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-07526

Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan

Lease(s) - OCS-G24069 Block - 301 Mississippi Canyon Area

Operator - LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.

Drill, complete, and install subsea wellhead for Well A

SEMISUBMERSIBLE

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.

James Webb

Plan Coordinator Description -

Rig Type - Subject: From: December 12, 2011

## LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C.

1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 200 Covington, Louisiana 70433



## SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

OCS-G-24069

MISSISSIPPI CANYON BLOCK 301

PREPARED BY:

Kathy Gowland Regulatory Specialist 985-801-4300 (Main) 985-801-4317 (Direct) kathygo@llog.comLLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, L.L.C.

SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

OCS-G-24069 Lease Mississippi Canyon Block 301

APPENDIX A Plan Contents

APPENDIX B General Information

APPENDIX C Geological, Geophysical Information

APPENDIX D Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Information

APPENDIX E Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

APPENDIX F Waste and Discharge Information

APPENDIX G Air Emissions Information

APPENDIX H Oil Spill Information

APPENDIX I Environmental Monitoring Information

APPENDIX J Lease Stipulation Information

APPENDIX K Environmental Mitigation Measures Information

APPENDIX L Related Facilities and Op erations Information

APPENDIX M Support Vessels and Aircraft Information

APPENDIX N Onshore Support Facilities Information

APPENDIX O Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Information

APPENDIX P Environmental Impact Analysis

APPENDIX Q Administrative Information

### APPENDIX A

PLAN CONTENTS (30 CFR Part 250.211 and 250.241)

A. Plan information

In accordance with 30 CFR 250.211 and 250.241(a),and NTL No. 2008-G04 and NTL 2010-N06, LLOG Exploration Offshore, LL C proposes supplementing the Initial Exploration Plan, Control No. 08413, for the drilling, comp letion, testing and

installation of subsea wellhead and/or manifo ld for one additional proposed location on Lease OCS-G-24069, Mississippi Canyon Block 301, Well A.

Included as Attachment A is Form MMS 137 “OCS Plan Information Form”.

. 

### B. Location

Attachment B

– Well Location Plat

Attachment C – Bathymetry Map – Seafloor disturbance area



### C. Safety & Pollution Features

Safety features on the semi-submersible will include well control, pollution prevention, welding procedure, and blow out prevention equipment as described in Title 30 CFR Part 250, Subparts C, D, E, G & O; and as fu rther clarified by Noti ces to Lessees, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U. S. Coast Guard. The appropriate life rafts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc., as prescribed by the U. S. Coas t Guard will be maintained on the facility at all times.



### D. Storage Tanks and Vessels

The following table details the storage tanks and/or production vessels that will store oil (capacity greater than 25 barrels) and be used to sup port the proposed activities (MODU, barges, platform, etc.):

Type of Storage Tank Type of Facility Tank Capacity (bbls) Number of

tanks Total Capacity (bbls) Fluid Gravity (API)

Fuel Oil (Marine Diesel) SemiSubmersible 95.24 2 190.5 No. 2 Diesel

2917.8 4 11,671.2

Total 11,861.7

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 1

### E. Pollution Prevention Measures

This section of the plan is not a pplicable to the proposed operations.



### F. Additional measures :

No additional measures are proposed.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 2

## OCS Plan Information Form

Attachment A (Public Information)U.S. Department of the Interior OMB Control Number: 1010-0151 Minerals Management Service OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/2011 OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM

General Information

Type of OCS Plan: Exploration Plan (EP) Deve lopment Operations Coordination Document (DOCD)

Company Name: MMS Operator Number:

Address: Contact Person:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

Lease(s): Area: Block(s): Project Name (If Applicable):

Objective(s): Oil Gas Sulphur Salt Ons hore Base: Distance to Closest Land (Miles):

Description of Proposed Activities (Mark all that apply)

Exploration drilling Development drilling

Well completion Installation of production platform

Well test flaring (for more than 48 hours) Installation of production facilities

Installation of caisson or platform as well protec tion structure Installation of satellite structure

Installation of subsea wellheads and/ or manifolds Commence production

Installation of lease term pipelines Other (Specify and describe)

Have you submitted or do you plan to submit a Conservation Information Document to accompany this plan? Yes No

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

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

Do you propose any activities that may disturb an MMS-des ignated high-probability archaeological area? Yes No

Have all of the surface locations of your proposed activities been previously reviewed and approved by MMS? Yes No

Tentative Schedule of Proposed Activities

Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days

Description of Drilling Rig Description of Production Platform

Jackup Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform

Gorilla Jackup Platform rig Well protector Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Fixed platform Guyed tower

DP Semisubmersible Other (Attach Descripti on) Subsea manifold Floating production system

Drilling Rig Name (If Known): Spar Other (Attach Description)

Description of Lease Term Pipelines

From (Facility/Area/Block) To (Facility/Area/Block) Diamet er (Inches) Length (Feet)

MMS FORM MMS-137 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous editi ons of form MMS-137 which may not be used.) Page 1 of 22

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 rena ming well or structure, reference previous name): Subsea Completion

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: Yes No

Surface Location Bottom-Hole Location (For Wells)

Lease No. OCS OCS

Area Name

Block No.

Blockline
Departures
(in feet) N/S Departure: F____ L N/S Departure: F____ L

E/W Departure: F____ L E/W Departure: F____ L

Lambert X-Y

coordinates X: X:

Y: Y:

Latitude/ Longitude Latitude Latitude

Longitude Longitude

TVD (Feet): MD (Feet): Water Depth (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 C oordinate Length of Anchor

Chain on Seafloor

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

X = Y =

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Statement: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires us to inform you that MMS collects this information as part of an applicant’s Exploration Plan or Development Operations Coordination Document submitted for MMS approval. We use the information to facilitate our review and data entry for OCS plans. We will protect proprieta ry data according to the Freedom of Information Act and 30 CFR 250.197. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a pe rson is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget Control Number. The use of this form is voluntary. The public reporting burden for this form is included in the burden fo r preparing Exploration Plans and Development Operations

Coordination Documents. We estimate that burden to average 600 hours per response, or 640 with an accompanying EP (1,000 hours in AKOCSR), or 690 (1,700 in AKOCSR) with an accompanying DPP or DOCD, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and comp leting and reviewing the forms associated with subpart B. Direct comments regarding the burden estimate or any other as pect of this form to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, Mail Stop 5438, Minerals Management Service, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.

MMS FORM MMS-137 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous editi ons of form MMS-137 which may not be used.) Page 2 of 2

## Well Location Plats

Attachment B (Public Information)

## LLOG EXPL OFFSHORE

Mississippi Canyon Block 301

Gulf of Mexico



## LOCATION MAP

9/11

Geo: Eric Zimmermann 

# PUBLIC

0’ 1000’ 2000’ 

### LLOG EXPLORATION OFFSHORE, INC.

OCS-G 24069



## MC 301

SURFACE LOCATION A: X: 1,271,302.00 Y: 10,417,170.00 Lat: 28 deg, 42 min, 01.379 sec Long: 88 deg, 09 min, 06.2160sec 4,102’ FWL 5,550’ FNL (NAD27) Surface

Loc AX= 1,267, 200X= 1,283,040 Y= 10,422,720

Y= 10,406,880

## Bathymetry Map

Attachment C (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 5Figure W

- 1 MC 301 

## Seafloor rendering with maximum anchor radius MC 301

- A G08807 #1 MC 258

MC 302 MC 300 MC 301

MC 346 MC 344 MC 345 MC 256 MC 257



### Mobile

Dome

1 MILE MISSISSIPPI

CANYON

AREA 

### Mitchell

Dome

Dauphin

Dome MC 301

- A Circle represents 1,000’ buffer from

maximum anchor

radius Existing

Circle represents 15,500’ maximum

anchor radius

circle around well Wells

Infrastructure Proposed Circle represents 2,000’

radius circle around well (per NTL 2009

- G40)

Communications Cable, active Expulsion Mounds Feature Bathymetry ( bsl )

### APPENDIX B

GENERAL INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.213 and 250.243)

A. Applications and Permits

There are no Federal/State applications to be submitted for the activities provided for in this Plan (exclusive to BOEMRE permit app lications and general pe rmits issued by the EPA and COE)

Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status

N/A



### B. Drilling Fluids

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be used per Well

Water Based (seawater, freshwater, barite) See Appendix F, Table 1 of this Plan Oil–based (diesel, mineral oil) N/A Synthetic-based (internal olefin, ester) See Appendix F, Table 2 of this Plan



### C. New Or Unusual Technology

LLOG does not propose using any new and/ or unusual technology for the operations proposed this Revised Plan.



### D. Bonding Statement

The bond requirements for the activities and f acilities proposed in this Revised EP are satisfied by an area wide bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR Part 256; subpart I; NTL No. 2006-G 16, “Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds,” and additional security under 30 CFR 256.43(d) and National NTL No. 2003-N06 “Supplemental Bonding Procedures.”



### E. Oil Spill Responsibility (OSFR)

LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C (MMS Co. No. 02058) will demonstrate oil spill financial responsibility for th e facilities proposed in this Revised EP according to 30 CFR Part 253, and NTL 99-N01, “Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for

Covered Facilities.”

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 6

### F. Deepwater Well Control Statement

LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. (MMS Co. No. 02058) has the financial capability

to drill a relief well and conduct othe r emergency well control operations.



### G. Blowout Scenario

See the following Blowout Scenario includ ing Site Specific Proposed Relief Well and Intervention Planning and Relief Well Response Time Estimate – Attachment D

.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 7

## NTL 2010-N06 Data

Attachment D (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 8BLOWOUT SCENARIO

Pursuant with 30 CFR 250.213(g), 250.219, 250,250 and NTL 2010-N06 the following attachment provides a blowout scenario description, informat ion regarding any oil spill, WCD results and assump tions of potential spill and additional measures taken to firstly enhance the ability to prevent a blowout and secondly to manage a
blowout scenario if it occurred.

INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS

PROPOSED PROSPECT INFORMATION

Well Surface Location WD X (NAD 27) Y (NAD 27) Latitude Longitude

MC 301 OCS-G-24069 6135 1,271,302’ 10,417,170’ 28 ° 42’ 01.3794” 89 ° 09’ 06.2164”

INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS

A) Blowout scenario

The MC 301 to be drilled to potential outlined in the Geol ogical and Geophysical Information Section of this plan utilizing a typical subsea wellhead system, conductor, su rface and intermediate casing strings from a new wellbore and a MODU rig with marine riser and a subsea BOP system. A hydrocarbon influx and a well control event occurring from the objective sand is model ed with no drill pipe or obstructions in the wellbore followed by a failure of the subsea BOP’s and loss of well control at the seabed. The simulated flow and worst case discharge (WCD) results for all wells are calculated and the highest WCD is used for this

unrestricted blowout scenario.

