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, 20121 

### 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 Servic e 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 R outing 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 H 2 S 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 InformationStatoil 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 CertificationStatoil 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 posit ioned 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 fa cility 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 capa city = 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 380OCS-G-32954Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAC380-BAC 380-AAC 380-C

1,125,000 1,130,000 1,135,000 1,140,0009,650,0009,655,0009,660,000 94°32'0"W

94°33'0"W

94°34'0"W26°37'0"N26°36'0"N26°35'0"NATTACHMENT BFIGURE 1JOB NO.: 0509-1644DATE: 4 SEPTEMBER 2012DATUM: NAD 27PROJECTION: UTMZONE 15WELL LOCATION PLATPUBLIC COPYWELL A, B, AND CBLOCK 380ALAMINOS CANYON AREAGULF OF MEXICO!.PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS.0 1,000 2,0005001 inch = 2,000 feet1:24,000Location Call N/S Call E/W X Coordinate Y Coordinate Latitude LongitudeWDProposed Locations- AC380AC380-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 380OCS-G-32954Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAC380-BAC 380-CAC 380-A - 6 0 0 0

- 5 5 0 0

- 4 5 0 0 - 50 0 0

- 6

5

0

0 - 6 5 0 0

1,125,000 1,130,000 1,135,000 1,140,0009,650,0009,655,0009,660,000 94°32'0"W

94°33'0"W

94°34'0"W26°37'0"N26°36'0"N26°35'0"NATTACHMENT CFIGURE 1BATHYMETRY PLATWELL A, B, AND CBLOCK 380ALAMINOS CANYON AREAGULF OF MEXICOJOB NO.: 0509-1644DATE: 4 SEPTEMBER 2012DATUM: NAD 27PROJECTION: UTMZONE 15AC380-AEasting: 1,131,739.00' ENorthing: 9,658,547.00' NFWL of AC380: 7,099'FNL of AC380: 3,853'!.PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS.WATER DEPTH CONTOUR IN FEET.0 1,000 2,0005001 inch = 2,000 feet1:24,000AC380-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

B 0 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. Stato il 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) S 

### uspension 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 evidenc e 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 GEOP HYSICAL 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 t he 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 ofStatoil 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 dominat e 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 GeologistStatoil 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 Manageme nt 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 C le arance Letter for the proposed AC380-A location in Block 380

, Al aminos 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. 0 509

- 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 26 o 36 ' 33.14779 " North Easting 1,131,739 US ft E Longitude 9 4 o 33 ' 26 .01201 " West Northing 9,658,547 US ft N FWL of Alaminos Canyon 380 7,099 US ft Inline 2912 FN L of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,853 US ft Crossline 2855 Water Depth:

- 4

, 544 ft Slope: 4.0 o s outh

- s outhwe st Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24 o 16 ' 42.95 " W Port of Operation Fourchon, Louisiana 318 miles bearing N 56 o 47 ' 28.07 "E Nearest Manned Platform A

- Hoover Spar, AC 25 25 miles N 19 o 2 3 ' 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 th e 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 GeologistStatoil 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 Cany on 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 GeologistStatoil 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 Manageme nt 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 C le arance Letter for the proposed AC380-B location in Block 380

, Ala minos 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 (Char t 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 26 o 36 ' 44.01534 " North Easting 1,133,818 US ft E Longitude 9 4 o 33 ' 03.2 4985 " West Northing 9,659,619 US ft N F E L of Alaminos Canyon 380 6,662 US ft Inline 2925 FN L of Alaminos Canyon 380 2,781 US ft Crossline 2805 Water Depth:

- 4

, 428 ft Slope: 3.6 o west

- s outhwe st 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 20 o 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 GeologistStatoil 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 GeologistStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 2103 CityWest Boulevard

Suite 800 Houston, Texas 77042 Main:713- 918

- 8200 Fa x: 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 Manageme nt 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 C le arance Letter for the proposed AC380-C location in Block 380

, Ala minos 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 (Char t 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 26 o 36 ' 16.92941 " North Easting 1,137,312 US ft E Longitude 9 4 o 32 ' 24.3 8506 " West Northing 9, 656

, 842 US ft N F E L of Alaminos Canyon 380 3,168 US ft Inline 2892 FN L of Alaminos Canyon 380 5

, 558 US ft Crossline 2720 Water Depth:

- 4

, 963 ft Slope: 2.3 o s outh Nearest Shoreline 162 miles bearing N 24o 16' 42.95" W Port of Oper ation 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 GeologistStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 9 Alaminos Canyon 380 Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

## HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

(a) Concentration

Statoil does not anticipate encountering H 2 S 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 H 2 S while conducting our proposed exploratory activities therefore a contingency plan is not required at this time.



