Page 1
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
1
WESTERN GRAY WHALE ADVISORY PANEL
NOISE TASK FORCE
NTF-14
REPORT OF THE NOISE TASK FORCE
AT ITS 14TH
MEETING
14-16 MARCH 2018
GLAND, SWITZERLAND
CONVENED BY THE INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE
Page 2
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
2
Contents
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 4
1 INTRODUCTORY ITEMS .................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Introductions including expectations from the meeting .................................................................... 5
1.2 Logistics ............................................................................................................................................ 5
1.3 Adoption of the Agenda .................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Available documents/materials .......................................................................................................... 5
2 Update on plans for seismic work by sakhalin energy in 2018 (SEIC) ............................................... 5
2.1 Updates from the company on seismic survey plans ......................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Order of survey .......................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Sound source reduction tests ..................................................................................................... 5
2.1.3 Permits and the SEER process .................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Discussion and conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5
3 Finalisation of the MMP and any associated practical details (SEIC) ............................................... 7
3.1 Chain of Command Protocol ............................................................................................................. 7
3.1.1 Presentation by Company .......................................................................................................... 7
3.1.2 Conclusion on the draft protocol ............................................................................................... 7
3.2 Acoustic monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 7
3.2.1 Numbers of archival and monitoring buoys .............................................................................. 7
3.2.2 NTF discussion and conclusions ............................................................................................... 8
3.3 Visual monitoring including final protocol ....................................................................................... 8
3.3.1 Mysticetus software and incorporation of factors such as tidal data and height of platform for
positional information ............................................................................................................................... 8
3.3.2 Poor visibility technology .......................................................................................................... 9
3.3.3 MMOs, schedules and duties ................................................................................................... 10
3.3.4 Definition of ‘aberrant’ behaviour in light of previous seismic survey guidelines ................. 10
3.3.5 Conclusions on the visual protocols ........................................................................................ 11
3.4 Other matters ................................................................................................................................... 11
3.4.1 Final Terms of Reference (TOR) and selection of the Independent Observer (update from
IUCN) 11
3.4.2 Advisory Group including communications protocol .............................................................. 11
3.5 Conclusions and recommendations ................................................................................................. 12
4 PREPARATION for Data analyses for the 2018 SEISMIC survey .................................................. 12
4.1 Data archiving and QA/QC plans .................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Planning for analyses including who, how and when, and incorporation of previous datasets ....... 12
5 Progress (IF ANY) with analyses of data from the 2015 SEISMIC SURVEY................................. 13
6 Non-seismic-related acoustic issues ...................................................................................................... 13
6.1 Issues concerning ‘control’ station(s) .............................................................................................. 13
6.2 POI analyses of acoustic data .......................................................................................................... 13
6.2.1 Follow-up on matters raised from the 2015 data as discussed at WGWAP-18....................... 13
6.2.2 Consideration of 2015 acoustic data provided to the Panel at WGWAP-18 ........................... 13
Page 3
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
3
6.3 Company plans for ‘noisy’ activities in 2018 e.g. use of echo sounders ......................................... 14
6.4 Progress on automatic detection algorithms .................................................................................... 14
6.6 Gray whale sounds ................................................................................................................................ 16
6.7 Plans for noise monitoring in 2018 outside the seismic survey period, if any ................................ 16
7 OTHER BUSINESS .............................................................................................................................. 17
ANNEX A - LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN NTF-14 MEETING ............................................................. 18
ANNEX B – Agenda ...................................................................................................................................... 19
ANNEX C - LIST OF DOCUMENTS ......................................................................................................... 21
Page 4
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
4
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AG Advisory Group
AUAR Automated Underwater Acoustic Recorder
Company Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd.
CC Central Commander
CMS Camera Monitoring System
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
ENL Exxon Neftegas Limited
ESHIA Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
GW Gray whale
IFC International Finance Corporation
IO Independent Observer
IR Infrared
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
Joint Programme Sakhalin Energy/ENL Joint Programme on Gray Whale Monitoring
LAN Local Area Network
LF Low frequency
MMO Marine Mammal Observer
MMP Monitoring and Mitigation Programme/Plan
MMPP Marine Mammal Protection Plan
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
NTF Noise Task Force
OBN Ocean Bottom Node
OVOS Russian Federation Environmental Impact Assessment
Panel Western Gray Whale Advisory Panel
PAM Passive Acoustic Monitoring
P-A Piltun-Ashtok
PML Perimeter Monitoring Line
POI Pacific Oceanological Institute
PTS Permanent Threshold Shift
QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
RF Russian Federation
RMS Root-Mean-Square
Sakhalin Energy Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd.
SCF SovComFlot Geo
SEER State Environmental Expert Review
SEIC Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd.
SEL Sound Exposure Level
TTS Temporary Threshold Shift
VHF Very High Frequency
WGWAP Western Gray Whale Advisory Panel
Page 5
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
5
1 INTRODUCTORY ITEMS
1.1 Introductions including expectations from the meeting
The 14th meeting of the Noise Task Force (hereafter NTF) was held at the IUCN headquarters in Gland,
Switzerland, from 14-16 March 2018, under the chairmanship of Greg Donovan. The list of participants is
given as Annex A.
Giulia Carbone welcomed the group on behalf of IUCN, and Donovan thanked her and her team for the
efficient organization of the meeting.
Donovan explained that the purposes of the workshop were three-fold: (1) to receive updates on the proposed
2018 seismic survey and finalise the MMP, work plan and field protocols for that survey, including
consideration of data collection and aspects of future analyses; (2) to review progress, if any, with analyses
of data collected during the Sakhalin Energy seismic survey in 2015; and (3) to review non-seismic acoustic
issues.
1.2 Logistics
Duramy and Carbone provided information on the logistics for the meeting
1.3 Adoption of the Agenda
The adopted agenda is given as Annex B.
1.4 Available documents/materials
The list of documents is given as Annex C. Donovan thanked the authors for making papers available in
advance of the workshop.
2 UPDATE ON PLANS FOR SEISMIC WORK BY SAKHALIN ENERGY IN 2018
(SEIC)
2.1 Updates from the company on seismic survey plans
2.1.1 Order of survey
Blonk summarized the status of the 2018 survey plans, with a key workshop held in February involving
SEIC, Shell, and all contractors, and focusing on technical survey design, logistics, and complex
simultaneous operations. Depending on ice retreat, a notional start of operations is planned for 8 June,
starting with 3-4 weeks of streamer operations, followed by Astokh OBN (in the south of the area) and then
Piltun OBN (in the north) with each OBN survey lasting 1.5-2 weeks; the latter sequence is not ideal but is
driven by Piltun drilling, and Astokh diving and platform shutdown activities (Fig. 1).