B) Estimated flow rate of the potential blowout

Category Revised EP Type of Activity Drilling / Completion Ops Facility Location (area / block) MC 301 Facility Designation MODU Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) ~62 Uncontrolled Blowout (Volume per day) 110,674 bbls Type of Fluid Oil, Gas and Water

C) Total volume and maximum duration of the potential blowout

Duration of Flow (days) 104 days total (s ee Relief Well Response Estimate below) Total Volume of Spill (bbls) ~11.5 MMBO based on 99 days of uncontrolled flow

D) Assumptions and calculations used in determining the worst case discharge

Attached to the Proprietary Copy - Omitted from Public Information Copies

E) Potential for the well to bridge over

Mechanical failure/collapse of the borehole in a blowout scenario is influenced by several factors including in-situ stress, rock strength and fluid velocities at t he sand face. Given the substantial fluid velocities inherent in the WCD, and the scena rio as defined where the formation is not supported by a cased and cemented wellbore, it is possible that the borehole may fa ll/collapse/bridge over within a span of a few days, significantly reducing the outflow of the rates. For this blowout scenario, no bridging is considered.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 9F) Likelihood for intervention to stop blowout

The likelihood of surface intervention to stop a blowout is based on some of the following equipment specific to potential MODU’s to be contracted for this well. It is reasonable to assume that the sooner you are able to respond to the initial blowout, the better likelihood t here is to control and contain the event due to reduced pressures at the wellhead, less exposure of well flui ds to erode and compromise the well control equipment, and less exposure of hydrocarbons to the surface to safeguard personnel and equipment in an emergency situation. This equipment includes:

• Secondary Acoustic BOP Control System – typically fitted on DP MODU’s presently operating in the GOM. This system has the ability to communicate and function specific BOP controls from the surface in the event of a failure of the primary um bilical control system. This system typically can
establish BOP controls from the surface acoust ic system package on the rig or by deploying a second acoustic package from a separate vessel of opportunity. This system may not be included
on all MODU’s such as 4 th generation moored rigs. This system is typically configured to function the following:

- Blind/shear ram close

- Pipe ram close

- LMRP disconnect

• ROV Intervention BOP Control System – includ es one or more ROV intervention panels mounted on the subsea BOP’s located on the seabed allows a ROV utilizing standard ROV stabs to access and function the specific BOP controls. These functions will be tested at the surface as part of the required BOP stump test and selectively at the seaf loor to ensure proper functionality. These function include the following (at a minimum):

- Blind/shear ram close

- Pipe ram close

- LMRP disconnect

- WH disconnect

• Deadman / Autoshear function – typically fitted on DP MODU’s and but to be on all MODU’s operating in the GOM according to new requireme nts, this equipment allows for an automated preprogrammed sequence of functions to close the ca sing shear rams and the blind/shear rams in the event of an inadvertent or emergency disconnec t of the LMRP or loss of both hydraulic and electrical supply from t he surface control system.

In the event that the intervention syst ems for the subsea BOP’s fail, LLOG will initiate call out of a secondary containment / surface intervention system supporte d by the Helix Well Containment Group (HWCG) of which LLOG is a member. This system incorporates a capping stack capable of being deployed from the back of a vessel of opportunity equi pped with a ROV or from the Helix Q4000 DP MODU. Based on the potential integrity concerns of the well, a “cap a nd flow” system can be deployed which may include the Helix Producer 1 capable of handling up to 55,000 BOPD flowback. The vertical intervention work is contingent upon the condition of the bl owing out well and what equipment is intact to access the wellbore for kill or containment operations. The available intervention equipment ma y also require modifications based on actual wellbore conditions. Standard equipment is available through the Helix Deepwater Containment System to fit the wellhead and BOP stack profiles used for the drilling of the above mentioned well.

G) Availability of rig to drill relief we ll, rig constraints and timing of rigs

LLOG currently has one deepwater MO DU under contract (Noble Amos Runn er moored semi). In the event

of a blowout scenario that does not involve loss or da mage to the rig such as an inadvertent disconnect of the BOP’s, then the existing contracted rig may be available for drilling the relief well and vertical

intervention work. If the blowout scenario involves dam age to the rig or loss of the BOP’s and riser, a replacement rig or rigs will be required.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 10With the current activity level in the GOM, 25 to 30 deepwater MODU’S are potentially available to support the relief well drilling operations. Rig share and resource sharing agreements are in place between members of the Helix Well Containment Group. The abilit y to negotiate and contract an appropriate rig or rigs to drill relief wells is highly probable in a short period of time. If the rig or rigs are operating, the time to properly secure the well and mobe the rig to the relief well site location is estimated to be about 14 to 21 days. Dynamically positioned (DP) MODU’s would be the preferred option due to the logistical advantage versus a moored MODU which may add complications due to the mooring spread.

VESSELS OF OPPORTUNITY

Based on the water depth restrictions for the proposed locations the following “Vessels of Opportunity” are presently available for utilization for intervention and containment and relief well operations. These may

include service vessel s and drilling rigs capable of working in the potential wa ter depths and may include moored vessels and dynamically positioned vessels. The spec ific conditions of the intervention or relief well operations will dictate the “best fit” vessel to efficiently perform the desired results based on the blowout

scenario. The list in cluded below illustrates specific option that may vary according to the actual timing / availability at the time the vessels are needed.

OPERATION SPECIF IC VESSEL OF OPPORTUNITY

Intervention and Containment • Helix Q4000 (DP Semi)

• Helix Producer 1 (DP FPU)
Relief Well Drilling Rigs • Seadrill West Sirius (DP Semi)

• Ensco 8502 (DP Semi)

• Transocean Enterpri se (DP Drillship) ROV / Multi-Purpose Service Vessels • Oceaneering (numerous DP ROV vessels)

• HOS Achiever, Iron Horse 1 and 2 (DP MPSV)

• Helix Pipe Lay Vessel (equipped w/ 6” PL – 75,000’)

• Other ROV Vessels – (Chouest, HOS, Fugro, Subsea 7) Shuttle Tanker / Barge Support • OSG Ship Management

H) Measures taken to enhance ability to prev ent blowout / reduce likelihood of blowout

Pursuant to BOEM-2010-034 Final Interim Rules, measur es to enhance the ability to prevent or reduce the likelihood of a blowout are largely based on proper pl anning and communication, i dentification of potential hazards, training and experience of personnel, use of good oil field practices and proper equipment that is properly maintained and inspected for executing dr illing operations of the proposed well or wells to be

drilled.

When planning and designing the well, ample time is spent analyzing offset data, performing any needed earth modeling and identifying any potential drilling hazards or well specific conditions to safeguard the safety of the crews when well construction operations are underway. Once the design criteria and well design is established, the well design is modeled for the lif ecycle of the wellbore to ensure potential failure modes are eliminated. Pursuant to BOEM-2010-0034 Interim Final Rules implemented additional considerations of a minimum of 2 independent barriers for both internal and external flow paths in addition to proper positive and negative te sting of the barriers.

The proper training of crew members and awareness to identify and handle well control event is the best way prevent a blowout incident. Contractor’s perso nnel and service personnel training requirements are verified per regulatory requirements per guidelines issued in BOEM-2010-034 Interim Final Rules. Drills are performed frequently to verify crew training and improve reaction times.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 11Good communication between rig personnel, office support personnel is critical to the success of the operations. Pre-spud meetings are conducted with rig crews and service providers to discuss, inform and as needed improve operations and well plans for safety and efficiency considerations. Daily meetings are conducted to discuss planning and potential hazard s to ensure state of preparedness and behavior is
enforced to create an informed and safe culture for the operations. Any changes in the planning and initial wellbore design is incorporated and communicated in a Management of Change (MOC) process to ensure continuity for all personnel.

Use of established good oil field practices that safeguard crews and equipment are integrated to incorporate LLOG’s, the contractor and se rvice provider policies.

Additional personnel and equipment will be used as needed to elevate awareness and provide real time monitoring of well conditions while drilling such as MWD/LWD/PWD tools used in the bottom hole assemblies. The tool configuration for each open hol e section varies to optimize information gathered including the use of Formation-Pres sure-While-Drilling (FPWD) tools to establish real time formation pressures and to be used to calibrates pore pressure models while drilling. Log information and pressure data is used by the drilling engineers, geologist and pore pressure engineers to maintain well control and reduced potential events such as well cont rol events and loss circulation events.

Mud loggers contin uously monitor return drilling fluids, drill gas le vels and cuttings as well as surface mud volumes and flow rates, rate of penetration and lithol ogy/paleo to aid in understanding trends and geology being drilled. Remote monitoring of real time dr illing parameters and evaluation of geologic markers and pore pressure indicators is used to identify potential well condition changes.

Proper equipment maintenance and inspection program for same to before the equipment is required. Programmed equipment inspections and maintenance will be performed to ensure the equipment operability and condition. Operations will cease as needed in order to ensure equipment and well conditions are maintained and controlled for the safety of personnel, rig and subsurface equipment and the environment.

I) Measures to conduct effective and early intervention in the event of a blowout

In conjunction with the LLOG Exploration’s “Well Cont rol Emergency Response Plan” and as required by NTL 2010-N06, the following is provided to demonstra te the potential time needed for performing secondary intervention and drilling of a relief well to handle potential worst case discharge for the proposed prospect. Specific plans are integrated into the Helix Well Containment Groups procures to be approved and submitted with the Application for Permit to Drill. Equipment availability, backup equipment and adaptability to the potential scenarios will need to be addressed based on the initial site assessment of the seafloor conditions for intervention operations. Relief well equipment such as backup wellhead equipment and tubulars will be available in LLOG’s inventory for immediate deployment as needed to address frilling the relief well(s).

SITE SPECIFIC PROPOSED RELIEF WELL AND INTERVENTION PLANNING

No platform was considered for drilling relief wells for th is location due to locati on, water dept h and lack of appropriate platform within the area. For this reas on a moored or DP MODU will be preferred / required.

