix K. 
!(

NEAREST LANDFALLRANGE: 162 MILESBEARING: 24° 16' 42.95"

FOURCHON(Diesel Oil Supply Vessel Route)RANGE: 318 MILESBEARING: 56° 47' 28.07"

Green Cany

Garden Banks East Breaks

Keathley Canyon

Alaminos Canyon

Walker Rid

Texas

Louisian

GALVESTON

Texas

City

0 25 50 75 100 12.5

Miles
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 24 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION 

(a) General 

Statoil proposes to utilize the following existing onshore base for support: 

Name Location Existing, New or 

Modified 

C-Port & BHI Port Fourchon Existing 

(b) Support Base Construction or Expansion 

The proposed operations do not mandate any immediate measures for land acquisition or 

expansion of the existing onshore base facilities. 

(c) Support Base Construction or Expansion Timetable 

This discussion is not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(d) Waste Disposal 

Name / Location 

of Facility

Type of Waste Amount Rate Disposal Method

Newpark 

Environmental 

Services 

Port Fourchon, LA 

Contaminated syntheticbased drilling fluids and 

cuttings and wash water 

15,000 

bbls/well 125 bbls/day

Transport in Tote Tanks on Supply or 

Crew boat to shore base - Picked up at 

shore base and trucked or barged to 

disposal facility 

Baker Hughes 

Port Fourchon, LA 

Return Synthetic-based 

drilling fluids 5,000 bbls/well 30 bbls/day

Transport in Tote Tanks on Supply or 

Crew boat to shore base - Picked up at 

shore base and returned to mud 

contractor 

C-Port & IESI-SWDI 

Port Fourchon, LA Trash / Debris 73.5 tons/well 0.46 ton/day

Store in drums or bins transported to 

Port Fourchon via supply boat and 

picked up for disposal at a public 

landfill. 

NA Chemical product wastes NA NA NA 

American Recovery 

Houma, LA Waste Oil & Filters 96 bbls/well 0.60 bbls/day Incinerate 

(e) Air Emissions 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 

(f) Unusual Solid and Liquid Wastes 

Not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 25 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

SULPHUR OPERATIONS INFORMATION

Statoil is not proposing any sulphur operations in this plan.
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 26 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

The States of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida have federally approved 

coastal zone management programs (CZMP). Applicants for an OCS plan submitted to the 

BOEM must provide a certification with necessary data and information for the affected State to 

determine that the proposed activity(s) complies with the enforceable policies of each States’ 

approved program, and that such activity will be conducted in a manner consistent with the 

program. 

(a) Consistency Certification 

A Coastal Zone Management Consistency Certification for the States of Texas and Louisiana is 

required for the initial exploratory activities proposed in this plan and is included as Appendix +.

(b) Other Information 

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for the state of 

Louisiana. Statoil will submit a request for consistency certification to the Louisiana Coastal 

Zone Management Division. 

For Texas: 

As authorized by the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), the State of Texas 

developed a Coastal Management Program (CMP) to allow for the review of proposed Federal 

license and permit activities affecting any coastal use or resource, in or outside of the Texas 

Coastal Zone. 

The OCS related oil and gas exploratory and development activities having potential impact on 

the Texas Coastal Zone are based on the location of the proposed facilities, access to those 

sites, best practical techniques for drilling locations, drilling equipment guidelines for the 

prevention of adverse environmental effects, effective environmental protection, emergency 

plans and contingency plans. 

Below are topics found in other sections of the plan and have been cross referenced for ease in 

locating: 

Topic Cross Reference Comments 

Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Oil and 

Gas Exploration and Production Facilities 

CHAPTERS 1 and 

2 

Discharges of Wastewater and Disposal of Waste 

from Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Activities 

CHAPTERS 7 and 

15 

Construction and Operation of Solid Waste Treatment, 

Storage, and Disposal Facilities 

CHAPTER 15 

Prevention, Response, and Remediation of Oil Spills CHAPTER 9 

Discharge of Municipal and Industrial Waste Water to 

Coastal Waters 

CHAPTER 2 and 6 

Development in Critical Areas CHAPTER 9 

Construction of Waterfront Facilities and Other 

Structures on Submerge lands 

CHAPTERS 2 and 

9 

Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal and 

Placement 

CHAPTER 9 

Construction in the Beach / Dune System CHAPTER 9 

Alteration of Coastal Historic Areas CHAPTER 9 

Transportation CHAPTER 15 

Emission of Air Pollutants CHAPTER 8 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 27 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

Appropriations of Water There will be no fresh water 

appropriations as a result of our 

operations 

Marine Fishery Management CHAPTERS 2 and 

9 

Administrative Policies Proposed operations are 162 miles 

offshore, therefore, not subject to 

Section 501.15 regarding major actions 


Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 30 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (EIA)

See EIA prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants attached 

For Alaminos Canyon Block 380. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

For 

Initial Exploration Plan 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

OCS G-32954 

Prepared for: 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico, LLC

Prepared by: 

SWCA Environmental Consultants 

September 2012 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

for 

Initial Exploration Plan 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 

OCS G-32954

Prepared for: 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico, LLC 

(or Statoil USA E&P Inc.) 

