UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MEMORANDUM

To: Public Information (MS 5030)

Plans Section, Office of Field 

Operations (MS 5231)

Public Information copy of Exploration Plan

Control # - S-07638

Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan

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

OCS-G08797 Block - 85 Mississippi Canyon Area

Operator - Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

Wells A&B & Subsea Trees

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.

Ronald O'Connor

Plan Coordinator

Description -

Rig Type -

Subject:

From:

May 12, 2014
Record of Changes-PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY

S-7638, Supplemental EP, Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas LLC, OCS-G 08484/08797/10977 (Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84/85/129) 

Date Section Page Remarks

10/18/2013 All All Plan received by BOEM

1/23/2014 All All Company amended to Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G) and Operator number 

03280

1/23/2014 1 p. 1 Added FM O&G became Designated Operator of Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84. 85 & 129 

on November 29, 2014. 

1/23/2014 1 Attachment 1-A, p. 1 Company amended to Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Operator number 03280)

1/23/2014 8 pp. 18-19 Oil Spill Response Planning and Worst Case Scenario Determination amended to show FM 

O&G OSRP submitted with a certification statement on January 10, 2014 (Control number 

O-713)

1/23/2014 8 Attachment 8-A Company amended to Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC 

1/23/2014 14 Attachment 14-A CZM Consistency Certification company amended to Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC 

and date following merger

1/23/2014 15 Attachment 15-A Company amended to Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

1/23/2014 16 p.28 Bibliography amended to FM O&G Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (Control Number O713)

1/24/2014 Cover Letter Cover Letter Area/block reference amended.

2/12/2014 7 Attachment 7-A Daily fuel usage for 6 months period added. 

2/12/2014 8 pp. 18-19 Oil Spill Response Planning ans Worst Case Scenario Determination amended to include 

FM O&G OSRP submitted January 10, 2014, revised January 31, 2014, and approved on 

February 4, 2014. 

2/12/2014 8 p. 18 OSRO Information amended to include Marine Spill Response Corporation equipment. 

3/6/2014 1 Attachement 1-A, p. 1 Amended to correct area and blocks

3/6/2014 2 pp. 5-6 Oil Spill Financial Responsibility (OSFR) and Deepwater Well Control Statement amended 

Operator Number to 03280

3/6/2014 8 p. 18 Oil Spill Response Planning amended to include Operator Number 03280 and plan 

referred to as Supplemental EP

3/6/2014 8 p. 19 Worst Case Scenario Determination comparison table total volumes moved to total 

volumes row.

3/27/2014 8 p. 19 Worst Case Scenario Determination amended to refer to plan as EP. 

3/27/2014 4 p. 11 H2S Classification request amended to area of proposed activity. 

3/27/2014 10 p. 21 Protection of Archaeological Resources added. 
Record of Changes-PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY

S-7638, Supplemental EP, Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas LLC, OCS-G 08484/08797/10977 (Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84/85/129) 

3/27/2014 2 p. 5 Volume of synthetic -based drilling fluids amended to 10,000 bbls/well. 

3/27/2014 12 Attachment 12-A Volume of cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid amended to 300 bbbls/well. 

4/21/2014 8 p. 19 Reference to "DOCD" amended to "EP."
PUBLIC COPY

October 17, 2013

Amended April 21, 2014

SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

Lease Numbers: OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 10977

Area/Blocks: Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 / 129

Unit Number: 754396002

Prospect Name: King

Offshore: Alabama

Submitted by: Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Road, Suite 1100

Lafayette, LA 70508

Paul Landry

Office: (337) 354-5065

Mobile: (337) 349-7781

paul_landry@fmi.com

Estimated start-up date: January 21, 2015

Authorized Representative: No. Copies Being Submitted:

Jean Martin Proprietary: 1 Copy & CD

J. Connor Consulting, Inc. Public Info: 1 Copy & CD

16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700

Houston, Texas 77084 For BOEM:

(281) 578-3388 Plan No.

jean.martin@jccteam.com Assigned to:
TOC Pg 1 of 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

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

1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES....................................... 2

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS.............................................. 3

1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES ............................................................. 4

1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES .................................................................................... 4

1.7 COST RECOVERY FEE........................................................................................ 4

SECTION 2 GENERAL INFORMATION........................................................................ 5

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS ........................................................................... 5

2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS................................................................................................. 5

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY.................................................................... 5

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT........................................................................................ 5

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)............................................... 5

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT .................................................... 6

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS..... 6

SECTION 3 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION ........................... 10

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION............................................................................ 10

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAP........................................................................... 10

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINES......................................................................... 10

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS-SECTIONS ............................................. 10

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT ......................................................................... 10

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT................................................................ 10

3.7 HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES................................................................. 10

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN ............................................................................... 10

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLES......................................................................... 10

SECTION 4 HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION .................................................. 11
TOC Pg 2 of 3

4.1 CONCENTRATION.............................................................................................. 11

4.2 CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................................... 11

SECTION 5 BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION.... 12

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES ........................................................... 12

5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)............................................................... 12

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING).................................. 12

5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES)............................................ 12

5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) ......................................................................... 12

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP.............................. 12

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS....................................... 13

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND 

MARINE MAMMAL INFORMATION .......................................................................... 13

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT............................................................................ 15

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION .................................................... 15

5.11 SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION.................................................................. 15

SECTION 6 WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION ...................................... 16

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES................................................................ 16

6.2 MODELING REPORT.......................................................................................... 16

SECTION 7 AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION............................................................ 17

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS.......................... 17

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION................................................................................. 17

SECTION 8 OIL SPILLS INFORMATION.................................................................... 18

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING .................................................................... 18

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES................................................................................... 18

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION ........................................................................................ 18

8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION................................................... 18

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION ................................................................ 19

SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION................................ 20

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS.................................................................................... 20

9.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES........................................................................................... 20

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY ....................... 20
TOC Pg 3 of 3

SECTION 10 LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION.............................................. 21

10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA) ................................................................. 21

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES ..................................................................... 21

10.3 PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEOURCES ................................. 21

SECTION 11 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION........... 22

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS.......... 22

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES......................................................................................... 22

SECTION 12 SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION ...................... 23

12.1 GENERAL.......................................................................................................... 23

12.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS....................................................................... 23

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION ............................................................. 23

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION........................................... 23

12.5 VICINITY MAP................................................................................................... 24

SECTION 13 ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION ............................ 25

13.1 GENERAL.......................................................................................................... 25

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION ..................................... 25

13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE ................ 25

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL ........................................................................................... 25

SECTION 14 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION........ 26

SECTION 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS .............................................. 27

SECTION 16 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION....................................................... 28

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION.................................................... 28

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................ 28
Attachment Pg 1 of 1

SECTION ATTACHMENTS

Section 1 Plan Contents

1-A OCS Plan Information Form

1-B Well Location Plat

1-C Bathymetry Map

1-D Pay.gov Receipt

Section 3 Geological, Geophysical Information

3-D Shallow Hazard Assessment

Section 5 Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

5-A Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas Map

Section 6 Wastes and Discharges Information

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

Discharge to the GOM 

Section 7 Air Emissions Information

7-A Emissions Worksheets

Section 8 Oil Spill Information

8-A Oil Spill Response Discussion

Section 12 Support Vessels and Aircraft Information

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

12-B Vicinity Map

Section 14 Coastal Zone Management Act Information

14-A Coastal Zone Consistency Certification

Section 15 Environmental Impact Analysis

15-A Environmental Impact Analysis
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 1 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 1

PLAN CONTENTS

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION

In Initial EP (N-4208), the drilling of four (4) wells in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 127 

and 129 was approved on January 24, 1992. A Supplemental EP (S-3630) was 

approved on May 31, 1995 and included the drilling of one (1) well in Mississippi 

Canyon Block 84. Three exploratory wells have been drilled. Two were plugged and 

abandoned and one was completed and is producing. 

Mississippi Canyon Block 084 Unit (King) was amended on April 1, 2003 to include 

portions of Mississippi Canyon Block 84 (OCS-G 08484), Mississippi Canyon Block 85 

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

blocks have been placed on continuous production, are 100% owned by FM O&G

Offshore LLC (03263). On November 29, 2013, FM O&G (Operator Number 03280) 

became Designated Operator of Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 and 129.

Under this Supplemental EP, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G) proposes to 

drill and complete two (2) wells and install two subsea trees with surface locations in 

Mississippi Canyon Block 85 and bottom hole locations in Mississippi Canyon Block 84; 

all being in the Mississippi Canyon Block 084 Unit (King). The proposed activities will be 

conducted in approximately 5,370 feet of water, approximately 90 miles from the 

Alabama coastline and approximately 66 miles from the Louisiana coastline. The 

proposed wells will be drilled with a dynamically positioned drillship similar to the 

Transocean Deepwater Champion with a subsea BOP. On January 10, 2014, FM O&G 

submitted a Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) with a certification statement 

(Control Number O-713).

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

1.2 LOCATION

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

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

included as Attachment 1-B.

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

proposed well is included as Attachment 1-C. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 2 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

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

1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES

Safety of personnel and protection of the environment during the proposed operations is 

one of the primary concerns of FM O&G. FM O&G mandates regulatory compliance 

with the contractors and vendors associated with the proposed operations as follows:

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) mandates that the operations 

described in this Supplemental EP comply with well control, pollution prevention, 

construction, welding procedures, and training described in Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) regulations 30 CFR 250 C, D, E, O and S; and as 

further clarified by BSEE Notices to Lessees.

BSEE conducts periodic announced and unannounced onsite inspections of offshore 

facilities to confirm operators are complying with lease stipulations, operating regulatory 

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.

U.S. Coast Guard regulations contained in Title 33 CFR Part 144 mandate the 

appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc. be maintained on the facilities at all 

times.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations contained in the NPDES General 

Permit GMG290000 mandate that supervisory and certain designated personnel onboard the facility be familiar with the effluent limitations and guidelines for overboard 

discharges into the receiving waters.

FM O&G will drill these wells with a dynamically positioned drillship which is equipped 

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

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

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

blowout prevention equipment as described in BSEE regulations 30 CFR 250 C, D, E, O

and S; and as further clarified by BSEE Notices to Lessees, and current policy making 

invoked by the BSEE, Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Coast Guard. 

Appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc., will be maintained on the facility at all 

times.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 3 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

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

drains on drilling deck areas to collect all contaminants and debris. 

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS

All facility tanks with capacity of 25 barrels or more.

Type of

Storage 

Tank

Type 

of

Facility

Tank Capacity 

(bbls)

Number

of 

Tanks

Total Capacity 

(bbls)

Fluid 

Gravity

(API)

Fuel Oil DPDS 4,135.6 2 8,271.2 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 9,340.4 2 18,680.8 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 9,048.5 1 9,048.5 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 9,043.5 1 9,043.5 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 445.3 2 830.6 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 320.2 2 640.3 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 359.8 1 359.8 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 435.3 1 435.3 33 ̊

Fuel Oil DPDS 59.8 1 59.8 33 ̊

Base Oil DPDS 3,683.9 1 3,683.9 31 ̊

Base Oil DPDS 3,687.1 1 3,687.1 31 ̊

Lube Oil DPDS 429.6 1 429.6 22.3o

Waste Oil DPDS 132.1 1 132.1 20o

Waste Oil DPDS 44 1 44.0 20o

Waste Oil DPDS 143.4 1 143.4 20o
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 1 – Pg. 4 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

Waste Oil DPDS 1,366.2 1 1,366.2 6.5o

1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES

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

state.

1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES

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

detection measures beyond those required by 30 CFR 250.