A relief well site has been initially identified to addre ss blowout scenarios for the potential geologic targets for the proposed wells. One relief well surface locations is proposed for the proposed exploration plan well. Due to shipping fairway restrictions, the proposed relief well location(s) is dependent on governmental agency approvals. A 1000’ bathometry limit is pl anned to accommodate the use of DP MODUs which typically need 1000’ water depths to operate in a very tight watch circle. Based on actual seafloor state unforeseen at this time, the final location(s) may need to be revised. The location has been selected based on proximity to the targets sands and potential shallow hazards.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 12Proposed EP Well Proposed Relief Well X (NAD 27) Y (NAD 27)

MC 301 OCS-G-24069 MC 301 RW1 1,269,442’ 10,419,549’

MC 301 RW2 1,274,238’ 10,417,443’

MC 301 RW3 1,270,863’ 10,414,416’

“*” indicates common relief well site to more than 1 exploration plan well

RELIEF WELL RESPONSE TIME ESTIMATE

OPERATION TIME ESTIMATE (DAYS)

IMMEDIATE RESPONSE

• safeguard personnel, render first-aid

• make initial notifications

• implement short term intervention (if possible)

• implement spill control

• develop Initial Action Plan 1

INTERIM REPSONSE

• establish Onsite Command Center and Emergency Management Team

• assess well c ontrol issues

• mobilize people and equipment (H elix DW Containment System)

• implement short term intervention and containment (if possible)

• develop Intervention Plan

• initiate relief well planning, negotiate, acquire rig(s) – 4 days

• continue spill control measures 4

INTERVENTION AND CONTAIMENT OPERATIONS

• mobilize equipment and initiate intervention and containment operations

• perform TA operations and mobilize relief wells rig(s)

• secure rig operations (10 days) , prep and mobe to location (4 days)

• finalize relief well plans, mobilize spud equipment, receive approvals

• continue spill control measures 14

RELIEF WELL(S) OPERATIONS

• continue intervention and containment measures

• continue spill control measures

• drill relief well(s), ranging operations to intersect wellbore 65

PERFORM HYDRAULIC KILL OPERATIONS / SECURE BLOWNOUT WELL

• continue intervention and containment measures

• continue spill control measures

• perform hydraulic kill operati ons, monitor well, secure well 20

ESTIMATED TOTAL DAYS OF UNCONTROLLED FLOW 104 SECURE RELIELF WELL(S) / PERFORM P&A / TA OPERATIONS / DEMOBE 30

TOTAL DAYS 129

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 13Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 14

### APPENDIX C

GEOLOGICAL AND GEOP HYSICAL INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.214 and 250.244)

A. Geological Description

Included as Attachment E are the geological targets and a narrative of trapping features proposed in this Plan



### B. Structure Contour Maps

Included as Attachment F are current structure maps (depth base and expressed in feet subsea) depicting the entire lease coverage area; drawn on top of the prospective hydrocarbon sands. The maps depict each proposed bottom hole location and applicable geological cross section.



### C. Interpreted Seismic Lines

Included as Attachment G is a copy of the migrated and annotated (shot points, time lines, well paths) deep seismic line with in 500 feet of the surface location being proposed in this Plan.



### D. Geological Structure Cross-Sections

An interpreted geological cross section depi cting the proposed well locations and depth of the proposed wells is included as Attachment H . Such cross section corresponds to each seismic line being submitted.



### E. Shallow Hazards Report

Berger Geosciences, LLC conducted a Shallow Hazards Assessment, Benthic Communities Evaluation, and Archaeological Resource Survey for Mississippi Canyon Block 301 on behalf of LLOG Exploration O ffshore, Inc. The pur pose of the survey was to evaluate geologic conditions and inspect for potential hazards or constraints to lease development. The report was submitted to Minerals Management Service (BOEMRE) under separate c over on September 22, 2011.



### F. Shallow Hazards Assessment

Utilizing the 3D deep seismic exploration data a shallow hazards analysis was prepared for the proposed surface locations, evaluati ng seafloor and subsurface geologic and manmade features and conditions, and is included as Attachment I.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 15

### G. High Resolution Seismic Lines

LLOG provided exploration 3-D seismic data for the evaluation of the proposed surface disturbance operations.



### H. Stratigraphic Column

A generalized biostratigraphic/ lithostratigraphic column from the seafloor to the total depth of the proposed wells is included as Attachment J.



### I. Time vs Depth Tables

LLOG has determined that there is existing sufficient well control data for the target areas proposed in this plan; therefore, tables providing seismic time versus depth for the proposed well locations are not required.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 16

## Geological Description

Attachment E (Proprietary Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 17

## Structure Maps

Attachment F (Proprietary Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 18

## Deep Seismic Lines

Attachment G (Proprietary Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 19

## Cross Section Maps

Attachment H (Proprietary Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 20

## Shallow Hazards Assessment

Attachment I (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 21Project No. 11

- 03

- 01



### Executive Summary

T his report provides an assessment of the seafloor and subsurface conditions in Mississippi Canyon (MC) Block 301 (the study area) that can impact exploration activities. The

assessment is based on interpretation of 3

- D seismic data and information from th e MC 255,

256 , and 300 Shallow Hazards Assessment ( Berger, 2010 )

, submitted to LLOG in

December 2010. The limit of the investigation is constrained to the sediments between the

seafloor and 1.2 seconds two

- way travel time below the mudline (

~ 3,590 ft ).

Th e following points summarize the seafloor and shallow g eologic conditions in the study

area.

Section 1

– Shallow Hazards Assessment

 Water depths in the seafloor assessment area range from approximately 5,466 ft to
6,496 ft.

 Pursuant to the public information in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcem ent (BOEMRE) database, there is an existing well in the

northwest ern portion of MC 300

. A 2” fiber optic cable owned by BP extends

southwest to northeast across the center of the assessment area.

 Salt uplift within the seafloor assessment area has led to complex and irregular morphology but is limited to the eastern portion of the area represented by Mobile Dome. The only seafloor faulting within the assessment area is atop Mobile Dome. The dome is bounded by a steep escarpment and slump failures.

 The general dip of the seafloor is to the south. Slopes range from nearly flat to 60° along the margin of Mobile Dome.

 Seafloor amplitude anomalies indicating areas of potential hydroc arbons at or near the seafloor are located above the salt in the southeastern p ortion of the seafloor

assessment area.

 Subsurface amplitude anomalies representing possibl e shallow gas are present in stratigraphic sequences below Horizon 1 . There is an ov erall negligible

- to
moderate

- potential for encountering shallow gas in the study area.

 Bottom

- simulating reflectors , and other potential indicators of gas hydrates have not

been identified in the subsurface study area

. There is an overall negligible

- to
low

- potential for encountering gas hydrates in the study area.

 Seve n horizons and the top of salt were mapped within the study area. There are no significant sand units anticipated above Horizon 4 with one exception just above

Horizon 4

. The regional ris k of shallow water flow ( SWF ) is low. The potential for SWF within the study area ranges from negligible (clay

- dominated units) to moderate (sand

- bearing units). This range is based on offset well reports in the area and stratigraphic conditions.

 A d etailed hazards assessment and a tophole prognosis for the proposed well in the study area are included in the Wellsite Discussion of this report.Project No. 11

- 03

- 01

 Any additional proposed wells within the study area should also have detailed hazards assessments and tophole prognosis figures prepared.

Section 2

– Benthic Communities Evaluation

 Although we do not know the exact anchor pattern to be used, the maximum area of proposed disturbances to the seafloor is 1 5

, 500 ft from the proposed well as per LLOG’s request.

 Seafl oor amplitude anomalies indicating areas of potential hydrocarbons at or near the seafloor are located above the salt in the southeastern part of the seafloor assessment area. The presence of seafloor anomalies may represent areas of hardgrounds that may s upport high

- density chemosynthetic or other benthic

communities.

 An expulsion feature is located in the central portion of MC 301 that may support chemosynthetic or other benthic communities. Further analysis indicated that there

are no signs of potential hardgrounds that may support high

- density chemosynthetic

or other benthic communities.

 There are no apparent features or areas that could support high

- density benthic

communities identified within 2,000 ft of the proposed muds and cuttings discharge

loca tion for the proposed well in the study area

.  We recommend that any seafloor disturbances be located at least 250 ft from any features that could support high

- density benthic communities. We recommend using

a state

- of

- the art positioning system to ensure any seafloor disturbances do not occur

within 250 ft of such areas.

 Any additional proposed wells within the anchor assessment area should also have a detailed benthic communities evaluation prepared.

Section 3

– Archaeological Resource Survey

 Information from an archaeological resource survey and report entitled, “Archaeological Deep Tow Survey, Blocks 255, 256, 300, 301, 344, 388 Mississippi Canyon Area, OCS

- G 24064, OCS

- G 22865, OCS

- G 22868, OCS

- G 24069, OCS

- G 24074, OCS

- G 27272” completed by Tesla Offshore, LLC is included in Section 3 of this report. The complete archaeological report is to be submitted under separate

cover.

 Eleven sonar contacts were identified within the seismic data coverage area. Four

sonar contacts are located wit hin the maximum anchor radius of the proposed well. A 100 ft avoidance radius was recommended by Tesla for three of the sonar

contacts. A 500 ft avoidance radius was recommended by Tesla for one sonar contact located in the northeastern portion of MC 25 7

.  For further description of individu al sonar contacts, refer to the Tesla archaeological report ( Tesla , 20 10 ).

## Stratigraphic Column

Attachment J (Proprietary Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 22

### APPENDIX D

HYDROGEN SULFIDE (H2S) INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.215 and 250.245)

A. Concentration

LLOG does not anticipate encountering H2S while conducting the proposed exploratory operations provided for under this plan.



### B. Classification

In accordance with 30 CFR 250.490(c) a nd NTL 2007-G11, LLOG requests that the proposed location be classified H2S unknown.

Further investigation is ongoing as offset well information b ecomes available. A final determination will be made prior to submissi on of the Application for Permit to Drill as to whether the presence of H2 S is still classified as unknown.



### C. H2S Contingency Plan

Contingent upon the outcome of B above , LLOG will submit to the appropriate

BOEMRE GOMR District Offi ce an H2S Contingency Plan prepared according to 30 CFR 250.417(f) before conducting the proposed exploration activities.



### D. Modeling Report

Not applicable to the proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 23

### APPENDIX E BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SO CIOECONOMIC INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.216 and 250.247)

A. High-Density Deepwater Benthi c Communities Information

The maximum area of proposed disturbances to the seafloor is 15,500’ from the proposed well. Seafloor amplitude a nomalies indicating areas of potential hydrocarbons at or near the seafloor are loca ted above the salt in th e southeastern part of the seafloor assessment area. The pres ence of seafloor anomalies may represent areas of hardgrounds that may support high- density chemosyntheti c or other benthic

communities.

An expulsion feature is located in the central portion of MC 301 that may support chemosynthetic or other benthic communities. Further analysis indicated that there are no signs of potential hardgrounds that ma y support high-density chemosynthetic or

other benthic communities.

There are no apparent features or areas that could support high-density benthic communities identified within 2,000’ of th e proposed muds and cuttings discharge location for the proposed well in the study area.



### B. Topographic Features Map

The activities proposed in this Plan are not affected by a topographic feature.



### C. Topographic Features Statement (Shunting)

The activities proposed in this Plan are not affected by a topographic feature; therefore, LLOG is not required to shunt dr ill cuttings and drill fluids.



### D. Live Bottoms (Pinnacle Trend) Map

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is not located w ithin the vicinity of a proposed live bottom (Pinnacle trend) area.



### E. Live Bottoms (Low Relief) Map

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is not located w ithin the vicinity of a proposed live bottom (Low Relief) area.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 24

### F. Potentially Sensitive Biological Features Map

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is not located within the vicinity of a proposed sensitive biological feature area.



### G. Remotely Operated Vehicle (R OV) Monitoring Survey Plan

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is located in Grid 16 which does not require a ROV

survey.

H. 

### Threatened or Endangered Species, Critical Habitat, and Marine

Mammal Information

.

Proposed activities in Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is not located in the presence of federally listed threatened or endangered species and critical ha bitat designated under the ESA and marine mammal protected under the MMPA.

I. 

### Archaeological Report

Berger Geosciences, LLC conducted a Shallow Hazards Assessment, Benthic Communities Evaluation, and Archaeological Resource Survey for Mississippi Canyon Block 301 on behalf of LLOG Exploration O ffshore, Inc. The pur pose of the survey was to evaluate geologic conditions and inspect for potential hazards or constraints to lease development. The report was submitted to Minerals Management Service (BOEMRE) under separate c over on September 22, 2011.