Building 4, Suite 800 

2103 City West Blvd. 

Houston, Texas, 77042 

Prepared by: 

7255 Langtry, Suite 100 

Houston, Texas 77040 

(713) 934-9900 

www.swca.com 

______________________________ 

Richard Greig, PWS 

Senior Project Manager 

Baton Rouge Natural Resources 

September 6, 2012
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

1.0 (A) IMPACT-PRODUCING FACTORS (IPFS) 

Below is the Environmental Impact Analysis Worksheet provided by the BOEM. An “x” has 

been placed in the space under each IPF category associated with the proposed activities that 

may impact a particular environmental resource. For the cells that contain footnotes a 

statement has been provided that explains the applicability for the proposed activity for 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380. Where any of the IPFs may affect a specific environmental 

resource an analysis of that effect is provided. 

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET 

Emissions 

(air, noise, 

light, etc.)

Effluents (muds, 

cuttings, other 

discharges to the 

water column or 

seafloor)

Physical 

disturbances to the 

seafloor (rig or 

anchor 

emplacements, etc.)

Wastes sent 

to shore for 

treatment of 

disposal

Accidents 

(e.g., oil spills, 

chemical 

spills, H2S 

releases)

Other IPFs 

identified

 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)

 Chemosynthetic communities x (4) x

 Water quality x x

 Fisheries x

 Marine mammals x (8) x (8) x

 Sea turtles x (8) x (8) x

 Air quality x (9)

 Shipwreck sites (known or potential) (7)

 Prehistoric archaelogical sites (7)

 Vicinity of Offshore Location

 Essential fish habitat x x (6)

 Marine and pelagic birds x 

 Public health and safety (5)

 Coastal and Onshore

 Beaches x (6)

 Wetlands x (6)

 Shore birds and coastal nesting birds x (6)

 Coastal wildlife refuges x

 Wilderness areas x

 Other Resources Identified

Environmental Resources

Refer to a recent GOM OCS Lease Sales EIS for a more complete list of IPFs

Impact Producing Factors (IPFs) 

Categories and Examples 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Worksheet

1. Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topographic feature. Specifically, if the 

well or platform site or any anchors will be on the seafloor within the: 

(a) 4-mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks, or the 3-mile zone of Stetson Bank; 

(b) 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; 

(c) Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 ft from any no-activity zone; or 

(d) Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft buffer zone) with relief greater than 2 

meters that is not protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached 

to an OCS lease. 

2. Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS lease block protected through the 

Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 

3. Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seafloor habitats are protected by 

the Live Bottom (Low-relief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 

4. Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being in water depths 400 meters or 

greater. 

5. Exploration or production activities where H2S concentrations greater than 500 ppm 

might be encountered. 

6. All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydrocarbons or 

diesel fuel that is determined to impact these environmental resources. If the proposed 

action is located a sufficient distance from a resource that no impact would occur, the 

EIA will note that in a sentence or two. 

7. All activities that involve seafloor disturbances, including anchor placement, in any OCS 

block designated by the BOEM as having high-probability for the occurrence of 

shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such blocks that will be affected that are 

adjacent to the lease block in which the planned activity will occur. If the proposed 

activities are located at sufficient distance from a shipwreck or prehistoric site that no 

impact would occur, the EIA will note that in a sentence or two. 

8. All activities that are determined to possibly have an adverse effect on endangered or 

threatened marine mammals or sea turtles or their critical habitats. 

9. Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle 

tankers or barges. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

3.0 (B) ANALYSIS 

DESIGNATED TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES 

No impacts to designated topographic features are anticipated from the proposed activities in 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380. Effluents (including muds, cuttings, and other discharges), 

Emissions (including air, noise, light, etc.), Shore Bound Wastes, and Physical Disturbances to 

the seafloor should not have any detrimental affect to topographic features. The nearest named 

topographic feature is Harrison Mound which is located approximately 21 miles easterly of 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

PINNACLE TREND AREA LIVE BOTTOMS 

No impacts to pinnacle trend area live bottoms are anticipated from the proposed activities in 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380. Effluents (including muds, cuttings, and other discharges), 

Emissions (including air, noise, light, etc.), Shore Bound Wastes, and Physical Disturbances to 

the seafloor should not have any detrimental affect to any pinnacle trend area live bottom. The 

nearest designated pinnacle trend area live bottom is Main Pass Area Block 290. 

The Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation and Topographic Features Stipulation was 

promulgated by NTL 2009-G39, “Biologically-Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas” of the 

Gulf of Mexico. In addition to existing stipulated areas for biological features, this NTL 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

established a new category of protected area termed “Potentially Sensitive Biological Features.” 