1.7 COST RECOVERY FEE

A pay.gov receipt in the amount of $7346 to cover the cost recovery fee associated with 

this plan is included as Attachment 1-D.
U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

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

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

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

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

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

Description of Proposed Activities and Tentative Schedule (Mark all that apply)

Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days

Drill, complete, install subsea tree Well Location A 1/21/2015 4/27/2015 96 days

Drill, complete, install subsea tree Well Location B 4/28/2015 9/5/2015 130 days

Description of Drilling Rig Description of Structure

Jackup X Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform

Gorilla Jackup Platform rig Fixed platform Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Spar Guyed tower

DP Semisubmersible Other (Attach description) Floating production 

system Other (Attach description)

Drilling Rig Name (If known):

Description of Lease Term Pipelines

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

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

General Information

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

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

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

 Lafayette, LA 70508 Phone Number: (office) 337-354-5065 (mobile) 337-349-7781

E-Mail Address: paul_landry@fmi.com

If a service fee is required under 30 CFR 550.125(a), provide the Amount paid $7346 Receipt No. 74511125329

Project and Worst Case Discharge (WCD) Information

Lease(s): OCS-G 08484 Area: Mississippi Canyon Block(s) 84 Project Name (If Applicable): King

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

Platform / Well Name: MC 84 Location B Total Volume of WCD: 23,345,850 bbls API Gravity: 33.2o

Distance to Closest Land (Miles): ~66.0 miles Volume from uncontrolled blowout: 155,639 bbls

OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM

OMB Control Number: 1010-0151

OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14
OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED)

Include one copy of this page for each proposed well/structure

Proposed Well/Structure Location

Well or Structure Name/Number (If renaming well or 

structure, reference previous name): Location A Previously reviewed under an approved EP or DOCD? Yes X No

Is this an existing well or 

structure? Yes X No If this is an existing well or structure, list the Complex ID or API No.

Do you plan to use a subsea BOP or a surface BOP on a floating facility to conduct your proposed activities? X Yes No

WCD Info For wells, volume of uncontrolled 

blowout (Bbls/Day): 155,639 bbls

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 33.2o

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

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 08797 OCS-G 08484 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon

Block No. Block 85 Block 84

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 5,474.00’ FNL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 462.00’ FWL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,331,022.00’ X:

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,496,446.00’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28o 55’ 11.719” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 58’ 02.725” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,160’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

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

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

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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

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

Include one copy of this page for each proposed well/structure

Proposed Well/Structure Location

Well or Structure Name/Number (If renaming well or 

structure, reference previous name): Location B Previously reviewed under an approved EP or DOCD? Yes X No

Is this an existing well or 

structure? Yes X No If this is an existing well or structure, list the Complex ID or API No. Is this an existing well or structure?

Do you plan to use a subsea BOP or a surface BOP on a floating facility to conduct your proposed activities? X Yes No

WCD Info For wells, volume of uncontrolled 

blowout (Bbls/Day): 155,639 bbls

For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines 

(Bbls): NA API Gravity of fluid 33.2o

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

separate lines)

Lease No. OCS-G 08797 OCS-G 08484 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon Mississippi Canyon

Block No. Block 85 Block 84

Blockline 

Departures 

(in feet)

N/S Departure 5,874.00’ FNL N/S Departure 

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 862.00’ FWL E/W Departure 

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y 

coordinates

X: 1,331,422.00’ X:

X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,496,046.00’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/

Longitude

Latitude 28 o 55’ 07.791” N Latitude 

Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 87 o 57’ 58.183” W Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 5,175’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

MD (Feet):

TVD (Feet): 

TVD (Feet): 

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

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

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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

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

MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Sep. 24, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Bathymetric information based on seafloor horizon pick from 3D

data set

Contour interval = 25 feet

Zero datum = Sea level

Applied acoustic velocity using Advocate and Hood (1993)

COLOR SHADED BATHYMETRY MAP

Color shaded image

6XQD]LPXWK 

6XQHOHYDWLRQ 
MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

GRADIENT

Gradient is the first order derivative of the multibeam data.

Bin size = 20 meters (65.62 feet)

SLOPE IN DEGREES  19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Sep. 24, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Seafloor surface location of well

SEAFLOOR GRADIENT MAP
MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH 17500 17000 16500 16000 15500 15000 14500 14000 13500 13000 12500 12000 11500 11000 10500 10000 9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 - 500 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000 

SEAFLOOR AMPLITUDE

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Sep. 24, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET SEAFLOOR AMPLITUDE MAP
MC84

MC85

-3140'

-633'

-567' OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

-4400'

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Sep. 24, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Fault scarp with seafloor displacement (Hachures on downthrown side)

Amplitude anomaly within Unit B (2.102 to 2.652 sec/BSL)

15-1,080 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Ridge

Subsurface fault with depth of burial (Hachures on downthrown side) -750'

NOTE: All pipelines shown are from public information obtained from the Bureau of Ocean Energy

Management (BOEM).
Your payment has been submitted to Pay.gov and the details are below. If you have any 

questions or you wish to cancel this payment, please contact Wendy Yanez at (504) 

736-2818.

Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF Pay.gov Tracking ID: 25CJB2QF 

Agency Tracking ID: 74511125329 Transaction Type: Sale Transaction Date: Oct 1, 

2013 11:52:47 AM

Account Holder Name: Paul Landry

Transaction Amount: $7,346.00

Billing Address: 700 Milam, Suite 3100

City: Houston

State/Province: TX

Zip/Postal Code: 77002

Country: USA

Card Type: MasterCard

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

Region: Gulf of Mexico

Contact: Paul Landry 337-354-5065

Company Name/No: Plains Exploration Production Company, 02702 Lease Number(s): 

08484, 08797, , ,

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

Locations: 2

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 5 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 2

GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS

Listed in the table below are the additional applications to be filed covering operations 

proposed under this EP. 

Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status

Application for Permit to 

Drill

BSEE To Be Submitted

Application for Permit to 

Modify

BSEE To Be Submitted

2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS 

The following table provides information on the types and estimated amounts of the 

drilling fluids that FM O&G plans to use to drill the proposed wells. 

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be 

Used per Well

Water-based 50,000 bbls/well

Oil-based (diesel, minerals) 0 bbls/well

Synthetic-based 10,000 bbls/well

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY

PROPRIETARY

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT

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

by an areawide bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR 256 Subpart I; 

NTL No. 2000-G16, "Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds;" and a current 

BOEM-approved deferment from providing additional security under 30 CFR 256.53 and 

National NTL 2008-N07, “Supplemental Bond Procedures.” If, at any point, FM O&G no 

longer qualifies for a supplemental bonding deferment, FM O&G will either provide the 

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

disqualification.

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC, BOEM Company number 03280, will demonstrate 

oil spill financial responsibility for the facilities proposed in this EP according to 30 CFR 

Part 553; andNTL 2008-N05, "Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for 

Covered Facilities" prior to conducting operations covered in this EP. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 6 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT 

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC, Operator number 03280, has the financial capability 

to drill a relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations.

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS

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

string during drilling operations on Mississippi Canyon Block 84 Well Location B.

Estimated Initial Flow Rate (bbls/day): 155,639 bbls/day

Maximum Duration of Potential Blowout (Days): 150 days

Total Volume (bbls) (Flow Rate X Duration): 23,345,850 bbls

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

by the wells in this EP are expected to be slightly consolidated, Freeport-McMoRan Oil 

& Gas LLC (FM O&G) does NOT assume that the proposed well would bridge over in a 

blowout scenario. The basis for this assumption comes from work done in association 

with Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Paper #163438 on the analysis of potential 

bridging scenarios during blowout events in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. FM O&G

agrees with the conclusions of this SPE paper that the only instances in which a 

deepwater well could potentially bridge over is a complete loss of the marine riser 

hydrostatic column resulting in a sharp pressure reduction downhole leading to wellbore 

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

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

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

Case Discharge calculations will be based upon a well blowing out unimpeded until a 

relief well can be completed.

Discussion of likelihood for surface intervention to stop blowout: Well Location 

“B” will be drilled in the Mississippi Canyon (GC) Blocks 84 and 85 as a subsea well in 

approximately 5,175’ of water with the wellhead and BOP equipment located on the 

seabed. Surface intervention would be the preferred method of intervention pending an 

uncontrolled blowout, however the technique used would be contingent upon the 

condition of the rig, marine riser system and BOP equipment. Surface intervention is a 

quicker solution than drilling a relief well, but actual methodology of controlling the 

blowout would have to be determined pending an analysis of the site‐specific conditions 

at the location. 

Prior to any surface intervention operations a team of specialists would be mobilized 

immediately to assess the situation and determine a corrective course of action to 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 7 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

control the blowout. Well control specialists would perform either a fly‐by via helicopter 

and/or surface vessel to assess conditions at the site. FM O&G has Master Service

Agreements with both Wild Well Control (a Superior Energy Services company) and 

Boots and Coots (a Halliburton company). Additionally an ROV capable of manipulating 

the rig’s BOP hot‐stab functions would be mobilized to location and, if appropriate, an 

attempt would be made to shut in the well by closing the blind shear rams if not done 

previously. These actions would take place within 24 ‐ 48 hours of the incident. Initial 

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

control team would analyze the blowout situation, devise an intervention strategy and 

mobilize additional service company specialists, supplies and equipment. FM O&G

would establish a field support base and secondary command center in the company 

owned shore base facility in Port Fourchon, LA. Communication would simultaneously 

be established with the support base and command center.

Relief Well

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

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

necessary, there are deepwater rigs rated and equipped to drill in water depth of 5,000' 

or greater actively working in the Gulf of Mexico. Since all rigs proposed for drilling a 

relief well are dynamically positioned Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs), the time 

necessary to mobilize the rig to location is minimal. The time required to drill the relief 

well is dependent on many factors, chief among them is the required depth of the relief 

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

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

drill an example well to potential target depth (PTD) is 150 days. The probable 

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

compared to the blown‐out well. The time required to drill this extra distance is 

anticipated to be more than offset by the better understanding of the optimum drilling 

parameters learned while drilling the blown‐out well. In order to intersect the blowout 

well, numerous ranging runs will be required which will add approximately three weeks 

to the drilling program. The steps and time required to accomplish the dynamic kill are 

also dependent on the particular circumstances of the blown‐out well. 

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

than 10 drilling rigs currently working or slated to begin work in the Gulf of Mexico that 

are capable of drilling a relief well at these locations.

Rig package constraints: The rig chosen to drill the relief well must:
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 8 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

• Be rated and equipped to work in water depths of greater than 5,000’ due to 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 deepwater location.

• Dynamically‐positioned to eliminate anchoring issues caused by potential subsea 

debris.

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

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

Activity Duration (days)

Assess the situation and obtain the optimum MODU 5

Secure the well at current location of MODU 14

Mobilization time to relief well location 3

Drill relief well 100

Wellbore intersection (of blown out well) 21

Dynamic kill operations 7

Total Anticipated Time 150

Statement whether possibility of using nearby platform was considered: There 

are no facilities within the area of MC 84 and 85; therefore, no relief well can be drilled 

from a nearby platform.

Other

Measures to enhance ability to prevent a blowout: 

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

maintained and are capable of operating in the anticipated conditions required for 

operations.

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

testing and operation of the diverter system and diverter outlets. 

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

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

stability of the wellbore and to determine whether sufficient mud weights are 

being utilized.

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

areas in order to properly assess the current wellbore conditions.

Measures to reduce the likelihood of a blowout: 

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

additional barrier for well safety.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2 – Pg. 9 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

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

mud system’s ability to prevent lost circulation. Sweeps and concentrated pills 

will be used to prevent uncontrolled mud losses.

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

a mud weight schedule that will allow for safe drilling margin without putting 

excess hydrostatics pressures on known zones previously encountered.

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

content of mud returns, formation characteristics and abnormalities of cuttings 

and to estimate paleo aging of cuttings.

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

evaluate formations, formation pressures and fluid content in the critical sections 

of the well.

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

departments.

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

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

and has full access to a subsea capping stack and a complete suite of oil recovery 

equipment as required. This subsea capping stack has been deployed successfully to a 

well location with cooperation from BSEE.

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

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

Halliburton company) who would assist in detailed relief well planning including the 

identification of required equipment and services. 

