### 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-07731

Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan

Lease(s) - OCS-G32500 Block - 393 Green Canyon Area

Operator - Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC
Drill, test, flare, and install subsea wellhead for Well F

Not Found

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.

Madonna Montz Plan Coordinator Description -
Rig Type - Subject: From: March 3, 2015

### Record of Changes-PUBLIC INFORMATION COPY S-7731, Exploration Plan, Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas LLC, (OCS-G 32500, Mississippi Canyon Block 393)

Date Section Page Remarks 1/23/2015 All All Plan received by BOEM 1/29/2015 7 Attachment 7-A Added. 2/18/2015 All All Final copies provided.

## PUBLIC COPY January 22, 2015



# SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

Green Canyon Block 393 OCS

- G 32500 Giverny Prospect Affected State: Louisiana

Estimated Startup Date: February 19, 2017

SUBMITTED BY : Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC 400 E. Ka liste Saloom Road, Suite 1100 Lafayette, Louisiana 70508

Paul Landry Office: 337

- 354

- 5065 Mobile: 337

- 349

- 7781 paul_landry@fmi.com

AUTHORIZED REPRES ENTATIVE: Jean Martin J. Connor Consulting, Inc. 16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77084 281

- 698

- 8544 jean.martin@jccteam.com

### TOC Pg 1 of 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 PLAN CONTENTS

................................ ................................ ................................ . 1

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION

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

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 1
1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES

................................ .................. 1
1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS

................................ ......................... 2
1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES

................................ ................................ ........ 2
1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES

................................ ................................ ............................... 2
1.7 COST RECOVERY FEE

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

................................ ................................ .................... 3

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS

................................ ................................ ...................... 3
2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 3
2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY

................................ ................................ ............... 3
2.4 BONDING STATEMENT

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3
2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONS IBILITY (OSFR)

................................ .......................... 3
2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT

................................ ................................ 3
2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4
SECTION 3 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

................................ .......... 8

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

................................ ................................ ......................... 8
3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAPS

................................ ................................ ...................... 8
3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINE

................................ ................................ ........................ 8
3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS

- SECTION

................................ ............................. 8
3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT

................................ ................................ ...................... 8
3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

................................ ................................ ............. 8
3.7 HIGH

- RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES

................................ ................................ ............. 8
3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

................................ ................................ ............................ 8
3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLES

................................ ................................ ...................... 8
SECTION 4 HYDROGEN SULFI DE INFORMATION

................................ ................................ 9

4.1 CONCENTRATION

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 9
4.2 CLASSIFICATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 9

### TOC Pg 2 of 3 4.3 H 2 

### S CONTINGENCY PLAN

................................ ................................ .............................. 9
4.4 MODELING REPORT

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

................. 10

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

................................ ................................ ....... 10 5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)

................................ ................................ ........... 10 5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING)

................................ .............. 10 5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES)

................................ ........................ 10 5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF)

................................ ................................ ..................... 10
5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP

................................ .......... 10 5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS

................................ ................... 10

5.8 THREA TENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT AND MARINE MAMMAL INFORMATION

................................ ................................ .............................. 11
5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT

................................ ................................ ........................ 12
5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION

................................ ................................ 12
5.11 SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

................................ ................................ .............. 12
SECTION 6 WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

................................ ................... 13

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES

................................ ................................ ............ 13
6.2 MODELING REPORT

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 13
SECTION 7 AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ........ 14
7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS

................................ ...... 14
7.2 S UMMARY INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ............................ 14
SECTION 8 OIL SPILL INFORMATION

................................ ................................ .................. 15

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING

................................ ................................ ................ 15
8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES

................................ ................................ ............................... 15
8.3 OSRO INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15
8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION

................................ ............................... 15
8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

................................ ................................ ............ 16
8.6 MODELING REPORT

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 16
SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORI NG INFORMATION

................................ ............ 17

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS

................................ ................................ ............................... 17
9.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 17
9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

................................ .... 17
SEC TION 10 LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

................................ .......................... 18

### TOC Pg 3 of 3 10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA)

................................ ................................ ............. 18
10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

................................ ................................ ................. 18
SECTION 11 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

....................... 20
11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS

...................... 20
11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 20
SECTION 12 SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

................................ ... 21

12.1 GENERAL

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 21
12.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS

................................ ................................ ................... 21
12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION

................................ ................................ ......... 21
12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION

................................ ....................... 21
12.5 VICINITY MAP

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 21
SECTION 13 ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

................................ ......... 22

13.1 GENERAL

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 22
13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION

................................ ................. 22
13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE

............................. 22
13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL

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

..................... 23

SECTION 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

................................ ........................... 24

SECTION 16 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ... 25

16.1 EXEMPTED I NFORMATION DESCRIPTION

................................ ................................ 25
16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 25

### Attachments Pg 1 of 1 SECTION ATTACHMENTS

Section 1 Plan Contents 1

- A OCS Plan Information Form 1

- B Well Location Plat 1

- C Bathymetry Map 1

- D Pay.gov Receipt Section 3 Geological, Geophysical Information 3

- D Shallow Hazard Assessment Section 5 Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information 5

- A Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas Map Section 6 Wastes and Discharges Information 6

- A Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to the GOM Section 8 Oil Spill Information 8

- A Oil Spill Response Discussion Section 12 Support Vessels and Aircraft Information 12

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

- B Vicinity Map Section 15 Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) 15

- A Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA)

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Se ction 1

– Pg. 1 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 1 PLAN CONTENTS

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION The drilling, evaluation and temporary abandonment of five wells in Green Canyon Blocks 349 and 393 was approved in Initial EP (Control No. N

- 9739) March 31, 2014. No wells have been drilled.

Under this Supplemental EP, Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (FM O&G) proposes to drill, complete, test, flare and install a subsea wel lhead for one additional well location in 3,803 feet of water in Gre e n Canyon Block 393 ( OCS

- G Lease 32500) using a dynamically positioned drillship with a subsea BOP

.
The OCS Plan Information Form BOEM

- 137 is included as Attachment 1

- A

.
1.2 LOCATION A Well Location Plat depicting the surface location of the proposed well and water depth is included as Attachment 1

- B

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

A Bathymetry Map depicting the surface location and water depth of the proposed well is included as Attachment 1

- C

.
1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES FM O&G proposes to drill the well with a dynamically positioned drillship which is equipped with

a Subsea BOP . Once a rig is determined , BOP information and schemat ics will be included as a part of the Application for Permit to Drill.

The rig will be equipped with safety and fire

- fighting equipment required to comply with United States Coast Guard (USCG) regulations. Appropriate life saving equipment such as life raf ts, life jackets, ring buoys, etc. as prescribed by the USCG, will be maintained on the rig at all times.

Safety features on the drilling unit will include well control, pollution prevention, and blowout prevention equipment as described in BSEE regulatio ns 30 CFR 250 C, D, E, O, Q and S; and as further clarified by BSEE Notices to Lessees, and current policy making invoked by the BSEE, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USCG

. Pollution prevention measures include installation of curbs, gutter s, drip pans, and drains on drilling deck areas to collect all contaminants and debris. Compliance will be maintained with the EPA NPDES Permit. The rig will be monitored daily and any waste or fuel resulting in pollution of the Gulf waters will be reporte d to the representative in charge for immediate isolation and correction of the problem. Any spill will be reported to the appropriate governmental agencies.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Se ction 1

– Pg. 2 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS The table below provides storage tanks with capacity of 25 barrels or more that will store fuels

, oil and lubricants.

Type of Storage Tank Type of Facility Tank Capacity (bbl) Number of Tanks Total Capacity (bbl) Fluid Gravity

(API) Fuel oil DPDS 4,135.6 2 8,271.2 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 9,340.4 2 18,680.8 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 9,048.5 1 9,048.5 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 9,043.5 1 9,043.5 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 445.3 2 890.6 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 320.2 2 640.4 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 359.8 1 359.8 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 435.3 1 435.3 33  ̊ Fuel oil DPDS 59.8 1 59.8 33  ̊ Base oil DPDS 3,683.9 1 3,683.9 31  ̊ Base oil DPDS 3,687.1 1 3,687.1 31  ̊ Lube oil DPDS 429.6 1 429.6 22.3  ̊ Waste oil DPDS 132.1 1 132.1 20  ̊ Waste oil DPDS 44.0 1 44.0 20  ̊ Waste oil DPDS 143.4 1 143.4 20  ̊ Waste oil DPDS 1,366.2 1 1,366.2 6.5  ̊



## 1.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES These operations do not propose activities for which the State of Florida is an affected state.

1.6 ADDITIONAL MEASURES FM O&G d oes not propose any additional safety, pollution prevention, or early spill detection measures beyond those required by 30 CFR 250.

1.7 COST RECOVERY FE E Documentation of the $ 3,673 cost recovery fee payment is included as Attachment 1

- D

.

### U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Have you previously provided information to verify the calculations and assumptions for your WCD? X Yes No
If so, provide the Control Number of the EP or DOCD with which this information was provided N

- 9739
Do you propose to use new or unusual technology to conduct your activities? Yes X No
Do you propose to use a vessel with anchors to install or modify a structure? Yes X No
Do you propose any facility that will serve as a host facility for deepwater subsea development? Yes X No 

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

Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days Well Location F: Drill, complete, test, flare and install subsea wellhead 2/19/2017 6/4/2017 105



### Description of Drilling Rig Description of Structure

Jackup X Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform
Gorilla Jackup Platform rig Fixed platform Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Spar Guyed tower

DP Semisubmersible Other (Attach description) Floating production system Other (Attach description) Drilling Rig Name (If known): NA 

### Description of Lease Term Pipelines

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

### NA NA NA NA

Form BOEM

- 0137 (December 2011

– Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 1 of 4 

### General Information

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

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC BOEM Operator Number: 03280

Address: 400 E. Kaliste Saloom Road, Suite 1100 Contact Person: Jean Martin
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508 Phone Number: (281) 698

- 8544

E

- Mail Address: jean.martin@jccteam.com
If a service fee is required under 30 CFR 550.125(a), provide the Amount paid $3,673 Receipt No. 25JDE82J 

### Project and Worst Case Discharge (WCD) Information

Lease : OCS

- G 32500 Area: Green Canyon Block: 393 Project Name: Giverny
Objective(s) X Oil X Gas Sulphur Salt Onshore Support Base : Fourchon, Louisiana

Platform / Well Name: Well Location B Total Volume of WCD: 63,667,520 bbl API Gravity: 25 o

Distance to Closest Land: 97 miles Volume from uncontrolled blowout: 397,922 bbl/day 

## OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM OMB Control Number: 1010

- 0151 OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14

### OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED) Include one copy of this page for each proposed well/structure 

### Proposed Well/Structure Location

Well or Structure Name/Number (If renaming well or structure, reference previous name): Well Location F Previously reviewed under an approved EP or DOCD? Yes X No
Is this an existing well or structure? Yes X No If this is an existing well or structure, list the Complex ID or API No.

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

WCD Info For wells, volume of uncontrolled blowout (Bbls/Day): 202,000 bbl/day For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines (Bbls) : NA API Gravity of fluid 25 o

Surface Location Bottom

- Hole Location (For Wells) Completion (For multiple completions, enter separate lines)

Lease No. OCS

- G 32500 OCS

- G 32500

Area Name Green Canyon Green Canyon

Block No. 393 393

Blockline Departures (in feet) N/S Departure : 3,595.00’ FNL N/S Departure : N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure : 10,360.00’ FWL E/W Departure : E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X

- Y coordinates X: 2,639,800.00’ X: X: X: X:

Y: 10,023,125 .00 ’ Y: Y: Y: Y:

Latitude/ Longitude Latitude : 27 o 35’ 12.232” N Latitude : Latitude Latitude Latitude

Longitude : 89 o 54’ 52.252” W Longitude : Longitude Longitude Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 3,803’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: NA 

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

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

NA NA NA X: NA Y: NA NA

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:



### Form BOEM

- 0137 (December 2011

– Supersedes all previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4

### 35'

3' l l l ll l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l

l
l l
l
l l l l l
l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l



### l 

### l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l



### l l l 

### l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l

l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l

l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l
l l
l

l l l l l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l ll

l

l

l

ll

l l

l

l

l

ll
l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l
l l

l

l
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l



### l 

### l l l l l l l



### l 

### l 

### l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l
l

l
l
l

l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

ll

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l
l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l
l

l

l

l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l
l
l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l lll l l

l l l l l

l

l
l

l

l

l l

l

l

l l l
l
l
l l

l

l l l l 

### l l

l 

### l l
l

l
l l l 

### l

l

l

l
l l l l l l l

l l

l l

l l l l l l l

l

l l

l
l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l

l

l l l

l

l

l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l
l

l

l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

ll

l

l

l

l l l

l l

l l l l l

l

l

l

l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l

l ll l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l

l l l l l

l 

### l

l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l l l



### l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l

1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8 9

10 11

12 13

14

15 16 17

18 13

14 

# GC304

GC348

GC392

GC436 GC305 AT265 A T W A T E R V A L L E Y A R E A G R E E N C A N Y O N A R E A

2 ' 2 ' 2
' 4
' 8
' 8

' 2

' 1 ' 4

' 5

' 4 ' 6

' 2 1

' 5

' 1 0 ' 8

' 9

' 1

' 2

3

' 1 1 ' 7

' 8 ' 3 ' 1

' 3 ' 1 '

1

' 5

' 4

' 4 ' 1 ' 4 '

1 0 '

1 0 ' 3 1 ' 8 ' 1

8 ' 8

' 4 ' 3

' 

### 4' 6

' 7

' 4

' 3

5 ' 4 8 ' 3 6

' 2

2

' 4 5 ' 

### 38' 5 ' 3 ' 5 ' 9 ' 7 ' 6 ' 3 '

3 ' 6

' 9 ' 1 2 ' 5

' 4 ' 3

'
1

0 '

1 ' 

### 3 0 ' 4 ' 5 0 ' 

### 4 4 ' 1 4 ' 7 ' 

### 1 1 ' 2 7 ' 

### 5 '

5

' 4 ' 2 3 ' 7 0 ' 

### 4 8 ' 2 ' 

### 2 8 ' 2 ' 

### 7'

4

3 ' 5 0 ' 8 ' 

### 9' 1 2 ' 

### 8'

6

' 7

' 2

' 2 ' 1 ' 2 0

' 

### 23' 15' 5 3 ' 3 ' 

### 21' 23'

3

' 3

' 6 ' 

### 2 6 ' 3 7 ' 

### 5 5 ' 

### 25' 1 2 ' 1 2 '

2 ' 4

' 1 3

' 6

' 1 ' 

### 2 ' 3 ' 2

' 5 ' 7 ' 

### 22' 2 1 ' 3 7 ' 

### 38' 1 1 ' 1 4
' 

### 1 0 '

4

' 

### 4 ' 3 ' 

### 3 ' 

### 41' 1 9

'



### 4 6 ' 1 0 '

1 0 ' 

### 4 8 '



### 2 8 '

3 3 '

9

'

9

'

3
'

4 '

5 ' 

### 1 4 '

4 3 '



### 2 3 '



### 2 4 '

1 1 '

1 4 '

7 '

3 ' 2 0 '

2 '



### 17'

1 7 '

5
'

2 '

6 '8'

1 7 '

1 5

'

3

'

5 ' 1 0 '

5 '

1 4 '

3 5 '

7 '

1 6 '

6 '

4 '

3 1 '

7 '

3 ' 3 '

3 '

8 ' 5 '

6 '

8 '

1 3 '



### 55'

2 3

' 2 0

'



### 32'

7 '

2 ' 4

' 5
' 1 0 '

1 6 '

1 1 '

8 '

3 0 '



### 26'

6'

2 6
' 2 ' 

### 2 '



### 3 ' 

### 2' 5'

7 ' 2 ' 2 ' 1

6 ' 2 7 '

1 4 '



### 1 0 '

1 9

'

2

' 

### 6 0 ' 7 4 ' 2 3 '

3 4 ' 

### 2 3 ' 

### 15' 8'

16' 1 5 '



### 10' 1

1 '

2

'

LINE 200 >>>LINE121>>>LINE120>>><<<LINE119LINE118>>><<<LINE117LINE116>>><<<LINE115LINE114>>><<<LINE113LINE112>>><<<LINE111LINE110>>><<<LINE109LINE108>>><<<LINE107LINE106>>><<<LINE105LINE104>>><<<LINE103LINE102>>><<<LINE101LINE100>>> LINE 210 >>>

<<< LINE 209

LINE 208 >>>

<<< LINE 207

LINE 206 >>>

<<< LINE 205

LINE 204 >>>

<<< LINE 203

LINE 202 >>>

<<< LINE 201 6

' 2

'2'2'1'5' 5

'

2 '

2
' 2 '

5 ' 7 ' 5 '

1

0

' 9

'

2

' 2

'

8

' 3

'

3

' 2

7

' 1 0
'

3 ' 4

' 2

'

WELL NO. 1 WELL NO. 2

OCS-G-18578

OCS-G-18578 

# AT310

AT354

OCS-G-34580



# AT398

OCS-G-31796



# AT397

OCS-G-33287 

# AT353

OCS-G-35022 

# AT309

16 15 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1



# GC393

OCS-G-32500



# GC437 GC349

OCS-G-31717

l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l l l
l
l
l
l
l l
l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l 2
' 4 3 '

2 3 ' 1 0 '

A

- 2

5 ' 1 4
'

1 '

1 ' 3 5 '

1 3 '

1 3
' 1 4
'

1

6 ' 1 9

'

1 0 ' 2 3

'

1

4 '

1 4 ' 1 5 '

2
'

6 '

2 ' 5 ' 1 3 ' 

### 1 7 ' 7 5 '

5

'

1 ' 8 ' 7
'

8
'

6
' 3

' 7 5 ' 4 3 '

8

0 '

1 1

' 1

0

'

5
'

1 0 ' 2

' 2

' 2

' 3

'

2

' 2

' 3

' 9 ' 3

3 '

1 5 '

3
' 8
'

4 '

4

' 6 '

3

' 1 ' 1 ' 8 ' 1

2
' 2
'

1

'

1 '

3
' 0 ' 2
' 2 3 '

4 '

3 '

4

' 3 ' 3

'

5 ' 5

'

3 '

1 2 ' 6
'

1 1 '

2 ' 1 ' 1 ' 5 '

0

'

3
' 3

' 2 0 ' 2 8
' 1
' 1 0 ' 6
'LINE301>>><<<LINE302LINE303>>><<<LINE304LINE305>>><<<LINE306LINE307>>><<<LINE308LINE309>>><<<LINE310LINE311>>><<<LINE312LINE313>>><<<LINE314LINE315>>><<<LINE316LINE317>>><<<LINE318LINE319>>><<<LINE320LINE321>>><<<LINE322LINE323>>><<<LINE324LINE325>>><<<LINE326

<<< LINE 400 <<< LINE 406

LINE 405 >>>

<<< LINE 404

LINE 403 >>>

<<< LINE 401 LINE 402 >>>



### SURVEY VESSEL:

JOB NO.: 2414-5050 POSITIONING BY: STARFIX INTERPRETATION BY: D. MATTE / M. SAMSON DATE: DECEMBER 29, 2014 SURVEY DATES:

DWG NO.: 24145050-B.dwg REVISION NO.: 0 CHECKED BY: D. GRESHAM DRAFTED BY: K. LEMAIRE



# CHART 1 OF 1 3D SHALLOW HAZARDS STUDY SEAFLOOR FEATURES & BATHYMETRY MAP

" GIVERNEY " PROSPECT PROPOSED WELL "F"

BLOCKS GC 349, GC 393 & AT 353

GREEN CANYON & ATWATER VALLEYAREA

GULF OF MEXICO

200 DULLES DRIVE - LAFAYETTE, LOUISIANA 70506 - (337) 237-2636 

# Fugro GeoServices, Inc. 4,000 3,000

FEET 2,000 0 1,000 SCALE = 1:12,000

5,000

GEODETIC DATUM: NAD27
PROJECTION: UTM GRID UNITS: US SURVEY FEET ZONE: U.T.M. 15 (NORTH) *** IMPORTANT - PLEASE NOTE ***

ANY COMMUNICATION AND/OR POWER CABLES THAT MAY BE PRESENT IN THE AREA CANNOT BE LOCATED BY INSTRUMENTS UTILIZED DURING THIS SURVEY. INQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE TO INTERESTED PARTIES AS TO THE PRESENCE OF SUCH OBSTRUCTIONS. Z O N E

