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-07712

Type - Supplemental Exploration Plan

Lease(s) - OCS-G21176 Block - 563 Mississippi Canyon Area

Operator - Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC

Drill and complete wells A and B

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.

Michelle Griffitt

Plan Coordinator Description -

Rig Type - Subject: From: December 4, 2014

### PUBLIC COPY November, 2014



## SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLORATION PLAN

Mississippi Canyon Block 563
OCS-G 21176
South Santa Cruz Affected States: Alabama, Louisiana, Texas

Estimated Startup Date: January, 2015

SUBMITTED BY: Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC 738 Highway 6 South
Suite 800 Houston, Texas 77079

Bill Fisher (281) 596-0933 bfisher@deepgulfenergy.com

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Kelley Pisciola J. Connor Consulting, Inc. 16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700 Houston, Texas 77084 (281) 698-8519 kelley.pisciola@jccteam.comTOC 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 MEASU RES

................................ ................................ .......... 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 RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)

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

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT

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

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS

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

SECTION 3 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

................................ .......... 4

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

................................ ................................ ........................... 4

3.2 STRUCTUR E CONTOUR MAP

................................ ................................ .......................... 4

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINE(S)

................................ ................................ ..................... 4

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS

- SECTIONS

................................ ............................ 4

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT

................................ ................................ ......................... 4

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

................................ ................................ ............... 4

3.7 HIGH

- RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES

................................ ................................ ................ 4

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

................................ ................................ ............................... 4

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLES

................................ ................................ ........................ 4

SECTION 4 HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

................................ ................................ . 5

4.1 CONCENTRATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 5

4.2 CLASSIFICATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 5

SECTION 5 BIOLOGICAL, PHYSICAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC INFORMATION

................... 6

5.1 DEEPWATER BENTHIC COMMUNITIES

................................ ................................ .......... 6

5.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES (BANKS)

................................ ................................ .............. 6

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING)

................................ ................. 6

5.4 LIVE BOTTOMS (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES)

................................ ........................... 6TOC Pg 2 of 3 5.5 LIVE BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF)

................................ ................................ ......................... 6

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP

................................ ............. 6

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) SURVEYS

................................ ...................... 6

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND MARINE
MAMMAL INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 7

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPOR T

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

5.10 AIR AND WATER QUALITY INFORMATION

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

SECTION 6 WASTES AND DISCHARGES INFORMATION

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

6.1 PROJECTED GENERATED WASTES

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

SECTION 7 AIR EMISSIONS INFORMATION

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

7.1 EMISSIONS WORKSHEETS AND SCREENING QUESTIONS

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

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION

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

SECTION 8 OIL SPILL INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ................... 11

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING

................................ ................................ ................. 11

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES

................................ ................................ ................................ 11

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 11

8.4 WORS T CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION

................................ ................................ 11

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

................................ ................................ ............. 12

SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

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

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS

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

9.2 IN CIDENTAL TAKES

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

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

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

SECTION 10 LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

................................ ........................... 14

10.1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA)

................................ ................................ .............. 14

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

................................ ................................ ................... 14

SECTION 11 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

........................ 16

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS

...................... 16

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 16

SECTIO N 12 SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

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

12.1 GENERAL

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

12.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS

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

12.3 DRILLING FLUID TRANSPORTATION

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

12.4 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE TRANSPORTATION

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

12.5 VICINITY MAP

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

SECTION 13 ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

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

13.1 GENERAL

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

13.2 SUPPORT BAS E CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION

................................ .................. 18TOC Pg 3 of 3 13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE

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

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL

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

SECTION 14 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

..................... 19

SECTION 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

................................ ............................ 26

SECTION 16 ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

................................ ................................ .... 27

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION

................................ ................................ . 27

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 27Attachments 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 2 General Information

2

- A Blowout Scenario

Section 3 Geological, Geophysical Information

3

- A Geological Description (Proprietary Copy Only)

3

- B Structure Contour Maps (Proprietary Copy Only)

3

- C Interpreted Seismic Lines (Proprietary Copy Only)

3

- D Geological Structure Cross Sections (Proprietary Copy Only)

3

- E Shallow Hazard Assessment

3

- F Stratigraphic Column (Proprietary Copy Only)

3

- G Time Versus Depth Table (Proprietary Copy Only)

Section 5 Biological, Physical and Socioeconomic Information

5

- A Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and Areas Map

Section 6 Wastes and Discharges Information

6

- A Wastes You Will Generate, Treat and Downhole Dispose or Discharge to
the GOM

Section 7 Air Emissions Information

7

- A Emissions Worksheets

Section 8 Oil Spill Information

8

- A Oil Spill Response Discussion

Section 12 Support Vessels and Aircr aft Information

12

- A Waste You Will Transport and/or Dispose Onshore

12

- B Vicinity Map

Section 14 Coastal Zone Management Act Information

14

- A Coastal Zone Consistency Certification

- Louisiana

14

- B Coastal Zone Consistency Certification

- Alabama

14

- C Coastal Zone Consistency Certification

- Texas

Section 15 Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA)

15

- A Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA)Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1

– Pg. 1 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 1
PLAN CONTENTS

1.1 PLAN INFORMATION Noble Energy, Inc. (“Noble”) submitted an Initial Exploration Plan (Plan Control No. N

- 9122) for Mississippi Canyon Block 563 on Januar y 3, 2008 which proposed to drill and suspend three (3)

Well Locations ( H, I and J ) . The Initial Exploration Plan was approved on February 29, 2008. Further, on November 19, 2008, Noble submitted a Supplemental Exploration Plan (Plan
Control No. S

- 7289) to provide for the drilling and temporary abandonment of one (1) Well

Location ( K )

. The Supplemental Exploration Plan was approved on January 8, 2009. To date, drilling operations on Mississippi Canyon Block 563 have not commenced.

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC (“DGE III”) was Designated Operator of Mississippi Canyon Block

563 on November 3, 2014 . DGE III’s request for Designation of Unit Suboperator of Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (Unit Agreement No. 754309001) was submitted on Octobe r 20, 2014 and is pending BSEE approval.

Under this Supplemental Exploration Plan, DGE III, as designated operator proposes to cancel

Well Location s H, I, J and K and proposes to drill and complete t wo (2) Well Locations, A and B. The wells will be drilled with a dynamically positioned semi

- submersible MODU, and are located in approximately 6,548 feet of water.

The OCS Plan Information Form BOEM

- 137 is included as Attachment 1

- A

.

1.2 LOCATION

A Well Location Plat depicting the proposed surface and bottom hole location s of the proposed

well s, measured depth/t rue vertical depth and water depth for each location is included as

Attachment 1

- B

.

A Bathymetry Map depicting the proposed surface location(s) and water depth of each proposed

well is included as Attachment 1

- C

.

1.3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION FEATURES

DGE III proposes to drill the well s with a dynamically positioned semi

- submersible MODU which is equipped with a Subsea BOP. The BOP information and schematics 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. Ap propriate life saving equipment such as life rafts, 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

pre vention equipment as described in BSEE regulations 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 and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)

.

Pollution prevention measures include installation of curbs, gutters, drip pans, and drains on drilling deck areas to collect all contaminants and debris. Compliance will be maintained with theDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1

– Pg. 2 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) EPA NPDES Permit. The rig will be monitored daily and any was te or fuel resulting in pollution of the Gulf waters will be reported to the representative in charge for immediate isolation and correction of the problem. Any spill will be reported to the appropriate governmental agencies.

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUC TION VESSELS

Type of Storage Tank Type of Facility Tank Capacity

(bbls) Number
of Tanks Total Capacity

(bbls) Fluid Gravity

(API)

Fuel Oil (day/settling tanks) DP
Semisubmersible 360/256/161 3 777 No. 2

Diesel

Emergency
Generator Fuel
Oil DP
Semisubmersible 31 1 31 No. 2

Diesel

Fuel Oil (port) DP
Semisubmersible 4541/3396 2 7937 No. 2

Diesel

Fuel Oil (stb) DP
Semisubmersible 4541/3396 2 7936 No. 2

Diesel

Lube Oil DP
Semisubmersible 116 1 116 26°

Waste Oil DP
Semisubmersible 38/28 2 66 26°

Oily Water (port) DP
Semisubmersible 186/178 2 364 N/A

Oily Water (stb) DP
Semisubmersible 186/178 2 364 N/A

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
DGE III does 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 $ 7,346.00 cost recovery fee payment is included as A ttachment 1

- D

.U.S. Department of the Interior ATTACHMENT 1-A Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

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

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

Do you propose to use new or unusual tec hnology 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 f acility for deepwater subsea development? Yes X No

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

Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days

Drill and Complete Well Location A 01/20/2015 04/17/2015 87

Drill and Complete Well Location B 04/18/2015 07/02/2015 75

Description of Drilling Rig Description of Structure

Jackup Drillship Caisson Tension leg platform

Gorilla Jackup Platform rig Fixed platform Compliant tower

Semisubmersible Submersible Spar Guyed tower

X DP Semisubmersible Other (Attach description) Floating production

system Other (Attach description) Drilling Rig Name (If known): Ensc o 8500 Series or Equivalent

Description of Lease Term Pipelines

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

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

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

Company Name: Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC BOEM Operator Number: 03362

Address: 738 Highway 6 South, Suite 800 Contact Person: Kelley Pisciola

Houston, Texas 77079 Phone Number: 281.698.8519

E-Mail Address: kelley.pisciola@jccteam.com

If a service fee is required under 30 CFR 550.125(a), provide the Amount paid $7,346.00 Receipt No.

Project and Worst Case Discharge (WCD) Information

Lease(s): OCS-G 21176 Area: Mississippi Cany on Block(s) 563 Project Name: So. Santa Cruz

Objective(s) x Oil x Gas Sulphur Salt Onshore Support Base(s): Fourchon, LA

Platform / Well Name: A and B Total Volume of WCD: 938,595 bbls API Gravity: 23.2°

Distance to Closest Land (Miles): 65 miles Volume from uncontrolled blowout: 62,573 bbls/day 

### OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM OMB Control Number: 1010-0151 OMB Approval Expires: 12/31/14OCS 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): A Previously reviewed under an approved EP or DOCD? Yes X No

Is this an existing well or

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

or API No.

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

WCD Info For wells, volume of uncontrolled blowout (Bbls/Day): 62,573 bbls/day For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines (Bbls): N/A API Gravity of fluid 23.2°

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

Lease No. OCS-G 21176 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon

Block No. 563

Blockline Departures (in feet) N/S Departure 4,506’ FNL N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 7,227’ FWL E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y

coordinates X: 1,242,747’ X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,323,174’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/ Longitude Latitude 28° 26’ 27.731” Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 88° 14’ 16.005” Longitude Longitude Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 6,548’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: N/A

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

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

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

Form BOEM- 0137 (December 2011 – Supersedes all previ ous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 2 of 4OCS 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): B Previously reviewed under an approved EP or DOCD? Yes X No

Is this an existing well or

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

or API No.

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

WCD Info For wells, volume of uncontrolled blowout (Bbls/Day): 62,573 bbls/day For structures, volume of all storage and pipelines (Bbls): N/A API Gravity of fluid 23.2°

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

Lease No. OCS-G 21176 OCS

OCS

Area Name Mississippi Canyon

Block No. 563

Blockline Departures (in feet) N/S Departure 3,702’ FNL N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L N/S Departure F __ L

E/W Departure 6,094’ FWL E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L E/W Departure F __ L

Lambert X-Y

coordinates X: 1,241,614’ X:

X:

X:

Y: 10,323,978’ Y:

Y:

Y:

Latitude/ Longitude Latitude 28° 26’ 35.577” Latitude

Latitude

Latitude

Longitude 88° 14’ 28.793” Longitude Longitude Longitude

Water Depth (Feet): 6,534’ MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): MD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): TVD (Feet): Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: N/A

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

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

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

X: Y:

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

## B

A

MC 563

DEEP GULF ENERGY III, LLC

MC 563

Well Surface Location Map

0 6000 ft 2000 4000 Scale = 1:240003,702’

6,094’ Surface Location

OCS

‐ G 21176 Well B

X = 1,241,614’

Y = 10,323,978’
6,094’ FWL of MC 563 3,702’ FNL of MC 563

Lat: N 28 ° 26’ 35.577”
Long: W 88 ° 14’ 28.793”

PTD: 13,419’md 13,108’tvd

Water Depth: 6,534’ 

### Y = 10,327,680’X=1,251,360’X=1,235,520’



### Y = 10,311,840’ Surface Location

OCS

‐ G 21176 Well A

X = 1,242,747

Y = 10,323,174’
7,227’ FWL of MC 563 4,506’ FNL of MC 563

Lat: N 28 ° 26’ 27.731”
Long: W 88 ° 14’ 16.005”

PTD: 14,211’md 13,215’tvd

Water Depth : 6,548’4,506’

7,227’5 6 0 0

0 0 6 6

5 6 0
5 

### MC 563 

## A B

DEEP GULF ENERGY III, LLC

MC 563

Bathymetry Map

0 6000 ft 2000 4000 Scale = 1:24000 Surface Location

OCS

‐ G 21176 Well B

X = 1,241,614’

Y = 10,323,978’
6,094’ FWL of MC 563 3,702’ FNL of MC 563

Lat: N 28 ° 26’ 35.577”
Long: W 88 ° 14’ 28.793”

PTD: 13,419’md 13,108’tvd

Water Depth: 6,534’ Surface Location

OCS

‐ G 21176 Well A

X = 1,242,747

Y = 10,323,174’
7,227’ FWL of MC 563 4,506’ FNL of MC 563

Lat: N 28 ° 26’ 27.731”
Long: W 88 ° 14’ 16.005”

PTD: 14,211’md 13,215’tvd

Water Depth : 6,548’1 

### Kelley Pisciola

From: pay.gov.clev@clev.frb.org

Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 4:56 PM

To: Kelley Pisciola Subject: Pay.gov Payment Confirmation: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF

Your payment has been submitted to Pay.gov and the det ails are below. If you chose the option to receive payment reminders in your user profile and this is a def erred or recurring payment, you will receive a reminder email several days before the payment is processed. You may change your payment reminder preferences and email address in your user profile at any time.

If you wish to cancel this transaction, log in to your account at https://www.pay.gov/ and choose the Pending tab of the Payment Activity page. If you have any questions regarding this payment, please contact Brenda Dickerson at (703) 787-1617 or by email at BseeAccountsReceivable@bsee.gov

.

Application Name: BOEM Exploration Plan - BF Pay.gov Tracking ID: 25I3VDGI Agency Tracking ID: 74696343971

Account Holder Name: Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Transaction Type: ACH Debit Transaction Amount: $7,346.00 Payment Date: 10/22/2014 Account Type: Business Checking Routing Number: 121000248

Account Number: ************6945

Transaction Date: 10/21/2014 05:55:57 PM EDT Total Payments Scheduled: 1 Frequency: OneTime

Region: Gulf of Mexico Contact: Kelley Pisciola 281-698-8519 Company Name/No: Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC, 03362 Lease Number(s): 21176, , , , Area-Block: Mississippi Canyon MC, 563: , : , : , : ,
Surface Locations: 2

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY.De ep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 2

– Pg. 3 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 2

GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS

The t able below provides all additional 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 fluids DGE III plan s to
use to drill the proposed well s.