### (d) Modeling Report

Statoil does not anticipate encountering H 2 S 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 CO NSERVATION INFORMATION

( a) Technology and Reservoir Engi neering 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 SO CIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

(a) High-Density Deepwater Be nthic 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 Sensiti ve 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 V ehicle Surveys in Deepw ater,” 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 wate r 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 bbl s 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 = 3400D 2/3 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 87.5 o W longitude? X Do you expect to encounter H 2 S at concentrations greater than 20 parts per million (ppm)? X Do you propose to flare or vent natural gas 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 CHECKLISTOMB Control No. 1010-0151OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14COMPANYStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAREAAlaminos CanyonBLOCK380LEASEOCS-G 32954PLATFORMWELLA, B, CCOMPANY CONTACTErin RachalTELEPHONE NO.713-485-2555REMARKSDrill and TA or PA three well locationsFORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 1 of 8EMISSIONS FACTORSFuel Usage Conversion FactorsNatural Gas Turbines Natural Gas Engines Diesel Recip. Engine REF. DATESCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483AP42 3.2-1 4/76 & 8/84Equipment/Emission Factorsunits PM SOx NOx VOC CO REF. DATENG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83AP42 3.2-1& 3.1-1 10/96NG 2-cycle leangms/hp-hr0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5AP42 3.2-1 10/96NG 4-cycle leangms/hp-hr0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6AP42 3.2-1 10/96NG 4-cycle richgms/hp-hr0.00185 10 0.14 8.6AP42 3.2-1 10/96Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03AP42 3.3-1 10/96Diesel Recip. > 600 hp.gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4AP42 3.4-1 10/96Diesel Boilerlbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21AP42 1.3-12,14 9/98NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84P42 1.4-1, 14-2, & 147/98NG Flareslbs/mmscf0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5AP42 11.5-1 9/91Liquid Flaringlbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21AP42 1.3-1 & 1.3-3 9/98Tank Vaporslbs/bbl0.03E&P Forum 1/93Fugitiveslbs/hr/comp.0.0005API Study 12/93Glycol Dehydrator Ventlbs/mmscf6.6La. DEQ1991Gas Ventinglbs/scf0.0034Sulphur Content Source Value UnitsFuel Gas3.33 ppmDiesel Fuel0.4 % weightProduced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppmProduced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weightFORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 2 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEARCOMPANYAREABLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLCONTACTPHONE REMARKSStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, CErin Rachal713-485-2555OPERATIONSEQUIPMENTRATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIMEMAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOURESTIMATED TONSDiesel EnginesHP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas EnginesHP SCF/HR SCF/DBurnersMMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24 142 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 340.51 2551.50 76.54 556.69PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00BURNER diesel00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1 20 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 0.09 0.88 0.07 0.19VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4 101 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 4.73 35.43 1.06 7.73VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12 61 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 10.65 79.81 2.39 17.41VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs)00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00MISC.BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK-00 00.000.00DRILLING OIL BURN00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE00 00.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002013 YEAR TOTAL61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97162.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 3 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 2ND YEARCOMPANYAREABLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLCONTACTPHONE REMARKSStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, CErin Rachal713-485-2555OPERATIONSEQUIPMENTRATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIMEMAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOURESTIMATED TONSDiesel EnginesHP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas EnginesHP SCF/HR SCF/DBurnersMMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24.00 142.00 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 340.51 2551.50 76.54 556.69PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00BURNER diesel000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1.00 20.00 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 0.09 0.88 0.07 0.19VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4.00 101.00 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 4.73 35.43 1.06 7.73VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12.00 61.00 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 10.65 79.81 2.39 17.41VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00MISC.BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK-0000.000.00DRILLING OIL BURN000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE0000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002014 YEAR TOTAL61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97162.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 4 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 3RD YEARCOMPANYAREABLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLCONTACTPHONE REMARKSStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLCAlaminos Canyon380 OCS-G 32954 A, B, CErin Rachal713-485-2555OPERATIONSEQUIPMENTRATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIMEMAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOURESTIMATED TONSDiesel EnginesHP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas EnginesHP SCF/HR SCF/DBurnersMMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24 142 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 74.23 340.51 2551.50 76.54 556.69PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00BURNER diesel000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 2856 137.9448 3310.68 1 20 6.29 9.23 88.07 7.05 19.06 0.06 0.09 0.88 0.07 0.19VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 7240 349.692 8392.61 4 101 5.10 23.41 175.42 5.26 38.27 1.03 4.73 35.43 1.06 7.73VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 9000 434.7 10432.80 12 61 6.34 29.10 218.06 6.54 47.58 2.32 10.65 79.81 2.39 17.41VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00MISC.BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK-0000.000.00DRILLING OIL BURN000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE0000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002015 YEAR TOTAL61.30 261.58 1978.91 63.77 431.61 77.64 355.98 2667.62 80.07 582.03EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97162.0FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 5 of 8SUMMARYCOMPANY AREABLOCKLEASEPLATFORM WELLStatoil Gulf of MeAlaminos Canyon 380OCS-G 32954A, B, CEmittedSubstanceYearPMSOxNOxVOCCO2013 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032014 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032015 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032016 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032017 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032018 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032019 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032020 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032021 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.032022 77.64355.98 2667.62 80.07582.03Allowable5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 5394.60 101038.97FORM BOEM-0138(December 2011 - Supersedes all previous versions of this form which may not be used).Page 8 of 8Statoil 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 Cl ean 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 Designation 2 SS001 C Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) 111 162 Volume 3 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 blow out. Determine this volume using the provisions of 30 CFR 254.47(b). For DOCD’s, determine the volu me 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-caseStatoil 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 Mana gement Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well bl owout during drilling operations, estimated to be 50,251 barrels of crud e 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 BS EE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website. The results are shown in Figure 1. The BSEE OSRAM identifies an 8% proba bility of impact to the shor elines of Matagorda County, Texas within 30 days. Matagorda County stretc hes from Matagorda Bay, across the Colorado River and up to the border of San Bernard Wildli fe Refuge (immediately we st of the San Bernard River). The county includes Ma tagorda Peninsula on the Gulf coast and Matagorda Bay. This area is primarily open beach. However, marshland exists along the east si de of Matagorda Bay. Several bird rookeries are present around the peni nsula. Seagrass is present off of Matagorda Peninsula on the bay side.