Any other measures: No
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 3 – Pg. 10 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 3

GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

PROPRIETARY

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAP

PROPRIETARY

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINES

PROPRIETARY

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS-SECTIONS

PROPRIETARY

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT

A shallow hazards survey was conducted over Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85.

In accordance with NTL 2008-G05, “Shallow Hazards Program” (Extended by NTL 

BOEM 2013-G02, “Extension of Prior Notices for Lessees”), a shallow hazards survey 

evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions 

that may adversely affect drilling operations, was conducted by C&C Technologies. The 

shallow hazards report is provided with this plan.

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT 

In accordance with NTL 2008-G05, “Shallow Hazards Program” (Extended by NTL 

BOEM 2013-G02, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”), a 3-D seismic shallow 

hazards assessment has been prepared for each proposed surface locations, 

evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions 

that may adversely affect drilling operations. The shallow hazards assessments are 

included at Attachment 3-D.

3.7 HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES

PROPRIETARY

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

PROPRIETARY

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLES

PROPRIETARY
Project No. 130295

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

October 3, 2013

Plains Exploration & Production Co. 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “A”

Block 85 (OCS-G-08797)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

Plains Exploration & Production Co. (PXP) contracted C & C Technologies, Inc. (C&C) to 

prepare a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “A” location in Block 85 (OCS-G08797), Mississippi Canyon (MC) Area. The data used for the site clearance letter is based on 

the interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by PXP. C&C 

completed the geohazard assessments titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, 

Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area” in July 2013. This site clearance letter is based 

on the findings provided within that report. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

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

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

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

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

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

The processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

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

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

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

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

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)
Project No. 130295

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

WELL LOCATION

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

Table 1. Proposed MC85 Well “A”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 85,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“A” 1,331,022.00 10,496,446.00 28 55’ 11.719” N 87 58’ 02.725” W 462’ FWL 5,474’ FNL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is proposed for the proposed Well “A”.

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

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

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

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

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study maps (Sheets 

1 through 4). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

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

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

continental slope offshore Louisiana. MC85 is situated on the northern most portion of the

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

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

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

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

deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated hemipelagic clays. The 

expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of rapidly accumulated, 

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

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “A” surface location is 5,160 feet below sea level (BSL). 

Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “A” location, the seafloor depth 

ranges from 5,101 feet in the northwest to 5,227 feet in the east (Sheet 1, Color Shaded 

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

well location (Figure 2). The seafloor at the proposed well site slopes southeast at a gradient of 

1.7° (Sheet 2, Seafloor Gradient Map).

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheet 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range of low to 

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

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

clay.

There were no other potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well location or within 

the 2,000-foot radius area.
Project No. 130295

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

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

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

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

mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 3).

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 25 miles 

north of the proposed Well “A” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows eight (8) pipelines and two (2) wells

occur within 2,000 feet of the proposed well. Table 2 lists the existing infrastructure near the 

well.

Table 2. Existing infrastructure near proposed Well “A”

Wells

Name Block(s)

OCS-G-08484 Well No. 1 MC84

OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-2 MC85

Pipelines

Name Block(s)

S-13884 PXP 2” Umbilical MC84, 85

S-13388 PXP 4” Umbilical MC84, 85

S-13386 PXP 8”

S-13387 PXP 12” (Casing) MC84, 85

S-16085 PXP 6” (Umbilical) MC85

S-16086 PXP 5” (Umbilical) MC85

S-13385 PXP 12” MC85

S-13384 PXP 8” MC85

S-16166 BP 6”

S-16167 BP 10” (Casing) MC85

 

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

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

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

successive units.

Three (3) buried faults were mapped in the study area (Sheet 4, Figure 4). These buried faults

are located further than 400 feet southwest of the proposed well location, trend northwest to 

southeast, and are buried greater than 600 feet. 

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

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

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

below the seafloor:
Project No. 130295

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

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

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

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

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

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 221 feet thick at the proposed Well “A” location. These 

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

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

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

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

possible sand sheet. The unit is 363 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

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

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

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

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

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

chaotic reflectors and is 343 feet thick at the proposed Well “A” location. Unit C is interpreted 

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

impedance.

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

chaotic reflectors and is 1,251 feet thick at the proposed Well “A” location. These reflection 

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

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

three located in close proximity to the proposed well location. The coarser-grained channel fills 

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

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

chaotic reflectors and is 1,273 feet thick at the proposed Well “A” location. The sediments in 

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

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

chaotic reflectors and is 1,348 feet thick at the proposed Well “A” location. The sediments 

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

channel fills.

SHALLOW GAS

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

areas of fluid/gas saturation usually associated with porous sands. Shallow gas is interpreted 

with amplitude levels and the gas risk is assessed as being at one of four levels. These are:
Project No. 130295

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

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

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

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

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

and phase reversal.

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

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

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

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

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

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

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

within Unit D, with an isolated high risk of gas located within Unit D at approximately 1,420 

feet BML. The well is located X feet from the amplitude anomaly. 

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 50

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

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

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

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

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

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

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “A” location suggests that medium to 

high amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within Units B and D exhibit a moderate risk 

of SWF. Units C, E, and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a negligible risk of 

SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be executed for any 

drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 
Project No. 130295

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “A” surface location is 5,160 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes 1.7° to the southeast.

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

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

proposed Well “A” surface location. 

Eight (8) pipelines and two (2) wells exist within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “A” location.

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

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

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

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

Unit D (927–2,178 feet BML). Additionally, a high risk of gas was identified at approximately 

1,420 feet BML. Moving the well to the northwest would avoid the amplitude anomaly. Units 

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

negligible risk of gas. 

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

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist

ENCLOSURES

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

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

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7650 through the proposed Well “A”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6495 through the proposed Well “A”.

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

Sheet 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry Map

Sheet 2. Seafloor Gradient Map

Sheet 3. Seafloor Amplitude Map

Sheet 4. Seafloor and Shallow Subsurface Hazards Map
Project No. 130295

1

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

October 3, 2013

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas 

400 E. Kaliste Saloom Rd.

Lafayette, La, 70508

Attn: Mr. Brian Brennan

Site Clearance Letter

Proposed Well “B”

Block 85 (OCS-G-08797)

Mississippi Canyon Area

Dear Mr. Brennan,

INTRODUCTION

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

a wellsite clearance letter for the proposed Well “B” location in Block 85 (OCS-G-08797), 

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

interpretation of an exploration-quality 3D seismic volume provided by FMOG. C&C 

completed the geohazard assessment titled “3D Seismic Shallow Hazard Report, King Field, 

Block 84, 85, and 128, Mississippi Canyon Area” in July 2013. This site clearance letter is based 

on the findings provided within that report. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Deepwater Benthic Communities). 

METHODS

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

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

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

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

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

processed output sample interval is 2 milliseconds.

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

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

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

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

stratigraphic horizons, etc.)
Project No. 130295

2

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

WELL LOCATION

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

Table 1. Proposed MC85 Well “B”

Well Easting 

(feet)

Northing 

(feet)

Latitude Longitude Calls From Block 85,

Mississippi Canyon Area

“B” 1,331,422.00 10,496,046.00 28 55’ 07.791” N 87 57’ 58.183” W 862’ FWL 5,874’ FNL

A 2,000-foot clearance radius is proposed for the proposed Well “B”.

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

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

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

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

coordinates given are presented in this projection within this letter and on the study maps (Sheets 

1 through 4). All grid units, as well as scales and measurements are in U.S. survey feet. 

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

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

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

continental slope offshore Louisiana. MC85 is situated on the northern most portion of the

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

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

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

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

deposited during high sea level stands and consist of slowly accumulated hemipelagic clays. The 

expanded sections are formed during low sea level stands and consist of rapidly accumulated, 

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

BATHYMETRY AND SEAFLOOR GRADIENTS

The water depth at the proposed Well “B” surface location is 5,165 feet below sea level (BSL). 

Within the 2,000-foot radius area centered at the proposed Well “B” location, the seafloor depth 

ranges from 5,120 feet in the northwest to 5,251 feet in the east (Sheet 1, Color Shaded 

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

well location (Figure 2). The seafloor at the proposed well site slopes southeast at a gradient of 

1.7° (Sheet 2, Seafloor Gradient Map).

SEAFLOOR HAZARDS

The 3D seafloor amplitude image (Sheets 3, Seafloor Amplitude Map) displays a range of low to 

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

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

clay.

There were no other potential seafloor hazards identified at the proposed well location or within 

the 2,000-foot radius area.
Project No. 130295

3

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

POTENTIAL DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

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

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

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

mounded carbonates representing potential benthic communities (Sheet 3).

The nearest reported benthic community is located in Block 826, Viosca Knoll Area, 25 miles 

north of the proposed Well “B” location according to the BOEM/BSEE (NTL No. 2009-G40).

MAN-MADE HAZARDS

A review of company and BOEM/BSEE databases shows that eight (8) pipelines and two (2) 

wells occur within 2,000 feet of the proposed well. Table 2 lists the existing infrastructure near 

the well.

Table 2. Existing infrastructure near proposed Well “B”

Wells

Name Block(s)

OCS-G-08484 Well No. 1 MC84

OCS-G-08797 Well No. SS-2 MC85

Pipelines

Name Block(s)

S-13884 PXP 2” Umbilical MC84, 85

S-13388 PXP 4” Umbilical MC84, 85

S-13386 PXP 8”

S-13387 PXP 12” (Casing) MC84, 85

S-16085 PXP 6” (Umbilical) MC85

S-16086 PXP 5” (Umbilical) MC85

S-13385 PXP 12” MC85

S-13384 PXP 8” MC85

S-16166 BP 6”

S-16167 BP 10” (Casing) MC85

 

SUBSURFACE GEOHAZARDS AND STRATIGRAPHY

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

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

successive units.

Three (3) buried faults were mapped in the study area (Sheet 4, Figure 4). These buried faults

are located further than 500 feet southwest of the proposed well location, trend northwest to 

southeast, and are buried greater than 600 feet. 

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

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

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

below the seafloor:
Project No. 130295

4

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

D = 312.76T

2

 + 1,651.4T

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

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

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

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

parallel, continuous reflectors that are 218 feet thick at the proposed Well “B” location. These 

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

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

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

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

possible sand sheet. The unit is 382 feet thick at the proposed well location. The reflection 

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

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

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

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

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

chaotic reflectors and is 322 feet thick at the proposed Well “B” location. Unit C is interpreted 

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

impedance.

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

chaotic reflectors and is 1,269 feet thick at the proposed Well “B” location. These reflection 

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

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

three located in close proximity to the proposed well location. The coarser-grained channel fills 

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

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

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

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

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

chaotic reflectors and is 1,357 feet thick at the proposed Well “B” location. The sediments 

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

channel fills.

SHALLOW GAS

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

areas of fluid/gas saturation usually associated with porous sands. Shallow gas is interpreted 

with amplitude levels and the gas risk is assessed as being at one of four levels. These are:
Project No. 130295

5

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

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

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

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

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

and phase reversal.

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

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

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

Stratigraphic and structural settings may also be taken into account.

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

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

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

within Unit D, with an isolated high risk of gas located within Unit D at approximately 1,420 

feet BML. 

SHALLOW WATER FLOW

The nearest reported shallow water flow (SWF), according to the BOEM/BSEE, is located 50

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

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

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

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

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

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

The assessment of seismic profiles at the proposed Well “B” location suggests medium to high 

amplitude, potentially sand-prone sequences within Units B and D exhibit a moderate risk of 

SWF. Units C, E, and F exhibit a low risk of SWF, while Unit A exhibits a negligible risk of 

SWF. Due to the unpredictable nature of SWF it is advised that caution be executed for any 

drilling operations through these sediments.

GAS HYDRATES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

obvious BSRs at the drill center. 
Project No. 130295

6

730 E. KALISTE SALOOM ROAD, LAFAYETTE, LA 70508

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

interfere with drilling activities. 