1 5 Z O N E

1 4 Z O N E

1 6 Z O N E

1 5 

## T E X A S A L A B A M A M I S S I S S I P P I

L O U I S I A N A

Pascagoula Gulfport Biloxi Mobile

EWING BANKVERMILION

Port O'Conner Port Lavaca Matagorda Freeport Galveston Houston Port Arthur

Sabine Pass Cameron Grand Cheniere Intracoastal City

Fresh Water City Morgan City

Amelia Houma

Dulac Grand

Isle

Fourchon Lake Charles Lafayette Pensacola

Destin

SOUTH PADRE ISLAND NORTH PADRE ISLAND MUSTANG ISLAND MATAGORDA ISLAND BRAZOS GALVESTON HIGH ISLAND

EAST BREAKS

CORPUS CHRISTI

PORT ISABEL ALAMINOS CANYON GARDEN BANKS

KEATHLEY CANYON GREEN CANYON

WALKER RIDGE ATWATER VALLEY

LUND HENDERSON LLOYD RIDGE DESOTO CANYON
MISSISSIPPI CANYON DESTIN DOME PENSACOLA MOBILE

WEST CAMERONEASTCAMERONSOUTHMARSHISLAND

EUGENE ISLAND SHIP

SHOAL SOUTH

TIMBALIER GRAND

ISLE WEST DELTA SOUTH PELTO BAY MARCHAND SOUTH PASS V I O S C A K N O L L MAIN PASS CHANDELEUR SOUND

CHANDELEUR BRETON SOUND New Orleans

Venice L A S O U T H T E X A S S O U T H C E N T R A L

T E X A S S O U T H C E N T R

A L T E X A S S O U T H

X COORDINATE NUMBER Y COORDINATE

X COORDINATE NUMBER Y COORDINATE PROJECT LOCATION



### STUDY AREA (JOB NO. 2412-5023)

1 0 ' l l 

### l 

### l



### WATER DEPTH CONTOURS

CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET

ZERO DATUM = MEAN LOWER LOW WATER - 3 7 5 0 ' 

### HIGHLY FAULTED ZONE

HUGIN AUV TRACKLINE NUMBER AND DIRECTION (JOB NO. 2412-5023) LINE 101 >>>



### POSSIBLE CHEMOSYNTHETIC AREA (BOEM DATABASE 5/2014)

HARD-BOTTOM AREA (POSSIBLE CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITY) 2,000' AVOIDANCE FOR MUD & CUTTINGS DISCHARGE; 250' AVOIDANCE FOR ALL OTHER BOTTOM-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES (NTL 2009-G40) SUBSIDENCE FEATURE EXISTING WELL LOCATION (FUGRO DATABASE)

2 

### PROPOSED WELL LOCATION WITH A 2,000 FT RADIUS FOR CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT (AS PER MMS NTL 2009-G40). HUGIN AUV TRACKLINE NUMBER AND DIRECTION (JOB NO. 2414-5050) LINE 101 >>>

2 

### STUDY AREA (JOB NO. 2414-5050)

RELICT MUD MOUND SIDE SCAN SONAR CONTACT WITH REFERENCE NUMBER (MINIMUM AVOIDANCE BOUNDARY WHERE APPLICABLE) (FGSI JOB NO. 2412-5023) SIDE SCAN SONAR CONTACT WITH REFERENCE NUMBER (MINIMUM AVOIDANCE BOUNDARY WHERE APPLICABLE (FGSI JOB NO. 2414-5050)

FAULT SCARP WITH SEAFLOOR OFFSET IN FEET, HACHURES ON DOWNTHROWN SIDE1 

## Favaloro, Katharine

From: notification@pay.gov Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 2:36 PM To: Favaloro, Katharine Subject: Pay.gov Payment Confirmation: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF



### Your payment has been submitted to Pay.gov and the details are below. If you have any questions regarding this payment, please contact Brenda Dickerson at (703) 787-1617 or BseeAccountsReceivable@bsee.gov

.
Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF Pay.gov Tracking ID: 25JDE82J Agency Tracking ID: 74739867958 Transaction Type: Sale Transaction Date: 01/20/2015 03:35:48 PM EST

Account Holder Name: Katharine Favaloro

Transaction Amount: $3,673.00 Billing Address: 700 Milam, Suite 3100 City: Houston State/Province: TX Zip/Postal Code: 77002 Country: USA Card Type: MasterCard Card Number: ************6901

Region: Gulf of Mexico Contact: Paul Landry 337-354-5065 Company Name/No: Freeport-McMoRan Oil Gas, 03280 Lease Number(s): 32500, , , , Area-Block: Green Canyon GC, 393: , : , : , : , Surface Locations: 1

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2

– Pg. 3 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 2 GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS The t able below provides all addition al applications to be filed covering operations proposed in this EP

.

Application/Permit Issuing Agency Status Application for Permit to Drill BSEE To be submitted Application for Permit to Modify BSEE To be submitted Emergency Evacuation Plan USCG To be submitted

2.2 DRILLING FLUIDS The table below provide s t he types and estimated volumes of the drilling fluid s FM O&G p lan s to use to drill the proposed well.

Type of Drilling Fluid Estimated Volume of Drilling Fluid to be Used per Well (bbl ) Water

- based (seawater, freshwater, barite) 50,000 Oil

- based (diesel, mineral oil ) 0 Synthetic

- based (internal olefin, ester) 31,000

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY [PROPRIETARY]

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT The bond requirements for the activities and facilities proposed in this EP are satisfied by an

area

- wide bond, furnished and maintained according to 30 CFR 5 56, S ubpart I; NTL No. 2000

- G16, "Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds;" and a current BOEM

- approved deferment from providing additional security under 30 CFR 5 56.53(d) and National NTL No. 2008

- N07, “Supplemental Bond Procedures .” If at any point Freeport

- McMoRan O il & Gas LLC no longer qualifies for a supplemental bonding deferment, Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC will either provide the required additional security or a third party guarantee within 60 days after suc h disqualification.

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL RESPON SIBILITY (OSFR) Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Company N o. 03280 ) will demonstrate oil s pill financial responsibility for the facilities proposed in this EP according to 30 CFR 5 53; and NTL No. 2008

- N05, "Guidelines for Oil Spill Financial Responsibility for Covered Facilities" (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “ Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operator s Pending Review and Reissuance”), prior to conducting operations covered in this EP.

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT Fr eeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC (Company No. 03280 ) ha s the financial capability to drill a relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2

– Pg. 4 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO The Worst Case Discharge is defined as an uncontrolled blowout through the drill ing string during drilling operations.

The highest Worst Case Discharge in this Exploration Plan is for Green Canyon Block 393 Well Location B accepted under Exploration Plan (Control No. N

- 9739) approved March 31, 2014.

Estimated Initial Flow Rate (bbls/day): 397,922 bbls

Maximum duration of potential blowout (days): 160 days

Total Volume (bbls) (flow rate x duration): 63,667,5 20 bbls

Discussion of potential for well to bridge over: While the sand s to be encountered by the well in this EP are expec ted to be slightly consolidated

, FM O&G does NOT assume that the proposed well would bridge over in a blowout scenario. The basis for this assumption comes from work done in association with SPE Paper # 163438 on the analysis of potential bridging scenari os during blowout events in the deepwater GoM. FM O&G agrees with the conclusions of this SPE paper that the only instances in which a deepwater well could potentially bridge over is a complete loss of the marine riser hydrostatic column resulting in a sh arp pressure reduction downhole leading to wellbore collapse before a blowout can fully develop. This bridging would occur quickly before large volumes of hydrocarbons could escape. As FM O&G does not consider this bridging method to cover all potential blowout scenarios in the proposed well

, all Worst Case Discharge calculations will be based upon a well blowing out unimpeded until a relief well can be completed.

Discussion of likelihood for surface intervention to stop blowout: Well Location “B” will be drilled in the Green Canyon (GC) Block 393 as a subsea well in approximately 3,800’ of water with the wellhead and BOP equipment located on the seabed. Surface intervention would be the preferred method of intervention pending an uncontrolled blowout, however the technique used would be contingent upon the condition of the rig, marine riser system and BOP equipment. Surface intervention is a quicker solution than drilling a relief well, but actual methodology of controlling the bl owout would have to be determined pending an analysis of the site

‐ specific conditions at the location.

Prior to any surface intervention operations a team of specialists would be mobilized immediately to assess the situation and determine a corrective co urse of action to control the blowout. Well control specialists would perform either a fly

‐ by via helicopter and/or surface vessel to assess conditions at the site. FM O&G has Master Service Agreements with both Wild Well Control (a Superior Energy Servic es company) and Boots and Coots (a Halliburton company). Additionally

, an ROV capable of manipulating the rig’s BOP hot

‐ stab functions would be mobilized to location and, if appropriate, an attempt would be made to shut in the well by closing the blind she ar rams , if not done previously. These actions would take place within 24

‐ 48 hours of the incident. Initial assessment activities are projected to take 3

– 5 days. During this period, the well control team would analyze the blowout situation, devise an i ntervention

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2

– Pg. 5 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) strategy and mobilize additional service company specialists, supplies and equipment. FM O&G would establish a field support base and secondary command center in the company owned shore base facility in Fourchon, LA. Communication would simult aneously be established with the support base and command center.

Relief Well

Discussion of Drilling a Relief Well: FM O&G has the financial capability to drill a relief well and conduct other emergency well control operations. Should a relief well be nec essary, there are deepwater rigs rated and equipped to drill in water depth of 4,000' or greater actively working in the Gulf of Mexico. Since all rigs proposed for drilling a relief well are dynamically positioned MODUs

, the time necessary to mobilize the rig to location is minimal. The time required to drill the relief well is dependent on many factors, chief among them is the required depth of the relief well. The deepest anticipated depth of the relief well would be when an intersection is required with the blown

‐ out well at its final target depth (TD). The total days estimated to drill an example well to potential target depth (PTD) is 95 days. The probable directional nature of the relief well could nominally increase its measured depth compared to the blown

‐ out well. The time required to drill this extra distance is anticipated to be more than offset by the better understanding of the optimum drilling parameters learned while drilling the blown

‐ out well. In order to intersect the blowout well, numerous ranging runs will be required which will add approximately three weeks to the drilling program. The steps and time required to accomplish the dynamic kill are also dependent on the particular circumstances of the blown

‐ out well.

Rig type capable of drill ing relief well at water depth and to TD: The Noble Tom Madden, under contract to FM O&G and scheduled to be in Mississippi Canyon Blocks 84, 127 and 129 in 2017, is capable of drilling a relief well at this location.

Rig package constraints: The rig chos en to drill the relief well must:

• Be rated and equipped to work in water depths of 4,000’ due to G reen Canyon Block 393 deepwater location near the Sigsbee Escarpment.

• Be d ynamically positioned to eliminate anchoring issues caused by potential subsea debri s.

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

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

Activity Duration (days) Assess the situation and obtain the optimum MODU 5 Secure the well at current location of MODU 14 Mobilization time to relief well location 3 Drill relief well 110 Wellbore intersection (of blown out well) 21 Dynamic kill operations 7 Total Anticipated Time 160

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2

– Pg. 6 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) Statement whether possibility of using nearby platform was considered: No production platforms exist in the area and could not be used to drill a relief well.

Other

Measures to enhance ability to prevent a blowout:

• FM O&G will verify with contractor tha t all BOPs have been certified, maintained and are capable of operating in the anticipated conditions required for operations.

• FM O&G representatives will review and witness the installation, testing, function testing and operation of the diverter system a nd diverter outlets.

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

• Wiper trips will be performed as hole conditions dictate in order to quantify the stability of the wellbore and to determine whether sufficient mud weights are being utilized.

• Connections will be simulated as needed while drilling into pressure transition areas in order to properly assess the current wellbore conditions.

Measures to reduce the likelihood of a blowout:

• A liner top packer or equivalent expandable will be run on all liner laps as an additional barrier for well safety.

• Lost circulation material will be added to the mud system in order to assist the mud system’s ability to prevent lost circulation. Sweeps and concentrated pills will be used to prevent unco ntrolled mud losses.

• Every effort will be made to review all offset and seismic data in order to prepare a mud weight schedule that will allow for safe drilling margin with out putting excess hydrostatic pressures on known zones previously encountered.

• Mudl oggers may be utilized during critical drilling operations to monitor gas content of mud returns, formation characteristics and abnormalities of cuttings and to estimate paleo aging of cuttings.

• Logging While Drilling (LWD) tools will be utilized as much as possible to evaluate formations, formation pressures and fluid content in the critical sections of the well.

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

Measures to enhance ability to conduct effective and ear ly intervention in event of a blowout: FM O&G is a member of the Helix Well Containment Group (HWCG) and has full access to a subsea capping stack and a complete suite of oil recovery equipment as required. This subsea capping stack has been deployed succ essfully to a well location with cooperation from BSEE.

Arrangements for drilling relief wells: FM O&G has Master Service Agreements with both Wild Well Control (a Superior Energy Services company) and Boots and Coots (a Halliburton

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 2

– Pg. 7 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) company) who would assi st in detailed relief well planning including the identification of required equipment and services.

Any other measures: No

In accordance with NTL No. 2015

- N01 , “Information Requirements for Exploration Plans, Development and Production Plans, and Develo pment Operations Co ordination Documents on the OCS for Worst Case Discharge and Blowout Scenarios ” the Blowout Scenario and Worst Case Discharge Assumptions and Ca lculations were submitted with Exploration P lan ( C ontrol No. N

- 9739 ) approved March 31, 2014

.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 3

– Pg. 8 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 3 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION [PROPRIETARY]

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAP S [PROPRIETARY]

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINE [ PROPRIETARY]

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS

- SECTION [PROPRIETARY]

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT In accordance with NTL No. 2008

- G05, “Shallow Hazards Program” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operators Pending Review and Reissuance”), shallow hazards and archaeological survey s w ere cond ucted over Green Canyon Block s 349 and 393 evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions that may adversely affect drilling operations

. The report was submitted with Exploration Plan (Control No. N

- 9739) approved March 3 1, 2014

.
Additional shallow hazards and archaeological survey s over Atwater Valley Blocks 353 and portions of the eight surrounding blocks: Atwater Valley Blocks 309, 310, 354, 397, 398, and Green Canyon Blocks 349, 393 and 437

, w ere conducted by Fugro Geoservices, Inc. Th e report , supplemental to the report provided with N

- 9739, is provided with this plan.

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT In accordance with NTL No. 2008

- G05, “ Shallow Hazards Program

, ” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “Elimination of Expir ation Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operators Pending Review and Reissuance”), a shallow hazards assessment has been prepared f or the proposed surface location evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions that may adversely affect drilling operations. The shallow hazards survey and archaeological assessment is included as Attachment 3

- D

.
3.7 HIGH

- RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES [PROPRIETARY]

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN [PROPRIETARY ]

3.9 TIME V ERSUS DEPTH TABLES [ PROPRIETARY]Report No. 2414-5050 1 

### Report No. 2414-5050-F December 29, 2014

Freeport McMoRan Oil & Gas 717 Texas Avenue, Suite 2100 Houston, Texas 77002

Attention: Mr. Riley Bates

Wellsite Clearance Letter Giverny Prospect, Proposed Wellsite F Block 393 (OCS-G-32500) Green Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico

Introduction. Fugro GeoServices, Inc. (FGSI) was contracted by Freeport McMoRan Oil & Gas (FMOG) to prepare a geohazards assessment of Proposed Wellsite F (Giverny Prospect). The proposed borehole has a surface location in Green Canyon (GC) Block 393 ( OCS-G-32500) and i s planned to be vertical through the tophole section. T he principal scope of the assessment is to address specific seafloor and shallow geologic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed surface location. Potential drilling hazards in the tophole section are identified and as sessed to 1.5 seconds two-way time (TWT) below mudline (BML) (approximately 4,740 feet BML) at this location.

This site-specific assessment is a s upplement to FGSI Report No. 2412-5023 (“Shallow Hazards and Archaeological Assessment, Giverny Prospect, Blocks 349 & 393, Green Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico”) and FGSI Report No. 2414-5050 (“Shallow Hazards and A rchaeological Assessment, Giverny Prospect, Block 353 & Vicinity, Atwater Valley Area, Gulf of Mexico”). These reports correspond to geophysical data collected by FGSI in 2012 and 2014, respectively, as well as a 3D exploration seismic dataset provided by FMOG. Please refer to the above-referenced documents for a comprehensive assessment of geohazards within GC393, GC349, Atwater Valley (AT) Block 353 and vicinity as well as a description of the data used in this study, its limitations, time-depth conversions, and a c omplete list of references used in this investigation. The study areas from both surveys are displayed on the enclosed Study Chart (Chart 1) and the Multibeam Bathymetry Rendering (Figure 2). A summary of each geophysical survey is provided in the archaeological portion of this assessment.

This wellsite clearance assessment, together with the above-referenced geohazards and archaeological assessments, comply with the latest guidelines established by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and t he Bureau of Safety and En vironmental Enforcement (BSEE) for s hallow drilli ng hazards (NTLs 2008-G04 & 2008-G05), archaeological resources (NTLs 2005-G07, 2011-JOINT-G01, and Mitigation 3.20), and chemosynthetic community assessment (NTL 2009-G40).

This wellsite clearance assessment is based on the interpretation of 3D seismic data and high-resolution Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (A UV) data. T he AUV dat aset includes side scan sonar (SSS), multibeam echosounder bathymetry (MBES), MBES backscatte r, and s ub-bottom profiler records. Subsurface depths referenced in this letter were calculated with a fifth order polynomial function that was derived by FGSI and is based on checkshot survey data for AT398 Well No. 1.

3D Seismic Frequency and Resolution. Based on frequency spectra analysis of the 3D seismic data at 50% power (within the upper 1.0 second two-way travel time below the seafloor), the frequency bandwidth for data covering Proposed Wellsite F ranges from 29 to 63 Hz (Figure 1). T his frequency bandwidth corresponds to a limit of separability of about 26.9 feet, assuming a dominant frequency of 29 Hz and an average velocity of 5,328 ft/sec in the t ophole section. The 3D seismic data used in this wellsite clearance 

## FUGRO GEOSERVICES, INC.

200 Dulles Drive P.O. Box 740010 Lafayette, Louisiana 70506 T ( 3 37 ) 237

- 2636 F ( 3 37 ) 268

- 3221Report No. 2414-5050 2 

### assessment were post-processed (spectrally whitened) with IHS Kingdom software for the purpose of frequency enhancement in the tophole section. A dditional details regarding the data descriptions and limitations are documented in FGSI Report Nos. 2412-5023 & 2414-5050. Overall, the data used in this study are judged to be of adequate quality and r esolution to make an as sessment of the geologic conditions and potential hazards that may constrain exploratory drilling operations within the study area.

Graphics. A Seafloor Features and B athymetry Chart (Chart 1; 1:12,000-scale) showing the proposed wellsite, water depth contours, and seafloor features accompanies this wellsite assessment. A 2,000 foot chemosynthetic community clearance radius around the proposed wellsite is shown on t he chart (as per BOEM NTL 2009-G40). The enclosed 3D seismic frequency spectrum illustrates that the 3D seismic data are in compliance with the BOEM’s minimum frequency requirements (Figure 1). An 8.5” x 11” multibeam rendering figure is attached to provide a regional view of the seafloor bathymetry (Figure 2). 8. 5” x 11” multibeam backscatter and side scan sonar images (Figures 3 and 4, respectively) are included to show surface conditions within a 2 ,000’ radius of the proposed wellsite. The nearest 3D s eismic inline and crossline profiles (Figures 5 and 6, respectively) are also attached to illustrate shallow geologic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed location. In addition, shallow geologic conditions at the proposed wellsite are summarized on the attached Tophole Prognosis Chart (Figure 7). A figure of the nearest AUV sub-bottom profiler line is provided to provide a high-resolution image of the shallow subsurface in the vicinity of the proposed wellbore (Figure 8). Finally, an 8.5” x 11”, 1:12, 000-scale Subsurface Geologic Features Map (Figure 9) is included to show shallow geologic features near the wellsite in plan view.

