1

Chikyu IODP Board #3 meeting 30 – 31 March 2015

Miyoshi Memorial Auditorium JAMSTEC Yokohama Institute for Earth Sciences (YES)

Draft Agenda ver. 1.6

Day-1 Monday, 30 March 2015

0900-0905 1. Welcome Remarks (Hotta)

0905-0915 2. Introductions and Logistics (Kuramoto/Eguchi)

0915-0925 3. Approval of Agenda (Chair - Kimura)

0925-0930 4. Introduce New CIB Members (Yamada)

0930-0940 5. Approval of Last Meeting Minutes (Chair - Kimura)

0940-0950 6. CIB Decisions since Last Meeting (Chair - Kimura)

0950-1000 7. CIB Action Item Status (Chair - Kimura)

Coffee Break

1030-1130 8. Chikyu Operation/status Update (TBN) Current Status NanTroSEIZE Update

NanTroSEIZE PCT reports CDEX C0002 Task Force update C0010 Observatory (Exp. 365 Summary)

1130-1145 9. Chikyu 5year inspection and refurbishment plan (Kyo) Shipyard and Sea Trial Schedule Major Work Items

1145-1200 10. Chikyu Membership Status (Kuramoto) Update since the last meeting

LUNCH 1330-1445 11. Other FB, IODP Forum, and Agency Activities

JR Facility Board (Humphris) ECORD Facility Board (Gohl) IODP Forum (Becker) MEXT (Kimura) NSF (Janecek) ECORD (Camoin) ANZIC (Heap)

1445-1500 12. Chikyu Safety Review Committee Report Chikyu Safety Review Sub-committee Update (Naganawa) Chikyu Safety Review Update (Matsuda)

Coffee Break

2

1530-1700 13. JR Advisory Panels Report/Proposal Overview Science Support Office (Given) Science Evaluation Panel (Mallinson) 1700-1730 14. Chikyu Scientific Highlight (NanTroSEIZE) 1800- Reception Day-2 Tuesday, 31 March 2015 0900-0930 15. Chikyu Long-term Ops models (Kuramoto) Outlook for the Future Operation Windows Potentials for New External Funding Sources 0930-1030 16. Chikyu Proposals (update and discussion) (Chair - Kimura) Chikyu Project Update (CRISP, IBM) New Proposals from SEP 865-Full: Nankai Trough T Limit 871-Pre: Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution 876-Pre: Bend-Fault Serpentinization CIB Workshop

Coffee Break 1100-1115 17. Mantle Drilling Working Group (Chair - Kimura) Draft Terms of Reference 1115-1130 18. Usage of Membership Fee (ECORD and ANZIC) (Kuramoto)

LUNCH

1300-1430 19. Chikyu Facility Procedures, Guidelines and Policies (Chair - Kimura) Chikyu Staffing Procedures Chikyu Onboard Measurements Guidelines Chikyu 3rd Party Tools and Instruments Policy Chikyu 2nd Post Expedition Meeting Guidelines IODP Proposal Confidentiality Policy IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing: Implications for IODP 1430-1500 20. KCC report (Kinoshita)

Coffee Break 1530-1545 21. Outreach Activities (10th anniversary activities) (Omata) 1545-1600 22. Review of Consensus Statements and Action Items 1600-1615 23. Next CIB meeting 1615-1630 24. Any Other Business

Adjourn meeting

CIB positions to be openCIB positions to be open

• Chair (one)Chair (one)• US member (one)( )• Japanese member (one)

All two‐year term

CIB nomination committeeCIB nomination committee• Ryo Matsumoto; Professor, Meiji UniversityRyo Matsumoto; Professor, Meiji University

• Hiroshi Nishi; Professor Tohoku University• Hiroshi Nishi; Professor, Tohoku University

G t h F h G P f D ETH Z i h• Gretchen Fruh‐Green; Professor, Dr., ETH Zurich

• John Jaeger; Associate Professor, University of Florida

• Yasuhiro Yamada (Chair); Director, Ocean Drilling Science Center, JAMSTEC

Nomination processNomination process

• Dec. 15; Open call to the community• Jan. 31; End call, 6 applicants receivedJan. 31; End call, 6 applicants received• Feb. 1; start discussions• Mar.; consensus 

New CIB Chair and membersYoshiyuki Tatsumi(Chair) Bernardus Adrianus(Ben) van 

der PluijmJames J. Mori

Kobe university, Japan University of Michigan‐Ann Arbor Kyoto University

2 year‐term 2 year‐term 2 year‐term

Evolution of the solid Earth based on analysis of 

Structual Geology, Tectonophysics, Tentonics.

Earthquake seismology with studies about the earthquake y

petrological and geochemicalcharacteristics of arc and hotspot magmas, high‐

i t d

qsource processes from waveform analyses and tectonic structures using tomographic

th dpressure experiments, and modeling.

methods.

Chikyu Current Status

Shin’ichi KuramotoShin ichi Kuramoto

Agenda 8

Chikyu Current Schedule4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

JFY2014

non‐IODPCommercial‐1

R&M R&Mnon‐IODPScience

2015 non‐IODPCommercial‐2

R&M non‐IODPScience

IODPScience

1) Chikyu is off India for a commercial operation which started from early February and will finish bythe end of August 2015.

2) 5 years large maintenance inspections and certifications are required by low in2) 5 years large maintenance, inspections and certifications are required by low inSeptember through October.

3) Significant engineering works required from safety point of view in November to mid‐January (replace DCIS, UWTV, etc).

4) Non‐IODP science operation in mid‐January to late‐March 2016 will going to the Okinawa Troughby using a SIP fund.

Agenda 8

*SIP: Cross‐Ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program

5) IODP science operation (NanTroSEIZE C0010 Obs.) in late‐March to April 2016.

C0002 Task Force Update

Operations DepartmentOperations DepartmentIkuo Sawada

Agenda 8Agenda 8

Task Force UpdateExp348 Cause of Hole Instability• Steep Formation • Invasion of  Drilling Fluid into bedding planes

d ( i h i i l)

Exp338/ 348 Result

• Improper mud property (High viscosity, pH Control)• Vibration of bottom hole assembly

Countermeasures• Expandable Casing Technology（2sections）+ Conventional Casing(2 Sections)

13‐3/8"2010m

Sidetrack

SidetrackPlug back 2006m

pa dab e Cas g ec o ogy（ sect o s） Co e t o a Cas g( Sect o s)– Increase  number of casing section– Past Record for deepwater wells (2008~2012 : 142wells , Success ratio 97%)

• Improvement of Mud Property– Re‐design of mud property (Glycol contents, pH Control etc..)

11‐3/4"L 2923m

Plug back 2330m

Plug back 3058m

Sidetrack

– Add Seal/Plugging Agent – Improve Cutting transport capability

• Update proper mud density while drilling operation.– Use Geo‐mechanics  software– Conduct Extended Leak Off Test

9‐3/8"LinerExpandable CSG

Expandable CSGConduct Extended Leak Off Test

• Precise monitoring real time LWD/MWD Data• Use special stabilizers to mitigate vibration of drill string• Continuous circulation system• Establish Onshore Back‐up Team including service contractor specialists.

7"Liner 4700m

Mega‐splay

Issues• Unknown formation structure/formation pressure 

– Unable to set proper Mud weight prior to drilling– Collapse/Burst of Expandable Casing– Unknown open hole condition during disconnecting BOP (10～14days)

6" Hole 5200m

Agenda 8

Unknown open hole condition during disconnecting BOP.(10 14days)– Non Stop Driller will not be available while coring operation

• Complicated casing design/operation procedure 

Operation Guideline(1)1. Recover Corrosion Cap2. Run and land BOP3. Run 12‐1/4" Bit (Slick BHA) and drill out cement 

inside 13‐3/8" CSG(3405 – 3505mBRT)4. Continue to run to top of 11‐3/4"Liner 

@3883.8mBRT5 Temperature Survey inside 11 3/4"Liner w/Drill

Plug back 2006m

5. Temperature Survey inside 11‐3/4 Liner w/Drill String 

6. Run 10‐5/8" (Slick BHA) and drill out shoe.7. Conduct ELOT

13‐3/8"2010m

8. Run scraper 9. Run CBL/UCI 10. Walk Away VSP

Plug back 2330m

Sidetrack

y11. If both Poor Bonding and  leak off pressure result 

are acceptable, set Whipstock and sidetrack. *  If not acceptable, spot cement in the open hole and sidetrack from just below 11‐3/8" shoe.

11‐3/4"L 2923m

Plug back 3058m

Expandable CSGj /

12. Take spot cores in vertical section.13. Drill 10‐5/8" hole to XXXXm and open the hole to 

12‐1/4"

Agenda 8

14. Run and set Expandable Casing (9‐5/8" x 11‐3/4")Mega‐splay fault ±5200m

Operation Guideline (2)15. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT.16. Drill 9‐1/2"hole to XXXXm (Spot cores)17. Open the hole to 11‐3/8"18. Run and set 9‐3/8" Liner (9‐5/8" Tie‐back if 

necessary) 19. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT.20 D ill 8 1/2"h l XXXX (S )13 3/8"2010m

Sidetrack

20. Drill 8‐1/2"hole to XXXXm (Spot cores)21. Open the hole to 9‐1/2"22. Run and set Expandable CSG (7‐5/8" x 9‐3/8")23 Drill out cement and LOT

13‐3/8 2010m

Plug back 2330m

Sidetrack

23. Drill out cement and LOT24. Drill 7‐1/2"hole to 4700m(Spot Cores)25. Open the hole to 8‐1/2"26 Run and set 7" Liner

11‐3/4"L 2923m

Plug back 3058m

26. Run and set 7  Liner27. Drill out cement and conduct ELOT28. Nudge the hole and drill 6" hole to XXXXm to 

identify Mega‐splay Fault

Expandable CSG

Expandable CSG

9‐3/8"Liner

y g p y29. Plug back the hole30. Drill 6" vertical hole to deflect the original hole.31. Take core to Mega‐splay Fault.Mega‐splay fault ±5200m

7"Liner 4700m

Agenda 8

32. Wireline Logging33. Plug back and suspend the hole.

g p y

Expandable Casing(1)Expandable Casing(1)

Agenda 8

Expandable Casing (2) • Clarification in progress.

– Preparation (Properties of special tool,  subs, etc..)– Detail running procedure– Emergency countermeasure– Cementing

• Detailed calculation for casing strength/hydraulics in progress– Limitation of mud weight– Limitation of setting depthLimitation of setting depth– Appropriate circulation pressure

• Selection of Liner Hanger (Special size 9‐3/8")

Agenda 8Run Launcher Run inner string

inside Exp CSG.Monitor pressure/Hook Load during Expansion

Run Anchor HangerMake up Exp CSG

I ti ti D illi Fl id P tiInvestigating Drilling Fluid PropertiesNo. Task Progress

(1) Re‐design of Rheology<Target> MW=1.36sg, Minimize PV value, Maintain pH < 10.5Select Sealant additives and PPG 0% or 3%

Not commenced

(2) Alternative sweeps instead of high viscosity sweeps Done , BAROLIFTU d i i i(3) Reduce glycol, reduce/eliminate lubricants, test cloud point Under investigating

(4) Use citric acid to treat out cement contamination Available in domestic(5) Use Particle Plugging Test to select proper sealant In progress,

Under consideration for composition. Need renewing the laboratory equipmentlaboratory equipment

(6) Erosion Test and Immersion Test with low and high pH drilling fluids

Done,pH10.5 mud is more effective for preventing dispersion/erosion than pH12.5 

Product name<Supplier>

POROSEAL<Mi SWACO>

STEEL SEEL50<Halliburton Baroid>

Astex‐S<Telnite>

Graphite

Sealant

Classification Latex Graphite(Resilience up to 120%) Soltex

Particle size < 10micron 50micron 70‐300micronDensity 1.02 1.75 1.2 ‐ 1.5

Agenda 8

No Stop Driller(Continuous Circulation System)

Standard Continuous

(Continuous Circulation System)  

ポンプ

Pump

Standard Procedure

Continuous Circulation System

ポ

Agenda 8

6" Wireline Core Service6  Wireline Core Service• NOV Slimhole Express(Wireline Coring System)

Barrel Size 5‐1/4" x 3"

Hole Diameter 6"

Core Diameter 3" (Drill String ID more than 4.00")

Outer Tube OD : 5.25 ID : 4.375"

Connection VS Slimhole

Length 9m, 18m or 27m

Make up Torque 8000 ft‐lbs

Yield Torque 13 440 ft lbsYield Torque 13,440 ft‐lbs

Tensile Yield 285,185 lbs

RPM 30 ‐ 150

Agenda 8* Special Drill Pipe has to be used inside 6" hole & 7" Liner

Mitigate Drill String VibrationMitigate Drill String Vibration• V‐Stab® ‐ Asymmetric Vibration Damping Tool (NOV)

Agenda 8

C0010 Observatory Exp365 Summary

Ikuo Sawadauo Sa ada

Agenda 8Agenda 8

C10 Operation Plan

Agenda 8

C10 Operation PeriodC10 Operation PeriodTotal Operation days 30 daysTotal Operation days 30 days

