Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Project Number: DE-FC26-05NT42590

Presented to:

Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships 2011 Peer ReviewArlington, Virginia

March 17, 2011

Presented by:

Susan HovorkaResearch Scientist

Bureau of Economic Geology

The University of Texas at Austin

Vello A. KuuskraaPresident

Advanced Resources International, Inc.

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory.

Cost share and research support provided by SECARB/SSEB Carbon Management Partners.

2

Presentation Outline

3

1. Introduction (Hovorka)

2. Technical Discussion: Early Test (Hovorka)

3. Technical Discussion: Anthropogenic Test (Kuuskraa)

4. Wrap Up (Kuuskraa)

Early Test

Denbury Resources’ Cranfield FieldNear Natchez, Mississippi

SECARB Phase III

SECARB Early Test was recognized by DOE for furthering CCS technology and meeting G-8 goals for deployment of 20 similar projects by 2010. The Early Test is the fifth project worldwide to reach the CO2 injection volume of one million tonnes and the first in the U.S.

- (DOE Techline, 11/05/2009)

4

Anthropogenic Test

Capture: Alabama Power ‘s Plant Barry, Bucks, Alabama

Transportation: Denbury Onshore LLC

Geo Storage: Denbury’s Citronelle Field,

Citronelle, Alabama

RCSP Program Goals – Early Test

Predict storage capacities within +/- 30% Well known based upon production history; Early Test advanced the understanding

of efficiency of pore-volume occupancy (E factor). Success metrics: Measure saturation during multiphase plume evolution

(completed). Increase predictive capabilities (modeling underway).

Evaluate protocols to demonstrate that 99% of CO2 is retained Permanence of geologic system well understood prior to test because of retention

of large volumes of methane. Retention uncertainties lie in well performance. Early Test is evaluating methods to

assess well performance. Success metrics: Measure changes above the injection zone along well, above

zone monitoring interval (AZMI), and at surface (P-site) over long times (underway).

Contribute to development of Best Practices Manuals Early Test researchers have contributed to Best Practices Manuals on MVA,

characterization, risk and modeling. Assistance has been provided on related protocol development, including IOGCC (U.S.), Pew Center accounting study (U.S.), IPAC-CO2 (Canada), and CO2-Care (EU).

5

RCSP Project Goals – Early Test

Goal 1 - Adequate Injectivity and Capacity Advanced the understanding of efficiency of pore-volume occupancy (E factor) by measuring

the saturation during multiphase plume evolution. Anticipate increasing predictive capabilities through modeling.

Goal 2 - Storage Permanence Although well understood prior to test, assessed methods for documenting well performance,

which include:–Measure changes above the injection zone along well, above zone monitoring interval (AZMI), and at surface (P site) over long times (underway)

Goal 3 - Areal Extent of Plume and Potential Leakage Pathways Measured down-dip extent of plume via VSP and 4-D seismic to improve the uncertainty

regarding the radial flow (down dip/out of pattern) in the 4-way closure. Increase predictive capabilities through modeling

Goal 4 -Risk Assessment Saline storage site is located in EOR field with operator owning CO2. Use Early Test to advance risk assessment techniques and share information. Completed certification framework assessment of leakage risk. Confirmed well performance as highest uncertainty and focus of monitoring research.

6

RCSP Project Goals – Early Test

Goal 5 - Develop Best Practices Participated in developing BPMs for MVA, characterization, risk and reservoir modeling.

Goal 6 - Public Outreach and Education On-site outreach handled by Landmen. SSEB and Early Team focus on O&E in public and technical arenas. Hosted site visits, responses to local and trade media, Fact Sheets, and website postings of

project information.

Goal 7 - Improvement of Permitting Requirements Permits obtained by site operator. Project team focus is on development of regulatory framework for GHG. Provided experience with monitoring instruments and well performance to decision makers.