The water depth at the proposed Well “B” surface location is 5,165 feet with a seafloor which 

slopes 1.7° to the southeast.

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

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

proposed Well “B” surface location. 

Eight (8) pipelines and two (2) wells exist within 2,000 feet of the proposed Well “B” location.

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

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

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

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

Unit D (922–2,191 feet BML). Additionally, a high risk of gas was identified at approximately 

1,420 feet BML. Units B, C, E, and F are assessed as having a low risk of gas, while Unit A is 

assessed as having a negligible risk of gas. 

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

concerning this assessment.

Sincerely,

___________________________

Christopher Baker

Marine Geologist

ENCLOSURES

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

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

Figure 3. 3D seismic Inline 7650 through the proposed Well “B”.

Figure 4. 3D seismic Crossline 6482 through the proposed Well “B”.

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

Sheet 1. Color Shaded Bathymetry Map

Sheet 2. Seafloor Gradient Map

Sheet 3. Seafloor Amplitude Map

Sheet 4. Seafloor and Shallow Subsurface Hazards Map
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 4 – Pg. 11 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 4

HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

4.1 CONCENTRATION

FM O&G does not anticipate encountering any H2S during the proposed operations.

4.2 CLASSIFICATION

In accordance with Title 30 CFR 550.215, FM O&G requests that the area of proposed 

activities be classified by the BOEM as H2S absent.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 12 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 5

BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES 

The seafloor disturbing activities proposed in this plan are in water depths greater than 

300 meters (984’). C&C Technologies Survey Services was contracted to provide an 

assessment of the shallow conditions at the proposed surface locations. The purpose 

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

drilling operations within 2,000 feet of the proposed well sites. FM O&G will avoid all 

high-density deepwater benthic communities by 2,000 feet from each proposed mud 

and cuttings discharge location and 250 feet from the location of all other seafloor 

disturbances. As per NTL 2009-G40, “Deepwater Benthic Communities,” a map 

showing the 2,000 foot radius around the well site is included as Attachment 5-A.

5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)

Activities proposed in this EP do not fall within 305 meters (1000 feet) of a topographic 

“no activity zone;” therefore, no map is required per NTL 2009-G39, “Biologically 

Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING)

All activities proposed under this EP will be conducted outside all Topographic Feature 

Protective Zones; therefore shunting of drill cuttings and drilling fluids is not required per 

NTL 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES)

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 are not located within 61 meters (200 feet) of any 

pinnacle trend feature; therefore, a separate bathymetric map is not required per NTL 

2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) 

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 are not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of any 

pinnacle trend feature with vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live 

bottom (low relief) maps are not required per NTL 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive 

Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 are not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of 

potentially sensitive biological features; therefore, biologically sensitive area maps are 

not required.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 13 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS 

BOEM has determined there is enough data gathered in Grid Area 16; therefore, FM 

O&G will not be conducting any ROV surveys either pre-spud or post-drill operations

per NTL No. 2008-G06, “Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys in Deepwater” (Extended 

by NTL BOEM 2013-G02, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”).

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND

MARINE MAMMAL INFORMATION

Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) all federal agencies must ensure 

that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of a listed species, or destroy or adversely modify its designated 

critical habitat.

In accordance with 30 CFR 550, Subpart B, and further outlined in NTL 2008-G04,

“Information requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations 

Coordination Documents” (Extended by NTL BOEM 2013-G02, “Extension of Prior 

Notices to Lessees”), and NTL 2012-JOINT-G01,”Vessel Strike Avoidance and 

Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting,” lessees/operators are required to address 

site-specific information on the presence of federally listed threatened or endangered 

species and critical habitat designated under the ESA and marine mammals protected 

under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in the area of proposed activities 

under this plan.

There are five (5) species of sea turtles that may be found in the Gulf of Mexico (see 

table below). NOAA fisheries currently list all five of these turtles as endangered (E) or 

threatened (T).

Species Scientific Name Status Potential 

Presence

Critical 

Habitat 

Designated in 

the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area

Coastal

Sea Turtles

Loggerhead Carettsa caretta T x x None

Green Chelonia mydas T,E x x None

Leatherback Dermochelys coriacea E x x None

Hawksbill Eretmochelys 

imbricata

E x x None

Kemp’s 

Ridley 

Lepidochelys kempli E x x None
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 14 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

In addition, there are 28 species of marine mammals that may be found in the Gulf of 

Mexico. The table provided below identifies the seven (7) species of marine mammals 

that are listed as endangered or threatened. Currently, there are no designated critical 

habitats for the listed species in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf; however, it 

is possible that one or more of these species could be seen in the area during 

operations.

Species Scientific Name Status Potential 

Presence

Critical 

Habitat 

Designated in 

the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area

Coastal

Marine Mammals

Sperm 

Whale

Physeter 

macrocephalus

E x -- None

West Indian 

Manatee

Trichechus manatus 

latirostris

E -- x Florida 

(Peninsular)

Blue Whale Balaenoptera 

masculus

E x -- None

Fin Whale Balaenoptera 

physalus

E x -- None

Humpback 

Whale

Megaptera 

novaeangliae

E x -- None

North

Atlantic 

Right Whale

Eubalaena glacialis E x -- None

Sei Whale Balaenopiera borealis E x -- None

There is one (1) species of fish that NOAA fisheries currently list as threatened (T) that 

may be found in the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf sturgeon, also known as the Gulf of 

Mexico sturgeon, is an anadromous (breeding in freshwater after migrating up rivers

from marine and estuarine environments) fish overwintering in estuaries, bays, and the 

Gulf of Mexico (see table below). 

Species Scientific Name Status Potential 

Presence

Critical 

Habitat 

Designated 

in the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area Coastal
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5 – Pg. 15 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

Fish

Gulf Sturgeon Acipenser 

oxyrinchus 

(=oxyrhynchus) 

desotoi

T X X None

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT

Mississippi Canyon Block 84 has been determined to be located in an area where 

historic shipwrecks may exist. In accordance with NTL 2005-G07 “Archaeological 

Surveys and Reports,” and NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease 

Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports,” an Archaeological 

Survey Report is provided with this plan.

The proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 85 will be conducted from 

previously approved surface locations as provided for in the Supplemental Exploration 

Plan approved on September 24, 2009 (Control No. S-7147); therefore, in accordance 

with NTL 2005-G07, “Archaeological Surveys and Reports,” and NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, 

“Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys 

and Reports,” an archaeological survey report is not provided.

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION

Air and water quality information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL 

2008-G04, “Information Requirements for Exploration Plans and Development 

Operations Coordination Documents.”

5.11 SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

Socioeconomic Information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL 2008-

G04, “Information Requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations 

Coordination Documents.”
MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Oct. 3, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Bathymetric information based on seafloor horizon pick from 3D

data set

Contour interval = 25 feet

Zero datum = Sea level

Applied acoustic velocity using Advocate and Hood (1993)

COLOR SHADED BATHYMETRY MAP

Color shaded image

6XQD]LPXWK 

6XQHOHYDWLRQ 
MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

GRADIENT

Gradient is the first order derivative of the multibeam data.

Bin size = 20 meters (65.62 feet)

SLOPE IN DEGREES  19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Oct. 3, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Seafloor surface location of well

SEAFLOOR GRADIENT MAP
MC84

MC85

OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH 17500 17000 16500 16000 15500 15000 14500 14000 13500 13000 12500 12000 11500 11000 10500 10000 9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 - 500 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000 

SEAFLOOR AMPLITUDE

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Oct. 3, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET SEAFLOOR AMPLITUDE MAP
MC84

MC85

-3140'

-633'

-567' OCS-G-08797

Well No. SS-2

OCS-G-08484

Well No. 1

OCS-G-08484

PXP

OCS-G-08797

PXP

-4400'

X= 1,331,022.00'

Y= 10,496,446.00'


1


:

X= 1,331,422.00'

Y= 10,496,046.00'


1


:

UTM16N

GRID NORTH S-13384 PXP 8" S-13385 PXP 12"

S-13884 PXP 2" (Umbilical) S-13388 PXP 4" (Umbilical)

S-14090 BP 10" (Casing) S-14089 BP 6"

S-14091 BP 4" (Umbilical)

S-13386 PXP 8" S-13387 PXP 12" (Casing)

S-16086 PXP 5" (Umbilical)

PROPOSED WELL LOCATIONS A and B

JOB No: REVISED: DATE:

FILENAME:

130295 Oct. 3, 2013

1,000' 0 1,000' SCALE IN US SURVEY FEET

Fault scarp with seafloor displacement (Hachures on downthrown side)

Amplitude anomaly within Unit B (2.102 to 2.652 sec/BSL)

15-1,080 feet BML

Amplitude anomaly within Unit D (2.329 to 3.152 sec/BSL)

539-2,934 feet BML

Ridge

Subsurface fault with depth of burial (Hachures on downthrown side) -750'

NOTE: All pipelines shown are from public information obtained from the Bureau of Ocean Energy

Management (BOEM).
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 6 – Pg. 16 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 6

WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES

“Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to the Gulf of 

Mexico” is included as Attachment 6-A.

6.2 MODELING REPORT 

Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan. 
N/A

Rejected water from the watermaker. 143,450 BBLS/WELL 1,510 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Potable Water with

4% Stack-Magic ECO-Fv2 95 BBLS/WELL 1 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharge at the seafloor or with deck drainage when testedat surface No

Uncontaminated seawater used to 

maintainproper draft 57,550 BBLS/WELL 11,510 BBLS/DAY/WELL

Sea Water with no additional chemicals 3,040 BBLS/WELL 32 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

Cement Slurry 695 BBLS/WELL 347.5 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharge at seafloor during riserless operations. Dicharge rate based 

upon 2 days (28" & 22" cement returns) No

Hull discharge overboard. Based upon 5 major ballast operations, with 

rig at operating draft minimal ballast change is required No

Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit? GMG290534

Well treatment fluids

Well completion fluids

Workover fluids

Desalinization unit discharge

Blowout prevent fluid

Ballast water

Bilge water

Excess cement at seafloor

Fire water 

Cooling water Sea Water with no additional chemicals 56,273,200 BBLS/WELL 592,349 BBLS/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A No

Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste

 15,010 BBLS/WELL 158 BBLS/DAY/WELL USCG approved MSD with chlorination

Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Cuttings coated with synthetic drilling fluids,

i l di d ill d t t

 2,841 BBLS/WELL 130 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharged to surface. Treated cutting will be discharged

b d d i d illi f th SBM i t l Di h t i b d 

No

Domestic waste

Sanitary No

Gray water from living quarters 32,870 BBLS/ WELL 346 BBLS/DAY/WELL Chlorinate and discharge overboard No

Sanitary waste from living quarters, control 

rooms and change rooms.

Will you conduct well treatment, completion, or workover?

Micellaneous discharges. If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity.

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

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage

Deck Drainage Deck drainage from drilling floor 475 BBLS/WELL 5 BBLS/DAY/WELL No drillfloor drainage routed to sea. All retained on board and 

processed to <15ppm or sent to shore for disposal No

N/A

N/A

ATTACHMENT 6-A WASTES YOU WILL GENERATE, TREAT AND DOWNHOLE DISPOSE OR DISCHARGE TO THE GOM

Projected

Projected generated waste Projected ocean discharges Downhole Disposal

Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge Rate Discharge Method

Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings coated while drilling with WBM 2,197 BBLS/WELL 366 BBLS/DAY/WELL Discharged to mudline prior to riser installation. Based on 6 total days 

of drilling with WBM. No

Answer yes or no

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

Water-based drilling fluid Water, NaCI (salt), PHPA polymer and Barium

Sulfate (Barite) 50,000 BBLS/WELL 5,833 BBLS/DAY/WELL

Discharge at the mudline prior to the riser installation.

Nominal amount of unused fluid may be discharged at the

surface. Based on 8 days of drilling with WBM.