### J. Air and Water Quality Information

Not applicable to proposed operations.



### K. Socioeconomic Information

Not applicable to proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 25

## NOAA Species Known in GOM

Attachment K (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 26

### APPENDIX F

WASTE AND DISCHA RGE INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.217 AND 250.248)

A. Projected Generated Wastes

See the following tables:

TABLE 1. Wastes you will generate, treat and downhole dispose or discharge to the GOM

TABLE 2. Wastes you will transport and /or dispose of onshore



### B. Modeling

Not applicable. Proposed activities will be covered by U.S. EPA NPDES General

Permit.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 27please specify if the amount reported is a total or per well amount MC Bl oc k 301

Projected Generated Waste Projected Ocean Discharges

Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge rate Discharge Method Answer yes or no Will drilling occur ? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings. EXAMPLE: Cuttings wetted with synthetic

based fluid using synthetic based drilling fluid. X bbl/well X bbl/day/well discharge overboard No

Water-based drilling fluid Water based mud additives, barite and gel

used for WBM 80,822 bbls/well 8,572 bbls/day/well Discharge overboard No

Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings generated while using water based drilling fluid. 4,156 bbls/well 441 bbls/day/well Discharge overboard No

Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Cuttings generated while using synthetic based drilling fluid. 2,888 bbls/well 116 bbls/day/well Discharge overboard No Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste

EXAMPLE: Sanitary waste water Sanitary waste from living quarters X bbl/well X bbl/hr/well chlorinate and discharge overboard No

Domestic waste Misc waste for living quarters 12,146 bbls/well 2.7 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard (no free oil) No

Sanitary waste Processed sanitary waste from living quarters 8,098 bbls/well 1.8 bbls/hr/well Chlorinate and discharge overboard No Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage

Deck Drainage A ccumulated drainage due to rainfall 0 to 47,261 bbls/well 0 to 167 bbls/hr/well Test for oil and grease and discharge

overboard No Will you conduct well treatment, completion, or workover?

Well treatment fluids NPDES approved

treatment fluid used for well operations 100 bbls/well 0 to 20 bbls/hr/well Test for oil and grease and discharge

overboard. No

Well completion fluids Clear brines used for completion operations 500 bbls/well 0 to 100 bbls/hr/well Test for oil and grease and discharge

overboard. This

excludes clear brines

containing Zinc No

Workover fluids N/A N/A NA NA No Miscellaneous discharges. If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity.

Desalinization unit discharge Uncontaminated spent seawater used for potable

water generation unit 0 to 5,000 bbls/well 0 to 700 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard No

Blowout prevent fluid Treated freshwater used

control of subsea blowout preventers 0 to 100 bbls/well 0 t0 20 bbls/hr/well Discharge at seafloor

when BOP's installed No

Ballast water Uncontaminated seawater

used for ballast control 0 to 100,000

bbls/well 16,350 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard No

Bilge water Uncontaminated

freshwater and seawater

overflow / leakage

accumuated from machinery operations 0 to 5000 bbls/well 0 to 1635 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard No

Excess cement at seafloor Excess cement slurry and

mixwater used for cementing operation -

NPDES allowed 300 bbls/well 0 to 360 bbls/hr/well Discharge at mudline No

Fire water Uncontaminated seawater

used for fire control system 0 to 10,000 bbls/well 0 to 16,350 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard No

Cooling water Uncontaminated seawater used for heat exchanger operations used to cool machinery 3,367,000 bbls/well 1542 bbls/hr/well Discharge overboard No Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in for produced water.

Produced water NA NA NA NA No Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit ? NPDES Permit# GMG290000 NOTE: If you will not have a type of waste, enter NA in the row. j

Downhole Disposal TABLE 1. WASTES YOU WILL GENERATE, TREAT AND DOWNHOLE DISPOSE OR

DISCHARGE TO THE GOMPlease specify whatever the amount reported is a total or per wellMC Block 301Projectedgenerated wasteSolidandLiquidWastsesTransportationType of Waste Composition Transport Method Name/Location of Facility Amount Disposal MethodNewport EnvironmentalServices Inc., Ingleside, TXX bbl/well RecycledOil-based drilling fluid or mudN/ANAN/A NA NASynthetic-based drilling fluid or mudInternal olifin, ester nbasedmudBarged in 25 bbls cutting boxesand / or liquid mud tanks forsupply vesselsNewpark Transfer Station,Fourchon, LA 6750 bbls / well RecycledCuttings wetted with Water-based fluidN/ANAN/A NA NACuttings wetted with Synthetic-based fluidN/ANAN/A NA NACuttings wetted with oil-based fluidsN/ANAN/A NA NAWill you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in for produced sand.Produced sandN/A N/A N/A N/A N/AEXAMPLE: trash and debris (recylables) Plastic, paper, aluminum barged in a storage binARC, New Iberia, LAXlb/well RecycledTrash and debrisPlastic, paper, aluminum Barged in a storage binBlanchard Landfill, GoldenMeadows, LA 4000 lbs / well Recycled/Land fillUsed oilSpent oil from machineryBarged in USCG approvedtransfer tote tanks. L&L Services, Fourchon, LA 200 bbls / well RecycledWash waterWash water w/ SBM residueand surfactantsBarged in 25 bbls cutting boxesand / or liquid mud tanks forsupply vesselsNewpark Transfer Station,Fourchon, LA 2000 bbls / wellApproved disposal wellinjection or land farmChemical product wastesSpent treatment and / ordamaged chemicals used inoperationsBarged in 25 bbls cutting boxesand / or cutting boxes L&L Services, Fourchon, LA 10 bbls / well RecycledNOTE: If you will not have a type of waste, enter NA in the row.TABLE 2. WASTES YOU WILL TRANSPORT AND /OR DISPOSE OF ONSHOREWill you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge? IfWaste Disposal

### APPENDIX G

AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.218AND 250.249)

A. Emissions Worksheets and Screening Questions

The Projected Quality Emissions Report (Form MMS-138) addresses the proposed drilling, completion and potential testi ng operations utilizi ng a typical semisubmersible drilling unit, with related support vesse ls and construction barge

information.

As evidenced by the Screening Questions below, the proposed operations screened

out based on “no” answer to all the screening questions.

Screening Questions for EP’s Yes No
Is any calculated Complete Total (CT) Emis sion amount (in tons associated with your proposed exploration activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated using the following formulas: CT = 3400D(2/3) for CO, and CT = 33.3D for the other air pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles)? X

Does your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures or modified

emission factors? X

Are your proposed exploration activities loca ted east of 87.5 degrees 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



### B. Emissions Reduction Measures

The projected air emissions are within th e exemption level; ther efore, no emission reduction measures are being proposed.



### C. Verification of Nondefault Emissions Factors

LLOG has elected to use the default emission factors as provided in Attachment L.



### D. Non-Exempt Activities

The proposed activities are within th e exemption amount as provided in Attachment L.



### E. Modeling Report

This section of the Plan is not a pplicable to the proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 28

## Air Quality Emissions Report

Attachment L (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 29COMPANY LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.

AREA Mississippi Canyon

BLOCK 301

LEASE OCS-G-24069

PLATFORM

WELL A

COMPANY

CONTACT Kathy Gowland

TELEPHONE NO. 985-801-4300

REMARKS Drill and complete one well

Air Pollutant Plan Emission

Amounts* (tons) Calculated Exemption

Amounts** (tons) Calculated Complex Total

Emission

Amounts*** (tons)
Carbon monoxide (CO) 169.12 53831.85 N/A Particulate matter (PM) 22.55 2097.90 N/A Sulphur dioxide (SOx) 103.44 2097.90 N/A Nitrogen oxides (NOx) 775.11 2097.90 N/A Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 23.25 2097.90 N/A
*For activities proposed in your EP, list the projected emissi ons calculated from the worksheet. **List the exemption amounts in your proposed activities calc ulated using the formulas in 30 CFR 250.303(d). ***List the complex total emissions a ssociated with your porposed activi ties calculated from the worksheets.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 30

### APPENDIX H

OIL SPILL INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.219 AND 250.250)

A. 

### Oil Spill Response Planning

All the proposed activities in this Plan w ill be covered by the Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) filed by LLOG (MMS Operator No. 02058) in accordance with 30 CFR 254 and approved on June 3, 2009, modified October 5, 2010, November 10, 2010, January 13, 2011, March 15, 2011 and modification receive d June 8, 2011. Cert ification letter accepted July 11, 2011.

The WCD proposed in this Plan does not exceed the WCD outlined in our OSRP.

B. 

### Spill Response Sites

The following locations will be used in the ev ent an oil spill occurs as a result of the proposed activities.

Primary Response Equipment

Location Pre-Planned Staging Location(s)

Houma, LA Fort Jackson, LA

C. 

### OSRO Information

The O’Brien Group (TOG) will provide tr ained personnel capable of providing supervisory management of the oil spil l response in additi on to contacting and deploying cleanup personnel and equipment

LLOG utilizes Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) as it’s primary provider for equipment, which is an industry cooperative owning an i nventory of oil spill clean-up equipment. CGA is supported by the Marine Spill Resp onse Corporation’s (MSRC), which is responsible for storing, inspecting, maintaini ng and dispatching CGA’ s equipment. The MSRC STARS network provides for the closest available personnel, as well as an MSRC supervisor to operate the equipment.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 31D. 

### Worst-Case Scenario Information

Category Regional OSRP Revised EP Type of Activity Exploratory MODU Exploratory MODU Facility Surface Location Mississippi Canyon Block 547 Mississippi Canyon Block 301 Facility Description Well Location Well No. SS002 (Location B) Location A

Distance to Nearest Shoreline (Miles) 38.4 miles 53 miles

Volume: Storage Tanks (total) Facility Piping (total) Lease Term Pipeline Uncontrolled Blowout (day) Barging

Potential 24 Hour Volume (bbls) 225,144 bbls 110,674bbls

Type of Liquid Hydrocarbon Crude Oil Crude Oil API Gravity 28o 36o

Since LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. (LL OG) has the capability to respond to the appropriate worst-case spill scenario include d in its regional OSRP approved on June 3, 2009, modified October 5, 2010, Novemb er 10, 2010, January 13, 2011, March 15, 2011, and modification received June 8, 2011, a nd certification letter accepted July 11, 2011, I hereby certify that LLOG has the capabil ity 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. The WCD for the subject plan does not exceed the worst case discharge previously submitted for MC 547.

LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C., Co mpany No. 02058, previously submitted the Regional OSRP Exploration WCD volume to be reviewed in Plan R-5139, Revised Exploration Plan submitted on March 2, 2011.

The required proprietary data outlined in NTL 2010-N06 is being submitted to

BOEMRE with the Confiden tial Copy of this Supplemental Exploration Plan.

E. 

### Oil Spill Response Discussion

See the following Oil Spill Response Discussion.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 32SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Mana gement Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well bl owout during drilling operations, estimated to be 110,674 barrels of crude oil with an API gravity of 36°.