These are hard-bottom features not protected by a biological lease stipulation that are of 

moderate to high relief (about 8 ft (2.4 m) or higher), provide surface area for the growth of 

sessile invertebrates, and have the potential to attract large numbers of fish. These features 

would be located outside any “No Activity Zone” of any of the named topographic features 

(banks) or the 70 live-bottom (pinnacle trend) stipulated blocks. Following the completion of any 

activity that proposes disturbance of the seafloor within a specified distance of pinnacles, livebottom (low-relief) features, or potentially sensitive biological features, operators must submit a 

map showing the location of the seafloor disturbance relative to these features. In reviewing 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc, (GEMS) reports it appears that there is the potential 

for relief features to occur within the block but none are likely to be impacted by the proposed 

activities. The locations will be drilled by a dynamically positioned drill ship; therefore no 

anchors will impact the seabed. 

In the unlikely event that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill was to occur, no adverse 

effects to stipulated or named pinnacle trend area live bottoms are expected. In the case of an 

accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented in their regional 

Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and 

approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional 

OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and 

NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment 

Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment equipment through this 

company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System 

which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo 

incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to MWCC members 

which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has 

to be flowed to the surface. 

EASTERN GULF LIVE BOTTOMS 

No impacts to eastern gulf live bottoms are anticipated from the proposed activities in Alaminos 

Canyon Block 380. Effluents (including muds, cuttings, and other discharges), Emissions 

(including air, noise, light, etc.), Shore Bound Wastes, and Physical Disturbances to the seafloor 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

should not have any detrimental affect to eastern gulf live bottoms. The nearest designated 

eastern gulf live bottom is Viosca Knoll Area Block 573 at a distance so great that potential 

impact percentages are negligible. 

In the unlikely event that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill was to occur, no adverse 

effects to pinnacle trend area live bottoms are expected. In the case of an accidental oil spill, 

Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response 

Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and approval. The 

activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in 

accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-

G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company 

(MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment equipment through this company. 

During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which 

utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 

2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to MWCC members which utilize 

dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed 

to the surface. 

CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITIES 

The proposed activities for Alaminos Canyon Block 380 occur at a water depths ranging from 

4150 to 7300 feet thereby having a possibility of Chemosynthetic Communities occurring, since 

they require a water depth of at least 400 meters or 1312 feet. These communities are normally 

found near seafloor gas vents and gas hydrates. Per GEMS reports for the proposed well 

locations “Features or areas that could support high-density chemosynthetic or other deepwater 

benthic communities are not observed within 2,000 ft of the proposed location in the 3D data.” 

However it was also noted by GEMS on the proposed WELLSITE AC 380-19 that “It is possible 

that when the required pre-spud ROV or AUV survey is conducted that scattered benthic 

communities may be found. If any high-density benthic communities are observed then they 

should be avoided by a minimum of 2,000 ft for all muds and cuttings discharge locations (NTL 

2009 G-40; MMS,2010).” NTL 2009-G40 reclassifies deepwater in reference to benthic 

communities as greater than 300 meters and includes deepwater coral communities which are 

typically found in close association with chemosynthetic communities. These associations form 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

hot spots of biological diversity and should be avoided by 2000 feet for proposed mud and 

cuttings discharge and 250 feet by all other seafloor disturbances (such as anchors or wire 

ropes). 

As stated, a dynamically positioned drillship will be used for the activities in this block so 

chemosynthetic communities should not be impacted by any bottom impacting activities. 

Therefore, it appears that chemosynthetic communities and potential deepwater coral 

communities are being avoided by greater than 2000 feet for all wells proposed within these 

blocks. 

In the unlikely event that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill was to occur there could 

be detrimental effects to the chemosynthetic communities within this block and neighboring 

blocks. It is likely that dispersants would be used to help reduce the potential impacts to these 

communities. In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the 

procedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted 

February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are 

covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 

30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 

2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 

and has access to well containment equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has 

access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs 

and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded 

System will become available to MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in 

lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

WATER QUALITY 

Effluents and accidents could possibly impact the water quality due to the proposed activities for 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380. The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), 

specifically Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s general permit under GMG 290000 issued by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), will cover all discharges and the regulations coinciding 

with this permit will be followed. The EPA has issued permit number GMG290202 for Statoil 

USA E&P Inc. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

In the unlikely event that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill was to occur, water quality 

would be adversely affected for a period of time immediately following the spill. In the event of a 

worst-case spill scenario Statoil USA E&P Inc. will make every effort to keep impacts to water 

quality to a minimum. In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the 

procedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted 

February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are 

covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 

30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 

2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 

and has access to well containment equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has 

access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs 

and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded 

System will become available to MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in 

lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

FISHERIES 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block located within the limits of the fisheries conservation zone. It is 

unlikely that any of the following IPFs would have an impact on fisheries within Alaminos 

Canyon Block 380: emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and shore bound wastes. 

However, an effluent discharge or an accidental spill has the possibility of causing some impact 

to the fisheries. 