1 Transit, Set Transponders, Retrieve Corrosion Cap 3 days

2 Retrieve Casing Packer w/Genius Plug 5 days2 Retrieve  Casing Packer w/Genius Plug 5 days

3 Drill 8‐1/2”hole w/ 9‐7/8”underreamer* LWD will not be run.

3.5 days

4 Run 9‐5/8”Casing Scraper. 3.5 days

5 Set Completion String 10 days

6 Recover Transponder, Transit 2 days

7 Contingency 3 days

Agenda 8

Planned Completion SchematicPlanned Completion SchematicAssumption: Sensor BTM @ 850mbsf

WD: 3904.0mBRT

Sensor BTM @ 850mbsf

13‐3/8”CSG68ppf HC110 TSH Wedge 521

Liner Top @4404mBRT

Swellable Packer @4545.9mBRT(641.9mbsf)Perforation

@4562.6‐4581mBRT(658 6 677 0 b f) 12 1/4”OH

17‐1/2”OHpp g

& 68ppf N‐80 ER& 68ppf L‐80 BTC (Combination)@4454mBRT (550mbsf)

(500mbsf)

(658.6‐677.0mbsf)

Est. TOC in Annulus @4647.7mBRT(743.7mbsf)

42.4m

9 5/8”Shoe

8‐1/2”OH@4719.7mBRT(815 7 b f)

TOC@4623.7mBRT(719.7mbsf)

12‐1/4 OH

Sensors9‐5/8 Shoe@4717.7mBRT(813.7mbsf)

(815.7mbsf)

Sensor@4738.7‐4754.0mBRT(834.7‐850.0mbsf)

20.7m

150m

Sensors Seismometer Strain Gauge Tiltmeter

CMT Port @4774mBRT(870.0mbsf)

Protect Zone50m

BTM Bull Nose @4784mBRT(880 0mbsf)

20m

t ete Temperature Gauge Pressure Gauge

（US provides)

Agenda 8

9‐7/8” Open hole@4823.4mBRT(919.4mbsf)

8‐1/2”OH@4829.4mBRT(925.4mbsf)

50m @4784mBRT(880.0mbsf)40m

p )

Guide Roller C l ti G id R ll

Newly Developed Handing EquipmentGuide Roller Completion Guide Roller

Packer installation  Working  Sheave

platform Platform for Flatpack

Agenda 8

Chikyu 5 year inspection andChikyu 5 year inspection and refurbishment planp

Technology DepartmentNori KYONori KYO

Agenda 9Agenda 9

ScheduleSchedule

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

Shipyard maintenance@MHI Yokohama

Dry dock Wharf@MHI, Yokohama

Wharf repair work@Shimizu port DCIS

Shake down cruise

BOP R&M@MHI, Yokohama Loading Assemble / Stack up / Function testR&M (‐ 2014Sep)

@Singapore, ,

Riser R&M*@MHI, Yokohama

T i R&M

Loading

Tensioner R&M@MHI, Yokohama Maintenance Test

*Riser R&M is planned in May – August, 2014

Agenda 9Agenda 9

Major Work Items (1/3)Major Work Items (1/3)• Class NK / ABS required inspections & maintenancesC ass / S equ ed spect o s & a te a ces

– 6,600 V high voltage instruments– Navigation instruments, Radio– Dynamic Positioning Systemy g y– Explosion proof instruments– Water tight door/hatch– Azimuth thruster– Ship construction– Main generator– Mooring gear– Ballast tank– Life boat– Crane

El– Elevator– Derrick– CMC

Tra elin blo k

Agenda 9Agenda 9

– Traveling block

Major Work Items (2/3)Major Work Items (2/3)• 5 year certification works

– Mud circulation facilities– Pipe handling facilities– Power swivel– Draw worksDraw works– Riser– Tensioner

BOP– BOP

Agenda 9Agenda 9

Major Work Items (3/3)Major Work Items (3/3)• Replacement of deterioration instruments

– DCIS(Drilling Control Instrumentation System)– IAS (Integrated Automation System)– LaboratoryLaboratory– Intake exhaust facilities– Air conditioning facilities– Pump

Agenda 9Agenda 9

R&DR&D• Ultra deep water Drill Pipe: Fatigue test and analysis, model test for stick‐slip/whirl/VIV

• Turbine Driven Coring System(TDCS): On‐land coring test using experimental prototypeu b e e Co g Syste ( CS): O a d co g test us g e pe e ta p ototype

• Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) Riser: Tensile/fatigue/collapse test, evaluation for 4,000 m application

• Long Term Borehole Monitoring System (LTBMS): Preparation for high temperature lifeLong Term Borehole Monitoring System (LTBMS): Preparation for high temperature life test on borehole telemetry, On‐land test for deployment tool  of C6 LTBMS

• High Voltage Pulse Drilling: Feasibility study• Chikyu Under Water TV Camera system ROV (CU ROV): Performance test at flow tank• Chikyu Under Water TV Camera system ROV (CU‐ROV): Performance test at flow tank

Agenda 9Agenda 9

C t d j th f l b difi tiConcepts and major themes for lab modifications:

1 O ti i f D Ri D illi1. Optimize for Deep Riser Drilling1.1 Efficient treatment for Cuttings1.2 Deep Drilling Samples (Lithified and igneous rocks)p g p ( g )1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life)

2 More Flexibility in Lab Operation2. More Flexibility in Lab Operation2.1 Simple Path of Samples2.2 Efficient Layout in Each Area2.3 Spare Space for layout customization and Third Party Tool in 

each Expedition

3. Safe and Comfortable Work Environment

Agenda 9

New Design for Lab Layoutg y

1.1 Efficient treatment for Cuttings  Space for Cuttings Treatment in Core Processing Deck Large Sink for Cuttings Washing and Wet Sieving Separate Sample Flow Route from Core Sample Separate Sample Flow Route from Core Sample

1.2 Deep Drilling Samples (Lithified and Igneous Rock) Space for Core Sampling Room

1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life)1.3 Deep Drilling Samples (Limit of Life) New Equipment: Cell Alive System Table KOACH R d d D t f Ai C diti i S t Reduced Dust from Air Conditioning System

Agenda 9

New Design for Lab Layout2 1 Simple Path of Samples2.1 Simple Path of Samples Separate Work Space for Working and Archive 

Halves Simplified Sample Flow Path for Powdered 

Solid Samples (New X‐ray Lab for XRD XRF)(New X ray Lab for XRD, XRF)

2.2 Efficient Layout in Each Area f b h b New Layout for PP Lab, Geochemistry Lab New GC Lab New Gas pipes New Gas pipes More Monitors to display Drill Floor Operation 

and Real‐time Data

2.3 Spare Space for layout customization and Third Party Tool in Each Expedition

Agenda 9

y p Additional desks in Library Spare space in each Lab

Chikyu Membership StatusChikyu Membership Status

• Current Members– ECORD (USD1M/yr)( /y )– ANZIC (USD0.3M/yr)

U d ti ti• Under negotiation– Taiwan (received LOI on March 2014)– China (planning next meeting through MEXT)– Malaysia Myanmar Vietnam IndonesiaMalaysia, Myanmar, Vietnam, Indonesia,Philippines (talking)

Agenda 10

JOIDESResolutionFacilityBoardReport

SusanE.HumphrisWoodsHoleOceanographicInstitution

Chikyu IODPBoard:30‐31March2015,Yokohama,Japan

Role of JOIDES Resolution Facility BoardRoleofJOIDESResolutionFacilityBoard

• Determine the operations schedule of the JOIDES Resolution

• Approve the JOIDES Resolution Annual Program Plan

• Approve the IODP Science Support Office Annual Program Plan

• Provide oversight of the JOIDES Resolution Facility’s advisory panelso de o e s g o e O S eso u o ac y s ad so y pa e s‐‐Maintaincommunicationswith,andreceivefeedbackfrom,otherFBsregardingtheeffectivenessoftheadvisorypanelsinmeetingtheirneeds

• Develop and monitor policies for data collection, pre‐ and post‐cruisepublications, and core curation associated with the JOIDES Resolution

Meetings:   March and August 201323‐24 April 2014

Next Meeting:  12‐13 May 2015

JR FacilityExpeditionStatusExpeditions Completed Since Last EFB Meeting:30 March–30 May 2014:  350: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Rear‐arc30 May–30 July 2014: 351: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Arc Origins

ExpeditionsCompletedSinceLastEFBMeeting:

30 May 30 July 2014: 351: Izu Bonin Mariana: Arc Origins30 July–29 September 2014: 352: Izu‐Bonin Mariana: Forearc29 November 2014–29 January 2015: 353: Indian Monsoon29 January–31 March 2015:  354: Bengal Fan

Expeditions Scheduled:ExpeditionsScheduled:31 March–31 May 2015: 355: Arabian Sea Monsoon CPP*31 July–30 September 2015: 356: Indonesian Throughflow30 September–30 November 2015:   359: Maldives Monsoon30 November 2015–30 January 2016: 360: Indian Ridge Moho30 January 31 March 2016 361 South African Climates &30 January–31 March 2016: 361: South African Climates & 

Agulhas Current Density Profile APL31 July–30 September 2016: 362: Sumatra Seismogenic Zone

* Not included in the base budget; dependent on external funding source

30 September–30 November 2016: 363: Western Pacific Warm Pool

Long Term JOIDES ResolutionLong‐TermJOIDESResolutionCruiseTrack

In 2014 the JRFB reaffirmed that based on current andIn 2014, the JRFB reaffirmed that, based on current and

anticipated proposal pressure, the JOIDES Resolution will follow a

path from the western and southwestern Pacific Ocean, through

the Southern Ocean and into the Atlantic Ocean for opportunitiesthe Southern Ocean, and into the Atlantic Ocean for opportunities

for drilling there starting in 2018 and 2019.

This will be revisited/updated at the May 2015 JRFB meeting.

JOIDESResolutionFacilityBoardMembershipSusan Humphris, Chair WHOI, USA (Extended to 9/30/2015)James Allan National Science Foundation, USARyo Anma University of Tsukuba, JapanB.K. Bansal Ministry of Earth Science, IndiaGilbert Camoin European Management Agency, CEREGE, FranceGilbert Camoin European Management Agency, CEREGE, FranceManoel Cardoso Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nivel

(CAPES), BrazilB d Cl JR I l i O i i T A&M U i i USABrad Clement JR Implementing Organization, Texas A&M University, USAMike Coffin Australia‐New Zealand IODP ConsortiumGil Young Kim Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM), g ( ),

Republic of KoreaAnthony Koppers Oregon State University, USAHeiko Pälike University of Bremen GermanyHeiko Pälike University of Bremen, GermanyChristina Ravelo U. California, Santa Cruz, USAAndrew Roberts Australian National University, AustraliaQing Sun Ministry of Science and Technology, China

Items for CIB AttentionItemsforCIBAttention

db k di h ff i f h d i l i i•  Feedback regarding the effectiveness of the advisory panels in meeting the needs of the Chikyu IODP Board

•  Proposal and site survey confidentiality policies – clarifications regardinghandling of proprietary data and information

•  Amphibious IODP‐ICDP drilling proposal procedures and guidelines

• Curatorial Advisory Board: Curators make recommendations FBs approve•  Curatorial Advisory Board: Curators make recommendations, FBs approve3 new members to start October 2015

i di i i l i h i i•  Suggestions regarding retiring proposals with no proponent activity

JR FacilityBoardPanels•  ScienceEvaluationPanel

(merger of Proposal Evaluation Panel and Site Characterization Panel)• Responsible for evaluation of all IODP drilling proposals • Two co‐Chairs (one each for scientific evaluation and site survey review)• Initially will remain the same size as two panels but may reduce in size Initially will remain the same size as two panels, but may reduce in size

Advantages:‐ Allows more holistic review of feasibility and readiness of proposals for drilling‐ Proponents receive one comprehensive review letter‐ Should result in fewer proposals in the “holding bin” ‐ One message to the appropriate FBs on status of proposal

• EnvironmentalProtection&SafetyPanel• Provides independent advice with regard to safety and environmental issuesp g yassociated with proposed drilling

• Used by ECORD FB, and the CIB only for riserless proposals (riserproposals go straight to Chikyu safety panel)proposals go straight to Chikyu safety panel)

JOIDESResolution FacilityPoliciesandGuidelines

Approved: •  Conflict of Interest Policy• JR Staffing Proceduresg• JR Standard Measurements• SEP Site Survey Guidelines• EPSP Safety Review Guidelines• Third Party Tools & Instruments Policy

IODPPolicies

A d IODP E i t l P i i lApproved: •  IODP Environmental Principles• IODP Proposal Confidentiality Policy• IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy• IODP Site Survey Data Confidentiality Policy• IODP Proposal Submission Guidelines• IODP Sample, Data and Obligations Policyp , g y

Role of JOIDES Resolution Facility BoardRoleofJOIDESResolutionFacilityBoard

• Determine the operations schedule of the JOIDES Resolution

• Approve the JOIDES Resolution Annual Program Plan

• Approve the IODP Science Support Office Annual Program Plan

• Provide oversight of the JOIDES Resolution Facility’s advisory panelso de o e s g o e O S eso u o ac y s ad so y pa e s‐‐Maintaincommunicationswith,andreceivefeedbackfrom,otherFBsregardingtheeffectivenessoftheadvisorypanelsinmeetingtheirneeds

• Develop and monitor policies for data collection, pre‐ and post‐cruisepublications, and core curation associated with the JOIDES Resolution

Meetings:   March and August 201323‐24 April 2014

Next Meeting:  12‐13 May 2015

ECORD Facility Board (EFB)ECORD Facility Board (EFB)

R t d P U d tReport and Progress Update

CIB Meeting Yokohama 30 31 March 2015CIB Meeting, Yokohama, 30-31 March 2015

ECORD FB members:

- Science Board: Karsten Gohl (GER), Chair - reportingAntonio Cattaneo (F)Dominique Weis (CAN)Dominique Weis (CAN)Gerald R. Dickens (USA)Marta Torres (USA)

ECORD E ti B (ECORD C il b EMA ESO- ECORD Executive Bureau (ECORD Council core members, EMA, ESO,ESSAC, E-ILP)

- Funding agencies (NSF, MEXT)

Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015

758 F ll2 ‘Atl ti M if’ (F üh G t l )758-Full2 ‘Atlantis Massif’ (Früh-Green et al.)- Expedition 357 in late 2015 (Co-Chiefs G. Früh-Green & B. Orcutt)- 10 drill sites with MeBo70 and RockDrill-2 on RV James Cook- 10 drill sites with MeBo70 and RockDrill-2 on RV James Cook- expedition costs are about $4.0M with ship as IKC

548-Full3-Add ‘Chicxulub Crater‘ (Morgan et al.)