2.1.2 Sound source reduction tests
After completion of the Piltun OBN survey, 1-2 days of source reduction tests are planned using a few
selected seismic sail lines to the east of the Piltun platform (i.e. furthest away from the PML). The tests will
be recorded by the OBNs and the AUARs, and will make it possible to assess the smallest source that
provides a technically acceptable 4D image whilst reducing the associated noise levels at the PML. The
results from this work will not be available before late 2019. JASCO and the NTF are expected to play key
roles in assessing of noise levels at the PML.
2.1.3 Permits and the SEER process
Public hearings were held from 17-18 January in Nogliki and Okha. Regulatory ecological material prepared
by a specialized consultancy agency was submitted to the SEER in early February, including the draft MMP
and the discussion of the exclusion zone. SEIC follows the communication with the SEER and will intervene
whenever needed or possible.
2.2 Discussion and conclusions
The NTF thanked Blonk for this updated information and for his informative and helpful monthly summaries
of progress received since NTF-13. It looked forward to the continuation of this process.
The NTF welcomed the confirmation of the sound source experiments. It re-emphasised the importance of
this work for future mitigation as expressed at NTF-13 and WGWAP-18 and thanked the Company for
dedicating resources to this effort. Noting the importance of this work outside as well as within the Sakhalin
Page 6
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
6
region, the NTF urged publication of the results (including any implications for whales) once the analyses
are complete and expressed a willingness to help in relevant aspects of the analysis (e.g. interpretation of
received sound levels).
Fig. 1. Area for the 2018 seismic survey.
A number of points were raised in discussion related to the experiments themselves and their design
including the steps in reduction (down to 10% of the original source level), the general applicability of
results obtained from the limited area of the experiments and the need to continue to investigate other
approaches to minimising sound energy released into the environment (e.g. Marine Vibroseis).
Blonk indicated that the Company hoped this work would allow reduction of the sound source in future
surveys to levels likely to have little or no impact on whales but of course that will depend on the results. An
additional source of uncertainty that would need to be considered (but will not be possible to address in this
experiment) relates to the ability to accurately reposition the OBNs. The focus of the geophysicists analysing
the data obtained will be on determining the lowest source level that enables reliable compatibility with the
results from previous surveys. Once this has been achieved, the implications for whales and future mitigation
can be examined by a future NTF. Blonk also noted that the Company was continuing to monitor potential
alternatives to seismic surveys.
There was also some discussion of the likelihood of shooting A-lines at night. It was noted at NTF-13 that
this could be investigated by considering various scenarios regarding start date, line sequences and available
tide information. Blonk indicated that, given the uncertainties in start date (ice conditions are very hard to
Page 7
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
7
predict this far ahead of the surveys), it was difficult to say more at this point than that surveys at night
would be limited as much as possible. He added that it was not yet feasible to predict whether there would be
less night-time shooting than in 2015.
3 FINALISATION OF THE MMP AND ANY ASSOCIATED PRACTICAL DETAILS (SEIC)
At WGWAP-18, the Panel had endorsed the Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (MMP) developed at NTF-13,
recognising that there were some outstanding issues to be resolved at NTF-14.
3.1 Chain of Command Protocol
3.1.1 Presentation by Company
The Company presented the proposed Chain of Command protocol summarised in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Summary of the Chain of Command protocol.
Successful implementation of the MMP requires effective communication between SEIC management,
vessel contractors and field MMOs. Communication protocols have been developed to facilitate efficient
deployment and movement of MMO resources and to assure that the SEIC Central Commander is kept fully
apprised of the progress and effectiveness of the MMP.
3.1.2 Conclusion on the draft protocol
The NTF welcomed the comprehensive work undertaken with respect to communications and the Chain of
Command protocol, noting that the experience in 2015 (both successes and challenges) had been taken into
account. It agreed that the protocol (and the associated backup provisions) were appropriate and sufficient.
3.2 Acoustic monitoring
3.2.1 Numbers of archival and monitoring buoys
MMO SOUTH TEAM 1(4 MMOs - DAYS)
ACOUSTIC BUOYS (AUR SOUND LEVEL => IRIDIUM =>
CENTRAL CAMP)
CENTRAL COMMANDER
JASCO MODEL CALIBRATION WITH
ACOUSTIC FOOTPRINTS
MMO TEAM (4 MMOs DAYS)
CMS TECHNOLOGIST (NIGHTS)
MMO TEAM (2 MMOs DAYS)
LEAD MMO
SCF PARTY MANAGER
MMO NORTH TEAM 1(4 MMOs - DAYS)
CENTRAL COMMAND/FIELD STATIONS SEISMIC VESSEL
CHASE VESSEL
MMO NORTH TEAM 2(4 MMOs - DAYS)
MMO SOUTH TEAM 2(4 MMOs - DAYS)
AIS VESSEL POSITION
TRACKED WHALE POSITIONS LINKED TO CC
WHALE POSITION
DECISION (A-ZONE)
INFORMATION
EXCLUSION ZONE or CC-DECIDED SHUT DOWN
Page 8
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
8
At NTF-13 there had been some uncertainty about the number of archival buoys that would be available. The
Company confirmed that there would be 10 monitoring buoys (including 1 spare) and announced that there
would be three archival buoys that were kindly being lent by ENL.
3.2.2 NTF discussion and conclusions
The NTF welcomed the news that there would be three archival buoys and thanked both the Company and
ENL for their efforts in this regard. At NTF-13 it had been envisioned that there would be an Acoustic
Monitoring Protocol attached to the MMP but it was agreed that the specifications provided in the text of the
MMP were sufficient.
3.3 Visual monitoring including final protocol
The Company produced two draft protocols for visual monitoring – onshore (that includes distribution,
abundance and behavioural monitoring) and offshore (onboard the vessels). In addition, a number of related
issues had been raised at NTF-13 as discussed below.
3.3.1 Mysticetus software and incorporation of factors such as tidal data and height of platform for
positional information
The use of Mysticetus software at the visual camps and in the command centre had been considered at NTF-
13 but some aspects were identified that required further consideration at this meeting. This item was
discussed with Dave Steckler (developer of Mysticetus) and Dave Weller (a Panel member who had been
unable to attend the meeting) present remotely. Steckler provided a brief update of the work undertaken thus
far (in co-operation with JASCO scientists) to modify the Mysticetus platform for the forthcoming survey.