Proposed Well Location. The surface location for Proposed Wellsite F is in the northeastern portion of GC393 as follows:

Proposed Wellsite F Block 393, Green Canyon Area UTM Zone 15, NAD 1927 X = 2,639,800’ Y = 10,023,125’ Latitude: 27° 35’ 12.232” N Longitude: 89° 54’ 52.252” W 3D Inline: 6664 3D Crossline: 2050 Block Call 1: 3,595’ From North Line of GC393 Block Call 2: 10,360’ From West Line of GC393

Water Depth and Seafloor Gradient. The water depth at Proposed Wellsite F is about -3,803’ (based on MBES data and assuming zero datum at Mean Lower Low Wate r [MLLW]), and the local seafloor gradient is about 3.4 o 

### (~7.3%) to the southeast (Chart 1 & Figure 2). S urficial soils appear to be stable at this location; however, a s eabed investigation utilizing sediment cores would be r equired to accurately determine the sediment type, soil stability, and precise geotechnical properties for this location.

Seafloor Features. Several seafloor faults lie within a 2,000 foot radius of the proposed wellsite (Chart 1). These fault scarps are associated with increased seafloor gradients, and di fficulties with placement of bottom-founded infrastructure may be encountered during lease development. The closest seafloor fault lies approximately 165 f eet to the southwest, strikes northwest-southeast, and i s downthrown to the southwest. The proposed wellbore will not penetrate this fault, as it is cited on the upthrown fault block.

The seafloor expression of a shallow-buried mudmound is located approximately 625 feet to the southwest of the Proposed F location. This topographic anomaly is about 350 feet in diameter and displays about seven feet of relief above the ambient seafloor (Figures 2 & 9; Chart 1). The buried mudmound is located along a seafloor fault and is interpre ted to represent a relict fluid ex pulsion feature. MBES Backscatter and SSS records display uniform seafloor reflectivity in the location of the buried mudmound and do not indicate the presence of authigenic carbonates or other hardbottom material (Figures 3 & 4). A sub-bottom profiler line does not transect the buried mudmound, and the feature is not fully resolvable in the 3D seismic data.Report No. 2414-5050 3 

### For these reasons, the precise depth of burial is unclear; however, it is apparant that this feature is covered by a t hin veneer of hemipelagic clay drape, which indicates that it has been dor mant for hundreds or thousands of years. This feature should not present a hazard or constraint to exploratory drilling activity at the Proposed F Location.

Potential for Chemosynthetic Communities. No BOEM-designated “potential chemosynthetic zones” are located within a 2, 000 foot radius of the proposed wellsite (Chart 1). A dditionally, no e vidence of chemosynthetic communities was observed in the AUV data within 2,000 feet of Proposed Wellsite F. Analysis of the 3D seismic seafloor horizon, AUV MBES backscatter data, and SSS record s indicate a seafloor of uniform reflectivity; therefore, the potential for encountering chemosynthetic communities or authigenic carbonates in this vicinity is considered to be very low (Figures 3 & 4).

Man-Made Obstructions. T he proposed wellsite lies within a z one designated as archaeologically sensitive by the BOEM (NTLs 2005-G07 & 2011-JOINT-G01). No man-made features such as pipelines, wellheads, or other infrastructure are reported within 2,000 feet of the proposed location. No evidence of man-made infrastructure was observed in the geophysical data that were interpreted for this project. Additionally, no side scan sonar targets were identified within 2,000 feet of Proposed Well Location F. This interpretation is supported by FGSI’s regional Giverny Archaeological Assessment (FGSI Report Nos. 2412-5023 and 2414-5050) and by the site-specific archaeological assessment included herein.

Mooring Considerations. FMOG plans to utilize a dynamically positioned (DP) drilling vessel at the proposed wellsite; thus, seafloor clearance for anchor locations will not be addressed at this time.

Stratigraphy. The mapped horizons (Horizons 10, 20, and 30) divide the shallow section into four stratigraphic sequences (Sequences 1 through 4) of distinct seismic character and inferred lithology (Figures 5 and 6). This stratigraphic characterization is consistent with the 2012 Giverny geohazards assessment (FGSI Report No. 24125023). The 2014 Giverny geohazards assessment breaks Sequence 4 into three additional stratigraphic units (Sequences 5 t hrough 7); however, for practical purposes, Sequences 5 through 7 are collectively referred to as “Sequence 4” in this wellsite clearance assessment (as outlined in FGSI Report No. 24125023). Predicted depths of Horizons 10, 20, and 30 (and the intervening sequence thicknesses) are displayed on t he attached Tophole Prognosis Chart for Proposed Wellsite F (Figure 7). All stratigraphic intervals in the tophole were interpreted from the 3D seismic data volume, unless otherwise noted.

Sequence 1 is about 410 feet thick and is divided into two subunits. Sub-bottom profiler data indicate that the surficial subunit (Sequence 1a) is 65 feet thick at the wellsite location and consists of parallel-stratified clays that accumulated from the normal gravitational settling of suspended material in a marine environment (normal marine deposits) (Figure 8). The basal subunit (Sequence 1b) is about 345 feet thick and is composed of fine-grained normal marine deposits with thin, interbedded mass transport deposits (MTDs). Occasional silt lenses may be encountered in Sequence 1b.

Sequence 2 is approximately 394 feet thick and is similar in seismic character to Sequence 1b. This interval is composed of fine-grained normal marine deposits with interbedded MTDs. P oorly developedsilts may be encountered in this interval, with Horizon 20 (the base of Sequence 2) interpreted as sandprone.
Sequence 3 is about 465 feet thick and is divided into two subunits. The upper subunit (Sequence 3a) is 138 feet thick at the wellsite location and consists of fine-grained, chaotically-bedded MTDs. T he basal subunit (Sequence 3b) is about 327 feet thick and i s a m ixed-lithology interval of fine sands, silts, and clays. This interval is interpreted to consist of submarine channel-levee deposits and MTDs.

Sequence 4 i s a g eologically complex, 3,470-foot thick package of chaotically-bedded, fine-grained channel/levee deposits with interbedded MTDs. T his interval is divided into eight subunits. T he upperReport No. 2414-5050 4 

### subunit (Sequence 4a) is a 561- foot thick package of discontinuous to semi-continuous, fine-grained channel/levee complexes with interbedded MTDs. The second subunit of Sequence 4 (Sequence 4b) is a 696-foot thick mixed-lithology interval of submarine channel/levee deposits and MTDs. The third subunit (Sequence 4c) is a 331-foot thick package of semi-continuous, fine-grained channel/levee complexes with interbedded MTDs. P oorly-developed sands or silts may be enc ountered in this interval. The fourth subunit (Sequence 4d) is a 194- foot thick mixed-lithology interval of submarine channel/levee deposits. The fifth subunit (Sequence 4e) is a 246-foot thick package of semi-continuous, fine-grained channel/levee complexes with interbedded MTDs. The sixth subunit of Sequence 4 ( Sequence 4f) is a 212- foot thick mixed-lithology interval of submarine channel/levee deposits. The seventh subunit (Sequence 4g) is a 429 foot-thick package of semi-continuous, fine-grained channel/levee complexes with interbedded MTDs. Minor silt or sand stringers may be enc ountered within this interval. T he basal portion of Sequence 4 (Sequence 4h) is about 802 feet thick and is a mixed-lithology interval of submarine channel/levee deposits and MTDs to the depth of the tophole investigation (~4,740 feet BML).

Fault Penetrations. One major seafloor fault will be crossed by the proposed wellbore at a depth of about 2,963 feet BML (-6,766 feet MLLW). The top of this fault is located approximately 3,630 feet to the northeast of Proposed Well F. The fault strikes northwest-southeast, is downthrown to the southwest, and is interpreted to be active due to significant stratigraphic offset at the seafloor. Continued movement may have long-term effects on subsurface installations that penetrate this fault and should be a c onsideration during wellbore design.

In addition, the drill string will intersect one mapped buried fault at a depth of approximately 1,537 feet BML (-5,340 feet MLLW). Nu merous unresolved buried faults may also be i ntersected by the dr ill string throughout the tophole section. Due to the inactive nature of these buried features, fault plane movement is not expected to present a haz ard to drilling operations. How ever, possible drilling fluid circulation interruptions should be expected when penetrating major faults and/or highly faulted zones.

Salt Penetration. The top of salt exists below the depth of investigation of this wellsite clearance assessment; however, a general description of shallow salt conditions is provided below. T he proposed wellsite will penetrate a salt structure at approximately 7,214 feet BML (-11,017 feet MLLW). The top of salt gradient at this location is approximately 23.4 o 

### (43.3%) to the northeast.

Drilling complications that may be enc ountered with salt penetration include bit wander, rapid salt dissolution (uncontrolled borehole enlargement), major temperature and/or pressure fluctuations, drilling fluid circulation problems, casing collapse, and stuck bits. In addition, unresolved sub-salt geohazards may exist and should be taken into consideration. The salt body at this location is considered to be active and gradual, continued movement is likely. Ongoing halokinetic activity may have a significant impact on both surface and subsurface infrastructure installations. These problems should be anticipated, and mitigating measures should be incorporated into borehole design, equipment selection, and drilling techniques.

Potential for Lost Circulation or Caving. The proposed wellbore will intersect two major faults within the tophole section. Secondary porosity and permeability may exist that could cause drilling fluid loss to the formation surrounding the borehole. The attached tophole prognosis chart displays an assessment of lost circulation/caving potential for each sedimentary unit. Designations of “negligible”, “low”, “moderate”, and “high” are used to indicate lost circulation and caving potential.

Unit 1a does not contain any resolvable faults; however, due t o the likelihood of encountering looselyconsolidated sediments within this interval, borehole integrity may be difficult to maintain. For this reason, a (slightly elevated) lost circulation/caving potential of “low” is assessed for Unit 1a. Units 1b through 4a are assessed a l ost circulation/caving potential of “negligible”. Problems with jetted installation of conductor pipe are not expected, as near-surface soils appear to be normally consolidated and relatively fine-grained. How ever, geotechnical data would be required to accurately define the soil type in the shallow section at the proposed wellbore. Washouts and caving are possible if unresolved sandy sectionsReport No. 2414-5050 5 

### are encountered. T hese problems could affect the verticality and load-carrying capacity of the surface conductor. In addition, if dewatered/compacted MTDs are encountered, pipe refusal during jet-in of the 36- inch conductor may be experienced by the drilling contractor.

A major fault will be penet rated in Unit 4a; therefore, this interval is assessed a drilling fluid circulation loss/caving potential of “low to moderate”. Unit 4b may contain intraformational faults that are below the resolution of the 3D seismic data and is also assessed a lost circulation/caving potential of “low”. A major fault will be penet rated in Unit 4d; thus, this interval is assessed a dr illing fluid circulation loss/caving potential of “low to moderate”. Dr illing fluid interruptions and/or problems with borehole caving are not anticipated in the remainder of the tophole section; for this reason, these intervals are assessed a l ost circulation/caving potential of “negligible”. The drilling mud program should be des igned with these assessments as a consideration.

Potential for Sub-Seafloor Gas Hydrates. No evidence of a bottom-simulating-reflector (BSR) that may indicate the base of the gas hydrate stability zone (BGHSZ) was observed in the shallow seismic data near the proposed wellbore (Figures 5 & 6). It is important to note that the presence of a BSR is not a requisite for the existence of gas hydrates, nor is a BSR alone necessarily indicative of gas hydrates. The seismic data cannot help directly predict the distribution and quantity of hydrates within the stability zone. However, it is reasonable to expect that accumulations of gas hydrates are more likely to occur near accumulations of free-phase gas. If gas hydrates are present in the shallow sediments, they would likely occur within the predominately fine-grained interval between the seafloor and t he BGHSZ in localized and di sseminated accumulations of small crystals and nod ules, lenses and partings, or thin veins. Although disseminated gas hydrates are possible, it is unlikely that this condition would constrain exploratory drilling.

Potential for Free-Phase Gas Accumulations. No subsurface seismic amplitude anomalies that were interpreted to represent probable free-phase gas accumulations will be intersected by the proposed vertical wellbore within the depth of this geophysical investigation. Amplitude anomalies that were delineated in the Giverny regional geohazards studies (FGSI Job Nos. 2412-5023 & 2414-5050) are annotated on t he attached 8.5” x 11” Subsurface Geologic Features Map (Figure 9).

The closest amplitude anomaly within the depth of investigation is located approximately 238 feet to the south of Proposed Wellsite F. This anomaly falls within Stratigraphic Sequence 3 and i s buried approximately 1,103 feet BML (-4,906 feet MLLW). This anomaly and several others exist within 500 feet of the proposed wellsite; however, they are limited in lateral extent and should not pose a hazard to vertical drilling activity at the proposed surface location.

Stratigraphic Sequences 4b, 4d, and 4f are assessed a shallow gas potential of “low” due to the presence of relatively high amplitude, sand-prone, potentially gas-charged sediment. However, seismic amplitudes within these intervals are below the respective anomaly picking thresholds and were not mapped as hazards. A lthough problems with shallow gas are not likely within these intervals, mitigation measuresshould be considered as a risk-reduction measure. The remainder of the tophole section is primarily finegrained and is assessed a shallow gas potential of “negligible”.

Seismic amplitude analysis is a subjective process; therefore, any additional seismic records collected near the proposed well location should be inspected for evidence of shallow gas. Possible shallow gas accumulations should be avoided or otherwise mitigated by proper well design. Additionally, the possibility of penetrating unresolved gas-charged sands within the riserless section should be c arefully considered and incorporated into the wellbore design.

Potential for Shallow Water-Flow (SWF). Shallow geologic conditions are conducive for the induction and preservation of geopressure within sand-prone deposits in the vicinity of the proposed wellbore. Based on regional analysis, the study area lies within a zone of high risk for SWF (Ostermeier et al, 2002). This classification is based on t he number of local SWF occurrences and t heir severity. The closest shallowReport No. 2414-5050 6 

### water flow event that was reported in the vicinity of the study area was at the AT398 No. 1 well, which is located approximately 5.8 miles southeast of the proposed wellsite. This SWF event was reported to the BOEM at a depth of 4,473 feet below sea surface (BSS) (854 feet BML) with a severity of “minor”. The AT398 No. 1 SWF sand was seismically correlated with Horizon 20 in the Giverny prospect area. Horizon 20 is a sand-prone reflector that forms the base of Stratigraphic Sequence 2 and the top of Stratigraphic Sequence 3.

All SWF problems that were reported to the BOEM within a 15 m ile radius of the proposed Giverny “F” Location are summarized in the table below. The seismic dataset that was used for the regional Giverny geohazards analysis (FGSI Report Nos. 2412-5023 and 2414- 5050) did not encompass offset wells GC435-1, AT267-1, and AT222-1; therefore, a direct stratigraphic correlation of the SWF-prone intervals encountered at these locations was not attempted.

Well Name Distance from Proposed Giverny “F” Location Depth BML of SWF

Sand Depth BSS of SWF

Sand SWF Severity Spud Date Well Integrity

AT398-1 ~5.8 miles SE 854’ 4,473’ Minor 6/18/2005 Maintained GC435-1 ~7.4 miles SW 1,400’ 5,125’ Moderate 7/13/2003 Not Maintained AT267-1 ~10.8 miles NE 934’ 4,275’ Minor 1/6/2005 Maintained AT222-1 ~9.3 miles NE 1,204’ 4,374’ Low 3/14/1992 Maintained



### S ediments within Stratigraphic Sequence 1 ( -3,803’ MLLW to -4,213’ MLLW) are interpreted to consist primarily of fine-grained material with relatively low overburden; thus, the likelihood for SWF within these intervals is deemed “negligible”. The remainder of the tophole sediment sequences may contain silt or sand-prone, loosely-consolidated material that is overlain by rapidly-deposited, fine-grained overburden and are assigned elevated SWF potentials. Det ails regarding these assessments are provided in the Tophole Prognosis Chart (Figure 7). In addition, the following table summarizes the SWF assessments for potential problem intervals within the riserless section.

Stratigraphic Designation SWF Potential Qualitative Reasoning for Assessment

Sequence 2 (-4213’ to -4,607’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Potentially contains unresolved sand lenses sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs; additionally, the base of this interval (Horizon 20) is stratigraphically correlative with the AT398-1 SWF event

Sequence 3a (-4607’ to -4,745’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Potentially contains unresolved sand lenses sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs; additionally, the top of this interval (Horizon 20) is stratigraphically correlative with the AT398-1 SWF event
Sequence 3b (-4,745’ to -5,072’ MLLW) Moderate Sand-prone interval sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs
Sequence 4a (-5,072’ to -5,633’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Generally fine-grained interval; however, unresolved, overpressured sands may be encountered Sequence 4b (-5,633’ to -6,329’ MLLW) Moderate to High High-amplitude, laterally continuous sand-prone interval sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs
Sequence 4c (-6,329’ to -6660’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Generally fine-grained interval; however, unresolved, overpressured sands may be encountered Sequence 4d (-6660’ to -6854’ MLLW) Moderate Sand-prone interval sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs
Sequence 4e (-6,854’ to -7,100’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Generally fine-grained interval; however, unresolved, overpressured sands may be encountered Sequence 4f (-7,100’ to -7,312’ MLLW) Moderate Sand-prone interval sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDs Sequence 4g (-7,312’ to -7,741’ MLLW) Low to Moderate Generally fine-grained interval; however, unresolved, overpressured sands may be encountered
Sequence 4h (-7,741’ to -8,543’ MLLW) Moderate to High Moderate to high-amplitude, laterally continuous sand-prone interval sealed by rapidly deposited, fine-grained MTDsReport No. 2414-5050 7 

### Given the regional geologic setting and the reported shallow water flow issues with offset wells in the vicinity of this location, it is recommended that mitigation measures are planned as a precaution against potential SWF events. Real -time remotely operated vehicle (ROV) monitoring at the wellhead is recommended for early detection of SWF problems. Additionally, the drilling contractor should maintain an adequate supply of kill mud to maintain control of the well in the event that a SWF problem occurs. A small-diameter pilot hole through the riserless section is an optional pre-spud mitigation measure that may be employed to reduce the risks associated with drilling in areas with known SWF problems. A contingency plan for SWF containment should be developed so that problems can be contained as quickly as possible.

Archaeological Assessment. Findings submitted in this archaeological assessment are based on the interpretation of AUV side scan sonar and AUV bathymetric data sets. FGSI acquired the high-resolution geophysical survey data utilizing a Hugin 3000 AUV aboard the Fugro Enterprise on October 9-11, 2012 (described in FGSI Report No. 2412-5023) and on October 7-9, 2014 (described in FGSI Report No. 2414- 5050). T he quality of the collected geophysical data for both surveys was excellent, and t he data were suitable for interpretation.

Horizontal positioning of the survey vessel was accomplished with the FUGRO STARFIX  Differential Global Positioning System, which has a field accuracy of <1 meter. T he AUV navigates using a gl obal positioning system (GPS) while on the surface and an inertial navigation system (INS) coupled with a Doppler velocity logger when submerged. In addition, the AUV is tracked with a super-short baseline (SSBL) system and s ent position updates via an acoustic modem to continually augment the INS navigation. During the 2012 survey, the AUV performed pre-programmed survey missions collecting 120 kilohertz (kHz) and 410 kHz chirp side scan sonar data. The sonar sensor on the AUV was upgraded subsequent to the 2012 survey; for this reason, 230 kHz and 5 40 kHz chirp side scan sonar data were collected during the 2014 survey. 200 kHz multibeam bathymetry data were collected during both surveys. During data acquisition, the AUV was maintained at an al titude of approximately 40 m eters above the seafloor.

The survey grid for the 2012 dat aset (FGSI report No. 2412-5023) consists of twenty-two (22) primary north-south tracklines (Lines 100-121) spaced 200 meters apart and eleven (11) east-west tie-lines (Lines 200-210) spaced 900 meters apart. Maritime conditions during portions of the 2012 survey used for this study were variable, with seas ranging from 2 to 5 feet and winds ranging from 5 to 20 knots.

The survey grid for the 2014 dataset consists of twenty-six (26) primary north-south tracklines (Lines 301- 326) spaced at 200-meter intervals and seven (7) east-west tie lines (Lines 400-406) spaced at 900-meter intervals. Sea conditions during data acquisition were moderate, with winds ranging from approximately five to 15 knots and seas ranging from one to five feet. Tracklines from the 2012 and 2014 s urveys are shown on Chart 1 in green and blue, respectively.

