MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
REVISION CHANGE DETAILS
Rev Location of Change Brief Description of Change
01 First formal issue of 2003 Western Gray Whale Protection Plan
02 Throughout document Update of 2003 Western Gray Whale Protection Plan. Title reflecting new companies of document changed into Marine Mammal Protection Plan. approach
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 2 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN
A FRAMEWORK FOR MITIGATION AND MONITORING RELATED TO SAKHALIN ENERGY OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS, SAKHALIN ISLAND, RUSSIA.
©Yuri N. Yakovlev
Prepared by
Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited 35 Dzerzhinskogo Street Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, 693020 Russia
April 2005
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 3 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION...... 5
1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT ...... 5 1.2 SCOPE OF 2005 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN ...... 6 1.3 TARGET AUDIENCE...... 7 1.4 IMPLEMENTATION...... 7 1.5 REVIEW AND IMPROVEMENT ...... 8 2 WESTERN GRAY WHALE BACKGROUND INFORMATION ...... 9
2.1 STATUS ...... 9 2.2 DISTRIBUTION ...... 9 2.3 FOOD RESOURCES ...... 10 3 OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ...... 12
3.1 OFFSHORE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES...... 12 3.2 OFFSHORE OPERATION ACTIVITIES...... 12 3.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ...... 13 3.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...... 16 4 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION...... 18
4.1 MITIGATION APPROACH ...... 18 4.2 PROTECTION ZONES ...... 19 4.3 SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE...... 20 4.4 GENERAL MITIGATION MEASURES...... 21 4.5 2005 CGBS INSTALLATION PA-B MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 30 4.6 IMPLEMENTED MITIGATION MEASURES...... 34 5 MONITORING ...... 35
5.1 MONITORING DURING CONSTRUCTION...... 35 5.2 LONG TERM MONITORING ...... 37 6 REFERENCES ...... 41 ANNEX 1 ANNEX 2
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 4 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
Sakhalin Energy considers marine mammal protection an important issue that will remain relevant for the full duration of the Sakhalin offshore oil and gas development (predicted as approximately 50 years). It is of particular relevance during the planning and full-scale field development stage over the next 5 to 10 years. The focus of this marine mammal protection plan is primarily on the critically endangered Okhotsk-Korean or Western North Pacific (western) population of gray whales (Hilton-Taylor 2000). The reason for this is that the only two currently known feeding areas of this critically endangered species are located along the NE coast of Sakhalin Island close to Sakhalin Energy’s planned oil and gas developments. Specific protection measures for other endangered whale and pinniped species have not been included in this protection plan for the reasons outlined below: Available information and research evidence suggests that the potential environmental impacts of the Sakhalin II project upon other endangered and vulnerable marine mammals in the waters around Sakhalin Island and the Sea of Okhotsk are very low. This has been assessed through a process of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and reported in the Sakhalin II Phase 2 International EIA (SEIC, 2003) and associated EIA addenda (SEIC,2005). With the implementation of the mitigation measures in this plan that are defined primarily for the western gray whale and with supplementary activity-specific measures (that are subject to updates as new information becomes available), the impacts to both western gray whales and other marine mammals will be managed. Sakhalin Energy developed the first protection plan in 2001 in analogue to a “habitat conservation plan” as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (USFWS and NMFS 1996). A “habitat conservation plan” is a requirement of the U.S. Endangered Species Act when a proposed activity may have impacts on an endangered species in the United States or in International Waters by a United States entity. Although there is no regulatory requirement to develop a “habitat conservation plan” or similar plan in Russian waters, Sakhalin Energy has agreed to develop this marine mammal protection plan and to implement mitigation strategies, protection measures and continued monitoring programs to reduce the possibility that its activities may cause harm to the critically endangered western gray whale. Since 2001 the protection plan has been updated in 2002, 2003 and, in 2004, two separate activity specific protection plans were developed for offshore construction at Lunskoye. The current 2005 marine mammal protection plan incorporates new information from the 2003 and 2004 data of the western gray whale research and monitoring programme, data from the extensive 2004 acoustic programme, technical developments of offshore activities and evaluation of 2004 mitigation measures applied during Lunskoye construction.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 5 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
2.2 SCOPE OF 2005 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN
This document is presented to demonstrate that: (1) Sakhalin Energy has conducted a detailed western gray whale research and monitoring program between 1997-2004 that provides sufficient information to design mitigation and protection measures for western gray whales off northeastern Sakhalin Island; (2) Sakhalin Energy has implemented mitigation and protection measures in based on previous protection plans; (3) Sakhalin Energy has committed to fund future western gray whale studies to meet information needs; (4) Sakhalin Energy has evaluated the effectiveness of its mitigation and monitoring programs and modifies plans and studies as necessary in order to respond to new information as it becomes available, i.e., Sakhalin Energy adopts an adaptive approach to assessing and managing impacts on the western gray whales and their habitat. This document presents the general approach used by Sakhalin Energy to help protect critically endangered western gray whales while in their summer feeding grounds and to ensure that impacts to their northeast Sakhalin Island habitat are minimized. An updated summary of background information on western gray whales, and a summary of Sakhalin Energy’s Phase 1 and Phase 2 offshore activities that may have impacts on western gray whales are included in chapters 2 and 3. Note that this document does not go into detail on the technical background of impacts on marine mammals. These subjects are addressed separately in the International EIA, the WGW Technical EIA (both released by Sakhalin Energy in May 2003), the respective EIA addenda (SEIC, to be released) and the Comparative Environmental Analysis of the Piltun Astokh Pipeline routes (SEIC, 2004). The protection programme applies during all stages of the project lifecycle, being: Planning and design stages, including surveys and site selection Site preparation activities Installation and construction Commissioning and operation Decommissioning
This Marine Mammal protection plan does not address the following issues: Onshore facilities and activities Wastewater discharges (refer to the guidelines outlined by the Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78) and by Russian federal law) Oil spill response and prevention (refer to SEIC Central Oil Spill Response Plan 0000-S-90- 04 P-7030-00) Biodiversity (refer to the Standard for Biodiversity) Safety issues Detailed descriptions of the offshore activities (refer to the specific project plans and schedules).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 6 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
2.3 TARGET AUDIENCE
The protection programme applies to all Sakhalin Energy staff and contractors involved in offshore construction and operation activities.
2.4 IMPLEMENTATION
2.4.1 General approach
Sakhalin Energy has adopted the following ‘principles’ in implementing their western gray whale protection plan. Throughout this plan, unless otherwise indicated, the term “gray whale” refers to the western gray whale while in Russian waters. Western gray whale conservation measures are under the authority of the Russian Government during the period of time these whales are in Russian waters. The primary elements of this protection plan are the development and implementation of protection/mitigation measures and a monitoring program based on the findings of past monitoring and research, additional data needs, and anticipated future operations and activities. Sakhalin Energy will make every effort to address cumulative impacts and coordinate its gray whale monitoring activities and proposed mitigation measures as much as possible with other stakeholders (such as Exxon Neftegas, BP International, and the Russian Federation). Sakhalin Energy continues to maximize Russian content in gray whale studies in accordance with its commitments to the Russian Federation. Sakhalin Energy continues to provide monitoring and study findings to Russian authorities. Sakhalin Energy continues to apply a transparency policy by making monitoring and study findings available to the public and interested non-governmental organizations wherever possible. Sakhalin Energy will continue to seek cooperation and sharing of information among whale researchers/contractors to ensure a coordinated overall understanding of the gray whale issue.
2.4.2 Responsibilities
Marine mammal and western gray whale protection is centrally managed within Sakhalin Energy. All activities are therefore subject to the same management framework, with clearly defined responsibilities that apply to all relevant Sakhalin Energy staff and contractors. Project and Asset Managers responsibilities Ensure that Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA’s) are conducted prior to all new major activities or significant modifications to existing facilities if these are not covered by existing EIA’s and have the potential to affect the western gray whale population (from Biodiversity Standard); Ensure that requirements of this protection programme are reflected in the planning of activities and in documents that are of relevance for the projects; To ensure that a detailed understanding of the marine mammal protection conditions of the project area is gained, and effective and available measures and means are taken by the contractors and their staff to ensure that impact on any marine mammal is minimised. The General Manager HSE shall be responsible for:
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 7 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Implementing marine mammal/western gray whale monitoring as required and ensure analysis and collation of the monitoring data. Based on this information updates of the marine mammal protection plan will be issued if necessary. Development of generic and specific marine mammal protection mitigation measures in cooperation with project engineers for offshore installation and construction activities and operations that may affect the western gray whale and other marine mammals; Marine mammal/western gray whale awareness training materials for all new and existing Sakhalin Energy staff and its relevant contractors in relation to this protection plan; Conducting routine audits of activities as part of the HSE Management System (HSE-MS) auditing or as part of a themed audit; Reporting audit findings within the Company and to other stakeholders as appropriate. The SEIC Representative on board Understand the potential impacts on marine mammals associated with their area of responsibility and required measures to minimise these impacts. Ensure that staff and contractors under their supervision understand the marine mammal protection issues associated with their work, and the required measures to minimise potential impacts on marine mammals. Liaise with other SEIC chartered vessels to communicate on marine mammal related issues to maximise efficiency of specific measures. They report incidents, like injury, death or entanglement of marine mammals to the General Manager HSE using the Marine Mammal Mortality Injury report (Annex 2). In the course of conducting their duties they comply with this protection plan. Staff and contractors responsibilities Understand the marine mammal protection issues associated with their work, and the required measures to minimise potential impacts on marine mammals. Report incidents, like injury, death or entanglement of marine mammals to the supervisor using a special form (Marine mammal Mortality-Injury Report, see Annex 2). In the course of conducting their duties they comply with this protection plan.
2.5 REVIEW AND IMPROVEMENT
Any user of this document who encounters a mistake or confusing entry is requested to immediately notify the Document Custodian on the User Feedback Form. This Marine Mammal Protection Plan shall be reviewed as necessary by the Document Custodian, but no less frequently than every two years. Triggers for full or partial review may include: Emerging/growing HSE concerns in specific areas; Changes in shareholder requirements and concerns of staff, contractors, customers, Government agencies and the public; Changes in legislation and/or regulations; Incident investigations which identify shortfalls in the Marine Mammal Protection Plan Changing Company activities and locations New hazards or activities not considered by the Marine Mammal Protection Plan.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 8 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
3 WESTERN GRAY WHALE BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following sections summarise briefly the currently available knowledge on the status of western gray whales as far as relevant for this protection plan. More detailed information on the current knowledge of western gray whale ecology is provided in the CEA (SEIC, 2004), in separate reports from the WGW research and monitoring program and in scientific publications Detailed literature references are included in Chapter 6.