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

Water

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

- based (diesel, mineral oil ) N/A Synthetic

- based (internal olefin, ester) 13,500

2.3 NEW OR UNUSUAL TECHNOLOGY

No new or unusua l technology is proposed to carry out activities in this Supplemental Exploration Plan as defined by 30 CFR 550.200

.

2.4 BONDING STATEMENT The bond requirements for the activities and facilities proposed in this EP are satisfied by a
lease bond, furnishe d and maintained according to 30 CFR 556, Subpart I; NTL No. 2000

- G16, "Guidelines for General Lease Surety Bonds"; and additional security under 30 CFR 556.53(d)

and National NTL No. 2008

- N07, “Supplemental Bond Procedures” as required by BOEM.

2.5 OIL S PILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR) Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC

, Operator N o. 03362

, will demonstrate oil spill 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" prior to conducting operations covered in this EP.

2.6 DEEPWATER WELL CONTROL STATEMENT Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC, Operator No. 03362

, has the financial capability to drill a relief well

and conduct other emergency well control operations.

2.7 BLOWOUT SCENARIO AND WORST CASE DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS

In accordance with NTL No. 2010

- N06, “Information Requirements for Exploration Plans, Development and Production Plans, and Development Operations Coordination Documents on the OCS,” the B lowout S cenario and W orst C ase D ischarge Assumptions and C alculations are

included as Attachment 2

- A

.

## ATTACHMENT 2

- A

Blowout Scenario

Estimated M aximum F low R ate

The estimated maximum flow rate would occur in the objective section, if a kick were taken and the well blew out. The maximum Worst Case Discharge (WCD) modeled for

this scenario is 62,573 BOPD

.

Maximum D uration of B lowout ( D ays )

The duration of the blowout will be a function of the well bridging over, the ability of surface intervention to shut or contain the well or, as a last resort, drilling a relief well to kill the blowout. The expected ma ximum time frames for uncontrolled flow in each of the different operational outcomes would be as follows:

• Bridging Over i n two ( 2 ) Days,

• Surface Intervention in fifteen ( 15 ) Days

• Relief Well to be drilled in forty

- five (45) Days

Maximum D ischarge V olume s The following table is a linear estimate of the maximum discharge volume for each of
the afor ementioned operational activities ( assuming no reservoir depletion )

Operational

Outcome Maximum Discharge

Rate (bbl/day) Discharge
Duration

(days) Maximum Discharge

Volume

(bbl s )

Bridging Over 62

, 5 7 3 BOPD Two ( 2 ) 125

, 146

Surface

Intervention 62,573 BOPD Fifteen ( 15 ) 938,595

Relief Well 62,573 BOPD F ifty

- two (5 2 ) 3

, 253 ,7 96

Potential of W ellbore to B ridge O ver D uring a B lowout

There is potential for the wellbore to bridge over during the WCD blowout. Bridging may occur due to the drawdown calculated between the formation and the open hole section

. A Merlin reservoir simulation model was used to investigate the well conditions during
the WCD blowout scenario. The estimated initial reservoir pressure is 7

, 017 psi. The

reservoir model estimate s bottom hole flowing pressures, based upon reservoir

pro perties and flow rates. The calculated delta reservoir pressure (initial reservoir pressure minus flowing BHP at Day 1 WCD rate) is modeled to be 2 ,32 9 psi.

### In our experience in deep water GOM, we strive to limit the estimated total drawdown on a producing interval to reduce the risk of wellbore collapse and sand/fines migration

into a well. We limit the drawdown to typically less than 8 00 psi

– 1,5 00 psi by reducing

the rates the wel ls produce and by completing each well with a cased hole frac

- pack completion. There is a potential for the wellbore bridging over in the event of a blowout because of the following :

• Drawdown is estimated to be above 3, 3 00 psi

.

• The b lowout occurs in a long open hole section of the well, with no benefit of casing or a frac

- pack completion

.

• If any water zones are exposed this will accelerate wellbore collapse and bridging

.

Surface I ntervention to S top the B lowout

In the event of a blowout and assuming the blowout prevention equipment is still intact ; the subsea BOP will be used for successful shut

- in of the well. The well would then be

killed and re

- entered to either abandon or return to normal operations. Surface

intervention would be the first line of defense after a blowout occurs. The specific intervention technique chosen will depend on actual conditions and ability to access the existing well.

In the event that the subsea BOP is inoperable, the surface intervention would employ

the Helix Well Cont ainment Group ( HWCG ) containment system to achieve successful containment of the well. The system will be employed, while simultaneously initiating relief well planning and operations. S pecifics will be submitted with in the Well
Containment Plan.

Typically blowouts can be controlled with surface intervention, with a good likelihood of success and in a relatively short time frame, as long as, the subsea casing, the subsea

wellhead and the BOP’s are not damaged beyond use. The intervention technique chosen will depend on actual conditions and ability to access the existing well. There can be simple solutions such as rig up and bullhead kill mud or more complex solutions, but the solution will depend on wellbore conditions.

Surface I ntervention T ime E stimate

The assumption is that the well has an uncontrolled blowout and the MODU has sunk with displacement from the wellhead. Additionally, it assumes that debris removal will be required to gain access to the subsea BOP system. The ROV has been deployed and was unsuccessful in shutting in the well, using the existing subsea BOP control panel. The scenario employs one of the aforementioned containment system’s capping BOP.

The table on the next page describes the estimated time required to shut in and secure the well using the containment system or capping stack

. Note that these operations all basically start at the same point in time and are performed in parallel. The entire operation is estimated to take 15 days from start of site assessm ent until the capping stack has been deployed and the well shut in.

### Duration of W ell C apping O peration s

Operation Incremental
Duration

( days ) Cumulative Time Since

Event Start (days)

Assess wellbore conditions for surface intervention requirements.
Conduct notifications to the regulatory agencies and primary

contractors. Two ( 2 ) Two ( 2 )

Site Preparation which includes mobilizing and deployment of the IWOCS system and Dispersant system. Three ( 3 ) Five ( 5 )

Debris removal including
mobilization of ROV boat and construction support vessel and execution of debris removal plan. Two ( 2 ) Seven ( 7 )

Well capping and/or cap and flow operations which include mobilization, deployment, and

installation of the well containment system. Eight ( 8 ) Fifteen ( 15 )

Relief Well

It is preferred to drill relief wells from an open water location, rather than a platform location. Open water locations provide the best option on designing a simpler intercept well and allow a greater choice on rig availability. There are not any platforms in the

immediate vicinity, therefore it is not feasible to consider as a relief well location.

Relief W ell L ocation and D rilling S trategy

The surface location for a relief well ( s ) is a function of seabed bottom and shallow

hazard conditions, current, wind direction and wellbore access. T he relief well surface
location for t he MC 563 Well No. 00 1 c ould be drilled from an appropriately cleared

- of

hazards surface location 1,500 ft to the north of the Well Site location.

A relief well for MC 563 Well No. 00 1 would be design ed to intersect the blowout well

below the 13

- 5/8 ” casing point. Once the well is intersected

, kill pumping operations

would be init iated to kill the blowout well

.

### Relief W ell : Drilling R ig A vailability

As of the date of this EP submittal, t he rigs listed below have Gulf of Mexico area of operations, and could be avail able for relief well operations:

Rig Name Contractor Rated

Water Depth MODU Type Rig Status

Ensco 850 1 Ensco 8

, 5 00’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted
GOM

Ensco DS

- 4 Ensco 12,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted
GOM

Ensco DS

- 5 Ensco 12,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted
GOM

West Sirius Seadrill 10,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted
GOM Maersk Developer Maersk 10,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted
GOM Danny Adkins Noble 12,000’ DP Semisubmersible Contracted
GOM C.R. Luigs Transocean 10,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted
GOM

Discoverer Clear

Lea der Transocean 1 2 ,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted
GOM

Discoverer India Transocean 10,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted
GOM

Relief W ell P ackage C onstraints

The proposed rigs for relief well operations have suitable drilling packages with sufficient capabilities to work in the subject water depth and dr ill to the required relief

well depth . The BOP systems have met the BSEE certification requirements and will be

re

- certified while in transit, prior to drilling a relief well to the required depth.

Relief W ell R ig C ontract and M obilization T iming

A suitable rig could be selected and a contract finalized in 48 hours after undertaking the decision to begin relief well operations. Backup tubulars and wellhead systems are maintained in stock for each well. Mobilization of equipment and services to the rig for
the relief well could be compl eted while operations required to suspend the rig’s current activity were taking place. T he t ime required to contract, mobilize

, drill a relief well and

kill the blowout well is estimated at f ift y two (5 2 ) days and is summarized on the next

page

.

### Duration of relief well

Description Days Cumulative Days

Well Control Assessment. Identify suitable MODU for relief well operations 2 2

MODU suspends operations from current
well. Contract to be executed and Well Spud Equipment is mobilized 14 16

Mobilize Rig and instal l 36” Structural Casing 6 22

Spud and drill to the top of the zone of interest and set casing. 30 52

Mag-Range relief well into intersecting position. 6 58

R/U pumping equipment and kill well. 5 63

R/D Pumping Equipment, PA Wellbore, Pull Riser, and Demobilize 12 75

Blowout Prevention and Intervention

Summary of Prevention Measures

DGE III has maintained a safe track record of prudent operations in the GOM deepwater environment. DGE III will continue to implement its safe operating practices to enhance its operating risk reduction program. In additi on to the safe operating practices, the following measures will be implemented into well design, drilling and completion operations.

 BOP Certification, BOP Drills, Pit Drill’s and all ot her required BSEE testing requirements,

 Current Well Control Certification fo r all Drilling and Completion Rig Site Supervisors,

 Taking Slow Pump Rate measurement s during all open hol e operations and critical cased hole operations,

 Updating Kill Sheets duri ng each tour and posting the same on the rig floor,

 Maintain a current BOP to RKB spaceout Chart,

 Monitoring wellbore fill-ups and displace ments during trips, by the Well Site Supervisor,

 Maintain the necessary circulating sw ages, TIW Valves and IBOP on the rig floor at all times during operations and f unction test these valves during each

tour.

### The utilization of Pre

- Job Safety meetings will continue to be implemented prior to each

op eration with all of the rig crews. These are intended to create a behavior based safety program and promote an atmosphere within the and rig crew interface, such that a “Stop the Job” mentality is promoted across the rig contractor ’ s crew, empowering ever y crew member to question the safety of each operation.

Early W ell C ontrol I ntervention

In the event of a blowout situation, due to failed BOP equipment and uncontrolled flow at the seafloor or at surface, assuming all other surface controlled actuation m easures hav e failed or are inaccessible, a ROV will fly into position at the BOP subsea actuation panel and actuate the shear ram or p ipe rams to establish containment.

If the riser system and rig have been compromised, then debris removal will be initiated to obtain clear access to the BOP. A Capping Stack will be employed to achieve
successful containment of the well. Once containment is established and wellbore

pressur e testing and assessment is completed by DGE III and Well Control Specialist, well kill operations can be initiated t hrough the existing wellbore.

Well C ontrol E ngineering S ervices

DGE III will have service agreements in place with Wild Well Control and Boots and Coots International Well Control prior to commencement of well operations

. In the event of a blowout situation, these companies will be contacted to assist in the detailed design and implementation of well control and/or rel ief well operations.

Additional P revention & M itigation T echniques

Pursuant to wellbore cementing and zonal isolation techniques, all cementing operations will be modeled and designed under the guidelines set forth in API

Recommended Practice 65 Part 1 & 2. Operations will be dictated by the rules and requirements set forth in Federal Regulations, under the wellbore cementing requirements.

API Standard 53 Blowout Prevention Equipment Systems for Drilling Wells and
Recommended Practice 16Q for Marine Dril ling Risers will be used as the guidelines for installation, testing and maintenance of the surface and subsea Marine Risers and BOP systems. The purpose of these recommended practices is to provide information that can serve as a guide for installation an d testing of blowout prevention systems

. The goal of using these recommended practices is to assist DGE III operations in promoting personnel safety, public safety, and integrity of the drilling equipment and preservation of the environment for floating marine drilling operations. These recommended practices help to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operating practices.

These practices are considered acceptable for accomplishing BOP and Marine Riser associated operations. However, equivalent alternative installations and practices may be utilized to accomplish the same objectives. W hen using these recommended practices or other alternatives

, DGE III will insure that operations comply with requirements of Federal Regulations.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 3

– Pg. 4 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 3
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION

3.1 GEOLOGICAL DESCRIPTIO N Propri etary Information.

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAP Propri etary Information.

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINE(S ) Propri etary Information.

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS

- SECTIONS Propri etary Information.

3.5 SHALLOW HAZARDS REPORT A shallow hazards survey was conducted over Mississippi Canyon Block 563 and previously

submitted.

3.6 SHALLOW HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

In accordance with NTL No. 2008

- G05, “ Shallow Hazards Program

, ” (Extended by NTL No.

2014

- G05 , “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees” ), a shallow hazards assessment has been prepared for each proposed surface location s evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological and manmade features and conditions that may adversely affect drilling operations. The shallow hazards survey and archaeological assessment is inclu ded as Attachment 3

- E

.

3.7 HIGH

- RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES Propri etary Information.

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN Propri etary Information.

3.9 TIME V ERSUS DEPTH TABLES Propri etary Information.10344 Sam Houston Park Dr. Houston, Texas 77064 713.351.7900 [o] 713.351.7996 [f] www.gemsinc.com

October 8, 2014 Project No. 0914-2457

Deep Gulf Energy Companies 738 Highway 6 South
Suite 800 Houston, TX 77079

Attention: Mr. Martin Bethke



### Site Clearance Letter for Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Block 563 (OCS-G-21176) Mississippi Canyon Area
Gulf of Mexico

Deep Gulf Energy Companies (DGE) contracted Geosci ence Earth & Marine Serv ices (GEMS) to provide an assessment of the seafloor and shallow geologic conditions to determine the favorability of drilling operations for the proposed location CPS-DGE-A_ rev002 in Block 563 (OCS-G-21176), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico. This letter addresse s specific seafloor and subsurface conditions around the proposed location to the limit of investigation, a depth of about 4,017 ft below the mudline (bml).

This letter provides details specific to the well locati on, including: available data, Notice to Lessees (NTL) requirements, man-made features, and wellsite conditions.



### Proposed Well Location

The surface location for the Proposed Exploration Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 lies in the north central portion of MC 563. Deep Gulf Energy Co mpanies provided the following coordinates:

Table 1. Proposed Location Coordinates

Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002

Spheroid & Datum: Clarke 1866, NAD27 Projection: UTM Zone 16 North Line Reference Block Calls (MC 563)

X: 1,242,746.877 ft Latitude: 28o 26’ 27.7307” N Inline 11360 7,227 ft FWL

Y: 10,323,174.300 ft Longitude: 88o 14’ 16.0047” W Crossline 11590 4,506 ft FNL

Deep Gulf Energy plans to drill this well using a dynamically positioned drills hip. Our assessment addresses the seafloor conditions within a 2,000 ft radius around the proposed wellsite location.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 2 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Available Data

The following discussion is based on the findings pr ovided by Noble from several geohazard reports over MC 563 and surrounding blocks. Noble provided an exploration 3-D seismic time volume for the geohazard analysis, covering an approximate 41 square-mile study area that includes all or portions of Federal lease Blocks MC 475, 518 -520, 562-564, and 607 (Figure 1). Noble provided mapped seafloor
and sub-seafloor features covering the study area.

Figure 1. Seafloor Rendering of the Mississippi Canyon Study Area.