For both surveys, side scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and multibeam bathymetric systems were run on all AUV tracklines. Navigational fixes (shot points) were recorded at 410-foot (125 meter) intervals and were annotated on al l data. The survey grids provide complete coverage of the seafloor with the sonar and multibeam bathymetry systems and a representative sampling of the subsurface with the sub-bottom profiler.

An archaeological assessment of the proposed well location is summarized below:

 This Archaeological Assessment was written to satisfy the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management/Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforc ement (BOEM/BSEE) regul ations set forth by NTLs 2005-G07, 2011-JOINT-G01, and Mitigation 3.20 (Avoidance of Archaeological Resources).Report No. 2414-5050 8 

###  The regional probability for shipwrecks in this area is considered to be low; preservation of a wreck would be moderate to good (Pearson et al. 2003). Analyses of available shipwreck sources, as well as the FUGRO CHANCE database, indicate that no shipwrecks have been reported in the vicinity of the proposed well location.

 The seafloor within close proximity to the proposed “F” surface location is relatively flat and featureless. Regionally, the seafloor displays some irregularities due t o seafloor fault scarps and a b uried mudmound. The closest fault scarp is approximately 165 feet to the southwest of the proposed surface location. There were no i rregular seafloor features identified on the multibeam bathymetry data that could represent unidentified shipwreck remains.

 The water depth at the proposed “F” surface location is approximately -3,803 feet with zero datum at Mean Lower Low Water.

 In general, the side scan sonar images exhibit low to moderate reflectivity, which is indicative of relatively homogenous, fine-grained seafloor sediments.

 Eighteen (18) sonar contacts were mapped in the 2012 regional Giverny study area (FGSI Report No. 2412-5023). Sonar Contact No. 13 was recommended for avoidance by 1,000 feet. This contact is located within the eastern portion of GC349 (approximately 2.4 miles from the Proposed “F” Location). Sonar Contact No. 13 measures 6.6 feet x 21.9 feet and exhibits a hei ght of approximately 2.7 feet above the ambient seafloor. This contact could not be reliably identified by the sonar records. The remaining seventeen (17) sonar contacts were interpreted to represent modern anthropogenic debris or geologic features and are not deemed archaeologically significant. All sonar contacts from the 2012 survey are displayed on Chart 1 in orange.

 Sixteen (16) additional sonar contacts were mapped from the survey data collected in 2014. These contacts were interpreted to represent modern anthropogenic debris or geologic features and are not deemed archaeologically significant. All sonar contacts from the 2014 survey data are displayed on Chart 1 in green.

 No side scan sonar contacts were noted within 2,000 feet of the proposed “F” surface location.

 The evaluation of the high-resolution geophysical survey data indicates that there were no unus ual depressions, scours, sediment changes, or unidentified seafloor targets observed within 2,000 feet of the proposed surface location that could represent unidentified shipwreck remains. It is possible that small features representing high probability areas for historic shipwreck materials may not be detected by the geophysical instruments or may not be det ected during interpretation of the data. If evidence of histor ic cultural remains is encountered dur ing subsequent work, the BOEM/BSEE archaeologists must be contacted within 48 hour s to provide an as sessment of these artifacts, and al l operations must cease within 1,000 feet of the exposed objects.Report No. 2414-5050 9 

### Closing. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project and look forward to continuing as your geohazards consultants. I f you have any questions concerning this assessment, please do not hesitate to contact us (337-268-3236).

Sincerely, FUGRO GEOSERVICES, INC.

Dean Gresham Geoscience Group Manager

Ray Blackmon Supervising Archaeologist

Attachments:

 Wellsite-Specific Seafloor Features & Bathymetry Chart (1 :12,000)

 3D Seismic Frequency Spectrum, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 1)

 Multibeam Bathymetry Rendering, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 2)

 MBES Backscatter Mosaic, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 3)

 Side Scan Sonar Mosaic, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 4)

 3D Seismic Inline 6664 Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 5)

 3D Seismic Crossline 2050, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 6)

 Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 7)

 Sub-bottom Profiler Section, Line 117, Wellsite F, Block 393, Green Canyon Area (Figure 8)

 Subsurface Geologic Features Map, Proposed Wellsite F (8.5” x 11”, 1:12,000) (Figure 9)

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 4

– Pg. 9 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 4 HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

4.1 CONCENTRATION FM O&G a nticipates encountering 0 ppm H 2 

### S during the proposed operations.

4.2 CLASSIFICATION In accordance with Title 30 CFR 550.215, FM O&G requests that Green Canyon Block 393 be classified by the BOEM as H 2 

### S absent.

4 .3 H 2 

### S CONTINGENCY PLAN An H 2 

### S Contingency Plan is not required for the activities proposed in this plan.

4.4 MODELING REPORT Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5

– Pg. 10 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 5 BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES The seafloor disturbing activities proposed in this plan are in water depths greater than 300 meters (984’). Fugro Geoservices, Inc. w as contracted to provide an assess ment of the shallow conditions a t the proposed surface location . The purpose of the assessment was to address seafloor conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 feet of the proposed well site

. FM O&G wil l avoid all high

- density deepwater benthic communities by 2,000 feet from each proposed mud and cuttings discharge location and 250 feet from the location of all other seafloor disturbances. A s per NTL No. 2009

- G40, “Deepwater Benthic Communities,” a map showing the 2 ,000 foot radius around the well site is included as Attachment 5

- A

.
5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES ( BANKS) Activities proposed in this EP do not fall within 305 meters (1000 feet) of a topographic “N o Activity Z one ; ” therefore, no map is required per NTL No. 2 009

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

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING) All activities proposed under this EP will be conducted outside all Topog raphic Feature Protective Zones; therefore shunting of drill cuttings an d drilling fluids is not required per NTL No. 2009

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

5.4 LIVE BOTTOM S (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES) Green Canyon Block 393 is not located within 61 meters (200 feet) of any pinnacle trend feature; therefore

, a separate bathymetric map is not required per NTL No. 2009

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

5.5 LIVE BOTTOM S (LOW RELIEF) Green Canyon Block 393 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of any live bottom (low relief) feature with vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live bottom (low relief) maps are not required per NTL No. 2009

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

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP Green Canyon Block 393 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of potentially sensitive biological features; therefore, biologically sensitive area maps are not required.

5.7 REMOTEL Y OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS BOEM has determined there is enough data gathered in Grid Area 13 ; therefore, FM O&G wil l not be conducting any ROV surveys either pre

- spud or post

- drill operations per NTL No. 2008

- G06, “Remotely Operated Vehicle Surveys in Deepwater” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operators Pending Review and Reissuance”).

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5

– Pg. 11 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 5.8 THREATENED AND ENDAN GERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT AND MARINE MAMMAL INFORMATION The federally l isted endangered and threatened species potentially occurring in the lease area and along the Gulf Coast are provided in the table below.

Species Scientific Name Status Potential Presence Critical Habitat Designated in the Gulf of Mexico Lease Area Coastal

Marine Mammals Manatee, West Indian Trichechus manatus latirostris E

-- X Florida (p eninsular)

Whale, Blue Balaenoptera masculus E X *

-- None Whale , Finback Balaenoptera physalus E X *

-- None Whale

, Humpback Megaptera novaeangliae E X *

-- None

Whale , North Atlantic Right Eubalaena glacialis E X *

-- None

Whale , Sei Balaenopiera borealis E X *

-- None Whale, Sperm Physeter catodon (= macrocephalus ) E X

-- None

Terrestrial Mammals Mouse, Beach (Alabama, Choctawatchee, Perdido Key, St. Andrew) Peromyscus polionotus E

- X Alabama, Florida (p anhandle) beaches

Birds Plover, Piping Charadrius melodus T

- X Coastal Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida (p anhandle) Crane, Whooping Grus Americana E

- X Coastal Texas Reptiles Sea Turtle, Green Chelonia mydas T,E ** X X None

Sea Turtle, Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata E X X None

Sea Turtle, Kemp’s Ridley Lepidochelys kempli E X X None

Sea Turtle, Leatherback Dermochelys coriacea E X X None

Sea Turtle, Loggerhead Carett a caretta T X X Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida Fish Sturgeon, Gulf Acipenser oxyrinchus (=oxyrhynchus) desotoi T X X Coastal Louisiana, Mis sissippi, Alabama and Florida (p anhandle) Coral s Coral, Elkhorn Acopora palmate T

- X Florida Keys and Dry Tortugas Coral, Staghorn Acopora cervicornis T

- X Florida

Abbreviations: E = Endangered; T = Threatened

* The Blue Fin, Humpback, North Atlantic Right, and Sei Whales are r are or extralimital in the Gulf of Mexico and are

unlikely to be present in the lease area.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 5

– Pg. 12 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) ** Green Sea turtle is threatened, except for the Florida breeding population, which is listed as endangered.



### 5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT Green Canyon Block 393 has been determined to have a high potential for conta ining archaeological properties

.
In accordance with NTL No. 2005

- G07 “Archaeological Surveys and Reports,” and NTL No. 2011

- JOINT

- G01, “Revisions to the List of OCS Lease Blocks Requiring Archaeological Resource Surveys a nd Reports,” a Shallow Hazard and Archaeological Assessment was included with Exploration Plan (Control No. N

- 9739) approved March 31, 2014. A supplement to th e previously submitted report is provided with this plan.

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATI ON Air and water quality information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL No. 2008

- G04, “Information R equirements for Exploration Plans and Development Operations Coordination Documents” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “ Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operator s Pending Review and Reissuance”).

5.11 SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION Socioeconomic Information is not required to be included in this plan per NTL No. 2008

- G04, “Information Requirements for Explorati on P lans and Development Operations Coordination Documents ” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “ Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operator s Pending Review and Reissuance”).

### 35'

3' l l l ll l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l

l
l l
l
l l l l l
l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l



### l 

### l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l



### l l l 

### l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l

l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l

l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l ll l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l
l l
l

l l l l l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l ll

l

l

l

ll

l l

l

l

l

ll
l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l
l l

l

l
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l



### l 

### l l l l l l l



### l 

### l 

### l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l
l

l
l
l

l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l 

### l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

ll

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l
l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l
l

l

l

l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l
l
l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l lll l l

l l l l l

l

l
l

l

l

l l

l

l

l l l
l
l
l l

l

l l l l 

### l l

l 

### l l
l

l
l l l 

### l

l

l

l
l l l l l l l

l l

l l

l l l l l l l

l

l l

l
l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l l

l

l l l

l

l

l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l l

l

l

l

l
l

l

l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l

ll

l

l

l

l l l

l l

l l l l l

l

l

l

l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l

l ll l 

### l l 

### l l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l

l l l l l

l 

### l

l 

### l l l 

### l 

### l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l l l 

### l 

### l 

### l l 

### l l l 

### l l 

### l 

### l l l l l



### l 

### l 

### l 

### l 

### l

1 2

3

4 5 6

7

8 9

10 11

12 13

14

15 16 17

18 13

14 

# GC304

GC348

GC392

GC436 GC305 AT265 A T W A T E R V A L L E Y A R E A G R E E N C A N Y O N A R E A

2 ' 2 ' 2
' 4
' 8
' 8

' 2

' 1 ' 4

' 5

' 4 ' 6

' 2 1

' 5

' 1 0 ' 8

' 9

' 1

' 2

3

' 1 1 ' 7

' 8 ' 3 ' 1

' 3 ' 1 '

1

' 5

' 4

' 4 ' 1 ' 4 '

1 0 '

1 0 ' 3 1 ' 8 ' 1

8 ' 8

' 4 ' 3

' 

### 4' 6

' 7

' 4

' 3

5 ' 4 8 ' 3 6

' 2

2

' 4 5 ' 

### 38' 5 ' 3 ' 5 ' 9 ' 7 ' 6 ' 3 '

3 ' 6

' 9 ' 1 2 ' 5

' 4 ' 3

'
1

0 '

1 ' 

### 3 0 ' 4 ' 5 0 ' 

### 4 4 ' 1 4 ' 7 ' 

### 1 1 ' 2 7 ' 

### 5 '

5

' 4 ' 2 3 ' 7 0 ' 

### 4 8 ' 2 ' 

### 2 8 ' 2 ' 

### 7'

4

3 ' 5 0 ' 8 ' 

### 9' 1 2 ' 

### 8'

6

' 7

' 2

' 2 ' 1 ' 2 0

' 

### 23' 15' 5 3 ' 3 ' 

### 21' 23'

3

' 3

' 6 ' 

### 2 6 ' 3 7 ' 

### 5 5 ' 

### 25' 1 2 ' 1 2 '

2 ' 4

' 1 3

' 6

' 1 ' 

### 2 ' 3 ' 2

' 5 ' 7 ' 

### 22' 2 1 ' 3 7 ' 

### 38' 1 1 ' 1 4
' 

### 1 0 '

4

' 

### 4 ' 3 ' 

### 3 ' 

### 41' 1 9

'



### 4 6 ' 1 0 '

1 0 ' 

### 4 8 '



### 2 8 '

3 3 '

9

'

9

'

3
'

4 '

5 ' 

### 1 4 '

4 3 '



### 2 3 '



### 2 4 '

1 1 '

1 4 '

7 '

3 ' 2 0 '

2 '



### 17'

1 7 '

5
'

2 '

6 '8'

1 7 '

1 5

'

3

'

5 ' 1 0 '

5 '

1 4 '

3 5 '

7 '

1 6 '

6 '

4 '

3 1 '

7 '

3 ' 3 '

3 '

8 ' 5 '

6 '

8 '

1 3 '



### 55'

2 3

' 2 0

'



### 32'

7 '

2 ' 4

' 5
' 1 0 '

1 6 '

1 1 '

8 '

3 0 '



### 26'

6'

2 6
' 2 ' 

### 2 '



### 3 ' 

### 2' 5'

7 ' 2 ' 2 ' 1

6 ' 2 7 '

1 4 '



### 1 0 '

1 9

'

2

' 

### 6 0 ' 7 4 ' 2 3 '

3 4 ' 

### 2 3 ' 

### 15' 8'

16' 1 5 '



### 10' 1

1 '

2

'

LINE 200 >>>LINE121>>>LINE120>>><<<LINE119LINE118>>><<<LINE117LINE116>>><<<LINE115LINE114>>><<<LINE113LINE112>>><<<LINE111LINE110>>><<<LINE109LINE108>>><<<LINE107LINE106>>><<<LINE105LINE104>>><<<LINE103LINE102>>><<<LINE101LINE100>>> LINE 210 >>>

<<< LINE 209

LINE 208 >>>

<<< LINE 207

LINE 206 >>>

<<< LINE 205

LINE 204 >>>

<<< LINE 203

LINE 202 >>>

<<< LINE 201 6

' 2

'2'2'1'5' 5

'

2 '

2
' 2 '

5 ' 7 ' 5 '

1

0

' 9

'

2

' 2

'

8

' 3

'

3

' 2

7

' 1 0
'

3 ' 4

' 2

'

WELL NO. 1 WELL NO. 2

OCS-G-18578

OCS-G-18578 

# AT310

AT354

OCS-G-34580



# AT398

OCS-G-31796



# AT397

OCS-G-33287 

# AT353

OCS-G-35022 

# AT309

16 15 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1



# GC393

OCS-G-32500



# GC437 GC349

OCS-G-31717

l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l l l
l
l
l
l
l l
l

l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l

l

l

l

l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l l l

l l l l l l 2
' 4 3 '

2 3 ' 1 0 '

A

- 2

5 ' 1 4
'

1 '

1 ' 3 5 '

1 3 '

1 3
' 1 4
'

1

6 ' 1 9

'

1 0 ' 2 3

'

1

4 '

1 4 ' 1 5 '

2
'

6 '

2 ' 5 ' 1 3 ' 

### 1 7 ' 7 5 '

5

'

1 ' 8 ' 7
'

8
'

6
' 3

' 7 5 ' 4 3 '

8

0 '

1 1

' 1

0

'

5
'

1 0 ' 2

' 2

' 2

' 3

'

2

' 2

' 3

' 9 ' 3

3 '

1 5 '

3
' 8
'

4 '

4

' 6 '

3

' 1 ' 1 ' 8 ' 1

2
' 2
'

1

'

1 '

3
' 0 ' 2
' 2 3 '

4 '

3 '

4

' 3 ' 3

'

5 ' 5

'

3 '

1 2 ' 6
'

1 1 '

2 ' 1 ' 1 ' 5 '

0

'

3
' 3

' 2 0 ' 2 8
' 1
' 1 0 ' 6
'LINE301>>><<<LINE302LINE303>>><<<LINE304LINE305>>><<<LINE306LINE307>>><<<LINE308LINE309>>><<<LINE310LINE311>>><<<LINE312LINE313>>><<<LINE314LINE315>>><<<LINE316LINE317>>><<<LINE318LINE319>>><<<LINE320LINE321>>><<<LINE322LINE323>>><<<LINE324LINE325>>><<<LINE326

<<< LINE 400 <<< LINE 406

LINE 405 >>>

<<< LINE 404

LINE 403 >>>

<<< LINE 401 LINE 402 >>>



### SURVEY VESSEL:

JOB NO.: 2414-5050 POSITIONING BY: STARFIX INTERPRETATION BY: D. MATTE / M. SAMSON DATE: DECEMBER 29, 2014 SURVEY DATES:

DWG NO.: 24145050-B.dwg REVISION NO.: 0 CHECKED BY: D. GRESHAM DRAFTED BY: K. LEMAIRE



# CHART 1 OF 1 3D SHALLOW HAZARDS STUDY SEAFLOOR FEATURES & BATHYMETRY MAP

" GIVERNEY " PROSPECT PROPOSED WELL "F"

BLOCKS GC 349, GC 393 & AT 353

GREEN CANYON & ATWATER VALLEYAREA

GULF OF MEXICO

200 DULLES DRIVE - LAFAYETTE, LOUISIANA 70506 - (337) 237-2636 

# Fugro GeoServices, Inc. 4,000 3,000

FEET 2,000 0 1,000 SCALE = 1:12,000

5,000

GEODETIC DATUM: NAD27
PROJECTION: UTM GRID UNITS: US SURVEY FEET ZONE: U.T.M. 15 (NORTH) *** IMPORTANT - PLEASE NOTE ***

ANY COMMUNICATION AND/OR POWER CABLES THAT MAY BE PRESENT IN THE AREA CANNOT BE LOCATED BY INSTRUMENTS UTILIZED DURING THIS SURVEY. INQUIRIES SHOULD BE MADE TO INTERESTED PARTIES AS TO THE PRESENCE OF SUCH OBSTRUCTIONS. Z O N E

1 5 Z O N E

1 4 Z O N E

1 6 Z O N E

1 5 

## T E X A S A L A B A M A M I S S I S S I P P I

L O U I S I A N A

Pascagoula Gulfport Biloxi Mobile

EWING BANKVERMILION

Port O'Conner Port Lavaca Matagorda Freeport Galveston Houston Port Arthur

Sabine Pass Cameron Grand Cheniere Intracoastal City

Fresh Water City Morgan City

Amelia Houma

Dulac Grand

Isle

Fourchon Lake Charles Lafayette Pensacola

Destin

SOUTH PADRE ISLAND NORTH PADRE ISLAND MUSTANG ISLAND MATAGORDA ISLAND BRAZOS GALVESTON HIGH ISLAND

EAST BREAKS

CORPUS CHRISTI

PORT ISABEL ALAMINOS CANYON GARDEN BANKS

KEATHLEY CANYON GREEN CANYON

WALKER RIDGE ATWATER VALLEY

LUND HENDERSON LLOYD RIDGE DESOTO CANYON
MISSISSIPPI CANYON DESTIN DOME PENSACOLA MOBILE

WEST CAMERONEASTCAMERONSOUTHMARSHISLAND

EUGENE ISLAND SHIP

SHOAL SOUTH

TIMBALIER GRAND

ISLE WEST DELTA SOUTH PELTO BAY MARCHAND SOUTH PASS V I O S C A K N O L L MAIN PASS CHANDELEUR SOUND

CHANDELEUR BRETON SOUND New Orleans

Venice L A S O U T H T E X A S S O U T H C E N T R A L

T E X A S S O U T H C E N T R

A L T E X A S S O U T H

X COORDINATE NUMBER Y COORDINATE

X COORDINATE NUMBER Y COORDINATE PROJECT LOCATION



### STUDY AREA (JOB NO. 2412-5023)

1 0 ' l l 

### l 

### l



### WATER DEPTH CONTOURS

CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET

ZERO DATUM = MEAN LOWER LOW WATER - 3 7 5 0 ' 