3.1 STATUS
The western gray whale is listed as a Category I species (endangered) in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation (Red Data Book of the Russian Federation, 2000) and is considered “endangered” by the United States Government (USFWS, 1997). This population was recently reclassified as “critically endangered” (facing an extremely high risk of extinction) by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (Hilton-Taylor, 2000; Weller and Brownell, 2000). The historical range of the western gray whale has not been systematically surveyed, and therefore the size of the entire population is currently unknown. Population estimates based on photo-identification monitoring studies sponsored by SEIC and others (Sobolevsky, 2000, 2001; Weller et al., 2000, 2001b, 2002a, 2002b, 2004; Würsig et al., 1999, 2000; Yakovlev and Tyurneva, 2004) suggest that the number summering off Piltun Bay, which most likely represents a significant proportion of the entire population, is approximately 100. The chance of population recovery for the western gray whale is likely to be constrained by a variety of demographic factors. Small populations are inherently more vulnerable than large populations to stochastic changes in parameters such as sex ratio or birth rate (Clapham et al., 1999; Gilpin and Soule, 1986). The number of calves seen between 1997 2003 has ranged from a low of two in 1997 to a high of 11 in 2003 (Weller et al., 2004; Yakovlev and Tyurneva, 2004). Genetic analysis from 108 of 131 gray whale biopsy samples show an overall male- biased sex ratio, with 59.1% males to 40.9% females; among calves, 68% were male and 32% female. Between 1995 and 2003, researchers were able to identify just 23 reproductively active females in the population, although there may be as many as 28 based on the presence of five calves that were already weaned prior to their first sighting (Weller et al., 2004). In addition to the high incidence of male calves and the low number of reproductive females, first-year calf survival rates are low 0.70 compared to 0.95 for non-calves (Bradford, 2003; Bradford et al., 2004). Calving intervals are also longer in the WGW; 2 to 4 years, with an overall mean of 2.8 years, compared to an average two-year interval in the eastern gray whale (Weller et al., 2004).
3.2 DISTRIBUTION
Currently, two feeding areas are known along the north-east coast of Sakhalin Island, the Piltun feeding area and the feeding area offshore Chaivo, discovered in 2001 (Blokhin et al., 2002; Maminov, 2003, 2004) (Figure 1). In the Piltun feeding area, that extends for about 90 km along the coast, most whales are observed feeding in shallow waters less than 20 m depth (Berzin et al., 1988, 1990, 1991; Blokhin et al., 1985, 2002, 2003a,b, 2004; Brownell et al., 1997; Gailey et al., 2004; Maminov, 2003, 2004; Sobolevsky, 1998, 2000, 2001; Vladimirov, 1994; Votrogov and Bogoslovskaya, 1986; Würsig et al., 1999, 2000), while the offshore area covers depth of 35-65 m. Both feeding areas were used by large numbers of whales in 2002 and 2003; however, in 2004 only a few whales were observed in the offshore feeding area (Blokhin et al., 2002, 2003a,b, 2004; Maminov 2003, 2004).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 9 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Results from the photo-identification studies have shown frequent movements of western gray whales between the two feeding areas, with some whales moving over 20 km within a 50 km2 area (Yakolev and Tyurneva, 2003, 2004). Seasonal shifts in whale distribution are likely to occur as whales reduce and deplete their own prey habitat (i.e. top-down effects) or as the biomass and quality of prey fluctuates throughout the season (i.e. bottom-up effects). To date, the majority of mother/calf pairs in the Piltun feeding area have been observed within 1 km of shore, and other whales seen mainly within 2 km of shore. No mother/calf pairs have been observed in the offshore feeding area off Chaivo Bay (Yakovlev and Tyurneva, 2003, 2004) in any of the years from 2001 to 2004.
3.3 FOOD RESOURCES
Western gray whales feed predominantly on organisms that live in or on the sea bottom (benthic organisms). They consume these organisms by ploughing into the sediment and extracting their food by filtration against baleen plates as they expel associated sediment. This method of feeding leaves large (average 1.6 m long) oval depressions in the sea floor that gradually fill up over time and are re-colonised by benthic organisms. Since gray whales have a relatively short season in which to feed, any change in distribution or quantity of their prey could result in reduced food consumption. Whales that do not eat enough may lose weight, making them less able to complete their long migration, or for females less able to carry a foetus to term or suckle it after birth. Prey studies conducted throughout the Piltun area since 2001 demonstrate high but patchy prey abundance. The prey distribution corresponds with the distribution and abundance of western gray whale sightings in both the Piltun and Offshore feeding area; (Blokhin et al., 2004; Fadeev, 2003, 2004) waters typically not used by gray whales for feeding were characterised by lower concentrations of potential gray whale prey or by unsuitable species for feeding (i.e. sand dollars). Studied for the first time in 2002, the Offshore feeding area was found to be a highly productive area dominated by tube-dwelling benthic ampeliscid amphipods, and was comparable in species composition and richness to eastern gray whale feeding areas in the Bering and Chukchi seas (Fadeev, 2003, 2004).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 10 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Figure 1: Western gray whale feeding areas along the NE coast of Sakhalin Island.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 11 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
4 OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS
4.1 OFFSHORE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The offshore construction activities from the Sakhalin II Phase 2 projects that have the potential to impact marine mammals or the western gray whale are listed below.
ANIVA BAY 2005: Offshore pipeline & cable construction connecting the Oil Export Terminal (OET) and the Tanker Loading Unit (TLU). Activities consist of dredging, pipe laying, backfilling. 2005: Construction of LNG Jetty and Tanker Loading unit (TLU) in Aniva Bay. The LNG jetty is about 800m long with a seabed footprint of 6250m2.
LUNSKOYE 2005: Offshore pipeline & cable construction from shore to the LUN-A platform location. Activities include dredging, pipe laying, shore pulling, backfilling and boulder cleaning. 2005: Construction of a temporary Heavy load material off-loading facility, including transport and off-loading of the heavy load transport barges and associated tugs. 2005: Installation of LUN-A concrete gravity based structure (CGBS). Activities include levelling seabed, tow-in, anchor install, ballast down and placement of scour protection. 2005: LUN-A pipeline tie-inn activities. 2006: Installation of LUN-A Topsides. Activities include tow-in, mating, leg welding, flotel accommodation at location and hook-up. PILTUN: 2005: Installation of PA-B concrete gravity based structure (CGBS). Activities include tow-in, anchor install, ballast down and placement of scour protection. 2005: Molikpaq Riser/J-tube pull (dredging and installation of 300 m of pipe) and installation of MTI lift. 2006: Installation of PA-B Topsides. Activities include tow-in, mating, leg welding, flotel accommodation at location and hook-up. 2006-2007: Offshore pipeline construction from PA-A and PA-B platform to shore (see Figure 1). Activities include dredging, pipe laying, shore pulling, backfilling and boulder cleaning.
4.2 OFFSHORE OPERATION ACTIVITIES
The offshore operation activities from the Sakhalin II Phase 2 projects that have the potential to impact marine mammals or the western gray whale are listed below.
ANIVA BAY 2006-beyond: Vessel transport activities in La Perouse Strait during operation phase.
LUNSKOYE 2006-beyond: Future LUN-A platform operations including all associated vessel and air traffic.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 12 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
PILTUN: 2007-beyond: Future PA-B platform operations including all associated vessel and air traffic. 2005-2006: Current PA-A operations (Molikpaq platform and Okha FSO) 2007-beyond: PA-A operations without the Okha FSO.
4.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS
An overview of the most important potential impacts on the western gray whales and other marine mammals related to all Sakhalin Energy’s offshore construction and operations activities is summarised in table 1. A short summary of the main potential sources of impact for western gray whales is outlined below. More detailed information on western gray whales impacts and potential impacts for other marine mammals can be found in the EIA’s and CEA. The main impact criteria with regard to the WGW can be divided in two different categories as follows: Those that will definitely occur to some extent, such as from noise and physical disturbance to benthic communities. Mitigation is needed to the point that potential impacts are considered to have no biological impacts on the population (see section 4.1 for definition). Those that are risk based, but impacts are potentially high and directly visible in the short term. These include oil spills and collision. The risk is quantified to the extent possible and needs to be mitigated to a level as low as practicable.
4.3.1 Collisions
A direct relationship exists between the amount of ship traffic and ship speed and the number and severity of ship-whale collisions. Certain assumptions about the risk of ship-whale collisions can be made (Laist et al., 2001): o All types and sizes of vessels can hit whales o Ships over 80 m in length cause most severe or lethal injuries o Vessels travelling over 12-13 knots cause most severe or lethal injuries o Serious injuries to whales rarely occur if struck by vessels travelling at speeds of less than 10 knots o Whales struck by vessels are usually not seen beforehand, or are seen too late to be avoided o The risk of ship-vessel collisions increases in poor visibility Although Sakhalin Energy construction vessels, supply vessels and crew change vessels generally travel well south of the main WGW feeding area near Piltun Bay, some migrant whales moving along the coast in May and November may be vulnerable to collisions with these vessels. Additional potential impact could occur with survey and environmental monitoring vessels performing work within the Piltun Astokh license area. In order to manage the collision risk mitigation measures have been developed that will decrease collision risk for western gray whales and all other marine mammals occurring in the area.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 13 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
4.3.2 Oil spill
There are few reports or studies relating specifically on the interaction of gray whales and oil slicks and so it is unclear whether they can detect surface oil (Moore and Clarke, 2002). The recorded data on other cetaceans also leads to no firm conclusions. While some reports conclude that cetaceans do not avoid oil slicks others have suggested otherwise. Studies on the effects of direct contact of petroleum products to cetacean skin have demonstrated that the marine mammals do not react to the type of prolonged exposure that would cause severe reaction in other mammalian species (Hunter, 1968; Hansborough et al., 1985). Where histological changes were evident, they healed within a week of the exposure. Experiments appear to show that the cetacean epidermis is a near-complete barrier to hydrocarbons (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1990; Bratton et al., 1993). The potential for baleen whales to have their baleen plates fouled by oil has also been a focus of concern. Because baleen whales rely on filtering their food from the water through their baleen plates, any fouling that diminishes feeding efficiency or increases the likelihood of ingesting oil, could have implications for individual survival. More detailed studies (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1982, 1985) demonstrated that oiling increased resistance to flow across the baleen, but also showed that over 70 percent of the oil was lost from the baleen within 30 minutes and that over 95 percent of the oil cleared after 24 hours. These data suggest that a baleen whale that suffered oiling of its baleen whale might have its feeding efficiency reduced for, at most, a few days. Stranded gray whales, examined after the “Exxon Valdez” spill, had oil on their baleen but not in their digestive tracts, suggesting that the baleen was fouled after the animals died (M. Dahlheim, pers. comm. in Moore and Clarke, 2002). Based on the above, the following assumptions can be made regarding the impact of oil on marine mammals. More background information and references are included in the project EIA’s (SEIC, 2003) and the CEA (SEIC, 2004): o Cetaceans do not appear to consistently avoid oil slicks. o At least some species are able to detect some oils (indicated by avoidance behaviour). o Cetacean skin is largely impermeable to hydrocarbons, although surface layers may be damaged by crude oils and gasoline. o Baleen appears to be only temporarily affected by oiling.
Prevention of oil spills is primarily managed through project design, e.g. construction of oil sumps for offshore pipelines. The impact following an oil spill is dependent on a lot of factors such as the type of oil spilled, the quantity, prevailing wind direction, etc. Reduction of impacts of an oil spill on western gray whales and other marine mammals is managed through the development of effective oil spill response plans.