### Attachments

Wellsite maps are centered on the Proposed Expl oration Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 location and are displayed at a 1 inch = 1,000 ft scale (1:12,000). The maps included in this letter are as follows:

Map No. MC 563-A-1: Bathymetry Map Map No. MC 563-A-2: Seafloor Features Map Map No. MC 563-A-3: Seafloor Amplitude Rendering Map No. MC 563-A-4: Geologic Features MapProposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 3 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The illustrations accompanying this letter were extracted from the av ailable datasets and are listed below:

Illustration MC 563-A-1: Portions of Inline 11360 and Crossline 11590 Showing Conditions Beneath Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Illustration MC 563-A-2: Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002, Mississippi Canyon, Block 563



### NTL Requirements

The following report complies with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Notice to Lessees (NTL’s) 2009-G40, 2008-G04, and 2008-G05 (MMS, 2010 and 2008a, b). BOEM’S NTL 2014-G05 (BOEM, 2014a) extends the expiration of NTL 2008-G04 and 2008-G05. The Federal lease Block MC 948 is considered archaeologically significant (NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, BOEM, 2011); therefore, requirements set forth in NTL 2005-G07 (MMS, 2005) are applicable in terms of high-probability for historic resources. C & C Technologies prepared an archaeological assessment to comply with the Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports requirements and submitted the report to Noble in 2006.

As specified in NTL 2008-G05 (MMS, 2008b), GEMS ex tracted the power spectrum diagram from the 3-D seismic data cube provided by Noble at the propos ed wellsite (Figure 2). The extraction was generated within a 2,000-ft radius of the intersection of t he inline and crossline at t he proposed wellsite. The
extraction time interval consisted of the seafloor to 4.0 seconds. We converted the amplitude vs. frequency spectrum, generated by the SMT software, to power vs. frequency by squaring the amplitude values as described by J. A. Coffeen, 1978. The frequency bandwidth at 50 % power ranges between 18

and 51 Hz.

Figure 2. Power Spectrum Curve, Proposed Wellsite MC 563 CPS-DGE-A_rev002Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 4 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Man-Made Features

There are no wells in the immediate vicinity of the proposed well. The nearest well to the proposed wellsite is Nobles MC 519 #1 well, approximately 1.3 miles north-northeast. Wells exist in several of the adjacent blocks, including BP’s MC 520 H001 and MC 607 #1 wells, that experienced shallow water flow.

A Shell, 5-8-inch, bulk gas pipeline crosses through MC 563 to the northeast of the proposed location (Map MC 563-A-1). The pipeline trends southeast-northwest and the closest point to the proposed location is approximately 4,300 ft to the northwest. Additionally a BP 8-inch bulk oil pipeline and a Shell 5-inch umbilical pass through the MC 563 block to t he northwest and northeast, respectively. The closest point to the proposed location is approximately 1.3 miles.

Noble provided side-scan sonar targets for the study area. A single target exists within a 2,000 ft radius, approximately 646 ft west-northwest of the proposed location. The target measures 2 ft by 12 ft with no measurable height. The target does not have an archaeol ogical avoidance and is not expected to impact the proposed well.



### Wellsite Conditions

The proposed location is clear of any constraining s eafloor conditions as defined by the features and 3-D seismic dataset provided by Noble. The potential for encountering shallow water flow is moderate between Horizon D to Horizon E and low to negligible for other intervals. The potential for encountering shallow gas is negligible above Horizon G and moderate from Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation.

Water Depth and Seafloor Conditions

The water depth at the proposed location is appr oximately -6,548 ft, based on multibeam bathymetry (Map MC 563-A-1). The seafloor at the propo sed site dips east at approximately 1.0  . The proposed location occurs in a relatively flat area where th e seafloor is relatively smooth and featureless (Maps MC 563-A-1 and MC 563-A-2). The near-surface sediments are expected to be normally consolidated clays forming a drape over the area.

Deepwater Benthic Communities

The seafloor amplitude search (Map MC 563-A-3) does not show evidence of seafloor anomalies within a 2,000 ft radius of the proposed wellsite location. Awaiting regional geohazards report for additional

details.

Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic conditions are shown on Illustration s MC 953-A-1 and MC 953- A-2. The surficial and shallowest unit, seafloor to Horizon A (228 ft bml), will likely consist of a very soft, silty clay hemipelagic drape overlying stratified, normally consolidated hemi pelagic clays, silty clays, and muddy turbidites. Interbedded within the stratified clays in this unit ar e thin, clay-prone mass-transport deposits, particularly near the base of the unit (Figure MC 953-A-1).

The sedimentary section below Horizon A to the Limit of Investigation (4,017 ft bml) consists primarily of interbedded hemipelagic and pelagic clays, turbid ites, and mass-transport complexes (Illustration MC 953-A-2). The sequence will likely consist predomi nantly of clays and silts; however, sands, thick in some places, may occur below 228 ft bml.

A sand-prone sequence may occur between 228 and 488 ft bml. Stratigraphic units within this section possibly correspond to the regionally mapped “Blue Un it” and likely consist of turbidite and slope-fan deposits that have been modified by submarine slides and mass-wasting events. Most sand seams encountered within this unit are likely to be discontinuous.

The interval from Horizon C to Horizon D (754 to 1, 030 ft bml) appears to be normally deposited, layered clays and silts.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 5 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. A unit of potentially sand-rich deposits ma y exist between Horizon D and Horizon E (1,030 ft to 1,593 ft bml) along the channel margins and at the base of the unit. Shallow water flow experienced at the BP MC 607 #1 well correlates to t he potential sand unit along the base of the unit.

The interval from Horizon E to Horizon F (1,593 to 1,993 ft bml) consists of clay-rich turbidites with thin, clay-dominated mass-transport and rotational slide deposits.

Slope-fan turbidite deposits interbedded with mud-ri ch, mass-transport deposits make up the interval between Horizon F and Horizon G (1,993 to 2,820 ft bml) . This unit is mostly silts and clays; however, continuous sand seams are pos sible (Illustrations MC 563-A-1 and MC 563-A-2).

The deepest interval from Horizon G to the Limit of In vestigation (2,820 ft to 4,017 ft bml), is a rubble-like zone consisting of chaotic, discontinuous reflections to sand-rich seams interbedded in slope-fan turbidite deposits (Illustrations MC 563-A-1 and MC 563-A-2).

Faults

The proposed trajectory will penetrate a buried fault at approximately 3,096 ft bml (Illustrations MC 563-A-1 and MC 563-A-2). This southwest dipping normal fault does not appear extend above Horizon F, indicating that the fault is geologically in active. There may be minor faults characterized by
small offsets below the resolution of the 3-D dataset. There is no evidence suggesting the presence of seafloor faulting at the proposed location.

Shallow Gas and Shallow Water Flow

The BOEM regional maps designate numerous blocks wi thin this portion of the Mississippi Canyon Area as having experienced shallow water flow (BOEM, 2014b ). Most of the document ed flows are attributed to the sand-bearing, intraslope fan deposits of the MC “Blue” unit; however, other intervals of sand-bearing deposits have reported flow. The potential for shallow water flow is considered moderate for the Horizon D to Horizon E interval. Significant sh allow gas is not likely to be encountered within the
shallow sediments above Horizon G. Below Horizo n G to the Limit of Investigation (2,820 ft to 4,017 ft bml) there is moderate potential for shallow gas (Illustration MC 563-A-2).

Shallow Gas. The potential for encountering shallow ga s from the seafloor to Horizon G is negligible. The interval from Horizon A to Horizon B (288 ft to 488 ft bml) contains dispersed moderate to high-amplitude anomalies that are li kely associated to discontinuous sand seams (Illustration MC 563 A-1 and MC 563 A-2). These amplitudes do not show any cl ear direct hydrocarbon indicators. The interval from Horizon D to Horizon E (1,030 ft to 1,593 ft bml) contains moderate to high-amplitude anomalies associated with coarser grained material and di scontinuous sand seams along channel margins. Amplitudes in this interval do not show evi dence of direct hydrocarbon indicators.

The Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation (2,820 ft to 4,017 ft bml) interval contains numerous, discontinuous high-amplitude anomalies. Anomalies wi thin the interval show evidence of direct hydrocarbon indicators, such as phase reversal (I llustrations MC 563 A-1 and MC 563 A-2). Well design allowed for trajectory av oidance of the anomalous amplitudes by approximatel y 245 ft. The potential for encountering shallow gas in the Horizon G to Li mit of Investigation interval is moderate.

Shallow Water Flow. Within the survey area the Horizon A to Horizon B interval (228 ft to 488 ft bml) possibly correlates to the “Blue Unit”. This interval shows clay-rich mass-transport deposits, interbedded with discontinuous sands. Nearby offset wells did not report flow associated with this interval; therefore, a low potential for encountering sh allow water flow was assigned for this interval.

The nearby MC 607 #1 well (~2.6 miles southeast of t he location) encountered low-severity water flow at1,246 ft bml, within the mass-transport deposit and channel complex at the proposed location. The sandprone flow zones correlate to the strata at the ba se of the interval between Horizon D and Horizon E (1,030 ft to 1,593 ft bml) at the proposed location (I llustration MC 563-A-2). A moderate potential for encountering shallow water flow occurs within the interval and low to negligible down to the Limit of investigation at the proposed CPS-DGE-A_rev002 well.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 6 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The MC 520 H001 well (~4.5 miles northeast of the location) encountered low-severity water flow at 2,371 ft bml, within the slope-fan tu rbidite deposits at the proposed location. The sand prone flow zone likely correlates to a sand seam through the middle of the interval from Horizon F to Horizon G (1,993 ft to 2,830 ft bml); however, the probable sand seam is trun cated by a clay dominated mass-transport deposit and does not extend to the proposed location. The closes t point of the feature to the proposed location is approximately 1.8 miles away. A low potential for enc ountering shallow water flow is assigned for this interval at the proposed CPS-DGE-A_rev002 well.

A low potential for shallow water flow has been assigned to the interval from Horizon G to Limit of Investigation (2,820 ft to 4,017 ft bml). T he well design allowed for trajectory avoidance of the anomalous amplitudes that likely correlate to disco ntinuous sand-rich seams by approximately 245 ft.



### Results

The potential for high-density deepwater benthic communi ties within 2,000 ft of the proposed location is negligible. Confirmation of this awaiting Regional Geohazard Report. In addition, no unidentified sonar targets of archaeological significance have been identi fied in the vicinity of the proposed wellsite.

The probability for encountering sand in the shallow section increases for the intervals between 228 ft to 488 ft bml, 1,030 ft to 1,593 ft bml, and below 2,820 ft bm l to the Limit of Investigation at 4,017 ft bml. Engineers should be aware that these areas have an incr eased potential for overpressured sand layers.

A moderate potential for encountering shallow gas below 2,820 ft bml to the Limit of Investigation exists along the proposed well trajectory. A buried fault w ill be intersected by the proposed trajectory at approximately 3,096 ft bml. Additional buried faults ma y exist that are beyond the resolution the available
3-D seismic data.



### Closing

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to De ep Gulf Energy and look forward to working with you on future projects.

Sincerely,

GEOSCIENCE EARTH & MARINE SERVICES

Bradley Mills
Geoscientist

Christopher Madere Daniel Lanier Project Manager/Senior Geoscientist Direct or – Geoscience Earth & Marine Services

Attachments (4 Maps and 2 Figures)

Distribution: Mr. Martin Bethke, Deep Gulf Energy, (Draft copy)Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-A_rev002 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 8, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 7 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. REFERENCES

BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management), 2011, Notice to lessees and operators (NTL) of federal oil and gas leases and pipeline right-of-way (ROW) holders on the outer continental shelf (OCS), Revisions to t he list of OCS lease blocks requiring archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR), NTL 2011-JOINT-G01. Effective Date December 29, 2011.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region: Extension of prior notice to lessees, NTL 2014-G05.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014b, Safety performanc e review – shallow water flows can pose significant hazards to deepwater drilling, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM /Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program/Resource _Evaluation/Geological_and_Geophy sical_Reviews/SWF2011.pdf>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014b, Shallow Water Flow s in the Gulf of Mexico, June 2011 ReportSeismic Water Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-andGas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic -Water-Bottom-Anomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014c, ASCII Data Files, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.gomr.boem.gov/homepg/pubinfo/freeasci /freedesc.html>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014d, Seismic Wate r Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Progr am/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic-Water-BottomAnomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014.

Coffeen, J. A., 1978, Seismic Exploration Fundament als: Tulsa, the Petroleum Publishing Co., p. 125.

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, Archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Mana gement Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005-G07.

Minerals Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexi co OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans and development operations coordination docu ments: U. S. Department of the Inte rior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G04.

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow haz ards requirements: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G05.

Minerals Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operat ors of federal oil and gas leas es in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communitie s: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2009-G40. Effective Date January 27, 2010.10344 Sam Houston Park Dr. Houston, Texas 77064 713.351.7900 [o] 713.351.7996 [f] www.gemsinc.com

October 9, 2014 Project No. 0914-2457

Deep Gulf Energy Companies 738 Highway 6 South
Suite 800 Houston, TX 77079

Attention: Mr. Martin Bethke



### Site Clearance Letter for Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Block 563 (OCS-G-21176) Mississippi Canyon Area
Gulf of Mexico

Deep Gulf Energy Companies (DGE) contracted Geosci ence Earth & Marine Serv ices (GEMS) to provide an assessment of the seafloor and shallow geologic conditions to determine the favorability of drilling operations for the proposed location CPS-DGE-B_ rev001 in Block 563 (OCS-G-21176), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico. This letter addresse s specific seafloor and subsurface conditions around the proposed location to the Limit of Investigation, a depth of about 4,037 ft below the mudline (bml).

This letter provides details specific to the well locati on, including: available data, Notice to Lessees (NTL) requirements, man-made features, and wellsite conditions.



### Proposed Well Location

The surface location for the Proposed Exploration We llsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 lie s in the north-central portion of MC 563. Deep Gulf Energy Co mpanies provided the following coordinates:

Table 1. Proposed Location Coordinates

Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001

Spheroid & Datum: Clarke 1866, NAD27 Projection: UTM Zone 16 North Line Reference Block Calls (MC 563)

X: 1,241,613.713 ft Latitude: 28o 26’ 35.5769” N Inline 11354 6,094 ft FWL

Y: 10,323,978.283 ft Longitude: 88o 14’ 28.7927” W Crossline 11624 3,702 ft FNL

Deep Gulf Energy plans to drill this well using a dynamically positioned drills hip. Our assessment addresses the seafloor conditions within a 2,000 ft radius around the proposed wellsite location.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 2 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Available Data

The following discussion is based on the findings pr ovided by Noble from several geohazard reports over MC 563 and surrounding blocks. Noble provided an exploration 3-D seismic time volume for the geohazard analysis, covering an approximate 41 square-mile study area that includes all or portions of Federal lease Blocks MC 475, 518 -520, 562-564, and 607 (Figure 1). Noble provided mapped seafloor
and sub-seafloor features covering the study area.

Figure 1. Seafloor Rendering of the Mississippi Canyon Study Area.



