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.com
TOC Pg 1 of 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

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

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

1.4 STORAGE TANKS AND PRODUCTION VESSELS...........................................................2

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

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

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

SECTION 2 GENERAL INFORMATION.....................................................................................3

2.1 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS.........................................................................................3

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

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

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

2.5 OIL SPILL FINANCIAL 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 STRUCTURE 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)...........................................................6
TOC 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 REPORT. ..........................................................................................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 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION................................................................11

8.5 OIL SPILL RESPONSE DISCUSSION .............................................................................12

SECTION 9 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION.............................................13

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS.................................................................................................13

9.2 INCIDENTAL 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

SECTION 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 BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION ..................................................18
TOC 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..............................................................................................................27
Attachments Pg 1 of 1

SECTION ATTACHMENTS

Section 1 Plan Contents

 1-A OCS Plan Information Form

 1-B Well Location Plat

 1-C Bathymetry Map

 1-D Pay.gov Receipt

Section 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 Aircraft Information

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

 12-B Vicinity Map

Section 14 Coastal Zone Management Act Information

 14-A Coastal Zone Consistency Certification - 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 January 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 October 20, 2014 and is 

pending BSEE approval.

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

Well Locations H, I, J and K and proposes to drill and complete two (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 bottomhole locations of the proposed 

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

Attachment 1-B.

A Bathymetry Map depicting the proposed surface 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 wells 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. Appropriate lifesaving 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 

prevention 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 the 
Deep 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 waste 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 PRODUCTION 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 FEE

Documentation of the $7,346.00 cost recovery fee payment is included as Attachment 1-D.
U.S. Department of the Interior ATTACHMENT 1-A

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Proposed Activity Start Date End Date No. of Days 

Drill 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): Ensco 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 previous editions of this form which may not be used.) Page 1 of 4 

General Information 

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

Company Name: 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 Canyon 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: 12/31/14 
OCS PLAN INFORMATION FORM (CONTINUED) 

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

Proposed Well/Structure Location 

Well or Structure Name/Number (If renaming well or 

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

Is this an existing well or 

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

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

WCD Info 

For wells, volume of uncontrolled 

blowout (Bbls/Day): 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): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: N/A TVD (Feet): 

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

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

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

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

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

Proposed Well/Structure Location 

Well or Structure Name/Number (If renaming well or 

structure, reference previous name): 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 floating 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): 

Anchor Radius (if applicable) in feet: N/A TVD (Feet): 

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

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

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

 X: Y: 

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

A

MC 563

DEEP GULF ENERGY III, LLC

MC 563

Well Surface Location Map

0 6000 ft 2000 4000

Scale = 1:24000

3,702’

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’
56

00

00

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 details are below. If you chose the option to receive 

payment reminders in your user profile and this is a deferred 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. 
Deep 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 table 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 provides the types and estimated volumes of the drilling fluids DGE III plans to 

use to drill the proposed wells.

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 unusual 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, furnished 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 SPILL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (OSFR)

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC, Operator No. 03362, will demonstrate oil spill financial responsibility 

for the facilities proposed in this EP according to 30 CFR 553; 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 Blowout Scenario and Worst Case Discharge Assumptions and Calculations are 

included as Attachment 2-A.
ATTACHMENT 2-A

Blowout Scenario

Estimated Maximum Flow Rate

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 Duration of Blowout (Days)

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 maximum time frames for uncontrolled flow in each of the 

different operational outcomes would be as follows:

• Bridging Over in two (2) Days,

• Surface Intervention in fifteen (15) Days

• Relief Well to be drilled in forty-five (45) Days

Maximum Discharge Volumes

The following table is a linear estimate of the maximum discharge volume for each of 

the aforementioned operational activities (assuming no reservoir depletion)

Operational 

Outcome

Maximum 

Discharge 

Rate 

(bbl/day)

Discharge 

Duration 

(days)

Maximum 

Discharge 

Volume 

(bbls)

Bridging Over 62,573 BOPD Two (2) 125,146

Surface 

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

Relief Well 62,573 BOPD Fifty-two (52) 3,253,796

Potential of Wellbore to Bridge Over During a Blowout

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 estimates bottom hole flowing pressures, based upon reservoir 

properties and flow rates. The calculated delta reservoir pressure (initial reservoir 

pressure minus flowing BHP at Day 1 WCD rate) is modeled to be 2,329 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 800 psi – 1,500 psi by reducing 

the rates the wells 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 3,300 psi.

• The blowout 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 Intervention to Stop the Blowout

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 Containment Group (HWCG) containment system to achieve successful 

containment of the well. The system will be employed, while simultaneously initiating 

relief well planning and operations. Specifics will be submitted within 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 Intervention Time Estimate

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 assessment until the capping 

stack has been deployed and the well shut in. 
Duration of Well Capping Operations

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 Well Location and Drilling Strategy

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

hazard conditions, current, wind direction and wellbore access. The relief well surface 

location for the MC 563 Well No. 001 could be drilled from an appropriately cleared-ofhazards surface location 1,500 ft to the north of the Well Site location. 

A relief well for MC 563 Well No. 001 would be designed to intersect the blowout well 

below the 13-5/8” casing point. Once the well is intersected, kill pumping operations 

would be initiated to kill the blowout well.
Relief Well: Drilling Rig Availability

As of the date of this EP submittal, the rigs listed below have Gulf of Mexico area of 

operations, and could be available for relief well operations: 

Rig Name Contractor

Rated 

Water 

Depth

MODU Type Rig Status

Ensco 8501 Ensco 8,500’ 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 

Leader

Transocean 12,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted 

GOM

Discoverer India Transocean 10,000’ DP Drill Ship Contracted 

GOM

Relief Well Package Constraints

The proposed rigs for relief well operations have suitable drilling packages with 

sufficient capabilities to work in the subject water depth and drill 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 Well Rig Contract and Mobilization Timing

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 completed while operations required to suspend the rig’s current 

activity were taking place. The time required to contract, mobilize, drill a relief well and 

kill the blowout well is estimated at fifty two (52) 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 install 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 addition 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 other required BSEE testing 

requirements, 

 Current Well Control Certification for all Drilling and Completion Rig Site 

Supervisors, 

 Taking Slow Pump Rate measurements during all open hole operations and 

critical cased hole operations, 

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

 Maintain a current BOP to RKB spaceout Chart, 

 Monitoring wellbore fill-ups and displacements during trips, by the Well Site 

Supervisor, 

 Maintain the necessary circulating swages, TIW Valves and IBOP on the rig 

floor at all times during operations and function test these valves during each 

tour. 
The utilization of Pre-Job Safety meetings will continue to be implemented prior to each 

operation 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 every 

crew member to question the safety of each operation.

Early Well Control Intervention

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 measures 

have failed or are inaccessible, a ROV will fly into position at the BOP subsea actuation 

panel and actuate the shear ram or pipe 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 

pressure testing and assessment is completed by DGE III and Well Control Specialist, 

well kill operations can be initiated through the existing wellbore. 

Well Control Engineering Services

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 relief well operations.

Additional Prevention & Mitigation Techniques

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 Drilling 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 and 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. When 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 DESCRIPTION

Proprietary Information.

3.2 STRUCTURE CONTOUR MAP

Proprietary Information.

3.3 INTERPRETED SEISMIC LINE(S) 

Proprietary Information.

3.4 GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE CROSS-SECTIONS 

Proprietary 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 locations evaluating seafloor and subsurface geological 

and manmade features and conditions that may adversely affect drilling operations. The 

shallow hazards survey and archaeological assessment is included as Attachment 3-E.

3.7 HIGH-RESOLUTION SEISMIC LINES

Proprietary Information.

3.8 STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

Proprietary Information.

3.9 TIME VERSUS DEPTH TABLES 

Proprietary 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 Geoscience Earth & Marine Services (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 addresses 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 location, 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 Companies 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 drillship. 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 provided 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 Exploration 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 Map 
Proposed 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 available 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 extracted the power spectrum diagram from the 3-D 

seismic data cube provided by Noble at the proposed wellsite (Figure 2). The extraction was generated 

within a 2,000-ft radius of the intersection of the inline and crossline at the 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_rev002 
Proposed 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 the 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 archaeological avoidance and is not expected to impact 

the proposed well. 

Wellsite Conditions

The proposed location is clear of any constraining seafloor 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 approximately -6,548 ft, based on multibeam bathymetry 

(Map MC 563-A-1). The seafloor at the proposed site dips east at approximately 1.0. The proposed 

location occurs in a relatively flat area where the 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 Illustrations 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 hemipelagic clays, silty clays, and muddy turbidites. 

Interbedded within the stratified clays in this unit are 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, turbidites, and mass-transport complexes (Illustration 

MC 953-A-2). The sequence will likely consist predominantly 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 Unit” 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 may 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 the 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-rich, 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 possible (Illustrations MC 563-A-1 and MC 563-A-2). 

