FUGRO – McCLELLAND MARINE GEOSCIENCES INC.

6100 Hillcroft (77081)

P.O. Box 740010
Houston, TX 77274
Phone: 713-369-5600
Fax: 713-369-5570

Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2

Subject: Advanced Final Engineering, Location: ETAME12-1, Etame Marin, Offshore Gabon
To: Craig Devenney, VAALCO Energy, Inc. (VAALCO)
Paul Robinson, Ph.D., McDermott Engineering, LLC
From: Benjamin Lunsford, P.E., Fugro-McClelland Marine Geosciences, Inc. (FMMG)
Lawrence Soosainathan, P.E., FMMG
Date: December 6, 2012

FMMG is pleased to submit this technical note on the final engineering analysis for the proposed
ETAME-1 platform located in the Etame Marin area, offshore Gabon. Soil parameters and engineering
recommendations were determined based on geotechnical properties encountered at the ETAME12-1
geotechnical borehole location. Table 1 presents the coordinates and estimated water depth at the
geotechnical borehole location.

Table 1: ETAME12-1 Borehole Coordinates

Estimated Water Depth,

Easting (m) Northing (m)
MSL (m)

667584.69 9583804.53 79.7

Datum M’Poraloko-Clarke 1880, UTM, Zone 32,
Southern Hemisphere, EPSG code: 26692

This note includes an analysis of ultimate capacity for 48-in.-diameter pipe piles installed by
driving through the near seafloor soils, drilling out to the pile termination depth by under reaming to a
diameter of 54-in., and grouting the pile in place once the termination depth is reached. The results of the
analysis, including unit skin friction, ultimate axial capacity, axial side load-pile movement (t-z) data and
lateral load transfer (p-y) data, are presented in this memo. Soil parameters and engineering
recommendations were developed from the information obtained at the ETAME12-1 site investigation and
may not be appropriate if extrapolated or assumed for alternative locations.

Soil Parameters

Soil parameters were derived from geotechnical data obtained at the ETAME12-1 geotechnical
borehole. A geotechnical borehole log of the site is presented on Plate 1. Parameters were developed to
assist with calculations of ultimate capacity for a composite driven and drilled-and-grouted pile foundation
and are presented in tabular format on Plate 2. These parameters were developed from our
interpretation of in situ and laboratory test results from ETAME12-1.

Engineering Analysis

Unit skin friction, ultimate axial capacity, axial side load-pile movement (t-z) data and lateral load
transfer (p-y) data, were developed for 48-in.-diameter pipe piles driven to maximum penetration of 9.7 m
below the mudline, and drilled and grouted below that to a maximum termination depth of 40.0 m at the

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 1

FUGRO – McCLELLAND MARINE GEOSCIENCES INC.

ETAME12-1 site. The drilling is proposed by utilizing an under reamer with a coring diameter of 54-in.
Our analysis is still applicable should pile driving be terminated at a depth shallower than 9.7 m below the
mudline. However, pile driving may be possible beyond a tip depth of 9.7 m below the mudline.

Ultimate axial capacities in tension and compression were developed using the Alpha method
(Tomlinson, 1977) in cohesive soils and recommendations by API RP 2GEO (2011) in frictional soils.
The unit skin friction profile used to determine the ultimate axial capacity is presented on Plate 3. The
capacity from end bearing was conservatively ignored for this site. The ultimate axial capacity is
presented on Plate 4.

Axial side load-pile movement (t-z) data were developed using recommendations by API RP
2GEO (2011) in cohesive and frictional soils. Axial side load-pile movement (t-z) data are presented in
tabular format on Plate 5.

Lateral load transfer (p-y) data were developed using recommendations by API (1979 with Errata
and Supplement 2008) in cohesive soils and recommendations by API RP 2GEO (2011) in frictional soils.
Lateral load transfer (p-y) data are presented in tabular format on Plate 6.