Response

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC will make every effo rt to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as practicable. A de scription of the response equipmen t under contract to contain and recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical charact eristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering model was run on a similar product from the ADIO S oil database. The results indicate 35% or approximately 17,588 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed w ithin 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 evaporatio n/dispersion at 24 hours. The list estimates individual times needed for proc urement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure 2 also indicates how operations will be supported.

### 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 aircraft s and 4 sorties (8,000 gall ons) from the Basler aircraft would provide a daily dispersant ca pability of 7,540 barrels. If the conditions are favorable for in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is in place, in-situ burning of oil may be 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 cont ainment boom would be immediately called out and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore respons e 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. Temporar y storage associated with sk imming equipment equals 5,700 barrels. If additional st orage is needed, a 25,000 barrel st orage barge and three 20,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and centrally lo cated 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, s horeline impact in Matagorda County, Texas would depend upon existing environmental conditions. Shoreline prot ection would include the use of CGA’s near shore and shallow water skimmers with a tota led derated skimming cap acity 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 oi l 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 allowi ng a more effective res ponse to site-specific circumstances. Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s c ontract Spill Management Team holds a copy of the One-Gulf Plan.

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge s cenario, Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC can be onsite with contracted o il spill recovery equipment with ad equate 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 equi pment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).

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

• Weather

• Equipment and materials availability

• Ocean currents and tides

• Location of the spill

• Product spilled

• Amount spilled

• Environmental risk assessments

• Trajectory and product analysis

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

Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC will take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much of the spilled oi l as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response actions wi ll be designed to provide an “in-depth” protection strategy meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations.