The deepest interval from Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation (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 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 within this portion of the Mississippi Canyon Area 

as having experienced shallow water flow (BOEM, 2014b). Most of the documented 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 shallow gas is not likely to be encountered within the 

shallow sediments above Horizon G. Below Horizon 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 gas 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 likely associated to discontinuous sand seams (Illustration MC 563 A-1 

and MC 563 A-2). These amplitudes do not show any clear 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 discontinuous sand seams along channel margins. 

Amplitudes in this interval do not show evidence 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 within the interval show evidence of direct 

hydrocarbon indicators, such as phase reversal (Illustrations MC 563 A-1 and MC 563 A-2). Well design 

allowed for trajectory avoidance of the anomalous amplitudes by approximately 245 ft. The potential for 

encountering shallow gas in the Horizon G to Limit 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 shallow water flow was assigned for this interval. 

The nearby MC 607 #1 well (~2.6 miles southeast of the location) encountered low-severity water flow at 

1,246 ft bml, within the mass-transport deposit and channel complex at the proposed location. The sandprone flow zones correlate to the strata at the base of the interval between Horizon D and Horizon E 

(1,030 ft to 1,593 ft bml) at the proposed location (Illustration 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 turbidite 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 truncated by a clay dominated mass-transport deposit 

and does not extend to the proposed location. The closest point of the feature to the proposed location is 

approximately 1.8 miles away. A low potential for encountering 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). The well design allowed for trajectory avoidance of the 

anomalous amplitudes that likely correlate to discontinuous sand-rich seams by approximately 245 ft. 

Results 

The potential for high-density deepwater benthic communities 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 identified 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 bml to the Limit of Investigation at 4,017 ft bml. 

Engineers should be aware that these areas have an increased 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 will be intersected by the proposed trajectory at 

approximately 3,096 ft bml. Additional buried faults may exist that are beyond the resolution the available 

3-D seismic data. 

Closing

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Deep 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 Director – 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 the 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 performance 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 Flows 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 Water Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM 

Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic-Water-BottomAnomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014. 

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

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and operators 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 Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005-G07. 

Minerals Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline 

right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans 

and development operations coordination documents: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf 

of Mexico, NTL 2008-G04. 

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline 

right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow hazards requirements: U. S. 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G05. 

Minerals Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil and gas leases in the outer continental 

shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communities: 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 Geoscience Earth & Marine Services (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 addresses 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 location, 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-B_rev001 lies in the north-central 

portion of MC 563. Deep Gulf Energy Companies 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 drillship. 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 provided 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 Exploration 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 Map 
Proposed 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 available 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 extracted the power spectrum diagram from the 3-D 

seismic data cube provided by Noble at the proposed wellsite (Figure 2). The extraction was generated 

within a 2,000-ft radius of the intersection of the inline and crossline at the 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_rev001
Proposed 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 through 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. Additionally 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 location. The target measures 2 ft by 12 ft with no 

measurable height. The target does not have an archaeological avoidance and is not expected to impact 

the proposed well. 

Wellsite Conditions

The proposed location is clear of any constraining seafloor 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 approximately -6,534 ft, based on multibeam bathymetry 

(Map MC 563-B-1). The seafloor at the proposed site dips east at approximately 1.0. The proposed 

location occurs in a relatively flat area where the seafloor is relatively smooth and featureless (Maps 

MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-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 Illustrations 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 hemipelagic clays, silty clays, and muddy turbidites. 

Interbedded within the stratified clays in this unit are 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, turbidites, and mass-transport complexes (Illustration 

MC 563-B-2). The sequences will likely consist predominantly 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 Unit” 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 may 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 the 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-rich, 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 possible (Illustrations MC 563-B-1 and MC 563-B-2). 

The deepest interval from Horizon G to the Limit of Investigation (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 dipping 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 within this portion of the Mississippi Canyon Area 

as having experienced shallow water flow (BOEM, 2014b). Most of the documented 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 shallow gas is not likely to be encountered within the 

shallow sediments above Horizon G. Below Horizon 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 gas 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 associated 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 show 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 within the interval show evidence of direct 

hydrocarbon indicators, such as phase reversal (Illustrations MC 563 B-1 and MC 563 B-2). Well design 

allowed for trajectory avoidance of the anomalous amplitudes by greater than 245 ft. The potential for 

encountering shallow gas in the Horizon G to Limit 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 shallow water flow was assigned for this interval. 

The nearby MC 607 #1 well (~2.6 miles southeast of the 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 (Illustration 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 turbidite 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 truncated by a clay dominated mass-transport deposit 

and does not extend to the proposed location. The closest point of the feature to the proposed location is 

approximately 1.8 miles away. A low potential for encountering 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). The well design allowed for trajectory avoidance of the 

anomalous amplitudes that likely correlate to discontinuous sand-rich seams by greater than 245 ft. 

Results 

The potential for high-density deepwater benthic communities 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 identified 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 bml to the Limit of Investigation at 4,037 ft bml. 

Engineers should be aware that these areas have an increased 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 will be intersected by the proposed trajectory at 

approximately 1,966 ft bml. Additional buried faults may exist that are beyond the resolution the available 

3-D seismic data. 

Closing

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Deep 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 Director – 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 the 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 performance 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 Flows 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 Water Bottom Anomalies Map Gallery, published on the BOEM 

Homepage, <http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy-Program/Mapping-and-Data/Map-Gallery/Seismic-Water-BottomAnomalies-Map-Gallery.aspx>, accessed October, 2014. 

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

Minerals Management Service, 2005, Notice to lessees and operators 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 Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2005-G07. 

Minerals Management Service, 2008a, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline 

right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, information requirements for exploration plans 

and development operations coordination documents: U. S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf 

of Mexico, NTL 2008-G04. 

Minerals Management Service, 2008b, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil, gas, and sulphur leases and pipeline 

right-of-way holders in the outer continental shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, shallow hazards requirements: U. S. 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico, NTL 2008-G05. 

Minerals Management Service, 2010, Notice to lessees and operators of federal oil and gas leases in the outer continental 

shelf, Gulf of Mexico OCS region, deepwater benthic communities: 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 H2S 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 H2S 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 

communities by 2,000 feet from each proposed mud and cuttings discharge location and 250 

feet from the location of all other seafloor disturbances. As per NTL 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 “No 

Activity Zone;” therefore, no map is required 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 Topographic 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 BOTTOMS (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 BOTTOMS (LOW RELIEF) 

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located within 30 meters (100 feet) of any live bottom (low 

relief) feature with vertical relief equal to or greater than 8 feet; therefore, live bottom (low relief) 

maps are not required per NTL No. 2009-G39, “Biologically Sensitive Underwater Features and 

Areas.”

5.6 POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL FEATURES MAP

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 VEHICLE (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 drilling 

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 extending 
Deep 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 submitted 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 

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

(T).

Species Scientific Name Status

Potential Presence Critical Habitat 

Designated in 

the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area Coastal

Sea Turtles

Loggerhead Caretta 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 Scientific Name Status

Potential Presence Critical Habitat 

Designated in 

the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area Coastal

Marine Mammals

Sperm Whale Physeter 

macrocephalus E x -- None

West Indian 

Manatee

Trichechus manatus 

latirostris E -- x Florida

Blue Whale Balaenoptera masculus E x -- None

Fin Whale Balaenoptera physalus E x -- None

Humpback 

Whale

Megaptera 

novaeangliae E x -- None
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 5 – Pg. 8 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS-G 21176)

Species Scientific Name Status

Potential Presence Critical Habitat 

Designated in 

the Gulf of 

Mexico

Lease 

Area Coastal

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 Sturgeon

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 containing 

archaeological properties. In accordance with NTL No. 2005-G07 “Archaeological Surveys and 

Reports,” an 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, “Information Requirements 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 Plans and Development Operations Coordination 

Documents” (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 chute
Deep 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 = 3400D2/3 for CO, and CT = 

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

Do your emission calculations include any emission reduction measures or

modified emission factors? X

Are your proposed exploration activities located east of 87.5° W longitude? X

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

per million (ppm)? X

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

hours from any proposed well? X

Do you propose to burn produced hydrocarbon liquids? X

7.2 SUMMARY INFORMATION

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

calculations for the Plan Emissions 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 CHECKLIST

OMB Approv

COMPANY Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC

AREA Mississippi Canyon

BLOCK 563

LEASE OCS-G 21176PLATFORMWELL Locations A and BCOMPANY CONTACT Kelley PisciolaTELEPHONE NO. 281.698.8519

REMARKS Drill and Complete with a DP Semi (AQR for DP Semi calculated using

Ensco 8500 Series Specific Horsepower.)

Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 1 of 8
EMISSIONS FACTORS

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

SCF/hp-hr 9.524 SCF/hp-hr 7.143 GAL/hp-hr 0.0483 AP42 

Equipment/Emission Factors units PM SOx NOx VOC CO RENG Turbines gms/hp-hr 0.00247 1.3 0.01 0.83 AP42 3.2-NG 2-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10.9 0.43 1.5 AP42 NG 4-cycle lean gms/hp-hr 0.00185 11.8 0.72 1.6 AP42 NG 4-cycle rich gms/hp-hr 0.00185 10 0.14 8.6 AP42 Diesel Recip. < 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 1 1.468 14 1.12 3.03 AP42 Diesel Recip. > 600 hp. gms/hp-hr 0.32 1.468 11 0.33 2.4 AP42 Diesel Boiler lbs/bbl 0.084 2.42 0.84 0.008 0.21 AP42 1.3NG Heaters/Boilers/Burners lbs/mmscf 7.6 0.593 100 5.5 84 P42 1.4-1, 1NG Flares lbs/mmscf 0.593 71.4 60.3 388.5 AP42 1Liquid Flaring lbs/bbl 0.42 6.83 2 0.01 0.21 AP42 1.3-Tank Vapors lbs/bbl 0.03 E&P FFugitives lbs/hr/comp. 0.0005 API SGlycol Dehydrator Vent lbs/mmscf 6.6 La. DGas Venting lbs/scf 0.0034

Sulfur Content Source Value Units

Fuel Gas 3.33 ppm

Diesel Fuel 0.4 % weight

Produced Gas( Flares) 3.33 ppm

Produced Oil (Liquid Flaring) 1 % weight

Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 2 of 8
EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS 1ST YEAR

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELL CONTACT PHONE REMARKS

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLCMississippi Canyon 563 OCS-G 21176 0 Locations A and B Kelley Pisciola 281.698.8519 

OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT RATING MAX. FUEL ACT. FUEL RUN TIME MAXIMUM POUNDS PER HOUR 

Diesel Engines HP GAL/HR GAL/D

Nat. Gas Engines HP SCF/HR SCF/D

Burners MMBTU/HR SCF/HR SCF/D HR/D DAYS PM SOx NOx VOC CO PM 

DRILLING PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 21739 1049.9937 25199.85 24 162 15.32 70.29 526.72 15.80 114.92 29.79 

PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIME MOVER>600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BURNER diesel 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AUXILIARY EQUIP<600hp diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 2065 99.7395 2393.75 8 46 1.46 6.68 50.03 1.50 10.92 0.27 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 4400 212.52 5100.48 10 46 3.10 14.23 106.61 3.20 23.26 0.71 VESSELS>600hp diesel(tugs) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

FACILITY DERRICK BARGE diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INSTALLATION MATERIAL TUG diesel 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

VESSELS>600hp diesel(crew) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VESSELS>600hp diesel(supply) 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MISC. BPD SCF/HR COUNTTANK- 0 0 0 0.00 

DRILLING OIL BURN 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WELL TEST GAS FLARE 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2015 YEAR TOTAL 19.88 91.20 683.36 20.50 149.10 30.77 

EXEMPTION 

CALCULATION

DISTANCE FROM LAND IN 

MILES 2164.50 

65.0

Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 3 of 8
SUMMARY

COMPANY AREA BLOCK LEASE PLATFORM WELLDeep Gulf EnergMississippi Canyon 563 OCS-G 21176 0 Locations A and B

Emitted Substance

Year

 PM SOx NOx VOC CO

2015 30.77 141.15 1057.66 31.73 230.76

Allowable 2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 2164.50 54965.20

Form MMS-138 (August 2003)Page 8 of 8
Rig 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/day

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 November, 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 WORST CASE SCENARIO DETERMINATION 

Category Regional OSRP

WCD - Drilling

EP

WCD - Drilling

Type of Activity > 10 Miles Drilling > 10 Miles 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 

does 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 

Regional 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 practicable, to a
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 8 – Pg. 12 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 Management Act analysis, the largest spill volume 

originating from the proposed activity would be a well blowout during drilling operations, 

estimated to be 62,573 barrels of crude 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 BOEM 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 the affiliated islands and bays. This region is an extremely 

sensitive habitat and serves as a migratory, breeding, feeding and nursery habitat for numerous 

species of wildlife. Beaches in this area vary in grain particle size and can be classified as fine 

sand, shell or perched shell beaches. Sandy and muddy tidal flats are also abundant. 

Response 

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC will make every effort to respond to the Worst Case Discharge as 

effectively as practicable. A description of the response equipment under contract to contain and 

recover the Worst Case Discharge is shown in Figure 2.

Using the estimated chemical and physical characteristics of crude oil, an ADIOS weathering 

model was run on a similar product from the ADIOS oil database. The results indicate 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, travel time to the site and deployment. Figure 2 also indicates 

how operations will be supported. 

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s Oil Spill Response Plan includes alternative response technologies 

such as dispersants and in-situ burn. Strategies will be decided by Unified Command based on 

an operations safety analysis, the size of the spill, weather and potential impacts. If aerial 

dispersants are utilized, 8 sorties (9,600 gallons) from two of the DC-3 aircrafts and 4 sorties 
(8,000 gallons) from the Basler aircraft would provide a daily dispersant capability of 7,540 

barrels. If the conditions are favorable for in-situ burning, the proper approvals have been 

obtained and the proper planning is in place, 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 skim utilizing CGA spill response equipment, with 

a total derated skimming capacity of 105,943 barrels. Temporary storage associated with 

skimming equipment equals 6,198 barrels. If additional 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 temporary storage and minimize off-loading time. Safety is first 

priority. Air monitoring will be accomplished and operations deemed safe prior to any 

containment/skimming attempts. 

If the spill went unabated, shoreline impact in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana would depend 

upon existing environmental conditions. Shoreline protection would include the use of CGA’s 

near shore and shallow water skimmers with a totaled derated skimming capacity of 45,264 

barrels. Temporary storage associated with skimming 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-loading time. Onshore response may include the 

deployment of shoreline boom on beach areas, or protection and sorbent boom on vegetated 

areas. Master Service Agreements with AMPOL and OMI Environmental will ensure access to 

147,000 feet of 18” shoreline protection boom. Figure 2 outlines individual times needed for 

procurement, load out, travel time to the site and deployment. Strategies would be based upon 

surveillance and real time trajectories that depict areas of potential impact given actual sea and 

weather conditions. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan, applicable Area 

Contingency and Geographical Response Plans and Unified Command would be consulted to 

ensure that environmental and special economic resources would be correctly identified and 

prioritized to ensure optimal protection. Shoreline protection strategies depict the protection 

response modes applicable for oil spill clean-up operations. The State of Louisiana Initial Oil 

Spill Response Plan provides detailed shoreline protection strategies for this area, and it 

describes necessary action to keep the oil spill from entering Louisiana’s coastal wetlands, based 

on the assumption that removal of the released oil will be much easier and less damaging to 

fragile coastal ecosystems if done in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Supervisory 

personnel have the option to modify the deployment and operation of equipment allowing a more 

effective response to site-specific circumstances. Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s contract Spill 

Management Team holds a copy of the State of Louisiana Initial Oil Spill Response Plan. 

Based on the anticipated worst case discharge scenario, Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC can be onsite 

with contracted oil spill recovery equipment with adequate response capacity to contain and 

recover surface hydrocarbons, and prevent land impact, to the maximum extent practicable, 

within an estimated 48 hours (based on the equipment’s Effective Daily Recovery Capacity 

(EDRC)). 
Initial Response Considerations 

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

be limited to: 

 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 take action to provide a safe, aggressive response to contain and 

recover as much of the spilled oil as quickly as it is safe to do so. In an effort to protect the 

environment, response actions will be designed to provide an “in-depth” protection strategy 

meant to recover as much oil as possible as far from environmentally sensitive areas as possible. 

Safety will take precedence over all other considerations during these operations. 

Coordination of response assets will normally be supervised by the Operations Section as 

necessary for close quarter vessel response activities. A Simultaneous Operations (SIMOPS) 

unit may be established in the Source Control Section to control operations if events require a 

significant number of large vessels to operate independently, but in coordination with each other. 

This unit would normally monitor the subsurface activities of each vessel (ROV, dispersant 

application, well control support, etc.), as well. 

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

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

slick movement in real time. 