### Attachments

Wellsite maps are centered on the Proposed Explor ation Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 location and are displayed at a 1 inch = 1,000 ft scale (1:12,000). The maps included in this letter are as follows:

Map No. MC 563-B-1: Bathymetry Map Map No. MC 563-B-2: Seafloor Features Map Map No. MC 563-B-3: Seafloor Amplitude Rendering Map No. MC 563-B-4: Geologic Features MapProposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 3 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The illustrations accompanying this letter were extracted from the av ailable datasets and are listed below:

Illustration MC 563-B-1: Portions of Inline 11354 and Crossline 11624 Showing Conditions Beneath Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Illustration MC 563-B-2: Tophole Prognosis Chart, Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001, Mississippi Canyon, Block 563



### NTL Requirements

The following report complies with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Notice to Lessees (NTLs) 2009-G40, 2008-G04, and 2008-G05 (MMS, 2010 and 2008a, b). BOEM NTL 2014-G05 (BOEM, 2014a) extends the expiration of NTL 2008- G04 and 2008-G05. The Federal lease Block MC 948 is considered archaeologically significant (NTL 2011-JOINT-G01, BOEM, 2011); therefore, requirements set forth in NTL 2005-G07 (MMS, 2005) are applicable in terms of high-probability for historic resources. C & C Technologies prepared an archaeological assessment to comply with the Archaeological Resource Surveys and Reports requirements and submitted the report to Noble in 2006.

As specified in NTL 2008-G05 (MMS, 2008b), GEMS ex tracted the power spectrum diagram from the 3-D seismic data cube provided by Noble at the propos ed wellsite (Figure 2). The extraction was generated within a 2,000-ft radius of the intersection of t he inline and crossline at t he proposed wellsite. The
extraction time interval consisted of the seafloor to 4.0 seconds. We converted the amplitude vs. frequency spectrum, generated by the SMT software, to power vs. frequency by squaring the amplitude values as described by J. A. Coffeen, 1978. The frequency bandwidth at 50 % power ranges between 18

and 51 Hz.

Figure 2. Power Spectrum Curve, Proposed Wellsite MC 563 CPS-DGE-B_rev001Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 4 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

### Man-Made Features

There are no wells in the immediate vicinity of the proposed well. The nearest well to the proposed wellsite is Noble’s MC 519 #1 well, approximately one mile north-northeast. Wells exist in several of the adjacent blocks, including BP’s MC 520 H001 and MC 607 #1 wells, that experienced shallow water flow.

A Shell 5-8-inch bulk gas pipeline crosses thro ugh MC 563 northeast of the proposed location (Map MC 563-B-1). The pipeline trends southeast-northwest and the closest point to the proposed location is approximately 5,016 ft northwest. Additiona lly a BP 8-inch bulk oil pipeline and a Shell 5-inch umbilical pass through the MC 563 block to the northwest and northeast, respectively. The closest point to the proposed location is approximately one mile.

Noble provided side-scan sonar targets for the study area. A single target exists within a 2,000 ft radius, approximately 809 ft southwest of the proposed locati on. The target measures 2 ft by 12 ft with no measurable height. The target does not have an archaeol ogical avoidance and is not expected to impact the proposed well.



### Wellsite Conditions

The proposed location is clear of any constraining s eafloor conditions as defined by the features and 3-D seismic dataset provided by Noble. The potential for encountering shallow water flow is moderate between Horizon D to Horizon E and negligible to low for other intervals. The potential for encountering shallow gas is negligible above Horizon G and moderate from Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation.

Water Depth and Seafloor Conditions

The water depth at the proposed location is appr oximately -6,534 ft, based on multibeam bathymetry (Map MC 563-B-1). The seafloor at the propo sed site dips east at approximately 1.0  . The proposed location occurs in a relatively flat area where th e seafloor is relatively smooth and featureless (Maps MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-2). The near-surface s ediments are expected to be normally consolidated clays forming a drape over the area.

Deepwater Benthic Communities

The seafloor amplitude search (Map MC 563-A-3) does not show evidence of seafloor anomalies within a 2,000 ft radius of the proposed wellsite location. Awaiting regional geohazards report for additional

details.

Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic conditions are shown on Illustration s MC 953-B-1 and MC 953- B-2. The surficial and shallowest unit, seafloor to Horizon A (228 ft bml), will likely consist of a very soft, silty clay hemipelagic drape overlying stratified, normally consolidated hemi pelagic clays, silty clays, and muddy turbidites. Interbedded within the stratified clays in this unit ar e thin, clay-prone mass-transport deposits, particularly near the base of the unit (Illustration MC 563-B-1).

The sedimentary section below Horizon A to the Limit of Investigation (4,037 ft bml) consists primarily of interbedded hemipelagic and pelagic clays, turbid ites, and mass-transport complexes (Illustration MC 563-B-2). The sequences will likely consist predom inantly of clays and silts; however, sands, thick in some places, may occur below 228 ft bml.

A sand-prone sequence may occur between 228 and 494 ft bml. Stratigraphic units within this section possibly correspond to the regionally mapped “Blue Un it” and likely consist of turbidite and slope-fan deposits that have been modified by submarine slides and mass-wasting events. Most sand seams encountered within this unit are likely to be discontinuous.

The interval from Horizon C to Horizon D (770 ft to 1,065 ft bml) appears to be normally deposited, layered clays and silts.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 5 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. A unit of potentially sand-rich deposits ma y exist between Horizon D and Horizon E (1,065 ft to 1,616 ft bml) along the channel margins and at the base of the unit. Shallow water flow experienced at the BP MC 607 #1 well correlates to t he potential sand unit along the base of the unit.

The interval from Horizon E to Horizon F (1,616 ft to 1, 963 ft bml) consists of clay-rich turbidites with thin, clay-dominated mass-transport and rotational slide deposits.

Slope-fan turbidite deposits interbedded with mud-ri ch, mass-transport deposits make up the interval between Horizon F and Horizon G (1,963 ft to 2,692 ft bml) . This unit is mostly silts and clays; however, continuous sand seams are pos sible (Illustrations MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-2).

The deepest interval from Horizon G to the Limit of In vestigation (2,692 ft to 4,037 ft bml), is a rubble-like zone consisting of chaotic, discontinuous reflections to sand-rich seams interbedded in slope-fan turbidite deposits (Illustrations MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-2).

Faults

The proposed trajectory will penetrate a buried fault at approximately 1,966 ft bml (Illustrations MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-2). This southwest di pping normal fault does not appear to extend above Horizon E, indicating that the fault is geologically inactive. There may be minor faults characterized by
small offsets below the resolution of the 3-D dataset. There is no evidence suggesting the presence of seafloor faulting at the proposed location.

Shallow Gas and Shallow Water Flow

The BOEM regional maps designate numerous blocks wi thin this portion of the Mississippi Canyon Area as having experienced shallow water flow (BOEM, 2014b ). Most of the document ed flows are attributed to the sand-bearing, intraslope fan deposits of t he MC “Blue Unit”; however, other intervals of sand-bearing deposits have reported flow. The potential for shallow water flow is considered moderate for the Horizon D to Horizon E interval. Significant sh allow gas is not likely to be encountered within the
shallow sediments above Horizon G. Below Horizo n G to the Limit of Investigation (2,692 ft to 4,037 ft bml) there is moderate potential for shallow gas (Illustration MC 563-B-2).

Shallow Gas. The potential for encountering shallow ga s from the seafloor to Horizon G is negligible. The interval from Horizon A to Horizon B (228 ft to 494 ft bml) contains dispersed moderate to high-amplitude anomalies that are likely associ ated with discontinuous sand seams (Illustration MC 563 B-1 and MC 563 B-2). These amplitudes do not show evidence of direct hydrocarbon indicators. The interval from Horizon D to Horizon E (1,065 ft to 1,616 ft bml) contains moderate to high-amplitude anomalies associated with coarser grained material and discontinuous sand seams along channel margins. Amplitudes in this interval do not sh ow evidence of direct hydrocarbon indicators.

The Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation (2,692 ft to 4,037 ft bml) interval contains numerous, discontinuous high-amplitude anomalies. Anomalies wi thin the interval show evidence of direct hydrocarbon indicators, such as phase reversal (I llustrations MC 563 B-1 and MC 563 B-2). Well design allowed for trajectory av oidance of the anomalous am plitudes by greater than 245 ft. The potential for encountering shallow gas in the Horizon G to Li mit of Investigation interval is moderate.

Shallow Water Flow. Within the survey area the Horizon A to Horizon B interval (228 ft to 494 ft bml) possibly correlates to the “Blue Unit”. This interval shows clay-rich mass-transport deposits, interbedded with discontinuous sands. Nearby offset wells did not report flow associated with this interval; therefore, a low potential for encountering sh allow water flow was assigned for this interval.

The nearby MC 607 #1 well (~2.6 miles southeast of t he location) encountered low-severity water flow at 1,246 ft bml, within the mass-transport deposit and channel complex at the proposed location. The sand-prone flow zones correlate to the strata at the base of the interval between Horizon D and Horizon E (1,065 ft to 1,616 ft bml) at the proposed location (I llustration MC 563-B-2). A moderate potential for encountering shallow water flow occurs within the interval and negligible to low down to the Limit of Investigation at the proposed CPS-DGE-B_rev001 well.Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 6 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The MC 520 H001 well (~4.5 miles northeast of the location) encountered low-severity water flow at 2,371 ft bml, within the slope-fan tu rbidite deposits at the proposed location. The sand prone flow zone likely correlates to a sand seam through the middle of the interval from Horizon F to Horizon G (1,963 ft to 2,692 ft bml); however, the probable sand seam is trun cated by a clay dominated mass-transport deposit and does not extend to the proposed location. The closes t point of the feature to the proposed location is approximately 1.8 miles away. A low potential for enc ountering shallow water flow is assigned for this interval at the proposed CPS-DGE-B_rev001 well.

A low potential for shallow water flow has been assigned to the interval from Horizon G to Limit of Investigation (2,692 ft to 4,037 ft bml). T he well design allowed for trajectory avoidance of the anomalous amplitudes that likely correlate to di scontinuous s and-rich seams by greater than 245 ft.



### Results

The potential for high-density deepwater benthic communi ties within 2,000 ft of the proposed location is negligible. Confirmation of this awaiting Regional Geohazard Report . In addition, no unidentified sonar targets of archaeological significance have been identi fied in the vicinity of the proposed wellsite.

The probability for encountering sand in the shallow section increases for the intervals between 228 ft to 494 ft bml, 1,065 ft to 1,616 ft bml, and below 2,692 ft bm l to the Limit of Investigation at 4,037 ft bml. Engineers should be aware that these areas have an incr eased potential for overpressured sand layers.

A moderate potential for encountering shallow gas below 2,692 ft bml to the Limit of Investigation exists along the proposed well trajectory. A buried fault w ill be intersected by the proposed trajectory at approximately 1,966 ft bml. Additional buried faults ma y exist that are beyond the resolution the available
3-D seismic data.



### Closing

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to De ep Gulf Energy and look forward to working with you on future projects.

Sincerely,

GEOSCIENCE EARTH & MARINE SERVICES

Bradley Mills
Geoscientist

Christopher Madere Daniel Lanier Project Manager/Senior Geoscientist Direct or – Geoscience Earth & Marine Services

Attachments (4 Maps and 2 Figures)

Distribution: Mr. Martin Bethke, Deep Gulf Energy, (Draft copy)Proposed Wellsite CPS-DGE-B_rev001 Clearance Letter Deep Gulf Energy Companies // October 9, 2014

Geoscience Earth & Marine Services // 7 FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, INC. REFERENCES

BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management), 2011, Notice to lessees and operators (NTL) of federal oil and gas leases and pipeline right-of-way (ROW) holders on the outer continental shelf (OCS), Revisions to t he list of OCS lease blocks requiring archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR), NTL 2011-JOINT-G01. Effective Date December 29, 2011.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region: Extension of prior notice to lessees, NTL 2014-G05.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014b, Safety performanc e review – shallow water flows can pose significant hazards to deepwater drilling, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM /Oil_and_Gas_Energy_Program/Resource _Evaluation/Geological_and_Geophy sical_Reviews/SWF2011.pdf>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014b, Shallow Water Flow s in the Gulf of Mexico, June 2011 ReportSeismic Water Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-andGas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic -Water-Bottom-Anomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014c, ASCII Data Files, published on the BOEM Gulf of Mexico Region Homepage, <http://www.gomr.boem.gov/homepg/pubinfo/freeasci /freedesc.html>, accessed October, 2014.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 2014d, Seismic Wate r Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Progr am/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic-Water-BottomAnomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014.

Coffeen, J. A., 1978, Seismic Exploration Fundament als: Tulsa, the Petroleum Publishing Co., p. 125.

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, Archaeological resource surveys and reports: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Mana gement Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005-G07.

Minerals Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexi co OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans and development operations coordination docu ments: U. S. Department of the Inte rior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G04.

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and oper ators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow haz ards requirements: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G05.

Minerals Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operat ors of federal oil and gas leas es in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communitie s: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2009-G40. Effective Date January 27, 2010.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 4

– Pg. 5 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 4
HYDROGEN SULFIDE INFORMATION

4.1 CONCENTRATION
DGE III anticipates encountering zero ppm H 2 S during the proposed operations.

4.2 CLASSIFICATION
In accordance with Title 30 CFR 250.490(c)

, DGE III requests that the area of proposed operations be classified by the BOEM as H 2 S absent

.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 5

– Pg. 6 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## 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’). Geoscience Earth & Marine Services (“GEMS”) was contracted to provide an
assessment of the shallow conditions at the proposed surface locations. The purpose of the assessment was to address seafloor conditions that may impact exploratory drilling operations within 2,000 feet of the proposed well sites. DGE III will avoid all high

- density deepwater benthic

communiti es 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 req uired per NTL No. 2009

- G39, “Biologically Sensitive

Underwater Features and Areas.”

5.3 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES STATEMENT (SHUNTING) All activities proposed under this EP will be conducted outside all Topog raphic Feature Protective Zones; therefore shunting of drill cuttings and drilling fluids is not required per NTL

No. 2009

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

5.4 LIVE BOTTOM S (PINNACLE TREND FEATURES) Mississippi Canyon Block 563 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) Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located with in 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 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of potentially sensitive biological features; therefore, biologically sensitive area maps are not required.

5.7 REMOTELY OPERATED VEHI CLE (ROV) SURVEYS

Pursuant to 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”), operators may be required to conduct remotely operated vehicle (ROV) surveys during pre

- spudding and post

- drilling operations for the purpose of biological and physical observations.

If required, surveys will be conducted immediately prior and upon completion of drillin g operations. A rig

- based ROV equipped with video imaging capabilities will be used. The survey pattern will consist of six transects centered on the well location with tracks extendingDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 5

– Pg. 7 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) approximately 100 meters away from the well on bearings of 30 degrees , 90 degrees, 150 degrees, 210 degrees, 270 degrees and 330 degrees. The seafloor will be videotaped continuously along each track.

Biological and physical observations as described in the subject NTL and Form BOEM

- 0141 will be made prior to commencing drilling operations and also following the completion of drilling operations, but prior to moving the rig off location. The observations will be documented using
Form BOEM

- 0141 or a facsimile and submit ted to the BOEM within 60 days after the second survey is completed.

5.8 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, CRITICAL HABITAT, AND MARINE

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

belo w). NOAA fisheries currently list all five of these turtles as endangered (E) or threatened (T).

Species Scientific Name Status Potential Presence Critical Habitat Designated in
the Gulf of

Mexico Lease

Area Coastal

Sea Turtles

Loggerhead Carett a caretta T x x Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama,

Florida

Green Chelonia mydas T,E x x None

Leatherback Dermochelys coriacea E x x None

Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata E x x None Kemp’s Ridley Lepidochelys kempli E x x None

In addition, there are 28 species of marine mammals that may be found in the Gulf of Mexico. The table provided below identifies the seven (7) species of marine mammals that are listed as endangered or threatened. Currently, there are no designated critical habitats for the listed species in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf; however, it is possible that one or more of these species could be seen in the area during operations.