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

• Information will be confirmed

• An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

• OSROs and appropriate agen cies will be notified

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form will be completed

• Initial Safety plan will be written and published

• Unified Command will be established

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

o Areas of responsibility established for S ource 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 Qu alified Individual (QI) notification, or at first light

• Provide trained observer to pr ovide on site status reports

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

• Continual surveillance of oil movement by 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, ai rcraft, and support equipment and personnel

• Confirm dispersant availability fo r current and long range operations

• Start ordering dispersa nt stocks required for expected operations

Containment boom

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

• Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom

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

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

Dedicated off-shore skimming systems General

• Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

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

CGA HOSS Barge

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

CGA FRUs

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

• VOOs 140’ – 180’ in length

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

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of CGA contracted assets

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

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

• Position as closely as possible to ski mming assets to minimize offloading time

### Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

• Use Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s c ontracted 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 sa fety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

In-situ Burn assets

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

• Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

• Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

• Contact boom manufacturer to provide training if required

• Determine assets to perform on water operation

• Build operations into safety plan

• Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

### Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

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

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

Vessel Deployment Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• Fast Response Vessels (FRV)

• Egmopol and Marco Shallow Water Skimmer (SWS)

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

VOO

• Use Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC’s c ontracted 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 sa fety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches

### Shoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Considerations

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

• Time to acquire personnel and eq uipment and their availability

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

Actions

Placement of boom

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

• Assess timing of booming operations to ensure it is where it needs to be at time of impact. Consider:

o Trajectories

o Weather forecast

o Oil Impact forecast

o Verified spill movement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

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

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

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

• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

• Determination of Archeological site s and gaining authority to enter

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Passive clean up of marshes should be consider ed and appropriate stoc ks of sorbent boom and/or sweep obtained

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

### Decanting Strategy Recovered oil and water mixtures will typically se parate into distinct phases when left in a quiescent state. When separati on occurs, the relatively clean water phase can be siphoned or decanted back to the recovery point with minima l, if any, impact. Decan ting therefore increases the effective on-site oil storage capacity a nd equipment operating time. FOSC/SOSC approval will be requested prior to decanting operations. This practice is routinely used for oil spill
recovery.

CGA Equipment Limitations The capability for any spill response equipment, whether a dedicated or portable system, to operate in differing weather conditions will be directly in rela tion to the capabilities of the vessel the system in placed on. Most importantly, however, the decision to operate will be based on the judgment of the Unified Command a nd/or the Captain of the vessel, who will ultimately have the final say in terminating operations. Skimming equipment listed below may have operational limits which exceed those safety thresholds. As was seen in the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill response, vessel skimming opera tions ceased when seas reache d 5-6 feet and vessels were often recalled to port when those conditions were exceeded. Systems below are some of the most up-to-date systems available and were employed during the DWH spill.

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots Visibility less than 3 nautical miles Ceiling less than 1,000 feet. FRU 8 foot seas HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas Koseq Arms 8 foot seas OSRV 4 foot seas

### Environmental Conditions in the GOM Prevailing winds, waves and curren ts along the Texas coast are from the southeast and northeast quadrants. Ten to 20 foot waves may occur dur ing hurricanes. The combined effect of the winds, surface currents, and waves refracting shoreward produce the prevailing westerly longshore currents.

Tides are semi-diurnal and diurna l, and range in height from le ss 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 expe cted during severe hurricanes a nd 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 wi nter the average is slightly less than 60° F and the range is between 35 and 80° F.

The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico hurricane seas on is officially from 1 June to 30 November. 97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The Atlant ic basin shows a very peaked season from August through October, with 78% of the tropical storm days, 87% of the minor (Saffir-Simpson Scale categories 1 and 2) hurricane days, and 96% of the major (Saffir-Simpson categories 3, 4 and 5) hurricane days occurri ng then. Maximum activity is in early to mid September. Once in a few years there may be a hurri cane occurring "out of season" - primarily in May or December. Globally, September is the mo st active month and May is the least active month.