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

 Information will be confirmed 

 An assessment will be made and initial objectives set 

 OSROs and appropriate agencies will be notified 

 ICS 201, Initial Report Form completed 

 Initial Safety plan will be written and published 

 Unified Command will be established 

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

objectives 

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

site 

o On-site command and control established 
Offshore Response Actions 

Equipment Deployment

Surveillance 

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

 Provide trained observer to provide on site status reports 

 Provide command and control platform at the site if needed 

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

and visual confirmation 

 Continual monitoring of vessel assets using vessel monitoring systems 

Dispersant application assets 

 Put ASI on standby 

 With the FOSC, conduct analysis to determine appropriateness of dispersant application 

(refer to Section 18) 

 Gain FOSC approval for use of dispersants on the surface 

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

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

 Confirm dispersant availability for current and long range operations 

 Start ordering dispersant stocks required for expected operations 

Containment boom 

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

 Ensure boom handling and mooring equipment is deployed with boom 

 Provide continuing situational status reports to vessels to expedite their arrival at sites 

that will provide for their most effective containment 

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

Oceangoing Boom Barge 

 Containment at the source 

 Increased/enhanced skimmer encounter rate 

 Protection booming 

In-situ Burn assets 

 Determine appropriateness of in-situ burn operation 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 aerial dispersant and in-situ burn operations 

CGA HOSS Barge 

 Use in areas with heaviest oil concentrations 

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

CGA 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 draft of <10 feet when fully loaded 

T&T Koseq Skimming Systems 

 To the area of the thickest oil 

 Use as far off-shore as allowed 

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

 VOOs at least 200’ in length 

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

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

Storage Vessels 

 Establish availability of CGA contracted assets (See Appendix E) 

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

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

systems 

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

Vessels of Opportunity (VOO) 

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

 Industry vessels are ideal for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming Systems 

(VOSS) 
 Acquire additional resources as needed 

 Consider use of local assets, i.e. fishing and pleasure craft for ISB operations or boom 

tending 

 Expect mission specific and safety 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 storage if appropriate 

 Maximize non-organic storage appropriate to vessel limitations 

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

 Assign bulk storage barges to each Division/Group 

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

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

 Maximize skimming area (swath) to the optimum width given sea conditions and 

available equipment 

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

 Nearshore, use shallow water barges and shuttle 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, the 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 operations and will cease at the order of the Unified 

Command, vessel captain, or in an emergency, ”stop work” may be directed by any crew 

member. 

Surface Oil Recovery Considerations and Tactics 

(Offshore and Near-shore Operations) 

Maximization of skimmer-oil encounter rate

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

time 

 Place barges alongside skimming systems for 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 trailing 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, first considering safety issues 
 Utilize all available advanced technology systems ( IR, X-Band Radar, etc.) to determine 

the location of, and move to, recoverable oil 

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

Maximize skimmer system efficiency 

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

 Maximize the use of oleophilic skimming systems in heavier seas 

 Place less mobile, high EDRC skimming systems (e.g. HOSS Barge) in the largest 

pockets of the heaviest oil 

 Maximize onboard recovered oil storage for vessels. 

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

 Use smaller, more agile skimming systems to recover streamers of oil normally found 

farther from the source. Place recovered oil barges nearby 

Recovered Oil Storage 

 Smaller barges in larger quantities will increase flexibility for multi-location skimming 

operations 

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

time 

 Procure and deploy the maximum number of portable tanks to support Vessel of 

Opportunity Skimming Systems if onboard storage is not available 

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

Command, Control, and Communications (C3) 

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

 Design an operational scheme, maintaining a manageable span of control 

 Designate and mark C3

 vessels for easy aerial identification 

 Designate and employ C3 aircraft for task forces, groups, etc. 

 Use reconnaissance air craft and Rapid Response Teams (RAT) to confirm the presence 

of recoverable oil 
On Water Recovery Group 

When the first skimming vessel arrives on scene, a complete site assessment will be conducted 

before recovery operations begin. Once it is confirmed that the air monitoring readings for O2, 

LEL, H2S, CO, 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 oil. Vessel groups will 

vary in structure as determined by the Operations Section of the Unified Command, but will 

generally consist, at a minimum, of the following dedicated assets: 

 3 to 5 – Offshore skimming vessels (recovery) 

 1 – Tank barge (temporary 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 dependent on several factors including, asset 

availability, weather, spilled oil migration, currents, etc.) 

The 95’ FRV Breton Island out of Venice arrives on scene and conducts an initial site 

assessment. Air monitoring levels are acceptable and no other visual threats have been observed. 

The area is cleared for safe skimming operations. The Breton Island assumes command and 

control (CoC) of on-water recovery operations until a dedicated non-skimming vessel arrives to 

relieve it of those duties. 

A second 95’ FRV arrives and begins recovery operations alongside the Breton Island. Several 

more vessels begin to arrive, including a third 95’ FRV out of Galveston, the HOSS Barge (High 

Volume Open Sea Skimming System) out of Harvey, a boom barge (CGA 300) with 25,000’ of 

42” auto boom out of Leeville, and 9 Fast Response Units (FRUs) from the load-out location at 

C-Port in Port Fourchon. 

As these vessels set up and begin skimming, they are grouped into task forces (TFs) as directed 

by the Operations Section of the Unified Command located at the command post. 

Initial set-up and potential actions: 

 A 1,000 meter safety zone has been established around the incident location for vessels 

involved in Source Control 

 The HOSS Barge is positioned facing the incident location just outside of this safety zone 

or at the point where the freshest oil is reaching the surface 

 The HOSS Barge engages its Oil Spill Detection (OSD) system to locate the heaviest oil 

and maintains that ability for 24-hour operations 
 The HOSS Barge deploys 1,320’ of 67” Sea Sentry boom on each side, creating a swath 

width of 800’ 

 The Breton Island and H.I. Rich skim nearby, utilizing the same OSD systems as the 

HOSS Barge to locate and recover oil 

 Two FRUs join this group and it becomes TF1 

 The remaining 7 FRUs are split into a 2 and 3 vessel task force 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 position in front of TF2 and TF3 

 A 100,000+ barrel offshore tank barge is placed with each task force as necessary to 

facilitate the immediate offload of skimming vessels 

The initial task 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 AquaGuard skimmers and 11 sets of Koseq Rigid 

Skimming Arms. These high volume heavy weather capable systems will be divided into 

functional groups and assigned to specific areas by the Operations Section of the Unified 

Command. 

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

TF 4 

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

 1 – AquaGuard Skimmer 

 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s) 

 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction 

 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility) 

 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

 6 – Boom-towing vessels 

TF 5 

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

 1 – AquaGuard Skimmer 

 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s) 

 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction 

 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility) 

 8 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

 8 – Boom-towing vessels 

TF 6 

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

 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s) 

 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction 

 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility) 

 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

 6 – Boom-towing vessels 

TF 7 

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

 1 – 100,000+ barrel tank barge and associated tug(s) 

 1 – Dedicated air asset for tactical direction 

 2 – Support vessels (crew/utility) 

 6 – 500’ sections of auto boom with gates 

 6 – Boom-towing vessels 
Near Shore Response Actions 

Timing 

 Put near shore assets on standby and deployment in accordance with planning based on 

the actual situation, actual trajectories and oil budgets 

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

 Outfitting of VOOs for specific missions 

 Deployment of assets based on actual movement of oil 

Considerations 

 Water depth, vessel draft 

 Shoreline gradient 

 State of the oil 

 Use of VOOs 

 Distance of surf zone from shoreline 

 Sea state 

 Tides 

 Currents 

Surveillance 

 Provide trained observer to direct skimming operations 

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

and visual confirmation 

 Continual monitoring of vessel assets 

Dispersant Use 

 Dispersants are pre-approved with FOSC approval 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 Response Team level (Region 6) 

Dedicated Near Shore skimming systems 

 FRVs 

 56’ shallow water skimmers 

 Egmopol and Marco SWS (protected waters) 

 Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to observed oil slicks 

VOO 

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

 Industry vessels are usually best for deployment of Vessel of Opportunity Skimming 

Systems (VOSS) 

 Acquire additional resources as needed 

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

 Expect mission specific and safety training to be required 

 Plan with the US Coast Guard for vessel inspections 

 Operate with aerial spotter directing systems to oil patches 
Shoreline Protection Operations 

Response Planning Considerations 

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

 Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Team (SCAT) assessments 

 Time to acquire personnel and equipment 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 sites and gaining authority to enter 

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

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

 Staging of equipment and housing of response personnel as close to the job site as 

possible to maximize on-site work time 

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

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

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

 Passive clean up of marshes should considered and appropriate stocks of sorbent boom 

and/or sweep obtained 

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

inland areas 
Decanting Strategy 

Recovered oil and water mixtures will typically separate into distinct phases when left in a 

quiescent state. When separation occurs, the relatively clean water phase can be siphoned or 

decanted back to the recovery point with minimal, if any, impact. Decanting therefore increases 

the effective on-site oil storage capacity and equipment operating time. FOSC/SOSC approval 

will be requested prior to decanting operations. This practice is routinely used for oil spill 

recovery. 

CGA Equipment Limitations 

The capability for any spill response equipment, whether a dedicated or portable system, to 

operate in differing weather conditions will be directly in relation to the capabilities of the vessel 

the system in placed on. Most importantly, however, the decision to operate will be based on the 

judgment of the Unified Command and/or the Captain of the vessel, who will ultimately have the 

final say in terminating operations. Skimming equipment listed below may have operational 

limits which exceed those safety thresholds. As was seen in the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil 

spill response, vessel skimming operations ceased when seas reached 5-6 feet and vessels were 

often recalled to port when those conditions were exceeded. Systems below are some of the 

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

Boom 3 foot seas, 20 knot winds 

Dispersants Winds more than 25 knots 

Visibility less than 3 nautical miles 

Ceiling less than 1,000 feet. 