No
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 7 – Pg. 17 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 7

AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS

Screen Procedures for EP’s Yes No

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

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

calculated using the following formulas: CT = 3400D2/3 for CO, and CT = 

33.3D for the other air pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles)?

X

Do your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures 

or modified emission factors?

X

Are your proposed exploration activities located east of 87.5° W 

longitude?

X

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

per million (ppm)?

X

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

hours from any proposed well?

X

Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liquids? X

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION

Included as Attachment 7-A are Air Emission Worksheets which show the emissions 

calculations for the Plan Emissions. There are no co-located facilities; therefore, plan 

emissions are the same as complex total emissions. 

This information was calculated by: Jean Martin 

(281) 578-3388

Jean.martin@jccteam.com
EXPLORATION PLAN (EP)

AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLIST

OMB Control No. 1010-0151

OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14

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

COMPANY Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC

AREA Mississippi Canyon

BLOCKS 84 / 85 / 129

LEASE OCS-G 08484 / 08797 / 03263

PLATFORM NA

WELL Locations A and B

COMPANY CONTACT Jean Martin 

TELEPHONE NO. 281-578-3388

REMARKS

FM O&G will use a drillship similar to the Deepwater Champion. Total 

horsepower is calculated at 82% of actual horsepower of Deepwater 

Champion (Total horsepower = 60,348 hp). Actual fuel usage calculated at 

highest monthly average in 6 month fule usage data for Deepwater 

Champion.
EMISSIONS FACTORS

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

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

SCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483 AP42 3.2-1 4/76 & 8/84

Equipment/Emission Factors units PM SOx NOx VOC CO REF. DATE

NG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83 AP42 3.2-1& 3.1-1 10/96

NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96

Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03 AP42 3.3-1 10/96

Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4 AP42 3.4-1 10/96

Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21 AP42 1.3-12,14 9/98

NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84 P42 1.4-1, 14-2, & 14 7/98

NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5 AP42 11.5-1 9/91

Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21 AP42 1.3-1 & 1.3-3 9/98

Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03 E&P Forum 1/93

Fugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005 API Study 12/93

Glycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6 La. DEQ 1991

Gas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034

Sulphur Content Source Value Units

Fuel Gas 3.33 ppm

Diesel Fuel 0.4 % weight

Produced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppm

Produced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weight
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEAR

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

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Mississippi Canyon 84 / 85 / 129 OCS-G 08484 / NA Locations A and B Jean Martin 281-578-3388

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

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

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

DRILLING

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 

(Drill Rig - 82%) Deepwater 

Champion

49486 2390.1738 14186.00 24 226 34.88 160.01 1199.00 35.97 261.60 23.39 107.32 804.13 24.12 175.45

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

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

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

BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 97 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.42 1.94 14.54 0.44 3.17

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 97 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 1.50 6.89 51.63 1.55 11.26

VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 97 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 1.50 6.89 51.63 1.55 11.26

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

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

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

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNT

TANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

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

WELL TEST GAS FLARE 208,333.33 24 2 0.12 14.87 12.56 80.94 0.00 0.36 0.30 1.94

2015 YEAR TOTAL 42.54 195.27 1477.12 56.43 399.97 26.82 123.04 922.29 27.96 203.09

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.51

66.0

PXP will use a drillship similar to the Deepwater Champion. Total horsepower is calculated at 82% of actual horsepower of Deepwater Champion (Total horsepower = 60,348 hp). Actual fuel usage calculated at highest monthly average in 6 month fuel 

usage data for Deepwater Champion. 
SUMMARY

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

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL

Freeport-McMoR Mississippi Canyon 84 / 85 / 129 OCS-G 08484 / 08797 NA Locations A and B

Emitted Substance

Year

PM SOx NOx VOC CO

2015 26.82 123.04 922.29 27.96 203.09

Allowable 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 2197.80 55527.51
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 11,174 gal 16,299 gal 11,042 gal 17,594 gal 13,605 gal 17,383 gal

2 14,133 gal 8,321 gal 11,095 gal 20,843 gal 12,786 gal 20,658 gal

3 17,409 gal 13,816 gal 11,941 gal 15,296 gal 8,612 gal 14,318 gal

4 5,733 gal 12,073 gal 14,529 gal 14,292 gal 12,231 gal 22,032 gal

5 34,818 gal 13,658 gal 11,359 gal 23,353 gal 12,231 gal 12,443 gal

6 16,775 gal 11,386 gal 9,510 gal 31,886 gal 12,469 gal 20,658 gal

7 14,662 gal 12,865 gal 10,223 gal 10,725 gal 13,103 gal 11,016 gal

8 16,167 gal 17,726 gal 11,016 gal 12,495 gal 11,174 gal 15,824 gal

9 14,133 gal 18,043 gal 10,567 gal 14,741 gal 14,556 gal 10,699 gal

10 12,046 gal 13,209 gal 10,514 gal 12,627 gal 18,017 gal 6,789 gal

11 12,733 gal 14,952 gal 13,182 gal 12,760 gal 17,752 gal 11,280 gal

12 12,812 gal 9,880 gal 10,567 gal 12,390 gal 13,895 gal 12,944 gal

13 15,190 gal 23,141 gal 10,752 gal 10,857 gal 12,046 gal 9,722 gal

14 14,001 gal 9,801 gal 11,359 gal 9,695 gal 11,412 gal 13,763 gal

15 10,223 gal 7,819 gal 10,910 gal 8,638 gal 12,073 gal 16,114 gal

16 7,661 gal 5,072 gal 11,069 gal 12,575 gal 10,039 gal 14,080 gal

17 14,635 gal 10,540 gal 12,786 gal 12,099 gal 14,397 gal 15,613 gal

18 11,650 gal 14,107 gal 10,884 gal 7,661 gal 13,314 gal 15,771 gal

19 15,005 gal 18,334 gal 15,692 gal 9,537 gal 14,080 gal 15,401 gal

20 14,899 gal 14,450 gal 7,899 gal 9,827 gal 11,650 gal 14,160 gal

21 13,473 gal 12,495 gal 10,646 gal 18,386 gal 11,967 gal 10,620 gal

22 12,575 gal 19,364 gal 8,189 gal 11,095 gal 14,979 gal 18,439 gal

23 10,778 gal 16,854 gal 11,174 gal 10,778 gal 13,552 gal 15,375 gal

24 10,857 gal 6,234 gal 9,642 gal 10,250 gal 10,725 gal 18,862 gal

25 12,786 gal 12,944 gal 12,443 gal 16,009 gal 10,250 gal 14,477 gal

26 10,805 gal 8,586 gal 11,069 gal 12,786 gal 12,944 gal 10,963 gal

27 12,469 gal 12,760 gal 14,899 gal 12,284 gal 9,589 gal 11,597 gal

28 11,148 gal 14,556 gal 10,673 gal 12,231 gal 11,016 gal 12,125 gal

29 13,684 gal 9,193 gal 9,827 gal 11,148 gal 11,359 gal

30 13,552 gal 13,869 gal 15,375 gal 14,688 gal 11,307 gal

31 13,499 gal 15,507 gal 13,763 gal

Average 13,596 gal 12,734 gal 11,290 gal 13,691 gal 12,677 gal 14,179 gal

Transit Days

Daily Fuel Usage for a 6 month period

Month
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8 – Pg. 18 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 8

OIL SPILLS INFORMATION

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING

All the proposed activities and facilities in the Supplemental EP will be covered by the 

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G; Operator Number 03280) Oil Spill 

Response Plan (OSRP), submitted on January 10, 2014, revised on January 31, 2014, 

and approved on February 4, 2014 (OSRP Control Number O-713).

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES

Primary Response Equipment 

Location

Preplanned Staging Location

Houma, LA

Harvey, LA

Venice, LA

Houma, LA

Harvey, LA

Venice, LA

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION

FM O&G’s primary equipment providers are Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) and Marine 

Spill Response Corporation (MSRC), and National Response Corporation (NRCC).

Clean Gulf Associates Services, LLC (CGAS) will provide closest available personnel, 

as well as a CGAS supervisor to operate the equipment. MSRC personnel are 

responsible for operating MSRC response equipment. Through its Independent 

Contractor Network (ICN), NRCC will also provide closest available personnel, as well 

as an NRCC ICN supervisor to operate the equipment.

8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION 

Category Regional OSRP

WCD

EP

WCD

Type of Activity  10 miles Drilling Exploratory Drilling

Facility Location 

(Area/Block) GC 393 MC 84

Facility Designation Well Location B Well Location B

Distance to Nearest 

Shoreline (miles) 96.5 mi. 66.0 miles

Volume

Storage Tanks (Total) 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8 – Pg. 19 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

Uncontrolled blowout

Total Volume 400,000 bbls 155,639 bbls

Type of Oil Crude Crude

API Gravity 25o 33.2 o

The Regional OSRP WCD was verified and accepted by BOEM in Plan N-9739 (per 

NTL 2010-N06).

FM O&G has determined that the worst-case scenario from the activities proposed in 

this EP does not supersede the worst-case scenario from our Regional OSRP.

Since FM O&G has the capability to respond to the worst-case spill scenario included in 

our Regional OSRP, submitted on January 10, 2014, revised on January 31, 2014, and 

approved on February 4, 2014 (OSRP Control Number O-713), and since the worstcase scenario determined for our DOCD does not replace the worst-case scenario in 

our Regional OSRP, FM O&G hereby certifies that FM O&G has the capability to 

respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge, or a substantial 

threat of such a discharge, resulting from the activities proposed in this EP.

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

The Oil Spill Response Discussion is included as Attachment 8-A.
SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

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

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

estimated to be 155,639 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 33.2°.

Land Segment and Resource Identification

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

utilizing information in the BSEE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and 

Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website. The results are shown in Figure 1. The 

BSEE OSRAM identifies a 21% probability of impact to the shorelines of Plaquemines Parish, 

Louisiana within 30 days. Plaquemines Parish includes Barataria Bay, the Mississippi River 

Delta, Breton Sound and the affiliated islands and bays. This region is an extremely sensitive 

habitat and serves as a migratory, breeding, feeding and nursery habitat for numerous species of 

wildlife. Beaches in this area vary in grain particle size and can be classified as fine sand, shell 

or perched shell beaches. Sandy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant.

Response

FM O&G will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as 

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

Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

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

model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil database. The results indicate 15% or 

approximately 23,346 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with 

approximately 132,293 barrels remaining.

Spill Response MC 85, Location B Barrels of Oil 

WCD Volume 155,639

Less 15% natural evaporation/dispersion 23,346

Remaining volume 132,293

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

storage equipment available to respond to a spill of approximately 132,293 barrels. The volume 

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

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

2 also indicates how operations will be supported. 

FM O&G’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies such as 

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

of the spill, weather and potential impacts. If aerial dispersants are utilized, 8 sorties (9,600 

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

in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is in place, insitu burning of oil may be attempted. Slick containment boom would be immediately called out 

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

utilizing CGA’s spill response equipment, with a total derated skimming capacity of 270,819

barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 22,447 barrels. If 

additional storage is needed, a 107,285 barrel storage barge, a 25,000 barrel storage barge, a 

20,000 barrel storage barge, three 23,000 barrel storage barges, and a 47,000 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. Safety is first priority. Air monitoring will 

be accomplished and operations deemed safe prior to any containment/skimming attempts. 

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

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

near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 40,341

barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 504 barrels. If additional 

storage is needed, two 20,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and centrally located to 

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

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

protection and sorbent boom on vegetated areas. Master Service Agreements with AMPOL and 

OMI Environmental will ensure access to 147,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom. Figure 

2 outlines individual times needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and 

deployment. Strategies would be based upon surveillance and real time trajectories that depict 

areas of potential impact given actual sea and weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial 

Oil Spill Response Plan for Plaquemines Parish and Unified Command would be consulted to 

ensure that environmental and special economic resources would be correctly identified and 

prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shoreline protection strategies depict the protection 

response modes applicable for oil spill clean-up operations. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil 

Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it 

describes necessary action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, based 

on the assumption that removal of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to 

fragile coastal ecosystems if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervisory 

personnel have the option to modify the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more 

effective response to site-specific circumstances. FM O&G’s contract Spill Management Team 

holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan.