### FIGURE 1 TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

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

Area/Block OCS-G Launch Area Land Segment and/or Resource Conditional Probability (%) within 30 days

Exploratory Drilling

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 1WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS(162miles from shore)32,663 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)API Gravity 40.8°FIGURE 2 – Equipment Response Time to AC 380, Well Location CDispersants/SurveillanceDispersant/SurveillanceDispersantCapacity (gal)StorageCapacityPersons Req.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel tositeTotal HrsCGABasler 67T2000 NA2Houma1 1 1.63.6ASIDC 31200 NA2Houma1 1 2.14.1DC 31200 NA2Houma1 1 2.14.1Aero CommanderNANA2Houma1 1 1.63.6Offshore ResponseOffshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAHOSS Barge43000 4000 3 Tugs 5Harvey7 0535 1 48Recovered Oil Storage NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsEnterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)CTCo 2603NA 25000 1 Tug 6Amelia4 12 4 32.5 1 53.5CTCo 2604NA 20000 1 Tug 6Amelia4 12 4 32.5 1 53.5CTCo 2605NA 20000 1 Tug 6Amelia4 12 4 32.5 1 53.5CTCo 2606NA 20000 1 Tug 6Amelia4 12 4 32.5 1 53.5Staging Area: GalvestonOffshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAFRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2015 1 19FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey 1 2 6.5 15 1 25.5FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2415 1 23FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2315 1 22FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 1 2715 1 26FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 1 2 5.25 15 1 24.3FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 1 2815 1 27Offshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGA42” Auto Boom (5000’)NA NA 10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2015 1 1942” Auto Boom (10000’) NA NA 20 Crew 40 Harvey 1 2 6.5 15 1 25.542” Auto Boom (2500’)NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2415 1 2342” Auto Boom (5000’)NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2315 1 2242” Auto Boom (2500’)NA NA 6 Crew 12 Pascagoula 1 2 7.5 15 1 26.5Hydro-Fire BoomNA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey (HFB) 1 4 6.5 15 6 32.5Nearshore ResponseNearshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsEnterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)CTCo 2607NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 124 31.25 1 52.25Staging Area: GalvestonNearshore and Inland SkimmersWith StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsCGASWS Egmopol3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 20205SWS Egmopol3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 1 2 5.252010.25SWS Marco3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 23208SWS Marco3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 1 272012SWS Marco3588 34 NA 3 Venice 1 282013Rope Mop77 2 0 3 Harvey 1 20205Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 23208Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Galveston 1 20208Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Harvey 1 26.520114 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 232084 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 1 26.520112 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118)240 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 23208Shoreline ProtectionStaging Area: GalvestonShoreline ProtectionBoomVOOPersonsReq.Storage/WarehouseLocationHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toGalvestonTravel toDeployment SiteHrs toDeployTotal HrsOMI Environmental (availablethrough Letter of Intent)10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10New Iberia, LA1 1 4.52311.510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10Houston, TX1 1 123810,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10Port Arthur, TX1 1 223920,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20Belle Chasse, LA1 1 6.52616.510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10Port Allen, LA1 1 5231210,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10Houma, LA1 1 5.752312.7515,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 6.52416.5Beach BoomEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsCGABeach Boom (2000’)NA NA NA 6 Galveston 1 20126Beach Boom (1000’)NA NA NA 4Ingleside 1 241210Beach Boom (2000’)NA NA NA 6 Pascagoula 1 27.51213.5Wildlife ResponseEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsCGAWildlife Support TrailerNA NA NA 2Houma1 261212Bird Scare Guns (24)NA NA NA 2 Belle Chasse 1 26.51212.5Bird Scare Guns (12)NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 20126Bird Scare Guns (24)NA NA NA 2Houma1 261212Bird Scare Guns (12)NA NA NA 2Ingleside 1 241210Bird Scare Guns (24)NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 23129Bird Scare Guns (24)NA NA NA 2 Pascagoula 1 27.51213.5Response AssetTotalOffshore EDRC81,259Offshore Recovered Oil Storage90,700Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC21,126Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 23,725Page 1 of 9 

# Statoil Response to NTL No. 2010-N06 Blowout Prevention and Intervention MeasuresStatoil 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 ........................................................................................................