FRU 8 foot seas 

HOSS Barge/OSRB 8 foot seas 

Koseq Arms 8 foot seas 

OSRV 4 foot seas 
Environmental Conditions in the GOM

Louisiana is situated between the easterly and westerly wind belts, and therefore, experiences 

westerly winds during the winter and easterly winds in the summer. Average wind speed is 

generally 14-15 mph along the coast. Wave heights average 4 and 5 feet. However, during 

hurricane season, Louisiana has recorded wave heights ranging from 40 to 50 feet high and 

winds reaching speeds of 100 mph. Because much of southern Louisiana lies below sea level, 

flooding is prominent. 

Surface water temperature ranges between 70 and 80 ̊F during the summer months. During the 

winter, the average temperature will range from 50 and 60 ̊F. 

The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico hurricane season is officially from 1 June to 30 November. 

97% of all tropical activity occurs within this window. The Atlantic basin shows a very peaked 

season from August through October, with 78% of the tropical storm days, 87% of the minor 

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

categories 3, 4 and 5) hurricane days occurring then. Maximum activity is in early to mid 

September. Once in a few years there may be a hurricane occurring "out of season" - primarily in 

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

month. 
FIGURE 1 

TRAJECTORY BY LAND SEGMENT 

Trajectory of a spill and the probability of it impacting a land segment have been projected 

utilizing Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC’s WCD and 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 

1 
WCD Scenario– BASED ON WELL BLOWOUT DURING DRILLING OPERATIONS (65 miles from sh

56,941 bbls of crude oil (Volume considering natural weathering) 

API Gravity 23.2° 

FIGURE 2 – Equipment Response Time to MC 563, Well Location A 

Dispersants/Surveillance

Dispersant/Surveillance Dispersant Capacity (gal) Storage Capacity Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Trav

si

ASI 

Basler 67T 2000 NA 2 Houma 2 2 0DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 2 2 1DC 3 1200 NA 2 Houma 2 2 1Aero Commander NA NA 2 Houma 2 2 0

Offshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

CGA 

HOSS Barge 43000 4000 3 Tugs 5 Harvey 7 0 5 95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Leeville 2 0 2 95’ FRV 12342 249 NA 4 Venice 2 0 1 Boom Barge (CGA-300) 42” Auto Boom (25000’) NA NA 1 Tug 50 Crew 4 (Barge) 2 (Per Crew) Leeville 4 0 6 

Recovered Oil Storage No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA) 

CTCo 2603 NA 25000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2607 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2608 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2609 NA 23000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 5001 NA 47000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 
Staging Area: Venice

Offshore Equipment With 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging 

CGA 

FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (1) 4251 100 1 Utility 6 Galveston 2 2 12.7 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Harvey 2 2 2.1 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Aransas Pass 2 2 17.7 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Lake Charles 2 2 8 FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Leeville 2 2 4.4 FRU (1) + 100 bbl Tank (2) 4251 200 1 Utility 6 Morgan City 2 2 4.9 FRU (2) + 100 bbl Tank (4) 8502 400 2 Utility 12 Venice 2 2 0 Hydro-Fire Boom NA NA 8 Utility 40 Harvey 2 4 2.1 
Nearshore Response

Nearshore Equipment No 

Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Required From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Hrs to GOM 

CGA 

46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Morgan City 2 0 2 46’ FRV 5000 65 NA 4 Venice 2 0 1 Trinity SWS 21500 249 NA 4 Venice 2 2 2 

Enterprise Marine Services LLC (available through contract with CGA) 

CTCo 2604 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2605 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 CTCo 2606 NA 20000 1 Tug 6 Amelia 4 12 4 

Staging Area: Venice

Nearshore and Inland 

Skimmers With Staging EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Trav

Deplo

CGA 

SWS Egmopol 3000 100 NA 3 Morgan City 2 2 4.9 SWS Marco 3588 20 NA 3 Lake Charles 2 2 8 SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Leeville 2 2 4.4 SWS Marco 3588 34 NA 3 Venice 2 2 0 
Shoreline Protection 

Staging Area: Venice 

Shoreline Protection 

Boom VOO Persons Req. Storage/Warehouse Location Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Travel to Deployment Site 

AMPOL (available through MSA) 

42,000’ 18” Boom 16 Crew 40 New Iberia, LA 2 2 6 2 20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 New Orleans, LA 2 2 2.2 2 

OMI Environmental (available through MSA) 

10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 New Iberia, LA 1 1 6 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houston, TX 1 1 12.1 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Arthur, TX 1 1 9.7 2 20,000’ 18” Boom 8 Crew 20 Belle Chasse, LA 1 1 1.9 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Port Allen, LA 1 1 4.5 2 10,000’ 18” Boom 4 Crew 10 Houma, LA 1 1 3.8 2 15,000’ 18” Boom 6 Crew 14 Gretna, LA (Warehouse) 2 2 2.1 2 

Wildlife Response EDRC Storage Capacity VOO Persons Req. From Hrs to Procure Hrs to Loadout Travel to Staging Trav

Deplo

CGA 

Wildlife Support Trailer NA NA NA 2 Harvey 2 2 2.1 Bird Scare Guns (48) NA NA NA 2 Harvey 2 2 2.1 Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Galveston 2 2 12.7 Bird Scare Guns (12) NA NA NA 2 Aransas Pass 2 2 17.7 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Lake Charles 2 2 8 Bird Scare Guns (24) NA NA NA 2 Leeville 2 2 4.4 

Response Asset Total 

Offshore EDRC 105,943 

Offshore Recovered Oil Storage 147,198 

Nearshore / Shallow Water EDRC 45,264 

Nearshore / Shallow Water Recovered Oil Storage 60,567 
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 9 – Pg. 13 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS-G 21176)

SECTION 9

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING INFORMATION

9.1 MONITORING SYSTEMS

DGE III 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 III 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 ensure 

protection of the environment and the facility/equipment.

DGE III will monitor loop currents per the requirements as set forth in NTL 2009-G02, “Ocean 

Current Monitoring.”

9.2 INCIDENTAL TAKES

There is no reason to believe that any of the endangered species or marine mammals as listed 

in the ESA will be “taken” as a result of the operations proposed under this plan. 

It has been documented that the use of explosives and or seismic devices can affect marine life. 

Operations proposed in this plan will not be utilizing either of these devices. 

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”

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 November, 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 proposed operations.

10.2 MARINE PROTECTED SPECIES

In accordance with the 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 are observed, and maintain a distance of 90 

meters or greater from whales, and a distance of 45 meters or greater from small cetaceans and 

sea turtles; 

(d) 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 listed 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 injured or dead animal (e.g., because of a vessel strike), the 

responsible parties should remain available to assist the stranding network. If the injury or death 

was caused by a collision with the lessee’s vessel, the lessee must notify BOEM within 24 hours 

of the strike. 
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 10 – Pg. 15 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 NMFS 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 activity 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, identified 

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 November, 2014

Mississippi 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 November, 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 Capacity

Maximum Number 

in Area at Any Time

Trip Frequency or 

Duration

Crew Boat 1500 bbls 2 2 per week

Supply Boat 1500 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 between the onshore support 

facilities and the drilling unit is included as Attachment 12-B.
1000 lbs / well 

CaCI2 / CaBr2 / KCI / NaCI Below deck storage tanks on offshore support vessels

Newport 

Environmental 

Services, Inc., 

Ingleside Texas

1000 lbs / well 

Well Completion Fluids

Well Treatment Fluids

CaCI2 / CaBr2 / KCI / NaCI Below deck storage tanks on offshore support vessels

Newport 

Environmental 

Services, Inc., 

Ingleside Texas

Synthetic Based Cuttings Internal Olefin 

Below deck storage tanks on offshore support vessels

Newport 

Environmental 

Services Inc., 

Ingleside, TX

1000 bbls/well

Will drilling occur? If yes, fill in the muds and cuttings.

SUPPORT VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT INFORMATION (30 CFR 250.224 & 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 Disposal

Type of Waste Composition Transport Method Name/Location of Facility Amount

NOTE: IF YOU WILL NOT HAVE A TYPE OF WASTE, ENTER “NA” IN THE ROW.

Synthetic Base Mud Internal Olefin Below deck storage tanks on offshore support vessels M-I Swaco Port Fourchon, La. 13500 bbls/well 

Will you have additional wastes that are not permitted for discharge?

Trash and debris

Used oil

Chemical product wastes

Wash water

Non-hazardous trash & debris 

(non-recyclables)

Transport in DOT containers on supply vessels to 

shorebase

Progressive Waste 

Solutions of LA, 

Houma, LA

700 lbs / well 

420 gal / well 

(10 bbls well)

N/A

130 lbs / well

Used oil and glycol

N/A

Paints, solvents, unused 

chemicals, etc.

Safety Kleen 

System, Baton 

Rouge, LA

N/A

Safety Kleen 

System, Baton 

Rouge, LA

Transport in DOT containers on supply vessels to 

shorebase

N/A

Transport in DOT containers on supply vessels to 

shorebase
!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!!!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!!