Species S cientific Name Status Potential Presence Critical Habitat Designated in
the Gulf of

Mexico Lease

Area C oastal

Marine Mammals

Sperm Whale Physeter macrocephalus E x

-- None

Wes t Indian

Manatee Trichechus manatus

latirostris E

-- x Florida

Blue Whale Balaenoptera masculus E x

-- None

Fin Whale Balaenoptera physalus E x

-- None Humpback

Whale Megaptera novaeangliae E x

-- NoneDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 5

– Pg. 8 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176)

Species S cientific Name Status Potential Presence Critical Habitat Designated in
the Gulf of

Mexico Lease

Area C oastal

Marine Mammals

NorthAtlantic Right Whale Eubalaena glacialis E x

-- None

Sei Whale Balaenopiera borealis E x

-- None

There is one (1) species of fish that NOAA fisheries currently list as threatened (T) that may be found in the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf sturgeon, also known as the Gulf of Mexico sturgeon, is an anadromous (breeding in freshwater after migrating up rivers from marine and estuarine environments) fish overwintering in estuaries, bays, and the Gulf of Mexico (see table below).

Species Scientific Name Status Potential

Presence Critical

Habitat Designated in
the Gulf of
Mexico Lease

Area Coastal

Fish

Gulf S turgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus (=oxyrhynchus)

desotoi T X X None

5.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT Mississippi Canyon Block 563 has been determined to have a high potential for conta ining archaeological properties

. In accordance with NTL No. 2005

- G07 “Archaeological Surveys and Reports,” a n Archaeological Survey Report was previously submitted

.

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

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

- G05 , “Extension of Prior Notices

to Lessees” ).

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

- G04, “Information Requirements for Exploration P lans and Development Operations Coordination

Document s ” (Extended by NTL No. BOEM 2014

- G05, “Extension of Prior Notices to Lessees”).Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 6

– Pg. 9 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## 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

**.**Waste you will generate, treat and downhole dispose or discharge to the GOM Projected Generated Waste Projected Ocean Discharges

Will drilling occur? If yes, you should list muds and cuttings Type of Waste Composition Projected Amount Discharge Rate Discharge Method

Cuttings wetted with water-based fluid Cuttings coated with water based drilling mud 1,445 bbl/well 361 bbl/day/well Water-based Drilling Fluids Water based drilling fluid 50,000/bbl/well 12,500 bbl/day/well Discharged at mudline prior to BOP and riser

installation

Discharged at mudline prior to BOP and riser

installation

Will humans be there? If yes, expect conventional waste Synthetic-based Drilling Fluids Synthetic based drilling fluid - retained on cuttings 981 bbl/well 36/bbl/day/well Discharged thru shunt pipe to 25' below water's

surface

Cuttings wetted with synthetic-based fluid Cuttings coated with synthetic based drilling fluid 4,196 bbl/well 155 bbl/day/well Treated using solids control equipment and discharged thru shunt pipe 25' below water's

surface.

Is there a deck? If yes, there will be Deck Drainage Deck Drainage Platform washings and 105 bbl/well 0.1 bbl/hr/well Oily water is treated in Oily Water Separator Domestic waste Gray water (laundry, galley, lavatory) 4,930 bbl/well 5 bbl/hr/well Discharged overboard. Any associated food waste will be processed using an approved grinder

Sanitary waste Treated human body waste

from toilets 4,930 bbl/well 5 bbl/hr/well USCG approved MSD

333 bbl/well/day Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region
6 GOM GMG 290000 regulations. Well completion fluids Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2 2000/well 333 bbl/well/day Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region
6 GOM GMG 290000 regulations. Will you conduct well treatment, completion or workover? If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity

Well treatment fluids Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2 2000/well 333 bbl/well/day Overboard upon samples passing the Static Sheen Test per Region
6 GOM GMG 290000 regulations.

Workover fluids Brines, NaCl, KCl, CaBr2, CaCl2 2000/well

Excess cement at seafloor Cement slurry 900 bbl/well 19 bbl/hr Discharged at the mudline during cementing conductor casing Ballast water Uncontaminated seawater used to maintain proper draft 21,000 bbl/well 9 bbl/hr Discharged overboard

Bilge Water Bilge water 99/bbl/well 0.1 bbl/hr Discharged overboard

Cooling water Seawater with no addition of

chemicals 165,000 bbl/well 1,667 bbl/hr Discharged overboard Firewater Seawater with no addition of

chemicals N/A N/A Discharged overboard

Will you be covered by an individual or general NPDES permit:

General - NPDES ID GMG290356
NOTE: IF YOU WILL NOT HAVE A TYPE OF WASTE, ENTER “NA” IN THE ROW. Will you produce hydrocarbons? If yes, fill in for produced water

Produced water N/A N/A N/A N/A Blowout prevent fluid Stackmagic 200/0/5% glycol

based on 2% mixture with potable water 180 bbl/well 12/bbl/ per week

with funtion test Discharged from BOP near mudline Miscellaneous discharges? If yes, only fill in those associated with your activity

Desalinization unit discharge Rejected water from water

maker unit 123,390 bbl/well 57 bbl/hr Cuttings chuteDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 7

– Pg. 10 of 27 Supplemental EP November , 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## 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

Included as Attachment 7

- A are Air Emission Worksheets which show the emissions calculations for the Plan Emissions and if different, a set of worksheets showing the emissions calculations for the Complex Total emissions.

This information was calculated by: Kelley Pisciola (281) 578

- 3388 kelley.pisciola@jccteam.com

Air Emissions were calculated using Ensco 8500 Series Specific Horsepower and fuel consumption. **DGE III will use a Rig equal to or similar to an Ensco 8500 Series Rig.**EXPLORATION PLAN (EP)AIR QUALITY SCREENING CHECKLISTOMB Control No. 1010-0049OMB Approval Expires: August 31, 2006COMPANYDeep Gulf Energy III, LLCAREAMississippi CanyonBLOCK563LEASEOCS-G 21176PLATFORMWELLLocations A and BCOMPANY CONTACTKelley PisciolaTELEPHONE NO.281.698.8519REMARKSDrill and Complete with a DP Semi (AQR for DP Semi calculated usingEnsco 8500 Series Specific Horsepower.)Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 1 of 8EMISSIONS FACTORSFuel Usage Conversion FactorsNatural Gas Turbines Natural Gas Engines Diesel Recip. Engine REF. DATESCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483AP42 3.2-1 4/76 & 8/84Equipment/Emission Factorsunits PM SOx NOx VOC CO REF. DATENG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83AP42 3.2-1& 3.1-1 10/96NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5AP42 3.2-1 10/96NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6AP42 3.2-1 10/96NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6AP42 3.2-1 10/96Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03AP42 3.3-1 10/96Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4AP42 3.4-1 10/96Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21AP42 1.3-12,14 9/98NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84P42 1.4-1, 14-2, & 147/98NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5AP42 11.5-1 9/91Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21AP42 1.3-1 & 1.3-3 9/98Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03E&P Forum 1/93Fugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005API Study 12/93Glycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6La. DEQ 1991Gas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034Sulfur Content Source Value UnitsFuel Gas 3.33 ppmDiesel Fuel 0.4 % weightProduced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppmProduced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weightForm MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 2 of 8EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEARCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKSDeep Gulf Energy III, LLCMississippi Canyon 563 OCS-G 21176 0 Locations A and B Kelley Pisciola 281.698.8519OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR ESTIMATED TONSDiesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/DNat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/DBurners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM SOx NOx VOC CODRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 21739 1049.9937 25199.85 24 162 15.32 70.29 526.72 15.80 114.92 29.79 136.65 1023.94 30.72 223.40PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00PRIME 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 0.00BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00AUXILIARY 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 0.00VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 8 46 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.27 1.23 9.21 0.28 2.01VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 46 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.71 3.27 24.52 0.74 5.35VESSELS>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 0.00FACILITY 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 0.00INSTALLATION 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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00VESSELS>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 0.00MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 0.00DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002015 YEAR TOTAL19.88 91.20 683.36 20.50 149.10 30.77 141.15 1057.66 31.73 230.76EXEMPTIONCALCULATIONDISTANCE FROM LAND INMILES2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 54965.2065.0Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 3 of 8SUMMARYCOMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLDeep Gulf EnergMississippi Canyon 563 OCS-G 21176 0 Locations A and BEmitted SubstanceYearPM SOx NOx VOC CO2015 30.77 141.15 1057.66 31.73 230.76Allowable2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 54965.20Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 8 of 8Rig 1/1/2013
Fuel On Board, Bbl 7/1/2013
Fuel On Board, Bbl Fuel Taken On, Bbl Total Fuel Used,

Bbl Daily Ave. Fuel,

Bbl

8500 6580.0 10836.0 50858.0 46602.0 257.47

8501 6870.0 9284.0 48936.0 46522.0 257.03

8503 11812.0 9295.0 39202.0 41719.0 230.49

8505 10618.0 10205.0 43477.0 43890.0 242.49

246.87 bbl/da y

12.95 1 Std. deviation 8500, 8501, 8503, 8505 reported fuel-on-board at beginning (01 Jan. 2013) and ending (01 July 2013) dates, also all fuel taken onbaord that period

8502.0 36582.0 202.11

8506.0 40791.0 225.36

213.74 (bbl/day)

16.44 1 Std. deviation 8502 and 8506 reported total fuel consumption for the period 01 Jan. - 01 July 2013

Rig Total Fuel Used, Bbl Daily Ave. Fuel, Bbl

6 x 8500 Series Rigs 256106.0 235.83 bbl/day

21.15 1 Std. Deviation

63.5 3 std. deviation

299.28 bbls/day, Mean + 3 std. deviations (99.73%)

0.0483 gal/hp-hr (diesel recip. Factor, AQE)

10843.47 HP

21686.94 HP x 2

21739.00 HP used in AQE reporting

600.00 bbl/day used in AQE reporting

257.47

257.03

230.49

242.49

202.11

225.36 Daily Fuel Consumption 8500 series January 1, 2013 to July 1, 2013 (181 days)Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 8

– Pg. 11 of 27 Supplemental EP Novemb er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 8
OIL SPILL INFORMATION

8.1 OIL SPILL RESPONSE PLANNING All the proposed activities and facilities in this EP will be covered by the Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP) filed by Deep Gulf Energy LP (BOEM Operator Number 02815) which includes Deep Gulf Energy II, LLC (BOEM Operator Number 02985) and Deep Gulf Energy III,
LLC (BOEM Operator Number 03362), dated May 2013, last approved October 10, 2014 (OSRP Control Number O

- 978).

8.2 SPILL RESPONSE SITES Primary Response Equipment Location Preplanned Staging Location
Houma, LA Houma, LA Harvey, LA Harvey, LA Venice, LA Venice, LA

8.3 OSRO INFORMATION
DGE III’s primary equipment provider is Clean Gulf Associates (“CGA”). Clean Gulf Associates Services, LLC (“CGAS”) will provide closest available personnel, as well as a CGAS supervisor to operate the equipment.

8.4 W ORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION

Category Regional OSRP
WCD

- Drilling EP
WCD

- Drilling

Type of Activity > 10 Mile s Drilling > 10 Mile s Drilling

Facility Location (Area/Block) MC 521 MC 563

Facility Designation Well Location A Well Location A

Distance to Nearest Shoreline (miles) 65 65

Volume Storage Tanks (Total)

Uncontrolled blowout

Total Volume 155,762 62,573 Type of Oil(s) (crude, condensate, diesel) Oil Oil

API Gravity 29 ° 23.2 °

DGE III has determined that the worst

- case scenario from the activities proposed in this EP

do es not supersede the worst

- case scenario from our approved Regional OSRP.

Since DGE III has the capability to respond to the worst

- case spill scenario included in our

R egional OSRP approved on October 10, 2014 , and since the worst

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

- case scenario in our Regional OSRP, DGE III hereby
certifies that DGE III has the capability to respond, to the maximum extent pra cticable, to aDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 8

– Pg. 12 of 27 Supplemental EP Novemb er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) worst

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

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION The Oil Spill Response Discussion is included as Attachment 8

- A.

### SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION

For the purpose of NEPA and Coastal Zone Mana gement Act analysis, the largest spill volume originating from the proposed activity would be a well bl owout during drilling operations, estimated to be 62,573 barrels of crud e oil with an API gravity of 23.2°.

Land Segment and Resource Identification

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

Western Gulf of Mexico available on the BO EM website. The results are shown in Figure 1. The BOEM OSRAM identifies an 11% probability of impact to the shorelines of Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana within 30 days. Plaquemines Parish includes Barataria Bay, the Mississippi River Delta, Breton Sound and th e affiliated islands and bays. This region is an extremely sensitive habitat and serves as a migratory, breeding, feeding and nursery habitat for numerous species of wildlife. Beaches in th is area vary in grain particle size and can be classified as fine sand, shell or perched shell beaches. Sa ndy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant.

Response

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as effectively as practicable. A de scription of the response equipmen t under contract to contain and

recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical charact eristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil database. The results indicate 9% or approximately 5,632 barrels of crude oil would be evaporated/dispersed within 24 hours, with approximately 56,941 barrels remaining.

Spill Response MC 563, Well Location A Barrels of Oil

WCD Volume 62,573

Less 9% natural evaporation/dispersion 5,632

Remaining volume 56,941



### Figure 2 outlines equipment, personnel, materials and support vessels as well as temporary storage equipment available to respond 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, tr avel time to the site and deployment. Figure 2 also indicates how operations will be supported.

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s O il Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies such as dispersants and in-situ burn. Strategi es will be decided by Unified Command based on an operations safety analysis, the size of the spill, weather and potential impacts. If aerial dispersants are utilized, 8 sort ies (9,600 gallons) from two of th e DC-3 aircrafts and 4 sorties

### (8,000 gallons) from the Basler aircraft would provide a daily dispersant capability of 7,540 barrels. If the conditions are favorable for in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been obtained and the proper planning is in place, in -situ burning of oil may be attempted. Slick containment boom would be immediately called out and on-scene as soon as possible. Offshore response strategies may include attempting to sk im utilizing CGA spill response equipment, with a total derated skimming capac ity of 105,943 barrels. Temporar y storage associated with skimming equipment equals 6,198 barrels. If add itional storage is needed, a 47,000 barrel storage barge, a 25,000 barrel storage barge, and three 23,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporar y storage and minimize off-loading time. Safety is first priority. Air monitoring will be accomplish ed and operations deemed safe prior to any containment/skimming attempts.

If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana would depend upon existing environmental conditions. Shorelin e protection would include the use of CGA’s

near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated sk imming capacity of 45,264 barrels. Temporary storage associated with skim ming equipment equals 567 barrels. If additional storage is needed, three 20,000 barrel storage barges may be mobilized and centrally located to provide temporary storage and minimize off-lo ading 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 imp act given actual sea and

weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Re sponse 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 co rrectly identified and prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shorel ine protection strategies depict the protection response modes applicable for o il spill clean-up operati ons. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it describes necessary action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, based on the assumption that removal of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to fragile coastal ecosystems if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervisory personnel have the option to modify the deploym ent and operation of equipment allowing a more effective response to site-specific circumstances . Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s contract Spill Management Team holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial O il Spill Response Plan.