- Expedition 364 in early 2016y- 1 drill hole to 1500 m penetration; jack-up drill- expedition costs are about $9.9M with $8.5M coming from ECORD,$1 0M f ICDP d IKC ( l l?) t d f M i$1.0M from ICDP and IKC (supply vessel?) requested from Mexico

Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015

813-Full-Add ‘Antarctic Paleoclimate’ (Williams et al.)

- scheduled for early 2018 (2017 not possible)- 8 sites with RockDrill-2 on RV N/B Palmer- expedition costs must be lower than $9.0M incl ship costs (negotiations with NSF on ship costs), provided that primary objectives in proposal and addendum are not changedaddendum are not changed

708-Full ‘Arctic Paleoceanography’ (Stein et al.)g p y ( )

- scheduled for Arctic summer 2018- 1 site with drill ship- expedition cost is limited to $15.0M with ice-breaker support as IKC, provided that primary objectives in proposal and addendum are not changedchanged

Status of MSP proposals at EFB as of 26 March 2015

581-Full2 ‘Late Pleistocene Coralgal Banks’ (Droxler & Sager)g ( g )- EFB holding bin

637-Full2 ‘New England Shelf Hydrogeology’ (Person et al.)- EFB holding bin

716-Full2 ‘Hawaiian Drowned Reefs’ (Webster et al.)- EFB holding bin- EFB holding bin

Schedule of MSP expeditions2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 20232015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

758 Atlantis M. MeBo & RD‐II,

548 Chicxulub jack‐up, MC

none 813 Antarctic RD‐II, LC‐MC

LC LC MC LC HCMeBo & RD II, LC

jack up, MC RD II, LC MC708 Arcticdrill ship, HC

LC l t (<$8M) MC id t ($8 15M) HC hi h t (>$15M)

708

LC = low-cost (<$8M) MC = mid-cost ($8-15M) HC = high-cost (>$15M)

758Exp. 357

637

716 548Exp. 364

581

Exp. 364

813

MSP proposals in EFB holding binscheduled MSP proposals

EFB Science Board membership changes

Number of Science Board members increases to 6 with fixed quotas:

- 3 members from ECORD countries (incl. Chair)1 b f IODP JR (USA)- 1 member from IODP-JR (USA)

- 1 member from associated IODP-JR (non-US)- 1 member from IODP-Chikyu (Japan)

Members rotating off at end of 2015:

- Antonio Cattaneo (France)( )- Marta Torres (USA)

New members starting 1 Jan 2016:

- Gilles Lericolais (France)- Stephen Gallagher (Australia)- Fumio Inagaki (Japan)- Fumio Inagaki (Japan)

New Chair and Vice-Chair starting 1 Jan 2016:

Chair Gilles Lericolais (France) Vice Chair Dominiq e Weis (Canada)Chair: Gilles Lericolais (France) Vice-Chair: Dominique Weis (Canada)

Other issues

MSP Third-Party Tools Policy

The EFB accepts the MSP Third-Party Tools and Instruments Policy. The policy will be posted on the IODP website.

Guidelines on Amphibious Drilling Proposals (ADP)

The EFB discussed the guidelines of ADPs which were drafted by an g yIODP-ICDP committee led by Ken Miller and presented at the EFB meeting by Keir Becker. The EFB suggested some minor changes and corrections to the flow charts for workshops and full proposals andcorrections to the flow charts for workshops and full proposals, and accepted the guidelines.

Next EFB meetingNext EFB meeting

- 2 days in the two weeks of 4-15 April 2016 (dates still to be determined)- meeting venue will likely be in Brussels (Belgium)meeting venue will likely be in Brussels (Belgium)

International Ocean Discovery Program

International Continental Scientific Drilling Program

Guidelines for joint review of “Amphibious Drilling Proposals” (ADP’s)

Version 1 (Jan/Feb 2015) developed by the joint ICDP-SAG IODP-SEP committee

Kenneth Miller (IODP SEP), Pierre Francus (ICDP EC), Flavio Anselmetti (ICDP SAG),

Jochen Erbacher (IODP Forum), and Sean Gulick (IODP SEP)

Version 2 (3 April 2015) modified after review at EFB and March CIB meetings

The International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP) and the International Continental

Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP) support scientific endeavours requiring drilling on the

seafloor or on land, respectively. Both programs focus on challenging themes of global

geoscientific and socio-economic relevance, including, but not limited to: 1) active faulting,

earthquake, and geohazard processes; 2) heat and mass transport, global cycles, and planetary

dynamics; 3) environmental and climate change; and 4) the hidden biosphere. Scientific

interests in these topics potentially span onshore and offshore drilling objectives, though

programmatically crossing the shoreline can be a challenge since IODP is focused on

seafloor scientific drilling and ICDP is focused on continental scientific drilling. Although

previous onshore-offshore coordinated drilling proposals have been successful (New Jersey

sea level and Chicxulub impact structure), IODP and ICDP recognized the challenges in

proposing scientific drilling to two organizations with different deadlines and procedures.

Hence, IODP and ICDP commissioned a committee to develop protocols for joint review of

proposals that require scientific drilling both onshore and offshore, here dubbed Amphibious

Drilling Proposals (ADP’s).

Definition: Amphibious drilling proposals are those for which full achievement of the

scientific objectives requires scientific drilling at both onshore and offshore sites.

This report presents the recommended submission and joint evaluation procedures for

ADP’s. To the extent possible, they generally preserve the normal deadlines and review

procedures of the two programs, with an added final step to produce a single integrated

review statement that is passed back to proponents and forward to both IODP facility boards

and the ICDP Executive Committee (EC) for potential joint implementation. The committee

was not tasked with working out protocols for joint implementation, which will need to be

resolved between IODP Facility Boards and ICDP EC and Assembly of Governors, possibly

on a case-by-case basis.

Workshop Proposals

Development of a successful ADP will normally require a workshop to bring together

members of the IODP and ICDP communities and to justify the need for both onshore and

offshore sites. Figure 1 presents a flow chart to illustrate the recommended procedure for

joint ICDP-IODP evaluation of ADP workshop proposals. ICDP formally accepts workshop

proposals that can be funded by ICDP program funds. The current phase of IODP has no

program-wide commingled funds for support of workshops, but most IODP national or

consortium committees have some workshop funding (e.g., Magellan+ within ECORD,

USSSP workshop funding, JDESC workshop funding, etc). It should be noted that ICDP

workshop proposals are in some ways equivalent to pre-proposals within IODP. The

following recommended procedures for review of ADP workshop proposals involve

coordination between the different ICDP and IODP procedures but no significant changes to

them.

Formal ADP workshop proposals should be submitted to ICDP for its annual January

15 deadline for normal review at the spring meeting of the ICDP SAG. On a coordinated

timeline, proponents should submit workshop co-funding proposals to relevant IODP

national or consortium workshop funding sources (and potentially to other sources like

private foundations and industry) for review by their normal procedures. The formal ICDP

workshop proposal should be clearly identified as an ADP workshop proposal in the abstract

of the submission. An ADP workshop proposal submission to ICDP should include a

complete and realistic workshop agenda, enabling the execution of the workshop and

production of a workshop report within a maximum of 12 months following funding. The

workshop proposal should describe the scientific objectives of the project, general drilling

strategy, and the societal relevance. It is recommended that the workshop plan include: (1)

invitation of international experts of the relevant disciplines to provide scientific input to the

workshop themes and to foster international collaboration; (2) participation of experts in

drilling strategies and technologies; and (3) participation of the operators (ICDP for onshore

sites and from JRSO, ESO or CEDEX as appropriate for the offshore sites) to provide some

idea of feasibility and preliminary cost estimates. The participation of young scientists should

be especially encouraged.

ADP workshop proposals will be reviewed by the ICDP SAG/EC following normal

ICDP procedures and the IODP SEP by adapting its procedures for review of IODP pre-

proposals. For the latter, the ICDP office will transmit a copy of the ICDP submission to the

IODP Science Support Office, who will distribute it to SEP for evaluation of the proposed

amphibious drilling program much as if it were an IODP pre-proposal. The SEP review will

generally occur at its regular late June/early July meeting, shortly after the ICDP EC

considers the SAG review and makes a decision about ICDP workshop funding. At the time

of the SEP review, there might also be feedback from IODP national or consortium workshop

programs about the coordinated workshop co-funding proposals. The SEP review will focus

primarily on scientific and preliminary logistical feedback that can be provided along with

the SAG review to proponents/workshop organizers well before any workshop actually

occurs.

Full Proposals

Funding of a workshop proposal should lead to a joint IODP-ICDP Full Amphibious

Drilling Proposal. We recommend the following pathway for evaluation of a Full ADP.

Full ADP proposals should be submitted for the 1 Oct. IODP deadline using the IODP

proposal template (modified to allow appendices as outlined below) and electronic

submission system (see www.iodp.org/submitting-proposals); the IODP Science Support

Office will send copies of the formal IODP submission to the ICDP science office for

forwarding to SAG members. As there are differences in IODP and ICDP proposal formats

(see next paragraph), proponents may also need to make coordinated ICDP submissions for

the annual ICDP 15 Jan deadline, if required by ICDP. This submission timing will allow

time for the IODP-SEP to evaluate the proposal in early January, to decide if the proposal

warrants revision or external reviews. If external reviews are sought, these should be

obtained by mid-March, which would require that the reviews be fast tracked by the IODP

Science Support Office. This process will allow time for the ICDP SAG to review the joint

proposal plus IODP external reviews at its regular mid-March to early April annual meeting.

The SAG will forward their review in time for the late spring ICDP EC/OAG meeting and

early summer IODP SEP meeting, when the SEP would normally consider the external

reviews plus any proponent response before making a recommendation that could include

endorsement and forwarding to the appropriate IODP facility board for potential

implementation.

Full Proposals differ somewhat in ICDP and IODP. In ICDP, key components, aside

from the scientific goals and drilling strategy common to both, include developing the

scientific team, ensuring that it is sufficiently international. ICDP proposals also include site

survey, drilling strategy, and cost information in the body of the proposal, whereas IODP

proposals include site survey information in proscribed tables following the proposal and do

not include staffing suggestions. We suggest that these standard ICDP proposal components

(non-binding science team, international representation, site survey description, and drilling

strategy including costing) be included as an appendix to the formal IODP Full ADP

submission. The formal IODP ADP must include all IODP forms for offshore sites (and

possibly onshore sites if recommended by ICDP) and follow IODP protocols for delivery of

site survey information needed to drill these sites.

Following the SAG and SEP reviews, the chairs of these two panels should organize a

joint evaluation resulting in an integrated judgment and formal review document for the

ADP. This could be accomplished electronically or by sending an appropriate SAG member

to the early summer SEP meeting. The suggested timing would allow SEP to iterate with

comments from the SAG at its summer meeting. Both the SAG and the SEP can consider

evaluation of the science and the suitability of the site survey data for the ADP in their

normal deliberations.

Implementation of an Approved ADP

The committee was not tasked with developing all the procedures for actual

implementation of an approved amphibious drilling project, but it makes the following initial

recommendations. If the full proposal is viewed favourably by the SAG (early spring) and

SEP (early summer), then it will be forwarded to both the Executive Committee/Assembly of

Governors (ICDP) and the appropriate facility board (IODP) for consideration and possible

implementation (Fig. 2). At this point, issues of coordination of the onshore and offshore

components will be discussed by the appropriate facility board and ICDP Operational

Support Group (OSG).