!!

!! !! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

South Marsh Island 

North

Garden Banks Green Canyon Atwa

East Breaks

Mississippi 

Walker Ridge

Galveston

High Island

Keathley Canyon

Vermilion

Alaminos Canyon

Ship Shoal

West Cameron

M

Galveston South Ewing Bank

Houston Metro Area

Baton Rouge

Lafayette

Beaumont

Lake Charles

Gulfp

Texas City

Port Arthur

Galveston

49

55

59

45

Big Thicket NPRES

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC 

~351.6 Miles to TX Shore
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 13 – Pg. 18 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 support for the 

proposed 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 proposed in this EP.

13.3 SUPPORT BASE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION TIMETABLE

A support base construction or expansion timetable is not required for the activities proposed in 

this plan. 

13.4 WASTE DISPOSAL

The Table, “Wastes You Will Transport and/or Dispose of Onshore, “is included as Attachment 

12-A.
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 14 – Pg. 19 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 14 – Pg. 20 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS-G 21176)

The OCS related oil and gas development activities having potential 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, effective environmental protection, emergency plans and 

contingency plans. Alabama policies have been addressed below or are cross referenced to the 

appropriate sections of the plan:

Topic Cross 

Reference

Comments

Coastal 

Resource Use 

Policies

Coastal 

Development

Dock and port facilities in Louisiana will be used. There will 

be no new construction, dredging, or filling in Alabama state 

waters. There will be no new commercial development or 

capital improvements in Alabama’s coastal zone, nor will 

there be any employment effects.

Mineral 

Resource 

Exploration and 

Extraction

Proposed 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

Transportation 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 8
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 14 – Pg. 21 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 consistent 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 14 – Pg. 22 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 impact 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 environmental 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 General 

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 nearest 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 

properly transported to City, 

State, and disposed of as 
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 14 – Pg. 23 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 wastes 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 Texas 

coastal waters are proposed 

(Section 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 and 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 14 – Pg. 24 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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 Onshore 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 Support 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 proposed 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 development 

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 proposed 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 conformance 
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 14 – Pg. 25 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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:

Levee 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 Texas is included as 

Attachment 14-C.

Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 15 – Pg. 26 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 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, H2S 

releases) 

Discarded 

Trash & 

Debris 

Site-specific at Offshore 

Location 

Designated topographic features (1) (1) (1) 

Pinnacle Trend area live bottoms (2) (2) (2) 

Eastern Gulf live bottoms (3) (3) (3) 

Benthic communities (4) 

Water quality X X 

Fisheries X X 

Marine Mammals X(8) X X(8) X 

Sea Turtles X(8) X X(8) X 

Air quality X(9) 

Shipwreck sites (known or 

potential) 

 (7) 

Prehistoric archaeological sites (7) 

Vicinity of Offshore Location 

Essential fish habitat X X(6) 

Marine and pelagic birds X X 

Public health and safety (5) 

Coastal and Onshore 

Beaches X(6) X 

Wetlands X(6) 

Shore birds and coastal nesting 

birds 

 X6) 

Coastal wildlife refuges 

Wilderness areas 
Footnotes for Environmental Impact Analysis Matrix 

1) Activities that may affect a marine sanctuary or topographic feature. Specifically, if the well or platform site or 

any anchors will be on the seafloor within the: 

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

o 1000-m, 1-mile or 3-mile zone of any topographic feature (submarine bank) protected by the Topographic 

Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease; 

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

o Proximity of any submarine bank (500 ft. buffer zone) with relief greater than 2 meters that is not protected 

by the Topographic Features Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 

2) Activities with any bottom disturbance within an OCS lease block protected through the Live Bottom (Pinnacle 

Trend) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 

3) Activities within any Eastern Gulf OCS block where seafloor habitats are protected by the Live Bottom (LowRelief) Stipulation attached to an OCS lease. 

4) Activities on blocks designated by the BOEM as being in water depths 300 meters or greater. 

5) Exploration or production activities where H2S concentrations greater than 500 ppm might be encountered. 

6) All activities that could result in an accidental spill of produced liquid hydrocarbons or diesel fuel that you 

determine would impact these environmental resources. If the proposed action is located a sufficient distance 

from a resource that no impact would occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 

7) All activities that involve seafloor disturbances, including anchor emplacements, in any OCS block designated 

by the BOEM as having high-probability for the occurrence of shipwrecks or prehistoric sites, including such 

blocks that will be affected that are adjacent to the lease block in which your planned activity will occur. If the 

proposed activities are located a sufficient distance from a shipwreck or a prehistoric site that no impact would 

occur, the EIA can note that in a sentence or two. 

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

sea turtles or their critical habitats. 

9) Production activities that involve transportation of produced fluids to shore using shuttle tankers or barges. 
(B) Analysis 

Site-Specific at Mississippi Canyon Block 563 

Proposed operations consist of the drilling and completion of Well Locations A & B. The 

operations will be conducted with a dynamically-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); therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to 

benthic organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven 

into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At 

this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the 

amount shown to have an effect on corals. Because the crests of topographic features in the 

Northern Gulf of Mexico are found below 10 m, no oil from a surface spill could reach their 

sessile biota. Oil from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from 

a topographic area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities, which could impact topographic features. 

2. Pinnacle Trend Area Live Bottoms 

Potential IPFs on pinnacle trend area live bottoms include effluents and accidents. 

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is 53 miles from the closest live bottom (pinnacle 

trend) area; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills have the potential to 

foul benthic communities and cause lethal and sublethal effects on live bottom organisms. Oil 

from a surface spill can be driven into the water column; measurable amounts have been 

documented down to a 10 m depth. At this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several 

orders of magnitude lower than the amount shown to have an effect on marine organisms. Oil 

from a subsurface spill is not applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom 
(pinnacle trend) area. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact a live bottom 

(pinnacle trend) area. 

3. Eastern Gulf Live Bottoms 

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

Effluents: Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located in an area characterized by the 

existence of live bottoms; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. 

Accidents: It is unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to statistics in Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spills cause damage to live 

bottom organisms only if the oil contacts the organisms. Oil from a surface spill can be driven 

into the water column; measurable amounts have been documented down to a 10 m depth. At 

this depth, the oil is found only at concentrations several orders of magnitude lower than the 

amount shown to have an effect on marine invertebrates. Oil from a subsurface spill is not 

applicable due to the distance of these blocks from a live bottom area. The activities proposed in 

this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact an Eastern Gulf live 

bottom area. 

4. Benthic Communities 

There are no IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to 

shore for disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to benthic 

communities. 

A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being used for the proposed activities; therefore, 

only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the 

seafloor will be minimized by the use of a dynamically-positioned semisubmersible, DGE III’s 

proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 would not cause impacts to benthic 

communities. 

5. Water Quality 

IPFs that could result in water quality degradation from the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon Block 563 include effluents and accidents. 
 

Effluents: Levels of contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced water discharges, 

discharge-rate restrictions and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES 

permit, thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational 

discharges are not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to water quality. 

Accidents: Oil spills have the potential to alter offshore water quality; however, it is unlikely 

that an accidental surface or subsurface spill would occur from the proposed activities. Between 

1980 and 2000, OCS operations produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and spilled only 0.001 percent 

of this oil, or 1 bbl for every 81,000 bbl produced. The spill risk related to a diesel spill from 

drilling operations is even less. Between 1976 and 1985, (years for which data were collected), 

there were 80 reported diesel spills greater than one barrel associated with drilling activities. 

Considering that there were 11,944 wells drilled, this is a 0.7 percent probability of an 

occurrence. If a spill were to occur, the water quality of marine waters would be temporarily 

affected by the dissolved components and small oil droplets. Dispersion by currents and 

microbial degradation would remove the oil from the water column and dilute the constituents to 

background levels. Historically, changes in offshore water quality from oil spills have only been 

detected during the life of the spill and up to several months afterwards. Most of the components 

of oil are insoluble in water and therefore float. The activities proposed in this plan will be 

covered by DGE III’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to information submitted in 

Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor, and wastes 

sent to shore for disposal) from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to water 

quality. 

6. Fisheries 

IPFs that could cause impacts to fisheries as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon 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 potential to cause some detrimental effects on 

fisheries; however, it is unlikely that such an event would occur from the proposed activities 

(refer to Item 5, Water Quality). The effects of oil on mobile adult finfish or shellfish would 

likely be sublethal and the extent of damage would be reduced to the capacity of adult fish and 

shellfish to avoid the spill, to metabolize hydrocarbons, and to excrete both metabolites and 
parent compounds. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional 

OSRP (refer to information submitted in Section 8). 

There are no IPFs from emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor or wastes sent to shore 

for disposal from the proposed activities which could cause impacts to fisheries. 