An accidental oil spill or effluent discharge occurring due to the proposed activities for Alaminos 

Canyon Block 380 is unlikely. However, if either did occur it would most likely have a sub-lethal 

effect on the finfish or shellfish in the area because the hydrocarbons can be metabolized and 

increased exposure can be avoided. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

MARINE MAMMALS 

Over twenty (20) species of whales and dolphins have been identified in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Common shallow water dolphins are the Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontallis) and the 

bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). The five (5) species of whales listed as threatened or 

endangered that may occur in the Gulf of Mexico include the blue whale (Balaenoptera 

musculus), finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback whale (Megaptera 

novaeangliae), sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis) and sperm whale (Physter catdon) (USDOI, 

Region IV Endangered Species Notebook). Another endangered marine mammal that has 

historically utilized the waters of the Gulf Coast is the West Indian manatee (Trichechus 

manatus). Manatees prefer shallow protected waters in the central and eastern Gulf of Mexico 

and would not be encountered in the vicinity of Alaminos Canyon Block 380. 

BOEM and BSEE issued NTL 2012-JOINT-G01 pursuant to 30 CFR 250.103, 550.103, 250.282 

and 550.282 to update the guidelines on implementing monitoring programs to minimize the risk 

of vessel strikes to protected species and report observations of injured or dead protected 

species. In lieu of a formal observer program, this NTL provides specific guidelines to identify 

and avoid injury to marine mammals and sea turtles. Statoil will ensure that our contract vessel 

operators are aware of their requirement to report sightings of any injured or dead protected 

species immediately to the NMFS’s Stranding Hotline (for marine mammals) and to the NMFS 

Southeast Regional Office (for sea turtles). 

Statoil will utilize the “Guide to Marine Mammals and Turtles of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of 

Mexico” by Kate Wynne and Malia Schwartz to aid in the identification of the 28 species of 

whales and dolphins, 5 species of sea turtles and the single species of manatee that might be 

encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

Accidental blowouts, oil spills, and spill-response activities potentially resulting from proposed 

activities within Alaminos Canyon Block 380 could impact marine mammals. Characteristics of 

impacts (i.e., acute vs. chronic impacts) depend on the magnitude, characteristics of spilled oil, 

spill-response capabilities and timing, and various meteorological and hydrological factors. 

Populations of marine mammals could be exposed to residuals of oils spilled as a result of 

activities within Alaminos Canyon Block 380 during their lifetimes. Chronic or acute exposure 

may result in harassment, harm, or mortality to marine mammals. Marine mammals made no 

apparent attempt to avoid spilled oil in some cases (Smultea and Würsig, 1995); however, 

marine mammals have been observed apparently detecting and avoiding slicks in other reports 

(Geraci and St. Aubin, 1987). Exposure to hydrocarbons persisting in the sea following the 

dispersal of an oil slick is likely to result in sublethal impacts (e.g., decreased health, 

reproductive fitness, and longevity; and increased vulnerability to disease) to marine mammals. 

Impact producing factors that may affect marine mammals would include vessel traffic, noise, 

accidental oil spills, effluent discharge, and loss of shore bound wastes. Impacts due to noise 

would affect marine mammals in a non lethal manner, leading to interference in communication 

with other group members, confusion, and/or disorientation. Collisions with offshore vessels 

could be lethal to marine mammals; however, the occurrence of such collisions would be 

extremely rare. With the current regulations in place by the Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEM), impacts to marine mammals from the 

proposed activities in Alaminos Canyon Block 380 would be incidental and every effort will be 

made to protect any marine mammal in the event of a spill. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

SEA TURTLES 

Five (5) species of protected sea turtles are found within the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico: 

Kemp's ridley turtle (Lepidochelya kempii), green turtle (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill turtle 

(Eretmochelys imbricata), leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) and loggerhead turtle 

(Caretta caretta) (USDOI, Region IV Endangered Species Notebook). 

The most common sea turtle observed near offshore platforms is the loggerhead, with the 

majority of sightings occurring on the east side of the Mississippi River. Loggerheads prefer 

water depths of less than 50 meters (164 feet) and are considered benthic foragers with a major 

portion of their diet consisting of nearshore crabs and jellyfish. The green turtle prefers water 

depths less than 20 meters (66 feet) in areas containing seagrassess. Leatherbacks are 

pelagic turtles; however, they have been observed infrequently in shallower coastal waters. The 

hawksbill turtle prefers tropical seas and is a rare visitor to the northern Gulf of Mexico. The 

Kemp’s ridley prefers coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico and is more common in Texas and 

Mexico. The major nesting beach for the Kemp’s ridley is on the northeastern coast of Mexico. 

The water depths at Alaminos Canyon Block 380 are likely to preclude any of the sea turtles 

from routinely occurring there with the exception of the leatherback. If sea turtles were found 

within this block they would likely be passing through the area. 