Budgeting of the proposed science should be done by the appropriate IODP Science

Operator for offshore and ICDP for onshore, though it is likely that close interaction may be

involved when using mission specific platforms. As noted above, we strongly recommend

that possible costs be discussed at the workshop stage and preliminary costs estimates be

obtained prior to submission of the Full Proposal.

Science members of expedition science parties should be staffed jointly by the

relevant IODP operator (JRSO, ESO or CDEX) and ICDP, with the realization that

proponents are not guaranteed slots; rather the suggestions of participants in the Full Proposal

represent advice to the programs of interested potential science party members. All

participants should follow IODP sample and data policies in terms of obligations and

moratoria. ADP cores should be archived at the relevant IODP repositories. Project

publications should be handled through IODP-TAMU, following current IODP practice.

ICDP Potsdam

Evaluation

IODP-ICDP Amphibious Drilling Proposal (ADP) Development: Workshop

IODP Science Support Office

submission submission

June decision and funding

SEP SAG/EC

Green = ICDPBlue = IODPGray = scientists Workshop

ProposalJan 15 and ?

Workshop Funding

National/Consortium

IODP Workshop Programs

Figure 1

Costestimates

ICDP Potsdam

Evaluation

IODP-ICDP Amphibious Drilling Proposal (ADP) Development: Full Proposal

IODP Science Support Office

submission submission

Decision and funding

SAG

IODP Platfom Operators

Costestimates

SEP

Facilityboards

Workshop

Full ProposalOct 1 + Jan 15

Scheduling EC + OSG

Figure 2

IODP Progress Toward New Science PlanExpeditions and Full Proposals by Theme/Challenge

• Updated after Jan 2015 SEP + Mar 2015 EFB/CIB decisions• Does not include 12 pre-proposals identified at last two

SEP meetings (6 at each) for development to full

Key:* = holding bin after external review** = sent to external review after Jan 2015 SEP( ) = done at end of first IODP{ } = security issuesgreen font = 2012 top US priority challenge for JRcyan font = MSPorange font = Chikyu (*** = PCT approved)white font = JOIDES Resolution(or Chikyu riserless if CIB criteria are met)

Climate and Ocean Change (Challenges 1 & 2)

Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP

#1 Climate response to high atmospheric CO2

361 SAFARI708 ACEX2813 Ant. Cenozoic

567 SPac Paleogene760 SW Australia K{778 Tanzania?}

771 Iberia Paleoclimate**834 Agulhas Cret.847 Drake/Scotia884CPP S Australia Cret.

#2 Ice sheet and sea level response to warming climate

(347 Baltic Sea)359 Maldives Monsoon708 ACEX2813 Ant. Cenozoic

581 Coralgal Banks716 Hawaiian Reefs732 Ant. Sed. Drifts839 Amund. Sea WAIS

730 Vanuatu SL751 Ross Sea WAIS*771 Iberia Paleoclimate**847 Drake/Scotia863 MDP ISOLAT

Climate and Ocean Change (Challenges 3 & 4)

Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP

#3 Control of regional precipitation patterns

(341 S Alaska Margin)(346 Asian Monsoon)353 Indian Monsoon354 Bengal Fan355 Arab. Sea CPP356 Indon. Thruflow359 Maldives Mons’n361 SAFARI363 WPac Warm Pool

{549 Arabian Sea}{595 Indus Fan}618 E. Asian Mons’n777APL Okinawa

730 Vanuatu SL 819APL Arab Sea OMZ863 MDP ISOLAT868 Drake/Scotia877 Indian Monsoon

#4 Ocean response to chemical perturbation

364 Chicxulub Impact

760 Mentelle Basin 819APL Arab Sea OMZ857MDP DREAM858 APL NW Aust

Biosphere FrontiersChallenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP

#5 Origin, extent, significance of subseafloor biosphere

(347 Baltic Sea)357 Atlantis Massif

505 Mariana forearc

635 Hydrate Ridge830 APL Scott Plat.833 Guaymas Basin857MDP DREAM

#6 Limits of subseafloor life

830 APL Scott Plat.865 Nankai T Limit*** 857MDP DREAM

#7 Ecosystem sensitivity to environmental change

{724 Gulf of Aden}

760 Mentelle Basin 819 APL Arab OMZ857MDP DREAM858 APL NW Aust

Earth Connections

Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP

#8 Upper mantle composition and dynamics

(345 Hess Deep)360 Atlantis Bank

522 Superfast Crust800 Atlantis Bank

834 Agulhas Cret. 805 MDP Mohole

#9 Seafloor spreading and ocean crustal architecture

(345 Hess Deep)349 SCS Tectonics

522 Superfast Crust769 APL 504B logs

760 Naturiste Plat. 805 MDP Mohole838 CPP SCS II879 Corinth Rift**

#10 Chemical exchange between crust and seawater

357 Atlantis Massif 505 Mariana forearc 818 Brothers Arc

#11 Subduction and formation of continental crust

350 IBM rear arc351 IBM arc origins352 IBM forearc

698 IBM middle crust***

Earth in Motion

Challenge Done/scheduled At FB’s At SEP

#12 Control of earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis

(NanTroSEIZE 1,2,3)(334/344 CRISP A)362 Sumatra364 NTS C10 Obs’y

NanTroSEIZE 3,4***537B CRISP B***781A Hikurangi782B Hikurangi

770 Kanto Asperity796 Ligurian Slide 811 Cape Fear841 APL Hikurangi835 JTRACK

#13 Storage and flow of subseafloor carbon

533 Cascadia CORKs791 APL Cascadia

811 Cape Fear836 APL Timor Tr.841 APL Hikurangi

#14 Fluids linking biological, chemical, physical processes

837 New Eng. hydro.505 Mariana forearc633 Costa Rica mud mounds

MEXT Report to CIB #3 Meeting

Yuzuru KimuraYuzuru Kimura

JAMSTEC Budget

400000(Unit: 100 Mil Yen)

300000 Supplementary300000 Supplementary budget Others

Supplementary 200000 budget Drilling

Subsidy

100000Original budget

0

FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015

MOF evaluated Science Drilling ProjectMOF evaluated Science Drilling Project

• Ministry of Finance is responsible for its budgetdisbursement, and evaluates several sectorsevery year.

• Ministry of Finance studied the implementation• Ministry of Finance studied the implementationof Chikyu budget by itself in FY2014, and

l frecommended several actions of improvementof the contract procedures in its report.

E CORD  newsE CORD  news

G .   CAMO ING .   CAMO IN

Director of  the  ECORD  Managing Agency  Director of  the  ECORD  Managing Agency  

> Renewed contacts with Spain

> Potential newcomersFY14 contributions

($US) ‐ « Accessing Member » : Russia

‐ Contacts : Turkey, Czech Republic, Luxembourg

($US)Austria > FY18 100,000 Belgium TBD 30,000  Canada > FY15 150,000  5 5 ,Denmark > FY16 184,000Finland > FY18 80,000  Germany > FY18 5,600,000

l d

17 

Iceland >FY14 30,000 Ireland >FY18 137,000  Israel > FY16 30,000  Italy > FY18 400,000  

 ECOTotal fixed costs :

M 11.2 $ yr ‐1Italy > FY18 400,000  Netherlands >FY18 500,000  

Norway >FY18 1,100,000Poland >FY18 30,000  

RD m

$ y

Available for MSP

Portugal >FY18 90,000  Sweden >FY18 528,080

Switzerland >FY16 600,000  UK >FY18 4 296 400

mem

b

operations :

M 7.8 $ yr ‐1UK >FY18 4,296,400

France >FY18 5,212,000TOTAL 19,097,480

ers

>   P o t e n t i a l a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s     ( c a s h ,   I K C s )   n o t  c o n s i d e r e d

http://www.ecord.org

A m p h i b i o u s D r i l l i n g P r o p o s a l s ( A D P s )A m p h i b i o u s D r i l l i n g P r o p o s a l s ( A D P s )

ADPs can only be accomplished by

( )drilling both onshore (ICDP) and

offshore (IODP, mostly throughff ( y g

ECORD)

Landslide geohazards : 

796 Full

g

Testing multiple trigger mechanisms

at the Ligurian slope (A. Kopf et al.)

NADIR

Nice Amphibious Drilling, in situ 

monitoring and risk analysis

(A. Kopf et al.)

I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s   ( I K C s )I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s   ( I K C s )

• D r i l l i n g p l a t f o rms / s y s t ems

• Suppo r t v e s s e l s

• E s s e n t i a l s c i e n t i f i c s e r v i c e• E s s e n t i a l s c i e n t i f i c s e r v i c e

• Ha z a r d s i t e s u r v e y

• On sho r e fa c i l i t y n e a r t h e d r i l l s i t e

• I c e managemen tg

• Remo t e l o g i s t i c s a nd a s s i s t a n c e

I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s   ( I K C s )I n ‐ K i n d C o n t r i b u t i o n s   ( I K C s )

An y I ODP memb e r a n d n o n ‐membe r c o u n t r y c a n

p r o p o s e I K C s f o l l ow i n g a n o p e n c a l l

I K C s  o f f e r s   e v a l u a t e d  b y   E SO   a n d   t h e i r  p r o p o s e d  

c a s h   v a l u e  mu s t  b e   a p p r o v e d  b y   t h e   E CORD   C o u n c i l

I K C s   r ew a r d e d b y   e x t r a   S c i e n c e   P a r t y  p o s i t i o n s   o n t h e   I K C s   r ew a r d e d b y   e x t r a   S c i e n c e   P a r t y  p o s i t i o n s   o n t h e  

MSP   e x p e d i t i o n   f o r  wh i c h   t h e   I K C   h a s  b e e n   r e n d e r e d .  

ECORD Science and Educat ional ProgrammeECORD Science and Educat ional Programme

D i s t i ngu i s hed  Le c tu r e r  P rog ramme

Mage l l anP l u s Work shop  Se r i e s  P rog ramme

ECORD  Summer  Schoo l s  

ECORD  Scho l a r sh i p s   ECORD  Scho l a r sh i p s  

ECORD  Gran t s

Tea che r s  a t  Sea

ECORD  Schoo l  o f  Rock

Magel lanPlus Workshop  Series ProgrammeMagel lanPlus Workshop  Series Programme

2014

( ) Deep‐Sea Record of Mediterranean Messinian Events (DREAM‐II), Paris,  France

IODP Drilling within the Corinth Continental Rift, Athens, Greeceg f , ,

BLACKSINK:  Black Sea History of the past 15 Ma, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Accelerating Neoproterozoic Research through Scientific Drilling, Nottingham, UK

Advancing Sub‐surface Biosphere and Paleoclimate Research, Seoul, Korea

North Atlantic Drilling for Climate dynamics, Heidelberg, Germanyg f y , g, y

Magel lanPlus Workshop  Series ProgrammeMagel lanPlus Workshop  Series Programme

2015

D illi  th  C t P l t i l S th Atl ti  N tl  • Drilling the Cretaceous‐Palaeogene tropical South Atlantic, Newcastle, 

UK 

• MEDGATE : Mediterranean‐Atlantic Gateways, Rabat, Morocco

• Mantle, Water and Life, Lyon, France, f , y ,

• Submarine Paleoseismology, Zurich, Switzerland

Amph ib i ou s D r i l l i ng P roposa l work shops   :  

20  k€ y r ‐ 12 0  k€ y r 1

E C O R D   S umm e r S c h o o l sE C O R D   S umm e r S c h o o l s

20150 5

• Urbino Summer School  in Paleoclimatology

• ECORD Bremen Summer School 2015 Ocean crust processes : 

 f lt  fl   d lifmagma, faults, fluxes and life

• 8th Course, International School of Foraminifera, Urbino, Italy8 Course, International School of Foraminifera, Urbino, Italy

• ECORD Training Course : “The Virtual Drillship Experience”, 

Bremen, Germany

ECORD Council Funding agencies

JOIDES

EMA

JOIDESResolution

EMAManaging Agency

MagellanPlusW k h S i

Chikyu

ECORD FB MSP scheduling 

committee

Workshop Series(ECORD – ICDP)

ESOImplementing Organisation

ESSACScientific CommitteeMission Specific 

Platforms

Education / Outreach 

Vision

Task Force

Platforms

Task ForceTask Force

ECORD ILP( Industry Liaison )( Industry Liaison )

____________________________________________

Chikyu Board Meeting 30-31 March 2015 - ANZIC Report

ANZIC funding for membership expires within the Australian 2015-16

financial year. Currently ANZIC is preparing an application for another

5 years of funding for its IODP membership from the Australian

Government.

ANZIC currently comprises: Australia: 2 Australian Government funded

research agencies and 15 universities; NZ 1 NZ Government Funded

research agency and 2 universities. The new consortium will comprise

similar number and composition of agencies, with some universities

leaving and others joining. Membership is still strong and while the

majority of the membership fees comes from the Australian Government the

other ANZIC members will bring in about AUS$785K per year committed for

the life of the membership.