7. Marine Mammals 

GulfCet II studies revealed that cetaceans of the continental shelf and shelf-edge were almost 

exclusively bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. Squid eaters, including dwarf and 

pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough-toothed dolphin, and Cuvier’s beaked whale, 

occurred most frequently along the upper slope in areas outside of anticyclones. IPFs that could 

cause impacts to marine mammals as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon 

Block 563 include emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. 

Emissions: Noises from drilling activities, support vessels and helicopters may elicit a startle 

reaction from marine mammals. This reaction may lead to disruption of marine mammals’ 

normal activities. Stress may make them more vulnerable to parasites, disease, environmental 

contaminants, and/or predation (Majors and Myrick, 1990). There is little conclusive evidence 

for long-term displacements and population trends for marine mammals relative to noise. 

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges contain components which may be detrimental 

to marine mammals. Most operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any 

potential impact from drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items 

or possibly through ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989). 

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of debris have caused the 

death or serious injury of marine mammals (Laist, 1997; MMC, 1999). The limited amount of 

marine debris, if any, resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm 

marine mammals. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by 

MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations 

imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging 

materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials 

such as plastic or glass. 

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 
services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01. 

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and cetaceans would be unusual events, however 

should one occur, death or injury to marine mammals is possible. Contract vessel operators can 

avoid marine mammals and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for marine 

mammals and maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a 

reference guide to help identify the twenty-eight species of whales and dolphins, and the single 

species of manatee that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. Vessel crews must 

report sightings of any injured or dead protected marine mammal species immediately, 

regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine Mammal and 

Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional Office at (727) 

824-5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862-2850. In addition, if the 

injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must be notified 

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

responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and stranding 

network as needed. 

Oil spills have the potential to cause sublethal oil-related injuries and spill-related deaths to 

marine mammals. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the 

proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase 

vessel traffic in the area, which could add to changes in cetacean behavior and/or distribution, 

thereby causing additional stress to the animals. The effect of oil dispersants on cetaceans is not 

known. The acute toxicity of oil dispersant chemicals included in DGE III’s OSRP is considered 

to be low when compared with the constituents and fractions of crude oils and diesel products. 

The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s OSRP (refer to information 

submitted in accordance with Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact marine mammals. 

8. Sea Turtles 

IPFs that could cause impacts to sea turtles as a result of the proposed operations include 

emissions, effluents, discarded trash and debris, and accidents. GulfCet II studies sighted most 

loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and leatherback sea turtles over shelf waters. Historically these 

species have been sighted up to the shelf’s edge. They appear to be more abundant east of the 

Mississippi River than they are west of the river (Fritts et al., 1983b; Lohoefener et al., 1990). 

Deep waters may be used by all species as a transitory habitat. 
Emissions: Noise from drilling activities, support vessels, and helicopters may elicit a startle 

reaction from sea turtles, but this is a temporary disturbance. 

Effluents: Drilling fluids and cuttings discharges are not known to be lethal to sea turtles. Most 

operational discharges are diluted and dispersed upon release. Any potential impact from 

drilling fluids would be indirect, either as a result of impacts on prey items or possibly through 

ingestion in the food chain (API, 1989). 

Discarded trash and debris: Both entanglement in, and ingestion of, debris have caused the 

death or serious injury of sea turtles (Balazs, 1985). The limited amount of marine debris, if any, 

resulting from the proposed activities is not expected to substantially harm sea turtles. Operators 

are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the 

Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies 

including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). 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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and 

packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent 

materials such as plastic or glass. 

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III management or the designated lease 

operator management that emphasizes their commitment to waste management in accordance 

with NTL No. 2012-G01. 

Accidents: Collisions between support vessels and sea turtles would be unusual events, however 

should one occur, death or injury to sea turtles is possible. Contract vessel operators can avoid 

sea turtles and reduce potential deaths by maintaining a vigilant watch for sea turtles and 

maintaining a safe distance when they are sighted. Vessel crews should use a reference guide to 

help identify the five species of sea turtles that may be encountered in the Gulf of Mexico OCS. 

Vessel crews must report sightings of any injured or dead protected sea turtle species 

immediately, regardless of whether the injury or death is caused by their vessel, to the Marine 

Mammal and Sea Turtle Stranding Hotline at (888) 404-3922, the NMFS Southeast Regional 

Office at (727) 824-5312, or the Marine Mammal Stranding Network at (305) 862-2850. In 

addition, if the injury or death was caused by a collision with a contract vessel, the BOEM must 

be notified within 24 hours of the strike by email to protectedspecies@boemre.gov. If the vessel 
is the responsible party, it is required to remain available to assist the respective salvage and 

stranding network as needed. 

All sea turtle species and their life stages are vulnerable to the harmful effects of oil through 

direct contact or by fouling of their food. Exposure to oil can be fatal, particularly to juveniles 

and hatchlings. However, it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed 

activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Oil spill response activities may increase vessel traffic 

in the area, which could add to the possibility of collisions with sea turtles. The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional Oil Spill Response Plan (refer to 

information submitted in accordance with Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including physical disturbances to the seafloor) from the proposed 

activities which could impact sea turtles. 

9. Air Quality 

Mississippi Canyon 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 the proposed activities do not exceed the annual 

exemption levels as set forth by BOEM. Accidents and blowouts can release hydrocarbons or 

chemicals, which could cause the emission of air pollutants. However, these releases would not 

impact onshore air quality because of the prevailing atmospheric conditions, emission height, 

emission rates, and the distance of Mississippi Canyon Block 563 from the coastline. There are 

no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to shore for 

treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which would impact air quality. 

10. Shipwreck Sites (known or potential) 

Potential IPFs that could impact known or unknown shipwreck sites as a result of the proposed 

operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include disturbances to the seafloor. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being 

used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be 

disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a 

dynamically-positioned semisubmersible, DGE III’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon 

Block 563 would not cause impacts to shipwreck sites. 

Additionally, Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is not located in or adjacent to an OCS block 

designated by BOEM as having a high probability for occurrence of shipwrecks, therefore, no 

adverse impacts are expected. 
DGE III will perform an AUV/ROV survey imaging 100% of the seafloor with sector scanning 

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon 

commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine 

archaeologist and by DGE III to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources, including historic 

shipwrecks. Copies of the certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be 

submitted to the BOEM. Should a resource be encountered, DGE III will contact the BOEM 

immediately and make every reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or 

disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to shipwreck sites. 

11. Prehistoric Archaeological Sites 

Potential IPFs that could cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites as a result of the 

proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon Block 563 include disturbances to the seafloor. 

Physical disturbances to the seafloor: A dynamically-positioned semisubmersible is being 

used for the proposed activities; therefore, only an insignificant amount of seafloor will be 

disturbed. Because physical disturbances to the seafloor will be minimized by the use of a 

dynamically-positioned semisubmersible, DGE III’s proposed operations in Mississippi Canyon 

Block 563 would not cause impacts to prehistoric archaeological sites. 

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

sonar within a minimum 500’ radius of the proposed well location(s) prior to or upon 

commencement of operations. These locations will be certified by an authorized marine 

archaeologist and by DGE III to be clear of seafloor archaeological resources. Copies of the 

certifications and a circle radius plat of the survey area will be submitted to the BOEM. Should 

a resource be encountered, DGE III will contact the BOEM immediately and make every 

reasonable effort to preserve and protect that cultural resource. 

Additionally, Mississippi Canyon Block 563 is located outside the Archaeological Prehistoric 

high probability line, therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, effluents, wastes sent to shore for treatment or 

disposal, or accidents) from the proposed activities which could impact prehistoric archeological 

sites. 

Vicinity of Offshore Location 

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) 

IPFs that could cause impacts to EFH as a result of the proposed operations in Mississippi 

Canyon Block 563 include effluents and accidents. EFH includes all estuarine and marine waters 

and substrates in the Gulf of Mexico. 
Effluents: The Live Bottom Low Relief Stipulation, the Live Bottom (Pinnacle Trend) 

Stipulation, and the Eastern Gulf Pinnacle Trend Stipulation would prevent most of the potential 

impacts on live-bottom communities and EFH from operational waste discharges. Levels of 

contaminants in drilling muds and cuttings and produced-water discharges, discharge-rate 

restrictions, and monitoring and toxicity testing are regulated by the EPA NPDES permit, 

thereby eliminating many significant biological or ecological effects. Operational discharges are 

not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to EFH. 

Accidents: An accidental oil spill has the potential to cause some detrimental effects on EFH. 

Oil spills that contact coastal bays and estuaries, as well as OCS waters when pelagic eggs and 

larvae are present, have the greatest potential to affect fisheries. However, it is unlikely that an 

oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water Quality). The activities 

proposed in this plan will be covered by DGE III’s Regional OSRP (refer to information 

submitted in Section 8). 

There are no other IPFs (including emissions, physical disturbances to the seafloor and wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact essential 

fish habitat. 

2. Marine and Pelagic Birds 

IPFs that could impact marine birds as a result of the proposed activities include air emissions, 

accidental oil spills, and discarded trash and debris from vessels and the facilities. 