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, FM O&G can be onsite with contracted 

oil spill recovery equipment with adequate response capacity to contain and recover surface 

hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, within an estimated 

64 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).
Initial Response Considerations

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

are not limited to:

• Weather

• Equipment and materials availability

• Ocean currents and tides

• Location of the spill 

• Product spilled 

• Amount spilled

• Environmental risk assessments 

• Trajectory and product analysis

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

FM O&G will take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much 

of the spilled oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response 

actions will be designed to provide an “in-depth” protection strategy meant to recover as much 

oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. Safety will take 

precedence over all other considerations during these operations. 

Coordination of response assets will be supervised by the designation of a SIMOPS group as 

necessary for close quarter vessel response activities. Most often, this group will be used during 

source control events that require a significant number of large vessels operating independently, 

but in coordination to complete a common objective, in a small area and in close coordination 

and support of each other. This group must also monitor the subsurface activities of each vessel 

(ROV, dispersant application, well control support, etc.). The SIMOPS group leader reports to 

the Source Control Section Chief.

In addition, these activities will be monitored by the spill management team (SMT) and Unified 

Command via a structured Common Operating Picture (COP) established to track resource and 

slick movement in real time.

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

• Information will be confirmed

• An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

• OSROs and appropriate agencies will be notified 

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form will be completed 

• Initial Safety plan will be written and published

• Unified Command will be established

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

objectives

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

site

o On-site command and control established
Decanting Strategy

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

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

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

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

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

recovery.

Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

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

notification, or at first light

• Provide trained observer to provide on site status reports

• Provide command and control platform at the site if needed

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

and visual confirmation 

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems 

Dispersant application assets

• Put Airborne Support Inc. (ASI) on standby

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

appropriateness of dispersant application

• Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface

• Deploy aircraft in accordance with a plan developed for the actual situation

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

• Confirm dispersant availability for current and long range operations

• Start ordering dispersant stocks required for expected operations 

Containment boom

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

• Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom

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

their most effective containment 

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

Dedicated off-shore skimming systems

General

• Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

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

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

CGA FRUs

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

• VOOs 140’ – 180’ in length

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

• VOOs in shallow water should have a draft of <10 feet when fully loaded

T&T Koseq Skimming Systems

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

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

• VOOs at least 200’ in length

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

• VOOs for shallow water should be deck barges with a draft of <10 feet when fully loaded

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of CGA contracted assets

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

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

systems

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

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

• Use FM O&G’s contracted resources as applicable

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

Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed 

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections
In-situ Burn assets

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

affected State On-Scene Coordinator (SOSC)

• Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

• Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

• Contact boom manufacturer to provide training if required

• Determine assets to perform on water operation

• Build operations into safety plan

• Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

Adverse Weather Operations:

In adverse weather, when seas are > 3 feet, the use of larger recovery and storage vessels, 

oleophilic skimmers, and large offshore boom will be maximized. Safety will be the overriding

factor in all operations and will cease at the order of the Unified Command, vessel captain, or in 

an emergency, ”stop work” may be directed by any crew member.
Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

• Place near shore assets on standby and deploy in accordance with planning based on the 

actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets

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

• Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions

• Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil 

Considerations

• Water depth, vessel draft

• Shoreline gradient

• State of the oil 

• Use of VOOs

• Distance of surf zone from shoreline 

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

• Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations

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

and visual confirmation 

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets 

Dispersant Use

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

water depth 

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

Vessel Deployment

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• Fast Response Vessels (FRV)

• Egmopol and Marco Shallow Water Skimmer (SWS)

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks

VOO

• Use FM O&G’s contracted resources as applicable

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

Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed 

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

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

Response Planning Considerations

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

• Time to acquire personnel and equipment and their availability

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

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

Water Horizon, dated 2 May 2010

Actions

Placement of boom

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

appropriate ACP 

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

impact. Consider:

o Trajectories

o Weather forecast

o Oil Impact forecast

o Verified spill movement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

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

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

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

• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

• Determination of Archeological sites and gaining authority to enter 

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

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

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

possible to maximize on-site work time

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

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

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

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

and/or sweep obtained

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

inland areas 
Decanting Strategy

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

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

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

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

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

recovery.

CGA Equipment Limitations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds

Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots

Visibility less than 3 nautical miles

Ceiling less than 1,000 feet.

FRU 8 foot seas

HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas

Koseq Arms 8 foot seas

OSRV 4 foot seas
Environmental Conditions in the GOM

Louisiana is situated between the easterly and westerly wind belts, and therefore, experiences 

westerly winds during the winter and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is 

generally 14-15 mph along the coast. Wave heights average 4 and 5 feet. However, during 

hurricane season, Louisiana has recorded wave heights ranging from 40 to 50 feet high and 

winds reaching speeds of 100 mph. Because much of southern Louisiana lies below sea level, 

flooding is prominent. 

Surface water temperature ranges between 70 and 80 ̊F during the summer months. During the 

winter, the average temperature will range from 50 and 60 ̊F. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

month.
FIGURE 1

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

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

utilizing FM O&G’s WCD and information in the BSEE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model 

(OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website 

using 30 day impact. The results are tabulated below.

Area/Block OCS-G Launch

Area

Land Segment and/or 

Resource

Conditional 

Probability (%)

within 30 days

Drill and Complete 

two wells, Locations A 

& B, both of which 

have SL in MC 85 and 

BHL in MC 84. 

Install two subsea 

trees

MC 85, Location B

66 miles from shore

G08797 C57 Cameron, LA

Vermilion, LA

Terrebonne, LA

Lafourche, LA

Plaquemines, LA

St. Bernard, LA

Hancock & Harrison, MS

Jackson, MS

Mobile, AL

Baldwin, AL

Escambia, AL

Okaloosa, FL

Walton, FL

Bay, FL

1

1

2

2

21

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1
WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (66 miles from shore)

132,293 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)

API Gravity 33.2°

FIGURE 2 – Equipment Response Time to MC 85, Location B

Dispersants/Surveillance

Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant 

Capacity (gal)

Storage 

Capacity Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

site Total Hrs

ASI

Basler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9

DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.1 3.1

DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.1 3.1

Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9

Offshore Response

Offshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Hrs to 

GOM

Travel to 

Spill Site

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 5 Harvey 7 0 5 11.3 1 24.3

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Venice 1 0 2 3.6 0 6.6

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Leeville 1 0 2 5.6 0 8.6

95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Galveston 1 0 1 16.4 0 18.4

Boom Barge (CGA-300)

42” Auto Boom (25000’) NA NA 1 Tug50 Crew

4 (Barge)

2 (Per Crew) Leeville 4 0 6 20 1.5 31.5

T&T Marine (available through contract with CGA)

Koseq Skimming Arms (4) 71316 8000 4 Utility 24 Galliano 24 24 2 11.7 2 63.7

Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Harvey 24 24 2 7.5 2 59.5
Recovered Oil Storage No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Hrs to 

GOM

Travel to 

Spill Site

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

K-Sea Operating (available through contract with CGA)

DBL 101 1119760 NA 107285 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 2 12.8 1 31.8

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 27.5 1 48.5

Staging Area: Venice

Offshore Equipment With 

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

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

Staging

Travel to 

Site

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey 1 2 1.75 7.5 1 13.3

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 7.5 1 22.5

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 7.5 1 17

FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 1 2 3.5 7.5 1 15

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 1 2 3.25 7.5 1 14.8

FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 1 2 0 7.5 1 11.5

Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey 1 4 1.75 7.5 6 20.3

T&T Marine (available through contract with CGA)

Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston 4 12 8 7.5 1 32.5
Nearshore Response

Nearshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to

Loadout

Hrs to 

GOM

Travel to 

Spill Site

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 1 0 1 2 0 4

Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 1 2 2 2 0 7

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)

CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36

Staging Area: Venice

Nearshore and Inland 

Skimmers With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

Staging

Travel to 

Deployment

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 1 2 3.25 2 0 8.25

SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 2 0 10.5

SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 1 2 3.5 2 0 8.5

SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 1 2 0 2 0 5

Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Harvey 1 2 8 2 0 13
Shoreline Protection

Staging Area: Venice

Shoreline Protection 

Boom VOO Persons Req. 

Storage/Warehouse

Location

Hrs to 

Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

Staging

Travel to 

Deployment Site

Hrs to 

Deploy Total Hrs

AMPOL (available through MSA)

42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 4 2 12 22

20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2 2 6 14

OMI Environmental (available through MSA)

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 4 2 3 11

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 7.5 2 3 14.5

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 6.25 2 3 13.25

20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 1.75 2 6 11.75

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.5

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.5

15,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 2 2 4 12
Wildlife Response EDRC Storage 

Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure

Hrs to 

Loadout

Travel to 

Staging

Travel to 

Deployment

Hrs to 

Deploy

Total 

Hrs

CGA

Wildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Harvey 1 2 1.5 1 2 7.5

Bird Scare Guns (48) NA NA NA 2 Harvey 1 2 1.5 1 2 7.5

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 2 7 1 2 13

Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Aransas Pass 1 2 9.5 1 2 15.5

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 2 4.5 1 2 10.5

Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Venice 1 2 0 1 2 6

Response Asset Total

Offshore EDRC 270,819

Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 290,732

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 40,341

Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 40,504
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 9 – Pg. 20 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 9

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS

There are no environmental monitoring systems currently in place or planned for the 

proposed activities.

9.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

There is no reason to believe that any of the endangered species or marine mammals 

as listed in the ESA will be “taken as a result of the operations proposed under this plan. 

It has been documented that the use of explosives and or seismic devices can affect 

marine life. Operations proposed in this plan will not be utilizing either of these devices. 

FM O&G will adhere to the requirements as set forth in the following documents, as 

applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL 2012-BSEE-G01, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL 2012-JOINT-G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected 

Species Reporting”

• NTL 2012-JOINT-G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures 

and Protected Species Observer Program”

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 are not located in the Flower Garden Banks 

National Marine Sanctuary; therefore, relevant information is not required in this EP.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 10 – Pg. 21 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 10

LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

Exploration activities are subject to the following stipulations attached to Lease OCS-G 

08484 and OCS-G 08797, Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85, respectively. 

10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA)

OCS-G 08484 and OCS-G 08797 are located within designated W-155C. The Fleet 

Area Control and Surveillance in Pensacola, Florida, will be contacted in order to 

coordinate and control the electromagnetic emissions during the proposed operations.

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

The Marine Protected Species lease stipulation is meant to reduce the potential taking 

of marine protected species. FM O&G will operate in accordance with NTL 2012-JOINTG01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting,” 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.

10.3 PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEOURCES

Mississippi Canyon Block 84 has been determined to be located in an area where 

historic shipwrecks may exist. In accordance with NTL 2005-G07 “Archaeological 

Surveys and Reports,” and NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease 

Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports,” an Archaeological 

Survey Report is provided with this plan.

The proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 85 will be conducted from 

previously approved surface locations as provided for in the Supplemental Exploration 

Plan approved on September 24, 2009 (Control No. S-7147); therefore, in accordance 

with NTL 2005-G07, “Archaeological Surveys and Reports,” and NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, 

“Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys 

and Reports,” an archaeological survey report is not provided.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 11 – Pg. 22 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 11

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 and 85 are not located within Florida; therefore, mitigation

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

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

FM O&G will adhere to the requirements as set forth in the following documents, as 

applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL 2012-BSEE-G01, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL 2012-JOINT -G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected 

Species Reporting”

• NTL 2012-JOINT-G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures 

and Protected Species Observer Program”
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 12 – Pg. 23 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 12

SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

12.1 GENERAL

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

conditions will be utilized.