Under the new application ANZIC's membership will be similar to present,

joining the Chikyu, JOIDES, and ECORD platforms at US$1.5M to US/Europe

and US$0.3M to Japan. However, as part of the normal course of events,

we have been asked to provide an assessment of the effects on the

membership if we were to receive less Australian Government funding.

ANZIC should know likely outcome at the IODP forum in July with official

approval by September/October 2015.

During its membership of IODP, ANZIC has continued to provide world

class scientists on all IODP legs across a range of scientific

disciplines. Recently, we have had high quality scientists on Legs 353,

354, and 365. This will continue into the foreseeable future. ANZIC

continues to be able to develop world class drilling proposals. Leg 356

to NW Australia to investigate Indonesian Throughflow has an ANZIC co-

Chief and will sail in the middle of this year. Two very highly regarded

and exiting IODP proposals have been developed for potential riser

drilling on Chikyu in the Australia-NZ region: Hikurangi Margin - slow

slip led by Uni of Texas and GNS, and LHR - eastern Gondwana margin

break-up led by GA and JAMSTEC.

The Hikurangi Margin project is a multiphase drilling project, with the

Chikyu required for riser drilling in the slow slip fracture zone.

Unfortunately the proposal for the 3D seismic survey wasn't funded,

however another application will be prepared and submitted this calendar

year, and we are still awaiting the outcome of an application to NERC

for the same work. Understand its at the final stage and we are

expecting a decision very soon. Given the EPSP favourably reviewed the

proposed drill sites, we are expecting the riserless component to be

scheduled into the JOIDES 2017/18 schedule.

The LHR pre-proposal submitted in October 2014 was reviewed extremely

well by the SEP in January 2015, and on the back of this GA and JAMSTEC

will jointly be convening a science development workshop in Sydney next

week (7-10 April) to progress the proposal for submission in October

2014. A total of 36 scientists from all over the world will be in

attendance. The LHR project is a potential CPP, and GA has recently

obtained funding from the Australian Government to undertake the site

survey work with JAMSTEC. GAs commitment to the site survey has been

communicated to JAMSTEC. On the back of a good review of the proposal,

GA would then go back to the Australian Government for the remaining

funds for the drilling leg. We continue to have positive discussions

with the Federal Government about this project proposal - need to

identify a source of funding.

ANZIC is looking forward to receiving many of you at the IODP forum in

Canberra in July. Please bring warm clothes!

Andrew Heap

Geoscience Australia (on behalf of ANZIC)

12. Chikyu Safety Review Committee Report

Drilling Safety Sub-Committee U dUpdate

3rd Chikyu IODP Board (CIB) Meeting3rd Chikyu IODP Board (CIB) Meeting30 March 2015

Shigemi NaganawaChair of Drilling Safety Sub-Committee

Outline

2nd meeting on 13 March 2015: Review on interim report by CDEX for future NanTro C2 operation planreport by CDEX for future NanTro C2 operation plan

Borehole breakout was a major problem at Exp. 348 C0002 riser holeC0002 riser hole

Extremely difficult and challenging drilling project l i h i l d i i i t

1. Interpretation of the breakout mechanism: Prof.

also in geomechanical and engineering points

Morita gave an important comment to the iGM report2. Appropriate drilling fluid management: A

countermeasure for the borehole breakout was agreed3. New drilling plan: Casing program CDEX proposed

for the borehole breakout problem was discussed3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 2

1. Formation Characteristics and AnisotropicBorehole Breakout from iGM Report

Borehole Breakout Simulation Result

Formation Dip

4983.1m

4983.9m

Time-lapse Borehole Images

While drilling

Borehole Breakout from iGM Report Formation with steeply

dipping bedding planes

Coring Int.

30-Dec-13 22:30

30-Dec-13 23:00

4981.2m

4986.8m

4989.5m

4992.0m

4995.3m

4998.2m

900 Strong anisotropy in horizontalformation strength

Strong anisotropy in horizontalShmax(from C2A)

ding

fric

tion30-Dec-13 23:305001.2m

5003 7

After 3.5-5.5hrs

g pystress field

Formation with potentialweak planes

esio

n an

d sl

id weak planes A number of steeply dipping

sliding planes due to structuraldeformation

uctio

n of

coh

e

Aft 36h

deformation Anisotropic borehole

breakoutD illi fl id i i th h

ReduAfter 36hrs Drilling fluid invasion through

the weak planes into bedding/fracture which reduces cohesion and sliding frictioncohesion and sliding friction

3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 3* iGM: Insight GeoMechanics Pty. Ltd.

12 Chikyu Safety Review Update12. Chikyu Safety Review Update

Health, Safety and Environment(HSE) GroupShi i M t dShigemi Matsuda

Agenda 12

Recent Activities of Chikyu Safety Review Committee and Sub committeeYear Safety Review Committee Sub ‐Committee2014 1 Drilling Safety Sub committee was

and Sub‐committee

20142. Committee mtg. was held

to review the result of Exp348 based on CDEX report

1. Drilling Safety Sub‐committee was formed and 1st mtg. was held to find out the reason why Borehole  Instability problem occurred while 

348 Resu& sugg

and the suggestion madeby Drilling Safety Sub‐committee (June)

drilling C0002 in Ex348. SC provided the suggestion to CDEX in the end (March)

lt review 

estion 

2015  3. 2nd Drilling SC Mtg. was held to discussthe interim report of the possiblecountermeasures CDEX has studied so

Discus

4. Committee Mtg. will beheld after Chikyu returnsfrom India in Aug. to

countermeasures CDEX has studied sofar for NanTroSEIZE final TD drilling(March)

ss counter‐& Drilling P

discuss C10 detail drillingplan

5. Drilling SC Mtg. will be held 1or 2 timesaccording to the progress of CDEX study

6. Geo‐hazard Sub‐committee will beformed in 2015 in cooperation with

‐measures 

Plan

formed in 2015 in cooperation withDrilling Sub‐committee

Chikyu Safety Review Committee StructureSub‐committees (responsibility):1) Drilling Safety SC.(Riser and Riserless)2) G h d P ti SC (Ri )

JAMSTEC President&

2) Geo‐hazard Prevention SC.       (Riser)Mandate : After the project is shifted to the implementation stage,

CDEX Director General

Recommendations Review Request•• GeoGeo‐‐hazard Prevention SChazard Prevention SC shall study

the site survey data submitted by theproponent to identify potential geo‐Chikyu Safety Review Committee

q

hazard at the proposed riser drillingsite. ※ Geohazard SC will be formed in JFY 2015

•• Drilling Safety SC Drilling Safety SC shall study the A Committee Chair, SC chairs and other members with expertise in Drilling Ops Marine g yg y y

drilling plan and the technologies employed in that drilling to verify operational feasibility

members with expertise in Drilling Ops, Marine Ops, Hole Stability, Ship Safety and Ship engineering

•• Chikyu Chikyu Safety Review CommitteeSafety Review Committeeshall provide advice and suggestionbased on the committee meeting

Result Study Result Study

DrillingSafety SC

GeohazardPrevention SC g

discussion and the feed back fromeach sub‐committee prior to carryingout the expedition

Safety SC.(4 experts) 

(Currently active)

Prevention SC.

(To be active) 

Supplemental Comment on Breakout Mechanism by Prof Morita a member of sub-committee

(1) Stress Stress-strain curve of steeply dipping rock

formation changes in millimeters

by Prof. Morita, a member of sub-committee

e formation changes in millimeters Hard and soft beddings are layered one

after another* Heterogeneity * Macroscopically Directional Stress concentration in millimeters eh

ole

the

kout

Stress concentration in millimetersBorehole breakout occurs in the way of formation detaching along bedding planes

(2) Shale Swelling e to

bor

eng

Bre

ak

(4) Increase in Pore Pressure & Escalation

in Swelling( ) S a e S e gIn hard rock formation the layer detaching breakout and/or micro-fracture (0.01-0.1mm in width, a few cm in length) Especially laminated shale often creates tu

ck d

ueD

etac

hinin Swelling

Mud and filtrate invasion due to outbreak of micro-fracture

spec a y a ated s a e o te c eatesthis problem

(3) Temperature Change∆T (temp. difference between while drilling ll

Pipe

Sla

yer

D

∆T (temp. difference between while drilling and original formation temperature) causes the laminated formation to swell and shrinkWhen the temperature increases while drilling the hard rock formation in thermal i d d f il d

(5)D

ridrilling the hard rock formation in thermal expansion will have the same problem as (2) shale swelling

Time-dependent failure caused by synergistic effect of (1) to (4)

3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 4

2. Management of Drilling Fluid Properties(suggestion from Prof Morita)(suggestion from Prof. Morita) Sub-committee agreed on the following drilling fluid

management planmanagement plan Nano-sealant is recommended to be added into

drilling fluid: To prevent detaching breakout causeddrilling fluid: To prevent detaching breakout causedby shale swelling in 0.1% order along the beddingsteeply dipping bedding plane

Maximizing mud weight as much as practicallypossible is recommended to be adopted and to bemaintained around minimum horizontal stressmaintained around minimum horizontal stress(Shmin) as upper limit: To resist large stress ofaccretionary prismaccretionary prism

Management of drilling fluid is crucial for good borehole stability to deepen the C0002 site hole

53rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015

borehole stability to deepen the C0002 site hole

Pore Pressure/Stress Prediction, Mud Weight Window and Casing ProgramWindow and Casing Program

Upper limit of mud weight Should be determined

Pore Peressure/Stress Projection

WD: 1939mMSL (1967.5mbsf)

Casing/Liner

rrent Configuration and Future P

01.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40

ECD (sg)

Should be determined from predicted Shminand/or data from leakoff

36"53.9mbsf

500m

20"860 3mbsf 1000m

0Pore pressure (海水柱

圧)Mud Specific Gravity(17,12.25, 14.5 in hole)1.15sg_from LOT

1.39sg_from LOT

Sv

test at 11-3/4” Liner Casing design, riser load

i d i l i

860.3mbsf 1000m

1500m

T.O.L.1915.35mbsf

1000Shmin 1.42sg(InjectionTest Result)'SHmax 1.65sg（Packoff Event)'Shmin(est.)

'SHmax(est )' capacity and riser analysis should be also considered

Lower limit of mud weight

2000m13-3/8"2010.0mbsf

2500m

11-3/4"2922 5mbsf

2000

Dep

th (

mbs

f)

SHmax(est.)

Sv

SHmaxShmin

applied MW

Lower limit of mud weight Collapse/breakout

pressure

2922.5mbsf3000m

Length=±650m 3500m

3000

10-5

/8"

x 12

-1/4

"hol

e11

-3/4

"Exp

. ol

e

Pp

C ll /B k t pressure Casing program is discussed

based on safe operating

4000m

Length=±650m

4500mLength=±500m

4000

9-1/

2"x

11-3

/8"h

9-3/

8Lin

er

7-1/

2"x

8-1/

2!"h

ole

6" h l b l thi O li

<Contingency liner>8-1/2"x9-1/2"hole9-3/8"Exp.

Collapse/Breakoutpress.(estimated)

p gmud window

3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 6

5000m 5000

6" hole below this Org lineTarget interval including

3. New Drilling Plan and Casing Program

CDEX's New drilling plans are discussedCase A: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack atCase A: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack at

11-1/8" lowest existing casingCase B: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack atCase B: Deepening the existing hole with sidetrack at

13-3/8" upper existing casingCase C: Drilling a new hole

Casing program for Case A, most realistic plan CDEX proposal: Drill fast and set casing immediately in

every 650±m interval (3 casing + 1 contingency) to maintain safe mud window

Proposal from member: To reduce time spent for under Proposal from member: To reduce time spent for under-reaming and risk of using expandable casing, drill 1,000m in one interval (2 casing + 1 contingency)1,000m in one interval (2 casing + 1 contingency)

73rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015

Proposed Casing Program for Case A11-3/4”Liner(already installed)

2922.5mbsf

Hole Size:10-5/8” x 12-1/4”6” hole will be drilled

through target formation 9-5/8” x 11-3/4”Expandable Casing

Hole Size:9-1/2” x 11-3/8”

of mega-splay fault

9-3/8” Liner

9-1/2 x 11-3/8

Hole Size:

Contingency7-5/8” x 9-3/8”Expandable Casing

8-1/2” x 9-1/2”

Hole Size:7 1/2” x 8 1/2”

7” Liner

7-1/2” x 8-1/2”

3rd CIB Meeting 30-31 March 2015 8

Mega-splay fault

6” hole

IODP Science Support OfficefScripps Institution of Oceanography 

University of California San Diego

Brief Report to Chikyu IODP BoardBrief Report to Chikyu IODP Board 30 March 2015

Holly Given, Executive Director

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

What is the IODP Science Support Office?What is the IODP Science Support Office?

