Fw: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM Kelly Fortin to: kheitkamp Cc: Michael Carbon, Don Evans, Brian Glover, ealbright Bee: Lorinda Shepherd From: Kelly Fortin/R4/USEPA/US To: kheitkamp@environcorp.com 05/18/2012 01:56PM

Cc: Michael Carbon <mcarbon@environcorp.com>, Don Evans/R3/USEPA/US@EPA, Brian Glover <bglover@environcorp.com>, ealbright@environcorp.com Bee: Lorinda Shepherd/R4/USEPA/USKylePerthe email below, the NMFS January24, 2011 concurrence letter is still applicable. Please include the January letter (attached to my email on Monday} and the following information from my email in your application: "the most recent Biological Opinion for the drilling area, ifone has been performed, the status ofthis opinion in light of reinitiation, and status ofany additional listings ofspecies or habitat (in this case you appearto have come to the conclusion that there are none}." No lengthy discussion is necessary; this can all be covered in a paragraph. I will touch base with the Fish and Wildlife service. Feel free to contact me ifyou have any additional questions. Take care and hope you enjoyed yourtime outdoors. Kelly

- FoiWarded by Kelly Fortin/R4/USEPA/US on 05/18/2012 01:34PMFrom: To: Cc: Date: Subject: Kyle Baker <kyle.baker@noaa.gov> Kelly Fortin/R4/USEPA/US@EPA Jon_Hemming@fws.gov, "Epperson, Deborah" <Deborah.Epperson@boem.gov>, Adam Brame <adam.brame@noaa.gov> 05/18/2012 01:06PM Re: FW: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM Kelly, the information we expressed in theJan 24, 2011letterregarding airpermits still applies. Let's be sureto include airpermits and theregulatoryjurisdictions ofEPA and BOEMby planning area, as well as otheroil and gas discharges permittedbytheEPA in the BA Deb, regarding the lead agency, please submit some documentation with therevised request for consultation. Theregs are below: 

### § 402.07 Designation ofleadagency. When a particular action involves more than oneFederal agency, the consultation and conference responsibilities maybefulfilled through a lead agency. Factorsrelevant in determining an appropriate lead agency include the time sequence in which the agencies wouldbecomeinvolved, the magnitude oftheirrespective involvement, and theirrelative expertise withrespect to the environmental effects ofthe action. The Director shallbenotified ofthe designation in writingbythe lead agency.

OnFri, May 18,2012 at 12:42 PM, Kelly Fortin<Fortin.Kelly@epamail.epa.gov>wrote:KyleIwas speaking with Deborah as you were responding. She will include the information regarding the interagency cooperation with EPA in the cover letterwith the biological assessment. Iwill touch base with herto see ifthere is any additional information that she needs. This covers us going forward. Howwould you like to handle the projects that come in before the re -inititated consultation is complete? Is the January 24, 2011 letter still accurate? Kelly ""'Kyle Baker ---05/18/201212:12:46 PM---Kelly, due to the complexity ofthis consultation please provide the documentation ofthe lead agenc

From: Kyle Baker <kyle.baker@noaa.gov> To: Kelly FortinfR4/USEPAIUS@EPA Cc: Jon Hemming@fws.gov, "Epperson, Deborah" <Deborah.Epperson@boem.gov> Date: 05118/2012 12:12 PM Subject Re: FW: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM

Kelly, due to the complexity ofthis consultationpleaseprovidethe documentation ofthe lead agency designation to be submitted withthe biological assessment. Also, please get with Deb to includethe necessary information in the biological assessmentregarding the EPAthat will be submitted for consultation.

OnFri, May 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Kelly Fortin<Fortin.Kelly@epamail.epa.gov>wrote: Kyle, Thank you for your response. It is my understanding that we had already worked out between BOEM, NMFS, and EPA, that BOEM was to be the lead agency and EPA a coordinating (co-action) agency forthe purposes of ESA section 7 interagency cooperation for the drilling activities covered bythe lease plans. I had several discussions with Deborah and David Bernhart regardingthis matter in December 2011. I believe Mr. Bernhart and Ms. Epperson discussed this matterattheir consultation meeting in December 2011, which resulted in David's letter ofJanuary 24, 2011. David's letter indicates: "We have subsequently reviewed our approach to the issue ofair emissions. Following discussions with EPA and BOEMRE on air quality permits and the regulatoryjurisdictions ofthe agencies, NMFS will include the EPA as an action agency in future opinions on oil and gas activities on the Outer Continental Shelf." Such a consolidated approach will save the applicants and the Services from having to re-address the same projects for ESA purposes as the result ofour air quality permits. EPA requested that BOEM be designated as the lead agencyfor ESA purposes in our NEPA comments on the supplemental EIS. Please let me know ifwe need to provide an additional letter requesting that BOEM be designated the lead agency pursuantto the procedures set out at 402.06-07. With respect to the number of permit applications we anticipate, that is hard to say. We've had 5 so far resulting from the 2007-20121ease sales. I would expect 3-5 annually, depending on the results ofthe 2012 lease sale and upon the types ofpermits requested. I am happyto discuss our permitting process with you. There is also a description ofthe process on our OCS Permits page on the Region 4 website at: http://www.epa.gov/region4/air/permits/ocspermits/ocsprocess.html. Please let me know what additional information is needed , or ifwe should set up all call between our agencies to getthis worked out. Kelly Fortin 404-562-9117

""'Kyle Baker ---05/15/2012 11:03:13 AM---Kelly, we are currently preparing a new consultation on Gulfof Mexico oil and gas actions