4.3.3 Noise
Marine mammals rely heavily on the use of underwater sound to communicate and to gain information about their surroundings. Experiments also show that they hear and react to many anthropogenic sounds (see review in Richardson et al. 1995). Noise in the marine environment has the potential to interfere with a whale’s ability to communicate, which in turn has the potential to affect their distribution, abundance, behaviour, and general well-being (Richardson et al. 1995). Potential impacts due to high or increased noise levels are: o Direct physical impact on the hearing and other physical damage in whales due to high noise levels at close range (received level of 180 dB re 1µPA for pulsed sounds) o Behaviour modifications due to increased levels of noise, such as diversion from a migration path, avoidance of an area, changes in orientation and breathing, interrupted feeding that are of sufficient magnitude to be biologically significant
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 14 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
(received levels of 163 dB re 1µPA for pulsed sounds and about 115-123 dB re 1µPA for continuous sounds).
Physical damage Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS) is the mildest form of hearing damage that occurs on exposure to a strong sound (Kryter 1985). While experiencing TTS, hearing sensitivity is decreased. TTS can last from minutes or hours to days. The magnitude of TTS depends on the level and duration of noise exposure, among other considerations (Richardson et al. 1995). For sound exposures at or somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity recovers rapidly after exposure to the noise ends. Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) is a physical damage to the sound receptors in the ear. In some cases, there can be total or partial deafness, whereas in other cases, the animal is unable to hear sounds at specific frequency ranges. Physical damage to a marine mammal’s hearing apparatus can occur if it is exposed to sound impulses that have high peak pressures, especially if they have very short rise times. Such damage can result in permanent decrease in functional sensitivity of the hearing system at some or all frequencies. Noises generated from vessels involved during offshore pipeline and platform constructions do not have these specific characteristics and are not expected to cause PTS or TTS to marine mammals. Behaviour responses Behavioural reactions of marine mammals to a sound are difficult to predict. Reactions to sound, if any, depend on species, state of maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, time of day, weather, and many other factors. If a whale does react to an underwater sound by changing its behaviour or moving a small distance, the impacts of the change may not be significant to the individual, the stock, or the species as a whole. On the other hand, if a sound source displaces whales from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged period, impacts on the animals could be significant. Quantitative information on the reactions of gray whales to continuous anthropogenic sounds of the types associated with offshore pipeline construction and platform installations is very limited and show a wide variety in behavioural responses (Richardson et al. 1995; Moore and Clarke 2002; Dahlheim 1987; Bryant et al. 1984). Most available information relates to migrating or breeding whales, which appear to be less tolerant of anthropogenic sounds than are feeding gray whales (Richardson et al. 1995). Based on the scientific information available with regard to behavioural reactions of gray whales to continuous anthropogenic noise levels, 120 dB re 1 µPa has been adopted as the noise threshold above which most gray whales are predicted to avoid the area. A noise impact assessment strategy has been developed based on this received level and includes the criteria amount of potential feeding area avoided and duration of sounds above the threshold level in the feeding area. Both the scientific information and the noise impact assessment approach can be viewed in more detail in Chapter 4 of the CEA (SEIC, 2004).
NOISE TRESHOLD LEVELS:
163 dB Pulsed sources, such as seismic surveys 120 dB Continuous noise sources
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 15 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
4.3.4 Disruption to the Seafloor
Dredging activities required for the installation of the subsea pipelines, cables, GBS, TLU, jetty, and landing pier, will disrupt seafloor habitat and cause removal and burial of benthic fauna. Of all the marine mammals present in the area only western gray whales are particularly vulnerable to seafloor construction activities because they are the only whale species that feeds mainly on benthic organisms living in or on the seabed. Other whale species lead nomadic lives, form no stable local aggregations, and are only found in these waters in small groups or as individuals during their seasonal search for food. The only two known western gray whale feeding grounds along the NE Sakhalin coast is near shore Piltun and offshore Chaivo, so seafloor disruption outside the known feeding area will need no specific mitigation measures.
4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative effects refer to the impacts on the environment that result from a combination of past, existing, and imminent human activities. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time. There are other current and planned petroleum developments in the region, and the Russian Federation has national, regional, and local interests in maintaining other commercial and domestic activities (e.g., fishing, shipping, industrial development). A discussion of cumulative impacts is appropriate because cumulative impacts, rather than the isolated impacts associated with specific SEIC operations, are ultimately more likely to have effects on western gray whales and their environment. The impact sources to the western gray whales include noise, degradation of the marine environment and disturbance to their benthic food source, potential collisions with vessels and direct and indirect impact from oil spills. SEIC is sharing research and monitoring initiatives and mitigation measures as much as possible with other operators in the area to obtain a consistent approach in western gray whale protection on the short and long term.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 16 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Table 1 Summary of the 2005 offshore construction activities at Aniva Bay, Lunksoye and Piltun area on Sakhalin Island and their potential impact on marine mammals in general and the western gray whale in particular. Importance of project area for Potential Source Description of impact Impact assessment Impact assessment Area of Period of Offshore construction activities Marine mammals impact other Marine Gray whales activity activity1 mammals2 Risk to individual Low risk, potential for early Sept – Western gray whales not observed in Collisions Injury or death due to collisions with animal, negligible collision during migration late Nov 2005 Aniva Bay. Have migratory route vessels impacts on population season in Perouse Strait Offshore pipeline & cable construction connecting the Oil Export through La Perouse Strait . level Terminal (OET) and the Tanker Loading Unit (TLU). Activities Only spotted seals form rookeries in consist of dredging, pipe laying, backfilling. Aniva Bay during summer months. Low risk, possible No impact expected on ANIVA BAY PHYSICAL Sightings of other seals less frequent Oil spill Damage to skin, respiratory system, impact on individuals. migrating whales. DAMAGE and mostly solitary or in small groups. toxicity due to oil spills Negligible impact on Sea Lion and Fur seal sightings are population level Hearing damage leading to decreased No impact on hearing loss rare. Sightings of endangered whales No impact on hearing Early Sept – Noise orientation, food allocation, communication expected from vessel related Construction of LNG Jetty and Tanker Loading unit (TLU). rare. Regular sightings of visiting Killer loss expected from mid Dec 2005 due to high noise levels (>180 dB re 1 noise whales, dolphins and porpoises. vessel related noise uPa) Risk to individual Risk low, potential impact Installation of LUN-A Concrete Gravity Based Structure. Main mid June – mid Collisions Injury or death due to collisions with animal, negligible high if lethal activities are: tow-in, anchor install, ballast down and placement of July 2005 Western gray whales observed in low vessels impacts on population scour protection numbers migrating and feeding. level Sightings of other endangered marine PHYSICAL Low risk, Negligible Risk low, potential impact low mammals rare. LUNSKOYE DAMAGE Oil spill Damage to skin, respiratory system, impact on population due to low numbers Regular sightings of porpoises, seals, Offshore pipeline & cable construction from shore to the LUN-A late June – toxicity due to oil spills level platform location. Sept 2005 Killer Whales and to a lesser extent Minke whales and dolphins. Project area Hearing damage leading to decreased is no specific feeding or breeding area No impact on hearing Construction of a temporary Heavy load material off-loading facility mid July – mid Noise orientation, food allocation, communication No impact on hearing loss for marine mammals. loss expected from and 1 heavy load transport barge delivery.. August 2005 due to high noise levels (>180 dB re 1 expected from vessel related vessel related noise uPa) noise. Risk to individual Installation of PA-B Concrete Gravity Based Structure. Main late July – late Collisions Injury or death due to collisions with animal, negligible Risk high, potential impact activities are: tow-in, anchor install, ballast down and placement of August 2005 vessels impacts on population high scour protection level Western Gray whale feeding areas PHYSICAL Low risk, negligible along Piltun coast and offshore Chaivo. late Sept – DAMAGE Oil spill impact on population Regular sightings of other marine Damage to skin, respiratory system, Risk low, potential impact Installation of MTI lift on Molikpaq early Oct 2005 level mammals visiting the area include Killer toxicity due to oil spills high whales, Minke whales, Harbour porpoises, seals. Sightings of other Hearing damage leading to decreased endangered marine mammals rare. No impact on hearing No impact on hearing loss Dredging: early Noise orientation, communication, food PILTUN loss expected from expected from vessel related – late June All offshore activities outside western allocation, due to high noise levels (>180 Molikpaq Riser/J-tube pull (dredging and installation of 300m of vessel related noise noise pipe) gray whale feeding area. Noise dB re 1 uPa) Pipelaying: mid disturbance can extend into feeding Direct loss of food sources due to pollution – end July No impact Risk low, potential impact low areas. Piltun feeding area is most critical Oil spill of benthos (oil spill) due to mother/calf presence and high site fidelity. Lower return rate in Offshore Direct loss of food sources due to removal Summer feeding area, but high abundance of DECREASE Disruption and burial of benthos during pipeline and No impact Negligible impact season food and hence probability of western D FOOD seafloor platform installation Current PA-A Operations (Molikpaq platform and Okha FSO) gray whale sightings high. INTAKE Indirect loss of food source due to Noise avoidance of the feeding area and/or No impact Potential high impact disturbance during feeding caused by increased continuous noise levels (>120 dB re 1 uPa)
1 Note that indicative dates are provided as opposed to exact dates 2 No, negligible and low impacts belong to the category “no biological impact”, mitigation is not required. High impacts belong to the category “Potential biological impact”, mitigation is required. See section 4 for more details on mitigation approach. DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 17 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
5 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION
5.1 MITIGATION APPROACH
Sakhalin Energy is committed to minimising the impact of all its offshore operations on the marine environment and specifically on the western gray whale, to continually improve its environmental performance and to reflect this commitment in its HSE Commitment & Policy. The Sakhalin Energy framework is based upon compliance with Russian law and the incorporation of good international practice in the field of marine mammal protection. The regulatory instruments, guidelines and industry standards that guide the Marine Mammal Protection Plan are: o Terms and conditions of the agreement on development of the Piltun-Astokhskoye and Lunskoye oil and gas fields on the basis of the Production Sharing Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation, the Sakhalin Oblast Administration and Sakhalin Energy; o Requirements of the environmental legislation of the Russian Federation and the Sakhalin Oblast; o Relevant international laws and conventions; o International guidelines for impact assessment, for which the World Bank/IFC guidelines are applied as a benchmark; and o Shareholder standards; o International guidelines for minimising acoustic impacts to marine mammals (e.g. JNCC 1998; HESS 1999; NMFS 1999, 2000a,b; Environment Australia 2001; Lawson 2002; MMS 2002) The greatest opportunity for avoidance and/or minimisation of impacts to marine mammals is during the project planning, design and site selection stage. During this stage issues relating to facility construction and operations need to be considered so that potential problems and negative environmental impacts can be identified and addressed. Impact assessment criteria, methodologies and impact assessment documents have been developed and authored by external specialists. The results of this impact assessment process are reported in: o Detailed EIA’s for each of the project assets, prepared for the Russian approval (TEOC) process (2002); o Summary EIA for the Russian approval (TEOC) process (2002); o Comprehensive international-style EIA (2003) and related addenda (SEIC, 2005); o EIA on the 2003 seismic survey in the Lunskoye area (2003); o Specialised WGW Technical EIA (2003) and related addenda (2004). o Additionally to the EIA’s Sakhalin Energy developed the Comparative Environmental Analysis of the Piltun Astokh Pipeline route options (CEA, SEIC 2004) with internal and external technical specialists. The purpose of the CEA was to compare the advantages and disadvantages from an environmental perspective for three proposed pipeline routes including their landfalls and connective routes to the main north-south onshore pipeline, associated with the development of Sakhalin Energy’s Piltun-Astokhskoye (Piltun) oil field. The implementation of appropriate mitigation, monitoring and management measures, as defined within this protection programme, will be carried out by the individual Sakhalin Energy assets and overseen by the Company HSE group.