• Funded by US National Science Foundation• FY2015 budget US$1008KFY2015 budget US$1008K  • 4.9 person‐years (FTEs): 87% of budget

F T k• Four Tasks:– Support the JRFB and its advisory panels– Oversee the proposal process for IODP– Manage the Site Survey Data Bankg y– Provide www.iodp.org

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

What Holds IODP Together Now?

Science Plan MOUs on platform funding and staffing

What Holds IODP Together Now?

Science Plan, MOUs on platform funding and staffing

Common policies, proposal process

Expeditions, public relations, workshops

Discoveries, publications, other outcomes , p ,

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

30

35

IODP Proposal SubmissionsNew program

25

20

15

New1716 19

10

New 

Revised

0

510 11 9

0

Oct‐04

Apr‐05

Oct‐05

Apr‐06

Oct‐06

Apr‐07

Oct‐07

Apr‐08

Oct‐08

Apr‐09

Oct‐09

Apr‐10

Oct‐10

Apr‐11

Oct‐11

Apr‐12

Oct‐12

Apr‐13

Oct‐13

Apr‐14

Oct‐14

106 Active Proposalsp17% involve Chikyu

(Engineering:1)

Earth in MotionEarth in Motion

(Engineering:1)

Climate and OceanClimate and OceanEarth ConnectionsEarth Connections

2020

55551717

BiosphereBiosphere

Earth ConnectionsEarth Connections

1313BiosphereBiosphere

l l h kAs of 12 February 2015

12 proposals are uniquely Chikyu

Active proposal status: 106 ct e p oposa status 06by target ocean

Arctic: 8Southern: Southern:

88

Mediterranean: 4

Arctic: 8

Indian: Indian: 1818Pacific: Pacific: 4141

Atlantic:Atlantic: 2727

d ad a 88

Atlantic: Atlantic: 2727

A f 12 F b 2015As of 12 February 2015

Active proposal status: 106p pby Review stage

Holding Bin: 7

SSEPEP: : 5555FBs: 44FBs: 44

As of 12 February 2015

106 Active Proposals by lead proponent’s affiliation

China: 1K 1

Brazil: 1

Japan:9

Japan:9

China: 1Korea: 1India: 2

US43US43

ANZIC: 9

4343

ECORD40

ECORD404040

Lead proponent’s affiliation (as of 12 February 2015)

Active proponent distributionActive proponent distribution

1300 unique proponentsKorea: 10

q p p

China: 37China: 37

Korea: 10

ANZIC: 72

India: 22Brazil: 26

Others:53

US: 428

ANZIC: 72

Japan: 138

53

Japan: 138

ECORD: 514

As of 12 February 2015

Proposalsp

• IODP proposal submissions MUST be made via p pthe e‐system (proposals.iodp.org)

l b i i id li d i• Proposal Submission Guidelines document is continuously evolving (iodp.org/program‐documents)

• Proposals continue to be refined at the Facility• Proposals continue to be refined at the Facility Board (see p147 of Agenda Book) 

proponents Facility Board

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

SEP

Inquiries re: Agreements for proprietary site survey data (SSDB)  

Proposal Region Data Provider

846‐APL (Peck) Falkland Islands Geophysical Services Inc

840‐Pre (Wagner) 

Niger Margin Transect

Shell Nigeria

864‐Pre Pernambuco Unknown864‐Pre(Dunkley Jones)

PernambucoPlateau, Brazil

Unknown

730‐Full (Taylor) Bouganville Guyot, V t

IFREMERVanuatu

These inquiries resulted in clarifications to IODP Proposal and Data q pConfidentiality Policies (www.iodp.org/program‐documents)

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

Posting Program Policiesnts Posting Program Policies

cumen

m‐doc

progra

p.org/p

w.iodp

www

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

Call for Proposal language needed in early July

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

als

prop

ostting‐p

subm

itp.org/s

w.iodp

www

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

IODP proposals at the CIBIODP proposals at the CIBNumber Type Short Title Lead Proponent Affiliation Platform Status

537 CDP7 Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Overview von Huene USA Chikyu+JR CIB

537B Full4 Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Phase B Ranero ECORD: Germany Chikyu CIB

603 CDP3 NanTroSEIZE Overview Kimura Japan JR+Chikyu CIB

603C Full NanTroSEIZE Phase 3: Plate Interface Tobin Japan Chikyu CIB

698 Full3 Izu‐Bonin‐Mariana Arc Middle Crust Tatsumi Japan Chikyu CIB

707 CDP3 Kanto Asperity Project: Overview Kobayashi Japan JR+Chikyu SEP

781 MDP Hikurangi subduction margin Wallace ANZIC: New Zealand Chikyu+JR CIB

781B Full Hikurangi: Riser Wallace USA Chikyu CIBg y

782 Pre Kanto Asperity Project: Plate Boundary Deformation Yamamoto Japan Chikyu SEP

800 MDP Indian Ridge Moho Dick USA Chikyu+JR CIB

805 MDP MoHole to the Mantle Umino Japan Chikyu SEP

835 Full Japan Trench Tsunamigenesis Kodaira Japan Chikyu SEP835 Full Japan Trench Tsunamigenesis Kodaira Japan Chikyu SEP

857 MDP2 DREAM: Mediterranean Salt Giant Camerlenghi ECORD: Italy Chikyu+JR SEP

857A pre DREAM: Deep‐Surface Connection Rabineau ECORD: France Chikyu SEP

865 Full Nankai Trough Temperature Limit Hinrichs ECORD: Germany NR‐Chikyu CIB

871 Pre Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution Heap ANZIC: Australia Chikyu SEP871 Pre Lord Howe Rise Crustal Evolution Heap ANZIC: Australia Chikyu SEP

876 Pre Bend‐Fault Serpentinization Phipps Morgan ECORD: UK JR+Chikyu SEP

880 APL Experiment: Drilling parameters for Lithology Moe Japan NR‐Chikyu SEP

IODP Science Support Office • Scripps Institution of Oceanography • www.iodp.org 

Chikyu IODP Board #1 Chikyu IODP Board #1 –– March, 2015March, 2015

INTEGRATED OCEANDRILLING PROGRAM

横浜市

505 Full 5: Mariana Convergent Margin: Geochemical, Tectonic, and Biological Processes

At JRFB

P t P t i i F t l

Objectives:

Proponents: Patricia Fryer et al. (1) Understand mass transport and geochemical cycling in subduction zones of non-accretionary forearcs*Possible non-riser Chikyu expedition

(2) Determine spatial and temporal variability of slab-related fluids to trace dehydration carbonate dissolution and

y p

dehydration, carbonate dissolution, and water/rock reactions

(3) Understand physical properties as(3) Understand physical properties as controls over dehydration reactions and seismicity

(4) Study spatial and temporal variability in metamorphic and tectonic processes

(5) Investigate controls over biological activity associated with mud volcanoes

Site Issues Class

505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014Site Issues Class

MAF-2B No data in SSDB 3ANo longer

dMAF-3B No data in SSDB 3A

MAF-9B 150 m • Problems with discrepancies in site locations (NAV file does not agree with

1Bc

proposed

locations (NAV file does not agree with proposed site locations) for 11, 12, 13, 14.

• No bathy and backscatter in digital and l f

MAF-10B 250 m 1BcMAF-11A 150 m 1Bc

MAF 12B 250 1BSignificant

analog form; • No interpreted seismic data with site

locations.• No information on bottom samples or

MAF-12B 250 m 1BcMAF-13A 250 m 1BcMAF-14A 250 m 1Bc

gnavigation problems

o o a o o bo o sa p es onearby cores

• No metadata

MAF 14A 250 m 1BcMAF-15A 100 m

MAF-16A 250 m 1Bc

1B – A few items of required data are not in the SSDB but are readily available3A – No data are in the SSDB but are believed to exist“c” – data do not image the target adequately (in reference to low res bathy andc data do not image the target adequately (in reference to low res bathy and backscatter images)

505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014

Update:Navigation issues (site locations) were addressed in the PRL. Proponents need to finish uploading data, and correct the mistakes (mismatch between CMPs oncorrect the mistakes (mismatch between CMPs on basemap and in NAV and SEGY data). New maps should provide us with the unambiguous siteNew maps should provide us with the unambiguous site locations.

537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject Stage 2Project – Stage 2

• Lead Proponent: Cesar R. Ranero• CRISP Program B: The transition from stable to unstable slip at erosional• CRISP Program B: The transition from stable to unstable slip at erosional

convergent plate boundaries• Review Dates: Feb. 2005 (SSP), August 2011 (SPC) – At CIB

537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject – Stage 2Project Stage 2A principal objective of CRISP Program B is to reach the plate boundary,

observe physical conditions, and sample fault zone material at two sites, p y pone before and one after the onset of seismogenic behavior of large earthquakes.

537B-Full4 Costa Rica SeismogenesisProject Stage 2Site Characterization (2005) – SSP Consensus

Project – Stage 2

• the goal of obtaining physical properties of a 3D volume that spans the seismogenic zone….will require acquisition of a 3D MCS data set, which spans the aseismic to seismic transition.

• Require further documentation of the velocity model at the target location. • Need better definition of the updip limit of the seismogenic zone through further

OBS and GPS studies.OBS and GPS studies.

• SPC noted in 2011: Pending site selection, to be decided by proponents and the operator will incorporate the interpretation of newly acquired 3D seismicthe operator, will incorporate the interpretation of newly acquired 3D seismic data, as well as the integration of results from CRISP-A drilled to date

603C-Full: NanTroSEIZE Drilling and Observatory Phase 3and Observatory Phase 3

• Proponent(s): Kiyoshi Suyehiro, Harold Tobin et al.• Review Dates: Feb 23, 2005 (SSP), June 2009 (EPSP) – at CIBT d ill th l t i t fTo drill across the plate interfaceInto the Philippine Plate-intersect the mega-splay andintersect the mega splay and Decollement and studyprogressive change in fault properties

603C-Full: NanTroSEIZE Drilling and Observatory Phase 3

SSP Consensus (2005):• We recommend the proponents acquire 3D seismic data (done!) and show crossing

orthogonal seismic sections (in depth) imaging the targets (mega splay decollement top

and Observatory Phase 3

orthogonal seismic sections (in depth) imaging the targets (mega-splay, decollement, top basement)

• Reservations regarding the proposed alternate site NT3-02A: The p wave velocity model (and thus all estimates of target depth) is less well constrained- The p-wave velocity model (and thus all estimates of target depth) is less well constrained than the primary site, as the OBS velocity model is situated approximately 30 km from Line B.

- Heat flow data would have to be recompiled for the western transect.p

Good option for 2017

618-Add5; East Asia Margin• Lead Proponent: Peter Clift• Review date: January 2015 of 618-Add5• This proposal addresses three issues related to the uplift of the Tibetan

Plateau:– (1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate(1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate,– (2) the influence of the evolving tectonic and climatic situation on

continental erosion, and(3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt.

Addendum provides new sites to recover full composite section and to avoid bright spots on seismic data.

INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL OCEAN OCEAN DISCOVERY DISCOVERY PROGRAMPROGRAMSEP January 12SEP January 12--14, 201514, 2015

618-Add5 East Asia Margin

618 Add5618-Add5• 618-Add5 was reviewed at Jan. 2015 SEP meeting.

• Two new sites were proposed to build a composite section to replace VN-3.

• VN-4; SEP requested VN-4 be moved slightly to acquire better undisturbed section.

• VN-5; location appears fine.

• New data recently uploaded – a few issues with navigation (CDP y p g (mismatches between seismic data, maps and sections), but these have been addressed.

• Problems with drilling in disputed waters in the SCS

698-Full3: Continental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic ArcContinental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic Arc• Lead Proponent: Yoshiyuki Tatsumi• Review date: 29 January 2010 (SSP); Dec. 2011 (PEP)• This proposal is part of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana (IBM) project, which

aims at answering questions of the long-term growth of continents.

698-Full3: Continental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic ArcContinental Crust Formation at Intra-Oceanic Arc

• PEP 2011 stated: It is the opinion of the PEP that this proposal is ready for drilling as all site characterization data have been obtained, the site selection strategy is well developed (and criticisms of it have been addressed), and the hypotheses to be tested show good traceability fromaddressed), and the hypotheses to be tested show good traceability from the objectives, to the lithologies that will be drilled and the logging plan.

Si Ch i i C l d D Ad Cl ifi i• Site Characterization Completeness and Data Adequacy Classification:

1A: All required data are in the Data Bank and have been reviewed by SSP.b: Data image the target adequately but there are scientific concerns of drill site location or Penetrationb: Data image the target adequately but there are scientific concerns of drill site location or Penetration.

781B-Full: Northern Hikurangi subduction marging g• Lead Proponent: Laura Wallace• Deep, riser drilling component of 781-MDP to discern the mechanisms of slow slip

t (SSE ) b i tifi d illi i th i f h ll SSE t thevents (SSEs) by scientific drilling in the region of shallow SSEs at northern Hikurangi. The primary aims are to sample, log, and conduct downhole measurements in the hanging wall and across the plate interface where SSE occur.