7

SECARB Organizational Chart

8

DOE/NETL

Program ManagementProject Management & Budget/Administrative Oversight

Southern States Energy Board (SSEB)

Early Test

Continued CharacterizationTX BEG/GCCC, EPRI, ARI

Offshore Study(Collaborators: SSEB,

TX BEG/GCCC, Geological Survey of Alabama, and

IOGCC)

TX BEG /Gulf Coast Carbon Center(Collaborators outlined in

Early Test section)

Regional Activities

Electric PowerResearch Institute

(Collaborators outlined in Anthropogenic Test section)

Anthropogenic Test

OutreachSSEB

Environmental Information Volumes

Cardno ENTRIX, Steve Walden Consulting

Environmental Information Volumes

Steve Walden Consulting

Legal & RegulatorySSEB

Federal collaboratorsVis FWP

Separately funded

Stanford, Princeton, U Edinburgh, UT PGE & ICES (CFSES), U. Tennessee, USGS RITE, BP

Early Test Organization Chart

9

Gulf Coast Carbon CenterBureau of Economic Geology

Jackson School of GeosciencesThe University of Texas at Austin

Sandia Technologies Monitoring Systems Design, Installation,

HS&E

Denbury ResourcesField owner and injection system

design, management, 4-D

survey, HS&E

LBNLWell-based geophysics, U-tube and lab design

and fabrication

LLNLERT

ORNLPFT, Stable isotopes

NETLRock-water interaction

USGSGeochemistry

Environmental Information Volumes

Walden Consulting

SSEB

50 Vendorse.g. SchlumbergerVendors

e.g. local landman

Vendorse.g. equipment

MSU UmissHydro & hydrochem

Core LabUT DoG

Anchor QEA

NRAPVSP

Project Overview: Scope of Work Task 1.0: Continued Characterization of Regional Sequestration

Opportunities– Assessment of regionally significant formations (saline); update of CO2

sources; regional/national Atlas updates; participation in RCSP capacity work group.

Task 2.0: Public Outreach and Education– Local (field test), regional , national, and international public outreach and

education. Task 3.0: Site Permitting

– Identification and submittal of required site permitting (EQs, EAs, drilling and injection permits from Miss. Oil and Gas Board).

Task 4.0: Site Characterization and Modeling– Detailed site characterization (existing data and new data collection)

Task 5.0: Well Drilling and Completion– Design and completion of observation and injection wells (Sandia

Tech/Denbury)

10

Project Overview: Scope of Work Task 6.0: Infrastructure Development

– Mostly provided by Denbury. Enlarge well pad, electricity for MVA Task 7.0: CO2 Procurement

– Procure additional CO2 to meet project metric. Task 8.0: Transportation and Injection Operations

– Transportation and injection operations provided by Denbury Task 9.0: Operational Monitoring and Modeling

– Early Test surface and subsurface monitoring, data collection, and modeling.

Task 10.0: Site Closure– Early Test discontinuation plan: Denbury continue commercial injection for

decades Task 11.0: Post-Injection Monitoring and Modeling

– Time lapse monitoring and model updates to history match; RCSP MVA Work Group participation.

11

Project Overview: Scope of Work Task 12.0: Project Assessment

– Site-specific, regional and Partnership-wide findings. Task 13.0: Project Management

– Local project management for field sites and overall project management and oversight.

Task 14.0: Does Not Exist– A pipeline study was proposed for Phase III but was later added to the

Phase II program instead. Task 15.0, which was proposed at the same time, was added to the Phase III program. The task numbers were not changed, so there is no Task 14.0 in the Phase III SOW.

Task 15.0: Preliminary Evaluation of Offshore Transport and Storage of CO2

– Resource mapping offshore Gulf of Mexico (state and federal waters); infrastructure inventory; legal and regulatory analysis; outreach and education regarding findings.

12

Project Overview: Schedule and Cost

Project Schedule– Early Test adjusted to match Denbury’s field development plan

Project Cost

13

Phase III Early Test

Dollars Percent

DOE Share $34,186,226 59.53%

Non-DOE Share $23,240,580 40.47%

Total Value $57,426,806*Expenditures as of

12/31/2010$37,796,045

*Does not include the Anthropogenic Test, continued characterization (Task 1), offshore study (Task 15), or regional activities (outreach, project assessment, project management). The total SECARB Phase III Program budget is $111,413,431.

Project Overview: Milestones

14

Gantt Chart All tasks are on schedule and budget.