Steckler noted that there are three screens for observers – a real-time map to display, for example, theodolite
work, ensonification regions, whales with buffer rings, and vehicles. A second, data-entry part, to enter, for
example, behavioural and theodolite data in a separate part of screen is a table like Excel. A third small
window shows the overall status. The goal is to make the display as simple as possible for observers.
In discussion it was noted that there is a need for the interface to be customised for two quite different
situations. At the observation towers, the primary function is to enable observers to enter data efficiently.
However, at the command centre the primary need is to visualise the noise footprint, positions of whales and
the positions of vessels in real time. The NTF agreed that Steckler and JASCO would work together (in
conjunction as necessary with Dorrian, the Central Commander, and the visual monitoring team leads) to
ensure the most effective interfaces for these two situations.
Much of the discussion in the NTF focussed on testing and training, given the unacceptable amount of time
lost in 2015, particularly at the start (when pre-survey monitoring was supposed to have taken place) because
of a lack of testing and training with the Pythagoras software and the associated use of theodolites with that
software.
It was reported that final tests for the Sakhalin configuration would take place in Seattle at the end of April
and that Eloise Frouin (JASCO) would undertake a two-day intensive course using the final configuration.
She will be present on Sakhalin during the survey and will train the team leads (all of whom have some
experience in Mysticetus, Pythagoras or similar software).
As discussed at NTF-13, relevant participants (e.g. Team Leads, Central Commander and at least some
MMOs) would be able to participate in simulated training exercises. As the system is cloud-based, the
location of these training exercises is not especially important - Steckler confirmed that specially configured
computers would be set up for the exercises and sent to the locations where they would take place. The NTF
welcomed this recognition of training and testing but also stressed the importance of testing in situ, noting
that ideally the systems including theodolites should be tested a week or so before the expected date of the
pre-seismic monitoring.
The system in Sakhalin would also be cloud-based and the NTF welcomed the information provided on
back-up mechanisms including the ability for the monitoring teams to enter data offline and use alternative
communication methods to provide positional information to the Central Commander.
In response to questions raised at NTF-13 regarding the ability of the software to incorporate information on
tides, platform heights, and other local conditions on Sakhalin, Steckler indicated that this was possible and
that Mysticetus had been successfully used in areas with very strong tidal activity. The NTF recalled that the
Page 9
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
9
Company had already agreed that the height of the towers would be fully surveyed prior to the 2018 seismic
survey.
The importance of ensuring that data collected in 2018 is compatible with that collected on previous
occasions using Pythagoras was emphasised. It was noted that there was no reason why this should not be
possible and it was agreed that Steckler and Weller would work together to ensure that this was the case. It
was also agreed that the final specifications should be circulated to the Panel to ensure that data to allow all
the necessary parameters to be estimated were being collected and in a suitable format.
The NTF also agreed that some clarifying wording was required with respect to decisions taken by team
leaders as to when to undertake, for example, focal follows, recognising the dual objectives of collecting
behavioural (and distribution) data for later analysis and prioritising collection of positional data for real-
time mitigation efforts.
3.3.2 Poor visibility technology
At NTF-13 it had been agreed that the Company would provide more detailed information on the poor
visibility technology it was proposing to use, recognising that such technology was not a formal component
of the MMP.
Dorrian reported that the seismic vessel will be fitted with a Seiche Camera Monitoring System (CMS; Dual
Thermal Imaging / High Definition system). Installing a CMS on the chase vessel was considered, but was
not selected. CMS footage will be stored for key observations at night-time, and selected, limited daytime
observations will be collected and stored to allow focussed CMS – MMO comparisons. Discussions are
ongoing for a good comparison set-up, and the Advisory Group looks forward to details during the monthly
updates. The Company was encouraged to consider storing as much data as possible to allow a proper
evaluation of the technology – noting that the cost of storage is cheap compared to the cost of data collection.
An experienced Seiche CMS Technologist, the Seiche Project Manager Lorenzo Scala who is also a certified
MMO/PSO/PAM Technician with over 10 years mitigation field experience, will be onboard the seismic
vessel to assist in monitoring the exclusion zone, specifically at night and as feasible in poor visibility
conditions. The radar system, which would probably be installed some distance from the CMS, would be
used during fog and operated by the CMS expert (CMS does not function in fog). This Technologist will also
opportunistically train the other offshore MMOs in CMS usage, without allowing this to interfere with their
base duties.
Dorrian closed by providing some information obtained from Seiche Ltd comparing its CMS system against
MMOs and PAM for mitigation monitoring during a seismic survey (2017). Seiche Ltd concluded that the
results demonstrated a firm ‘proof of concept’ and thus a future for IR/HD as a supplementary method to
existing marine mammal monitoring technology; a quantitative comparison of CMS system observations and
MMO/PAM data is still lacking. It is expected by Sakhalin Energy that the deployment of CMS will increase
the monitoring capabilities of the survey through the hours of darkness.
In discussion, the NTF thanked the Company for providing this information and it especially welcomed the
presence of an experienced operator onboard during the surveys and the provision for training. The task force
noted that it was not possible, on the basis of the limited information provided, to draw any firm conclusions
about the relative merits of the CMS system when compared to MMOs, and it encouraged Seiche to develop
a formal paper with a full analysis for publication. A question was raised concerning the field of vision of the
system and the Company agreed to consult with Seiche and provide this information as part of its monthly
progress reports.
The NTF agreed that in order to take advantage of the opportunity to formally compare the CMS system
with MMOs, it was essential that a proper experimental design is developed (recognising that the ultimate
success would depend on the number of gray whales present). This would better inform the Company about
future (and possibly more formal) use of such technology in mitigation. The Panel members of the NTF
indicated their willingness to participate in discussions about how best to conduct an experiment without
interfering with the formal mitigation role of the MMOs, and to review any experimental protocols. The
Company welcomed this offer and agreed to report on progress with this issue as part of the monthly
progress reports.
Page 10
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
10
The NTF also noted the importance of considering if and how real-time CMS detections would be used in
mitigation (e.g. at night). Difficulties of identifying correctly to species were noted and the importance of not
instigating shutdowns based upon false positives was recognised as this would unnecessarily extend the
survey (and potentially increase the cumulative exposure of gray whales to noise). The Company noted that
authority for shutdowns aboard the vessel rested with the lead MMO (see Fig.2) who would need to be
contacted by the CMS operator but noted that the Company may consider whether, given his experience, the
CMS operator might be given such responsibility at night. Blonk agreed to provide any information on a
proposed updating of the Chain of Command protocol in his monthly reports for consideration by the
Advisory Group.