• Reviewed by SEP: January 2014• Recommendation: Forward to CIB with excellent rating

781B-Full: Northern Hikurangi Subduction Marging g• SCP Consensus:Require 3D seismic data files with crossing lines around the proposed drill site….The proponents have acknowledged the need for these data and have a plan to acquire them, but have not yet scheduled a cruise (funding request was unsuccessful).  )NSF funding provided for 34 OBS and active pressure gauges deployment beginning in March.

d l f l f h b k d l b b h d dRequire digital files for the backscatter and multibeam bathymetry grids, and velocity data as tables. Suggest uploading (copying) all date from 781A as well.gg p g ( py g)Concerns regarding site location (anticlinal structure with bright spots) which can only be addressed with more 3D MCS. 

782-Pre: Kanto Asperity Project Program A• Lead Proponent: Yuzuru Yamamoto• SSP Watchdogs: G. Uenzelmann-Neben, M. Yamashita, A.Tanaka• Review date: 3 August 2011 (SSP), Dec. 2011 (PEP)• This pre-proposal is closely connected to proposal 770-Full2 and addresses

the two different types of asperities of subduction zone at the southern Kantothe two different types of asperities of subduction zone at the southern Kanto region of Japan.

782-Pre: Kanto Asperity Project Program A

• PEP Recommendation (Dec. 2011): submit full proposal• More data are required for characterizing the drilling sites.• Some high quality 2D MCS data in SSDB. Requires grid of 3D MCS data,

precise velocity bathy backscatterprecise velocity, bathy, backscatter.• Concern regarding amplitude anomaly at KAP-8

800-MDP: Nature of the Lower crust and Moho at slower-spreading Ridges: Henry Dickp g g y

Lead Proponent: Henry DickReview date: Dec. 2012 (PEP); no SCP reviewObjective is to drill through the Atlantis Bank gabbroic massif into mantle near site 735B to 500-m below Moho. 2 major objectives:1) recover the lowermost gabbros and crust-mantle transition to understand

the processes creating Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalt and lower crust2) resolve the controversy as to whether the Moho at slow spreading ridges

can be a serpentinization front.

800-MDP: Nature of the Lower crust and Moho at slower-spreading Ridges, priority proposal by EC group within SEPp g g , p y p p y C g p S

PEP Review, Dec. 2012: proposal was extremely well written with excellent objectives. The PEP applauds the proponents for expanding the science goals to include the subsurface biosphere. Has the potential to produce t f ti l i th t ld dd t l t t h ll i thtransformational science that would address at least two challenges in the new science plan.

The PEP asked the proponents to design a multi phase drilling program; i eThe PEP asked the proponents to design a multi-phase drilling program; i.e. using the JR for two legs, or even the Chikyu if needed

Externally reviewed in Feb 2013 excellent reviewsExternally reviewed in Feb. 2013 – excellent reviews.PEP rated it as ‘excellent’ – first expedition scheduling by JRFB for November

805-MDP: Mohole to Mantle (M2M)• Lead Proponent: Susumu Umino• Objective: The MDP 805-Full plans to drill a complete section through the

oceanic crust and ~500 m into the mantle in a fast spreading environment using the Riser drill ship, Chikyu to understand bulk composition, fluids, heterogeneity, accretion history, limits of life, seismic properties, magnetic g y, y, , p p , ganomalies, etc.

805-MDP: Mohole to Mantle (M2M)• Lead Proponent: Susumu Umino• PEP review date: May 2012• Recommendation: submit revised proposal• No site survey data have been uploaded to the SSDB

3 potential sites considered: A) Cocos Plate; B) Baja area; C) Hawaii area

Technological challenges related to high temperature (300 C) and deep water.

835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trenchacross and along the Japan Trench• Lead Proponent: Shuichi Kodara

Objectives:JTRACK proposes to investigate processes leading to catastrophic, tsunamigenic earthquakes and the history of such events along the margin;tsunamigenic earthquakes and the history of such events along the margin; builds on success of Exp. 343

• SEP Review date: January 2014; forwarded the proposal to the CIB.• The CIB gave the green light and a workshop was held in Japan.

F ll l i d b SEP i J 2015• Full proposal was reviewed by SEP in Jan. 2015• Recommendation: submit revised proposal

835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trenchacross and along the Japan Trench

• 6 sites proposed focusing on the Tohoku segment• WD is 6900 to 7590 m• WD is 6900 to 7590 m• TD is 300 to 1350 mbsf

835-Full: J-Track: Tracking the tsunamigenic slips across and along the Japan Trench

• Workshop held in May 2014• SEP review January 2015

across and along the Japan Trench

SEP review, January 2015• Revised Full proposal recommended• Recommend removing paleoseismology objective and sites

R d d t t l i f k f lt d h i i l di th• Recommended structural mapping of key faults and horizons including the decollement.

• Possible site relocations based upon new data and maps collected in Oct. 2014

New data will improve characterizationcharacterization

857-MDP Umbrella proposal of the Deep Sea record of MediterraneanMessinian events (DREAM multi-phase drilling project: Uncovering a saltgiantgiant

• Lead Proponent: Camerlenghi• Review date: June 2014 (SEP)

Obj tiObjectives:

Four site-specific drilling proposals are conceived under this umbrella:Four site specific drilling proposals are conceived under this umbrella:• DREAM: Deep-Sea Records of the MSC;• Deformation and fluid flow in the MSC salt giant;g• Probing the Salt Giant for its Deep Biosphere secrets;• Probing deep Earth and surface connections (857A-Pre).

857-MDP Umbrella proposal of the Deep Sea record of MediterraneanMessinian events (DREAM multi-phase drilling project: Uncovering a saltgiantgiant

What are the causes, timing and emplacement mechanisms of the MSC salt giant?• Establish the chronology of the MSC;• Test existing hypotheses for Mediterranean evaporite formation;• Develop unifying models for the MSC salt giant.What are the factors responsible for early salt deformation and fluid flow across and out of theWhat are the factors responsible for early salt deformation and fluid flow across and out of the halite layer?• Understand syn-sedimentary salt tectonics and halite creep;• Constrain post-depositional salt deformation and its consequences on sedimentary massConstrain post depositional salt deformation and its consequences on sedimentary mass

wasting;• Understand the physical and mineralogical conditions that allow fluids to migrate in and

through thick tabular salt sequencesg qDo salt giants promote the development of a phylogenetically diverse and exceptionally active deep biosphere?• Determine whether evaporitic sulfate minerals are fuelling the Mediterranean’s deep p g p

biosphere;• Establish whether the interaction between limiting factors (pressure, temperature, salinity) and

a highly variable chemical environment has produced a diverse and novel deep biosphere community;

• Use the biomarkers and surviving microbes trapped within brine inclusions to reconstruct the depth, photic and oxic conditions of ancient, hypersaline depositional environments.

857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLDbasin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD

L d P t M R bi• Lead Proponent: M. Rabineau• SEP review date: June 2014• Recommendation: submit full proposal.Recommendation: submit full proposal.

Objective:The main objective is to sample for the first time the deep basin of the Mediterranean Sea in the Gulf of Lion while recovering strata from the base ofMediterranean Sea in the Gulf of Lion while recovering strata from the base of Pliocene, through the Messinian Series (evaporites and clastics), the pre-MSC Series, and down to basement rocks in a key transitional zone of unknown natureunknown nature.

857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLDbasin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD

• 1 site to 6500 mbsf – 6230 m of sediments; 270 m of basement; • Data appear to be readily available (but not in SSDB)Data appear to be readily available (but not in SSDB)

A brief overview…• Used to be 798-Pre; revised considerably and resubmitted• Companion to 857, both form part of the “DREAM” sequence.

This one is “GOLD”This one is “GOLD”.

• Objectives of this part:Ch t i d tif di t fl i th b i i d t – Characterise and quantify sediment fluxes in the basin in order to assess effects of MSC

– Reconstruct history of vertical basement motions– Characterise the nature of the crust in the western Mediterranean– Characterise the nature of the crust in the western Mediterranean

GOLD is essentially ythe deep basin part, Target A

Data given for GOL-01A, “alternate” alluded to but no ddata given

857A-Pre: Probing connections between deep earth and surface processes in a land-locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline

SEP Comments:

processes in a land locked ocean basin transformed into a giant saline basin: Mediterranean DREAM-GOLD

• SEP suggested developing this as a CPP with industry• Develop a Deep Biosphere component• Address how the chronology will be established• Address how the chronology will be established• Address the subsidence history and base level changes in greater detail.• Consider thicker salt sequence to address fluid flow.• Justify basement drilling.• Justify site selection using data• Choose an alternate siteChoose an alternate site.• Submit data.• Proponents and CDEX need to scope out the expedition in detail for the full

proposal For example coring over 4 km of rock is not feasible and aproposal. For example, coring over 4 km of rock is not feasible and a compromise needs to be reached so that the science goals can be met with operational reality.

865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloorp g

L d P t K Hi i h

A possible option in April 2016, following C0010 Obs replacement?

• Lead Proponent: K. Hinrichs• Review date: The SEP reviewed this proposal at New Brunswick late June

2014

Objective:We aim to study subseafloor sedimentary microbial communities situated in temperature ranges that span the temperature limit of microbial life in anoxic sedimentary systems (the biotic fringe)

Soft tissue signatures(e.g. membrane)

Molecular signatures Prokaryotes(e.g. Archaea & Bacteria)

865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloorp g

2 sites proposedODP1173A: WD is 4790 m; 725 m of sed; 20 m of basementO 3 90 ; 5 ; 0ODP1174A: WD is 4750 m; 1194 m of sed; 120 m of basementProposal calls for casing to sed/basement interface with cap containinghi h l ti T d P bhigh resolution T and P probes.

865-Full

Site 1174 Site 1173

Decollement

Oceanic crust

Muroto Transect: after Science party (2001), Bangs et al. (1999), Moore et al. (1999)

865-FullOverview (2) and lesson from Exp 337

Detection limits for microbial life have improved by a factor

Thermal OM degradation

life have improved by a factor of 500 since 2000.

Thermal OM degradation

865-FullTemperature window of site 1173 and 1174

measured

Focusing on the temperature range for 110-140 oC.

865-Full: Constraining the temperature limit of the microbial deepbiosphere in the Nankai Trough subseafloor

Site Classification Latitude Longitude

ODP1173A 1Aa 32°14.66'N 135°01.51'E

p g

ODP1174A 1Aa 32°20.54'N 134°57.39'E

Completeness: 1A: All required data are in the Data Bank and have been reviewed by the SEP. Appears Complete. We couldn’t find the 3D seismic data which would be an additional bonus, but it is likely found under 196 site survey data and can be readily downloaded at the UTIG seismic data portal. D t Ad d t i th t t d t l d th i tifiData Adequacy: a: data image the target adequately and there are no scientific concerns of drill site location and penetration.

Primary issue: WD5 notes that the science plan is operationally feasible proposal butPrimary issue: WD5 notes that the science plan is operationally feasible proposal but proponent's time estimation based on the JR operation to drill/core ODP sites 1173 and 1174 to penetrate into the oceanic crust (> 120 m) may be too optimistic for Chikyuoperation. Also, WD5 advised that CRFP casing installation operation needs to be carefully considered and the Kuroshio current could be an issue for the entire operation.

Addressed by PRL (Dec. 2014)

Revised operational plan from PRLIndicates 65.3 days for coring, BHA change, casing, capping, logging, transits and contingency timetransits, and contingency time

• Chikyu project

• Proposal of special interest to JAMSTEC

• Proposal expected to attract external fundingProposal expected to attract external funding as a Complementary Project Proposal (CPP)

• Science meeting planned for March 24-26, 2015 t th U i it f Sid2015 at the University of Sidney

• Presented as jointly initiated by Geoscience Australia and JAMSTECAustralia and JAMSTEC

• Proposal 871-Pre complements proposal 832 “Tasman Frontier” led by R. Sutherland, which i t d t d tif d f ti i thaims to date and quantify deformation in the

southwest Pacific

876 Pre: Bend Fault Serpentinization: Oceanic Crust876-Pre: Bend-Fault Serpentinization: Oceanic Crust and Mantle Evolution from Ridge through Trench

Lead Proponent: J. MorganReview data: January 2015Recommendation: Develop full proposalRecommendation: Develop full proposal

Objectives: R i it ti f t d ti i d tl• Recover in-situ sections of ocean crust and serpentinized mantle from a region undergoing Bend Fault Serpentinization.

• Establish if any Alpine-type ophiolites are actually preserved ‘fossil’ BFS systems.

• Determine the limits and activities of chemosynthetic communities in this environment related to hydrothermal activity. y y

• Establish the extent, timing, and rates of carbonation-related reactions that take place during mantle bend-fault serpentinization, and whether these reactions are a large player in the global carbonand whether these reactions are a large player in the global carbon cycle.

Hydration of Mantle• Subducting plate bends and

develops faults as it sinks into the mantle.

• Water can be pumped into the lithospheric mantle along faults;lithospheric mantle along faults; allows hydration of the slab while it is at the trench and chemical hydration linked reactionshydration-linked reactions.