Type Maximum Fuel 

Tank Capacity

Maximum 

Number in Area at 

Any Time

Trip Frequency or 

Duration

Crew Boat 1,800 bbls 1 3/week

Supply Boat 9,000 bbls 1 3/week

Supply Boat 5,800bbls 1 3/week

Helicopters 760 gals 1 3/week

12.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS

Size of Fuel 

Supply Vessel

Capacity of Fuel 

Supply Vessel

Frequency of Fuel 

Transfers

Route Fuel Supply 

Vessel Will Take

265’ 9,000 bbls Bi-weekly Shortest route from 

Shore base to 

Mississippi Canyon 

85

265’ 9,000 bbls Bi-weekly Shortest route from 

Shore base to 

Mississippi Canyon 

85

312’ 5,800 bbls Bi-weekly Shortest route from 

Shore base to 

Mississippi Canyon 

85

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION 

Drilling fluid transportation information is not required to be submitted with this plan.

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION

A table, “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore,” is included as 

Attachment 12-A.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 12 – Pg. 24 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

12.5 VICINITY MAP

A vicinity map showing the location of the activities proposed herein relative to the 

shoreline with the distance of the proposed activities from the shoreline and the primary 

route(s) of the support vessels from Fourchon, LA and aircraft from Houma, LA that will 

be used when traveling between the onshore support facilities and the drilling unit is

included as Attachment 12-B.
ATTACHMENT 12-A WASTE YOU WILL TRANSPORT AND/OR DISPOSE OF ONSHORE

Transport Method Name/Location of

Facility

Amount Disposal

Method

Solid and Liquid

Wastes

Transportation

Waste Disposal

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

Composition

Projected Generated

Wastes

Synthetic-based drilling fluid SBM Cuttings Boxes on Supply Boat Recycled

Newpark Enviromental Services

145 17th St

Port Fourchon, LA

1,000 BBLS/Well

130,000 LBS/WELL

Recycled if possible, 

transported to 

landfill otherwise

Used Engine Oil Proper DOT containers on supply boat Univar

Carencro, LA 215 BBLS/WELL Recycled or 

Inceretated

2,841 BBLS/WELL

Wll you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in produced sand.

Cuttings wetted with Synthetic-based

fluid Cuttings Boxes on Supply Boat

Newpark Enviromental Services

145 17th St

Port Fourchon, LA

300 BBLS/Well Recycled

Produced sand

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

Trash and debris

Used oil

No production is proposed under this Initial Exploration Plan

Refuse generated during operations: 

paper, cardboard, metal, and glass

Compactor bags in storage bins on 

Supply/Crew Boat

Gulf Offshore Logistics

Fourchon, LA
...\POE DOCD\MC\King\Vicinity.dgn

Approx. 66 Miles to Nearest Shore

Vessel Path to Fourchon Shore Base

Approx. 134 Miles
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 13 – Pg. 25 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 13

ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

13.1 GENERAL

Name of Shore base Location Existing/New/Modified

Freeport-McMoRan Oil & 

Gas LLC Shorebase

Port Fourchon, LA Existing

MI-Swaco Mud Plants Port Fourchon, La Existing

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION

There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will we expand the 

existing shore base as a result of the operations proposed in this EP.

13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE

A support base construction or expansion timetable is not required for the activities 

proposed in this plan. 

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL

The Table, “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore, “is included as

Attachment 12-A. 
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 14 – Pg. 26 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 14

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Alabama is 

included as Attachment 14-A.


Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 15 – Pg. 27 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 15

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 

The Environmental Impact Analysis is included as Attachment 15-A. 
Freeport McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G)

Supplemental Exploration Plan

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 85 & 129

OCS-G 08484/08797/10977

(A) IMPACT PRODUCING FACTORS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Environment

Resources

Impact Producing Factors (IPFs)

Categories and Examples

Refer to recent GOM OCS Lease Sale EIS for a more complete list of IPFs

Emissions 

(air, noise, 

light, etc.)

Effluents 

(muds, 

cutting, other 

discharges to 

the water 

column or 

seafloor)

Physical 

disturbances to the 

seafloor (rig or 

anchor 

emplacements, 

etc.)

Wastes sent 

to shore for 

treatment 

or disposal

Accidents 

(e.g., oil 

spills, 

chemical 

spills, H2S 

releases)

Discarded

Trash &

Debris

Site-specific at Offshore 

Location

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

Pinnacle Trend area live bottoms (2) (2) (2)

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

Benthic communities (4)

Water quality X X

Fisheries X X

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

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

Air quality X(9)

Shipwreck sites (known or 

potential)

(7)

Prehistoric archaeological sites X(7)

Vicinity of Offshore Location

Essential fish habitat X X(6)

Marine and pelagic birds X X

Public health and safety (5)

Coastal and Onshore

Beaches X(6) X

Wetlands X(6)

Shore birds and coastal nesting 

birds

X6)

Coastal wildlife refuges

Wilderness areas
Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

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

any anchors will be on the seafloor within the:

o 4-mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks, or the 3-mile zone of Stetson Bank;

o 1000-m, 1-mile or 3-mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine bank) protected by the Topographic 

Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease;

o Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 ft. from any no-activity zone; or

o Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft. buffer zone) with relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected 

by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease.

2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS lease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinnacle 

Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease.

3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seafloor habitats are protected by the Live Bottom (LowRelief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease.

4) Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being in water depths 300 meters or greater.

5) Exploration or production activities where H2S concentrations greater than 500 ppm might be encountered.

6) All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydrocarbons or diesel fuel that you 

determine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed action is located a sufficient distance 

from a resource that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two.

7) All activities that involve seafloor disturbances, including anchor emplacements, in any OCS block designated 

by the BOEM as having high-probability for the occurrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such 

blocks that will be affected that are adjacent to the lease block in which your planned activity will occur. If the 

proposed activities are located a sufficient distance from a shipwreck or a prehistoric site that no impact would 

occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two.

8) All activities that you determine might have an adverse effect on endangered or threatened marine mammals or 

sea turtles or their critical habitats.

9) Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle tankers or barges.
(B) Analysis

Site-Specific at Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129

Proposed operations consist of the drilling and completion of two locations A and B. Operations 

also include installation of two subsea trees.

The operations will be conducted with a dynamically positioned drillship.

1. Designated Topographic Features

Potential IPFs on topographic features include effluents, and accidents. 

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are 95 miles from the closest designated 

Topographic Features Stipulation Block (Sackett Bank); therefore, no adverse impacts are 

expected. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to 

benthic organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven 

into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At 

this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the 

amount shown to have an effect on corals. Because the crests of topographic features in the 

Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface spill could reach their 

sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from 

a topographic area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities, which could impact topographic features.

2. Pinnacle Trend Area Live Bottoms

Potential IPFs on pinnacle trend area live bottoms include effluents and accidents. 

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are 22 miles from the closest live bottom 

(pinnacle trend) area; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills have the potential to 

foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal effects on live bottom organisms. Oil 
from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been 

documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several 

orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on marine organisms. Oil 

from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom 

(pinnacle trend) area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s 

Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a live bottom 

(pinnacle trend) area. 

3. Eastern Gulf Live Bottoms

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

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located in an area characterized by 

the existence of live bottoms; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to live 

bottom organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven 

into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At 

this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the 

amount shown to have an effect on marine invertebrates. Oil from a subsurface spill is not 

applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom area. The activities proposed in 

this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live 

bottom area. 

4. Benthic Communities 

There are no IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to 

shore for disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to benthic 

communities.

A drillship is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of 

seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by 

the use of a drillship, FM O&G’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 

129 would not cause impacts to benthic communities.
5. Water Quality

IPFs that could result in water quality degradation from the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 include effluents and accidents.

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

discharge-rate restrictions and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES 

permit, thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational 

discharges are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to water quality.

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter offshore water quality; however, it is unlikely 

that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities. Between 

1980 and 2000, OCS operations produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and spilled only 0.001 percent 

of this oil, or 1 bbl for every 81,000 bbl produced. The spill risk related to a diesel spill from 

drilling operations is even less. Between 1976 and 1985, (years for which data were collected), 

there were 80 reported diesel spills greater than one barrel associated with drilling activities. 

Considering that there were 11,944 wells drilled, this is a 0.7 percent probability of an 

occurrence. If a spill were to occur, the water quality of marine waters would be temporarily 

affected by the dissolved components and small oil droplets. Dispersion by currents and 

microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column and dilute the constituents to 

background levels. Historically, changes in offshore water quality from oil spills have only been 

detected during the life of the spill and up to several months afterwards. Most of the components 

of oil are insoluble in water and therefore float. The activities proposed in this plan will be 

covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to water 

quality.

6. Fisheries

IPFs that could cause impacts to fisheries as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 include effluents and accidents. 

Effluents: Effluents such as drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components and 

properties which are detrimental to fishery resources. Moderate petroleum and metal 

contamination of sediments and the water column can occur out to several hundred meters downcurrent from the discharge point. Offshore discharges are expected to disperse and dilute to very 

near background levels in the water column or on the seafloor within 3,000 m of the discharge 

point, and are expected to have negligible effect on fisheries.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on 

fisheries; however, it is unlikely that such an event would occur from the proposed activities 
(refer to Item 5, Water Quality). The effects of oil on mobile adult finfish or shellfish would 

likely be sublethal and the extent of damage would be reduced to the capacity of adult fish and 

shellfish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydrocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and 

parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no IPFs from emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor or wastes sent to shore 

for disposal from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to fisheries.

7. Marine Mammals

GulfCet II studies revealed that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf-edge were almost 

exclusively bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. Squid eaters, including dwarf and 

pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough-toothed dolphin, and Cuvier’s beaked whale, 

occurred most frequently along the upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones. IPFs that could 

cause impacts to marine mammals as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon 

blocks 84, 85 and 129 include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. 

Emissions: Noises from drilling activities, support vessels and helicopters may elicit a startle 

reaction from marine mammals. This reaction may lead to disruption of marine mammals’ 

normal activities. Stress may make them more vulnerable to parasites, disease, environmental 

contaminants, and/or predation (Majors and Myrick, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence 

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

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components which may be detrimental 

to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any 

potential impact from drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items 

or possibly through ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989). 

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of debris have caused the 

death or serious injury of marine mammals (Laist, 1997; MMC, 1999). The limited amount of 

marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm 

marine mammals. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by 

MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations 

imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid 

waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using 

special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. 

Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging 

materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials 

such as plastic or glass.
Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and cetaceans would be unusual events, however 

should one occur, death or injury to marine mammals is possible. Contract vessel operators can 

avoid marine mammals and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for marine 

mammals and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a 

reference guide to help identify the twenty-eight species of whales and dolphins, and the single 

species of manatee that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must 

report sightings of any injured or dead protected marine mammal species immediately, 

regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and 

Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 

824-5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the 

injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified 

within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov. If the vessel is the 

responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding 

network as needed. 

Oil spills have the potential to cause sublethal oil-related injuries and spill-related deaths to 

marine mammals. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase 

vessel traffic in the area, which could add to changes in cetacean behavior and/or distribution, 

thereby causing additional stress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not 

known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chemicals included in FM O&G’s OSRP is 

considered to be low when compared with the constituents and fractions of crude oils and diesel 

products. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s OSRP (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact marine mammals.

8. Sea Turtles

IPFs that could cause impacts to sea turtles as a result of the proposed operations include 

emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. GulfCet II studies sighted most 

loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and leatherback sea turtles over shelf waters. Historically these 
species have been sighted up to the shelf’s edge. They appear to be more abundant east of the 

Mississippi River than they are west of the river (Fritts et al., 1983b; Lohoefener et al., 1990). 

Deep waters may be used by all species as a transitory habitat.

Emissions: Noise from drilling activities, support vessels, and helicopters may elicit a startle 

reaction from sea turtles, but this is a temporary disturbance.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges are not known to be lethal to sea turtles. Most 

operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from 

drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items or possibly through 

ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989).