3.3.3 MMOs, schedules and duties
The Company reported that contractual arrangements are proceeding for the following highly qualified
international MMOs: four onshore Team Leads, four Theodolite Operators, two Rotators with capacity to fill
either the Team Lead or Theodolite Operator role, and three offshore MMOs, including the Lead MMO.
These MMOs will be complemented with ten Russian onshore MMOs, including two more rotators, and
three offshore MMOs. The CV’s of all MMOs were vetted by Dorrian. Twenty onshore MMOs will staff
four 4-person teams on a rotating basis, and four offshore MMOs will be based on the seismic vessel and two
on the chase vessel.
On the North Spit, the Pioneer Camp will be used, as in 2015. The decision was made to use the existing
IFM Chaivo Camp as Central Command Post instead of rebuilding the South Piltun Camp. This decision was
driven by reduced bear-related risks, a more stable communication / internet network, daily comfort, good
food and showers, and less critical dependence on the access bridge and road conditions. The associated long
commutes on the South Spit will be mitigated through having rotator MMOs, having night-driving protocols,
and optimizing the team logistics. In addition, each observation post will also have a shelter for poor weather
or long waiting conditions.
In discussion, the NTF welcomed the excellent progress made in identifying and recruiting experienced
personnel in response to previous recommendations of the Panel. The need for a backup plan in light of the
present geopolitical climate was noted. The NTF reviewed the draft schedules provided in the onshore and
offshore visual monitoring protocols and agreed that they provided sufficient rest periods whilst producing
adequate monitoring capability.
It was noted that on the seismic vessel, the ‘Big Eyes’ would not be used continuously but would be used
primarily to supplement efforts of the chase vessel to monitor the PML when conditions prevented this from
shore or to confirm species identification if required. The importance of ensuring that the ‘Big Eye’ mounts
were suitably dampened was recognised.
3.3.4 Definition of ‘aberrant’ behaviour in light of previous seismic survey guidelines
NTF-13 had identified the need to examine definitions of ‘aberrant’ behaviour in light of the process
undertaken in previous surveys. It was noted that in the 2010 survey, one shutdown had been initiated for
‘repeated breaching’ by an animal outside the A-zone; Bröker et al. (2015) had reported the definition of
aberrant behaviour as
“…. a consistently high speed of travel (>10 km h−1), mother−calf pair separation of >5 body lengths, or repeated multiple
breaching (i.e. leaping above the sea surface) with correspondingly high speeds of movement away from a potential source
of disturbance.”
This had been based upon the guidance provided in the April 2010 Seismic Survey Task Force report1
(SSTF-5). No shut-downs due to aberrant behaviour occurred during the 2015 seismic operations.
There was considerable discussion of this important, albeit rare, issue, recognising the need to develop field
guidelines that protect individuals, and especially mother-calf pairs, while avoiding unnecessarily extending
the survey. A small working group was formed (Dorrian, Nowacek, Samatov, Southall and Vedenev) to
develop wording for consideration by the full NTF. The suggested wording was brought back to the NTF and
it was agreed that any aberrant gray whale behaviour observed from any platform would be reported to the
Central Commander. However, this will not necessarily trigger a shutdown (except an immediate shutdown
1 Available at:
https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/content/documents/wgwap_5th_seismic_survey_task_force_meeting_re
port.pdf
Page 11
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
11
will occur in the case of an M-C pair exhibiting aberrant behaviour within 2 km of the seismic source) but
will raise a warning flag such that the Central Commander will monitor the situation and the potential
associated risk. In this circumstance, sustained occurrence (increasing duration) of the behaviour,
high/increasing noise exposure level, and close/increasing proximity to the sound source would be among the
risk factors to be considered in deciding whether to order a shutdown.
The final wording is given in the relevant visual protocols (see below).
3.3.5 Conclusions on the visual protocols
The NTF thanked the Company for the draft visual monitoring protocols and adopted them as given in
Annexes B and C to the final MMP, recognising that:
(a) some details would be added as they became available e.g. make of theodolite, updated
information on the Mysticetus software and usage notes in the onshore protocol;
(b) there would be some purely editorial changes; and
(c) they would be modified to incorporate the changes agreed at NTF-13 including consideration of
aberrant behaviour, clarifications of the behavioural codes to ensure common understanding amongst
teams, the importance of maximising data and the need to undertake basic QA/QC work at the end of
each shift.
The NTF also noted that the exclusion zone distance could only be finalised once the outcome of the Russian
SEER process was known but the Company confirmed that if the SEER were to choose a value below that
recommended by the NTF and Panel (i.e. 1 km as detailed in the NTF-13 report) it would adhere to the 1 km
value.
The NTF encouraged the sharing of the draft documents with at least Team Leads as soon as possible
(including a Russian translation) and well before formal training to ensure that any issues of interpretation or
suggestions that they may have based upon their experience can be addressed. The Company concurred
with this and also requested that individual Panel members send any suggested modifications directly to
Dorrian. Suggested changes and updates to the protocols would be circulated to the Advisory Group (see
Item 3.4.2) for consideration before final adoption.
3.4 Other matters
3.4.1 Final Terms of Reference (TOR) and selection of the Independent Observer (update from IUCN)
Carbone reported that IUCN had appointed Tsidulko as the Independent Observer (IO) for the 2018 survey
(he had also acted as the IO for the 2015 survey). This position was created initially at the Panel’s
recommendation. The final TORs (as discussed at NTF-13 and annexed to the final MMP) were based on the
experience gained in 2015.
This appointment was welcomed by the NTF and it was agreed that Tsidulko and Blonk should work
together to confirm logistics as soon as possible
3.4.2 Advisory Group including communications protocol
As discussed at NTF-13 and approved at WGWAP-18, a small Advisory Group consisting of a subset of
NTF Panel members (Donovan, Reeves, Nowacek, Southall, Vedenev and Weller) has been established to
assist with issues arising during the final run-up to and the execution of the MMP (the terms of reference for
this group, including the communications protocol agreed at WGWAP-18, can be found here and will be
attached to the final MMP).
There was a short discussion of the importance of providing information on the MMP and the survey to the
‘outside world’. Lock reported that the next meeting of the Biodiversity Working Group of the Sakhalin
Oblast Interdepartmental Environmental Council would be in May, and that the Company would be sharing
plans, including appointment of the IO, at that meeting. It was also noted that the NTF-14 report and the final
MMP and protocols would be made available on the WGWAP website.