.......................... 9Statoil 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 comm encement 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 ear ly 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 verifi ed 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 Com pany (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 oper ators 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 STIPULATIO NS 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 En vironments 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 i ssued 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 Pr otected 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 Hydrocar bons 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 Helicopte r 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 stat ute 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 Alam inos 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"MississippiCanyonAtwaterValleyGreen CanyonGarden BanksEast BreaksKeathley CanyonAlaminos CanyonWalker RidgeTexasMississippiLouisianaFOURCHONGALVESTONTexasCityVICINITY MAPBLOCK 380ALAMINOS CANYONGULF OF MEXICOATTACHMENT LFIGURE 10 25 50 75 10012.5MilesStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 24 Alaminos Canyon 380 Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

## ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

(a) General

Statoil proposes to utilize the fo llowing 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). A pplicants 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 M anagement 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 Hist oric Areas CHAPTER 9 Transportation CHAPTER 15 Emission of Air Pollutants CHAPTER 8Statoil 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 actionsStatoil Gulf of Mexico LLC 30 Alaminos Canyon 380 Initial EP Lease OCS-G32954 

## ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (EIA)

See EIA prepared by SWCA Environm ental 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, 2012Environmental 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 Wo rksheet 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 t he 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, H 2 S 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) Cate g ories and Exam p lesEnvironmental 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 (incl uding 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 BO EM 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 ve ssels 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 (incl uding 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-S ensitive Underwater Features and Areas” of the Gulf of Mexico. In addition to existing stipulated areas for biological features, this NTLEnvironmental 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 Zo ne” of any of the named topographic features (banks) or the 70 live-bottom (pinnacle trend) stipulated blocks. Following the completion of anyactivity 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, Stat oil USA E&P Inc. will follow the pr ocedures documented in their regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) recently submi tted 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 w hat 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 antic ipated 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 seafloorEnvironmental 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 jo ined 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 formEnvironmental 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 Sp ill 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 Pollut ion Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), specifically Statoil USA E&P Inc.’s gener al 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 Sp ill 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 BO EM 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 containmentEnvironmental 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 ve ssels 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, th is 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 du ring their lifetimes. Chronic or acute exposure may result in harassment, harm, or morta lity 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 detec ting 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 resu lt 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 BO EM 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 toEnvironmental Impact Analysis Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380 Statoil Gulf of Mexico LLC

SWCA Environmental Consultants September 2012 MWCC members which utilize dedicated Capture ve ssels 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 spi lls 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 haveEnvironmental 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 expos ure 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 BO EM 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 ve ssels 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 withinEnvironmental 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 PREHIS TORIC 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 Ess ential 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 ExpandedEnvironmental 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 bo obies are moderately susceptible and the trulypelagic 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 BO EM 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 ve ssels 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 equi valent 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 fo r 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 (OSR P) 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 jo ined 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 Alamin os 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 gr eatly 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 BO EM 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 ve ssels 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 BO EM 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-G 21, 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 Inte rim 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 gr eatly 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 BO EM 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 ve ssels 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 lo cated 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 Deteri oration (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 BO EM 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 containmentEnvironmental 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 ve ssels 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 a ffect 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 ex pected on the proposed activities from site-specific

environmental conditions.

(E) Alternatives

Only minor environmental impacts have been determi ned to exist for the proposed activities for Alaminos Canyon Area Block 380; therefore, no alte rnatives were considered for this project.

(F) Mitigation measures

With the exception of measures required by re gulation, no mitigation will be employed to avoid, diminish, or eliminate potential impacts to environmental resources.

(G) ConsultationEnvironmental 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 Se rvice Environmental Studies Program: A History of Biological Investigations in the Gulf of Mexi co. 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. Mo rgan-Jacobs and W.A. Hoffman. 1982. Marine Birds of the Southeastern United States and Gulf of Mexico. Part I: Gaviifor mes 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 an d 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. Jenn ings, L.A. Collum, W. Hoffman, and M.A. McGehee. 1983. Turtles, birds, and mammals in the northern Gulf of Mexico and nearb y Atlantic waters. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Wash ington D.C. FWS/OBS-82/65. 455 pages.

Fugro Geoservices, Inc. Report “Archaeological Asse ssment, 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 “G eologic 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. Te xas 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 Managemen t 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 Me xico. 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 nort h-central Gulf of Mexico. OCS St udy/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 dolphi n 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 Mexi co. Prepared by Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana. 65 pp.

U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Manag ement Service. Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sales: 2003-2007, Central Planning Area Sa les 185, 190, 194, 198, and 201; Western Planning Area Sales 187, 192, 196, and 200; Final Environment al 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 Mana gement 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 Mana gement 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 Mana gement 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 Descripti on (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 Info rmation, 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.