### HIGHLY FAULTED ZONE

HUGIN AUV TRACKLINE NUMBER AND DIRECTION (JOB NO. 2412-5023) LINE 101 >>>



### POSSIBLE CHEMOSYNTHETIC AREA (BOEM DATABASE 5/2014)

HARD-BOTTOM AREA (POSSIBLE CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITY) 2,000' AVOIDANCE FOR MUD & CUTTINGS DISCHARGE; 250' AVOIDANCE FOR ALL OTHER BOTTOM-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES (NTL 2009-G40) SUBSIDENCE FEATURE EXISTING WELL LOCATION (FUGRO DATABASE)

2 

### PROPOSED WELL LOCATION WITH A 2,000 FT RADIUS FOR CHEMOSYNTHETIC COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT (AS PER MMS NTL 2009-G40). HUGIN AUV TRACKLINE NUMBER AND DIRECTION (JOB NO. 2414-5050) LINE 101 >>>

2 

### STUDY AREA (JOB NO. 2414-5050)

RELICT MUD MOUND SIDE SCAN SONAR CONTACT WITH REFERENCE NUMBER (MINIMUM AVOIDANCE BOUNDARY WHERE APPLICABLE) (FGSI JOB NO. 2412-5023) SIDE SCAN SONAR CONTACT WITH REFERENCE NUMBER (MINIMUM AVOIDANCE BOUNDARY WHERE APPLICABLE (FGSI JOB NO. 2414-5050)

FAULT SCARP WITH SEAFLOOR OFFSET IN FEET, HACHURES ON DOWNTHROWN SIDE

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 6

– Pg. 13 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 6 WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES “Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to the Gulf of Mexico” is included as Attachment 6

- A

**.**
6.2 MODELING REPORT Mod eling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan.N/A N/A N/A N/A No Potable Water with 4% Stack-Magic ECO-Fv2 105 BBL/WELL 1 BBL/DAY/WELL Discharge at the seafloor or with deck drainage when tested at surface No

Uncontaminated seawater used to maintainproper draft 1,208,550 BBL/WELL 11,510 BBL/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard. Based upon 5 major ballast operations, with rig at operating draft minimal ballast change is required No

Sea Water with no additional chemicals 3,360 BBL/WELL 32 BBL/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No Cement Slurry 36,488 BBL/WELL 348 BBL/DAY/WELL Discharge at seafloor during riserless operations. Dicharge rate based upon 2 days (28" & 22" cement returns) No Hull discharge overboard No 333 BBL/DAY/WELL

833 BBL/DAY/WELL

N/A Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region 6 GOM GMG 290000 regulations

Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region 6 GOM GMG 290000 regulations

N/A Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2

N/A 2,000 BBL/WELL

5,000 BBL/WELL

N/A

N/A Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit? General NPDES Permit No. GMG290534 Well treatment fluids

Well completion fluids

Workover fluids

Desalinization unit discharge

Blowout prevent fluid

Ballast water

Bilge water

Excess cement at seafloor

Fire water Cooling water Sea Water with no additional chemicals 62,196,645 BBL/WELL 592,349 BBL/DAY/WELL Hull discharge overboard No No

No

N/A

Rejected water from the watermaker. 158,550 BBL/WELL 1510 BBL/DAY/WELL Gray water from living quarters 36,330 BBL/WELL 346 BBL/DAY/WELL Chlorinate and discharge overboard No
Sanitary waste from living quarters, control rooms and change rooms.

Will you conduct well treatment, completion, or workover?

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

Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in for produced water.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage

Deck Drainage Deck drainage from drilling floor 525 BBL/WELL 5 BBL/DAY/WELL No drillfloor drainage routed to sea. All retained on board and processed to <15ppm or sent to shore for disposal No No

Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr 2 , CaCl 2 Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste

16,590 BBL/WELL 158 BBL/DAY/WELL USCG approved MSD with chlorination Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Cuttings coated with synthetic drilling fluids, including drilled out cement 4,939 BBL/WELL 140 BBBL/DAY/WELL Discharged to surface. Treated cutting will be discharged overboard during drilling of the SBM intervals. Discharge rate is based upon 35 days of drilling. Cuttings will be processed through a cuttings dryer, substantially reducing the ROC percentage. No

Domestic waste

Sanitary Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings coated while drilling with WBM 2,607 BBL/WELL 372 BBL/DAY/WELL Discharged to mudline prior to riser installation. Based on 7 total days of drilling with WBM. No Answer yes or no

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

Water-based drilling fluid Water, NaCI (salt), PHPA polymer and Barium Sulfate (Barite) 50,000 BBL/WELL 7,143 BBL/DAY/WELL Discharge at the mudline prior to the riser installation. Nominal amount of unused fluid may be discharged at the surface. Based on 7 days of drilling with WBM. No WASTES YOU WILL GENERATE, TREAT AND DOWNHOLE DISPOSE OR DISCHARGE TO THE GOM Projected Downhole Disposal Projected generated waste Projected ocean discharges

Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge Rate Discharge Method

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 7

– Pg. 14 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 7 AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS

Screen Questions for EP’s Yes No Is any calculated Complex Total (CT) Emission amount (tons) associated with your proposed exploration activities more than 90% of the amounts calculated using the following formulas: CT = 3400D 2/3 

### for CO, and CT = 33.3D for the other air pollutants (where D = distance to shore in miles) ? X

Do your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures or modified emission factors? X

Are your proposed exploration activities located east of 87.5° W longitude? X Do you expect to encounter H 2 

### S at concentrations greater than 20 parts per million (ppm)? X

Do you propose to flare or vent natural gas for more than 48 continuous hours from any proposed well? X Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liquids? X

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION Summary information regarding the peak year emissions that will be generated by and associated with the Plan Emissions and Complex Total Emissions are provided in the table below. This information is compiled on the summary form of the two sets of worksheets. There are no existing facilities o r activities co

- located with the currently proposed activities; therefore, the Complex Total Emissions are the same as the Plan Emissions and are provided in the table below.

Air Pollutant Plan Emission Amounts ( T ) Calculated Exemption Amounts ( T ) Calculated Complex Total Emission

Amounts ( T ) Carbon monoxide (CO) 425.52 71,778.34 425.52 Particular matter (PM) 56.48 3,230.10 56.48 Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 

### ) 259.09 3,230.10 259.09 Nitrogen oxides (NO x 

### ) 1,941.75 3,230.10 1,941.75 Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 58.54 3,230.10 58.54

This information was calculated by: Jean Martin 281

- 698

- 8544 jean.martin@jccteam.com

### EXPLORATION PLAN (EP) AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLIST OMB Control No. 1010-0151 OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/2011



## MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). 

### Page 1 of 8 COMPANY Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC AREA Green Canyon BLOCK 393 LEASE OCS-G 32500 PLATFORM NA WELL Well Loc. F

COMPANY CONTACT Jean Martin TELEPHONE NO. 281-698-8544

REMARKS FM O&G will drill, complete, test, flare and install subsea wellheads using a dp drillship.

### EMISSIONS FACTORS



## MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). 

### Page 2 of 8 Fuel Usage Conversion Factors Natural Gas Turbines Natural Gas Engines Diesel Recip. Engine REF. DATE SCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483 AP42 3.2-1 4/76 & 8/84



### Equipment/Emission Factors units PM SOx NOx VOC CO REF. DATE

NG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83 AP42 3.2-1& 3.1-1 10/96 

### NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5 AP42 3.2-1 10/96 

### NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96 

### NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6 AP42 3.2-1 10/96



### Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03 AP42 3.3-1 10/96 

### Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4 AP42 3.4-1 10/96 

### Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21 AP42 1.3-12,14 9/98



### NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84 P42 1.4-1, 14-2, & 14 7/98 

### NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5 AP42 11.5-1 9/91 

### Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21 AP42 1.3-1 & 1.3-3 9/98 

### Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03 E&P Forum 1/93 

### Fugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005 API Study 12/93 

### Glycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6 La. DEQ 1991 

### Gas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034

Sulphur Content Source Value Units Fuel Gas 3.33 ppm Diesel Fuel 0.4 % weight Produced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppm Produced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weightEMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEAR

MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). Page 3 of 8 COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Green Canyon 393 OCS-G 32500 NA Well Loc. F Jean Martin 281-698-8544 OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONS Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CO DRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 61800 2984.94 71638.56 24 105 43.56 199.83 1497.36 44.92 326.70 54.88 251.78 1886.67 56.60 411.64 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 6 45 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.20 0.90 6.75 0.20 1.47 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 45 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.70 3.20 23.99 0.72 5.23 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 45 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.70 3.20 23.99 0.72 5.23 VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNT TANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WELL TEST GAS FLARE 208333.33 24 2 0.12 14.87 12.56 80.94 0.00 0.36 0.30 1.94

2017 YEAR TOTAL 51.22 235.08 1775.48 65.38 465.07 56.48 259.09 1941.75 58.54 425.52

EXEMPTION CALCULATION DISTANCE FROM LAND IN MILES 3230.10 3230.10 3230.10 3230.10 71778.34 97.0

### SUMMARY



## MMS FORM MMS-138 (December 2008 - Supersedes all previous versions of form MMS-138 which may not be used). 

### Page 8 of 8 COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL Freeport-McMoR Green Canyon 393 OCS-G 32500 NA Well Loc. F 

### Emitted Substance Year

PM SOx NOx VOC CO 2017 56.48 259.09 1941.75 58.54 425.52 Allowable 3230.10 3230.10 3230.10 3230.10 71778.34

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8

– Pg. 15 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 8 OIL SPILL INFORMATION

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING All th e proposed activities and facilities in this EP will be covered by the Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) filed by Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC ( Company N o. 03280 ) dated January 2014 and last approved on December 19, 2014 (OSRP Control N o. O

- 713 ).

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location Houma, Louisiana Harvey, Louisiana Leeville, Louisiana Houma, Louisiana Harvey, Louisiana Fourchon, Louisiana

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION FM O&G ’s primary equipment providers are Clean Gulf Associates (CGA), Marine Spill Response Corpo ration (MSRC) and National Response Corporation (NRCC). Clean Gulf Associates Services, LLC (CGAS) will provide closest available personnel, as well as a CGAS supervis or to operate the equipment. MSRC personnel are responsible for operating MSRC response equipment. Through its Independent Contractor Network (ICN), NRCC will also provide closest available personnel, as wel l as an NRCC ICN supervisor to operate equipment.

8.4 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION

Category Regional OSRP WCD

- Drilling EP WCD

- Drilling Type of a ctivity Exploratory Drilling >10 miles Exploratory Drilling >10 miles Facility location (area/block) GC 393 GC 393 Facility designation Well Location B Well Location B Distance to nearest shoreline (miles) 96.5 mi 96.5 mi Uncontrolled blowout (bbl) 400,000 bbl 397,922 bbl Total volume (bbl) 400,000 bbl 397,922 bbl Type of oil(s) (crude, condensate, diesel) Crude Crude

API gravity 25 o 

### 25 o



### The Regional OSRP Drilling WCD calculations were approved December 19, 2014 (OSRP O

713). The EP Drilling WCD calculations were accepted under Exploration Plan ( Control No. N

9739 ) approved March 31, 2014.

FM O&G has determined that the worst

- case scenario from the activities proposed in this EP does not supersede the worst

- case scenario from our approved Regional OSRP.

Sinc e Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC h as the capability to respond to the worst

- case spill scenario included in our Regional OSRP approved December 19, 2014 , and since the worst

-

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 8

– Pg. 16 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) case scenario determined for our EP does not replace the worst

- case scenario in our Regional OSRP, Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC hereby certifies that Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Ga s LLC has the capability to respond, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst

- case discharge, or a substantial threat of such a discharge, resulting from the activities proposed in this EP

.
8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION The Oil Spill Response Disc ussion is included as Attachment 8

- A.

8.6 MODELING REPORT Modeling reports are not required for the activities proposed in this plan.

## SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Management Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well blowout during drilling operations

, estimated to be 397,922 barrels of crude oil wi th an API gravity of 25 °

. 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 BOEM Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BOEM website . Th e results are shown in Fi gure 1

. The BOEM OSRAM identifies a 5 % probability of impact to the shorelines of Cameron Parish, Louisiana within 30 days

. Cameron Parish includes the east side of Sabine La ke, Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Calcasieu Lake, Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge (inland) and Grand Lake. Cameron Parish also includes the area along the coastline from Sabine Pass to Big Constance Lake in Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge. This region is composed of open public beaches, marshlands and swamps. It serves as a habitat for numerous birds, finfish and other animals, including several rare, threatened and endangered species

.
Response

FM O&G will make every effort to respond to the Worst Ca se Discharge as effectively as
p racticable . A description of the response equipment under contract to contain and recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2

. Using the estimated chemical and physical characteristics of crude oil

, an ADIOS weat hering model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil da tabase. The results indicate 7 % or approximately 27,855 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with approximately 3 70

, 06 7 barrels remaining.

Spill Response G C 393 , Well Location B Barrels of Oil
WCD Volume 397,922
Less 7 % natural evaporation/dispersion 27,855 Remaining volume 370,067



## Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary storage equipment available to resp ond to the worst case discharge

. The volume accounts for the amount remaining after evaporation/dispersion at 24 hours. The list estimates individual times needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment

. Figure 2 also indicates ho w operations will be supported.

FM O&G ’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies such as dispersants and in

- situ burn. Strategies will be decided by Unified Command based on an operations safety analysis, the size of the spill , weather and potential impacts. If aerial

## disper sants are utilized, 8 sorties (9

, 6 00 gallons) from two of the DC

- 3 aircrafts and 4 sorties (8,000 gallons) from the Basler aircraft would provide a daily dispersant capability of 7,540 barrels . If the condit ions 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. S lick containment boom would be immediately called out and on

- scene as soon as possible. Offshore response strategies may include attempting to skim utilizing CGA’s, MSRC’s, and NRCC’s spill response equipment, with a total derated skimming capacity of 1,046,754 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 317,687 barrels. If ad ditional storage is needed, various tank barges with a total of 1.4 million+ barrels of storage capacity may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage and minimize off

- loading time

. Safety is first priority. Air monitoring will be ac complished and operations deemed safe prior to any containment/skimming attempts.

If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana would depend upon existing environmental conditions. Shoreline protection would include the u se of CGA’s and NRCC’s near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 147,605 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming equipment equals 2,393 barrels. If additional storage is needed, a 47,000 barrel storage ba rge, a 25,000 barrel storage barge, three 20,000 barrel storage barges, and three 23,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage and minimize off

- loading time . Onshore response may include the deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protection and sorbent boom on vegetated areas. Master Service Agreements with AMPOL and OMI Environmental will ensure access to 147,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom

. Figure 2 outlines individual times needed for procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Strategies would be based upon surveillance and real time trajectories that depict areas of potential impact given actual sea and weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan

, applicable Area Contingency and Geographical Response Plans a nd Unified Command would be consulted to ensure that environmental and special economic resources would be correctly identified and prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shorel ine protection strategies depict the protection response modes applicable for oil spill clean

- up operations. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it describes necessary action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, based on the assumption that removal of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to fragile coastal ecosystems if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervis ory personnel have the option to modify the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more effective response to site

- specific circumstances. FM O&G ’s contract Spill Management Team holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response P lan.

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, FM O&G can be onsite with contracted oil spill recovery equipment with adequate response capacity to contain and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent prac ticable , within an estimated 77 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).

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

• We ather

• Equipment and materials availability

• Ocean currents and tides

• Location of the spill

• Product spilled

• Amount spilled

• Environmental risk assessments

• Trajectory and product analysis

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

FM O&G will take act ion to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and recover as much of the spilled oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the environment, response actions will be designed to provide an “in

- depth” protection strategy meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations.

Coordination of response assets will be supervised by the designation of a SIMOPS group as necessary for close quarter vessel response activities. Most often, this group will be used during source control events that require a significant number of large vessels operating independently, but in coordination to complete a common objectiv e, in a small area and in close coordination and support of each other. This group must also monitor the subsurface activities of each vessel (ROV, dispersant application, well control support, etc.). The SIMOPS group leader reports to the Source Control S ection Chief.

In addition, these activities will be monitored by the spill management team (SMT) and Unified Command via a structured Common Operating Picture (COP) established to track resource and slick movement in real time.

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

• Information will be confirmed

• An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

• OSROs and appropriate agencies will be notified

• ICS 201, Initial Report Form completed

• Initial Safety plan will be written and p ublished

• Unified Command will be established

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

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

o On

- site command and control established

## Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment Surveillance

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

• Provide trained observer to provide on site status reports

• Provide command and control platform at the site if needed

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

• Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems

Dispersant application assets

• Put aerial dispersant provid ers on standby

• With the FOSC, conduct analysis to determine appropriateness of dispersant application (refer to Section 18)

• Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface

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

• Coordinate movement of dispersants, aircraft, and support equipment and personnel

• Confirm dispersant availability for current and long range operations

• Start ordering dispersant stocks required for expected operations

Containment boom

• Call out early a nd 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 Oppo rtunity (VOO) to deploy and maintain boom

Dedicated off

- shore skimming systems General

• Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

• Assets deployed at safe distance from aerial dispersant and in

- situ burn operations

CGA HOSS Barge

• Use in areas with heav iest oil concentrations

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

CGA 95’ Fast Response Vessels (FRVs)

• Designed to be a first vessel on scene

• Capable of maintaining the initial Command and Control function for on wa ter recovery operations

• 24 hour oil spill detection capability

## • Highly mobile and efficient skimming capability

• Use as far off

- shore as safely possible

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

MSRC PSV

- VOO Skimming Systems

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as near

- shore as allowed by draft of vessel

• Use as far off

- shore as needed

• Expected 24

- hour mobilization

• Expected length of 200 foot or greater

• PSV

- VOO with deck space of 150’ x 40’ to provide space for skimmer, marine storage tanks and boom

• PSV

- VOO with 2,000

- 20,000 bbl below deck storage supplemented with 2 or more 500 bbl marine portable tanks, if necessary, depending on below d eck storage

MSRC Oil Spill Response Vessels (OSRV)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

• Use as near

- shore as allowed by draft of vessel

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

• Use as far off

- shore as nee ded

MSRC Fast Response Vessels (FRV)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

• Use as far off

- shore as allowed

MSRC Responders

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

NRCC Oil Spill Response Barge (OSRB)

• Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

NRCC Oil Spill Response Vessel (OSRV)

• To the area of the thickest oil

• Use as far off

- shore as allowed

## NRCC Vessel of Opportunity Skimming System (VOSS)

• To the area o f the thickest oil

• Use as far off

- shore as allowed

• VOOs minimum 110’ in length

• VOOs with minimum of 8x15 of optimum deck space

• VOOs with 200

- 400 ft of boom

• Storage tanks of 100 bbls or more

Storage Vessels

• Establish availability of contracted assets (See Appendix E)

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

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

• Position as closely as possible to skimming assets to minimize offloading time

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

• Use FM O&G ’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessels are ideal for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard/ABS for vessel inspections

• 

## Place VOOs in Division or Groups as needed

• 

## Use organic on

- board storage if appropriate

• 

## Maximize non

- organic storage appropriate to vessel limitations

• 

## Decant as appropriate after approval to do so has been granted

• 

## Assign bulk storage barges to each Division/Group

• 

## Position bulk storage barges as close to skimming units as possible

• 

## Utilize large skimming vessel (e.g. barges) storage for smaller vessel offloading

• 

## Maximize skimming area (swath) to the optimum width given sea conditions and available equipment

• 

## Maximize use of oleophilic skimmers in all operations, but especially offshore

• 

## Nearshore, use shallow water barges and shuttle t o skimming units to minimize offloading time

• 

## Plan and equip to use all offloading capabilities of the storage vessel to minimize offloading time

In

- situ Burn assets

• Determine appropriateness of in

- situ burn operation in coordination with the FOSC and aff ected SOSC

• Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

• Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

• Ensure VOO crew members are trained prior to operations

## • Determine assets to perform on water operation

• Build opera tions into safety plan

• Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

• Initial test burn to ensure effectiveness

Adverse Weather Operations: In adverse weather, when seas are > 3 feet, the use of larger recovery and storage vessels, oleophilic ski mmers, and large offshore boom will be maximized. Safety will be the overriding factor in all operations and will cease at the order of the Unified Command, vessel captain, or in an emergency, ”stop work” may be directed by any crew member.