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scen ario, Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC can be onsite with contracted oil spill recove ry equipment with adequate re sponse capacity to contain and recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, within an estimated 48 hours (based on the equi pment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity (EDRC)).

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

be limited to:

 Weather

 Equipment and materials availability

 Ocean currents and tides

 Location of the spill

 Product spilled

 Amount spilled

 Environmental risk assessments

 Trajectory and product analysis

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

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

Coordination of response assets will normally be supervised by the Operations Section as necessary for close quarter vesse l response activities. A Simu ltaneous Operations (SIMOPS) unit may be established in the Source Control Sec tion to control operations if events require a significant number of large vessels to operate in dependently, but in coordination with each other. This unit would normally monitor the subsurfa ce activities of each vessel (ROV, dispersant application, well control s upport, etc.), as well.

In addition, these activities will be monitored by the spill mana gement team (SMT) and Unified

Command via a structured Common Operating Picture (COP) established to track resource and

slick movement in real time.

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

 Information will be confirmed

 An assessment will be made and initial objectives set

 OSROs and appropriate agen cies will be notified

 ICS 201, Initial Report Form completed

 Initial Safety plan will be written and published

 Unified Command will be established

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

o Areas of responsibility established for S ource Control and each surface operational

site

o On-site command and control established

### Offshore Response Actions

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance

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

 Provide trained observer to pr ovide on site status reports

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

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

and visual confirmation

 Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems

Dispersant application assets

 Put ASI on standby

 With the FOSC, conduct analysis to determin e appropriateness of di spersant 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 situation

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

 Confirm dispersant availability fo r current and long range operations

 Start ordering dispersa nt stocks required for expected operations

Containment boom

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

 Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom

 Provide continuing situational st atus reports to vessels to e xpedite their arrival at sites that will provide for their mo st effective containment

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

Oceangoing Boom Barge

 Containment at the source

 Increased/enhanced skimmer encounter rate

 Protection booming

In-situ Burn assets

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

affected SOSC

 Determine availability of fire boom and selected ignition systems

 Start ordering fire boom stocks required for expected operations

 Contact boom manufacturer to provide training if required

 Determine assets to perform on water operation

 Build operations into safety plan

 Conduct operations in accordance with an approved plan

### Dedicated off-shore skimming systems

General

 Deployed to the highest concentration of oil

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

CGA HOSS Barge

 Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations

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

CGA 95’ Fast Response Vessels (FRVs)

 Designed to be a first vessel on scene

 Capable of maintaining the initial Command and Control function for on water 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

 VOOs 100’ minimum in length

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

 VOOs in shallow water should have a dr aft of <10 feet when fully loaded

T&T Koseq Skimming Systems

 To the area of the thickest oil

 Use as far off-shore as allowed

 VOOs with a minimum of 2,000 bbls storage capacity

 VOOs at least 200’ in length

 VOOs with deck space of 100’ x 40’ to provide space for arms, tanks, and crane

 VOOs for shallow water should be deck barges wi th a draft of <10 feet when fully loaded

Storage Vessels

 Establish availability of CGA c ontracted assets (See Appendix E)

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

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

systems

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

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO)

 Use Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s co ntracted 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 pleasure cr aft for ISB operations or boom tending

 Expect mission specific and sa fety training to be required

 Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

 

### Place VOOs in Division or Groups as needed

 

### Use organic on-board st orage if appropriate

 

### Maximize non-organic storage approp riate 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 a nd shuttle to skimming units to minimize offloading time

 

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

Adverse Weather Operations:

In adverse weather, when seas are > 3 feet, th e use of larger recovery and storage vessels, oleophilic skimmers, and large offshore boom will be maximized. KOSEQ Arm systems are built for rough conditions, and they should be used until their operational limit (9.8’ seas) is met. Safety will be the overriding factor in all operati ons 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 immediate 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 tra iling skimming unit’s organic, V-shaped boom and skimmer (see page 7, CGA Equipment Guide Book 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, fi rst considering safety issues

###  Utilize all available advanced technology syst ems ( 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 ar eas of calm seas and thick oil

 Maximize the use of oleophilic sk imming 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 oi l 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 in crease 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 Systems if o nboard storage is not available

 Maximize use of the organic recovered o il storage capacity of the skimming vessel

Command, Control, and Communications (C 3 

### )

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

 Design an operational scheme, maintain ing 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 Res ponse Teams (RAT) to c onfirm the presence

of recoverable oil

### On Water Recovery Group When the first skimming vessel arrives on scene, a complete si te assessment will be conducted before recovery operations begin. Once it is co nfirmed that the air mon itoring readings for O2, LEL, H2S, CO, VOC, 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 o il. Vessel groups will vary in structure as determined by the Operat ions 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 storage)

 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 de pendent on several factors including, asset availability, weather, spilled o il migration, currents, etc.)

The 95’ FRV Breton Island out of Venice arri ves on scene and conducts an initial site assessment. Air monitoring levels are acceptable a nd no other visual threats have been observed. The area is cleared for safe skimming operati ons. The Breton Island assumes command and control (CoC) of on-water rec overy operations until a dedicate d non-skimming vessel arrives to

relieve it of those duties.

A second 95’ FRV arrives and begins recovery operations alongside the Breton Island. Several more vessels begin to arrive, including a thir d 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 Resp onse Units (FRUs) from the load-out location at

C-Port in Port Fourchon.

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

Initial set-up a nd potential actions:

 A 1,000 meter safety zone has been establis hed 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 freshe st 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 Se ntry boom on each side, creating a swath

width of 800’

 The Breton Island and H.I. Rich skim near by, 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 a nd 3 vessel task force numbered 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 po sition 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 forces (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-towing 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 vessels (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)

### Offshore skimming equipment continues to arrive in accordance with the ETA data listed in figure H.3a; this equipment includes 2 AquaGu ard skimmers and 11 sets of Koseq Rigid Skimming Arms. These high volume heavy weat her capable systems will be divided into functional groups and assigned to specific areas by the Operati ons 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 au to 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 au to 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 au to 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

### Near Shore Response Actions

Timing

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

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

 Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions

 Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil

Considerations

 Water depth, vessel draft

 Shoreline gradient

 State of the oil

 Use of VOOs

 Distance of surf zone from shoreline

 Sea state

 Tides

 Currents

Surveillance

 Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations

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

and visual confirmation

 Continual monitoring of vessel assets

Dispersant Use

 Dispersants are pre-approved with FOSC a pproval outside of 3 miles and the 10 meter depth curve and requires RRT VI approval inside 3 mile and/or 10 meter curve

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

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

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems

 FRVs

 56’ shallow water skimmers

 Egmopol and Marco SWS (protected waters)

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

VOO

 Use Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s co ntracted resources as applicable

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

 Acquire additional resources as needed

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

 Expect mission specific and sa fety training to be required

 Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections

 Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches

### Shoreline Protection Operations

Response Planning Considerations

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

 Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Team (SCAT) assessments

 Time to acquire personnel and eq uipment and their availability

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

Actions

Placement of boom

 Position boom in accordance with the ERA based on the actual situation or the appropriate ACP or GRP.

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

o Trajectories

o Weather forecast

o Oil Impact forecast

o Verified spill movement

o Boom, manpower and vessel (shallow draft) availability

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

Beach Preparation

Considerations and Actions

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

 Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team Reports and recommendations

 Determination of Archeological site s and gaining authority to enter

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

recovery.

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

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

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

OSRV 4 foot seas

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

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

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

month.

### FIGURE 1

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected utilizing Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s WCD a nd information in the BOEM Oil Spill Risk Analysis Model (OSRAM) for the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico available 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 and Complete

Well Locations A and

B

MC 563,

Well Location A

65 miles from shore G21176 C59 Cameron, LA Vermilion, LA Terrebonne, LA Lafourche, LA Jefferson, LA Plaquemines, LA

St. Bernard, LA Walton, FL

Bay, FL 1

1

2

2

1

11

2

1

1WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELLBLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (65 miles from shore)56,941 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering)API Gravity 23.2°FIGURE 2 – Equipment ResponseTime to MC 563, Well Location ADispersants/SurveillanceDispersant/SurveillanceDispersantCapacity (gal)StorageCapacityPersons Req.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel tositeTotal HrsASIBasler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 2 2 0.9 4.9DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 2 2 1.1 5.1DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 2 2 1.1 5.1Aero Commander NA NA2 Houma 2 2 0.9 4.9Offshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAHOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 5 Harvey 7 0 5 10 1 2395’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Leeville 2 0 2 5.2 0 9.295’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Venice 2 0 1 3.2 0 6.2Boom Barge (CGA-300)42” Auto Boom (25000’)NA NA1 Tug50 Crew4 (Barge)2 (Per Crew)Leeville 4 0 6 18.6 1.5 30.1Recovered Oil Storage NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsEnterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 26.25 1 47.25CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 26.25 1 47.25CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 26.25 1 47.25CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 26.25 1 47.25CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 26.25 1 47.25Staging Area: VeniceOffshore Equipment WithStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toSiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGAFRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Galveston 2 2 12.7 6.7 1 24.4FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Harvey 2 2 2.1 6.7 1 13.8FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Aransas Pass 2 2 17.7 6.7 1 29.4FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 2 2 8 6.7 1 19.7FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 2 2 4.4 6.7 1 16.1FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 2 2 4.9 6.7 1 16.6FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 2 2 0 6.7 1 11.7Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey 2 4 2.1 6.7 6 20.8Nearshore ResponseNearshore Equipment NoStagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsRequiredFromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutHrs toGOMTravel toSpill SiteHrs toDeployTotalHrsCGA46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Morgan City 2 0 2 4.8 0 8.846’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 2 0 1 2.0 0 5Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 2 2 2 2.0 0 8Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA)CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 15 1 36Staging Area: VeniceNearshore and InlandSkimmers With StagingEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsCGASWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 2 2 4.9 2 0 10.9SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 2 0 14SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 2 2 4.4 2 0 10.4SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 2 2 0 2 0 6Shoreline ProtectionStaging Area: VeniceShoreline ProtectionBoomVOOPersonsReq.Storage/WarehouseLocationHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeployment SiteHrs toDeployTotal HrsAMPOL (available through MSA)42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 6 2 12 2420,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2.2 2 6 14.2OMI Environmental (available through MSA)10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 6 2 3 1310,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 12.1 2 3 19.110,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 9.7 2 3 16.720,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 1.9 2 6 11.910,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 4.5 2 3 11.510,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 3.8 2 3 10.815,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 2.1 2 4 12.1Wildlife ResponseEDRCStorageCapacityVOOPersonsReq.FromHrs toProcureHrs toLoadoutTravel toStagingTravel toDeploymentHrs toDeployTotal HrsCGAWildlife Support Trailer NA NANA 2 Harvey 2 2 2.1 1 2 9.1Bird Scare Guns (48) NA NANA 2 Harvey 2 2 2.1 1 2 9.1Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NANA 2 Galveston 2 2 12.7 1 2 19.7Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA2 Aransas Pass 2 2 17.7 1 2 24.7Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 2 2 8 1 2 15Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Leeville 2 2 4.4 1 2 11.4Response AssetTotalOffshore EDRC 105,943Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 147,198Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 45,264Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 60,567Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 9

– Pg. 13 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem b er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 9

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS
DGE I I I subscribes to Wilkens Weather Service which provides access to real time weather
conditions and provides periodic updates on impending weather conditions such as tropical depressions, storms, and/or hurricanes entering the Gulf of Mexico.

DGE I II also relies on the National Weather Service to support the aforementioned subscribed service. During impending inclement weather conditions, DGE II closely coordinates the activity with our contractors and field personnel to ensure the safety of people for evacuation to ens ure protection of the environment and the facility/equipment.

DGE I I I will monitor loop currents per the requirements as set forth in NTL 2009

- G02, “Ocean Current Monitoring.”

9.2 INCID ENTAL TAKES There is no reason to believe that any of the endangered s pecies or marine mammals as listed
in the ESA will be “taken ” as a result of the operations proposed under this plan.

It has been documented that the use of explosives and or seismic devices can affect marine life. Operations proposed in this plan will n ot be utilizing either of these devices.
DGE III 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 opera tions 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 Miti gation Measures and Protected Species Observer Program”

9.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary; therefore, relevant information is not required in this EP.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 10

– Pg. 14 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem b er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 10
LEASE STIPULATIONS INFORMATION

Exploration activities are subject to the following stipulations attached to Lease OCS

- G 21176

, Mississippi Canyon Block 563

.

10. 1 MILITARY WARNING AREA (MWA) A Military Warning Area stipulation was attached to Lease OCS

- G 21176, Mississippi Canyon Block 563 when the lease was issued on May 18, 1999; however, per NTL No. 2014

- G04, “Military Warning and Water Test Area”, effective June 1, 2014, the lease block is not located within a designated military warning or water test area. If required, the Eglin Air Force Base in Eglin

, Florida

, will be contacted in order to coordinate and control the electromagnetic emissions
use of vessels and aircraft during the propos ed operations.

10. 2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

In accordance with t he Federal Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection

Act

, DGE III will:

(a) collect and remove flotsam resulting from activities related to exploration, development, and
production of this lease;

(b) post 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 debris must be eliminated;

(c) observe for marine mammals and sea turtles while on vessels, reduce vessel speed to 10 knots or less when assemblages of cetaceans a re 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) employ 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 water depth, ramp

- up and shutdown procedures, visual monitoring, and reporting;

(e) identify important habitats, including designated critical habitat, used by l isted species (e.g., sea turtle nesting beaches, piping plover critical habitat), in oil spill contingency 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) immediately 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 injur ed 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.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 10

– Pg. 15 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem b er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) BOEM and BSEE issue Notices 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 NM FS arising from, among others, conservation 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 measures

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 ac tivity is undertaken under this lease, 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, ident ified in the above referenced NTLs, and additional measures in the conditions of approvals for their plans or permits.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 11

– Pg. 16 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem ber, 2014

Mississi ppi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 11
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES INFORMATION

11.1 MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located within Florida; therefore, mitigation information is not required for the activities proposed in this plan

.

11.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES
DGE III 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, “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”Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 12

– Pg. 17 of 27 Supplemental EP Novemb er, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 12
SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

12.1 GENERAL The most practical, direct route from the shore base as permitted by weather and traffic

conditions will be utilized.