Land Segment and Resource Identification

Trajectories of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing information in the BS EE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and

Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website. The results are shown in Figure 1. The BSEE OSRAM identifies a 21% probabi lity of impact to the shorel ines of Plaquemines Parish, LA within 30 days. Plaquemines Parish includ es Barataria Bay, the Mi ssissippi River Delta, Breton Sound and the affiliated islands and bays. This region is an extremely sensitive habitat, and serves as a migratory, breeding, feeding a nd nursery habitat for numerous species of

wildlife. Beaches in this area vary in grain pa rticle size, and can be clas sified as fine sand, shell or perched shell beaches. Sandy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant.

Response

LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as practicable. A desc ription of the response eq uipment under contract

to contain and recover the Wors t Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical charact eristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering model was run on a similar product from the ADIO S oil database. The results indicate 20% or approximately 22,134 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed w ithin 24 hours, with approximately 88,540 barrels remaining.

Spill Response MC 301, Well Location A Barrels of Oil

WCD Volume 110,674

Less 20% natural evaporation/dispersion 22,134

Remaining volume 88,540

Daily dispersant capability 7,540

Oil addressed by in-situ burning 4,427

Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary storage equipment available to respond to a spill of approximately 88,540 barrels. The volume accounts for the amount remaining after evaporatio n/dispersion at 24 hours. The list estimates individual times needed for proc urement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure

2 also indicates how operations will be supported.LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.’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 size of the spi ll, 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 dail y dispersant capability of 7,540 barrels. If the conditions are favorable for in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is in place, in-situ burning of oil may be attempted. Using estimates based on the Deepwater Horizon spill of 2010, up to 5% or approximately 4,427 barrels of the total daily Worst Case Discharge volume could be burned. Slick containment boom would be immediately

called out and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore response stra tegies may include attempting to skim utilizing the HOSS Barge, nine Fa st Response Units, two Aqua Guard Triton RBS skimmers, and five sets of Koseq skimming arms , with a total derated skimming capacity of 211,635 barrels. Temporary storage associated w ith skimming equipment equals 19,700 barrels. If additional storage is needed, an 80,000 barrel storage barge, an 83,937 barrel storage barge, and an 86,948 barrel storage barge may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the skimmers to stay in th e 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. Shorelin e protection would include the use of CGA’s

near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated sk imming capacity of 54,753 barrels. Temporary storage asso ciated with skimming equipm ent equals 1,861 barrels. If additional storage is needed, an 86,948 barrel storage barge may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage allowing the sk immers 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 vegetate d areas. MSAs with AMPOL and Oil Mop will ensure the availability of 147,000 feet of 18” shoreline 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 protect ion strategies depict the protecti on 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 necessa ry action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, based on the assumption that re moval of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to fragile coastal ecosystem s if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervisory pers onnel have the option to modify the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more eff ective response to site-specific circumstances. LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L. C.’s contract Spill Management Team holds a copy of the

State of Louisiana Initia l Oil Spill Response Plan.Based on the anticipated worst case discharge sc enario, LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. can be onsite with contracted oil spill recovery equi pment with adequate response capacity to contain and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, within an estimated 36 hours (based on the equi pment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)). LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. will continue to commit additional on-water mechanical recovery resources as well as apply dispersants and in-situ burning needed and as approved, under the supervision of the USCG Ca ptain of the Port (COTP) and the Regional Response Team (RRT).Initial Response Considerations Actual actions taken during an oil spill response will be based on many factors to include but not

be limited to:

• Weather

• Equipment and materials availability

• Ocean currents and tides

• Location of the spill

• Product spilled

• Amount spilled

• Environmental risk assessments

• Trajectory and product analysis

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

LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. will take acti on to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much of the spilled oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response actions will be designed to provide an “in-depth” protection strategy meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations.

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

• Information will be confirmed

• An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

• OSROs and appropriate agen cies will be notified

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form completed

• Initial Safety plan will be written and published

• Unified Command will be established

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

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

site

o On-site command and control established

Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

• Surveillance Aircraft: within two hours of QI notificati on, or at first light

• Provide trained observer to pr ovide on site status reports

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

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

and visual confirmation

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systemsDispersant application assets

• Put ASI on standby

• With the FOSC, conduct analysis to determin e appropriateness of di spersant application

• Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface

• Deploy aircraft in accordance with a plan developed for the actual situation

• Coordinate movement of dispersants, ai rcraft, and support equipment and personnel

• Confirm dispersant availability fo r current and long range operations

• Start ordering dispersa nt stocks required for expected operations

Containment boom

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

• Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom

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

their most effective containment

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

Dedicated off-shore skimming systems

General

• Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

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

CGA HOSS Barge

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

CGA FRUs

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off-shore as allowed

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

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of CGA contracted assets

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

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

systems

• Position as closely as possible to ski mming assets to minimize offloading timeVessels of Opportunity (VOO)

• Use LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are usually best for depl oyment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed

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

• Expect mission specific and sa fety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

In-situ Burn assets

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

affected 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 planNear Shore Response Actions

Timing

• Put near shore assets on standby and deploym ent in accordance with planning based on the actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets

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

• Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions

• Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil

Considerations

• Water depth, vessel draft

• Shoreline gradient

• State of the oil

• Use of VOOs

• Distance of surf zone from shoreline

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

• Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations

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

and visual confirmation

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets

Dispersant Use

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

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

Vessel Deployment Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• FRVs

• Egmopol and Marco SWS

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

VOO

• Use LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are usually best for depl oyment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed

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

• Expect mission specific and sa fety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patchesShoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Considerations

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

• Time to acquire personnel and eq uipment and their availability

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

Actions

Placement of boom

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

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

o Trajectories

o Weather forecast

o Oil Impact forecast

o Verified spill movement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

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

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

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

• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

• Determination of Archeological site s and gaining authority to enter

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Passive clean up of marshes should considered and appropriate stocks of sorbent boom and/or sweep obtained

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

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

recovery.

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

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots Visibility less than 3 nautical miles Ceiling less than 1,000 feet.

FRU 8 foot seas HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas Koseq Arms 8 foot seas

OSRV 4 foot seasEnvironmental Conditions in the GOM Louisiana is situated between the easterly and westerly wind belts, and therefore, experiences westerly winds during the wint er and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is generally 14-15 mph along the coast. Wave he ights average 4 and 5 feet. However, during hurricane season, Louisiana has recorded wave heights ranging from 40 to 50 feet high and winds reaching speeds of 100 mph. Because much of southern Louisiana lies below sea level, flooding is prominent.

Surface water temperature ranges between 70 and 80  ̊ F during the summer months. During the winter, the average temperatur e will range from 50 and 60  ̊ F.

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

month.FIGURE 1

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing LLOG Exploration Offshor e, L.L.C.’s WCD and information in the BSEE Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM ) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BSEE website using 30 day impact. The results are tabulated

below.

Area/Block OCS-G Launch

Area Land Segment and/or Resource Conditional Probability (%) within 30 days

Exploratory Drilling

MC 301,

Well Location A

53 nautical miles from

shore G24069 C57 Cameron Parish, LA Vermilion Parish, LA Terrebonne Parish, LA Lafourche Parish, LA Plaquemines Parish, LA

St. Bernard Parish, LA Hancock & Harrison County, MS Jackson County, MS Mobile County, AL Baldwin County, AL Escambia County, FL Okaloosa County, FL Walton County, FL

Bay County, FL 1

1

2

2

21

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS(53 nautical miles from shore)88,540 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)API Gravity 36°FIGURE 2 – Equipment ResponseTime to MC 301, Well Location ADispersant/SurveillanceDispersantCapacity (gal)StorageCapacityPersonsReq.From Hrs to ProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel tositeTotal HrsCGABasler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9ASIDC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.1 3.1DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 1 1 1.1 3.1Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 1 1 0.9 2.9Offshore ResponseOffshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAHOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 8 Harvey 7 0 5 10.6 1 23.6T&T Marine (available through contract with CGA)Koseq Skimming Arms (3) 53487 6000 3 Utility 18 Leeville 4 12 1 11.3 2 30.3Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Venice 4 12 1 7.1 2 26.1Recovered Oil Storage NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsK-Sea Operating (available through contract with CGA)PACIFIC 996165 NA 80000 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 4 10.63 1 31.63DBL 76 1212984 NA 83937 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 4 10.63 1 31.63DBL 81 1132231 NA 86948 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 4 10.63 1 31.63Staging Area: VeniceOffshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAFRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Belle Chasse 1 2 2 7.1 1 13.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston 1 2 8 7.1 1 19.1FRU (3) + 100 bbl Tank (5) 11310 500 1 Utility 6 Houma 1 2 3 7.1 1 14.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Ingleside 1 2 11 7.1 1 22.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 3770 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 7.1 1 16.6FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 7540 400 1 Utility 6 Venice 1 2 0 7.1 1 11.1Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston 4 12 8 7.1 2 33.1Offshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGA42” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Belle Chasse 1 2 2 7.1 1 13.142” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Galveston 1 2 8 7.1 1 19.142” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Houma 1 2 3 7.1 1 14.142” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Ingleside 1 2 11 7.1 1 22.142” Auto Boom (5000’) NA NA 10 Crew 20 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 7.1 1 16.642” Auto Boom (2500’) NA NA 6 Crew 12 Pascagoula 1 2 4 7.1 1 15.11000’ Hydro-Fire Boom(In-Situ Burn)NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey 1 4 2 7.1 6 20.1Nearshore ResponseNearshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsK-Sea Operating (available through contract with CGA)DBL 82 1137538 NA 86948 1 Tug 6 Venice 4 12 4 6.25 1 27.25CGA46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Galveston 1 0 0 12.4 0 13.446’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Houma 1 0 2 2.8 0 5.846’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Lake Charles 1 0 1 9.2 0 11.246’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 1 0 1 2 0 4Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Morgan City 1 2 2 4.8 1 10.8Staging Area: VeniceNearshore and InlandSkimmers With StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGASWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 8 2 0 13SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Houma 1 2 3 2 0 8SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Houma 1 2 3 2 0 8SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 2 0 10.5Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Belle Chasse 1 2 2 2 0 7RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Galveston 1 2 8 2 0 13RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Houma 1 2 3 2 0 8RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 2 0 10.5RO Storage Barge NA 249 Towed 0 Venice 1 2 0 2 0 5Shoreline ProtectionStaging Area: VeniceShoreline ProtectionBoomVOOPersonsReq.Storage/WarehouseLocationHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsAMPOL (available through MSA)42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 4 2 12 2220,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2 2 6 14Oil Mop (available through MSA)10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 4 2 3 1110,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 7.5 2 3 14.510,000 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 6.25 2 3 13.2520,000 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 1.75 2 6 11.7510,000 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.510,000 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 3.5 2 3 10.515,000 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA 2 2 2 2 4 12Beach Boom EDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGABeach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Galveston 1 2 8 1 2 14Beach Boom (1000’) NA NA NA 4 Ingleside 1 2 11 1 2 17Beach Boom (2000’) NA NA NA 6 Pascagoula 1 2 4 1 2 10Wildlife Response EDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAWildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 3 1 2 9Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Belle Chasse 1 2 2 1 2 8Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 1 2 8 1 2 14Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Houma 1 2 3 1 2 9Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Ingleside 1 2 11 1 2 17Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 1 2 5.5 1 2 11.5Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Pascagoula 1 2 4 1 2 10Response Asset TotalOffshore EDRC 211,635Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 270,585Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 54,753Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 88,709

### APPENDIX I

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.221 AND 250.252)

A. Monitoring Systems

LLOG subscribes to Impact Weather Serv ice which provides access to real-time weather conditions, and provi des periodic updates on impending inclement weather conditions such as tropical depressions, storms and/or hur ricanes entering the Gulf of

Mexico.