.The ba From: Kyle Baker <kyle.baker@noaa.gov> To: Kelly Fortin1R4/USEPAIUS@EPA

Cc: Kyle Heitkamp <kheitkamp@environcorp.com>, Jon Hemminq@fws.gov, "Epperson, Deborah"< Deborah.Epperson@boem.gov> · Date: 05/15/2012 11:03 AM Subject: Re: FW: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM

### Kelly, we are currentlypreparing a new consultation on GulfofMexico oil and gas actions. Thebaseline status has changed due to DWH. I recommend the EPA ensure they are a co-action agency on the newprogrammatic opinionunderway. I suggestthe EPA and BOEM/BESEE document that BOEM is the lead federal agency onthe consultation, and providethat to me. We can then include an analysis ofthe EPA actions inthe consultation. I may need some additional information onthe EPA process and number ofexpectedpermitting actions from youto completethe analysis. OnMon, May 14,2012at 12:42 PM, Kelly Fortin<Fortin.Kelly@epamail.epa.gov> wrote: KyleUnlessthe BOEM designates us as a coordinating agency underthe ESA (which we have requested), the advice on whether consultation is necessary on the air permitting action must come from the FWS and NMFS, rather than the BOEM. An email thatthe most recent letter of concurrence to EPA (see below) or BOEM on the leasing program that covers the areas under consideration is still current , such as the 2007-2012 OCS Leasing program orthe Biological Opinion of Lease sale 224, would be fine. Please see the attached letters from the FWS and NMFS, which covered the projects we permitted this pastyear. Essentially, wejust need to know thatthe status has not changed

. I also included the letterfrom BOEM on the reinitiation ofthe consultation, for your records With respect to the permit application, please include the most recent Biological Opinion for the drilling area, ifone has been performed, the status ofthis opinion in light of of reinitiation , and status ofany additional listings ofspecies or habitat (in this case you appearto have come to the conclusion thatthere are none). Our contacts at the Services are listed below, and I have copied them on this email. Please let me know ifyou have any additional questions or if I can help facilitate this in any way. Kelly

Dr. Jon Hemming 850-769-0552 ext. 2238 US DOl Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office Panama City, FL 32405 Kyle Baker 727-551-5789 Protected Resource Division NOAA Fisheries Service Southeast Regional Office263 13th Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 (See attached file: MMSpost-BPspill_ reinit requeston 2007-2010 lease sales biop.pdj)(See attached.file: NMFSESA letter, 012411.PDF) (See attached file: epaair081210.pdj) ""'Kyle Heitkamp ---05/11/2012 05:48:33 PM---Kelly, Statoil has engaged BOEM and NMFS to determine ifthere are any new endangered species or cri From: Kyle Heitkamp <kheitkamp@environcorp.com> To: Kelly FortinfR4/USEPAIUS@EPA Date: 05/11/2012 05:48PM Subject FW: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM

Kelly, Statoil has engaged BOEM and NMFS to determine ifthere are any new endangered species or critical habitat identified in the EGOM. Would the email response below satisfy as an attachmentto the original biological opinion, or would EPA like to see a more formal letter response from BOEM & NMFS?
Ijustwantto make sure we are providing EPA with the correct documentation. Thanks, Kyle



### From: Epperson, Deborah [mailto:Deborah.Epperson@boem.gov] 

### Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:22 PM 

### To: Donald Evans Cc: Ensz, Holli 

### Subject: RE: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM Don, As we discussed, the current consultation with NMFS was reinitiated following the DWH event and we are working with NMFS on a new consultation that I am hoping will be completed by the end ofthis year. There were no new species or critical habitats identified and we are still consulting with NMFS on sperm whales, all 5 species ofsea turtles, and

### the gulf sturgeon. Please let me know ifyou need more information. Deborah 

### From: Donald Evans [mailto:DOEV@statoil.coml 

### Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 11:44 AM 

### To: Epperson, Deborah 

### Subject: NMFS Biological Opinion for GOM Deborah, Thanks for your time this morning discussing the current NMFS biological opinion and the new consultation for the GOM which is currently open and covers all three planning areas (western, central and eastern). No new endangered species have been included in the new consultation and air quality impacts are not expected to adversely impact anythreatened or endangered species or critical habitats. Thanks again, Donald P. Evans Lead HSE

- Environmental Statoil- DPNA UON HSE


### t: 71 3 485 2203 m: 832 788 9282 e: doev@statoil.com 

### 21 03 CityWest Blvd Suite 

### 800 Houston, TX 

### 77042 

## USA www.statoil.com 

### ..!; Please consider the environment before printing this email.

The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination ofthe information or copying ofthis message is prohibited. Ifyou are not the addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this message. Thank you

The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination ofthe information or copying ofthis message is prohibited. Ifyou are not theaddressee, please notifythe sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this message. Thank you This message contains information that maybe confidential,privileged or otherwiseprotectedbylaw from disclosure. Itis intended for the exclusiveuse ofthe Addressee(s). Unless you are the addressee or authorized agent ofthe addressee, you maynot review, copy, distribute ordisclose to anyone the message or any information contained within. Ifyouhavereceived this message in error, please contactthe senderby electronicreply to email@environcorp.com and immediately delete all copies ofthe message.

Kyle Baker NOAAFisheries Service ProtectedResources Division o: 727-824-5312 f: 727-824-5309

Kyle Baker NOAA Fisheries Service ProtectedResources Division 

### o: 727-824-5312 f: 727-824-5309

Kyle Baker NOAAFisheries Service Protected Resources Division 

### o: 727-824-5312 f: 727-824-5309