Type Maximum Fuel

Tank Capacit y Maximum Number in Area at Any Time Trip Frequency or

Duration

Crew Boat 1500 bbls 2 2 per week

Supply Boat 1 500 bbls 2 2 per week

Helicopter 600 gals 1 6 per week

12.2 DIESEL OIL SUPPLY VESSELS Size of Fuel Supply

Vessel Capacity of Fuel Supply Vessel Frequency of Fuel
Transfers Route Fuel Supply

Vessel Will Take

240 ’ 2500 bbls 1 per week Direct to Fourchon

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 from the shoreline and the primary route (s) of the support vessels and aircraft that will be used when traveling bet ween the onshore support facilities and the drilling unit is included as Attachment 12

- B.1000 lbs / well Disposed OnshoreCaCI2 / CaBr2 / KCI / NaCIBelow deck storage tanks on offshore supportvesselsNewportEnvironmentalServices, Inc.,Ingleside Texas1000 lbs / well Disposed OnshoreWell Completion FluidsWell Treatment FluidsCaCI2 / CaBr2 / KCI / NaCIBelow deck storage tanks on offshore supportvesselsNewportEnvironmentalServices, Inc.,Ingleside TexasRecycledSynthetic Based CuttingsInternal OlefinBelow deck storage tanks on offshore supportvesselsNewportEnvironmentalServices Inc.,Ingleside, TX1000 bbls/wellWill drilling occur? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings.Disposal MethodSUPPORTVESSELSANDAIRCRAFTINFORMATION(30CFR250.224&257)‐Drilling(c) Wastes you will transport and/or dispose of onshore.Please specify if the amount reported is a total or per well amount.Projected Generated Waste Solid and Liquid Wastes Transportation Waste DisposalType of Waste Composition Transport MethodName/Location ofFacilityAmountNOTE: IF YOU WILL NOT HAVE A TYPE OF WASTE, ENTER“NA”IN THE ROW.Synthetic Base Mud Internal OlefinBelow deck storage tanks on offshore supportvesselsM-I SwacoPort Fourchon, La.13500 bbls/well RecycledWill you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge?Trash and debrisUsed oilChemical product wastesWash waterNon-hazardous trash & debris(non-recyclables)Transport in DOT containers on supply vessels toshorebaseProgressive WasteSolutions of LA,Houma, LA700 lbs / wellDisposed inLandfillRecycledN/ARecylced420 gal / well(10 bbls well)N/A130 lbs / wellUsed oil and glycolN/APaints, solvents, unusedchemicals, etc.Safety KleenSystem, BatonRouge, LAN/ASafety KleenSystem, BatonRouge, LATransport in DOT containers on supply vessels toshorebaseN/ATransport in DOT containers on supply vessels toshorebase!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!South Marsh IslandNorthLundAtwater ValleyGreen CanyonGarden BanksEast BreaksMississippi CanyonWalker RidgeGalvestonHigh IslandKeathley CanyonLloyd RidgeVermilionAlaminos CanyonShip ShoalMobileWest CameronHendersonMain PassViosca KnollGalveston SouthEwing BankPensacolaHouston Metro AreaMobileBaton RougeLafayetteBeaumontLake CharlesPascagoulaGulfportTexas CityPort ArthurGalveston4955596545110Big Thicket NPRESDeep Gulf Energy III, LLCVicinity MapMississippi Canyon 563MC563

~ 65 M i l e s t o L A S h o r e

~ 3 5 1 . 6 M i l e s t o T X S h o r e ~ 1 2 4

. 8 M i l e s t o A L S h o r eDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 13

– Pg. 18 of 27 Supplemental EP Novembe r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 13
ONSHORE SUPPORT FACILITIES INFORMATION

13.1 GENERAL

A listing of the onshore facilities that will be used to provide supply and service supp ort for the

p roposed activities is provided in the table below.

Name Location Existing/New/Modified

Fourchon C

- Port Port Fourchon, Louisiana Existing

13.2 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION There will be no new construction of an onshore support base, nor will we expand the existing

shore base as a result of the operations 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

.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 19 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 14 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) INFORMATION

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for Louisiana

. A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Louisiana is

included as Attachment 14

- A.

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for Alabama . A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Alabama is

included as Attachment 14

- B.

Relevant enforceable policies were considered in certifying consistency for Texas . A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Texas is included

as Attachment 14

- C.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 20 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) The OCS related oil and gas development activities having pote ntial impact on the Alabama Coastal Zone are based on the location of the proposed facilities, access to those sites, best practical technique for operations and production equipment, guidelines for the prevention of adverse environmental effects, effectiv e environmental protection, emergency plans and contingency plans. Alabama policies have been addressed below or are cross referenced to the

ap propriate sections of the plan:



### Topic Cross

Reference Comments

**Coastal**

**Resource Use**
**Policies**

Coastal Development Dock and port facilities in Louisiana will be used. There will be no new construction, dredging, or filling in Alabama state waters. There will be no new commercial development or capital improvements in Alabama’s coastal zone, nor will

there be any employment effects.

Mineral

Resource Exploration and

Extraction Proposed exploration operations will take place 125 miles
from Alabama’s coastline.

Commercial Fishing Section 8

Hazard Management Section 3 A Shallow Hazards Report was previously submitted to BOEM in order to identify and assess the seafloor and shallow geologic conditions in this block.

Shoreline

Erosion Section 8 Proposed exploration operations will take place 125 miles
from Alabama’s coastline.

Recreation Section 8 Transpor tation Section 12

**Natural**

**Resource**
**Protection**

**Policies** Biological Productivity Section 8

Water Quality Section 8

Water

Resources Section 8

Air Quality Section 7

Wetlands and Submerged
Grassbeds Section 8

Beach and

Dune Protection Section 8

Wildlife Habitat

Protection Section 8

Endangered Species Section 8Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 21 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

### Topic Cross

Reference Comments

Cultural

Resources

Protection Section 5 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is located in an area where historic shipwrecks may exist. An archaeological report for Mississippi Canyon Block 563 was previously submitted and approved on February 29, 2008 (Plan Control No. N

- 09122 ).

The proposed activities described in detail in this Plan comply with Alabama’s approved Coastal Zone Management Programs and will be conducted in a manner consist ent with such Programs.

A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Alabama is included as

Attachment 14

- B

.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 22 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) As authorized by the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), the State of Texas developed a Coastal Management Program (CMP) to allow for the review of proposed Federal license and permit activities affecting any coastal use or resource, in or outside of the Texas
Coastal Zone. The OCS related oil and gas exploratory and development activities having potential impa ct on the Texas Coastal Zone are based on the location of the proposed facilities, access to those sites, best practical techniques for drilling locations, drilling equipment guidelines for the prevention of adverse environmental effects, effective enviro nmental protection, emergency plans and contingency plans. Listed below are the policies and corresponding sections within this Exploration Plan identified by the State of Texas CMP as being related to OCS Plans :

Policy of the Texas Coastal Management Plan (TCMP) (Texas Administrative Code, Title 31, Park 16, Chapter 501, Subchapter B)

Policies EP Section Evaluation Category 2: Construction, Operation and
Maintenance of Oil and Gas Exploration and Production

Facilities (501.17) 1 Plan Contents
2 Gener al The proposed activities are

located 352 miles from the nearest Texas coastline, No adverse impacts on Texas submerged lands, critical areas, wetlands, beaches, or
other coastal resources from

routine activities are anticipated. Category 3: Discharges of Wastewater and Disposal of Waste from Oil and Gas Exploration and

Production Activities (501.18) 6 Wastes and Discharges No adverse impacts on the

Texas coastal zone are anticipated. The proposed activities do not involve any discharges to the Texas coastal zone as the project is approximately 352 miles from

the ne arest Texas coastline, All offshore discharges associated with the proposed activities, as summarized in
Section 6 and evaluated in Section 15, will be conducted

in accordance with regulations implemented by
the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the U. S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). All wastes generated during drilling that do not meet discharge regulations will be

prope rly transported to City, State, and disposed of asDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 23 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) Policies EP Section Evaluation

summarized in Section 12. Category 4: Construction and Operation of Solid Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal

Facilities (501.19) 6 Wastes and Discharges 13 Onshore Support Facilities All solid was tes generated by the activities proposed in this plan will be treated, stored, and disposed of in State following applicable rules and regulations as described in
Section 12. Category 5: Prevention, Response, and Remediation of Oil Spills (501.20) 2 General 8 Oil Spill The proposed activities
summarized in Section 8 will comply with all applicable laws and regulations concerning oil spill prevention, response, and remediation. The proposed

activities will be covered

under DGE III’s approved Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (OSRP). The proposed

activities are located approximately 352 miles from

the nearest Texas coastline and no significant impacts on

the Texas coastal zone are expected. Category 6: Discharge of Municipal and

Industrial Waste Water to
Coastal Waters (501.21) 6 Wastes and Discharges No discharges to Texa s coastal waters are proposed (S ection 6) and no adverse impacts are expected . The proposed activities are located approximately 352
miles from the nearest Texas

coastline and will be

conducted in accordance with discharge regulations implemented by the USEPA, the USCD, and BOEM. Category 7:
Non Point Source Pollution (501.22) 6 Wastes and Discharges The proposed activities do not include nonpoint sources of water pollution an d no

adverse impacts are expected. Category 8: Development in Critical Areas (501.23) 5 Biological, Physical and
Socioeconomic 10 Lease Stipulations 11 Environmental Mitigation

Measures 13 Onshore Support Facilities 15 Environmental Impact No activities are proposed in

critical areas and no adverse impacts on critical areas from

routine activities are expected.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 24 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) Policies EP Section Evaluation Analysis Category 9:
Construction of Waterfront
Facilities and Other Structures on Submerge

lands (501.24) 2 General

7 Air Emissions
13 Ons hore Support Facilities 15 Environmental Impact Analysis No construction of waterfront
facilities or other structures on Texas submerged lands is proposed and no adverse impacts from routine activities are expected. Category 10: Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal and

Placement (501.25) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No dredging or dredged material disposal or placement is proposed and no adverse impacts are expected. Category 11:
Construction in the Beach / Dune System (501.26) 13 Onshore Supp ort Facilities No construction in the beach/dune system is proposed and no adverse impacts from routine activities are expected. Category 12: Development in Coastal

Hazard Area (501.27) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No development in coastal

hazard areas is proposed and no adverse impacts are expected. Category 13: Development within Coastal

Barrier Resource (501.28) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No development within the

Texas coastal barrier resource system is proposed

and no adverse impacts from

routine activities are expected. Category 14: Development in State Parks, Wildlife Management Areas

or Preserves (501.29) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No development in Texas state parks, wildlife management areas, or preserves is propo sed and no adverse impacts from routine activities are expected. Category 15:
Alteration of Coastal Historic

Areas (501.30) 5 Biological, Physical, and
Socioeconomic 15 Environmental Impact Analysis The proposed activities do not include any developme nt
that would alter or disturb

coastal historic areas and no adverse impacts from routine activities are expected. Category 16: Transportation Projects (501.31) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No transportation

construction or maintenance projects are prop osed and no adverse impacts are expected. Category 17:

Emission of Air Pollutants (501.32) 7 Air Emissions 15 Environmental Impact Analysis Air emissions associated with project activities are
summarized in Section 7. The proposed activities will be
conducted in conformanceDeep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 4

– Pg. 25 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) Policies EP Section Evaluation with applicable air quality laws, standards, and regulations. No adverse impacts on onshore air quality are expected based on the emission rates, prevailing atmospheric conditions, and
the distance from the nearest

Texas coastline ( 352 miles )
as discussed in Section 15. Category 18: Appropriations
of Water (501.33) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No appropriations, impoundments, or diversions
of water resources are proposed and no adverse impacts are expected. Category 19:

Leve e and Control Projects (501.34) 13 Onshore Support Facilities No levee or flood control projects are proposed and no adverse impacts are expected. Category 20: Marine Fishery Management 15 Environmental Impact Analysis No adverse impacts on

marine fisheries are anticipated. Category 22: Policies for Major Actions (501.15) 15 Environmental Impact Analysis The proposed activities are not a “major action” as defined by 501.15

A certificate of Coastal Zone Management Consistency for the state of Tex as is included as

Attachment 14

- C

.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 1 5

– Pg. 26 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 15
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

The Environmental Impact Analysis is included as Attachment 15

- A.

# Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC (DGE III)

Supplemental Exploration Plan

Mississippi Canyon Block 563

OCS-G 21176

(A) IMPACT PRODUCING FACTORS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Environment

Resources Impact Producing Factors (IPFs) Categories and Examples Refer to recent GOM OCS Lease Sale EIS for a more complete list of IPFs

Emissions (air, noise, light, etc.) Effluents (muds, cutting, other discharges to

the water

column or seafloor) Physical

disturbances to the

seafloor (rig or

anchor emplacements, etc.) Wastes sent

to shore for

treatment or disposal Accidents (e.g., oil spills,

chemical spills, 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 X6)

Coastal wildlife refuges

Wilderness areasFootnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix

1) Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topographic feature. Specifically, if th e well or platform site or any anchors will be on the seafloor within the:

o 4-mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks, or the 3-mile zone of Stetson Bank;

o 1000-m, 1-mile or 3-mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine bank) protected by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease;

o Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) criteria of 500 ft. from any no-activity zone; or

o Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft. buffer zone) w ith relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected by the Topographic Features Stipul ation attached to an OCS lease.

2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS l ease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seaflo or habitats are protected by the Live Bottom (LowRelief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 4) Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being in water depths 300 meters or greater. 5) Exploration or production activities where H2S concentr ations greater than 500 ppm might be encountered. 6) All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydr ocarbons or diesel fuel that you determine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed action is lo cated a sufficient distance from a resource that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 7) All activities that involve seafloor disturbances, including anchor emplacements, in any OCS block designated by the BOEM as having high-probability for the occurrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such blocks that will be affected that are adjacent to the leas e block in which your planned activity will occur. If the proposed activities are located a sufficient distance from a shipwreck or a prehistoric site that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 8) All activities that you determine might have an adverse effect on endangered or threatened marine mammals or

sea turtles or their critical habitats. 9) Production activities that involve trans portation of produced fluids to shor e using shuttle tankers or barges.

## (B) Analysis

Site-Specific at Missis sippi Canyon Block 563

Proposed operations consist of the drilling and completion of Well Locations A & B. The operations will be conducted with a dyna mically-positioned semisubmersible.

1. Designated Topographic Features

Potential IPFs on topographic features include effluents, and accidents.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is 81 miles from the closest designated Topographic Features Stipulation Block (Sackett Bank); ther efore, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to benthic organisms only if the oil contacts the orga nisms. 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 ma gnitude lower than the

amount shown to have an effect on corals. Becau se the crests of topogr aphic features in the Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface sp ill could reach their sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not app licable due to the distance of these blocks from a topographic area. The activities proposed in th is plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed act ivities, which could impact topographic features.

2. Pinnacle Trend Area Live Bottoms

Potential IPFs on pinnacle trend area live bo ttoms include effluent s and accidents.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is 53 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle trend) area; therefore, no adve rse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spill s have the potential to foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal effects on live bottom organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be dr iven 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 a pplicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom

### (pinnacle trend) area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a live bottom (pinnacle trend) area.

3. Eastern Gulf Live Bottoms

Potential IPFs on Eastern Gulf live bottoms include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located in an area characterized by the existence of live bottoms; therefor e, no adverse impacts are expected.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surf ace or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to live bottom organisms only if the oil contacts the organi sms. 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 ma gnitude lower than the

amount shown to have an effect on marine inve rtebrates. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in

Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed ac tivities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live

bottom area.

4. Benthic Communities
There are no IPFs (including emissions, physical di sturbances to the seaf loor, wastes sent to shore for disposal, or a ccidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to benthic

communities.

A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being used for the proposed ac tivities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be di sturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a dynamically-positioned semisubmersible, DGE III’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Bl ock 563 would not cause impacts to benthic

communities.

5. Water Quality

IPFs that could result in water quality degrada tion from the proposed oper ations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include effluents and accidents.

### Effluents: Levels of contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced water discharges, discharge-rate restrictions a nd monitoring and toxicity testin g are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significant bi ological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are not expected to cause si gnificant adverse impacts to water quality.