LLOG also relies on the National Weather Service to support the aforementioned subscribed service. During impending inclement weather conditions, LLOG closely coordinates the activity with our contractors and field personne l to ensure the safety of people for evacuation; measures to prepar e the facility for ev acuation to ensure protection of the environment and the facility/equipment.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is in water de pths greater than 400 meters (1,312’); therefore LLOG will follow the guideline s of the applicable NTL 2009-G02 by monitoring and gathering oc ean current data using Acous tic Doppler Current Profile (ADCP) while the MODU is on location.



### B. Incidental Takes

LLOG does not anticipate the incidental taki ng of any species as a result of the proposed activities based on the implementation of, and adherence to, the NTL 2007-

G03 “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness Training and Elimination” and NTL 2007- G04 “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injure d/Dead Protected Sp ecies Reporting”.



### C. Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary

This section of the plan is not a pplicable to the proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 33

### APPENDIX J

LEASE STIPULATIONS/SPECIAL CONDITIONS INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.222 AND 250.253)

A. Lease Stipulations

Minerals Management Service (BOEMRE) invoked Stipulation No. 6 – Marine Protected Species, Lease OCS- G-24069, Mississippi Canyon Block 301.

Lease Stipulation No. 6 is to reference meas ures to minimize or avoid potential adverse impacts to protected species (sea turtle s, marine mammals, gulf sturgeon, and other federally protected species). BOEMRE has issued Notice to Lessees NTL 2007-G02 “Implementation of Seismic Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program”, NTL 2007-G04 “Vessel Strike A voidance and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting” and NTL 2007-G03 “M arine Trash and Debris Awareness and

Elimination”.



### B. Special Conditions

• Subsea Completions

LLOG may potentially comple te the proposed wells as subsea completions. Therefore, LLOG will follow the regul ations in Title 30 CFR Parts 250.288 through 250.290, which mandates the submittal and approval of separate regulatory filings entitled a “Conser vation Information Document” and a “Deepwater Operations Plan”, respectively.

• Ocean Current Monitoring

The proposed operations under this Plan ar e in water depths greater than 400 meters (1,312’); therefore, LLOG will fo llow the guidelines of the applicable NTL 2009-G02 by continuously monitoring and gathering ocean current data using Acoustic Doppler Current Prof ile (ADCP) while the MODU is on

location.

• Breton Sound Area

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is located within the 200 km zone of the Breton National Wildlife Refuge, and will consid er the use of best available control technology as required if the projected air emissions are determined to significantly affect the air quality of an onshore area.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 34

### APPENDIX K

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.23 and 250.54)

A. Measures Taken to Avoid, Minimize, and Mitigate Impacts

This section does not apply to th e operations as proposed herein.



### B. Incidental Takes

LLOG does not anticipate the incidental taki ng of any species as a result of the proposed activities based on the implementation of, and adherence to, the NTL 2007-

G03 “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness Training and Elimination” and NTL 2007- G04 “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injure d/Dead Protected Sp ecies Reporting”.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 35

### APPENDIX L

RELATED FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.256)

A. 

### Produced Liquid Hydrocar bon Transportation Vessels

Not applicable to proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/8/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 36

### APPENDIX M

SUPPORT VESSELS AND AI RCRAFT INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.224 AND 250.257)

A. 

### General

Personnel involved in the proposed operations will typically use their own vehicles as transportation to and from the selected ons hore base; whereas the selected vendors will transport the equipment by a combination of trucks, boats and/or helicopters to the onshore base. The personnel and equipment will then be transported to the drilling rig via the transportation methods and frequenc ies shown, taking the most direct route feasible as mandated by weat her and traffic conditions:

Type Maximum Fuel Tank Storage Capacity Maximum No. in Area at Any Time Trip Frequency or

Duration

Tug Boats 2,600 bbls 2 Two days per well Supply Boats 1,875 bbls 1 Three times weekly

Crew Boats 809 bbls 1 Weekly

Aircraft 1912 lbs 1 As Needed



### B. Diesel Oil Supply Vessels

Size of Fuel Supply

Vessel Capacity of fuel Supply Vessel Frequency of Fuel

Transfers Route Fuel Supply

Vessel Will Take

180’ OSV 1900 bbls 1/weekly Fourchon, LA to Mississippi Canyon

Block 301



### C. Drilling Fluids Transportation

See Table 2 – Wastes you will Transport an d/or Dispose of Onshore, located in Appendix F of this Plan.



### D. Solid and Liquid Wastes Transportation

See Table 2 – Wastes you will Transport an d/or Dispose of Onshore, located in Appendix F of this Plan.



### E. Vicinity Map

A Vicinity Plat showing the location of Mississippi Canyon 301 relative to the nearest

shoreline and onshore ba se is included as Attachment M.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/8/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 37

## Vicinity Map

Attachment M (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 38

### APPENDIX N

ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.225 AND 250.258)

A. 

### General

The proposed surface disturbances in Miss issippi Canyon Block 301 will be located approximately 63 statute miles from th e nearest Louisiana shoreline, and approximately 129 statute miles from the following onshore support base:

Name Location Existing/New/Modified

Martin North Fourchon, LA Existing

LLOG will use an existing onshore base to accomplish the following routine operations:

● Loading/Offloading point for equipment supporting the offshore operations.

● Dispatching personnel and equipment, a nd does not anticipate the need for any expansion of the selected facilities as a result of the activities proposed in this

Revised Plan.

● Temporary storage for materials and equipment.

● 24 Hour Dispatcher

B. 

### Support Base Construction or Expansion

The proposed operations are temporary in nature and do not re quire any immediate action to acquire additional land or expand existing base facilities.

C. 

### Support Base Construction or Expansion Timetable

This section of the plan is not a pplicable to the proposed operations.

D. 

### Waste Disposal

See Table 2 – Wastes you will Transport an d/or Dispose of Onshore, located in Appendix F of this Plan.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 39

### APPENDIX O COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION (30 CFR PART 250.226 AND 250.260)

A. Consistency Certification

. A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Co nsistency for the States of Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi are enclosed as Attachment N



### B. Other Information

Included as Attachment O are the enforceable policies from the States of Alabama and Mississippi that are related to OCS Plan Filings.

LLOG has considered all of Louisiana’s enforceable policies and certifies the consistency for the proposed operations.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 40

## Coastal Zone Management Consistency Statement for the States of Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi

Attachment N (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 41

## Coastal Zone Management Enforceable Policies for the States of Alabama and Mississippi

Attachment O (Public Information)

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 42

### ALABAMA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

CONSISTENCY CERTIFICATION

SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

MISSISSIPPI CANYON 301

OCS-G-24069

The OCS related oil and gas development activities having potential impact on the Alabama Coastal Zone are based on the location of the pr oposed facilities, access to those sites, best practical techniques for operati ons and production equipment, guidelines for the prevention

of adverse environmental eff ects, effective environmental protection, emergency plans and contingency plans. Alabama policies have been addressed below or ar e cross referenced to the appropriate sections of the Plan:

Topic Cross

Reference Comments

Coastal Resource Use Policies Coastal Development Dock and port facilities in Louisiana will be used. There will be no new construction, dredging or filling in

Alabama state waters. There will be no new commercial development or capital improvements in Alabama’s coastal zone, nor will there be any employment effects. Mineral Resource Exploration

and Extraction Proposed development operations will take place 107

statute miles from Alabama’s coastline Commercial Fishing Appendix H Hazard Management Appendix C A Shallow Haza rds Report was previously submitted to BOEMRE in order to identify and assess the seafloor and shallow geologic conditions in this block

Shoreline Erosion Ap pendix H Proposed development operations will take place 107

statute miles from Alabama’s coastline

Recreation Appendix H Transportation Appendix B

Natural Resource Protection

Policies Biological Productivity Appendix H Water Quality Appendix H

Water Resources Appendix H Air Quality Appendix G Wetlands and Submerged

Grassbeds Appendix H

Beach and Dune Prot ection Appendix H

Wildlife Habitat Protection Appendix H Endangered Species Appendix H

Cultural Resources Protection Appendix D Mississippi Canyon Block 301 has been determined to have a high potential for containing archaeological properties. An archaeological report was submitted to BOEMRE under separate cover.

### As authorized by the Federal Zo ne Management Act (CZMA), the State of Mississippi developed a Coastal Management Program (CMP) to allow for the review of proposed Federal license and permit activities affecting any coastal use or resources in or outside the Mississippi Coastal Zone.

The OCS related oil and gas exploration a nd development activities having potential impact on the Mississippi Coastal Zone are based on the location of the proposed facilities, access to those sites, best practic al techniques for drilling locations, drilling equipment guidelines for the prevention of adverse environmental protection, emergency plans and contingency plans.

The proposed activities addressed in this Plan are located approximately 116 miles from the nearest Mississippi Coastline.

Below are the goals identified by the St ate of Mississippi and LLOG’s response:

Goal 1: To provide for rea sonable industrial expansion in the coastal area and to

ensure the efficient utilization of waterfront industrial sites so that suitable sites are conserved for water dependent industry.

The proposed activities are located in OCS Federal Waters, Gulf of Mexico, approximately 63 miles from the nearest Louisiana shoreline. LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. (LLOG) will utilize existing facilities in Fourchon, Louisiana. Therefore, there should not be any antic ipated or planned adverse impacts to Mississippi’s coastal area.

Goal 2: To favor the preservation of th e coastal wetlands and ecosystems, except where a specific alternation of specific coastal wetlands would serve a higher public interest in compliance with the public pur poses of the public trust in which the

coastal wetlands are held.

The proposed activities are located in OCS Federal Waters, Gulf of Mexico, approximately 116 miles from the Mississippi coastline and 63 miles from the nearest

Louisiana shoreline. LLOG will utilize exis ting facilities in Fourchon, Louisiana. Therefore there should not be any anticipated or planned adverse imp acts to Mississippi’s coastal wetlands and ecosystems.Goal 3: To protect, propagate and conserve the State’s seafood and aquatic life in connection with the revitalization, and cons erve the State’s seafood and aquatic life

in connection with the revitalization of the seafloor industry of the State of Mississippi.

The proposed activities are located in OCS Federal Waters, Gulf of Mexico, approximately 116 from the Mississippi coastline and 63 miles from the nearest

Louisiana shoreline. LLOG will utilize exis ting facilities in Fourchon, Louisiana. Therefore, there should not be any antic ipated or planned adverse impacts to Mississippi’s seafood and aquatic life.