15

Repetitive depositional units • Results transferable to:

• older and younger units• other parts of region

Confining System

Confining System

Regionally significant sequestration target: Gulf Coast wedge

Early Test – large volumes of CO2

17

Denbury Pipeline System

Update on Results of SECARB “ Early” Test of Monitoring Large Volume Injection at Cranfield

Natchez Mississippi

Mississippi River

3,000 m depthGas cap, oil ring, downdip water legShut in since 1965Strong water driveReturned to near initial pressure

Illustration by Tip Meckel 18

Cranfield

Source of large volumes ofCO2 via pipeline

Source: Dutton and others 1993

Upper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa-Woodbine Trend – Cranfield in Mississippi Salt Basin

19

Phase III

W E

Phase II

Oil-water contact

Stacked Reservoirs at Cranfield

Tip MeckelCross section from 3-D seismic survey

Mid

dle

Tu

scal

oo

sa

con

fin

ing

S

yste

m

20

Cranfield Progress

Ph

ase

II S

ite

dev

elo

pm

ent

Ch

arac

teri

zati

on

2007

Ph

ase

II S

ite

sele

ctio

n

2008 2009

Firstcored well,brine samples

baseline seismic

So

il g

as

ba

selin

e

2006

Phase IIPhase III

2010 2011 2012

Pha

se I

II N

EP

APhase III injection

Phase II injection

1 million tons Phase III injection 10/2010

5/1/2009 million tonnes injectedPhase II + III

End

SE

CA

RB

Ear

ly

12/20/2009Achieve 1 million tonnes/year rate

Drill Phase III3 DAS wells Commercial

injection

Monitoring

Repeat geophysical monitoring 10/2010

Project Workflow

22

Reservoir characterization;3-D, Production historyExisting cores and logsExisting aquifer data GEM and

TOUGH2 models for experiment design

Well drillingCross well seismicMulti-well hydro testsLogging, coring, Petrography, petrophysicsSoil gas recon,Groundwater surveillance

GEM, TOUGH2 Geochemist workbench models for Operations

BHP BHT DTS ERT, RST, U-tube geochemistryMeasurementGroundwater SurveillanceP-site measurements

GEM, TOUGH2 Geochemist workbench models for assessment

Time-lapse Cross well, VSP, repeat 3-DGroundwater SurveillanceP-site measurements

GEM, TOUGH2 Geochemist workbench models for assessment

MVA Design

23

Soil gas

Atmosphere

Area tested Whole plume Focus study

Not tested Not tested

Time-lapse surveys at active and P&Awell pads

“P site” methodology assessment

Groundwater

Shallow production

AZMI

Injection zone

Monitoring well at each injector

Not tested

EGL-7 UM cored test well. Push-pull test

Not tested

DAS pressure and EGL 7 pressure + fluids

DAS multi-well multi tool array

Not tested

Geochemistrybreakthrough

GeoMechanical test

Not tested GMT-failed

Injector

Producer (monitoring point)

Observation Well

High Volume Injection Test(HiVIT)

Detail Area Study DAS

GMT

Phase II

Five Study Areas

Pipeline head&Separation facility

5km

GIS base Tip Meckel

Psite

24

EGL-7

Scientific and Technical ActivitiesT

heo

ryan

d l

abF

ield

ex

per

imen

tsH

ypo

thes

is

test

ed

Commercial Deployment

CO2 retained in-zone- document no leakage to air-no damage to water

CO2 saturation correctly predicted by flow

modeling

Pressure (flow plus deformation)

correctly predicted by model

Above-zone acoustic monitoring (CASSM) & pressure monitoring

Contingency planParsimonious public

assurance monitoringTow

ard

co

mm

erci

aliz

ati

on

Surface monitoring: approach verificationGroundwater programGas variation over time