Mudmat Bearing Capacity

Ultimate bearing capacity equations for the near-surface soils were taken from a design
method developed by Terzaghi and Peck (1967) based on the angle of internal friction () of the surficial
granular soils. The following equation may be used to determine the ultimate bearing capacity for
horizontal tubular members and mud mats resting on the seafloor:

qu = (27B) (1 - 0.4B/L),

where: qu = ultimate bearing capacity, kPa;

B = width of mud mat, m; and
L = length of mud mat, m.
For horizontal tubular members penetrating less than one radius, the projected area at the
mudline should be used to calculate the ultimate bearing capacity of the members. For members
penetrating one radius or more, the diameter should be used. For triangular-shaped mud mats, B should
be taken as 75 percent of the least altitude and L should be taken as the longest side.
The ultimate bearing capacity of the near-seafloor soils is a function of the size and configuration
of the mud mats and jacket structure. A more detailed analysis of soil deformation and bearing capacity
can be undertaken when the actual configuration and loading conditions are determined.
For Working Stress Design (WSD), API RP 2A-WSD (2000) recommends that a safety factor of
at least 2.0 be used with the ultimate bearing capacity determined from the above equation. The ultimate
bearing (load-carrying) capacity of a horizontal tubular member or mud mat may be calculated as the
ultimate bearing capacity of the soil multiplied by the base area of the mat or member resting on the
seafloor. The equations for ultimate bearing capacity presented above are based on static bearing
capacity conditions. Significant vertical platform velocities at the time of jacket placement could cause
large or uneven jacket settlements.

Installation Considerations

The capacity of drilled-and-grouted piles may be affected more by construction procedures than
that of a driven pile. Kraft and Lyons (1974) have summarized the effects of construction procedures on

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 2

FUGRO – McCLELLAND MARINE GEOSCIENCES INC.

the capacity of grouted piles. Improper control of drilling procedures, the use of drilling mud, and grout
quality can seriously affect the capacity of a drilled-and-grouted pile. Abbs and Needham (1985) reported
“there are currently no recorded field situations where progressive failure has occurred despite some
platforms having been in place for 20 years, indicating perhaps the general conservatism in grouted pile
design.”

Foundation installation at this site will likely require pile driving through the loose, granular near-
seafloor soils in Unit I. Pile driving is likely possible in Unit II, and may be possible in Unit III. If the
driving is not monitored, driving should be terminated at a low blow count (10 blows per 0.25 m) to
prevent damage to the pile toe. The drilling program should only commence after pile driving is
terminated, and the drilling contractor has secured the pile to the platform jacket.

The object of a successful drilling program is to produce a clean, stable hole. The cuttings
generated during the drilling process should be removed as they are produced. Different techniques that
have been successfully used to remove cuttings include: (1) conventional oil well drilling techniques, and
(2) conventional geotechnical drilling techniques. The choice of the method depends on the anticipated
soil conditions and availability of equipment. When planning installation of drilled-and-grouted piles,
special consideration should be given to the following: (a) drilling fluid, (b) borehole stability, (c) width of
grout annulus, (d) grout volume and placement, (e) grout properties, (f) hydraulic fracturing, and (g) field
monitoring of borehole and grout return.

Comments and Recommendations

 Our analysis assumes that the use of shear keys will be implemented so that the critical pile load
transfer occurs at the soil-grout interface. In order to obtain the ultimate pile capacities
presented, a minimum shear key ratio (width of key outstand/key spacing) of 0.0263
should be used. This value also assumes that a grout with an unconfined compressive strength
of at least 27.5 MPa (4000 psi) is used. Design of the shear keys should be performed in
accordance with API 2A-WSD (2000) recommendations. The ultimate pile capacity for the
ETAME12-1 location is 27.7 MN at 40.0-m below the mudline without the use of shear keys.

 API RP 2A recommends that pile penetrations be selected using appropriate factors of safety or
pile resistance factors. For working stress design (WSD), API RP 2A recommends that pile
penetrations be selected to provide factors of safety of at least 2.0 with respect to normal
operating loads and at least 1.5 with respect to maximum design storm loads. These factors of
safety should be applied to the design compressive and tensile loads.

 We do not recommend that the holes be advanced using seawater alone. We believe that drilling
mud will be needed to support the boreholes and counter the effects of radial squeezing. We
recommend that delays in the installation of the drilled-and-grouted piles be kept to a minimum.
The faster the hole can be drilled, grout placed and pile installed, the less the softening of the soil
along the borehole wall. Another critical issue in the construction of drilled-and-grouted piles is
the potential for hydraulic fracture of the grout into the formation.