Activities considered under proposed activities for Alaminos Canyon Block 380 have the 

potential harm sea turtles and their habitats. Those activities include structure installation, water 

quality and habitat degradation, marine debris, vessel traffic, oil spills, oil-spill-response 

activities, pollution, and vessel collisions. Sea turtles could be killed or injured by chance 

collision with vessels or eating marine debris, particularly plastic items. The presence of, and 

noise produced by, service vessels and by the construction, operation, and removal of drill rigs 

may cause physiological stress and make animals more susceptible to disease or predation, as 

well as disrupt normal activities. Contaminants in waste discharges and drilling muds might 

indirectly affect sea turtles through food-chain biomagnification. Oil spills and oil-spill-response 

activities are potential threats that may be expected to cause turtle deaths. Contact with, and 

consumption of oil and oil-contaminated prey, may seriously impact turtles. Sea turtles have 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

been seriously harmed by oil spills in the past. The majority of OCS activities are estimated to 

be sublethal (behavioral effects and nonfatal exposure to intake of contaminants or debris). 

Chronic sublethal effects (e.g., stress) resulting in persistent physiological or behavioral 

changes and/or avoidance of impacted areas could cause declines in survival or productivity, 

resulting in either acute or gradual population declines. However, mitigations currently in place 

have, and will continue to, minimize sea turtle impacts. Generally, the offshore species and the 

offshore habitat are not expected to be severely affected in the long-term. 

Impact producing factors that may affect sea turtles include vessel traffic, noise, shore bound 

waste losses, effluents, and accidental oil spills. There is the potential that oil spills and 

response activities could harm individuals, especially hatchlings, through consumption of oil 

particles or oiled food sources. There is the possibility that sea turtles could be harmed by 

chance collisions with service vessels and from eating floating debris; however, these instances 

would be rare. The activities proposed for Alaminos Canyon Block 380 should not have an 

adverse effect on sea turtle populations since the majority of possible impacts to local sea 

turtles will be sub lethal. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

AIR QUALITY 

No IPFs at the site-specific location within Alaminos Canyon Block 380 are expected to impact 

air quality to a degree that would go above acceptable levels. Emissions will be kept within 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

generally acceptable standards, and effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and shore 

bound wastes are not expected to impact the air quality. In the unlikely event of an accidental 

oil spill, the air quality may be impacted due to the spill and response activities, however even 

then the impacts would be kept to a minimum. Air quality analyses of the proposed activities 

indicate that the Minerals Management Service (now BOEM) exemption level is not and will not 

be exceeded. 

SHIPWRECK SITES AND PREHISTORIC ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES 

Fugro Geoservices Inc. acquired and evaluated high-resolution geophysical survey data 

covering Blocks 380, 381, and 424, Alaminos Canyon Area and assessed the data for evidence 

of shipwrecks. Thirty nine sonar contacts noted within the survey area are interpreted as 

possible disturbed sediments, geologic features, or possible debris associated with former 

construction, shipping, or fishing activities, and are not deemed archaeologically significant. One 

contact (No. 19) could not be positively identified and should be avoided by at least 1,000 feet 

during future lease activities. There were no other unusual depressions, scours, sediment 

changes, or unidentified seafloor targets observed within the survey area that could represent 

unidentified shipwreck remains. The well will be drilled using a dynamically positioned drill ship, 

therefore no anchors will be set on the seafloor and the target will not be impacted by 

construction activities. 

There are no known shipwreck sites within Alaminos Canyon Block 380 and Fugro’s report 

addresses the new Bottom Disturbing activities avoidance/mitigation requirements implemented 

3/25/2011. Geophysical remote sensing data is not able to detect all historically significant 

features, and therefore caution should be maintained when conducting lease development 

activities. In compliance with 30 CFR 250.194(c), 30 CFR 250.1010(c), and NTL 2005-G07, if 

materials are observed during operations that could indicate the presence of a shipwreck, 

shipwreck site, or other potentially significant archaeological resource, operations will cease and 

the Regional Supervisor, Leasing and Environment with the Minerals Management Service will 

be notified within 48 hours of discovery. Therefore, no IPFs, including physical disturbances to 

the seafloor, would cause any impacts to these environmental resources. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT 

All marine waters and substrates of the Gulf of Mexico from the shoreline to the seaward limit of 

the Exclusive Economic Zone are considered Essential Fish Habitats (EFH) managed by the 

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC). Under this definition the marine 

waters surrounding Alaminos Canyon Block 380 is included as an EFH for species managed by 

the United States Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service through the 

GMFMC. The fisheries affected by the EFH designation are the fisheries for shrimp, red drum, 

coastal migratory pelagic, reef fish, and stone crab. 

Alaminos Canyon Block 380 is within the limits of the fisheries conservation zone. The oyster 

leases and blue crab fishing areas to the northwest, near the coast, would be at such a distance 

as to have minimal possibility for impact. It is unlikely that any of the following IPFs due to 

proposed activities would have an impact on fisheries within this block: emissions, physical 

disturbances to the seafloor, and shore bound wastes. However, an effluent discharge or an 

accidental spill has the possibility of causing some impact to fisheries and essential fish habitat. 