Sakhalin Energy’s strategy for the definition of mitigation measures is based upon two basic principles (see also Int EIA, WGW Technical EIA and CEA):
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 18 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
1. Avoidance of biological impact at the population level.Sakhalin Energy will not plan, implement or continue any activity predicted or found to have a biological impact on the western gray whale population or any other marine mammal population after all practicable mitigation measures have been adopted. 2. Reduction of biological impacts. Sakhalin Energy will work by planning, design and control measures to reduce predicted potential biological impacts on the population level to impacts that are not distinguishable from natural variation.
5.2 PROTECTION ZONES
The western gray whale is a long range migratory species. Its total habitat is large, i.e. many thousands of square km with migration routes expected to be well over 2000 km in length. It is recognised however that certain areas have an increased importance for the gray whales, specifically: o Feeding grounds; o Key migration and transit corridors; and o Breeding or calving grounds. Western gray whales do not breed or calve offshore Sakhalin Island but as mentioned in the previous section, summer feeding grounds with relative high concentrations of whales are confirmed in the near shore area of Piltun Bay and offshore Chaivo, in and near the area of Sakhalin Energy developments. Western gray whales have shown a high site fidelity towards the Piltun feeding area with the same whales returning almost every year over the past 8 years (aerial survey and other distribution research data 1997-2004). In the Chaivo offshore feeding area gray whales have been observed regularly since 2001, however the site fidelity for this area seems less strong as in 2004 whales have practically been absent in this area. Because benthic studies showed presence of high prey biomass, the absence is not directly related to food availability. The reasons for the absence in the Offshore feeding area are still unclear, but may be related to a high abundance of certain prey in the Piltun Feeding area (Fadeev et.al. 2005). The data of the 2003 and 2004 distribution surveys (aerial, vessel based and shore based) have been used to reassess the boundaries of the feeding areas as defined 2003 western gray whale protection plan. This resulted in modification of the zones, especially affecting shape and size of the offshore feeding. The absence of the whales in 2004 in the offshore feeding area shows an apparent higher site fidelity to the Piltun area
The Piltun and Offshore feeding areas as shown in Figure 1 are defined as Protection zones, i.e. zones that cannot be entered unless for safety or emergency reasons. Of these two areas, the Piltun area is the most sensitive because of the presence of mother/calf pairs.
NOTE CHANGES IN FEEDING AREAS COMPARED TO 2003 WESTERN GRAY WHALE
PROTECTION PLAN
The general migration route for western gray whales is anticipated to be northeast to southwest – along the eastern coast of the Asian landmass. The precise route is not well documented. However, gray whales are known to travel preferably in relatively shallow waters, so they can be expected to be present during migration along the whole east coast of Sakhalin island. Sightings of gray whales documented at Lunskoye (2003, 2004) and as far south as Cape Terpenia (2002) support this assumption.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 19 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
The near shore East Sakhalin coast is defined as an area where western gray whales might be encountered on their way North in spring and South in autumn and throughout the year in low numbers feeding on route. Mitigation measures related to avoidance of collisions are of main importance in this area (see section 4.4.1).
5.3 SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE
Western gray whales Western gray whales are not present all year round in the area of the Sakhalin Energy offshore development. Whale protection measures therefore need to reflect this in a practical manner. The seasonal nature of the WGW migration is linked to the ice conditions prevalent in the Sea of Okhotsk. The annual variability of the sea ice freezing and break up make it difficult to accurately predict the annual appearance and departure of gray whales in the Sakhalin Energy offshore development areas. The general pattern, with annual fluctuations because of the environmental conditions, is as follows: small numbers of whales begin to arrive in the area in May, increasing in numbers during June and July. The abundance of whales fluctuates during the summer with highest numbers of whales observed in August and September, and slowly declining numbers during late September, October and November as the whales begin their southward migration. These seasons are defined as follows: o Off Season – Western gray whales are not present due to sea ice conditions. No specific protection measures related to the physical presence of the whales are required. No monitoring is carried out. o Early Season – Western gray whale presence is low, although numbers will gradually increase over this period. Specific protection measures related to the physical presence of the whales are implemented. Because of the limited number of whales present in the feeding areas, offshore activities should be scheduled as much as possible in this season. o Peak Season – Western gray whales will definitely be present and numbers will increase to annual maxima. Specific protection measures related to the physical presence of the whales need to be implemented. Monitoring of whales is carried out. The number of feeding western gray whales potentially being impacted is considered to be at annual maximum. o Late Season – Western gray whales are still present but the numbers are gradually decreasing over this period. Specific protection measures related to the physical presence of the whales are implemented. Monitoring is completed or nearing completion. Because of the limited number of whales present in the feeding areas, offshore activities should be scheduled as much as possible in this season.
Other marine mammals The zoning described for the western gray whale reflects also the important seasons for the other marine mammals. o Northern Fur Seals and Steller’s sea lion arrive in the Sakhalin area around in early May and reach highest abundance by late June-July. They are wintering in the Sea of Japan. o Seal species: all seal species occurring around Sakhalin Island are present the whole year round in large numbers. o Other whale species (baleen and toothed whales) enter the Sea of Okhotsk to feed between spring and autumn when these waters become free from ice. With the onset of winter, they leave for the Pacific Ocean or the Sea of Japan. Only bowhead
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 20 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
whales (Balaena mysticetus) and beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) are year- round inhabitants of the Sea of Okhotsk. The four protection seasons that can be distinguished are3:
Off Season December 1 – April 30
Early Season May 1 – June 30
Peak Season July 1 – September 30
Late Season October 1 – November 30
5.4 GENERAL MITIGATION MEASURES
The mitigation measures outlined in this section apply to all offshore activities of Sakhalin II Phase 2, in all zones and where relevant (Table 2). Additional mitigation measures for specific activities that occur close to the Piltun feeding are described in a separate section.
5.4.1 Collision
In general, the risk of ship-whale collisions can be effectively mitigated by: o Limiting the number of vessels o Controlling vessel routes o Limiting vessel speed o Using Marine Mammal Observers Although the likelihood of a ship-whale collision is low in the vicinity of both platforms, the pipeline route, and along the designated shipping routes, mitigation measures will be employed to further reduce the probability of a harmful encounter. The following standard mitigation measures will be used to reduce the likelihood of ship-whale collisions in all phases of SEIC operations during the early, peak and late season: Vessels operating in the Piltun area will not traverse the Piltun feeding area or waters less than 20 m depth unless essential for safety or specifically required and authorised. All transiting vessels on voyage are required to keep within navigational corridors (see Figure 2A), unless essential for safety or specifically required and authorised. For all non-transiting vessels involved in offshore construction activities and Molikpaq operations, specific corridors have been promulgated. Vessels are required to operate within these corridors unless essential for safety or specifically required and authorised. These construction corridors are defined as follows (Figure 2B): o An area with a radius of 5 km around existing Molikpaq (PA-A) platform and planned LUN-A platform locations. o An area with a radius of 2 km around PA-B location (i.e. about 5 km from Piltun feeding area). o An area of 2 km on either side of the pipeline routes in Piltun and Lunskoye (total corridor width is 4 km).
3 The peak season, and consequently also the early and late season, are changed compared to the 2003 Western Gray whale Protection Plan. This is based on analysis of all available data that clearly show number of whales increasing early July, peak in August and early September and decreasing late September.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 21 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Speed requirements for vessels are established as follows:
Speed Transit vessels Transit vessels outside Within Piltun feeding requirements within navigational navigational corridors4 & area or < 20m corridors Vessels operating within depth5 construction corridors Daylight conditions 17 knts 10 knts 7 knts & visibility>1 km
Visibility <1 km or 17 knts 7 knts 5 knts at night
Sudden changes in speed and course should be avoided, except for vessels operating within construction corridors when necessary for specific performances (e.g. anchor handling). Transiting vessels will attempt to maintain a minimum of 1,000 m separation from observed western gray whales and other endangered whale species. If a whale surfaces in the vicinity of or is heading towards the vessel, all precautionary measures possible need to be taken to avoid collisions until it has been determined that the potential danger to the whale has passed. Non-transiting vessels moving with a speed of less than 5 knts will maintain course and speed unless there is an imminent risk of collision. In case of a collision risk with a whale they should stop if it is safe to do so until it has been determined that the potential danger to the whale has passed. Do not pursue, intercept, encircle, or cause groups of whales to separate. Vessels will not cross directly in front of or in the immediate vicinity of moving or stationary whales. When moving parallel to whales, vessels will maintain a constant speed and course. At least two trained marine mammal observers shall be present on all key vessels involved in offshore construction activities along the east Sakhalin coast and shall maintain a continuous watch for western gray whales and other marine mammals. All marine mammal sightings shall be recorded on specific data sheets. Trained MMOs or specially instructed crewmembers will keep a continuous watch for marine mammals during operations in Aniva Bay. Depending on the area of operations and logistics MMOs can operate from vessels or from onshore. All crewmembers shall be alert for marine mammals, regardless of whether or not the MMO is on watch.
Monitoring/Control All mitigation measures outlined above shall be included in the Marine Operating Procedures (phase 2) and Marine Control Guidelines (phase 1). These documents include a map of all western gray whale sightings and the shipping lanes and construction corridors. Prior to mobilisation all relevant persons on the vessel shall receive a briefing with regard to Marine Control Guidelines and mitigation measures that apply for its activity and area of operation. Position tracking by sat radio interrogation will be agreed for each vessel according to Contract and all vessels will send daily position reports as required by Marine Operating Procedures.
4 This only applies to situation where the corridor boundaries are passed to the west, i.e. in the direction to the shore. 5 Entering the Piltun feeding area is only allowed after authorisation in emergency situations.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 22 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Marine mammal observers are to report on a daily basis all marine mammals observed relative to the vessels. The marine mammal observers will immediately report all cases of whale/marine mammal collisions to SEIC HSE representative.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 23 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Figure 2A: Navigational and construction corridors for transiting vessels and vessels involved in offshore construction activities related to the Sakhalin II project.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 24 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Figure 2B: Detail of the navigational and construction corridors in the Piltun area for transiting vessels and vessels involved in offshore construction activities related to the Sakhalin II project.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 25 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
5.4.2 Oil spill
Specific requirements with respect to oil spill response close to the Piltun feeding area have been identified and are documented in the SEIC Central Oil Spill Response Plan. These requirements relate to the issues listed below and depend on proximity to Piltun feeding area and season. o Restriction to the use of dispersants in and close to the Piltun feeding area. o Guidelines for deployment of oil spill response vessels within and close to Piltun feeding area. o Restriction of use of in situ burning of spilled oil. o Use of aerial surveillances.