Subsurface perturbation predicted

Sensitivity of tools; saturated-vadose

modeling of flux and tracers

CO2 saturation measured through time – acoustic impedance + resistivity

Tomography and change through time, gravity

Microseismic test, RITE pressure

mapping

3- D time lapse surface/ VSP seismic

Acoustic response to pressure change over

time

Dissolution and saturation measured via tracer breakthrough and chromatography

Lab-based core response to EM and acoustic under various saturations, tracer

behavior

Advanced simulation of reservoir pressure field

25

CO2 Injection Zone

Above-Zone Pressure Monitoring –powerful tool for leakage detection

Fifteen Months of pressure data

Tip Meckel

E-W Stratigraphic Section

Middle Tuscaloosa Confining System

Tuscaloosa DE injection zone

AZMI

26

27

High quality but complex injection zone

Channelerosion

Channelerosion

Channelerosion

Point bar Point bar

Channelerosion

Galloway 1983

Meander fluvial model

Stratal slicing of 3-D volumeHongliu Zeng

DAS MonitoringInjectorCFU 31F1

Obs CFU 31 F2

Obs CFU 31 F3

Above-zone

monitoringF1 F2 F3

Injection Zone

Above Zone Monitoring

10,500 feet BSL

Closely spaced well array to examine flow in complex reservoir

68m

112 m

Petrel model Tip Meckel

28

Probabilistic realization of permeability

Jong-won Choi and JP Nicot BEG29

FI F2 F3

Modeled breakthrough time at well F2 for each of the 10 permeability fields

Breakthrough time at F2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

12/1/0

9

12/3/0

9

12/5/0

9

12/7/0

9

12/9/0

9

12/11/09

12/13/09

12/15/09

12/17/09

12/19/09

12/21/09

12/23/09

12/25/09

12/27/09

12/29/09

12/31/09

1/2/10

1/4/10

1/6/10

Date

Gas

sat

ura

tio

n

Set #1 at Ly14 (12/16/2009)

Set #2 at Ly17(12/20/2009)

Set #3 at Ly17(12/8/2009)

Set #4 at Ly10(12/15/2009)

Set #5 at Ly19(12/29/2009)

Set #6 at Ly10(12/23/2009)

Set #7 at Ly10(12/23/2009)

Set #8 at Ly10(12/7/2009)

Set #9 at Ly7(12/7/2009)

Set #10 at Ly10(12/11/2009)

Jong-won Choi and JP Nicot BEG

Observed breakthrough

30

Measuring distribution of CO2 in the reservoir

Well-based methods– Wireline logs in time lapse -RST– Temperature

Cross well methods– Time- lapse ERT– Time – lapse acoustic (seismic)

Arial methods– Azimuthal and walk away VSP– Time-lapse 3-D seismic from surface

31

F3

F2

F1 (Injection)

Inter-well Distance (ft)

0.0 140 367

BaselineSep. 2009

Prelim. Cross-well Seismic

ChangeNov. 2010

Ajo-Franklin and Daley LBNL

Edge

effe

cts

CO

2 masked

by m

ethan

e

Preliminary surface 3-D difference 2007 (pre injection)- 11/2010

InjectorProducer

Trevor Richards, Denbury

High frequency fluid sampling via U-tube yields data on flow processes

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

11/29/09 0:00 12/4/09 0:00 12/9/09 0:00 12/14/09 0:00 12/19/09 0:00 12/24/09 0:00 12/29/09 0:00 1/3/10 0:00

SAMPLING TIME

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

CH4

CO2

BEG, LBNL, USGS, ORNL, UTDoG, data compiled by Changbing Yang BEG

Breakthrough of of CO2

No sa

mple

s

Additional flow paths – more methane extracted

Double injection rate

Small diameter sampler with N2 drive brings fluids quickly to surface with tracers intactCO2 dissolution into brine liberates dissolved CH4

Originallybrine methane saturated

35

36

P site Tests Effects of Vadose-Zone Carbon Cycling on Leaked Gasses

Romanak and Yang, BEG

Modeling Underway

SIMSEQ – interpartnership model development test GEM models – DAS and HiVIT LBNL – TOUGH2 DOE BES EFRC program - CFSES NRAP

37

GEM modeled CO2 plume evolution HiVIT Nicot and Choi BEG

Dec 2009 March 2010

TOUGH2DAS DoughtyLBNL

Risk Assessment – Certification Framework

Nicot, (BEG) Oldenburg (LBNL) and others, 2011

38

39

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

Dep

th (m

)

Mass Flux (kg/m2/s)