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

concentrations which could harm coastal and marine birds. 

Accidents: An oil spill would cause localized, low-level petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. 

However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, 

Water Quality). Marine and pelagic birds feeding at the spill location may experience chronic, 

nonfatal, physiological stress. It is expected that few, if any, coastal and marine birds would 

actually be affected to that extent. The activities proposed in this plan will be covered by 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 ingest small plastic debris, which can cause permanent injuries and 

death. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOLAnnex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by 

various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of 

small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of non-biodegradable, 

environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. Informational placards will be 

posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food preparation capabilities. All offshore 

personnel, including contractors and other support services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter 

pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view 

the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed 

Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris 

training video annually. Offshore personnel will also receive an explanation from DGE III 

management or the designated lease operator management that emphasizes their commitment to 

waste management in accordance with NTL No. 2012-G01. Debris, if any, from these proposed 

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

negligible. 

There are no other IPFs (including effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, or wastes sent 

to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact marine and 

pelagic birds. 

3. Public Health and Safety Due to Accidents. 

There are no IPFs (emissions, effluents, physical disturbances to the seafloor, wastes sent to 

shore for treatment or disposal or accidents, including an accidental H2S release) from the 

proposed activities which could cause impacts to public health and safety. In accordance with 

NTL No.’s 2008-G04, 2009-G27, and 2009-G31, sufficient information is included in Section 4

to justify our request that our proposed activities be classified by BSEE as H2S absent. 

Coastal and Onshore 

1. Beaches 

IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to beaches include accidents (oil 

spills) and discarded trash and debris. 

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

and associated resources. Due to the distance from shore (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 recognized as a major threat to the 

enjoyment and use of beaches. There will only be a limited amount of marine debris, if any, 

resulting from the proposed activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging 

debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and 

Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast 
Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 

particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass. 

Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from 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 seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact beaches. 

2. Wetlands 

IPFs from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to wetlands include accidents (oil 

spills) and discarded trash and debris. 

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

5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (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 activities. Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging 

debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and 

Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast 

Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 

particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass. 
Informational placards will be posted on all vessels and facilities having sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from 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 seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities which could impact 

wetlands. 

3. Shore Birds and Coastal Nesting Birds 

Accidents: Oil spills could cause impacts to shore birds and coastal nesting birds. However, it is 

unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to Item 5, Water 

Quality). Given the distance from shore (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: Coastal and marine birds are highly susceptible to entanglement 

in floating, submerged, and beached marine debris: specifically plastics. Operators are prohibited 

from deliberately discharging debris as mandated by MARPOL-Annex V and the Marine Plastic 

Pollution Research and Control Act, and regulations imposed by various agencies including the 

United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, 

particularly those made of non-biodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as 

plastic or glass. 

 

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from 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 seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

shore birds and coastal nesting birds. 

4. Coastal Wildlife Refuges 

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to coastal 

wildlife refuges. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities 

(refer to Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from shore (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: Operators are prohibited from deliberately discharging debris as 

mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and 

regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and 

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when 

handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. 

 

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from 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 seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

coastal wildlife refuges. 

5. Wilderness Areas 

Accidents: An accidental oil spill from the proposed activities could cause impacts to wilderness 

areas. However, it is unlikely that an oil spill would occur from the proposed activities (refer to 

Item 5, Water Quality). Due to the distance from the nearest designated Wilderness Area (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 deliberately discharging debris as 

mandated by MARPOL-Annex V, the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act and 

regulations imposed by various agencies including the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and 

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 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 will be exercised when 

handling and disposing of small items and packaging materials, particularly those made of nonbiodegradable, environmentally persistent materials such as plastic or glass. 

 

Informational placards will be posted on vessels and every facility that has sleeping or food 

preparation capabilities. All offshore personnel, including contractors and other support 

services-related personnel (e.g. helicopter pilots, vessel captains and boat crews) will be 

indoctrinated on waste procedures, and will view the video (or Microsoft PowerPoint 

presentation), “Think About It” (previously “All Washed Up: The Beach Litter Problem”). 

Thereafter, all personnel will view the marine trash and debris training video annually. Offshore 

personnel will also receive an explanation from 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 seafloor, or wastes 

sent to shore for treatment or disposal) from the proposed activities that could cause impacts to 

wilderness areas. 

6. Other Environmental Resources Identified 

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

(C) IMPACTS ON PROPOSED ACTIVITIES 

The site–specific environmental conditions have been taken into account for the proposed 

activities. No impacts are expected on the proposed activities from site-specific environmental 

conditions. 

(D) ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS 

During the hurricane season, June through November, the Gulf of Mexico is impacted by an 

average of ten tropical storms (39-73 mph winds), of which six become hurricanes ( > 74 mph 

winds). Due to its location in the gulf, Mississippi Canyon Block 563 may experience hurricane 

and tropical storm force winds, and related sea currents. These factors can adversely impact the 

integrity of the operations covered by this plan. A significant storm may present physical hazards 

to operators and vessels, damage exploration or production equipment, or result in the release of 

hazardous materials (including hydrocarbons). Additionally, the displacement of equipment may 

disrupt the local benthic habitat and pose a threat to local species. 

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

impacts: 
1. Drilling & completion 

a. Secure well 

b. Secure rig / platform 

c. Evacuate personnel 

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

2010-N10. 

2. Structure Installation 

 Operator will not conduct structure installation operations during Tropical Storm or 

 Hurricane threat. 

(E) ALTERNATIVES 

No alternatives to the proposed activities were considered to reduce environmental impacts. 

(F) MITIGATION MEASURES 

No mitigation measures other than those required by regulation will be employed to avoid, 

diminish, or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources. 

(G) CONSULTATION 

No agencies or persons were consulted regarding potential impacts associated with the proposed 

activities. Therefore, a list of such entities has not been provided. 

(H) PREPARER(S) 

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. Effects of offshore petroleum operations on cold 

water marine mammals: a literature review. Washington, DC: American Petroleum 

Institute. 385 pp. 

Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on marine turtles: entanglement and ingestion. In: 

Shomura, R.S. and H.O. Yoshida, eds. Proceedings, Workshop on the Fate and Impact of 
Marine Debris, 26-29 November 1984, Honolulu, HI. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. NOAA 

Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. Pp 387-429. 

Burke, C.J. and J.A. Veil. 1995. Potential benefits from regulatory consideration of synthetic 

drilling muds. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 

ANL/EAD/TM-43. 

Daly, J.M. 1997. Controlling the discharge of synthetic-based drilling fluid contaminated 

cuttings in waters of the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Water. Work Plan, June 24, 1997. 

Hansen, D.J. 198l. The relative sensitivity of seabird populations in Alaska to oil pollution. U.S. 

Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Region, Anchorage. BLMYK-ES-81-006-1792. 

Laist, D.W. 1997. Impacts of marine debris: entanglement of marine life in marine debris 

including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, 

J.M. and D.B. Rogers, eds. Marine debris: sources, impacts, and solutions. New York, NY: 

Springer-Verlag. Pp. 99-139. 

Majors, A.P. and A.C. Myrick, Jr. 1990. Effects of noise on animals: implications for dolphins 

exposed to seal bombs in the eastern tropical Pacific purse-seine fishery–an annotated 

bibliography. NOAA Administrative Report LJ-90-06. 

Marine Mammal Commission. 1999. Annual report to Congress – 1998. 

Piatt, J.F., C.J. Lensink, W. Butler, M. Kendziorek, and D.R. Nysewander. 1990. Immediate 

impact of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on marine birds. The Auk. 107 (2): 387-397 

Vauk , G., E. Hartwig, B. Reineking, and E. Vauk-Hentzelt. 1989. Losses of seabirds by oil 

pollution at the German North Sea coast. Topics in Marine Biology. Ros, J.D, ed. Scient. 

Mar. 53 (2-3): 749-754. 

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

Field-Naturalist. 89:278-298. 

Although not cited, the following were utilized in preparing this EIA: 

 Hazard Surveys 

 BOEM EIS’s: 

o GOM Deepwater Operations and Activities. Environmental Assessment. BOEM 2000-

001 

o GOM Central and Western Planning Areas Sales 166 and 168 Final Environmental 

Impact Statement. BOEM 96-0058. 
Deep Gulf Energy III, LLC Section 16 – Pg. 27 of 27

Supplemental EP November, 2014

Mississippi Canyon Block 563 (OCS-G 21176)

SECTION 16

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

16.1 EXEMPTED INFORMATION DESCRIPTION

The proposed bottomhole locations of the planned wells have been removed from the Public 

Information copy of this EP as well as any discussions of the target objectives, geologic or 

geophysical data, and any interpreted geology.

16.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Initial Exploration Plan (Control No. N-9122). 

2. Supplemental Exploration Plan (Control No. S-7289).

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

and B, Block 563 (OCS-G 21176), Mississippi Canyon Area, Gulf of Mexico, Project No. 

0914-2457.