5.4.3 Noise
If practical feasible (schedule, weather and safety related), offshore construction activities close to the Piltun feeding area are to be scheduled outside the peak season, in order of preference this is: 1. Off season – from December 1 to April 30 2. Early season – from May 1 – June 30 or Late season – from October 1 – November 30 Contractors are requested to use equipment and procedures that minimise noise6. Possible options include use of special enclosures, mufflers, sound-isolation mounts, tuned propellers and drive shafts, and shrouds on propellers, along with minimal use of thrusters. Possible measures are outlined in the document Noise Mitigation Strategy relevant to Sakhalin II Construction and Operations (5052-S-90-04-T-0020-00-E). Use of bubble curtains or other mitigation strategies have been identified and/or are being developed for platform operations in case modelling results and noise monitoring of analogue operations predict higher noise levels than anticipated (Noise Mitigation Strategy relevant to Sakhalin II Construction and Operations (5052-S-90-04-T-0020-00-E). A specific noise mitigation approach has been developed for the planning phase of offshore activities that have the potential to impact whales on their feeding grounds (Step 1, Figure 3). This approach involves predictions of the noise footprint using an advanced acoustic model and an extensive source level measurement program. Verification of the predicted noise footprint and associated potential impact on the whales will occur with real time noise monitoring during actual construction in the field combined with whale distribution and abundance surveys. A specific procedure is established to define actual impacts and decide on actions to be taken (Step 2, Figure 3). All types of aircraft will maintain a minimum altitude of not less than 450 m over the western gray whale feeding area, subject to pilot safety requirements. Aircraft will be prohibited from flying over or circling wildlife, including whales, for the purposes of casual viewing.
Monitoring/Control Special noise monitoring shall be implemented that allows for real time monitoring of the received noise level in the Piltun feeding area (see for more detailed information the
6 During the Lunskoye noise monitoring program in 2004 source level measurements of vessels involved in pipe laying activities have been measured. These results have been used to identify suitable vessels for work to be conducted in Piltun, so far as availability, suitability and contractual issues allow.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 26 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
document: 0000-S-90-04-P-7057-00-rev01 2005 Offshore Construction Noise Monitoring Plan). Daily summary reports of the noise measurements and whale distribution and abundance will be reported to the HSE marine mammal specialist for review and analysis. In case whale distribution, abundance and behaviour deviates from normal observation patterns this will be communicated to SEIC Whale Council. This council will decide on action to be taken (see Step 2, Figure 3 for procedure).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 27 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
STEP 1: Noise Mitigation Assessment Planning phase
Planning Phase: Offshore construction activities
Have the activities the potential to impact western gray whales while in their feeding areas
No (further) mitigation required NO YES
Predict noise footprint in the Piltun feeding area using the acoustic model. A database of SL’s of different vessel types has been created for this purpose.
Are impacts acceptable according to the noise impact assessment criteria (see Annex 1)
No (further) YES NO mitigation required
Specify mitigation criteria for offshore STEP 2 construction activities. These include, but are not limited to*: • Use of quieter vessels • Construction configuration • Nr of tugs operating • Avoid use of propulsion system • Reduction of power levels
Figure 3: General Noise Mitigation Approach
------*The possibility to use these mitigation measures depends on the nature of the offshore activity. The mitigation measures will therefore be judged on practicality and effectiveness for each relevant offshore activity separately.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 28 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
STEP 2: Actual noise impact approach during offshore construction
Offshore Construction in Piltun area as planned in STEP 1
Real time noise monitoring of actual noise footprint Daily reports of ------and ------noise levels and Monitoring of daily whale distribution, whale abundance & abundance & behaviour distribution
Observed patterns of whale distribution, Analyses/Review of data abundance and feeding fall within by SEIC HSE Marine previously observed variations mammal specialist
NO YES
No action required
Communicate findings to relevant managers and experts within SEIC for decision on action to be taken. This group includes: • HSE managers • Project managers • CEO, Project director • External Affairs manager
Decision on action to be taken
Figure 3 continue: General Noise Mitigation Approach
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 29 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
5.4.4 Disruption of seafloor
No specific mitigation measures are defined for impacts related to disruption of the seafloor as currently no offshore activities will be performed within known whale feeding grounds. As part of the conditions imposed by the Water Use Licenses and Construction permits, plume cloud monitoring activities were conducted as a routine activity during pipeline installation activities in Lunskoye in 2004, where sediments are broadly similar, and where construction methodologies and water depths are near identical as in Piltun. The results indicated general transport to the south, based on net current direction. The same can be expected for the Piltun area, this means away from the Piltun feeding area. Disturbance of benthic communities in the feeding area due to sedimentation of dredging activities is not expected to occur.
5.4.5 Waste management
All hazardous operations at sea, such as fuelling, and hazardous waste transportation will be conducted in compliance with the guidelines outlined by the Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78) and with Russian federal law.
Monitoring/Control Monitoring of compliance with the waste standards and permit requirements is conducted under the Environmental Monitoring Program and is documented in “Concept of the System for Industrial Environmental Control and Local Monitoring” (SEIC, in preparation).
5.5 ACTIVITY SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES
The general mitigation measures as described in section 4.4 apply to all offshore activities that will take place along the NE coast of Sakhalin. In this section more detail is provided on mitigation measures for 2005 construction activities that are going to take place in the Piltun area.
5.5.1 CGBS installation
Because of the specific transport requirements of the CGBS, a tow route has been identified from Vostochny port to PA-B location. This route is shown in Figure 4. Towing of the LUN-A platform will start early June and arrives at location 16 days later. This period coincides with the migration of western gray whales. Most sensitive part of the tow-out will be La Perouse Strait. Collision with gray whales is not expected to be a major risk as the tow speed will be maximum 3 knots. Besides that towing of the CGBS through La Perouse Strait can only be done under good weather conditions. Two MMOs will be present on the lead tug to watch out for marine mammals. All these conditions also apply for the tow of the PA-B CGBS that will take place early July and will take 17 days to arrive on site.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 30 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Figure 4 Detail of the CGBS tow routes.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 31 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Main activities of CGBS installation are: o Seabed levelling o Tow in of CGBS o Anchor install, positioning and ballast down of CGBS structure o Placement of scour protection. Levelling of seabed is performed to achieve a flat and horizontal seabed. Area covers 110m x 110m down to an elevation of LAT-30m. Volume of 7500 m3 of sediment replaced east of CGBS. location. Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger “Gerardus Mercator ” is contracted for this work. Tow-in of the CGBS installation will take place with 3 tugs and a support vessel as shown in the figure below. It will be towed out following the tow-out route and will enter the PA-B area from the northeast.
Positioning of CGBS is performed by winches on tugs, fixed at 5 pre-installed anchors This prevents noise emission from tugs that otherwise should stay in position using their propulsion system. Placement of scour protection rock around the CGBS immediately follows placement of the structure on the sea bed. This work will be performed by the vessel Rocky Giant using a fall pipe. More specific details of the CGBS activities are described in relevant project plans and schedules. Because these activities are taking place close to the Piltun feeding area the procedure for general mitigation approach in the planning phase as identified in Step 1, Figure 3 has been followed. These specific steps of the CGBS PA-B Installation noise mitigation approach are described in Figure 5. The noise model predictions will be field tested during LUN-A installation that will take place one month prior to PA-B installation as an extra verification.
5.5.2 Molikpaq offshore activities
Two main activities will take place at the Molikpaq, being: o Molikpaq Riser/J-tube pull (dredging and installation of 300 m pipe). Dredging will take place by the Pompei in June (and mid June for three days by the Leonardi Da Vinci). Pipelaying will be done by the SEMAC from mid to end of July. o Installation of MTI lift, SEMAC being present late Sept/early October for 5-6 days. The same noise assessment process is being followed as for the CGBS installation. Where activities at Molikpaq overlap those of the CGBS installation they are modelled together.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 32 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
STEP 1: Noise Mitigation Assessment CGBS PA-B installation
Seabed leveling Tow-in, Anchor install, Scour protection PA-B location CGBS positioning placement mid June – 3 days end July – 4/5 days August/Sep – 40 days
Noise footprint of dredger Noise footprint of tugs involved Noise footprint of Pompei at Gerardus Mercator (GM) at in Tow-in and Anchor install PA-B as analogue for Rocky PA-B . SL data GM are based on analogue SL of Giant. SL data of Pompei available. KATUN working at full power. while rockdumping are For better noise prediction SL available. data from actual tow-in tug are being obtained at different power levels. Rerun models using realistic power regimes.
Are impacts acceptable according to noise impact assessment criteria for PA-B Platform installation (see Annex 1).
No (further) mitigation required YES NO
STEP 2 Rerun model with reduced and minimum power levels. Define effectiveness in terms of noise reduction – only possible for tow-in and not for seabed leveling and scour protection placement.
Are impacts acceptable according to noise impact assessment criteria for PA-B Platform installation (see Annex 1).
Identify effectiveness of bubble curtains or other active noise NO reduction methods.
Figure 5 2005 CGBS PA-B Installation noise mitigation approach
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 33 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
5.5.3 Implemented mitigation measures
Mitigation measures that have already been identified and implemented in the design and planning phase of the activities are: Vessel noise levels and signatures have been measured and used in the noise propagation models for activities that take place in the Piltun area. The noise models have been applied to minimise noise levels during construction activities. Limitations on vessel bunkering during construction work have been and will be implemented TSHD Gerardus Mercator: main Propellers shrouded and Bow Thrusters Water Jet to reduce noise emission. To reduce noise emission the positioning of CGBS is taking place by winches on five tugs without use of propulsion system. Placement of station keeping system by the Tugs in 1-2 days. During CGBS installation the Offshore Support Vessel will use propulsion system at low power to keep in position. CGBS ballasted down to seabed by controlled flooding. Duration 38 hours with minimal noise emission.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 34 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
6 MONITORING
SEIC-sponsored western gray whale research and monitoring programs have been in place off the northeast coast of Sakhalin Island since 1997. As in previous years, the 2005 and 2006 western gray whale monitoring programs will be composed of a suite of studies designed to provide information about western gray whale ecology and their marine acoustic environment. The main focus of the monitoring programme during 2005 and 2006 will be threefold: 1. To continue collecting baseline information data on western gray whale ecology and the acoustic environment, adding another two years to the 8-yr (1997-2004) accumulation of knowledge; 2. To provide real time information on the distribution of the whales and the acoustic footprint of planned activities in order to monitor the predicted potential impact and implement “action criteria” in case impacts are higher than expected. 3. To evaluate effectiveness of mitigation measures by analysing the actual impacts on western gray whales behaviour and distribution from offshore construction activities, using all available data and knowledge collected to date.
6.1 MONITORING DURING CONSTRUCTION
In order to meet these three objectives the 2005/2006 monitoring programme will be designed such that integration of the results from acoustic studies, behavioural studies, prey studies and distribution and abundance studies will occur. The research components of the long term WGW Research and Monitoring program will be continued in 2005 and 2006 to add to the existing knowledge and to define if and to what extent offshore construction in 2005 will have an impact on the whales. The specific objectives of this years monitoring is described in this section for each component separately.