An accidental oil spill or effluent discharge that may occur due to the proposed activities is 

unlikely. If either did occur it would most likely have a sub-lethal effect on the finfish or shellfish 

in the area of impact because the hydrocarbons can be metabolized and increased exposure 

can be avoided. 

The proposed activities in Alaminos Canyon Block 380 should not cause significant or long-term 

adverse impacts to any Essential Fish Habitats (GMFMC, 1998). Any impacts to local fisheries 

will be minor and temporary. In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will 

follow the procedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently 

submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and approval. The activities proposed in this 

plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 

30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 

2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 

and has access to well containment equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has 

access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs 

and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

System will become available to MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in 

lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

MARINE AND PELAGIC BIRDS 

Accidents such as oil spills are the only impact producing factor that may impact local marine 

and pelagic birds. Impacts to birds would include oiling of feathers and possible ingestion of the 

spilled product. Susceptibility of birds to oil depends not only on their juxtaposition in time and 

space, but also on currents, climatic factors, the life/annual cycle stage, and the behavior of the 

species. Contamination by oil may result in matted feathers; death may soon follow from chilling 

or starvation, or from the toxic effects of oil ingested when the birds attempt to preen 

themselves. Oil from feathers may be transferred to eggs by incubating birds and may greatly 

reduce reproductive success. 

Among the birds covered by this volume, loons and grebes are considered the most susceptible 

to oil pollution. Cormorants, pelicans, and boobies are moderately susceptible and the truly 

pelagic birds, including most of the Procellariiformes (the albatrosses, procellariids, stormpetrels and diving petrels), are the least susceptible. These impacts to marine and pelagic birds 

would be localized, and prompt cleanup would reduce the long term effects to avian 

populations. No significant habitat impacts are expected to occur directly from routine activities 

resulting from the proposed action. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY 

Precautions would be taken in the unlikely event of H2S presence. In accordance with Title 30 

CFR 250.417(c), Statoil requests Alaminos Canyon Block 380, be declared as H2S absent. The 

basis for this determination is the evaluation of the Baha (AC557 #1) and Tiber (KC102 #1) 

wells which were drilled to the stratigraphic equivalent of the Lower Wilcox Whopper Formation 

as proposed in the exploration plan. 

There are no IPFs (including emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, shore 

bound wastes and accidents) that would cause any harm to public health and safety. In 

accordance with 30 CFR 250.215 and 250.245 and NTL 2008-G04, Statoil USA E&P Inc. has 

submitted information requesting classification for these blocks as an area where the “absence” 

of hydrogen sulfide has been confirmed. 

BEACHES 

No impact producing factors with the exception of an accidental spill are expected to impact any 

coastal beaches from activities proposed within Alaminos Canyon Block 380. Upon review of 

Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (MMS 2004) the historical spill data and trajectory / risk 

calculations show that there would be a small risk to Matagorda County, TX. If an oil spill were 

to occur there would be a maximum of 0/0/8 percent chance (3, 10, and 30 days, respectively) 

that the spill would impact any beaches on the shore during the spring season. The possible 

percentage chance of impact for other counties and parishes (including Matagorda, Brazoria, 

Galveston and Jefferson counties, and Vermilion, Terrebonne and Plaquemines Parishes) is 

less than 8 percent and only after 30 days. 

Prompt response to an accidental spill would greatly reduce the probable impact to these areas 

In the case of an accidental oil spill Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) approved by the BOEM 13 May 2010. The 

activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in 

accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-

G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company 

(MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment equipment through this company. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which 

utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 

2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to MWCC members which utilize 

dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed 

to the surface. 

WETLANDS 

No impact producing factors with the exception of an accidental spill are expected to impact any 

wetlands from activities proposed within Alaminos Canyon Block 380. Upon review of Oil Spill 

Risk Analysis Model (MMS 2004) the historical spill data and trajectory / risk calculations show 

that there would be a small risk to wetlands within Matagorda County. If an oil spill were to 

occur there would be a maximum of 0/0/8 percent chance (3, 10, and 30 days, respectively) that 

the spill would impact any wetlands on the shore during the spring season. The possible 

percentage chance of impact to wetlands of other counties and parishes (including Matagorda, 

Brazoria, Galveston and Jefferson counties, and Vermilion, Terrebonne and Plaquemines 

Parishes) is less than 8 percent and only after 30 days. 

Prompt response to an accidental spill would greatly reduce the probable impact to these areas. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

SHORE BIRDS AND COASTAL NESTING BIRDS 

No impact producing factors with the exception of an accidental spill are expected to impact any 

shore birds or coastal nesting birds from activities proposed within Alaminos Canyon Block 380. 

Upon review of Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (MMS 2004) the historical spill data and trajectory / 

risk calculations show that there would be a small risk to rookeries and other shorebirds within 

Matagorda County. If an oil spill were to occur there would be a maximum of 0/0/8 percent 

chance (3, 10, and 30 days, respectively) that the spill would impact the shore during the spring 

season. The possible percentage chance of impact to wetlands of other counties and parishes 

(including Matagorda, Brazoria, Galveston and Jefferson counties, and Vermilion, Terrebonne 

and Plaquemines Parishes) is less than 8 percent and only after 30 days. 