Warranty

The findings of this technical note will be presented with more detail in a subsequent final report
submitted by FMMG, which will also contain the results of the onshore laboratory testing program. The
information in this technical note is subject to the service warranty written in that report.

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 3

FUGRO – McCLELLAND MARINE GEOSCIENCES INC.

References

Abbs, A.F. and Needham, A.D. (1985), “Grouted Piles in Weak Carbonate Rocks,” Proceedings, 1985
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC Paper 4852.
American Petroleum Institute (2000), Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing
Fixed Offshore Platforms - Working Stress Design, API Recommended Practice 2A WSD (RP 2A-WSD),
21st Ed., December 2000, API, Washington, D.C. (with Errata and Supplement 3, March 2008).
American Petroleum Institute (2011), Geotechnical and Foundation Design Considerations,
ANSI/API Recommended Practice 2GEO, 1st Edition, API, Washington, D.C.
Kraft, L.M., Jr. and Lyons, C.G. (1974), “State-of-the-Art: Ultimate Axial Capacity of Grouted Piles,”
Proceedings, 1974 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC Paper 2081.
Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B. (1967), Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice,2nd Edition, John Wiley &
Sons, p. 729.
Tomlinson, M.J. (1996), “Foundation Design and Construction”, Longman, Ed 6, Chapter 4, pp. 121-128.

List of Illustrations
Plate
Geotechnical Log ............................................................................................................................... 1
Parameters for Axial Pile Capacity Model ......................................................................................... 2
Unit Skin Friction for Pile Capacity..................................................................................................... 3
Ultimate Axial Pile Capacity ............................................................................................................... 4
Pile Axial Load Transfer (T-Z) Data ................................................................................................... 5
P-Y Data Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 6

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 5

 Unit Weight [kN/m³] Classification [%] Undrained Shear Strength [kPa]
In-situ Graphic
Samples Tests Log Unit Strata Description 10 15 20 25 0 30 60 90 120 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
11
0.0 W1 0.0 m to 1.2 m - loose dark olive grey to 12
I greenish grey clayey calcareous fine
CPT1 SAND, with few shells and shell fragments
- at top pockets of organic matter
1.2 m to 9.7 m - slightly cemented and 17
3.0 W2 fissured very stiff to hard black to dark
greenish grey calcareous CLAY
- at top traces of shell fragment
CPT2 from 1.2 m to 3.2 m - greenish grey to pale
yellow and lean, with rock fragments
II 47
6.0 W3

CPT3

9.0
W4 44
CPT4 9.7 m to 28.0 m - slightly to moderately
CPT5 cemented and fissured very hard dark olive
grey calcareous CLAY 32
- interbedded with SILT
12.0 RCRC1
36
- occasionally well cemented
- occasionally rock fragments
CPT6 from 9.7 m to 11.3 m - light grey
calcareous Claystone
from 14.0 m - with traces of shell fragments 32
W5
15.0 CPT7

CPT8
at 16.8 m - with sand 20
W6
18.0 CPT9 27
W7
Depth Below Seafloor [m]

III
CPT10

W8 25
21.0
CPT11
W9
from 21.2 m to 22.0 m - Siltstone
CPT12
20
RCRC2 from 23.1 m - lean 28
24.0
CPT13
25
RCRC3 at 25.0 m - Siltstone
at 25.3 m - with sand 16

27.0 CPT14
21
W10 CPT15
28.0 m to 40.0 m - interbedded light olive
Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2

14
RCRC4 grey SILTSTONE with Calcite veins and
moderately to well cemented black very
30.0 CPT16 dense calcareous SILT
W11 - with H2S odour 17
RCRC5
9
CPT17
33.0