6.1.1 Acoustic monitoring
The objectives of the 2005 acoustic monitoring program are as following: Ongoing verification and validation of the acoustic model that is used to predict the noise footprint from offshore activities in the Piltun area. For 2005 the received levels of the CGBS LUN-A installation activities will be monitored as extra validation of the predicted noise levels in the Piltun feeding area from CGBS PA-B installation. Additionally, source levels from vessels involved in Lunskoye pipeline construction activities will be measured. Focus will be primarily on measuring source levels of vessels that will be used in Piltun construction in 2006 (see 2005 Offshore Construction Noise Monitoring Plan, SEIC doc nr. 0000-S-90-04-P- 7057-00-rev02). Recording on a real-time basis received noise levels along the outer margin of the Piltun feeding area using enhanced versions of the Autonomous Underwater Acoustic Recorders (AUARs). Radio telemetry systems are being added to four of the standard AUAR systems in order to satisfy the real-time monitoring requirement). Data will be relayed to shore and vessel-based stations were it will be analysed and evaluated relative to industry activities occurring in the study area. This monitoring is a joint SEIC/ENL effort The acoustic data, along with information about the distribution and abundance of WGW (see 5.1.2), will assist SEIC in deciding whether to invoke additional noise mitigation measures during construction. Recording received noise levels in the Piltun feeding area during construction activities positioned at locations close to the behavioural stations will provide important information about possible behavioural reactions of whales to specific noise levels in case behavioural data show significant deviations from previous years (see behavioural section below).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 35 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Continuation of ambient noise measurements on long term monitoring stations, situated in both Piltun and Offshore feeding area and North of the Piltun feeding area (control station). This is also part of the joint SEIC/ENL WGW Research and Monitoring Program. Continuation of TL measurements along paths from locations of (planned) offshore construction to the feeding areas.
6.1.2 Distribution and Abundance Surveys
Distribution surveys are conducted by means of aerial surveys, vessel based surveys and surveys conducted from shore. They are designed to provide quantitative and systematically collected information on the distribution and abundance of WGW (all surveys), WGW feeding plumes in the Piltun feeding area (aerial survey), and distribution in the Offshore feeding area and over a broader area of the NE Sakhalin coast (aerial and vessel surveys). The vehicle based distribution survey started in 2003 and the data collected to date show that this method is a very valuable and cost effective way to monitor whale distribution, mainly because of the opportunity to scan the Piltun area for whale distribution on a daily basis (weather permitting). The whale distribution programme will satisfy the broad objectives of documenting whale abundance in the study area, and will also meet the more specific objectives related to the planned construction activities in 2005. The main construction related objectives are: Document distribution and abundance of western gray whales “before, during and after” CGBS installation at PA-B. Daily data transfers to a central data repository, and near real- time analysis and mapping of whale distribution will provide the necessary information to be used in risk management decisions (see section 4.4). Distribution data can also be used in Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) analyses to evaluate noise impacts of WGW after construction. Additionally to whale distribution data, the 2005 aerial surveys can provide valuable data on feeding index of the whales. Surveys can be flown any time when deemed necessary.
6.1.3 Behaviour Monitoring
Systematic behaviour monitoring studies were initiated in the Piltun feeding area in 1997. These studies are designed to provide information on WGW abundance and behaviour using several quantitative survey methods, i.e., scan sampling, focal animal tracking and detailed behaviour documentation. The overall goal of the study is to better understand the biology and “normal” behavior, distribution, abundance, and movement of western gray whales to further develop mitigation and protection measures in relation to present and planned industrial activity off northeastern Sakhalin Island. The specific objectives are: Evaluate spatial and temporal movement patterns of gray whales in relation to stochastic, demographic, and potential anthropogenic impacts; Conduct behavioral studies to ascertain baseline feeding and other behaviors, and assess behaviors that have the potential to be affected by anthropogenic activities; Evaluate the relative abundance and geographic distribution patterns of western gray whales; Identify potential behavioral, movement and habitat use differences among mom-calf pairs; Develop a geographic information system that incorporates environmental, habitat use, benthic, and anthropogenic information. As in 2004, two teams of behavioural scientists will conduct daily surveys from 6 fixed observation stations along the Piltun coast during 2005. These studies will be coordinated with the acoustic monitoring program so behavioural data can be interpreted and evaluated relative to both natural environmental variables and anthropogenic noise-related variables (see section 5.1.1).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 36 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
6.1.4 Prey Monitoring
Prey distribution and abundance have a major influence on the distribution and abundance of the western gray whale. The main objectives of this study are: Characterize the identity, (seasonal and annual) distribution and abundance of prey species within feeding areas (Piltun and Offshore feeding areas) where whales are and are not feeding; Identify and characterize western gray whale feeding (prey) habitat within the study area. Sediment characteristics, sea surface temperature, salinity, scans of seabottom, prey pollution, ocean currents, etc.; Compare the distribution of western gray whales within and between feeding seasons with the seasonal distribution of prey and habitat to understand seasonal movements of whales. Information from this study will help understand major food-related influences on western gray whale distribution and abundance during years when construction activities may also cause impacts. Studies in 2005 will focus mainly on sampling near feeding western gray whales, and in a select number of randomly chosen sites within the established prey sampling grids established in 2002. Early and late season sampling will obtain more information on the productivity of the prey and preferred prey sizes.
6.1.5 PhotoID
The technical objective of the work proposed here is to conduct photo-identification surveys to assess annual return and patterns of site fidelity for known individuals, which will contribute to defining the size, structure, status of the population in general. Photo-identification can be used to understand various aspects of western gray whale ecology such as: o Number and status of cow/calf pairs (calf production/survival) o Number of individual whales observed o Population demographics and structure o Number of re-sightings of individual whales (within and between feeding seasons) o Patterns of individual whale movement o Association patterns between individuals o Site-fidelity and interchange between the Piltun and Offshore feeding areas o Individual Health – Documentation of “skinny whales” and continued monitoring the affected individuals for continued susceptibility toward “skinniness” and/or recovery to “normal weight”. o Population Health o Individual foraging ranges and site-selection Continuation of PhotoID studies in 2005 and in the future will build upon a more comprehensive database and provide information on population health and status in years before, during and after construction.
6.2 LONG TERM MONITORING
Monitoring of the whale ecology will continue after construction of the planned facilities in cooperation with other operators in the area. The components of the survey will be the same as the ones mentioned above (distribution and abundance, feeding behaviour, prey and prey habitat studies, photo-identification studies, acoustic footprint of the environment). This allows SEIC to build upon the large amount of knowledge collected to date and to evaluate potential changes in the status or distribution of the whales on a longer term.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 37 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
The long term monitoring program is currently being developed with other operators in the Sakhalin area and will be integrated in the overall environmental monitoring program of SEIC documented in “Concept of the System for Industrial Environmental Control and Local Monitoring” (SEIC, in preparation)
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 38 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Table 2 Summary of general mitigation measures related to collision and noise disturbance. Source of Construction (C), Control/ Monitoring Mitigation measures7 Area8 impact Operation (O) / Documentation Vessels operating close to the Piltun area will not traverse the Piltun feeding area and waters less than 20 m depth Position tracking by Piltun C / O unless essential for safety or specifically required and authorised. satelitte radio All transiting vessels on voyage are required to keep within navigational corridors unless essential for safety or interrogation All C / O specifically required and authorised (Figure 2A). Daily position Non-transiting vessels involved in offshore construction and Molikpaq operations, are required to operate within All C construction corridors unless essential for safety or specifically required and authorised (Figure 2B) Reports to Marine Operator Within Outside corridors / within Within (Speed in knots) corridors construction corridors Feeding areas Speed Limits are All C / O established Visibility > 1km 17 10 7 Visibility < 1 km, at night 17 7 5 Sudden changes in speed and course should be avoided All C / O MMO Collision Transiting vessels will attempt to maintain a minimum of 1,000 m separation from observed western gray whales and other endangered whale species. If a whale surfaces in the vicinity of or is heading towards the vessel, all All C / O MMO precautionary measures possible need to be taken to avoid collisions until it has been determined that the potential danger to the whale has passed Non-transiting vessels moving with a speed of less than 5 knts will maintain course and speed unless there is an imminent risk of collision. In case of a collision risk with a whale they should stop if it is safe to do so until it has been All C / O MMO determined that the potential danger to the whale has passed Do not pursue, intercept, encircle, or cause groups of whales to separate All C / O MMO
Vessels will not cross directly in front of or in the immediate vicinity of moving or stationary whales. When moving All C / O parallel to whales, vessels will maintain a constant speed and course MMO At least two trained marine mammal observers shall be present on all key vessels involved in offshore construction Piltun, activities along the east Sakhalin coast and shall maintain a continuous watch for western gray whales and other Lunsko C Daily MMO reports marine mammals. All marine mammal sightings shall be recorded on specific data sheets ye
7 All mitigation measures apply in Early, Peak and Late season 8 All means all areas where SEIC is constructing or operating: Piltun, Lunskoye and Aniva
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 39 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Continuation Table 2 Summary of general mitigation measures related to collision and noise disturbance. Source of Construction (C), Control/ Monitoring / Mitigation measures Area impact Operation (O) Documentation Trained MMOs or specially instructed crewmembers will keep a continuous watch for marine mammals during operations in Aniva Bay. Depending on the area of operations and logistics MMOs can operate from vessels or from Aniva C Daily MMO reports Collision onshore. All crewmembers shall attempt to maintain a watch for marine mammals, regardless of whether or not the MMO is All C / O on watch. If practical feasible (schedule, weather and safety related), offshore construction activities close to the Piltun feeding Project schedules Piltun C area are to be scheduled outside the peak season Noise Contractors are requested to use equipment and procedures that minimise noise. Possible options include use of 5025-S-90-04-T-0020-E disturbance special enclosures, mufflers, sound-isolation mounts, tuned propellers and drive shafts, and shrouds on propellers, Piltun C / O Noise Mitigation Strategy (vessels) along with minimal use of thrusters. Noise footprint of offshore activities close to the whale feeding area will be predicted with acoustic models prior to Real time acoustic & Piltun C / O field construction and tested against noise impact criteria. whale monitoring