It was agreed that Lock and Carbone would discuss this issue further in terms of the IUCN website content.
Page 12
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
12
3.5 Conclusions and recommendations
The NTF recommends that the MMP and associated annexes are adopted as recommendations by the Panel
for use in the 2018 seismic survey.
4 PREPARATION FOR DATA ANALYSES FOR THE 2018 SEISMIC SURVEY
NTF-13 and WGWAP-18 had stressed the importance of preparations for data analysis from this and
previous surveys. It has been emphasised in the past that the considerable investment (financially and in
terms of human effort) by the Company in monitoring as part of its MMP would be effectively wasted if the
data are not analysed rigorously and thoroughly to gain insights relevant to mitigation planning for future
seismic surveys; the NTF reiterated this view. The Company noted that it had yet to receive approval of
funding for data analysis.
4.1 Data archiving and QA/QC plans
The first phase of any study is to obtain reliable data that are carefully archived and ensuring that:
(a) the data collection protocols are fully developed and properly followed by well-trained personnel
such that the data obtained are compatible with those previously obtained and include all of the
information likely to be useful in analyses;
(b) initial data validation is carried out regularly in the field such that any problems are identified
early and can be corrected in timely fashion rather than being discovered at the end of the survey, or
later; and
(c) processes are in place to archive the various data types – ideally in a relational database (or
databases) to facilitate data extraction for proposed multivariate and other analyses.
Points (a) and (b) are dealt with under Item 3. The Company agreed to provide information to the Advisory
Group on the data archiving procedures it plans to use.
In discussion, it was noted that ‘censoring’ of data should only occur at the analytical stage by the analysts
themselves - all data collected should be archived and made available if required. However, when
summarising the data collected in a report it is reasonable to provide some idea of the proportion of data in
particular categories, e.g. focal follows of a certain length or lengths.
4.2 Planning for analyses including who, how and when, and incorporation of previous datasets
The Company provided a brief summary document of its tentative plans for analyses, noting that in addition
to financial constraints:
(1) clearly any analyses were dependent on the amount of data collected;
(2) it planned to use data from all three surveys (2010, 2015 and 2018) where possible;
(3) the previous analyses from the 2010 datasets would be repeated using the larger datasets;
(4) further analyses would be considered in light of the expected published analyses of the 2015 data
collected and analysed by ENL; and
(5) work was needed to identify suitable Russian scientists to lead the analytical work in accord with
present Company and Russian Party policy.
The Company requested advice on any aspects of its plans, including after this meeting. The objective was to
have a scope of work that could be used to request funding and provide advice to analysts by the start of the
seismic survey, if possible.
The NTF made some general points during the meeting for the Company’s consideration.
(1) In addition to repeating previous analyses that attempted to identify and characterize significant
effects of seismic surveys on whales, it was important to consider whether alternative hypotheses
could be identified and tested. Such testing likely would require additional expertise.
(2) Panel members are available to provide advice in developing the scope of work and in the
subsequent analyses undertaken with Russian scientists in the lead. The NTF established an
Page 13
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
13
Advisory Group comprising Cooke, Tsidulko, Nowacek, Donovan, Samatov, Racca and Dorrian,
initially to assist in developing the scope of work.
(3) It is important that whoever acts as lead scientist in any analyses consults/collaborates with
scientists who were involved in data collection in the field.
5 PROGRESS (IF ANY) WITH ANALYSES OF DATA FROM THE 2015 SEISMIC SURVEY
Lock confirmed that there had been no further progress to report, for reasons discussed at NT-13 and
WGWAP-18.
6 NON-SEISMIC-RELATED ACOUSTIC ISSUES
6.1 Issues concerning ‘control’ station(s)
In its WGWAP-18 report (Item 2.1.1.2) the Panel reiterated its concern about the functionality of the current
control site for acoustic monitoring and recommended (Recommendation WGWAP-18/04) that Sakhalin
Energy provide a summary of available control site data, averaged on an hourly basis, for consideration by
the NTF at this meeting so that, if warranted, a recommendation for a new control station could be made in
time for implementation in the 2018 field season. No such summary was provided and Sakhalin Energy
indicated that it did not intend to implement the recommendation until a statistically well-informed basis was
available for evaluation.
In discussion, it was noted that the automated system described by Racca (see item 6.4) could be applied to
the acoustic recordings from the control station as a means of generating an informative profile of the
ambient sound (‘soundscape’) at that site through time. The WGWAP recommendation (WGWAP-18/04)
remains open, though the NTF recognizes that the Racca tool could inform this process.
The NTF agreed that after conferring with Racca, Panel members (Southall, Nowacek and Vedenev) would
provide any necessary specifications beyond those given in Recommendation WGWAP-18/04 (e.g.
identification of particular time periods with recorded sound at particular levels in particular bands), and this
advice would be passed on to Lock for implementation by the Company’s contractors. The eventual report
on this work would then be subject to further discussion by the NTF.
6.2 POI analyses of acoustic data
6.2.1 Follow-up on matters raised from the 2015 data as discussed at WGWAP-18
The rationale for continuing to consider this issue is that (a) excessive noise in or near the feeding area in
2015 caused by activities other than the seismic surveys would need to be taken into account in analyses of
the effects of those surveys on, for example, whale behaviour and (b) given the Company’s commitment in
its MMPP to avoid exposing the whales to noise above specific ‘safe’ levels, it is important to identify and
address any noise sources that could lead to violation of MMPP guidelines.
Both Racca and Lock confirmed that Sakhalin Energy had no ongoing noise-generating activities, either on
the water or on the platforms, that would have coincided in time with the Company’s seismic survey in 2015.
Lock noted that other possible explanations for noise events unrelated to the seismic survey in 2015 were
still being pursued.