RCRC6
IV 24

CPT18

36.0
RCRC7
20
CPT19
RCRC8

39.0
CPT20
at 40.0 m - End of Borehole

42.0

45.0

Date commenced : 11-Sep-2012 Unit weight derived Water content Pocket penetrometer
from water content
Method : Rotary borehole drilling, sampling and testing Plastic limit Torvane
Unit weight derived
Recovery depth : to 0.0 m below seafloor from volume mass Liquid limit Fallcone
calculation
Penetration depth : to m below seafloor Plasticity index Hand vane
Water depth : 79.7 m Percentage fines Laboratory vane
Co-ordinates : 667585 m E 9583805 m N Carbonate content UU-triaxial
Organic content CU-triaxial
Relative density Direct simple shear
derived from CPT
In-situ vane shear test
Undrained shear strength derived from CPT
Slashed symbol refers to test on remoulded soil
Plate 1

GEOTECHNICAL LOG
LOCATION ETAME 12-1
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN BLOCK, OFFSHORE GABON
Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2

Depth Ground Ground UW cu Alpha-c Phi-eff Beta Delta Kc Kt UCS Alpha-r f-limit
from unit unit
to name behaviour
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN BLOCK, OFFSHORE GABON

[m] [kN/m3] [kPa] [-] [deg] [-] [deg] [-] [-] [-] [kPa]
0.0 18.7 - 20 -
I Frictional - 0.21 - - - - -
1.2 18.7 - 20 -
48-in. DIAMETER DRIVEN AND DRILLED-AND-GROUTED CIRCULAR PILE

1.2 18.1 125.0 - -

II Cohesive 0.40 - - - - - -
9.7 18.1 400.0 - -
PARAMETERS FOR AXIAL PILE CAPACITY MODEL

9.7 18.1 700.0 - -

III Cohesive 0.50 - - - - - -
22.0 18.1 1000.0 - -
22.0 20.0 600.0 - -
III Cohesive 0.50 - - - - - -
28.0 20.0 600.0 - -
28.0 18.1 - 35 -
IV Frictional - 0.46 - - - - 96
40.0 18.1 - 35 -

Cohesive axial pile capacity model : Alpha (Tomlinson, 1977) UW : Total unit weight delta : Pile-soil interface friction angle
Frictional axial pile capacity model : API RP 2GEO (2011) cu : Undrained shear strength beta : Skin friction factor
Phi-eff : Internal effective soil friction angle f-limit : Limiting unit skin friction
UCS : Uni-axial compressive strength q-limit : Limiting unit end bearing
Alpha-c : Clay adhesion factor (Alpha 1977) Nq : End bearing factor
Alpha-r : Rock adhesion factor Ncr : Rock end bearing factor
Kc : Coefficient of lateral earth pressure in compression
Note(s): Kt : Coefficient of lateral earth pressure in tension
Plate 2

- Scour depth = 1.2m

 Ground Ground
Unit Skin Friction [kPa] Behaviour Unit
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Name

II

10

III

20

III

30

IV
Depth Below Seafloor [m]

40

50

60

70

80

90
Unit Skin Friction in Compression Ground Behaviour
Unit Skin Friction in Tension Legend
cohesive
frictional
rock
Note(s):
- Tension and compression curves coincide
- Assumes the use of shear keys as described in the text

UNIT SKIN FRICTION FOR PILE CAPACITY

48-in. DIAMETER DRIVEN AND DRILLED-AND-GROUTED CIRCULAR PILE
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN BLOCK, OFFSHORE GABON

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 Plate 3

 Ground Ground
Ultimate Capacity [MN] Behaviour Unit
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Name

II

10

III

20

III

30

IV
Depth Below Seafloor [m]

40

50

60

70

80

90
Outer Friction in Compression Ground Behaviour
Outer Friction in Tension Legend
cohesive
frictional
rock
Note(s):
- Tension and compression curves coincide
- End bering component of ultimate capacity is ignored
- Assumes the use of shear keys as described in the text

ULTIMATE AXIAL PILE CAPACITY

48-in. DIAMETER DRIVEN AND DRILLED-AND-GROUTED CIRCULAR PILE
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN BLOCK, OFFSHORE GABON

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 Plate 4

 Cohesive model: API RP 2GEO (2011)
Frictional model: API RP 2GEO (2011)
Depth Ground t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7 t8
[m] unit z1 z2 z3 z4 z5 z6 z7 z8
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 I
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.2 I
Date:

0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60

0.00 15.00 25.00 37.50 45.00 50.00 35.00 35.00
1.2 II
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 48.00 80.00 120.00 144.00 160.00 112.00 112.00
9.7 II
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 105.00 175.00 262.50 315.00 350.00 245.00 245.00
9.7 III
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
Drawn By:

0.00 150.00 250.00 375.00 450.00 500.00 350.00 350.00

22.0 III
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 90.00 150.00 225.00 270.00 300.00 210.00 210.00
22.0 III
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 90.00 150.00 225.00 270.00 300.00 210.00 210.00
28.0 III
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 28.80 48.00 72.00 86.40 96.00 96.00 96.00
28.0 IV
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
0.00 28.80 48.00 72.00 86.40 96.00 96.00 96.00
40.0 IV
0.00 2.19 4.25 7.82 10.97 13.72 27.43 1371.60
Date:

Date:
Approved By:
Checked By:

NOTES:
- "t" is mobilized soil-pile adhesion, [kPa].
- "z" is axial pile displacement, [mm].
- Data for tension and compression coincide.
- 1.2m scour

PILE AXIAL LOAD TRANSFER (T-Z) DATA

48-in.-DIAMETER DRIVEN AND DRILLED-AND-GROUTED CIRCULAR PILE
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN, OFFSHORE GABON

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 PLATE 5

 P-y data : Cyclic
Cohesive model : API (1979 with Errata & Supplement 2008)
Frictional model : API RP 2GEO (2011)

P1, ..., P8 = Lateral resistance per unit length of pile [MN/m]

y1, ..., y8 = Lateral pile deflection [mm]

Depth Ground Units p p p p p p p p

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
[m] unit name y y y y y y y y
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0.0 I [MN/m]
1.2m general scour
[mm]

[MN/m] 0.031 0.050 0.061 0.032

1.2 II
[mm] 1.125 2.249 4.499 17.995

[MN/m] 0.097 0.155 0.188 0.062

2.0 II
[mm] 2.144 4.288 8.576 34.302

[MN/m] 0.143 0.230 0.279 0.081

2.4 II
[mm] 2.513 5.026 10.052 40.206

[MN/m] 0.215 0.345 0.419 0.095

3.0 II
[mm] 2.852 5.704 11.408 45.633

[MN/m] 0.348 0.558 0.678 0.104

4.0 II
[mm] 3.160 6.319 12.639 50.555

[MN/m] 0.509 0.817 0.992 0.123

5.0 II
[mm] 3.275 6.550 13.099 52.397

[MN/m] 0.514 0.824 1.001 0.124

5.0 II
[mm] 3.278 6.555 13.110 52.441

[MN/m] 0.578 0.928 1.128 0.114

6.0 II
[mm] 3.367 6.734 13.468 53.873

[MN/m] 0.645 1.035 1.258 0.125

7.0 II
[mm] 3.374 6.748 13.497 53.986

[MN/m] 0.825 1.325 1.609 0.160

9.7 II
[mm] 3.374 6.748 13.497 53.986

[MN/m] 1.625 2.608 3.169 0.315

9.7 III
[mm] 3.796 7.592 15.184 60.734

[MN/m] 2.321 3.726 4.526 0.450

22.0 III
[mm] 3.796 7.592 15.184 60.734

[MN/m] 1.393 2.236 2.716 0.270

22.0 III
[mm] 3.796 7.592 15.184 60.734

[MN/m] 1.393 2.236 2.716 0.270

28.0 III
[mm] 3.796 7.592 15.184 60.734

[MN/m] 3.315 6.329 10.781 14.626

28.0 IV
[mm] 5.715 11.430 22.860 51.435

[MN/m] 4.797 9.144 15.515 20.893

40.0 IV
[mm] 5.715 11.430 22.860 51.435

Note(s):

P-Y DATA ASSESSMENT

48-in. DIAMETER DRIVEN AND DRILLED-AND-GROUTED CIRCULAR PILE
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - ETAME12-1 - ETAME MARIN BLOCK, OFFSHORE GABON

Fugro Technical Note No. 0201-7263-2 Plate 6