All types of aircraft will maintain a minimum altitude of not less than 450m over the western gray whale feeding Aviashelf Flight Piltun C / O Noise area, subject to pilot safety requirements. Operations Manual Disturbance (aircraft) Aviashelf Flight All aircraft will be prohibited from flying over or circling wildlife, including whales, for the purposes of casual viewing. All C / O Operations Manual Use of bubble curtains or other mitigation strategies have been identified in case monitoring and modelling results 5025-S-90-04-T-0020-E Piltun O Noise predict higher noise levels from platform operations than anticipated.. Noise Mitigation Strategy Disturbance (Platform Noise footprint of offshore activities close to the whale feeding area, other than normal operational activities, will be Noise modelling strategy operations) predicted with acoustic measurements and modeling prior to field construction and tested against noise impact Piltun O criteria.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-02 PAGE 40 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
7 REFERENCES
Berzin, A.A., V.L. Vladimirov, and N.V. Doroshenko. 1988. Results of aerial surveys to study the distribution and abundance of cetaceans in the coastal waters of the Sea of Okhotsk in 1986-1987. Pages 18-25 In: N.S. Chernysheva (ed.), All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO), Moscow, USSR. (In Russian). Berzin, A.A., V.L. Vladimirov, and N.V. Doroshenko. 1990. Aerial surveys to determine the distribution and number of polar gray whales and beluga whales in the Sea of Okhotsk in 1985-1989. Izvestiya Tikhookeanskogo Nauchno-Issledovatel’skogo Instituta Rybnogo Khozyaistva I Okeanografii (TINRO) 112:51-60. (In Russian). Berzin, A.A., V.L. Vladimirov, and N.V. Doroshenko. 1991. Results of aerial surveys to study the distribution and abundance of whales in the Sea of Okhotsk in 1988-1990. Pages 6-17 In: L.A. Popov (ed.), All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO), Moscow, Russia. (In Russian). Blokhin, S.A., N.V. Doroshenko and I.P. Marchenko. 2003a. The abundance, distribution, and movement patterns of gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) in coastal waters off the northeastern Sakhalin Island coast in 2002 based on the aerial survey data. Unpublished contract report by Russian Federations State Committee on Fisheries Federal Unitarian Enterprise TINRO-Center for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia, and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 67 p. [available on the Sakhalin Energy Investment Company website http://www.sakhalinenergy.com/environment/env_whales.asp] Blokhin, S.A., Doroshenko, N. and S. Yazvenko. 2004. Distribution, abundance, and movement patterns of western gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) in coastal waters of northeastern Sakhalin Island, Russia, in June-December 2003 based on aerial survey data. Unpublished contract report by TINRO-Centre, Vladivostok, for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno- Sakhalinsk, Russia. Blokhin, S.A., M.K. Maminov, and G.M. Kosygin. 1985. On the Korean-Okhotsk population of gray whales. Rep. Int. Whal. Comm. 35:375-376. Blokhin, S.A., S.B. Yazvenko, V.L. Vladimirov and S.I. Lagerev. 2002. Numbers, Distribution, and Behavior of the Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robustus) in Coastal Waters of northeastern Sakhalin in the Summer and Fall of 2001 (based on aerial survey data). Marine Mammals of the Holarctic. Materials from the second international conference, Baikal, Russia. pp. 36-38. Blokhin, S.A., V.L. Vladimirov, N.V. Doroshenko, M.K. Maminov and A.S. Perlov 2003b. Abundance, Distribution and Behavior of Gray Whales (Eschrichtius robustus) Offshore North-Eastern Sakhalin in 2002. Prepared by Russian Federation, Fisheries Committee, and Federal National Unitary Enterprize, Pacific Research Fisheries Center, TINRO-Center. Prepared for Exxon Neftegas Limited and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd. Bradford, A.L. 2003. Population assessment of western north Pacific gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus). M.Sc. Thesis, School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, 115 p. Bradford, A.L., Wade, P.R., Weller, D.W., Burdin, A.M., Ivashchenko, Y.V., Tsidulko, G.A,, VanBlaricom, G.R. and Brownell, R.L., Jr. 2004 Submitted. Survival estimates of western gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) incorporating individual heterogeneity and temporary emigration. Mar. Eco. Prog. Series. 40 pp Brownell, R.L., S.A. Blokhin, A.M. Burdin, A.A. Berzin, R.G. LeDuc, R.L. Piman, and H. Minakuchi. 1997. Observations on the Okhotsk-Korean gray whales on their feeding grounds of Sakhalin Island. Rep. Int. Whal. Comm. 47:161-162. Clapham, P.J., S. Young, and R.L. Brownell. 1999. Baleen whales: conservation issues and the status of the most endangered populations. Mammal Rev. 1999, Volume 29, No. 1, 35-60. Fadeev, V.I. 2003. Benthos and prey studies in feeding grounds of the Okhotsk-Korean population of gray whales. Final report from the Institute of Marine Biology (IMB) of Far East Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, to the Sakhalin Energy Investment Company. Fadeev, V.I. 2004. Benthic and prey studies in feeding grounds of the Okhotsk-Korean population of gray whales 2003. Unpublished contract report by the Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Science, Vladivostok, Russia, for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. Gailey, G., O. Sychenko and B. Würsig. 2004. Western gray whale behavior and movement patterns: shore-based observations off Sakhalin Island, July-September 2003. Unpublished contract report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kamchatka, Russia, for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 74 p. Gilpin, M.E. & Soule, M.E. 1986. Minimum viable population: processes of species extinctions. In: Conservation Biology, M. Soule (ed.), pp. 19–34. Sinauer, New York.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 41 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Hilton-Taylor, C. 2000. 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN/SSC, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Maminov, M.K. 2003. Abundance, distribution and behaviour of gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) offshore north- eastern Sakhalin Island in 2002. Unpublished contract report by Russian Federations State Committee on Fisheries Federal Unitarian Enterprise TINRO-Center for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 28 p. [available on the Sakhalin Energy Investment Company website: http://www.sakhalinenergy.com/environment/env_whales.asp] Maminov, M.K. 2004. Distribution and Abundance of Western Gray Whales off the Northeastern Sakhalin Shelf July - September 2003: Vessel-based Surveys. Unpublished contract report by TINRO-Centre, Vladivostok, for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno- Sakhalinsk, Russia. Sobolevsky, E.I. 1998. Observations of the behavior of Eschrichtius gibbosus Erxl., 1777 on the shelf of northeastern Sakhalin. Russ. J. Ecol. 29:103-108. Sobolevsky, E.I. 2000. Marine mammal studies offshore northeast Sakhalin, 1999. Final Report by the Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 149 p. Sobolevsky, E.I. 2001. Marine mammal studies offshore northeast Sakhalin, 2000. Final Report by the Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 199 p. Vladimirov, V.L. 1994. Present distribution and size of the whale population in the far-eastern seas. Russ. J. Mar. Biol. 20(1):3-13. (In Russian) Votrogov, L.M. and L.M. Bogoslovskaya. 1986. A note on gray whales off Kamchatka, the Kurile Islands and Peter the Great Bay. Rep. Int. Whal. Comm. 36:281-282. Weller, D.W. and R.L. Brownell, Jr. 2000. Eschrichtius robustus (Asian or Northwest Pacific Stock). In: C. Hilton- Taylor (comp.) 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN/SSC, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Weller, D.W., A.M. Burdin and R.L. Brownell, Jr. 2002b. The western North Pacific gray whale: a review of past exploitation, current status, and potential threats. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 4(1): 7-12. Weller, D.W., B. Würsig, and A.M. Burdin. 2001b. Gray whales off Sakhalin Island, Russia: June-September 2000. A joint U.S.-Russian scientific investigation. Interim Report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petropavlosk- Kamchatkii, Russia, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 24 p. Weller, D.W., A.M. Burdin, A.L. Bradford, G.A. Tsidulko, Y.V. Ivashchenko and R.L. Brownell, Jr. 2002a. Gray whales off Sakhalin Island, Russia: June-September 2001. A joint U.S.-Russian scientific investigation. Draft Final Report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petropavlosk-Kamchatkii, Russia, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 75 p. Weller, D.W., A.M. Burdin, A.L. Bradford, Y.V. Ivashchenko, G.A. Tsidulko, A.R. Lang and R.L. Brownell Jr. 2004. Western gray whales off Sakhalin Island, Russia: A joint Russia-U.S. Scientific Investigation July-September 2003. Report for International Fund for Animal Welfare and International Whaling Commission by Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla, CA, Kamchatka Branch of Pacific Institute of Geography, Petropavlovsk, Russia, and the Alaska Sealife Center, Seward, AK. 41p. Weller, D.W., B.G. Würsig, A.M. Burdin, S. Reeve, A.L. Bradford. 2000. Gray whales summering off Sakhalin Island, Far East Russia: June-October 1999. A joint U.S.-Russian scientific investigation. Report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kamchatka, Russia, 69 pp. Würsig, B.G., D.W. Weller, A.M. Burdin, S.H. Reeve, A.L Bradford, S.A. Blokhin, and R.L Brownell (Jr.). 1999. Gray whales summering off Sakhalin Island, Far East Russia: July-October 1997. A joint U.S.-Russian scientific investigation. Final Report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kamchatka, Russia, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited and Exxon Nefteygaz Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 101 p. Würsig, B.G., D.W. Weller, A.M. Burdin, S.H. Reeve, A.L. Bradford, and S.A. Blokhin. 2000. Gray whales summering off Sakhalin Island, Far East Russia: July-September 1998. A joint U.S.-Russian scientific investigation. Final Report by Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, and Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kamchatka, Russia, for Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited and Exxon Nefteygaz Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. 139 p. Yakovlev, Y. and O. Tyurneva. 2003. Photo-identification of the Korea-Okhotsk gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) population in 2002. Prepared for Exxon Neftegas and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 42 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Yakovlev, Y. and O. Tyurneva. 2004. Photo-identification of the Korea-Okhotsk gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) population in 2003. Report by Institute of Marine Biology of Far East Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences for Exxon Neftegas Limited, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia and Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited, Yuzhno- Sakhalinsk, Russia.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 43 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
ANNEX 1 NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENTS FOR PA-B INSTALLATION & PILTUN PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION
INTRODUCTION The noise impact assessment described in this Annex is derived from the Comparative Environmental Analysis of the Piltun pipeline route options (SEIC, 2004). Although this assessment was developed specifically for pipeline related activities, most of the criteria apply also for other offshore activities. Due to the nature of the PA-B installation activities, that are restricted to a limited area and consist of activities that are occurring strictly consecutive order, the noise impact assessment methodology slightly deviates form the pipeline related one (see Table 3). The scope of this noise impact assessment is as follows: • The area of focus is the Piltun feeding area, close to the planned pipeline construction and PA-B platform installation. Of the two locations where whales have been observed feeding on the north-east Sakhalin shelf, offshore Chaivo and near shore at Piltun, the Piltun feeding area is considered to be of most importance with regard to SEIC’s offshore activities. The WGW have shown high site fidelity at Piltun, and this is also where mother/calf pairs are present. The Chaivo offshore feeding area, although very rich in prey biomass, is more variable in terms of whale distribution and abundance, and no mother/calf pairs have been observed in this area. Additionally, there were relatively few whales observed in the offshore feeding area in 2004. The Piltun area is also in closer proximity to the PA Field development than the Chaivo area. For these reasons the focus in this impact assessment is on the Piltun feeding area only. • The impact assessment focuses only on behavioural changes as a result of noise disturbance and not on permanent or temporary hearing impairment. Because of the lack of information to estimate received continuous noise levels that could cause permanent or temporary hearing impairment in western gray whales (Richardson et al. 1995), the noise impact assessment is focused on known behavioural reactions of gray whales (primarily migrating individuals) to varying levels of continuous noise (see Section 4.4.2).