Impacts from spills may affect adult birds by the oiling of feathers, and may affect the nesting 

success should the product be ingested. Prompt response to an accidental spill would greatly 

reduce the probable impact to these areas. In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA 

E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan 

(OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM for review and approval. The activities 

proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with 

BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-

N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 

29, 2011 and has access to well containment equipment through this company. During 2012, 

Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid 

MODUs and equipment that was utilized on the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC 

Expanded System will become available to MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture 

vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

COASTAL WILDLIFE REFUGES 

No impact producing factors with the exception of an accidental spill are expected to impact any 

coastal wildlife refuges. Upon review of Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (MMS 2004) the historical 

spill data and trajectory / risk calculations show that there would be a small risk to National 

Wildlife Refuges and Wildlife Management Areas within Matagorda County. If an oil spill were 

to occur there would be a maximum of 0/0/8 percent chance (3, 10, and 30 days, respectively) 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

that the spill would impact any coastal wildlife refuges on the shore during the spring season.. 

The possible percentage chance of impact for other counties and parishes (including 

Matagorda, Brazoria, Galveston and Jefferson counties, and Vermilion, Terrebonne and 

Plaquemines Parishes) is less than 8 percent and only after 30 days. 

Prompt response to an accidental spill would greatly reduce the probable impact to these areas. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

WILDERNESS AREAS 

The only Wilderness Area occurring along the coastal region of Louisiana is the Breton 

Wilderness. Alaminos Canyon Block 380 is located over 200 miles southwest of the Breton 

Wilderness Area. It should be noted that the Breton Wilderness Area is classified as a Class I 

area under EPA's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations, and is managed by 

the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Based on a review of the Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model 

(MMS 2004) an accidental oil spill occurring in the autumn season would have a less than one 

percent chance of impact to the Breton Wilderness Area. 

In the case of an accidental oil spill, Statoil USA E&P Inc. will follow the procedures documented 

in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submitted February 24, 2012 to BOEM 

for review and approval. The activities proposed in this plan are covered by Statoil USA E&P 

Inc.’s regional OSRP in accordance with BOEM final rule 30CFR254.6, NTL 2006-G21, NTL 

2007-N04 and NTL 2008-G17, NTL 2010-N06 and NTL 2010-N10. Statoil joined the Marine 

Well Containment Company (MWCC) March 29, 2011 and has access to well containment 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

equipment through this company. During 2012, Statoil has access to what MWCC calls their 

Interim Response System which utilizes mutual aid MODUs and equipment that was utilized on 

the BP Macondo incident. In 2013, the MWCC Expanded System will become available to 

MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture vessels in lieu of mutual aid MODUs in the 

case that a well has to be flowed to the surface. 

OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES IDENTIFIED 

No other environmental resources have been identified that would be impacted by the proposed 

activities in Alaminos Canyon Area block 380. 

(C) Impacts on Proposed Activities for Alaminos Canyon Block 380. 

After review of the current site conditions, it is not expected that any known environmental 

conditions in the project area will have any affect on the activities proposed for Alaminos 

Canyon Area Block 380. 

(D) Environmental Hazards

The site-specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed 

activities under this plan. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site-specific 

environmental conditions. 

(E) Alternatives

Only minor environmental impacts have been determined to exist for the proposed activities for 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380; therefore, no alternatives were considered for this project. 

(F) Mitigation measures 

With the exception of measures required by regulation, no mitigation will be employed to avoid, 

diminish, or eliminate potential impacts to environmental resources. 

(G) Consultation 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

SWCA Environmental Consultants were consulted regarding potential for impacts to 

environmental resources associated with the proposed activities for Alaminos Canyon Area 

Block 380. 

(H) Preparers 

Richard Greig, Sr. Project Manager with SWCA Environmental Consultants prepared this 

Environmental Impact Analysis for Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380. 

 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

(I) References 

Avent, Robert M. 1973-2000. Minerals Management Service Environmental Studies Program: A History 

of Biological Investigations in the Gulf of Mexico. OCS Study MMS 04-015. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, Louisiana. 42pages. 

Castro, Jose 1. 1983. The sharks of North American waters, Texas A & M Un. Press., College Station, 

180 pp. 

Clapp, R.B., R.C. Banks, D. Morgan-Jacobs and W.A. Hoffman. 1982. Marine Birds of the Southeastern 

United States and Gulf of Mexico. Part I: Gaviiformes through Pelecaniformes. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington D.C. FWS/OBS-82/01. 637 pages. 

Clapp, R.B., D. Morgan-Jacobs and R.C. Banks. 1982. Marine Birds of the Southeastern United States 

and Gulf of Mexico. Part II: Anseriformes. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, 

Washington D.C. FWS/OBS-82/20. 492 pages. 