Goal 4: To conserve the air and waters of the State, and to protect, maintain and improve the quality thereof for public use, fo r the prorogation of wildlife, fish, and aquatic life and for domestic, agricultu ral, industrial, recreational, and other legitimate beneficial uses.

The activities proposed in this Plan are located in OCS Federal Waters and will use existing facilities located in Louisiana; therefore, there should be no adverse impacts to Mississippi air and water quality.

For the activities scheduled in this Plan, LLOG is proposing to discharge authorized effluents into the receiving wa ters of the Gulf of Mexico. Overboard discharges (i.e. drilling fluids and associat ed cuttings) associated with the proposed activities must be tested first for toxicity limitations as mandated by EPA’s General

Permit GMG290000. Other solid waste such as comminuted food will first pass through a 25 mm type mesh screen, as regulated by the US Coast Guard’s Marine Pollution Research and Control Act (MARPOL) of 1987.

Activities proposed in this plan will be conducted in accordance with LLOG’s approved Oil Spill Response Plan.

An Air Quality Review has been performed addressing the activities proposed in this Plan and emissions for all parameters are below exemption limitations.

Goal 5: To put to benefici al use to the fullest extent of which they are capable the water resources of the state, and to p revent the waste, unreasonable use, or

unreasonable method of use of water.

The activities proposed in this Plan are located in OCS Federal Waters and will use existing facilities located in Louisiana; therefore, there should be no adverse impacts to Mississippi water resources. Activities pr oposed in this Plan will be conducted in accordance with LLOG’s approved Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan.Goal 6: To preserve the st ate’s historical and archaeological resources, to prevent their destruction, and to enhance these resources wherever possible.

The activities proposed in this Plan are located in OCS Federal Waters and will use existing facilities located in Louisian a; therefore, there should be no adverse impacts to Mississippi historical and archaeological resources.

Goal 7: To encourage preservation of natu ral scenic qualities in the coastal area.

The activities proposed in this Plan are located in OCS Federal Waters and will use existing facilities located in Louisian a; therefore there should be no adverse impacts to Mississippi coastal area natural scenic qualities.

Goal 8: To assist local governments in the pr ovision of public facilities services in a manner consistent with the coastal program.

The activities proposed in this Plan are located in OCS Federal Waters and will use existing facilities located in Louisiana; therefore, there should be no affect on Mississippi local governments.

### APPENDIX P

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (30 CFR PART 250.227 AND 250.261)

A. Impact Producing Factors (IPF’ s) From Proposed Activities

The following matrix is utilized to identify the affected environments that could be impacted by these IPF’s. An “x” has b een marked for each IPF category that LLOG has determined may impact a particular environment as a resu lt of the proposed

activities. For those cells which are foot noted, a statement is provided as to the applicability of the proposed activities, and where there may be an effect, an analysis of the effect is provided.

Environmental Resources Impact Producing Factors (IPF’s)

Emissions (air, noise, light, etc) Effluents (muds, cuttings, other discharges

to the water

column or seafloor) Physical

disturbances

to the seafloor (rig, anchor,

structure emplacement, 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) Chemosynthetic communities X X (4) Water quality X X

Fisheries X

Marine mammals X (8) X (8)

Sea turtles X (8) X (8) Air quality X (9) Shipwreck sites (known or potential) (7)

Prehistoric archaeological sites (7)

Vicinity of Offshore Location

Essential fish habitat X (6) Marine and pelagic birds X Public health and safety (5)

Coastal and Onshore

Beaches X (6)

Wetlands X (6) Shorebirds and coastal nesting

birds X (6)

Coastal wildlife refuge X

Wilderness areas X

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 43Footnotes 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: (a) 4-mile zone of the Flower Gardens Banks, or the 3-mile zone of Stetson Bank; (b) 1000-m, 1-mile or 3-mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine bank) protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease; (c) Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 feet from any no-activity zone; or (d) Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft buffer zo ne) with relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected by the Topographic Stipul ation 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 BOEMRE 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 hydro carbons or diesel fuel that you determine would impact these environmen tal 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 BOEMRE as having high-probability for the occu rrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including

such blocks that will be affected th at 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 prehistoric site that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two.

8. All activities that you determine might have an adverse effect on endangered or threatened marine mammals

or sea turtles or their critical habitats.

9. Production activities that involve trans portation of produced fluids to shor e using shuttle tankers or barges.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 44

### B. Impact Analysis

LLOG does not anticipate any unforeseen inci dents from the proposed activities which could significantly impact the associated envi ronment. LLOG activities associated with this Exploration Plan (Plan) will be perf ormed with prudent and industry accepted standards, and in compliance with the fe deral agency regulations and oversight.

The “Oil Spills Information” Section of this Plan details the potential worse case discharge volume which has been calculated based on the new Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcemen t (BOEMRE) Notice to Lessees (NTL 2010- N06). Response details associated with an unanticipated spill from this site are detailed in our Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) which outlines the potential spill scenario, spill volumes, anticipated trajectory of the sp ill, response equipment available, and actions to be taken to respond to the po tential spill incident. Additional measures implemented by LLOG is trajectory analyses to be obtained prior to and during the proposed activities, contract ual arrangements with we ll control specialists and preliminary reviews of potential well interv ention scenarios, and to supplement existing contracted response/clean-up equipment w ith equipment offered by Helix which specializes in subsea deepwater well in tervention, containment and processing.



### Site Specific at Offshore Location

• Designated Topographic Features

There are no anticipated emissions, effl uents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes transported to shore, and/or accidents from the proposed

activities that could cause im pacts to topographic features.

The proposed surface distur bances within Mississippi Canyon Block 301 are located approximately 70 miles away fr om the closest desi gnated topographic feature (Sackett Bank).

The crests of these designated topogra phic features in the northern Gulf are typically found below 10 m; therefore, concentrated oil from a surface spill is not likely to reach sessile biota. Subs urface spills could ca use adverse impacts to a designated topographic feature; however, due to the offset distance this should not have an impact.

In the event of an unanticipated spill , LLOG would immediately implement its Regional Oil Spill Response Plan and active source control and countermeasures to minimize these potential impacts.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 45• Pinnacle Trend Area Live Bottoms

There are no anticipated emissions, effl uents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore and/or accidents from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to a pinnacle trend area.

The proposed surface disturbances within Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is located a significant distance (> 100 miles) from the closest pinnacle trend live bottom stipulated block. The crests of these pinnacle trend areas are much deeper than 20 m.

During the surface location disturbance review, LLOG reviews potential surface impacts, and would be able to identify any pinnacles within the vicinity and would avoid placement of any surface dist urbances such as a drilling rig and

associated anchors. These surface location disturbance areas would be avoided and/or mitigated during the review and approval process by the BOEM.

In the event of an unanticipated spill , LLOG would immediately implement its Regional Oil Spill Response Plan and activate source control and countermeasures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Eastern Gulf Live Bottoms

There are no anticipated emissions, efflue nts, emissions physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore, and/ or accidents from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to Eastern Gulf live bottoms.

The proposed surface disturbance with in Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is located a significant distance (> 100 mile s) from the closest Eastern Gulf live bottoms stipulated block. During the surface location disturbance review, LLOG previews potential surface impacts, and would be able to identify any live bottom areas within the vicinity a nd would avoid placeme nt of any surface

disturbances such as a drilli ng rig and associated anchors.

In the event of an unanticipated spill , LLOG would immediately implement its Regional Oil Spill Response Plan and activate source control and countermeasures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Chemosynthetic Communities

Water depths at the surface location in Mississippi Canyon Block 301 is approximately 6,150 feet including anchor radius. As noted in the shallow hazards assessment (Attachment I) it is unlikely that the identified anomalies represent the presence of high-dens ity chemosynthetic or other benthic

communities.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 46• Water Quality

Bottom disturbances which may result based on placement of drilling rigs during an exploratory pha se could increase water column turbidity and redistribution of any accumulated pollutants in the water column; which could cause temporary impacts on water qualit y conditions in the immediate vicinity.

Associated overboard effluents are re gulated by the EPA Region VI NPDES General Permit GMG290000 which mandates volume discharge rate limitations, certain testing requirements for toxicity and oil and grease limitations. As such, it is not anticipated these discharg es authorized under the approved EPA NPDES permit will cause significant adverse impacts to water quality.

Certain wastes generated from the propos ed activities will be manifested and sent to shore for treatment and/or dispos al at approved facilities. Other waste which may be considered hazardous will be collected and transported in sealed containers and transported to approve disposal sites in accordance with the RCRA regulations and guidelines.

An accidental oil spill release from the proposed activities, and cumulative similar discharge activity within the vici nity could potentia lly cause temporary impacts to water quality. In the event of such a release, the water quality would be temporarily affected by the dissolved components and small droplets. Currents and microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column

or dilute the constituen ts to background levels.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Fisheries

Accidental oil spill releases from the proposed activities, and cumulative similar discharge activity within the vicinity may potentially cause some detrimental effects on fisheries. It is unlikely a spill would occur; however, such a release in open waters closed to mobile adult finfis h or shellfish would likely be sub-lethal and the extent of damage would be redu ced to the capability of adult fish and shellfish to avoid a spill, to meta bolize hydrocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and parent compounds.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 47activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Marine Mammals

GulfCet II studies reveal that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf edge are comprised of bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. Squid eaters, including dwarf and pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin and Cuvier’s beaked whale occur most frequently along th e upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones.

As a result of the proposed activities, marine mammals may be adversely impacted by emissions, effluents, wast e sent to shore and/or accidents.

Chronic and sporadic sub-le thal effects would occur that may stress and/or weaken individuals of a local group or population and make them more susceptible to infection from natural or anthropogenic sources. Few lethal effects are expected from an accidental oi l spill, chance collisions with service vessels and ingestion of plastic material.

The net results of any disturbance would depend on the size and percentage of the population affected, ecological im portance of the disturbed area, environmental and biological parameters th at influence an animal’s sensitivity to disturbance and stress, and the accom modation time in response to prolonged disturbance (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1980) . Collisions between cetaceans and ship could cause serious injury or death (Laist et al., 2001).

Sperm whales are one of 11 whale species that are hit commonly by ships (Laist et al., 2001). Collisions between OCS ve ssels and cetaceans w ithin the project area are expected to be unusual events.

LLOG does not anticipate the incidental taking of any marine mammals as the result of the proposed activities. The proposed activities will be conducted by our company and its contractors under the additional criteria addressed by BOEMRE in Notice to Lessees (NTLs) 2007-G04 “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protective Species” a nd 2007-G03 “Marine Trash & Debris Awareness & Elimination”. The proposed operations will be conducted in accordance with the regulations via manifes ting waste sent to shore and ensuring such wastes are contained to prevent loss. Informational placards will be maintained on the facility, and LLOG a nd the associated contractors obtain training on at least an annual basis to en sure personnel are aware of the reporting and operational requirements.