6.2.2 Consideration of 2015 acoustic data provided to the Panel at WGWAP-18
Under this item, Racca gave a presentation entitled “Investigation of periodic noise events from August 2015
– comparison of recordings at multiple stations, and other insights.” He began by showing a map of the
Piltun-Astokh licence area identifying the assets (i.e. oil and gas structures) in the region (specifically the
two drilling and production platforms PA-A and PA-B belonging to Sakhalin Energy, plus the two platforms
to the south operated by ENL) and the locations of AUAR recorders that were active during August 2015. He
called attention to three of the recorders: Piltun-S to the south and shoreward of PA-A, the primary location
at which the episodes of periodic noise had been identified in earlier analyses; Molikpaq to the north and
Page 14
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
14
shoreward of PA-A, and Piltun further north yet, about half-way between PA-A and PA-B. He noted how the
location of origin of sound picked up at one recorder could be at least approximately inferred if the same
sound pattern was detected with different intensity at the other two. Racca then presented examples of daily
spectrograms for the dates of 1, 8 and 10 August from the three stations, all showing recognizable patterns of
progressive sound level increase with abrupt cessation, which would be consistent with the acquisition of
lines by a seismic source vessel or possibly two working in alternation. The levels of the matching sound
patterns were consistently loudest at Piltun-S, lesser at Molikpaq and least at Piltun, pointing to an activity
occurring to the south or south-east of the Piltun-Astokh area. Racca remarked that it had been difficult to
find examples like the ones presented, in which common sound trends from the alleged seismic survey
activities could be discerned at the two more northern stations, because of the confounding contribution to
the sound ensemble from more proximal operations which on many days altered or obliterated altogether the
weaker patterns. He indicated that the origin of these louder sound events was still the subject of active
investigation. To conclude, Racca informed the NTF that he had made inquiries with ENL regarding the
spatial-temporal agreement of the observed sound patterns at Piltun-S with its schedule of seismic line
acquisition in the Arkutun-Dagi license area. ENL confirmed that the two things – the Piltun-S sound
patterns and the ENL acquisition schedule – were consistent, thus corroborating the inferred origin of the
observed sound level patterns.
Nowacek pointed out that sonograms had shown on numerous occasions, and for long periods, including e.g.
at PAB-20 in early August, that noise levels over 120dB were recorded for 6-8 hours a day, and for up to 12
hours a day on occasion. These events have continued to be recorded, but now that the regular acoustic
monitoring programme has stopped, Sakhalin Energy is no longer in a position to ensure that its own noise
guidelines (as specified in the MMPP) are being followed.
It was generally agreed that, as noted under item 6.1, the automatic detection tool being developed by Racca
and his team (see item 6.4) would make the process of identifying periods of higher-than-permissible noise
levels in the feeding area(s), and their causes, more efficient. This in turn could be expected to facilitate
mitigation, which thus far has too often proven difficult to achieve. Therefore, development and
implementation of the automatic detection tool should be a high priority for Sakhalin Energy. It will allow a
statistical description of the soundscape for the first time and make it possible to determine more accurately
and precisely which periods of high noise levels are associated, for example, with weather events. The
diagnostic value of spectrograms is intrinsically limited in that they are already averaged, so that individual
events cannot be detected. Though in the present circumstances it is not possible for the NTF (or the Panel)
to examine original data, it would be possible to run detectors on those data, which would make it easier to
identify events and determine their causes.
A number of suggestions were made concerning the kinds of information that were not provided in the 2015
report but that should be provided more consistently in future acoustic monitoring reports. The 2015 report,
for example, did not make clear where the pile driving took place although it noted that it the location had
shifted. Periods of extremely loud noise were not discussed in the report. It would have been useful for the
report to relate loud noise events to where whales were and how they were behaving. In future reports, it
would also be useful if the type, timing and duration of storms were included.
6.3 Company plans for ‘noisy’ activities in 2018 e.g. use of echo sounders
Lock reported that the summary of activities presented at the last WGWAP meeting still stood. At that
meeting, Sakhalin Energy had provided the Panel with specifications for a multi-beam echosounder used for
a survey in 2015 (WGWAP-18 report, item 2.1.1.2) and the Panel recommended (recommendation
WGWAP-18/03) that the specifications for echosounders (at least output and operational plans) to be used in
any planned future surveys be shared ‘to ensure that appropriate and adequate measures are taken should
mitigation be necessary’.
In response to a question of whether any ‘noisy’ activities were planned for the PA-A platform in 2018 and
whether the timing of any such activities might conflict with that of seismic survey-related work, Lock stated
that she did not recall any but agreed to check and report back.
6.4 Progress on automatic detection algorithms
Page 15
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
15
Racca stated as a preamble that his progress report on the use of automatic detectors (“Use of automatic
detectors in retrospective analysis of Joint Program acoustic data, and some ideas about information
management”) would be more organizational in nature than technical, but nonetheless important. He
summarized the situation until recently with regard to testing various automated detection algorithms
developed by JASCO by applying them to acoustic data at POI. He noted that the testing had to be
performed physically on POI computers because acoustic time series data cannot be exported in any sizable
quantity due to potential national security issues. In the past JASCO had provided to POI sample detection
modules (running within JASCO’s PAMlab visualization and analysis software) for seismic and vessel noise.
Without a specific mandate and budget to set up a systematic test project, however, POI’s ability to work on
the task had been on a “best effort” basis. Furthermore, communications between JASCO and POI regarding
the detectors and their operation had been limited because of the lack of a clear framework, causing
reluctance on the part of POI to use a “black box” approach to the technology. The significant progress now
achieved in this matter, Racca explained, was the decision on the part of the Joint Program partners (Sakhalin
Energy and ENL) to incorporate a full test of automatic detection in an agreed retrospective study of the
annual acoustic data collected systematically until 2016. If proven effective, this would complement with a
“noise type aware” discrimination the more generic methods of comparing acoustic data across years based
on statistical (percentile) analyses of spectral composition to differentiate between transient and sustained
levels of sound in various frequency bands. Racca explained that under the framework of this retrospective
study, adequate time will be allocated for POI to install at its laboratories the most current version of
JASCO’s PAMlab software incorporating the required detectors and to test the system’s performance on a
representatively diverse sample from the Joint Program’s annual datasets. JASCO will work closely with
POI to review the outcome and if necessary adjust the detector parameters to optimize results, fully engaging
POI’s expertise in the process. After the trial, JASCO and POI will make a recommendation to the
companies on whether automated detection of noise events should be included as a systematic component of
their research and monitoring work.
In a follow-up section of his presentation, Racca gave a brief overview, using screen shots from the Web-
based interface of the software, of a framework for storing, retrieving and analyzing detected acoustic events
that could be a viable paradigm in a future effort to make the results from automated analysis easily
accessible. The software application (PAMview) developed by JASCO is already used in a variety of
contexts, primarily for the management and interpretation of detected marine animals’ vocalizations, but it
could work equally well for detecting anthropogenic noise events.