Base Case

Sensitivity Case 1

Sensitivity Case 2

Lower Tuscaloosa

Middle Tuscaloosa

Upper Tuscaloosa

Eutaw

Eagle Ford

Austin Chalk

Midway ClaystonesLower Tuscaloosa

Middle Tuscaloosa

Upper TuscaloosaEutaw

Eagle Ford

Austin Chalk

Midway Claystones

Wilcox

39

Nicot, (BEG) Oldenburg (LBNL) and others, 2011

Risk Assessment – Certification Framework

FloridaUSGS

SECARB Early Knowledge Sharing U.S. and International Programs

Building from past experiences

Exchange with sister projects

Sharing results with future projects

Frio Test 1&2

Plant Daniel

GEO-SEQ

Nagaoka

Mountaineer

SECARB Early Test

SECARB Anthro Test

Otway

Decatur

In Salah

BIG CCS(Norway)

Univ. Oslo(Norway)

Scottish Center CCS

RITE Microsesmic

FloridaPolk Co

NRG CCPI

SIM-SEQ

More commercial

CFSES

IPAC-CO2Examples

Mon

itorin

g ap

proa

ches

Fiel

d ex

perie

nce

Resi

stivi

ty

Resi

dual

gas

InSA

R

Pow

er p

lant

site

Pow

er p

lant

site

Mon

itorin

g ap

proa

ches

ERT

Indu

stria

l

Com

mer

cial

in

tegr

ation

40

Ketzin

NRAP

AP/Leucadia/Hastings

Education and Outreach

41

• GCCC Outreach: press, conferences, publications, testimony

www.gulfcoastcarbon.com

• ARRA Funded Projects– STORE:

• sequestration training outreach research and education www.storeCO2now.com

– SECARB-Ed www.secarb-ed.org (led by SSEB)

Interim Conclusions of Study at Cranfield

1 million metric ton/year rate achieved Dec 20, 2009, 2.6 Million metric tons monitored since July 2008

Injection maintained >30 months Monitored with standard and novel approaches

– History match pressure response– Above-Zone Monitoring Interval (AZMI)– Fluid flow measured/monitored with multiple tools in complex

flow field– Quantification of dissolution– Knowledge sharing, outreach, risk assessment

Export to commercial EOR/sequestration projects

42

SECARB Early Test Future Plans

Extensive modeling Continue monitoring Downhole,

P&T , AZMI P site , groundwater,

Mine existing Cranfield data and share with others to increase predictive capabilities (e.g., SIM-SEQ inter-partnership model development program).

43

Attachment A

44

SECARB Phase II

Stacked Storage ProjectCranfield Test Site

Host Company: Denbury Resources, Inc.near Natchez, Mississippi

Coal Seam ProjectHost Company: CNX GasRussell County, Virginia

Coal Seam ProjectHost Company: El Paso E&P

near Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Mississippi Test SiteMississippi Power’s Plant Daniel

Escatawpa, Mississippi

45

SECARB Phase III: Total Program Budget

46

Project Overview: Scope of Work Structure

Organization (Tasks 1, 15 are unique) Organization (Tasks 2-13)

– Task Level (Activity) Subtask Level (Field Test Site or Regional Effort)

– Early Test is X.1– Anthropogenic Test is X.2– Regional Efforts are X.3

Example– Task 2.0: Public Outreach and Education

Subtask 2.1: SECARB Early Test Public Outreach and Education

Subtask 2.2: SECARB Anthropogenic Test Public Outreach and Education

Subtask 2.3: Regional and Partnership Public Outreach and Education

47

SECARB Phase III: Tasks & ScheduleAll tasks are on schedule and budget.

Task Start EndContinued Characterization of Regional Sequestration Options (TASK 1.0) 10/1/07 3/31/17

Subtask 1.1: Improved Geologic Characterization of Regionally Significant Tuscaloosa/Woodbine Saline Formations 1/1/08 12/14/09Subtask 1.2: Information for Use in the Update to the Regional Atlas 10/1/07 9/25/08Subtask 1.3: Participation in Capacity Subgroup 10/1/07 9/25/08

Subtask 1.4: Further Geologic Characterization of Regionally Significant Large Capacity Saline Formations 1/1/09 12/31/12

Subtask 1.5: Updated Assessment of the CO2 Storage Potential of the SECARB Coals and the Organic Shales 1/1/09 12/17/10

Subtask 1.6: Reservoir Characteristic Data for Other SECARB Saline Reservoirs 10/1/09 9/30/12Subtask 1.7: Update of CO2 Sources in the SECARB Region 10/1/09 9/30/12Subtask 1.8: Provide Information for Use in the Updates to the Regional Atlas 10/1/12 9/30/15Subtask 1.9: Provide Information on Subsequent Updates to Regional Atlas 10/1/15 3/31/17Public Outreach and Education (TASK 2.0) 10/1/07 9/30/17Subtask 2.1: SECARB Early Test Public Outreach and Education 10/1/07 9/30/17Subtask 2.2: Anthropogenic Test Public Outreach and Education 1/1/09 9/30/15Subtask 2.3: Regional and Partnership Public Outreach and Education 10/1/07 9/30/17

48

SECARB Phase III: Tasks & ScheduleAll tasks are on schedule and budget.