## Surface Oil Recovery Considerations and Tactics (Offshore and Near

- shore Operations)

Maximization of skimmer

- oil encounter rate

• Place barges in skimming task forces, groups, etc., to reduce recovered oil offloading time

• Place barges alongside skimming systems for im mediate offloading of recovered oil when practicable

• Use two vessels, each with heavy sea boom, in an open

- ended “V” configuration to funnel surface oil into a trailing skimming unit’s organic, V

- shaped boom and skimmer (see page 7, CGA Equipment Guide Bo ok and Tactic Manual (CGATM)

• Use secondary vessels and heavy sea boom to widen boom swath beyond normal skimming system limits (see page 15, CGATM)

• Consider night

- time operations, first considering safety issues

• Utilize all available advanced technology sy stems ( IR, X

- Band Radar, etc.) to determine the location of, and move to, recoverable oil

• Confirm the presence of recoverable oil prior to moving to a new location

Maximize skimmer system efficiency

• Place weir skimming systems in areas of calm seas and thick oil

• Maximize the use of oleophilic skimming systems in heavier seas

• Place less mobile, high EDRC skimming systems (e.g. HOSS Barge) in the largest pockets of the heaviest oil

• Maximize onboard recovered oil storage for vessels.

• Obtain authorization for decanting of recovered water as soon as possible

• Use smaller, more agile skimming systems to recover streamers of oil normally found farther from the source. Place recovered oil barges nearby

Recovered Oil Storage

• Smaller barges in larger quantities will increase flexibility for multi

- location skimming operations

• Place barges in skimming task forces, groups, etc., to reduce recovered oil offloading time

• Procure and deploy the maximum number of portable tanks to support Vessel of Opportunity Skimming S ystems if onboard storage is not available

• Maximize use of the organic recovered oil storage capacity of the skimming vessel

Command, Control, and Communications (C 3 

## )

• Publish, implement, and fully test an appropriate communications plan

• Design an operatio nal scheme, maintaining a manageable span of control

• Designate and mark C 3 

## vessels for easy aerial identification

• Designate and employ C 3 

## aircraft for task forces, groups, etc.

• Use reconnaissance air craft and Rapid Response Teams (RAT) to confirm the pres ence of recoverable oil

## On Water Recovery Group When the first skimming vessel arrives on scene, a complete site assessment will be conducted before recovery operations begin. Once it is confirmed that the air monitoring readings for O2, LEL, H2S, CO, V OC, and Benzene are all within the permissible limits, oil recovery operations may begin.

As skimming vessels arrive, they will be organized to work in areas that allow for the most efficient vessel operation and free vessel movement in the recovery of oi l. Vessel groups will vary in structure as determined by the Operations Section of the Unified Command, but will generally consist, at a minimum, of the following dedicated assets:

• 3 to 5

– Offshore skimming vessels (recovery)

• 1

– Tank barge (temporary s torage)

• 1

– Air asset (tactical direction)

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility for supply)

• 6 to 10

– Boom vessels (enhanced booming )

Example ( Note: Actual organization of TFs will be dependent on several factors including, asset availability, weather, spil led oil migration, currents, etc.)

The 95’ FRV Breton Island out of Venice arrives on scene and conducts an initial site assessment. Air monitoring levels are acceptable and no other visual threats have been observed. The area is cleared for safe skim ming operations. The Breton Island assumes command and control (CoC) of on

- water recovery operations until a dedicated non

- skimming vessel arrives to relieve it of those duties.

A second 95’ FRV arrives and begins recovery operations alongside the Breto n Island. Several more vessels begin to arrive, including a third 95’ FRV out of Galveston, the HOSS Barge (High Volume Open Sea Skimming System) out of Harvey, a boom barge (CGA 300) with 25,000’ of 42” auto boom out of Leeville, and 9 Fast Response Units (FRUs) from the load

- out location at C

- Port in Port Fourchon.

As these vessels set up and begin skimming, they are grouped into task forces (TFs) as directed by the Operations Section of the Unified Command located at the command post.

Initial set

- u p and potential actions:

• A 1,000 meter safety zone has been established around the incident location for vessels involved in Source Control

• The HOSS Barge is positioned facing the incident location just outside of this safety zone or at the point where the freshest oil is reaching the surface

• The HOSS Barge engages its Oil Spill Detection (OSD) system to locate the heaviest oil and maintains that ability for 24

- hour operations

## • The HOSS Barge deploys 1,320’ of 67” Sea Sentry boom on each side, creating a swath width of 800’

• The Breton Island and H.I. Rich skim nearby, utilizing the same OSD systems as the HOSS Barge to locate and recover oil

• Two FRUs join this group and it becomes TF1

• The remaining 7 FRUs are split into a 2 and 3 vessel task force numb ered TF2 and TF3

• A 95’ FRV is placed in each TF

• The boom barge (CGA 300) is positioned nearby and begins deploying auto boom in sections between two utility vessels (1,000’ to 3,000’ of boom, depending on conditions) with chain

- link gates in the middle to funnel oil to the skimmers

• The initial boom support vessels position in front of TF2 and TF3

• A 100,000+ barrel offshore tank barge is placed with each task force as necessary to facilitate the immediate offload of skimming vessels

The initial task force s (36 hours in) may be structured as follows:

TF 1

• 1

– 95’ FRV

• 1

– HOSS Barge with 3 tugs

• 2

– FRUs

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 8

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 8

– Boom

- towi ng vessels

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

TF 2

• 1

– 95’ FRV

• 4

– FRUs

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 10

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 10

– Boom

- towing vessels

• 2

– Support v essels (crew/utility)

TF 3

• 1

– 95’ FRV

• 3

– FRUs

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 8

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 8

– Boom

- towing vessels

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

## Off shore skimming equipment continues to arrive in accordance with the ETA data listed in figure H.3a; this equipment includes 2 AquaGuard skimmers and 11 sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms. These high volume heavy weather capable systems will be divided into functional groups and assigned to specific areas by the Operations Section of the Unified Command.

At this point of the response, the additional TFs may assume the following configurations:

TF 4

• 2

– Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’ + PIDVs

• 1

– AquaGuard Skimmer

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 6

– Boom

- towing vessels

TF 5

• 3

– Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1

– AquaGuard Skimmer

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 8

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 8

– Boom

- towing vessels

TF 6

• 3

– Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 6

– Boom

- towing vessels

TF 7

• 3

– Sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms w/ associated 200’+ PIDVs

• 1

– 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s)

• 1

– Dedicated air asset for tactical direction

• 2

– Support vessels (crew/utility)

• 6

– 500’ sections of auto boom with gates

• 6

– Boom

- towing vessels

## CGA Minimum Acceptable Capabilities for Vessels of Opportunity (VOO) Minimum acceptable capabilities of Petroleum Industry Designed Vessels (PIDV) for conducting Vessel of Opportunity (VOO) skimming operatio ns are shown in the table below. PIDVs are “purpose

- built” to provide normal support to offshore oil and gas operators. They include but are not limited to utility boats, offshore supply vessels, etc. They become VOOs when tasked with oil spill response duties.

Capability FRU KOSEQ AquaGuard Type of Vessel Utility Boat Offshore Supply Vessel Utility Boat
Operating parameters
Sea State 3

- 5 ft max 9.8 ft max 3

- 5 ft max Skimming speed ≤1 kt ≤3 kts ≤1 kt
Vessel size Minimum Length 100 ft 200 ft 100 ft Deck space for:

• 

## Tank(s)

• 

## Crane(s)

• 

## Boom Reels

• 

## Hydraulic Power Units

• 

## Equipment Boxes 18x32 ft 100x40 ft 18x32 ft

Communication Assets Marine Band Radio Marine Band Radio Marine Band Rad io

Tactical use of Vessels of Opportunity (VOO): FM O&G will take all possible measures to maximize the oil

- to

- skimmer encounter rate of all skimming systems, to include VOOs, as discussed in this section. VOOs will normally be placed within an On

- water recovery unit as shown in figures below.

Skimming Operations: PIDVs are the preferred VOO skimming platform. OSROs are more versed in operating on these platforms and the vessels are generally large enough with crews more likely versed in spill response operations. They also have a greater possibility of having

on

- board storage capacity and the most likely vessels to be under contract, and therefore more readily available to the operator. These vessels would normally be assigned to an on

- water recovery group/division (see figure below) and outfitted with a VOSS suited for their size and capabilities. Specific tactics used for skimming operations would be dependent upon many parameters which include, but are not limited to, safety concerns, weather, typ e VOSS on board, product being recovered, and area of oil coverage. Planners would deploy these assets with the objective of safely maximizing oil

- to

- skimmer encounter rate by taking actions to minimize

non

- skimming time and maximizing boom swath. Speci fic tactical configurations are shown in figures below.

The Fast Response Unit (FRU) : A self

- contained, skid based, skimming system that is deployed from the right side of a vessel of opportunity (VOO). An outrigger holds a 75’ long

## section of air inflata ble boom in place that directs oil to an apex for recovery via a Foilex 250 weir skimmer. The outrigger creates roughly a 40’ swath width dependent on the VOO beam. The lip of the collection bowl on the skimmer is placed as close to the oil and water int erface as possible to maximize oil recovery and minimize water retention. The skimmer then pumps all fluids recovered to the storage tank where it is allowed to settle, and with the approval of the Coast Guard, the water is decanted from the bottom of the tank back into the water ahead of the containment boom to be recycled through the system. Once the tank is full of as much pure recovered oil as possible it is offloaded to a storage barge for disposal in accordance with an approved disposal plan. A sec ond 100 barrel storage tank can be added if the appropriate amount of deck space is available to use as secondary storage.

## Tactical Overview Mechanical Recovery

– The FRU is designed to provide fast response skimming capability in the offshore and nears hore environment in a stationary or advancing mode. It provides a rated daily recovery capacity of 4,100 barrels. An additional boom reel with 440’ of offshore boom can be deployed along with the FRU, and a second support vessel for boom towing, to exten d the swath width when attached to the end of the fixed boom. The range and sustainability offshore is dependent on the VOO that the unit is placed on, but generally these can stay offshore for extended periods. The FRU works well independently or assign ed with other on

- water recovery assets in a task force. In either case, it is most effective when a designated aircraft is assigned to provide tactical direction to ensure the best placement in recoverable oil. Maximum Sea Conditions

– Under most circum stances the FRU can maintain standard oil spill recovery operations in 2’ to 4’ seas. Ultimately, the Coast Guard licensed Captain in charge of the VOO (with input from the CGAS Supervisor assigned) will be responsible to determine when the sea conditions have surpassed the vessel’s safe operating capabilities.

Possible Task Force Configuration (Multiple VOOs can be deployed in a task force) 1

– VOO (100’ to 165’ Utility or Supply Vessel) 1

– Boom reel w/support vessel for towing 1

– Tank barge (offshore ) for temporary storage 1

– Utility/Crewboat (supply) 1

– Designated spotter aircraft

The VOSS (yellow) is being deployed and connected to an out

- rigged arm. This is suitable for collection in both large pockets of oil and for recovery of streaming oil

. The oil

- to

- skimmer encounter rate is limited by the length of the arm. Skimming pace is < 1 knot.

## Through the use of an additional VOO, and using extended sea boom, the swath of the VOSS is increased therefore maximizing the oil

- to

- skimmer encounter rate. Skimming pace is < 1 knot.

## The Koseq Rigid Sweeping Arm: A skimming system deployed on a vessel of opportunity. It requires a large Offshore or Platform Supply Vessel (OSV/PSV), greater than 200’ with at least 100’ x 50’ of free deck space. On e ach side of the vessel, a 50’ long rigid framed Arm is deployed that consists of pontoon chambers to provide buoyancy, a smooth nylon face, and a hydraulically adjustable mounted weir skimmer. The Arm floats independently of the vessel and is attached by a tow bridle and a lead line. The movement of the vessel forward draws the rubber end seal of the arm against the hull to create a collection point for free oil directed to the weir by the Arm face. The collection weir is adjusted to keep the lip as clos e to the oil water interface as possible to maximize oil recovery while attempting to minimize excess water collection. A transfer pump (combination of positive displacement, screw type and centrifuge suited for highly viscous oils) pump the recovered liqu id to portable tanks and/or dedicated fixed storage tanks onboard the vessel. After being allowed to sit and separate, with approval from the Coast Guard, the water can be decanted (pumped off) in front of the collection arm to be reprocessed through the system. Once full with as much pure recovered oil as possible, the oil is transferred to a temporary storage barge where it can be disposed of in accordance with an approved disposal plan.

Tactical Overview Mechanical Recovery

– Deployed on large vesse ls of opportunity (VOO) the Koseq Rigid Sweeping Arms are high volume surge capacity deployed to increase recovery capacity at the source of a large oil spill in the offshore and outer nearshore environment of the Gulf of Mexico. They are highly mobile an d sustainable in rougher sea conditions than normal skimming vessels (9.8’ seas). The large Offshore Supply Vessels (OSV) required to deploy the Arms are able to remain on scene for extended periods, even when sea conditions pick up. Temporary storage on deck in portable tanks usually provides between 1,000 and 3,000 bbls. In most cases, the OSV will be able to pump 20% of its deadweight into the liquid mud tanks in accordance with the vessels Certificate of Inspection (COI). All storage can be offloade d utilizing the vessels liquid transfer system. Maximum Sea Conditions

- Under most circumstances the larger OSVs are capable of remaining on scene well past the Skimming Arms maximum sea state of 9.8’. Ultimately it will be the decision of the VOO Capta in, with input from the T&T Supervisor onboard, to determine when the sea conditions have exceeded the safe operating conditions of the vessel. Command and Control

– The large OSVs in many cases have state of the art communication and electronic systems, as well as the accommodations to support the function of directing all skimming operations offshore and reporting back to the command post. Possible Task Force Configuration (Multiple Koseq VOOs can be deployed in a task force) 1

– > 200’ Offshore Supply Vessels (OSV) with set of Koseq Arms 2 to 4 portable storage tanks (500 bbl) 1

– Modular Crane Pedestal System set (MCPS) or 30 cherry picker (crane) for deployment 1

– Tank barge (offshore) for temporary storage 1

– Utility/Crewboat (supply) 1

– Designa ted spotter aircraft 4

– Personnel (4 T&T OSRO)

## Scattered oil is “caught” by two VOO and collected at the apex of the towed sea boom. The oil moves thought a “gate” at that apex, forming a larger stream of oil which moves into the boom of the skimming vessel. Operations are paced at >1. A recovered oil barge stationed nearby to minimize time taken to offload recovered oil.

This is a depiction of the same operation as above but using KOSEQ Arms. In this configuration, the collecting boom speed dictates the operational pace at > 1 knot to minimize entrainment of the oil.

## Clean Gulf Associates (CGA) Procedure for Accessing Member

- Contracted and other Vessels of Opportunity (VOOs) for Spill Response

• 

## CGA has procedures in place for CGA member com panies to acquire vessels of opportunity (VOOs) from an existing CGA member’s contracted fleet or other sources for the deployment of CGA portable skimming equipment including Koseq Arms, Fast Response Units (FRUs) and any other portable skimming system(s) deemed appropriate for the response for a potential or actual oil spill, WCD oil spill or a Spill of National Significance (SONS).

• 

## CGA uses Port Vision, a web

- based vessel and terminal interface that empowers CGA to track vessels through Automatic Iden tification System ( AIS) and terminal activities using a Geographic Information System (GIS). It provides live AIS/GIS views of waterways showing current vessel positions, terminals, created vessel fleets, and points

- of

- interest. Through this system, CGA h as the ability to get instant snapshots of the location and status of all vessels contracted to CGA members, day or night, from any web

- enabled PC.

## Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

• Put near shore assets on standby and deployment in accordance with pla nning based on the actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets

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

• Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions

• Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil

Consi derations

• 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 r emote 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 Respo nse Team level (Region 6)

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

• FRVs

• Egmopol and Marco SWS

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks

VOO

• Use FM O&G ’s contracted resources as applicable

• Industry vessel are usually best for de ployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems (VOSS)

• Acquire additional resources as needed

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

• Expect mission specific and safety training to be required

• Plan with the US Coast Guard for vess el inspections

• Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches

## Shoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Considerations

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

• Time to acquire personnel and e quipment and their availability

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

Actions

Placement of boom

• Position b oom 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 mov ement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

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

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

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

• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

• Determination of Archeological sites and gaining authority to enter

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

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

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

- site work time

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

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

• In

- situ burn may be considered when marshes have been impacted

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

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

## Decanting Strategy Recovered oil and water mixtures will typically separate into distinct phases when left in a quiescent state. When separation occurs, the relatively clean water phas e can be siphoned or decanted back to the recovery point with minimal, if any, impact. Decanting therefore increases the effective on

- site oil storage capacity and equipment operating time. FOSC/SOSC approval will be requested prior to decanting operations . This practice is routinely used for oil spill
recovery.

CGA Equipment Limitations The capability for any spill response equipment, whether a dedicated or portable system, to operate in differing weather conditions will be directly in relation to the cap abilities of the vessel the system in placed on. Most importantly, however, the decision to operate will be based on the judgment of the Unified Command and/or the Captain of the vessel, who will ultimately have the final say in terminating operations. Sk imming equipment listed below may have operational limits which exceed those safety thresholds. As was seen in the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill response, vessel skimming operations ceased when seas reached 5

- 6 feet and vessels were often recalled to p ort when those conditions were exceeded. Systems below are some of the most up

- to

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

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

## Environmental Conditions in the GOM Louisiana is situated between the easterly and westerly wind belts, and therefore, experiences

wes terly winds during the winter and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is generally 14

- 15 mph along the coast. Wave heights average 4 and 5 feet. However, during hurricane season, Louisiana has recorded wave heights ranging from 40 to 50 feet h igh and winds reaching speeds of 100 mph. Because much of southern Louisiana lies below sea level, flooding is prominent.

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

The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico hurricane season is officially from 1 June to 30 November. 97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The At lantic basin shows a very peaked season from August through October, with 78% of the tropical storm days, 87% of the minor (Saffir

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

- Simpson categories 3, 4 and 5) hurricane days occurring then. Maximum activity is in early to mid September. Once in a few years there may be a hurricane occurring "out of season"

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

## FIGURE 1 TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing FM O&G ’s WCD and information in the BOEM Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico a vailable on the BOEM website using 30 day impact. The results are tabulated below.