NOISE IMPACT CRITERIA The criteria considered to be of main relevance in assessing noise impacts on the WGW are: • Abundance of whales, expressed as numbers of whales potentially impacted by continuous noise levels >120 dB. • Size of the feeding area not exposed to continuous noise levels of >120 dB, expressed as a percentage of the total feeding area that remains available for feeding for the majority of the whales. The definition and discussion of feeding area is provided below. • Duration of exposure to continuous noise levels of >120 dB that will likely elicit behavioural (avoidance) responses, expressed as a percentage of the total feeding season. The determination of the impact levels for each criterion is based on available information and professional judgement. Because many gaps in knowledge on the ecology and behavioural responses of WGW still exist, several assumptions have been made to allow determination of impact levels. These assumptions are as follows:
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 44 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
1. The population of WGW occupying the Piltun area is composed of adult and sub-adult individuals of various ages and sexes, and male and female calves. Because information on behavioural responses is not available for whale age, sex or body condition, for this noise impact assessment process all western gray whales are considered to be of equal sensitivity as females with young-of-the-year calves. 2. The assumption is that migrating and feeding WGW will show similar reactions to noise. Although extensive behavioural research on other baleen whales, e.g. the bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus), has indicated that migrating individuals are more responsive to pulsed noise in the marine environment than are feeding individuals (Richardson et al. 1986, 1999; Miller et al. 1999, 2002), this has not been demonstrated for continuous noises and gray whales. Using avoidance criteria (percent avoidance) for feeding gray whales that are based on migrating gray whales is likely a conservative approach. 3. Habituation to prolonged noise exposures is not assumed. Although habituation could be expected if the noise source is stationary or nearly so and/or if whales are especially attracted to the area (by food), there is not enough evidence to support this assumption for the western gray whale. 4. There is no significant avoidance behaviour at noise levels < 120 dB. 5. All whales (except mother/calf pairs) have access to the Chaivo offshore feeding area. 6. Whales that avoid noisy areas will re-occupy these areas after cessation or reduction in sounds to levels below the avoidance threshold. 7. Whale abundance along the NE Sakhalin coast varies, with some whales arriving in May, peaks noted in August and September, and some whales leaving the area in October. Most whales have left the Piltun feeding area by late November. 8. Sufficient food is available in the Piltun feeding area to support western gray whales that have been observed in this area. 9. Shifts in whale distribution within the Piltun feeding area are considered acceptable. Gray whales are known to move throughout the Piltun feeding area on a daily basis, presumably in response to prey distribution and abundance. Such shifts from one area to another are considered normal and acceptable. 10. The area ensonified at noise levels >120 dB is considered to be avoided by 70% of the average number of whales occupying that area. 11. All western gray whales feed with uniform intensity, i.e. all have the same feeding success throughout the summer season.
Number of Whales Potentially Impacted The criterion considered to be of major importance in quantifying impacts on WGW is the number of whales potentially impacted, i.e. showing avoidance behaviour, within a certain area. For this purpose, density distribution maps were created from available systematic surveys (those conducted using systematic approaches under conditions of adequate sighting conditions) from 2002 and 2003 aerial surveys, 2002 and 2003 vessel surveys, and most of the 2004 vehicle-based surveys . The 2001 aerial survey data and some 2004 vehicle-based survey data was not taken into account because the abundance and distribution of the whales observed were not considered to represent baseline data, i.e., data was potentially affected by concurrent nearby seismic surveys. Due to the different nature of the aerial, vessel and vehicle distribution surveys, there are two factors that needed to be taken into account when comparing this data.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 45 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
These differences are: • The probability that some whales were below the surface and therefore not counted when the area was surveyed; • The reduced probability of sighting a whale at greater distances from the observer (Buckland et al. 1993). Combining the data mentioned above, density maps were created for the months July- November . The maps displayed maximum and average numbers of whales per km2 for all 1.5 km2 cells sampled within the Piltun feeding area. Noise contour maps showing noise generated by a specific offshore activity in a certain month were overlaid on the density map for that particular month. The total number of whales present in that portion of the feeding area ensonified at a level >120 dB was calculated. Based on available literature (Richardson et al. 1995; Tyack and Clark, 1998), the average percent avoidance by whales in areas ensonified at levels >120 dB was 70%. This average percent avoidance was considered conservative because it was based on responses to intermittent continuous noise by migrating, not feeding, gray whales. As noted earlier, feeding baleen whales, e.g. bowhead whales, are known to be more tolerant to loud anthropogenic noise than are migrating bowhead whales. The impact levels specified below are based on professional judgement taking into account the observations of the avoidance behaviour of whales in the Piltun feeding area during a seismic survey in 2001 (see Johnson 2002) and results of WGW monitoring surveys in subsequent years (2002-2004). The shifts of a small number (up to four to five) of gray whales within the Piltun feeding area during the seismic survey have not resulted in any subsequent detectable impact on the WGW population, based on the current level of sampling and sampling methodologies. The total abundance of gray whales using the Piltun area has not declined, the number of “skinny” whales has not increased, and relatively high numbers of mother/calf pairs have been observed in years since 2001. Therefore, the assumption is that impact to no more than five whales (not displaced from the feeding area) is acceptable and that this will not cause impact on population levels.
Impact levels for numbers of whales potentially impacted: High = > 5 Low = ≤ 5
Size of the remaining available area In addition to the numbers of whales that potentially avoid areas exposed to noise levels of > 120 dB, the actual area that remains available to the whales to resume feeding (the area outside the 120 dB zone of ensonification) is another criterion considered to be of importance. Prior to calculating the percentage of area remaining for feeding, the size of the total area used by the majority of the whales to feed was defined based on the following data: • Whale distribution and density (maximum density in any year for the entire Piltun area), including sightings of mother/calf pairs • Whale prey (amphipod) biomass (assuming that amphipods are the most important prey species in the Piltun feeding area) • Whale feeding locations, i.e. where feeding activity of whales has been confirmed (mud plumes, observed feeding behaviour). Plotting all three of the above spatially (superimposing), identifies those parts of the feeding area where high densities of feeding WGW have been consistently observed and where many mother/calf pairs have been recorded. This area is referred to as the Piltun feeding area (Figure 3.1).
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 46 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
The impact levels presented below, are expressed as a percentage of the total Piltun feeding area that is not exposed to noise levels >120 dB, and where feeding habitat is assumed to be still available. These levels are based largely on professional judgement, taking into account assumptions 6 to 9, above.
Impact levels for % of Piltun feeding area remaining available: High = < 90% Low = ≥ 90%
Duration of impact The duration of the impact is defined by the amount of time a certain offshore activity (dredging, pipe-laying, site preparation, platform installation) is estimated to occur and hence the duration that the whales are exposed to certain noise levels. This duration is expressed as a percentage of the total feeding period. The total feeding period of WGW was estimated using histograms of the numbers of whales sighted and the number of whale feeding plumes recorded during systematic aerial and shore-based surveys. Based on this data the total feeding period was estimated at 150 days, i.e., June through October. Similar to the other impact criteria, the impact levels for duration are based on professional judgement, taking into account assumptions 5 and 8 above.
Impact levels for duration of impact: High = > 7 days (> 5% of feeding period) Low = ≤ 7 days (≤ 5% of feeding period)
IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY The actual impact assessment consists of three steps: 1. Quantifying the impact for each of the individual criteria (using available data) 2. Determining the impact level for each criteria (H, L) 3. Evaluating the potential biological impact of each scenario based on predetermined combinations of impact levels of each criteria (Table 1) To assess the >120 dB (broadband re 1 uPa) noise contours of underwater noise generated by offshore pipeline and platform installation, a 3D noise model was developed with a Geographic Information System (GIS) interface that enabled prediction of the expected noise footprint from various planned offshore construction scenarios. By comparing these noise contour maps with the whale density maps for each month and the size of the Piltun feeding area, the impact criteria, i.e. the number of whales showing avoidance behaviour and the proportion of the feeding area that remains available, can be quantified for each construction scenario. Duration of the noise levels was determined for each scenario from the offshore construction schedule. Pipeline construction Three possible categories were determined in the impact matrix based on SEIC commitment to avoid biological (i.e. potential population level) impacts on western gray whales. Consistent with the terminology used in the International EIA and the WGW Technical EIA, the definitions of these categories are as follows (Table 3):
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 47 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
1. Not Acceptable: This category is designated if a significant portion of the population is affected (defined as > 5), likely causing a decline in local abundance and/or change in distribution. Because of the very low population size, deprivation of the opportunity for a number of whales to feed adequately during a season could potentially affect the entire population. In order to avoid potential biological impacts, mitigation measures must be applied to reduce the Not Acceptable level of impact to one of the categories listed below. If the impact level for the number of whales is HIGH, then the impact classification is not acceptable. 2. Marginal: This category is designated if only a small portion of the population is affected but the integrity of the population could be threatened due to a long duration of impact and exclusion from a large proportion of the feeding area. Further major mitigation measures, i.e. cessation of noisy activities, need to be applied to reduce marginal impacts to an acceptable level. The impact is within this category if the impact level for the number of whales is LOW and the level for the size of the remaining available area and duration of impact is HIGH. 3. Acceptable: This category applies to impacts that are not distinguishable from natural variation. No further mitigation is required. The impact is within this category if the impact level of a specific offshore activity is LOW for the number of whales in combination with a LOW level for at least one of the remaining criteria, i.e., size of remaining available area and duration of impact.
Table 3 Impact matrix showing impact levels of the criteria for pipeline construction
Number of whales Duration of Size of Remaining Categories potentially impacted Impact Available Area High High High Not Acceptable High High Low Not Acceptable High Low High Not Acceptable High Low Low Not Acceptable Low High High Marginal Low High Low Acceptable Low Low High Acceptable Low Low Low Acceptable
PA-B installation activities For offshore activities that take place around the PA-B location the impact is also considered to be within the acceptable category if the impact level is HIGH for the number of whales in combination with a LOW level for duration of impact only if the following conditions apply (see table 4). o The offshore activities are part of an offshore construction that is restricted to a specific limited area such as PA-B location; And o The impact level for the number of whales is LOW for the activity directly following.
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 48 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Table 4 Impact levels under specific conditions during PA-B installation
Number of whales Duration of Size of Remaining Categories potentially impacted Impact Available Area High High High Not Acceptable High High Low Not Acceptable Low High High Marginal High Low High Acceptable High Low Low Acceptable Low High Low Acceptable Low Low High Acceptable Low Low Low Acceptable
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 49 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
ANNEX 2 MARINE MAMMAL MORTALITY- INJURY REPORT
EXAMINER Name: ______Affiliation: ______Address: ______Phone: ______
SPECIES AND LOCATION DETAILS Common Name:______Genus:______Species:______Site Description:______GPS Coordinates:______
Floating? YES NO
CAUSES (IF KNOWN) Human Interaction YES NO
Check One: 1. Boat Collision 2. Fishery Interaction 3. Seismic Interaction 4. Other ______
How Determined: External Exam Internal Exam Not Examined
DATE OF INITIAL OBSERVATION
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 50 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
Year:______Month:______Day:______
CONDITION: 1. Alive 4. Advanced Decomposition 2. Fresh Dead 5. Mummified/Skeletal 3. Moderate 6. Decomposition Unknown
DATE OF EXAMINATION
CONDITION: 1. Alive 4. Advanced Decomposition 2. Fresh Dead 5. Mummified/Skeletal 3. Moderate 6. Decomposition Unknown
LIVE ANIMAL DISPOSITION
Check One or More: 1. Left/Released at Site 2. Relocated 3. Transferred into Rehabilitation 4. Died 5. Euthanised 6. Retained 7. Unknown
CONDITION: SICK INJURED UNKNOWN Treatment Facility:______
CARCASS DISPOSITION
Check One or More: 1. Left at site 2. Buried 3. Towed 4. Scientific collection 5. Educational collection 6. Other______7. Unknown
NECROPSIED? YES NO Date:______
NECROPSIED BY:______
TAG DATA
Tag # Color Type Placement ______
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 51 OF 52 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION PLAN Rev 02
MORPHOLOGICAL DATA
SEX: 1. Male 2. Female 3. Unknown
Straight Length:______cm (in approx) Weight:______kg/lb (estimate)
PHOTOS TAKEN? YES NO Disposition:______VIDEO TAKEN? YES NO Disposition:______
DOCUMENT NO. 1000-S-90-04-P-0048-00-E-02 PAGE 52 OF 52