Task Start EndSite Permitting (TASK 3.0) 7/7/07 6/30/11Subtask 3.1: Permitting for the Early Test Site 7/7/07 5/15/09Subtask 3.2: Permitting for the Anthropogenic Test Site 1/1/09 6/30/11Site Characterization and Modeling (TASK 4.0) 10/1/07 12/15/11Subtask 4.1: Site Characterization and Modeling for the Early Test Site 10/1/07 12/15/11Subtask 4.2: Site Characterization and Modeling for the Anthropogenic Test Site 1/1/09 7/31/11Well Drilling and Completion (TASK 5.0) 10/1/07 9/30/11Subtask 5.1: Early Test Site Well Drilling and Completion 10/1/07 5/21/10Subtask 5.2: Anthropogenic Test Well Drilling and Completion 10/1/09 9/30/11Infrastructure Development (TASK 6.0) 10/1/07 9/30/11Subtask 6.1: Early Test Site Infrastructure Development 10/1/07 1/30/11Subtask 6.2: Anthropogenic Test Site Infrastructure Development 10/1/10 9/30/11CO2 Procurement (TASK 7.0) 9/28/08 2/28/11Subtask 7.1: Early Test CO2 Procurement 9/28/08 1/30/11Subtask 7.2: Anthropogenic Test CO2 Procurement 10/1/10 2/28/11Transportation and Injection Operations (TASK 8.0) 9/30/09 3/31/14Subtask 8.1: Early Test CO2 Transportation and Injection Operations 9/30/09 1/30/11Subtask 8.2: Anthropogenic Test CO2 Transportation and Injection Operations 1/1/11 3/31/14Operational Monitoring and Modeling (TASK 9.0) 11/15/07 3/31/15Subtask 9.1: Early Test Operational Monitoring and Modeling 11/15/07 1/30/11Subtask 9.2: Anthropogenic Test Operational Monitoring and Modeling 4/1/10 3/31/15

49

SECARB Phase III: Tasks & ScheduleAll tasks are on schedule and budget.

Task Start EndSite Closure (TASK 10.0) 10/1/07 3/31/17Subtask 10.1: Cranfield Test Discontinuation 10/1/07 10/30/13Subtask 10.2: Anthropogenic Test Site Closure 10/1/15 3/31/17Post-Injection Monitoring and Modeling (TASK 11.0) 6/15/09 3/31/17Subtask 11.1: Early Test Post-Injection Monitoring and Modeling 6/15/09 9/30/14Subtask 11.2: Anthropogenic Test Post-Injection Monitoring and Modeling 6/1/15 3/31/17Project Assessment (TASK 12.0) 10/1/07 7/30/17Subtask 12.1: Early Test Project Assessment 4/1/08 9/15/15Subtask 12.2: Anthropogenic Test Project Assessment 10/1/10 7/30/17Subtask 12.3: Regional Project Assessment 10/1/07 7/30/17Project Management (TASK 13.0) 10/1/07 10/31/17Subtask 13.1: Project Management - GCCC 10/1/07 7/30/17Subtask 13.2: Project Management - EPRI 10/1/07 7/30/17Subtask 13.3: Project Management - SSEB 10/1/07 10/31/17Preliminary Evaluation of Offshore Transport and Storage of CO2 (TASK 15.0) 10/1/09 9/30/11Subtask 15.1: Offshore Gulf of Mexico Resource Mapping - Federal Waters 10/1/09 9/30/10Subtask 15.2: Offshore Gulf of Mexico Resource Mapping - State Waters - Florida Panhandle, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana 10/1/09 9/30/10Subtask 15.3: Legal and Regulatory Structures and Opportunities 10/1/09 9/30/11

50