Fritts, T.H., A.B. Irvine, R.D. Jennings, L.A. Collum, W. Hoffman, and M.A. McGehee. 1983. Turtles, birds, 

and mammals in the northern Gulf of Mexico and nearby Atlantic waters. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Office of Biological Services, Washington D.C. FWS/OBS-82/65. 455 pages. 

Fugro Geoservices, Inc. Report “Archaeological Assessment, Coral Prospect, Blocks 380, 381, and 424 

Alaminos Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico”. Report No. 2412-5015, August 3, 2012 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc’s Report “Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment Blocks 379, 

380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos Canyon Area Gulf of Mexico”. October 22, 2009, Project No. 0509-1644 

Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1980. Offshore petroleum resource development and marine mammals: A 

review and research recommendations. Marine Fisheries Review 42:1-12. 

Geraci, J.R., and D.J. St. Aubin. 1987. Effects of offshore oil and gas development on marine mammals 

and turtles. In: Boesch, D.F. and N.N. Rabalais, eds. Long-term environmental effects of offsore oil and 

gas development. London: Elsevier Applied Science. 

Geyer, R. A. 1979. Naturally occurring hydrocarbon seeps in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea. 

College Station, Texas: Texas A & M University Press. 

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 1998. Generic Amendment for Addressing Essential Fish 

Habitat Requirements. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, Tampa, Florida. 507pp. 

Hoese, H. D. and R. H. Moore. 1977. Fishes of the Gulf of Mexico. Texas A & M University Press, College 

Station, Texas. 327 pp. 

Ji, Zhen-Gang, W.R. Johnson, C.F. Marshall, E.M. Lear (editor). 2004. Oil Spill Risk Analysis: 

Contingency Planning Statistics for Gulf of Mexico OCS Activities. OCS Study MMS 04-026. U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Environmental Division. 63 pages. 

Lohoefener, R., W. Hoggard, K. Mullen, C. Roden and C. Rogers. 1990. Association of sea turtles with 

petroleum platforms in the north-central Gulf of Mexico. OCS Study MMS 90-0025. U.S. Department of 

the Interior, Minerals Management Services, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, New Orleans, 

Louisiana. 90 pages. 
Environmental Impact Analysis 

Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 

Mendelssohn, 1.A., M.W. Hester, and J.M. Hill. 1993. Effects of Oil Spills on Coastal Wetlands and Their 

Recovery. OCS Study MMS 93-0045. U.S. Department of the Interior, Mineral Management Service, Gulf 

of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, La. 46 pages. 

Mullin, K., W. Hoggard, C. Roden, R. Lohoefener, C. Rogers and B. Taggart. 1991. Cetaceans on the 

upper continental slope in the north-central Gulf of Mexico. OCS Study/MMS 91-0027. U.S. Department 

of the Interior, Minerals Management Services, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, New Orleans, 

Louisiana. 108 pages. 

Smultea, M. and B. Würsig. 1995. Bottlenose dolphin reactions to the Mega Borg oil spill. Aquatic 

Mammals 21:171-181. 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976. Endangered and threatened species 

of the southeastern United States. Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia (periodically updated). 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 2005. Environmental Assessment, 

Proposed OCS Lease Sale 198, Central Gulf of Mexico. Prepared by Minerals Management Service, Gulf 

of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana. 65 pp. 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas 

Lease Sales: 2003-2007, Central Planning Area Sales 185, 190, 194, 198, and 201; Western Planning 

Area Sales 187, 192, 196, and 200; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume I: Chapters 1-10; 

Volume II: Figures and Tables. OCS EIS/EA MMS 2002-052. 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Visual No. 3, 2003. Commercial 

Fisheries and Endangered and Threatened Species. Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana. 

Map. 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Visual No. 2, 1986. Commercial 

Fisheries and Endangered and Threatened Species. Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana. 

Map. 

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Visual No. 3, 1986. Recreation and 

Areas of Multiple Use. Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana. Map. 
Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 31 Alaminos Canyon 380 

Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION 

(a) Exempted Information Description (Public Information Copies Only)

In accordance with 43 CFR Part 2, Appendix E, sections (4) and (9), the following information is 

exempt from disclosure and has been omitted from the Public Information copy of this plan: 

 The geologic objectives, BHL, TVD, and MD information on form MMS-137 (OCS Plan 

Information Form) in Appendix A 

 All items under Geological and Geophysical Information, except for the non-proprietary 

version of shallow hazards assessment 

 Correlative well information used to justify H2S classification request under Hydrogen 

Sulfide Information 

(b) Bibliography 

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services Inc. “Geologic and Stratigraphic Assessment Blocks 379, 

380, 381, 423, and 424 Alaminos Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Volume 1.” Report No. 0509-

1644. August 31, 2012. 

Fugro GeoServices, Inc. “Archaeological Survey Blocks 380, 381, & 424 Alaminos Canyon 

Area, Gulf of Mexico.” Report No. 2412-5015. August 2012.