During discussion, Racca said that the first step in testing the representative trial dataset would be to look for
autocorrelation and boil down the entire time series to a series of detection windows. This involves stripping
down the dataset of what can already be identified and looking for additional events. The idea is to identify
the presence of noise from different sources on the whole dataset. Donovan emphasized that the Panel (and
presumably also the Company) was particularly interested in examining acoustic data retrospectively,
looking for areas and times that would merit closer scrutiny to evaluate whether Sakhalin Energy is
following the guidelines as specified in the MMPP. Southall asked whether, for example, the algorithms
would be able to detect periods of time over which sound exceeded particular levels at particular frequencies.
Racca responded in the affirmative and noted that a plan was needed for having the NTF review and test the
system and become familiar with how it functions. It was agreed that the NTF would work intersessionally
with Racca to learn more about the system, and, hopefully, some test data could be run through the system,
which could then be reviewed at NTF-15.
Participants thanked Racca and encouraged him and others involved to continue developing and testing this
promising new tool. It was understood that the Company had been unable to meet the Panel’s request for an
opportunity to review “selected informative sound recordings, based on the newly developed detections
schemes”, per recommendation WGWAP-18/05, by the time of this meeting, but that recommendation
remains open.
Lock indicated that Sakhalin Energy is positively disposed towards this new approach as it should allow
better, more detailed characterization of loud events. The Company would be able to use its event logs, at
least in recent years, together with weather records, to interpret past and future high noise events. It would be
very useful to have a statistical understanding of how many of these events were related to Sakhalin Energy
activities, and of whether anthropogenic noise in the feeding area was having an impact on the whales. She
noted that there would continue to be some ‘unexplained events’ caused by third-party activities over which
Page 16
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
16
the Company has no control, but she acknowledged that the new tool would definitely help the Company to
assess compliance with its MMPP.
6.5 Future of Joint Programme
The NTF had an inconclusive discussion of the future of the Joint Program, specifically in regard to the
acoustic monitoring component. There was no acoustic monitoring in 2017 and none was planned for 2018
(other than that associated with the Sakhalin Energy seismic survey). Some NTF members noted that it was
difficult to see why the Company would refer in its MMPP to specific allowable noise levels for its
operations in the area if there was no monitoring to determine whether the actual levels are or are not within
those limits.
Lock indicated that she expected to make progress during the coming months on the Joint Program scope of
work for 2019, as well as on plans for the longer term (2020 and beyond). She stressed that ENL was taking
the lead in preparing analyses of Joint Program data (for publication) and that the design of any future, long-
term work would depend heavily on the results of those analyses. It was not clear when such results would
become publicly available but at least a summary was expected to be presented at the April-May 2018
meeting of the IWC Scientific Committee, and this would perforce be a public document.
Although it was suggested that Lock might be able to provide the Panel with a draft of a proposed long-term
program ‘intersessionally’ (i.e. sometime between April 2018 and the WGWAP meeting in November 2018),
this seemed considerably less feasible than her being able to share some information on the ‘short-term’
plans for the 2019 season during that period. However, even if she was able to do that, an arrangement would
need to be made for the Panel to consider and discuss the information and prepare its advice in a sufficiently
timely way for that advice to have a chance of making a difference. Thus, the NTF recommends that the
Company provide, by 1 September, the plans for at least the 2019 research program, preferably for the long-
term JP plans. This timing would provide sufficient opportunity for the Panel to review the plans and
provide advice by the November WGWAP-19 meeting and, thus, have that advice incorporated into the final
plans for 2019.
Sakhalin Energy reported that Gazprom Neft had expressed interest in benefiting from and contributing to
the monitoring work on gray whales conducted under the Joint Program. Lock noted that the companies had
initiated discussions on how they might collaborate with Gazprom Neft on work of mutual interest but that
few decisions had been made thus far.
6.6 Gray whale sounds
In its WGWAP-18 report (item 2.1.1.2), the Panel noted that gray whale sounds recorded at Sakhalin
might prove “very useful in evaluating the whale sounds recorded by the U.S. Navy in the East China
Sea.” Southall reiterated that point at this meeting. Racca reported that his initial discussions with POI
about the possibility of releasing small amounts of uncontroversial data collected under the Joint Program to
help determine the species identity of whales recorded in other areas (e.g. the South China Sea) suggested
that this would not be a problem.
The NTF welcomed this news and strongly endorsed the idea of Joint Program data being used for this
scientific purpose.
6.7 Plans for noise monitoring in 2018 outside the seismic survey period, if any
As mentioned above, Sakhalin Energy had no current plans to monitor noise in 2018 other than during the
seismic survey. Lock noted that the only exception was some noise measurements of new vessels to be taken
in 2018 as discussed in the WGWAP meeting (see WGWAP-18 report, item 5.14, recommendation
WGWAP-18/18).
In response to questions from NTF members, Lock stated that there was no plan to deploy an acoustic buoy
or buoys at the control station in 2018, including during the seismic survey. However, she noted that the
Company had decided to redeploy a number of buoys immediately after the survey and to leave them
deployed until the end of September. The locations of these buoys had not yet been decided. Vedenev
suggested that one of these buoys should be deployed at a control station (after the survey) and Lock
responded that she had no objection to this but would need to confirm with colleagues.
Page 17
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
17
Donovan queried whether the acoustic buoys intended to continue monitoring for a short period after the
seismic might be deployed for longer, given that the only change required would be to retrieve them later
than originally planned. The Company agreed to leave the buoys in the water and operating for ca. two
weeks.
7 OTHER BUSINESS
Final review of the MMP
The Task Force went through the previous draft of the MMP and agreed on revisions that are reflected in the
final version available here. Donovan commended the Company (including Dorrian) as well as all NTF
members for the hard work and for producing an excellent product.
Jon Hancox update on status of the Marine Mammal Protection Plan (MMPP)
Hancox recalled that Ramboll had undertaken to go through all the comments received on the MMPP.
Donaghy had addressed all comments and submitted the final version of the MMPP, including an audit trail
in the form of a spreadsheet summarizing how the comments were addressed. The final version should be
definitively checked in the coming week; Donovan said the Panel would like to see the revised MMPP, and
Hancox said that the report was now with Ramboll for final approval.
Conclusion of meeting
Lock concluded the meeting with thanks to all participants. She also thanked the Advisory Group in advance
for their forthcoming assistance. She expressed hope that the weather and insects would be kind, and wished
all a safe, productive, well mitigated and well monitored survey.
Donovan added his thanks to IUCN for organization of the meeting, the end result of which had been very
successful. He also extended his thanks to the sound technician, the interpreters, and all others present for
their contributions.