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of, debris have caused the 

death or serious injury of sea turtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, 

resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm sea turtles. Operators 

are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the 

Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies 

including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss 

of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, 

and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of 

solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and 

packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent 

materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and sea turtles would be unusual events, however 

should one occur, death or injury to sea turtles is possible. Contract vessel operators can avoid 

sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and 

maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to 

help identify the five species of sea turtles that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. 

Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected sea turtle species 

immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine 

Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional 
Office at (727) 824-5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862-2850. In 

addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must 

be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov. If the vessel 

is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and 

stranding network as needed. 

All sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerable to the harmful effects of oil through 

direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fatal, particularly to juveniles 

and hatchlings. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed 

activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic 

in the area, which could add to the possibility of collisions with sea turtles. The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact sea turtles.

9. Air Quality

Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are located 80 miles from the Breton Wilderness Area 

and 66 miles from shore. Applicable emissions data is included in Section 7 of the Plan.

There would be a limited degree of air quality degradation in the immediate vicinity of the 

proposed activities. Plan Emissions for the proposed activities do not exceed the annual 

exemption levels as set forth by BOEM. Accidents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or 

chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, these releases would not 

impact onshore air quality because of the prevailing atmospheric conditions, emission height, 

emission rates, and the distance of Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 from the coastline. 

There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to 

shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which would impact air quality.

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential)

Potential IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a result of the proposed 

operations in Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 include disturbances to the seafloor.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A drillship is being used for the proposed activities; 

therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical 

disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a drillship, FM O&G’s proposed 

operations in Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 would not cause impacts to shipwreck 

sites.
Additionally, Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are not located in or adjacent to an OCS 

block designated by BOEM as having a high probability for occurrence of shipwrecks, therefore, 

no adverse impacts are expected.

FM O&G will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning 

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon 

commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine 

archaeologist and by FM O&G to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources, including 

historic shipwrecks. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be 

submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, FM O&G will contact the BOEM 

immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or 

disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites

IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites as a result of the proposed 

operations in Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 are physical disturbances to the seafloor 

and accidents (oil spills). 

Physical Disturbances to the seafloor: Although the operations proposed will be conducted by 

utilizing a drillship, which would cause only an insignificant amount of seafloor to be disturbed, 

Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 is located inside the Archaeological Prehistoric high 

probability lines. FM O&G will report to BOEM the discovery of any object of prehistoric 

archaeological significance and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural 

resource.

FM O&G will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning 

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon 

commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine 

archaeologist and by FM O&G to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources. Copies of the 

certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should 

a resource be encountered, FM O&G will contact the BOEM immediately and make every 

reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. .

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects to 

prehistoric archaeological sites if the release were to occur subsea. However, it is unlikely that 

an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). 

The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional Oil Spill Response 

Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section 8).
There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents or wastes sent to shore for treatment or 

disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact prehistoric archeological sites.

Vicinity of Offshore Location

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

IPFs that could cause impacts to EFH as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 include effluents and accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and 

marine waters and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulation, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) 

Stipulation, and the Eastern Gulf Pinnacle Trend Stipulation would prevent most of the potential 

impacts on live-bottom communities and EFH from operational waste discharges. Levels of 

contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced-water discharges, discharge-rate 

restrictions, and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, 

thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are 

not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to EFH.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on EFH. 

Oil spills that contact coastal bays and estuaries, as well as OCS waters when pelagic eggs and 

larvae are present, have the greatest potential to affect fisheries. However, it is unlikely that an 

oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information 

submitted in Section 8).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact essential 

fish habitat.

2. Marine and Pelagic Birds 

IPFs that could impact marine birds as a result of the proposed activities include air emissions, 

accidental oil spills, and discarded trash and debris from vessels and the facilities.

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

concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds.

Accidents: An oil spill would cause localized, low-level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. 

However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, 

Water Quality). Marine and pelagic birds feeding at the spill location may experience chronic, 

nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected that few, if any, coastal and marine birds would 
actually be affected to that extent. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM 

O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8).

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

discarded trash and debris, or ingest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and 

death. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOLAnnex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by 

various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also 

avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting 

trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent 

accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of 

small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, 

environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. Informational placards will be 

posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore 

personnel, including contractors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter 

pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view 

the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed 

Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris 

training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G

management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to 

waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012-G01. Debris, if any, from these proposed 

activities will seldom interact with marine and pelagic birds; therefore, the effects will be 

negligible.

There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent 

to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact marine and 

pelagic birds.

3. Public Health and Safety Due to Accidents.

There are no IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to 

shore for treatment or disposal or accidents, including an accidental H2S release) from the 

proposed activities which could cause impacts to public health and safety. In accordance with 

NTL No.’s 2008-G04, 2009-G27, and 2009-G31, sufficient information is included in Section 4

to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H2S absent. 

Coastal and Onshore

1. Beaches

IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to beaches include accidents (oil 

spills) and discarded trash and debris. 
Accidents: Oil spills contacting beaches would have impacts on the use of recreational beaches 

and associated resources. Due to the distance from shore (66 miles) and the response capabilities 

that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. The activities proposed 

in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 

Discarded trash and debris: Trash on the beach is recognized as a major threat to the 

enjoyment and use of beaches. There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, 

resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging 

debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and 

Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast 

Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in 

accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by 

maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special 

precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special 

caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 

particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact beaches.

2. Wetlands

IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil 

spills) and discarded trash and debris. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 

5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (66 miles) and the response capabilities that 

would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be 

covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 
Discarded trash and debris: There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, 

resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging 

debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and 

Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast 

Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in 

accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by 

maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special 

precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special 

caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 

particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact 

wetlands.

3. Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds

Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds. However, it is 

unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water 

Quality). Given the distance from shore (66 miles) and the response capabilities that would be 

implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by 

FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

Discarded trash and debris: Coastal and marine birds are highly susceptible to entanglement 

in floating, submerged, and beached marine debris: specifically plastics. Operators are prohibited 

from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic 

Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the 

United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G

will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste 

items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special 

precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special 

caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 
particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

shore birds and coastal nesting birds.

4. Coastal Wildlife Refuges

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to coastal 

wildlife refuges. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities 

(refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (66 miles) and the response 

capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this 

plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 

8).

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

mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and 

regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and 

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the 

regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management 

plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside 

trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when 

handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 
operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

coastal wildlife refuges.

5. Wilderness Areas

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to wilderness 

areas. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to 

Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area (80 

miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts 

are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G’s Regional OSRP 

(refer to information submitted in Section 8).

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

mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and 

regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and 

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the 

regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management 

plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside 

trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when 

handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

wilderness areas.

6. Other Environmental Resources Identified

There are no other environmental resources identified for this impact assessment.
(C) IMPACTS ON PROPOSED ACTIVITIES

The site–specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed 

activities. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site-specific environmental 

conditions.

(D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

During the hurricane season, June through November, the Gulf of Mexico is impacted by an 

average of ten tropical storms (39-73 mph winds), of which six become hurricanes ( > 74 mph 

winds). Due to its location in the gulf, Mississippi Canyon blocks 84, 85 and 129 may experience 

hurricane and tropical storm force winds, and related sea currents. These factors can adversely 

impact the integrity of the operations covered by this plan. A significant storm may present 

physical hazards to operators and vessels, damage exploration or production equipment, or result 

in the release of hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Additionally, the displacement of 

equipment may disrupt the local benthic habitat and pose a threat to local species.

The following preventative measures included in this plan may be implemented to mitigate these 

impacts:

1. Drilling & completion

a. Secure well

b. Secure rig / platform

c. Evacuate personnel

Drilling activities will be conducted in accordance with NTL No.’s 2008-G09, 2009-G10, and 

2010-N10.

2. Structure Installation

Operator will not conduct structure installation operations during Tropical Storm or 

Hurricane threat.

(E) ALTERNATIVES

No alternatives to the proposed activities were considered to reduce environmental impacts.

(F) MITIGATION MEASURES

No mitigation measures other than those required by regulation will be employed to avoid, 

diminish, or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources. 

(G) CONSULTATION

No agencies or persons were consulted regarding potential impacts associated with the proposed 

activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided. 
(H) PREPARER(S)

Krystal Nava

J. Connor Consulting, Inc.

16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700

Houston, TX 77084

(281) 578-3388

krystal.nava@jccteam.com

(I) REFERENCES

Authors: 

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

water marine mammals: a literature review. Washington, DC: American Petroleum 

Institute. 385 pp.

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on marine turtles: entanglement and ingestion. In: 

Shomura, R.S. and H.O. Yoshida, eds. Proceedings, Workshop on the Fate and Impact of 

Marine Debris, 26-29 November 1984, Honolulu, HI. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. NOAA 

Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. Pp 387-429.

Burke, C.J. and J.A. Veil. 1995. Potential benefits from regulatory consideration of synthetic 

drilling muds. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 

ANL/EAD/TM-43.

Daly, J.M. 1997. Controlling the discharge of synthetic-based drilling fluid contaminated 

cuttings in waters of the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Water. Work Plan, June 24, 1997.

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sensitivity of seabird populations in Alaska to oil pollution. U.S. 

Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLMYK-ES-81-006-1792.

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: entanglement of marine life in marine debris 

including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, 

J.M. and D.B. Rogers, eds. Marine debris: sources, impacts, and solutions. New York, NY: 

Springer-Verlag. Pp. 99-139.

Majors, A.P. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. 1990. Effects of noise on animals: implications for dolphins 

exposed to seal bombs in the eastern tropical Pacific purse-seine fishery–an annotated 

bibliography. NOAA Administrative Report LJ-90-06.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. Annual report to Congress – 1998.
Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler, M. Kendziorek, and D.R. Nysewander. 1990. Immediate 

impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on marine birds. The Auk. 107 (2): 387-397

Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vauk-Hentzelt. 1989. Losses of seabirds by oil 

pollution at the German North Sea coast. Topics in Marine Biology. Ros, J.D, ed. Scient. 

Mar. 53 (2-3): 749-754.

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

Field-Naturalist. 89:278-298.

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

• Hazard Surveys

• BOEM EIS’s:

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

001 

o GOM Central and Western Planning Areas Sales 166 and 168 Final Environmental 

Impact Statement. BOEM 96-0058.
Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 16 – Pg. 28 of 28

Supplemental Exploration Plan October, 2013

Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84 / 85 (OCS-G08484 / 09797)

SECTION 16

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION

The proposed bottom-hole locations of the planned wells have been removed from the 

Public Information copy of this EP as well as any discussions of the target objectives, 

geologic or geophysical data, and any interpreted geology.

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. C&C Technologies Survey Services. 3D Seismic Shallow Geohazard Report, 

King Field, Blocks 84 (OCS-G 08484), 85 (OCS-G 08797), and 128 (OCS-G 

27995) Mississippi Canyon Area, July 2013 (C&C Project #130295).

2. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Archaeological Assessment Report King 

Field, Blocks 84 (OCS-G 08484) and 128 (OCS-G 27995) Mississippi Canyon 

Area, July, 2013 (C&C Project #130270).

3. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Archaeological & Hazard Study, “King 

South,” Block 85 (OCS-G 08797) & Block 129 (OCS-G 10977) Mississippi 

Canyon Area, Block 45 (Unleased) & Block 89 (OCS-G 10441) Desoto Canyon 

Area, October, 2007 (C&C Project #072372-073019).

4. C&C Technologies Survey Services. Site Clearance Letters Proposed Wells “A” 

& “B” Blocks 85 (OCS-G 08797) Mississippi Canyon Area, September, 2013 

(C&C Project #130295).

5. Initial Exploration Plan (Control Number N-4208).

6. Regional Oil Spill Response Plan, Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Control 

Number O-713). 

7. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control Number S-3630).

8. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control Number S-7147). 

9. Unit Agreement (Unit Number 754396002).