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter o ffshore water quality; how ever, it is unlikely

that an accidental surface or s ubsurface spill would occur from th e proposed activities. Between 1980 and 2000, OCS operations produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and spilled only 0.001 percent of this oil, or 1 bbl for every 81,000 bbl produced. The spill risk related to a diesel spill from drilling operations is even less. Between 1976 and 1985, (years for which da ta were collected), there were 80 reported diesel spil ls greater than one barrel associ ated with drilling activities. Considering that there were 11,944 wells drille d, this is a 0.7 percen t probability of an occurrence. If a spill were to occur, the water quality of marine waters would be temporarily affected by the dissolved components and small oil droplets. Dispersion by currents and microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column and dilute the constituents to background levels. Historically, changes in offshore water quality from oil spills have only been detected during the life of the spill and up to seve ral months afterwards. Most of the components

of oil are insoluble in water and therefore floa t. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional Oil Spill Respons e Plan (refer to information submitted in

Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng 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 pr oposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include effluents and accidents.

Effluents: Effluents such as drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components and properties which are detrimental to fishery resources. Moderate petroleum and metal

contamination of sediments and the water column can occur out to several hundred meters downcurrent from the discharge point. Offshore discharges are expected to disperse and dilute to very near background levels in the water column or on the seafloor within 3,000 m of the discharge point, and are expected to have negligible effect on fisheries.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potent ial to cause some detrimental effects on fisheries; however, it is unlikely that such an event would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). The effects of oil on mobile adult finfish or shellfish would likely be sublethal and the extent of damage woul d be reduced to the cap acity of adult fish and shellfish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydr ocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and

### parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be cove red by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no IPFs from emissions, physical disturba nces to the seafloor or wastes sent to shore for disposal from the proposed activities which could cause imp acts to fisheries.

7. Marine Mammals

GulfCet II studies revealed that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf-edge were almost exclusively bottlenose dolphin a nd Atlantic spotted dolphin. S quid eaters, including dwarf and pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough-toothed dolphin, a nd Cuvier’s beaked whale, occurred most frequently along the upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones. IPFs that could cause impacts to marine mammals as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include emissions, effluents, discar ded 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 vul nerable to parasites, disease, environmental contaminants, and/or predation (Majors and Myri ck, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence for long-term displacements and population tren ds for marine mammals relative to noise.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cutti ngs discharges contain components which may be detrimental to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from drilling flui ds 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 inge stion of debris have caused the death or serious injury of marine mammals (Laist, 1997; MMC, 1999). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed act ivities is not expected to substantially harm marine mammals. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by

MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Polluti on Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

DGE III will operate in accordance with the regula tions 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 coveri ng outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handlin g and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biode gradable, 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 personne l, including contract ors and other support

### services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commi tment to waste management in accordance

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and cetaceans would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to marine mammals is possible. Contract vessel operators can

avoid marine mammals and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for marine mammals and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to help identify the twenty-eight species of whales and dolphins, and the single species of manatee that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected marine mamma l species immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is cau sed by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824-5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Networ k at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding

network as needed.

Oil spills have the potential to cause sublethal oil-related injuries and spill-related deaths to marine mammals. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic in the area, which could add to changes in cetacean behavior and/or distribution, thereby causing additional stress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chem icals included in DGE III’ s OSRP is considered to be low when compared with the constituents and fractions of crude o ils and diesel products. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s OSRP (refer to information

submitted in accordance with Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical di sturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impact marine mammals.

8. Sea Turtles

IPFs that could cause impacts to sea turtles as a result of the proposed operations include emissions, effluents, discarded tr ash and debris, and accidents. Gu lfCet II studies sighted most loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and le atherback sea turtles over shel f waters. Historically these species have been sighted up to the shelf’s edge. They appear to be more abundant east of the Mississippi River than they are west of the river (Fritts et al., 1983b; Lohoefener et al., 1990). Deep waters may be used by all sp ecies as a transitory habitat.

### Emissions: Noise from drilling activi ties, support vessels, and heli copters may elicit a startle reaction from sea turtles, but th is is a temporary disturbance.

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges are not k nown to be lethal to sea turtles. Most operational discharges are dilu ted 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 inge stion of, debris have caused the death or serious injury of sea tu rtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited am ount of marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activitie s is not expected to substantially harm sea turtles. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging de bris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the

Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Ac t, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USC G) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DGE III 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 outsid e trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commi tment to waste management in accordance

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and s ea turtles would be unusual events, however should one occur, death or injury to sea turtles is possible. Cont ract vessel operators can avoid sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by main taining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighte d. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to help identify the five species of sea turtles that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must report sightings of any inju red or dead protecte d sea turtle species immediately, regardless of whethe r the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 824-5312, or th e Marine Mammal Stranding Ne twork at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must

be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov . If the vessel

### is the responsible party, it is required to rema in available to assist the respective salvage and stranding network as needed.

All sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerab le to the harmful e ffects of oil through direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fa tal, particularly to juveniles and hatchlings. However, it is un likely that an accidental oil sp ill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). Oil sp ill response activities ma y 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 DGE III’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to

information submitted in accordance with Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (including physical di sturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed activities which could impact sea turtles.

9. Air Quality

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is located 92 miles from the Breton Wilderness Area and 65 miles from shore. Applicable emissions data is included in Section 7 of the Plan.

There would be a limited degree of air quality degradation in the immediate vicinity of the proposed activities. Plan Emissions for th e proposed activities do not exceed the annual exemption levels as set forth by BOEM. Acci dents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, th ese releases would not impact onshore air quality because of the prev ailing atmospheric cond itions, emission height, emission rates, and the distance of Mississippi Canyon Block 563 from the coastline. There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seaf loor, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which would impact air quality.

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential)

Potential IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a re sult of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 in clude disturbances to the seafloor.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activ ities; 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 semisubmersible, DGE III ’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 would not cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

Additionally, Missis sippi Canyon Block 563 is not located in or adja cent to an OCS block designated by BOEM as having a hi gh probability for occurrence of shipwrecks, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

### DGE III will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor w ith sector scanning

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine archaeologist and by DGE III to be clear of seafl oor archaeological resources, including historic shipwrecks. Copies of the cert ifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be

submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, DGE III will contact the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource.

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activitie s that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites.

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites
Potential IPFs that could cause impacts to preh istoric archaeological site s as a result of the proposed operations in Mississi ppi Canyon Block 563 include dist urbances to the seafloor.

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activ ities; 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 semisubmersible, DGE III ’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 would not cause impacts to prehistoric archaeo logical sites.

DGE III will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor w ith sector scanning

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine archaeologist and by DGE III to be clear of seafl oor archaeological resour ces. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, DGE III will cont act the BOEM immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve a nd protect that cu ltural resource.

Additionally, Mississipp i Canyon Block 563 is located outside the Archaeologi cal Prehistoric high probability line, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected.

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activitie s which could impact prehistoric archeological

sites.

Vicinity of Offshore Location

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

IPFs that could cause impacts to EFH as a resu lt of the proposed oper ations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include effluents a nd accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and marine waters

and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico.

### Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulati on, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) Stipulation, and the Eastern Gulf Pinnacle Trend Stipulation would prevent most of the potential impacts on live-bottom communities and EFH from operational waste discharges. Levels of contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings a nd produced-water discha rges, discharge-rate restrictions, and monitoring a nd toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, thereby eliminating many significa nt biological or ecol ogical effects. Operat ional discharges are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to EFH.

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on EFH. Oil spills that contact coastal bays and estuaries, as well as OCS waters when pelagic eggs and larvae are present, have the greatest potential to a ffect fisheries. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5 , Water Quality). The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DG E III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information

submitted in Section 8 ).

There are no other IPFs (includi ng emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities whic h could impact essential

fish habitat.

2. Marine and Pelagic Birds

IPFs that could impact marine birds as a result of the proposed activities include air emissions, accidental oil spills, and discarded trash a nd debris from vessel s and the facilities.

Emissions: Emissions of pollutants into the atmo sphere from these activities are far below

concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds.

Accidents: An oil spill woul d cause localized, low-level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill woul d occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5

, Water Quality). Marine and pelagic birds feedi ng at the spill location may experience chronic, nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected th at few, if any, coastal and marine birds would actually be affected to that extent. The activit ies proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris : Marine and pelagic birds could become entangled and snared in discarded trash and debris, or in gest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and death. Operators are prohibited from deliberat ely discharging debris as mandated by MARPOLAnnex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Resear ch and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations and also

avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent

### accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution w ill be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, par ticularly 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 suppor t services-related pers onnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat cr ews) will be indoctrinated on wa ste 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 DGE III management or the designated lease operator ma nagement that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance with NTL No . 2012-G01. Debris, if any, from these proposed

activities will seldom interact with marine and pelagic birds; therefore, the effects will be negligible.

There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the pr oposed activities which could impact marine and pelagic birds.

3. Public Health and Safety Due to Accidents.

There are no IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal or accidents, including an accidental H 2 

### S release) from the proposed activities which could cau se impacts to public health a nd safety. In accordance with NTL No.’s 2008-G04, 2009-G27, and 2009-G31, suffi cient information is included in Section 4 to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H 2 

### S absent.

Coastal and Onshore

1. Beaches

IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to beaches include accidents (oil spills) and discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: Oil spills contacting beaches would have impacts on the use of recreational beaches

and associated resources. Due to the distance fr om shore (65 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 DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in

Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: Trash on the beach is recogni zed 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 activ ities. Operators are prohibite d from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and th e Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by variou s agencies including the United States Coast

### Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protecti on Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoi d accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commi tment to waste management in accordance

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions , effluents, physical disturbances to the seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities which could impact beaches.

2. Wetlands

IPFs from the proposed activities that could ca use impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil spills) and discarded trash and debris.

Accidents: It is unlikely that an oil spill would occu r from the proposed activities (refer to Item

5 , Water Quality). Due to the distance from shor e (65 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’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 activ ities. Operators are prohibite d from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and th e Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by variou s agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protecti on Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoi d accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifes ting trash sent to shore, and using special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent materials such as plastic or glass.

### Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commi tment to waste management in accordance

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions , effluents, physical disturbances to the seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) fr om the proposed activities which could impact

wetlands.

3. Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds

Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore bird s 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 (65 mile s) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts are expected. The activ ities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’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 manda ted by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic

Pollution Research and Control Ac t, and regulations imposed by va rious agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Envi ronmental Protection Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations a nd also avoid accidental loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, mani festing 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 dispos ing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non- biodegradable, environmentally pe rsistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities that could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds.

4. Coastal Wildlife Refuges

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the di stance from shore (65 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no impacts ar e expected. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8 ).

Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from de liberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plas tic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various ag encies including the United St ates Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accide ntal loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and us ing special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packagi ng materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III 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 seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities that could cause impacts to coastal wildlife refuges.

5. Wilderness Areas

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to wilderness areas. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to

Item 5 , Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area (92 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 DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8).

### Discarded trash and debris: Operators are prohibited from de liberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plas tic Pollution Research and Control Act and regulations imposed by various ag encies including the United St ates Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DGE III will operate in accordance with the regulations and also avoid accide ntal loss of solid waste items by maintaining waste management plans, manifesting trash sent to shore, and us ing special precautions such as covering outside trash bins to prevent accidental loss of solid waste. Special caution will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packagi ng materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass.

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore personne l, including contract ors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel capt ains 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 debr is training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commi tment to waste management in accordance

with NTL No. 2012-G01.

There are no other IPFs (emissions , effluents, physical disturbances to the seaflo or, or wastes sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from th e proposed activities that could cause impacts to

wilderness areas.

6. Other Environmental Resources Identified

There are no other environmental resources identified for this impact assessment.

(C) IMPACTS ON PROPOSED ACTIVITIES

The site–specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed activities. No impacts are expected on the propos ed activities from site-specific environmental

conditions.

(D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS
During the hurricane season, June through November , the Gulf of Mexico is impacted by an average of ten tropical storms (39-73 mph winds), of which si x become hurricanes ( > 74 mph winds). Due to its location in the gulf, Mississippi Canyon Bl ock 563 may experience hurricane and tropical storm force winds, and related sea cu rrents. These factors can adversely impact the integrity of the operations covered by this pla n. A significant storm may present physical hazards to operators and vessels, damage exploration or pr oduction equipment, or result in the release of hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Add itionally, the displacement of equipment may disrupt the local benthic habitat a nd pose a threat to local species.

The following preventative measures included in this plan may be implemented to mitigate these impacts:

### 1. Drilling & completion

a. Secure well

b. Secure rig / platform

c. Evacuate personnel

Drilling activities will be conducted in accordance with NTL No.’s 2008-G09, 2009-G10, and

2010-N10.

2. Structure Installation Operator will not conduct structure instal lation operations duri ng Tropical Storm or

Hurricane threat.

(E) ALTERNATIVES

No alternatives to the proposed activities were cons idered to reduce environmental impacts.

(F) MITIGATION MEASURES

No mitigation measures other than those requ ired by regulation will be employed to avoid, diminish, or eliminate potential im pacts on environmental resources.

(G) CONSULTATION

No agencies or persons were consulted regard ing potential impacts associ ated with the proposed activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided.

(H) PREPARER(S)

Evan Connolly J. Connor Consulting, Inc. 16225 Park Ten Place, Suite 700 Houston, TX 77084 (281) 578-3388 Evan.connolly@jccteam.com

(I) REFERENCES

Authors:

American Petroleum Institute (API). 1989. Eff ects of offshore petroleum operations on cold

water marine mammals: a literature revi ew. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute. 385 pp.

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on mari ne turtles: entanglement and ingestion. In: Shomura, R.S. and H.O. Yoshida, eds. Proceedings, Workshop on the Fate and Impact of

### Marine Debris, 26-29 November 1984, Honolu lu, HI. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. Pp 387-429.

Burke, C.J. and J.A. Veil. 1995. Potential benef its from regulatory cons ideration of synthetic drilling muds. Environmental Assessmen t Division, Argonne Na tional Laboratory,

ANL/EAD/TM-43.

Daly, J.M. 1997. Controlling the discharge of synthetic-based drilling fluid contaminated cuttings in waters of the United States. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Work Plan, June 24, 1997.

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sens itivity of seabird populations in Al aska to oil pollution. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Mana gement, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLMYK-ES-81-006-1792.

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: en tanglement of marine life in marine debris including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, J.M. and D.B. Rogers, eds. Marine debris: s ources, 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 tropi cal Pacific purse-sein e fishery–an annotated bibliography. NOAA Admini strative Report LJ-90-06.

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. A nnual report to Congress – 1998.

Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler, M. Ke ndziorek, and D.R. Nysewander. 1990. Immediate impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on marine birds. The Auk. 107 (2): 387-397

Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vauk-Hentzelt. 1989. Losses of seabirds by oil pollution at the German North Sea coast. Topics in Marine Biology. Ros, J.D, ed. Scient. Mar. 53 (2-3): 749-754.

Vermeer, K. and R. Vermeer, 1975 Oil threat to birds on the Canadian west coast. The Canadian

Field-Naturalist. 89:278-298.

Although not cited, the following were utilized in prepar ing 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.Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 16

– Pg. 27 of 27 Supplemental EP Novem be r, 2014 Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS

- G 21176) 

## SECTION 16
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION The proposed bottomhole location s of the planned well s have been 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. Initial Exploration Plan (Control N o. N

- 9 122 ).

2. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control No. S

- 7289).

3. Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Inc. Site Clearance Letter, Proposed Wells ites A

and B , Block 5 63 (OCS

- G 21176 ), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Project No.

0914

- 2457

.