Adoption of report
Donovan recalled that the NTF report had to obtain the full approval of the panel, most of whom were
present. The report would be circulated to the full panel. There would normally be a full WGWAP meeting
close to the time of the NTF meeting, but the next WGWAP meeting would probably take place by
email/teleconference2. Written comments on the report would be requested, with a deadline for submission.
The MMP would remain open for comment from Panel members, but would be posted upon approval and
adoption.
2 Due to circumstances beyond the control of participants, the report was not finalized until mid-June, by which time the
seismic survey was under way. The plan to hold a WGWAP meeting to consider and comment on the MMP agreed by
the NTF was overtaken in April-May 2018 by conflicting commitments of Panel members and the unanticipated need
for all parties – Sakhalin Energy, IUCN and the Panel – to deal with the denial by Russian authorities of the Company’s
permit to allow acoustic monitoring during the seismic survey (see
https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/panel_statement_2018_seismic_survey_en_ru.pdf and associated responses).
Page 18
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
18
ANNEX A - LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN NTF-14 MEETING
Panel Members
1. Justin Cooke
2. Greg Donovan (Panel Co-Chair / Noise Task Force Chair)
3. Douglas Nowacek
4. Randall Reeves (Panel Co-Chair)
5. Brandon Southall
6. Grigory Tsidulko
7. Alexander Vedenev
Apologies: Dave Weller
Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd.
8. Stephanie Lock , HSE General Manager
9. Bastian Blonk, Chief Geophysicist
10. Roberto Racca, JASCO Applied Sciences / Acoustics expert
11. Mike Donaghy, MDA Ltd / Environmental Adviser
12. Neil Niru Dorrian, Environmental Adviser
13. Andrey Samatov, Head of Corporate Environmental Division
Invited experts
14. Jon Hancox, Ramboll Environ
IUCN
15. Giulia Carbone, Deputy Director, Global Business and Biodiversity Programme
16. Jerome Duramy, Programme Officer
17. Simon Delany, Rapporteur
Interpreters 18. Alexander Danilov
19. Grigory Shkalikov
Technical support:
20. Rainer Jacob, Brahler
Page 19
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
19
ANNEX B – AGENDA
1 introductory items
1.1 Introductions including expectations from the meeting
1.2 Logistics
1.3 Adoption of agenda
1.4 Available documents/materials
2 UPDATE ON PLANS FOR SEISMIC WORK BY SAKHALIN ENERGY IN 2018 (SEIC)
2.1 Updates from the company on seismic survey plans including:
• Permits and exclusion zone discussions with SEER
• Order of survey (OBN/PA-streamer)
• Time to be allocated to sound source experiments (reduced levels for future surveys)
• A-lines at night (related to tides and feathering)
2.2 Panel conclusions
3 FINALISATION OF THE MMP AND ANY ASSOCIATED PRACTICAL DETAILS(SEIC)
3.1 Chain of Command Protocol
3.1.1 Presentation by Company
3.1.2 Conclusion on the draft protocol
3.2 Acoustic monitoring including final protocol
3.2.1 Numbers of archival and monitoring buoys
3.2.2 Time allocated to sound source tests with reduced noise levels for future surveys
3.2.3 Conclusion on the draft protocol
3.3 Visual monitoring including final protocol
3.3.1 Mysticetus software and incorporation of factors such as tidal data and height of platform for
positional information
3.3.2 Further information on poor visibility technology (including results of use by NOAA)
3.3.3 MMO schedules and duties
3.3.4 Definition of ‘aberrant’ behaviour, in light of previous seismic survey guidelines
3.3.5 Conclusion on the visual monitoring protocol
3.4 Other matters
3.4.1 Final Terms of Reference and selection of the Independent Observer (update from IUCN)
3.4.2 Advisory Group including communications protocol
3.5 Conclusions and recommendations
4 PREPARATION FOR DATA ANALYSES FOR THE 2018 SURVEY
4.1 Data archiving and QA/QC plans (SEIC)
4.2 Planning for analyses including who, how, when and incorporation of previous datasets
4.3 Conclusions and recommendations
Page 20
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
20
5 PROGRESS (IF ANY) WITH ANALYSES OF DATA FROM THE 2015 SEISMIC SURVEYS
(SEIC)
6 NON-SEISMIC-RELATED ACOUSTIC ISSUES
6.1 Deployment of ‘control’ stations
Consideration of the development of a new recommendation in light of discussions at WGWAP-18
(Nowacek)
6.2 POI analyses of acoustic data
6.2.1 Follow up on matters raised from the 2015 data as discussed at WGWAP-18 (Racca)
6.2.2 Consideration of 2016 acoustic data provided to the Panel at WGWAP-18
6.3 Information on Ruban’s echo sounder (IUCN, SEIC)
6.4 Company plans for ‘noisy’ activities for 2018 e.g. use of echo sounders (SEIC)
6.5 Progress on automatic detection algorithms (POI, JASCO)
6.5.1 Periods of loud noise loud noise
6.5.2 Gray whale sounds
6.6 Plans for noise monitoring in 2018 outside the seismic survey period, if any (SEIC)
7 OTHER BUSINESS
8 ADOPTION OF REPORT
Page 21
Report of the Noise Task Force at its 14th Meeting, 14-16 March 2018, Gland, Switzerland
21
ANNEX C - LIST OF DOCUMENTS
DOCUMENT # TITLE LANGUAGE STATUS
NTF-13/
REPORT
Report from the 13th
meeting of the Noise Task
Force
English Public
NTF-14/01 Monitoring and mitigation plan (MMP) for the
2018 Piltun-Astokh 4D seismic survey of Sakhalin
Energy v26.04.2018
English Public
NTF-14/02 NTF-14 Status Update of 2018 4D Seismic Survey
at Piltun-Astokhskoye.
English Internal
NTF-14/03 Terms of Reference for the IUCN’s Independent
Observer (IO) to 2018 4D Seismic Survey at Piltun-
Astokhskoye
English Public
NTF-14/04 A: Offshore MMO Manual
B: Onshore MMO Manual
English Public, See Annexes C
& D of the MMP
NTF-14/05 Presentation on camera system (CMS), duties and
schedule for camera technician(s)
English Internal
NTF-14/06 Presentation on automated anthropogenic noise and
gray whale sounds
English Internal
NTF-14/07 From Sakhalin Energy: Presentation on periodic
loud noise events with data from additional
monitoring stations
English Internal
NTF-14/08 Pre-read: Mysticetus software English Internal