Area/Block OCS

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

Drill, complete, test, flare and install subsea wellhead

GC 393, W ell Location B

96.5 miles from shore G32500 C44 Matagorda, TX Galveston, TX Jefferson, TX Cameron, LA Vermilion, LA Terrebonne, LA Lafourche, LA Jefferson, LA Plaquemines, LA 1 2 1 5 2 2 1 1 4

## WCD Scenario

– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OP ERATIONS ( 96.5 miles from shore) 370,067 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering) API Gravity 25 ° FIGURE 2

– Equipment Response Time to G C 393, Well Location B

Dispersants/Surveillance
Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant Capacity (gal) Per sons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to site Total Hrs

ASI
Basler 67T 2000 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.7 4.7
DC 3 1200 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.9 4.9
DC 3 1200 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.9 4.9
Aero Commander NA 2 Houma, LA 2 2 0.7 4.7
MSRC
C

- 130 Spray AC 3,250 2 Kiln, MS 3 0.2 0.6 3.8 King Air BE90 Spray AC 250 2 Kiln, MS 3 0.3 1 4.3



### Offshore Response Offshore Equipment Pre

- Determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM Travel to Spill Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs CGA
95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Venice, LA 2 0 2 3.6 0 7.6
95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Leeville, LA 2 0 2 4 0 8
95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Galveston, TX 2 0 1 12.6 0 15.6 HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 8 Harvey, LA 7 0 5 11.3 1 24.3 Boom Barge (CGA

- 300) 42” Auto Boom (25000’) NA NA 1 Tug 50 Crew 4 (Barge) 2 (Per Crew) Leeville, LA 4 0 6 14.3 1.5 25.8Recovered Oil Storage Pre

Determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM Travel to S pill Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs Kirby Offshore (available through contract with CGA) RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 80000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 80000 + 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 100000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 110000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 130000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 140000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 150000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60 RO Barge NA 150000+ 1 Tug 6 Venice 46 0 2 12 0 60Offshore Equipmen t Pre

- determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM Travel to Spill Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs NRCC OSRV Energy Vikoma Sea 50 1509 300 NA 4

- 6 Grand Isle, LA 2 2 1 11 1 17

OSRV Admiral Marco Cla ss XI AB 8 Band Rope Mop 24000 2283 300 NA 4

- 6 Galveston, TX 2 2 1 32 1 38

OSRB Defender Marco Class XI AB Vikoma Cascade 24000 5520 16500 2 Tugs 4

- 6 Bayou La Batre, AL 4 2 3 29 1 39

OSRB Valiant Marco Class XI AB 24000 20892 2 Tugs 4

- 6 Aransas Pass, T X 4 2 3 61 1 71

OSRB Valor N/A 19000 2 Tugs 4

- 6 Tampa, FL 4 2 7 63 1 77Offshore Equipment Pre

- determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM Travel to Spill Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs
M SRC Louisiana Responder Transrec 350 + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 4000 NA 14 Fort Jackson, LA 2 0 4.5 7.2 1 14.7

MSRC 452 Offshore Barge 1 Crucial Disk 88/30 1 Desmi Ocean 2,640‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 3017 45000 3 Tugs 6 Fort Jackson, LA 2.5 0 6 14.2 1 23.7

Mississippi Responder Transrec 350 + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 4000 NA 14 Pascagoula, MS 2 0 2 15.2 1 20.2

MSRC 402 Offshore Barge 2 Crucial Disk 88/30 2,640‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 22244 40300 3 Tugs 6 Pascagoula, MS 2.5 0 3 30 1 36.5

Deep Blue Responder LFF 100 Brush + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 4000 NA 14 Fourchon, LA 2 0 1 7.2 1 11.2

Gulf Coast Responder Transrec 350 + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 4000 NA 14 Lake Charles, LA 2 0 4 18.5 1 25.5

Texas Responder Transrec 350 + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 4000 NA 14 Galveston, TX 2 0 1 22.9 1 26.9

MSRC 570 Offshore Barge 2 Crucial Disk 88/30 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 22244 56900 3 Tugs 6 Galve ston, TX 2.5 0 2 45 1 50.5

Southern Responder Transrec 350 + OSRV 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 4000 NA 14 Ingleside, TX 2 0 1 31.5 1 35.5

MSRC 403 Offshore Barge 1 Crucial Disk 88/30 2,640’ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 40300 3 Tugs 6 Ingles ide, TX 2.5 0 2 62.1 1 67.6

### Staging Area: Venice Offshore Equipment

Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs T&T Marine (available through direc t contract with CGA) Aqua Guard Triton RBS (2) 45560 4000 2 Utility 12 Galveston, TX 4 12 13 7.5 2 38.5 Koseq Skimming Arms (6) 106974 12000 6 Utility 36 Galveston, TX 24 24 13 7.5 2 70.5 Koseq Skimming Arms (3) 53487 6000 3 Utility 18 Galliano, LA 24 2 4 1 7.5 2 58.5 Koseq Skimming Arms (2) 35658 4000 2 Utility 12 Harvey, LA 24 24 2 7.5 2 59.5
CGA FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City, LA 2 2 5 7.5 1 17.5 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Harvey, LA 2 2 2 7.5 1 14. 5 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Galveston, TX 2 2 13 7.5 1 25.5 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Aransas Pass, TX 2 2 18 7.5 1 30.5 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles, LA 2 2 8 7.5 1 20.5 FRU ( 2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville, LA 2 2 5 7.5 1 17.5 FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice, LA 2 2 0 7.5 1 12.5

Offshore Equipment Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs t o Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs MSRC WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5 Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 4 00 1 ili 6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5 Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 ili 6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5 Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 ili 6 Ingleside, TX 1 2 18 7.5 1 29.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (2) 2742 400 2 ili 12 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5 Walosep 4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5 Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 ili 6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5 Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 ili 6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7 .5 1 24.5 Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Galveston, TX 1 2 13 7.5 1 24.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Port Arthur, TX 1 2 10 7.5 1 21.5 Queensboro Skimmer (5) 4525 400 5 ili 30 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5
Desm i Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5 Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5Offshore Equipment Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to L oadout Travel to Staging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs MSRC Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5 AardVac Skimmer (1) 38 40 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5 Transrec 350 Skimmer (1) 10567 400 1 ili 6 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5 Crucial Disk 88/30 Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

Cr ucial Disk 88/30 Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

Transrec 350 Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 11122 400 1 PSV 14 Lake Charles, LA 1 2 8 7.5 1 19.5

GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Baton Rouge, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5 Transrec 350 Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 10567 400 1 PSV 14 Houma, LA 1 2 4 7.5 1 15.5

Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Port Fourchon, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5
LFF 100 Brush Sk immer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5

LFF 100 Brush Skimmer (1) 1,320‘ 67” Curtain Pressure Boom 18086 400 1 PSV 14 Port Fourchon, LA 1 2 5 7.5 1 16.5

GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Walosep W4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Foilex 250 Skimmer (1) 3977 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Queensb oro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Foilex 200 Skimmer (1) 1989 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 ili 6 Belle Chasse, LA 1 2 2 7.5 1 13.5 Stress I Skimmer (1 ) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5Offshore Equipment Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to S taging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs MSRC AardVac Skimmer (1) 3840 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5 WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5 Queensboro Skimmer (1) 905 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5 Stress II Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Pascagoula, MS 1 2 6 7.5 1 17.5 Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Tampa, FL 1 2 21 7.5 1 32.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Tampa, FL 1 2 21 7.5 1 32.5
WP 1 Skimme r (1) 3017 400 1 U ili 6 Tampa, FL 1 2 21 7.5 1 32.5 Crucial Disk 56/30 Skimmer (1) 5671 400 1 ili 6 Tampa, FL 1 2 21 7.5 1 32.5
GT

- 185 Skimmer w Adaptor (1) 1371 400 1 ili 6 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5 Stress I Skimmer (1) 15840 400 1 ili 6 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5 Walosep W4 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 U ili 6 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5 AardVac Skimmer (2) 7680 400 2 ili 12 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5 WP 1 Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5
Desmi Skimmer (1) 3017 400 1 ili 6 Miami, FL 1 2 27 7.5 1 38.5Offshore Equipment Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs NRCC

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 4 4 26 17.2 1 52.2

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Belle Chasse, LA 4 4 2 17.2 1 28.2

Marco Class XI AB 24000 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 New Iberia, LA 4 4 6 17.2 1 32.2

Action 48 Skimmer 24 14 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Key West, FL 4 4 31 17.2 1 57.2

Hoyle Disc Skimmer 1632 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Tampa, FL 4 4 21 17.2 1 47.2

4

- Band Rope Mop Skimmer 1509 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 4 4 26 17.2 1 52.2

4

- Band Rope Mop Skim mer 1509 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Mobile, AL 4 4 7 17.2 1 33.2

4

- Band Rope Mop Skimmer (2) 3018 200 1 Offshore Vessel 8

- 16 New Iberia, LA 4 4 6 17.2 1 32.2

4

- Band Rope Mop Skimmer (2) 3018 200 1 Offshore Vessel 8

- 16 Corpus Christi, TX 4 4 18 17.2 1 44.2

Vikoma Cascade Skimmer 5520 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Baytown, TX 4 4 12 17.2 1 38.2

Vikoma Cascade Skimmer 5520 100 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Sulphur, LA 4 4 9 17.2 1 35.2

VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Port Arthur, TX 4 4 10 17.2 1 36.2

VTU w/weir head skimmer 6857 24 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 La Porte, TX 4 4 12 17.2 1 38.2Offshore Equipment Preferred Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Site Hrs to Deploy T otal Hrs
CGA 1000’ Hydro

- Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey, LA 1 4 2.1 7.5 6 20.6

MSRC
67” Curtain Pressure Boom (18480’) NA NA 14* 7 Lake Charles 1 2 8 7.1 1 19.1
67” Curtain Pressure Boom (8895’) NA NA 12* 6 Pascagoula 1 2 5.5 7.1 1 16.6 2000’ Hy dro Fire Boom NA NA 8* 8 Lake Charles 1 4 8 7.1 6 19.1

NRCC
42” Boom (1000’) NA NA 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Bayou La Batre, AL 4 4 6 7.5 1 22.5

42” Boom (3300’) NA NA 2 Offshore Vessels 8

- 16 Tampa, FL 4 4 21 7.5 1 37.5

42” Boom (2000’) NA NA 1 Offshore Ve ssel 4

- 8 Baytown, TX 4 4 12 7.5 1 28.5

42” Boom (1000’) NA NA 1 Offshore Vessel 4

- 8 Port Arthur, TX 4 4 10 7.5 1 26.5

42” Boom (4000’) NA NA 2 Offshore Vessels 8

- 16 Corpus Christi, TX 4 4 18 7.5 1 34.5
1000’ Hydro

- Fire Boom NA NA 6 Utility 20 New Iberia , LA 4 4 6 7.5 1 22.5

* Utility Boats, Crew Boats, Supply Boats, or Fishing Vessels

### Nearshore Response Nearshore Equipment Pre

- determined Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM Travel to Spill Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs CGA Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Galveston 1 2 2 3.6 1 9.6 Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Morgan City 1 2 2 4.4 1 10.4 Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Leeville 1 2 2 7.2 1 13.2 Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 1 2 2 9.2 1 15.2
46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Aransas Pass 1 0 2 10.4 0 13.4
46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Morgan City 1 0 2 4.4 0 7.4
46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Lake Charles 1 0 1 2 0 4
46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 1 0 1 9.2 0 11.2 Enterprise Marine Services LLC (Available through contract with CGA)
CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75
CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 13.75 1 34.75

### Staging Area: Cameron
Nearshore Equipment With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Load Out Travel to Staging Travel to Deployment Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs CGA SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 4 2 0 9 SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 1 2 5.3 2 0 10.3
SWS Ma rco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 1.5 2 0 6.5
SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 1 2 6.8 2 0 11.8
SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 1 2 9.2 2 0 14.2 Rope Mop 77 2 0 3 Harvey 1 2 7 2 0 12 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Lake Charles 1 2 1.5 2 0 6.5 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Galveston 1 2 4 2 0 9 Foilex Skim Package (TDS 150) 891 45 NA 3 Harvey 1 2 7 2 0 12 4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 2 1.5 2 0 6.5 4 Drum Skimmer (Magnum 100) 686 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 1 2 7 2 0 12 2 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118) 240 100 1 Crew 3 Lake Charles 1 2 1.5 2 0 6.5 2 Drum Skimmer (TDS 118) 240 100 1 Crew 3 Harvey 1 2 7 2 0 12Nearshore Equipment With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Load Out Travel to Staging Travel to Deployment Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs NRCC

Action 24 Skimmer 823 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Baytown, TX 4 4 3 2 1 14

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Tampa, FL 4 4 25 2 1 36

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 4 4 31 2 1 42

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 New Iberia, LA 4 4 3 2 1 14

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Corpus Christi, TX 4 4 13 2 1 24

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 La Porte, TX 4 4 7 2 1 18

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Port Arthur, TX 4 4 2 2 1 13

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Cocoa, FL 4 4 41 2 1 52

NRC Weir Disk Skimmer 1371 24 1 Nearshore Ves sel 4

- 8 Pensacola, FL 4 4 12 2 1 23

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Belle Chasse, LA 4 4 7 2 1 18

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 New Iberia, LA 4 4 3 2 1 14

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Sulphur, LA 4 4 2 2 1 13

Vikoma Fasflo Skimmer 2112 24 1 Nearshore Vessel 4

- 8 Atlantic Beach, FL 4 4 22 2 1 33

### Shoreline Protection Staging Area: Cameron Shoreline Protection Boom VOO Persons Req. Storage/Warehouse Location Hrs to Procure Hrs to Load out Travel to Staging Travel to Deployment Site Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs
OMI Environmental (Available through MSA) 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 4 2 3 11 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 3.8 2 3 10.7 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 1.4 2 3 8.4

Wildlife Response EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Deployment Hrs to Deploy Total Hrs

CGA Wildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Harvey 2 2 7.5 1 2 14.5
Bird Scare Guns (48) NA NA NA 2 Harvey 2 2 7.5 1 2 14.5
Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 2 2 5 1 2 12
Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Aransas Pass 2 2 9.5 1 2 16.5
Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 2 2 1.5 1 2 8.5
Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Leeville 2 2 8 1 2 15

Response Asset Total

Offshore EDRC 1,046,754
Offshore Recovered Oil Capacity 1,717,687+

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 147,605
Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Capacity 203,393

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 9

– Pg. 17 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS FM O&G will monitor loop currents per the requirements as set forth in NTL No. 2009

- G02

, “Ocean Curre nt Monitoring ” (Extended by NTL No. 2014

- N01, “Elimination of Expiration Dates on Certain Notices to Lessees and Operators Pending Review and Reissuance”)

.
9.2 INCID ENTAL TAKES There is no reason to believe that any of the endangered species or marine mammals as listed i n the ESA will be “taken ” as a result of the operations proposed under this plan.

It has been documented that the use of explosives and or seismic devices can affect marine life. Operations proposed in this plan will not be utilizing either of these devi ces.

FM O&G will a dhere to the requirements as set forth in the following documents, as applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL No. 2012

- BSEE

- G01, “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting”

• NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program”

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY Green Canyon Block 393 is not located in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary; therefore, relevant information is not required in this EP.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 10

– Pg. 18 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32 500) 

# SECTION 10 LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

Exploration activities are subject to the following stipulations attached to Lease OCS

- G 32500

, Green Canyon Block 393

.
10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA) Green Canyon Block 393 is not located in a MWA; however, vessels and helicopters associated with explo ration activities may traverse MW

- 92 . The Airspace Officer, Fleet Area Control Surveillance Facility, Jacksonville, Florida was contacted March 3, 2014 in order to coordinate and control the electromagnetic emissions and use of vessels and aircraft durin g the proposed operations.

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES In accordance with t he Federal Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act

, FM O&G will :
(a) C ollect and remove flotsam resulting from activities related to exploration, development, and production of this lease;

(b) P ost signs in prominent places on all vessels and platforms used as a result of activities related to exploration, development, and production of this lease detailing the reasons (legal and ecological) why release of deb ris must be eliminated;

(c) O bserve for marine mammals and sea turtles while on vessels, reduce vessel speed to 10 knots or less when assemblages of cetaceans are observed, and maintain a distance of 90 meters or greater from whales, and a distance of 45 meters or greater from small cetaceans and sea turtles;

(d) E mploy mitigation measures prescribed by BOEM/BSEE or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for all seismic surveys, including the use of an “exclusion zone” based upon the appropriate wat er depth, ramp

- up and shutdown procedures, visual monitoring, and reporting;

(e) Id entify important habitats, including designated critical habitat, used by listed species (e.g., sea turtle nesting beaches, piping plover critical habitat), in oil spill co ntingency planning and require the strategic placement of spill cleanup equipment to be used only by personnel trained in less

- intrusive cleanup techniques on beaches and bay shores; and

(f) I mmediately report all sightings and locations of injured or dead protected species (e.g., marine mammals and sea turtles) to the appropriate stranding network. If oil and gas industry activity is responsible for the injured or dead animal (e.g., because of a vessel strike), the responsible parties should remain available to assist the stranding network. If the injury or death was caused by a collision with the lessee’s vessel, the lessee must notify BOEM within 24 hours of the strike.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 10

– Pg. 19 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32 500) BOEM and BSEE issue N otices to Lessees (NTLs), which more fully describe measures implemented in support of the above

- mentioned implementing statutes and regulations, as well as measures identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS arising from, among others, cons ervation recommendations, rulemakings pursuant to the MMPA, or consultation. The lessee and its operators, personnel, and subcontractors, while undertaking activities authorized under this lease, must implement and comply with the specific mitigation measu res outlined in NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting;” NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program;” and NTL No. 2012

- BSEE

- G01 , “Marine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination.” At the lessee’s option, the lessee, its operators, personnel, and contractors may comply with the most current measures to protect species in place at the time an activity is undertaken under this lea se, including but not limited to new or updated versions of the NTLs identified in this paragraph. The lessee and its operators, personnel, and subcontractors will be required to comply with the mitigation measures, identified in the above referenced NTLs, and additional measures in the conditions of approvals for their plans or permits.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 11

– Pg. 20 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 11 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS Green Canyon Block 393 is not located within Florida; therefore, mitigation information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan

.
11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES FM O&G will adhere to the requirements as set forth in the following documents, as applicable, to avoid or minimize impacts to any of the species listed in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a result of the operations conducted herein:

• NTL No. 2012

- BSEE

- G01, “M arine Trash and Debris Awareness and Elimination”

• NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G01, “Vessel Strike Avoidance and Injured/Dead Protected Species Reporting”

• NTL No. 2012

- JOINT

- G02, “Implementation of Seismic Survey Mitigation Measures and Protected Species Observer Pr ogram”

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 12

– Pg. 21 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 12 SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

12.1 GENERAL The most practical, direct route from the shorebase as permitted by weather and traffic conditions will be utilized. Information regarding the vessels and aircraft to be used to support the proposed activities is provided in the table below.

Type Maximum Fuel Tank Capacit y Maximum Number in Area at Any Time Trip Frequency or Duration

Crew boat 500 bbl 1 3/week Supply boat 500 bbl 2 3/week

Helicopter 560 gal 1 2/day

1 2.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS Information regarding vessels to be used to supply diesel oil for fuel and other purposes is provided in the table below.

Size of Fuel Supply Vessel (ft) Capacity of Fuel Supply Vessel Frequency of Fuel Transfers Route Fuel Supply Vessel Will Take 265’ 9,000 bbl Bi

- weekly Shortest route from Shore base to block 312’ 5,800 bbl Bi

- weekly Shortest route from Shorebase to block

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION Drilling fluid transportation information is not required to be submitted with this plan.

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION A table, “ Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore

, ” is included as Attachment 12

- A.

12.5 VICINITY MAP A vicinity map showing the location of the activities proposed herein relative to the shoreline with the distance of the proposed activities f rom the shoreline and the primary route s of the support vessels and aircraft that will be used when traveling between the onshore support facilities and th e well is included as Attachment 12

- B.Recycled or Inceretated
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Wash water Chemical product wastes N/A

N/A N/A

Cuttings wetted with oil-based fluids Wll you produce hydrocarbons? If yes fill in produced sand. Cuttings wetted with Synthetic-based fluid N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A

N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

Produced sand Will you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge? If yes, fill in the appropriate rows.

Trash and debris

Used oil N/A N/A

No production is proposed under this Exploration Plan

Refuse generated during operations: paper, cardboard, metal, and glass Compactor bags in storage bins on Supply/Crew Boat Gulf Offshore Logistics Fourchon, LA 130,000 LB/WELL Recycled if possible, transported to landfill otherwise

Used Engine Oil Proper DOT containers on supply boat Univar Carencro, LA 215 BBL/WELL Will drilling occur? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings. Composition 

### Projected Generated
Wastes

Oil-based drilling fluid or mud N/A N/A N/A N/A

Synthetic-based drilling fluid

Cuttings wetted with Water-based fluid Recycled

N/A N/A

SBM Tanks in Support Vessel Newpark Enviromental Services Fourchon,
LA 1,500 BBL/WELL 

# TABLE 2. WASTE YOU WILL TRANSPORT AND/OR DISPOSE OF ONSHORE

Transport Method Name/Location of Facility Amount Disposal Method 

### Solid and Liquid
Wastes Transportation Waste Disposal

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 13

– Pg. 22 of 25 Supplemental EP Ja nuary, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 13 ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

13.1 GENERAL T he onshore facilities that will be used to provide supply and service supp ort for the proposed activities is provided in the table below.