LLOG will conduct the proposed activities under EPA’s Region VI NPDES

General Permit GMG290000 which authorizes the discharge of certain effluents, subject to certain limitations, prohibitions and recordkeeping requirements. As

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 48such, it is not anticipated these discharges authorized under the approved EPA NPDES permit will not cause significan t adverse impacts to water quality.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Sea Turtles

Small numbers of turtles could be killed or injured by chance collision with service vessels or by eating indigestib le trash, particularly plastic items accidentally lost from drilling rigs, produc tion facilities a nd service vessels. Drilling rigs and project vessels pr oduce noise that could disrupt normal behavior patterns and create some stre ss to sea turtles, making them more susceptible to disease. A ccidental oil spill releases are potential threats which

could have lethal effects on turtles. Contact and/or consumption of this released material could seriously affect individual sea turtles. Most OCS related impacts on sea turtles are expected to be sub- lethal. Chronic a nd/or avoidance of

affected areas could cause declines in survival or produ ctivity, resulting in gradual population declines.

LLOG will conduct the proposed activities under EPA’s Region VI NPDES

General Permit GMG290000 which authorizes the discharge of certain effluents, subject to certain limitations, prohibitions and recordkeeping requirements. As such, it is not anticipated these discharges authorized under the approved EPA NPDES permit will not cause significan t adverse impacts to water quality.

Additionally, LLOG and its contractors will conduct the proposed activities

under the additional criteri a addressed by BOEMRE in Notice to Lessees (NTLs) 2007-G04 “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protective Species” and 2007-G03 “Marine Trash & Debris Awareness & Elimination”. The proposed operations will be conducted in accordance with the regulations via manifesting waste sent to shore and ensuring such wastes are contained to prevent loss. Informational placards will be maintained on the facility, and

LLOG and the associated contractors obtai n training on at least an annual basis to ensure personnel are aware of the reporting and operational requirements.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 49• Air Quality

The proposed activities are located a pproximately 63 miles to the nearest

shoreline. LLOG has addressed the air quality issues associated with the proposed activities in the “Air Emissions Information” section of this Plan as a result of the proposed activities.

• Ship Wreck Sites (Known or Potential)

There are no physical disturbances to th e seafloor which could impact known or potential shipwreck sites, as the review of high resolution shallow hazards data indicate there are no known or potentia l shipwreck sites located within the survey area. As such, LLOG does not anticipate any IPF’s as a result of the proposed activities.

• Prehistoric Archaeological Sites

There are no physical disturbances to th e seafloor which coul d cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites, as the review of high resolution shallow hazards data and supporting studies did not re flect the occurrence of prehistoric archaeological sites. As such LLOG does not anticipate any IPF’s as a result of the proposed activities.

Vicinity of Offshore Location

• Essential Fish Habitat

As a result of the proposed activities, e ssential fish habita t may be adversely impacted by effluents and/or accidents.

An Accidental oil spill that may occur as a result of the proposed activities has potential to cause some detrimental effects on essential fish habitat. It is unlikely that an accidental oil spill release would occur; however, if a spill were to occur in close proximity to finfish or shellfish, the effects would likely be

sub-lethal and the extent of damage would be reduced to the capability of adult fish and shellfish to avoid a spill, to metabolize hydrocarbons and to excrete both metabolites and parent compounds.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 50• Marine and Pelagic Birds

As a result of the proposed activities, ma rine and pelagic birds may be adversely impacted by an accidental oil spill, by the birds coming into contact with the

released oil.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout resulting in an oil spill, it is likely to have an impact based on the industry wi de standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. In that event, LLOG will implement the Regional Oil Spill Response Plan and activate source control and countermeasures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Public Health and Safety

There are no anticipated emissions, efflue nts, wastes sent to shore, and/or accidents from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to the public health safety. LLOG has requested BOEM RE approval to classify the proposed objective area as absent of hydrogen sulfide.

Coastal and Onshore

• Beaches

As a result of the proposed activities, beaches may be adversely impacted by an accidental oil spill. However, due to the distance from shore (approximately 63 miles), and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. Both hi storical spill data and the combined trajectory/risk calculations referenced in the publication of OCS EIA/EA

BOEMRE 2002-052 indicate there is little ri sk of contact or impact to the

coastline and associated environmental resources.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Wetlands

As a result of the proposed activities, wetlands may be adversely impacted by an accidental oil spill. However, due to the distance from shore (approximately 63 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. Both hi storical spill data and the combined trajectory/risk calculations referenced in the publication of OCS EIA/EA

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 51BOEMRE 2002-052 indicate there is little ri sk of contact or impact to the

coastline and associated environmental resources.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds

As a result of the proposed activities, shore birds and coastal nesting birds may be adversely impacted by an accidental oi l spill. However, due to the distance from shore (approximately 63 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant a dverse impacts are expected. Both historical spill data and the combined trajectory/risk calculations referenced in the publication

of OCS EIA/EA BOEMRE 2002-052 indicate th ere is little risk of contact or impact to the coastline and asso ciated environmental resources.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Coastal Wildlife Refuges

As a result of the propose d activities, coastal wildlife refuges may be adversely impacted by an accidental oil spill. Ho wever, due to the distance from shore (approximately 63 miles) and the re sponse capabilities that would be implemented, no significant a dverse impacts are expected. Both historical spill data and the combined trajectory/risk calculations referenced in the publication

of OCS EIA/EA BOEMRE 2002-052 indicate th ere is little risk of contact or impact to the coastline and asso ciated environmental resources.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

• Wilderness Area

As a result of the proposed activities , wilderness areas may be adversely impacted by an accidental oil spill. Ho wever, due to the distance from shore (approximately 63 miles) and the re sponse capabilities that would be

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 52implemented, no significant a dverse impacts are expected. Both historical spill data and the combined trajectory/risk calculations referenced in the publication

of OCS EIA/EA BOEMRE 2002-052 indicate th ere is little risk of contact or impact to the coastline and asso ciated environmental resources.

In the event of an unanticipated blowout, LLOG will implement industry wide standards for using proven equipment and technology for such responses. LLOG would immediately implement its Re gional Oil Spill Response Plan and

activate source control and countermeas ures to minimize these potential impacts.

Other Resources Identified

LLOG has not identified any other environmen tal resources other than those addressed

above.



### C. Impacts of Proposed Activities

LLOG does not anticipate any impacts on th e offshore site specifi c locations, offshore vicinity, and/or coastal and onshore envir onmental conditions based on the potential impacts identified in the EIA worksheets and hi storical operations in the exploration of

this reservoir.



### D. Environmental Hazards

The Gulf of Mexico may experience se veral hurricanes throughout the season which typically runs from June through November. A severe hurricane may impact the activities covered in this Plan. Such imp acts may be damage to the drilling rig, the unanticipated release of hydrocarbons dependi ng upon the current status of the well. Additionally, the surface lo cated in Mississippi Canyon Bl ock 301 has the potential to be affected by the “Loop Current” which is a warm ocean current in the Gulf of Mexico

that flows northward between Cuba and the Yucatan Penins ula, moves northward into the Gulf of Mexico, then loops east and s outh before exiting to the east through the Florida Straits. While the loop current is present approximately 95% of the time, it is

most active in the summer and fall seasons.

To mitigate potential impacts to the well during impending hurricanes or loop currents, LLOG will take precautionary measures by securing the well, rig and evacuation of personnel; and will comply with the re quirements of NTL’s 2008-G09 and 2009-G10.



### E. Alternatives

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 53LLOG did not consider any alternatives to reduce environmental im pacts as a result of the proposed activities.



### F. Mitigation Measures

LLOG will not implement any mitigation measures to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential environmental resources, other th an those required by regulation and policy.



### G. Consultation

LLOG has not contacted any agencies or pe rsons for consultation regarding potential impacts associated with the pr oposed activities. Therefore, a list of such entities is not being provided.



### H. Preparers

Questions or requests for addi tional information should be made to LLOG’s authorized representative of this Plan:

Kathy Gowland Regulatory Specialist 1001 Ochsner Boulevard, Suite 2000 Covington, Louisiana 70433 985-801-4300 (Phone) kathygo@llog.com



### I. References

The following documents were utilized in preparing the Environmental Impact

Assessment:

Document Author Dated

Shallow Hazards Assessment, Benthic Communities Evaluation, and Archaeological Resources Survey Berger Geosciences, LLC 2011

BOEMRE Environmental Impact Statement Report No.

2007-003 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2007

Title 30 CFR Part 250 Subp art B (250.216 / 250.221 /

250.223 / 250.227 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2006

NTL 2000-G16 “Guidelines for General Lease Surety

Bonds” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2000

NTL 2005-G07 “Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2005

NTL 2006-N06 “Flaring and Venti ng Regulations” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2006

NTL 2006-G07 “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Surveys and Reports:” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2006

NTL 2007-G02 “Implementation of seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2007

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 54NTL 2007-G03 “Marine Trash & Debris Awareness &

Elimination” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2007

NTL 2007-G04 “Vessel Strike A voidance and Injured/Dead Protective Species” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2007

NTL 2008-G04 “Information Requirements for Exploration Plans and Development Op erations Coordination

Documents” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2008

NTL 2008-N05 “Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for Covered Offshore Facilities” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2008

NTL 2008-G06 “Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys in Deepwater” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2008

NTL 2008-N07 “Supplemental Bond Procedures Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2008

NTL 2008-G20 “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2008

NTL 2009-G02 “Ocean Current Monitoring” Bu reau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G27 “Submitting E xploration Plans and Development Operations Coordination Documents” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G29 “Implementation Plan for Transition from

North American Datum 27 to North American Datum 83” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G31 “Hydrogen Sul phide” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G34 “Ancillary Activities” Bur eau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G38 “Drilling Window s, Eastern Gulf of

Mexico” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G39 “Biologically-Sensitive Underwater

Features and Areas” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-G40 “Deepwater Benthic Communities” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2009-N11 “Air Quality Jurisdiction on the OC S” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2009

NTL 2010-N05 “Increased Safety Measures for Energy Development on the OCS” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2010

NTL 2010-N06 “Information Requirements for EP’s, DOCD’s, DPP on the OCS” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2010

NPDES General Permit GM G290000 EPA – Region VI 2007 Regional Oil Spill Response Plan LLOG Exploration Offs hore, L.L.C. 2010

Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 55Mississippi Canyon Block 301 (OCS-G 24069) 11/2/2011 Supplemental Exploration Plan 56 

### APPENDIX Q

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION (30 CFR Part 250.228 and 250.262)

A. Exempted Information Description (Public Information Copies only

Excluded from the Public Informa tion copies are the following:

• Proposed bottomhole location information

• Proposed total well depths (measured and true vertical depth)

• Production Rates and Life of Reserves

• New and Unusual Technologies

• Geological and Geophysical Attachments



### B. Bibliography

The following documents were utilized in preparing this Plan:

Document Author Dated

Shallow Hazards Assessment, Benthic Communities Evaluation, and Archaeological Resources Survey Berger Geosciences, LLC 2011

BOEMRE Environmental Impact Statement Report – No.

2007-003 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement 2007

Regional Oil Spill Response Plan LLOG Exploration Offs hore, L.L.C. 2010