Name Location Existing/New/Modified Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Shorebase Fourchon, Louisiana Existing

MI Drilling Fluids Fourchon, Louisiana Existing

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will FM O&G e xpand the existing shorebase as a result of the operations pro posed in this EP

.
13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE A support base construction or expansion timetable is not required for the activities proposed in this plan

.
13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL The Table, “ Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore

, “is included as Attachment 12

- A

.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 14

– Pg. 23 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 14 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

Coastal Zone Management certification is not required for activities proposed in this plan.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 15

– Pg. 24 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

The Environmental Impact Analysis is included as Attachment 15

- A.

# Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC ( FM O&G )

Supplemental Exploration Plan Green Canyon Block 393 OCS

- G 32500

(A) IMPACT PRODUCING FAC TORS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Environment

Resources Impact Producing Factors (IPFs) Categories and Examples Refer to recent GOM OCS Lease Sale EIS for a more complete list of IPFs

Emissions (air, noise, light, etc.) Effluents (muds, cutting, other discharges to

the water column or seafloor) Physical disturbances to the

seafloor (rig or anchor emplacements, etc.) Wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal Accidents (e.g., oil spills, chemical spills, H 2 S releases) Discarded Trash & Debris

Site

- specific at Offshore Location Designated topographic features (1) (1) (1)

Pinnacle Trend area live bottoms (2) (2) (2)

Eastern Gulf live bottoms (3) (3) (3)

Benthic communities (4) Water quality X X

Fisheries X X

Marine Mammals X(8) X X(8) X

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

Prehistoric archaeological sites (7)

Vicinity of Offshore Location

Essential fish habitat X X(6) Marine and pelagic birds X X

Public health and safety (5)

Coastal and Onshore

Beaches X(6) X

Wetlands X (6) Shore birds and coastal nesting birds X 6)

Coastal wildlife refuges

Wilderness areas

### Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

1) Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topographic feature. Specifically, if the well or platform site or any anchors will be on the seafloor within the:

o 4

- mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks, or the 3

- mile zone of Stetson Bank ;

o 1000

- m, 1

- mile or 3

- mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine bank) protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease;

o Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 ft. from any no

- activity zone; or

o Proximity of any submarin e bank (500 ft. buffer zone) with relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS lease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinna cle Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seafloor habitats are protected by the Live Bottom (Low

Relief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 4) Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being i n water depths 300 meters or greater. 5) Exploration or production activities where H2S concentrations greater than 500 ppm might be encountered. 6) All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydrocarbons or diesel fuel that you d etermine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed action is loc ated 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, includin g anchor emplacements, in any OCS block designated by the BOEM as having high

- probability for the occurrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such blocks that will be affected that are adjacent to the lease block in which your planned activity will occur. If the proposed activities are located a sufficient distance from a shipwreck or a prehistoric site that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 8) All activities that you determine might have an adverse effect on enda ngered or threatened marine mammals or sea turtles or their critical habitats. 9) Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle tankers or barges.

# ( B ) Analysis

Site

- Specific at Green Canyon Block 393 Proposed op erations consist of the drilling, completion, testing, flaring, and installation of a subsea wellhead for Well Location F

. The operations will be conducted with a dynamically positioned drillship.

1. Designated T opographic F eatures Potential IPFs on topographic features include effluents, and accidents.

Effluents: Green Canyon Block 393 is 58 mil es from the closest designated T opographic F eature s Stipulation Block ( Diaphus Bank ); therefore

, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Q uality). Oil spills cause damage to benthic organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil fro m a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been d ocumented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on corals. Because the crests of topographic features in the Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface spill co uld reach their sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a topograph ic area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions , physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities, which could impact topographic features.

2. Pinnacle T rend A rea L ive B ottoms Potential IPFs on pinnacle trend area live bottoms include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Green Cany on Block 393 is 144 miles from the closest live b ottom (pinnacle trend)
area; therefore

, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statis tics in Item 5 , Water Q uality). Oil spills have the potential to foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal eff ects on live bottom organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on marine organisms. Oil

## from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions , physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area.

3. Eastern Gulf Live B ottoms
Potential IPFs on Eastern Gulf live bottoms include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Green Cany on Block 393 is not located in an area characterized by the existence of live bottoms; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5

, Water Q uality). Oil spills cause damage to live bottom organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on marine invertebrates. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom are a. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions , physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) fr om the proposed activities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live bottom area.

4. Benthic C ommunities There are no IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to benthic communities.

A dynamically positioned drillship is being used for the proposed activities ; therefore

, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a dynamically positioned drillship

, FM O&G ’s proposed operatio ns in Green Canyon Block 393 would not cause impacts to benthic communities.

5. Water Q uality IPFs that could result in water quality degradation from the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 include effluents and accidents.

## Effluents: Levels of contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced water discharges, discharge

- rate restrictions and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operati onal discharges are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to water quality.

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter offshore water quality; however, it is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities. Between 1980 and 2000, OCS operations produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and spilled only 0.001 percent of this oil, or 1 bbl for every 81,000 bbl produced. The spill risk related to a diesel spill from drilling operations is even le ss. Between 1976 and 1985, (years for which data were collected), there were 80 reported diesel spills greater than one barrel associated with drilling activities. Considering that there were 11,944 wells drilled, this is a 0.7 percent probability of an

occurrence. If a spill were to occur, the water quality of marine waters would be temporarily affected by the dissolved comp onents and small oil droplets. Dispersion by currents and microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column and dilut e the cons tituents to background levels. Historically, changes in offshore water quality from oil spills have only been detected during the life of the spill and up to several months afterwards. Most of the components of oil are insoluble in water and the refore float. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to water quality.

6. Fisheries IPFs that could cause impacts to fisheries as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Effluents such as drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components and properties which are detrimental to fishery resources. Moderate petroleum and metal contamination of sediments and the water column can occur out to several hund red meters down

current from the discharge point. Offshore discharges are expected to disperse and dilute to very near background levels in the water column or on the seafloor within 3,000 m of the discharge point, and are expected to have negligible effe ct on fisheries.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimen tal effects on fisheries; however, it i s unlikely that such an event would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Q uality). The effects of oil on mobile adult finfish or shellfish would likely be sublethal and the extent of damage would be reduced to the c apacity of adult fish and shell fish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydrocarbons, and to excrete both met abolites and parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

## There are no IPFs from emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor or wastes sent to shore for disposal from the proposed activi ties which could cause impacts to fisheries.

7. Marine M ammals
GulfCet II studies revealed that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf

- edge were almost exclusively bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spo tted dolphin. Squid eaters, including dwarf and
py gmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough

- toothed dolphin, and Cuvier’s beaked whale, occurred most frequently along the upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones. IPFs that could cause impacts to marine mammals as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents.

Emissions : Noises from drilling activities, support vessels and helicopters may elicit a startle reaction from marine mammals. This reaction may lead to disruption of marine mammals’ normal activities. Stress may make them more vulnerable to parasites, disease, environmental contaminants, and/or predati on (Majors and Myrick, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence for long

- term displacements and popula tion trends for marine mammals relative to noise.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components which may be detrimental to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are dilut ed and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact f rom drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items or possibly through ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989).

Discarded trash and debris: Both en tanglement in, and ingestion of debris have caused the death or serious i njury of marine mammals (Laist, 1997; MMC, 1999). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm marine mammals. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as man dated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent ac cidental loss of solid waste. Sp ecial caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent mater ials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste pro cedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint
p resentation)

, “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ).

## Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel w ill also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.

Acci dents: Collisions between support vessels and cetaceans would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to marine mammals is possible. Contract vessel operators can avoid marine mammals and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for marine mammals and maintaining a safe d istance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to help identify the twenty

- eight species of whales and dolphins, and the single species of manatee that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of a ny injured or dead protected marine mammal species immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404

- 3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824

- 53 12, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862

- 2850

. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@bsee.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding network as needed.

Oil spills have the potential to cause sublethal oil

- related injuries and spill

- related deaths to marine mamma ls. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (ref er to Item 5 , Water Q uality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic in the area, which could add to changes in cetacean behavior and/ or distribution, thereby causing additional stress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chemicals included in FM O&G ’s OSRP is considered to be low when compared with the constituen ts and fractions of crude oils and diesel products. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s OSRP (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafl oor) from the proposed activities which could impact marine mammals.

8. Sea T urtles IPFs that could cause impacts to sea turtles as a result of the proposed operations include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. GulfCet II stu dies sighted most loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and leatherback sea turtles over shelf waters. Historically these species have been sighted up to the shelf’s edge. They appear to be more abundant east of the Mississippi River than they are west of the river (Fritts et al., 1 983b; Lohoefener et al., 1990). Deep waters may be used by all species as a transitory habitat.

Emissions: Noise from drilling activities, support vessels, and helicopters may elicit a startle reaction from sea turtles, but th is is a tem porary disturbance.

## Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges are not know n to be lethal to sea turtles. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items or possibly through ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989).

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of, debris have caused the death or serious injury of sea turtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited a mount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to s ubstantially harm sea turtles. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent ac cidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent
mater ials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capab ilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint
presen tation)

, “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the de signated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and sea turtles would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or inju ry to sea turtles is possible. Contract vessel operators can avoid sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to hel p identify the five species of sea turtles that may be encounte red in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected sea turtle species immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their v essel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404

- 3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824

- 5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862

- 2850

. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision w ith a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@b se e.gov

. If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding network as neede d.

All sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerable to the harmful effects of oil through direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fatal, particularly to juveniles

## and hatchlings. However, it is unlikely that an accid ental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Q uality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic in the area, which could add to the possibility of collisions with sea turtles. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impact sea turtles.

9. Air Quality The projected air emissions identified in Section 7 are not expected to affect the OCS air quality primarily due to distance to the shore or to any Prevention of Significant Deterioration Class I air quality area such as the Breton Wilderness Area. Green Canyon Block 393 is beyond the 200 kilometer (124 mile) buffer for the Breton Wilderness Area and is 97.2 miles from the coastline. Therefore, no special mitigation, monitoring, or reporting requirem ents apply with respect to air emissions.

Accidents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, these releases would not impact onshore air quality because of the prevailing atmospheric conditions, emission height, emission rates, and the distance of Green Canyon Block 393 from the coastline. There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the prop osed activities which could impact air quality.

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential) Potential IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 include disturbances to the seafloo r.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A dynamically positioned drillship is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimize d by the use of a dynamically positioned drillship

, FM O&G ’s proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 would not cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

Additionally, Green Canyon Block 393 is not located in or adjacent to an OCS block designated by BOEM as having a high probability for occurrence of shipwrecks, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. According to BOEM’s Grid EA and ROV Survey Status Report, Green Canyon Block 393

, which is located in Grid 13

, has adequate ROV coverage and a complete EA. Additional surveys are not planned unless requested (per NTL 2008

- G04). Should a resource be encountered, FM O&G will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cul tural resource.

## There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites
IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 are physical disturbances to the seafloor and accidents (oil spills).

Physical Disturbances to the seafloor: Although the operatio ns proposed will be conducted by utilizing a dynamically positioned drillship , which would cause only an insignificant amount of seafloor to be disturbed, Green Canyon Block 393 is located inside the Archaeological Prehistoric high probability lines. FM O& G will report to BOEM the discovery of any object of prehistoric archaeological significance and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

According to BOEM’s Grid EA and ROV Survey Status Report, Green Canyon Block 393

, which is located in Grid 13

, has adequate ROV coverage and a complete EA. Additional surveys are not planned unless requested (per NTL 2008

- G04). Should a resource be encountered, FM O&G will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects to prehistoric archaeological sites if the release were to occur subsea. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oi l spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in accordance with Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact prehistoric archeological sites.

Vicinity of Offshore Location

1. Essential F ish H abitat (EFH) IPFs that could cause impacts to EFH as a result of the proposed operations in Green Canyon Block 393 include effluents and accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and marine waters and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico.

Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Rel ief Stipulation, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation, and the Eastern Gulf Pinnacle Trend Stipulation would prevent most of the potential impacts on live

- bottom communities and EFH from operational waste discharges. Levels of contaminants in drill ing muds and cuttings and produced

- water discharges, discharge

- rate restrictions, and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit,

## thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are

n ot expected to cause significant adverse impacts to EFH.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on EFH. Oil spills that contact coastal bays and estuaries, as well as OCS waters when pelagic eggs and larva e are present, have the greatest potential to affect fisheries. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Q uality). The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional O SRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seaflo or and wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact essential fish habitat.

2. Marine and P elagic B irds IPFs that could impact marine birds as a result of the proposed activities include air emissions, accidental oil spills, and discarded trash and debris fr om vessels and the facilities.

Emissions: Emissions of pollut ants into the atmosphere from these activities are far below concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds.

Accidents: An oil spill would cause localized, low

- level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. However, it is unlikely that an oil spil l would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Q uality). Marine and pelagic birds feeding at the spill location may experience chronic, nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected that few, if any, coastal and marine birds would

ac tually be affected to that extent. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris : Marine and pelagic birds could become entangled and snared in dis carded trash and debris, or ingest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and death. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, a nd regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintain ing waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent

ac cidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packa ging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will v iew

## the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation)

, “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

. Debris, if any, from these proposed activities will seldom interact wit h marine and pelagic birds; therefore, the effects will be negligible.

There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact marine and pelagic birds.

3. Public H ealth and S afety D ue to A ccidents. There are no IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to sho re for treatment or disposal or accidents, incl uding an accidental H 2 

## S release ) from the
p roposed activities which could ca use impacts to public health and safety. In accordance with NTL No.’s 2008

- G04

, 2009

- G27, and 2009

- G31, sufficient information is included in Section 4 to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H 2 

## S absent.

C oastal and Onshore

1. Beaches IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to beaches include accidents (oil spills) and discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: Oil spills contacting beaches would have impacts on the use of recreational beaches and associated resources. Due to the distance from shore ( 97.2 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expecte d. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: Trash on the beach is recognized as a major threat to the enjoyment and use of beaches. There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regu lations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining wast e management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent ac cidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging mat erials,

## particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore pers onnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation)

, “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” )

. Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator man agement that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed ac tivities which could impact beaches.

2. Wetlands IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil spills) and discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore ( 97.2 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities propose d in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are proh ibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash b ins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass

.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ).

## Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and deb ris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.

There are no oth er IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact wetlands.

3. Shore B irds and C oastal N esting B irds
Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Given the distance from shore ( 97.2 miles) and the response capabilities that would be im plemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: Coastal and marine birds are highly susceptible to entanglement in floating, submerged, and beached marine debris: specifically plastics. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V and the Marine Plastic P ollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accide ntal loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

- biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational p lacards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) wi ll be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation)

, “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” )

. Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.
There are no other IPFs (emissions , effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds.

## 4. Coastal Wildlife Refuges
Accidents: An accidental oi l spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore ( 97.2 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (E PA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to pr event accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Inf ormational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and bo at crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris tr aining video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012

- G01

.

There are no other IPF s (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges.

5. Wilderness Areas
Accidents: An accidental oil spill fr om the proposed activities could cause impacts to wilderness areas. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area ( 136 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by FM O&G ’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash an d debris: Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debri s as mandated by MARPOL

- Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pol lution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and

## the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). FM O&G will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such a s covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non

biodegradable, environmentally persistent materi als such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support services

- related personnel (e.g. helico pter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” ( previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem” ). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from FM O&G management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No

. 2012

- G01

.

There are no other IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wilderness areas

.

6. Other Envi ronmental Resourc es Identified
There are no other environmental resources identified for this impact assessment

.
(C) IMPAC TS ON PROPOSED ACTIV ITIES
The site

– specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed activities. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site

- specific environmental conditions.

(D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD S During the hurricane season , June through November , the Gulf of Mexico is impacted by an average of ten tropical storms (39

- 73 mph winds), of which six become hurricanes ( > 74 mph winds) . Due to its location in the gulf, Green Canyon Block 393 may experience hurricane and tropical storm force winds, and related sea currents. These factors can adversely impact t he integrity of the operations covered b y this plan. A significant storm may present physical hazards to operators and vessels, damage exploration or production equipment, or result in the release of hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Additionally, the displacement of equipment may di srupt the local benthic habitat and pose a threat to local species.

The following preventative measures included in this plan may be implemented to mitigate these impacts:

1. Drilling & completion

a. Secure well

## b. Secure rig / platform

c. Evacuate personnel

Drilli ng activities will be conducted in accordance with NTL No.’s 2008

- G09, 2009

- G10 , and 2010

- N10

.

2. Structure Installation Operator will not conduct structure installation operations during Tropical Storm or Hurricane threat.

( E ) ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives to the proposed activities were considered to reduce environmental impacts.

( F ) MITIGATION M EASURES No mitigation measures other than those required by regulation will be employed to avoid, diminish, or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources.

( G ) CONSULTATION No agencies or persons were consulted regarding potential impacts associated w ith the proposed activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided.

( H ) PREPARER(S)

Jami Christley J. Connor Consulting, Inc. 16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700 Houston, TX 77084 (281) 578

- 3388 jami.christley @jccteam.com

( I ) REFERENCES
Authors:

American Pe troleum Institute (API). 1989. Eff ects of offshore petroleum operations on cold water marine mammals: a literature review. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute. 385 pp.

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on ma rine turtles: entanglement and ingestion. In: Shomur a, R.S. and H.O. Yoshida, eds. Proceedin gs, Workshop on the Fate and Impact of Marine Debris, 26

- 29 November 1 984, Honolulu, HI. U.S. Dept. of C ommerce. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA

- TM

- NMFS

- SWFC

- 54. Pp 387

- 429.

## Bu rke, C.J. and J.A. Veil. 1995. Potential benefits from regulatory consideration of synthetic drilling muds. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, ANL/EAD/TM

- 43

. Daly, J.M. 1997. Controlling the discharge of synthetic

- based drilling fluid contaminated cuttings in waters of the United States. U.S. Environmental Prote ction Agency, Office of Water. Work Plan, June 24, 1997.

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sensitivity of seabird populations in Alaska to oil pollu tion. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLM

YK

- ES

- 81

- 006

- 1792.

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: entanglement of marine life in marine debris including a comprehensive lis t of species with en tanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, J.M. and D.B . Rogers, eds. Marine debris: sources, impacts, and solutions. New York, NY : Springer

- Verlag. Pp. 99

- 139

. Majors, A.P. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. 1990. Effects of noise on animals: implications for dolphins exposed to seal bombs in the eastern tropical Pacific purse

- seine fishery

– an annotated bibliography. NOAA Administrative Report LJ

- 90

- 06.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. Annual report to Congress

– 1998

.
Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler , M. Kendziore k, and D.R. Nysewander. 1990. Immediate impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on marine birds. The Auk. 107 (2): 387

- 397

Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vauk

- Hentzelt. 1989. Losses of seabirds by oil pollution at the German North Sea coast. Topics in Marine Biology. Ros, J.D, ed. Scient. Mar. 53 (2

- 3): 749

- 754

.
Vermeer, K. and R. Vermeer, 1975 Oil threat to birds on the Canadian west coast. The Canadian Field

- Naturalist. 89:278

- 298.

Although not cited, the following were utili zed in preparing this EIA:

• Hazard Surveys

• BOEM EIS’s:

o GOM Deepwater Operations and Activities. Environmental Assessment. BOEM 2000

- 001

o GOM Central and Western Planning Areas Sales 166 and 168 Final Environmental Impact Statement. BOEM 96

- 0058

.

### Freeport

- McMoRan Oil & Gas LLC Section 16

– Pg. 25 of 25 Supplemental EP January, 2015 Green Canyon Block 393 (OCS

- G 32500) 

# SECTION 16 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION The proposed b ottom hole location of the planned well has bee n removed from the Public I nformation copy of this EP as well as any discussions of the target objectives, geologic or geophysical data, and any interpreted geology

.
16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Fugro Geoservices, Inc. Shallow Hazards and Archaeological Assessment Giverny Prospect Block 353 and Vicinity Atwater Valley Area Gulf of Mexico Report No. 2414

- 5050.

2. Fugro Geoservices, Inc. Shallow Hazards Survey and Archaeological Assessment Giverny Prospect Blocks 349 & 393 Green Canyon Area Gulf of Mexico Report No. 2412

- 5023.

3. Initial Exploration Plan (Control Number N

- 9739).