• In order to determine the composition of the oceanic crust and mantle recycled into subduction zones, we need samples of the oceanic crust and

Billen, Nat Geo (2008)

pmantle after it has experienced the chemical transformations linked to bend-fault serpentinizationbend fault serpentinization.

Serpentinization and connected carbonate precipitation has large impact on Earth climate studyprecipitation has large impact on Earth climate study

Subducted carbonate (commonly 1%) associated with BFS would recycle waterSubducted carbonate (commonly ~1%) associated with BFS would recycle water and CO2 into the mantle comparable to that emitted by plate spreading or consumed by crustal alteration, weathering and mountain building

Proposed site: offshore NicaraguaSeveral lines of geophysical evidence forgeophysical evidence for Bend-fault Serpentinization (BFS)p ( )• Direct seismic imaging• Bend-fault

earthquakes• Low regional heat flow• etc.

Drilling sites• Site 1a – WD 3200 m; 500 mbsf

Drill through active bend-fault in th di t ti i d

The same bend-fault should be drilled at different structural levels that include intersecting the fault

the sediment section, coring and CORKing

• Site 1b - WD 3250 m; 2400 mbsfDrill through bend-fault in the upper part of the gabbro section, spot coring LWD CORKingspot coring, LWD, CORKing

• Site 1c - WD 3300 m; 7000 mbsfDrill through bend-fault just g jbelow the Moho, fast-drill first, LWD, then side-wall coring (lower ~2/3), CORKing(lower 2/3), CORKing

• Site 1d - WD 3300 m; 7000 mbsfSame as 1c, but more coring of crustal and mantle sections, CORKing

Strength, etc.• Strength

– Scientific question has global relevance of Earth’s global carbon and water cycles

– Scientific team is very strong including world leading experts in the relevant fields

– Great potential to address multiple challenges of IODP science plan

• Potential issue• Potential issue– Drilling at this WD is beyond Chikyu’s capability

Proposals for site surveys were submitted to UK-IODP and the JAMSTEC Large-scale Planning workshop 2014.P t ill b i i i t ti l k h tProponents will be organizing an international workshop to assess drilling plans with discussion and input from the broader scientific communityy

WDs’ RecommendationDevelop Full Proposal

Development of full scientific plan with strategy to achieve– Development of full scientific plan with strategy to achieve their goal

– Need specific plans for non-riser coring, logging, and observatory

– Contact IOs for building feasible drilling planAlternate sites– Alternate sites

– Justification of multiple holes (especially deeper holes)

880APL I it h i l t t ith d ill bit880APL In-situ mechanical tests with drill bit (IMTB)

Proponents: K. Moe, T. Inoue, Y. Yamada, S. Saito, K. Ujiie, J. Ishiwata,Review date: January 2015e e date Ja ua y 0 5Recommendation: Revise

Primary Goals:Primary Goals:1. To make systematic analysis and experiment on the relationship

between routine drilling measurements (weight on bit, drillstringrotational torque rate of penetration and drillstring rotational speed)rotational torque, rate of penetration, and drillstring rotational speed) and scientifically important in situ rock properties

2 T i d illi d t f th h th2. To improve drilling and measurement performances through these experiment results and understanding on the rock mechanics by real-time monitoring and controlling in the future expeditions, and further extend it into better sampling and scientific interpretations

Experimental design and drilling plan

Experimental design is not clear. We need a better l ti ith d t il d diexplanation with details and diagrams.

• 1. Using different drilling parameters across same lithology formation experiment starting approximatelylithology formation, experiment starting approximately from the depth of 150 m below seafloor (mbsf) and then change the strategy into drilling for three different depthschange the strategy into drilling for three different depths with 50 meter distance after lowering down the weight-on-bit (WOB) to minimum (or reset to zero).

• 2. Using constant drilling parameters across different lithology/formation from the depth of 150 meter below

fl ( b f) dseafloor (mbsf) or deeper.

Drilling plang p• Either experiment during primary expedition if science party allows, or

drill new holes by primary sites – any LWD site on Chikyu can y p y y yaccommodate the proposed experiments

• Proposed locations are at NanTroSEIZE sites...i.e. well characterized alreadyalready.

Issues and Recommendations• The science behind this proposal needs to be better defined.• Petrophysical logging is not specified in detail...but LWD data collection and

l i i i t l t th ianalysis is integral to the science• Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE (Mechanical Specific Energy)

system (BHA configuration, drillstring behaviour, bit types.• Provide a thorough analysis of the sites/intervals you want to re-drill in

terms of lithology, recovery, drilling history, and data from the ship• Provide one or two examples with details showing the approach that they p g pp y

would take at that site including a diagram showing the drilling plan and linking it to the seismic data and stratigraphy as outlined by the shipboard sedimentologists.

• Consider testing on other lithologies• Consider a parametric approach, holding various conditions constant and

varying one at a time.varying one at a time.• The requirements for ship time and shipboard personnel should be specified

as required by the Proposal Submission Guidelines.• Workshop• Workshop• …and more…

300 mbsf

IMTB-2IMTB 2

450 mbsf

IMTB-3

300 mbsf

IMTB-4

400 mbsf

GeneralRecommendations

General1. Need to put proposal in context of previous work with references2 Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE system- viz BHA2. Describe and consider the Chikyu MSE system- viz, BHA

configuration, Chikyu drillstring behaviour and bit types in a lot more detail

3 The proposed data analysis and modeling work could be3. The proposed data analysis and modeling work could be developed more fully, giving a workflow, perhaps with an example from a Nankai or Japan trench well, and pointing out what comes

t f th l i th t i f b fit d h t i t b dout of the analysis that is of benefit, and what remains to be done 4. Lab work in support of proposal would be beneficial- looking at

the different aspects like cutting bit wear and balling, stick slip, drill string vibration.

5. Workshop the topic- Invite experts from oil and gas industry/service companies/bit p g y p

manufacturers as well as academic researchers- Define the state of the art in defining physical properties from drilling

data- Identify the inherent limitations of MSE analysis as practiced, and

identify steps to overcome some of the key barriers.

Recommendations

Specific to sites1 P id th h l i f th it /i t l t t1. Provide a thorough analysis of the sites/intervals you want to re-

drill in terms of lithology, recovery, drilling history and data from the ship (eg., downhole drilling rate through the intervals/lithologies, time on bit when started). Where were the problems at these sties and how might you solve them?

2. Be clear about the lithological differences being referred to: as g glithotypes and in terms of mechanical stratigraphy- i.e. logs of expected UCS, K, G...

3. Make a diagram showing the drilling plan and link it to the3. Make a diagram showing the drilling plan and link it to the seismic/stratigraphy, and lithology changes

4. Consider targeting some hard-to-drill sections e.g. Cherts.

DLHR-2A (alt.) 871-Pre

“DLHR-2A (-26.759528° 161.197392°) samples a rotated fault block near the edge of aDLHR 2A ( 26.759528 161.197392 ) samples a rotated fault block near the edge of amajor depocentre in the western Faust Basin, in water depth of c. 1600–1700 m. The site is located c. 570 km NNE of Lord Howe Island at the cross point of two high-quality seismic reflection lines (GA-302/01 and GA-302/08) and one moderate-quality line ( ) q y(s206r/02a). Given that the site is located on a cross point of three industry-standard seismic lines, and within the coverage of a high-resolution multibeam bathymetry data set, the pre-drill site survey should only require site reconnaissance activities

BLHRV-1A“volcanic basement”volcanic basement

Excellent industry data are availableExcellent industry data are available

650 mbsf

505 Full 5: Mariana Convergent Margin: Geochemical, Tectonic, and Biological ProcessesSite WD TD ObjectiveMAF-2B 3560 150 Pacman: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an

active protrusion/spring site (Cerulean Springs)

g

active protrusion/spring site (Cerulean Springs)

MAF-3B 3850 250 Pacman: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids above an active fault

MAF 9B 2000 150 C l ti l T i ti it d d fl id tMAF-9B 2000 150 Celestial: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an active protrusion/spring site

MAF-10B 3200 250 Celestial: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on lower flank for stratigraphy age and compositional variabilitylower flank for stratigraphy, age and compositional variability

MAF-11A 1260 150 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an active protrusion/spring site

MAF 12B 1400 250 Bi Bl T i ti it d d fl idMAF-12B 1400 250 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on upper flank

MAF-13A 2200 250 Big Blue: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on mid-flank for stratigraphy age and compositional variabilityflank for stratigraphy age and compositional variability

MAF-14A 3300 250MAF-15A 3666 100 Blue Moon: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids at an

active protrusion/spring sitep p g

MAF-16A 4500 250 Blue Moon: To examine serpentinite muds and pore fluids on mid-flank for stratigraphy, age and compositional variability

Objectives:

(1) Understand mass transport and(1) Understand mass transport and geochemical cycling in subduction zones of non-accretionary forearcs

(2) Determine spatial and temporal variability of slab-related fluids to trace dehydration, carbonate dissolution, and ywater/rock reactions

(3) Understand physical properties as controls over dehydration reactions and seismicity

(4) Study spatial and temporal variability in metamorphic and tectonic processes

(5) I ti t t l bi l i l(5) Investigate controls over biological activity associated with mud volcanoes

505 Full 5: SEP review June 2014

Proponents need to finish uploading data, and correct the mistakes (duplicate location for 11B and 12A; mismatch between CMPs on basemap(duplicate location for 11B and 12A; mismatch between CMPs on basemapand in NAV and SEGY data). This is critical. We don’t know if sites are correctly located (MAF-11A, 12B, 13A, 14A)!

We still require the following files:

• General CMP position (range) of proposed sites• General CMP position (range) of proposed sites• Annotated seismic images (with sites located)• Bathymetry data (as a netCDF grd, XYZ, GIS shapefile, etc.) and high

resolution analog (pdf jpeg gif)resolution analog (pdf, jpeg, gif)• Backscatter data (as a GIS shapefile) and high resolution analog (pdf, jpeg,

gif).• Geographic projection used for seafloor mapsGeographic projection used for seafloor maps• Information (geotechnical; lithologic, etc.) regarding short cores/bottom

samples• Acquisition and processing data for all geophysics.q p g g p y

Initial Issues:

Deep penetration (3 5 4 0 km) and risk of hydrocarbons and sandyDeep penetration (3.5–4.0 km) and risk of hydrocarbons and sandy lithologies requires riser drilling but water is too shallow at VN-1 and VN-2 for RV Chikyu and will need a mission specific platform. H d illi t VN 3 d XI 1 i id l f Chik b thHowever, drilling at VN-3 and XI-1 is ideal for Chikyu because the water depths are 1200 m and 1500 m respectively, in the middle of the proposed operation range of this vessel.

Non-riser drilling to ~1 km at VN-3 and XI-1 could be performed by RV Chikyu or JOIDES Resolution (or similar vessel), allowing penetration y ( ) g pto the middle Miocene (10 Ma). Such drilling would not only lay the geotechnical groundwork for deeper drilling but would allow the hypothesis of an 8-Ma Tibetan surface uplift and monsoonhypothesis of an 8 Ma Tibetan surface uplift and monsoon strengthening to be tested.

618-Full3; East Asia Margin• Lead Proponent: Peter Clift• Review date: January 2008 of 618-Add2• This proposal addresses three issues related to the uplift of the Tibetan

Plateau:– (1) the effect of orogenic growth on regional and global climate,( ) g g g g ,– (2) the influence of the evolving tectonic and climatic situation on

continental erosion, and– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt– (3) understanding strain accommodation in the orogenic belt.

Initial sites had issues with respect to hydrocarbons, lithologies depth of drilling; several Addenda werelithologies, depth of drilling; several Addenda were

subsequently submitted

The NanTroSEIZE Transect So Far:Accomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODPʼs

The NanTroSEIZE Transect So Far:Accomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODPʼsAccomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODP s

Deep Window into Megathrust ProcessesAccomplishments and a Look Ahead for IODP s

Deep Window into Megathrust ProcessesGaku Kimura Un TokyoGaku Kimura Un TokyoGaku Kimura, Un. Tokyo

Harol Tobin,Un of Wisconsin-Madison

Gaku Kimura, Un. TokyoHarol Tobin,

Un of Wisconsin-MadisonUn. of Wisconsin Madison

and all NanTroSEIZE Expedition

Un. of Wisconsin Madison

and all NanTroSEIZE Expeditionand all NanTroSEIZE ExpeditionScientists

and all NanTroSEIZE ExpeditionScientists

Initial Science Plan (2001): Seismogenic Zone Initiative

Seismogenic ZoneSeismogenic Zone Challenges

• What governs subduction zone seismogenic fault locking vsseismogenic fault locking vs stable slip and/or transitional fault behavior?

• Does fault state evolve during interseismic and pre-seismic period? If so, how?

• What governs tsunami generation characteristics for a given great earthquake?

NanTroSEIZE conceived to address these questions2011 Tohoku M9.0 earthquake slip model

(Lay et al., 2011)

3D seismic box

NanTroSEIZENanTroSEIZE: The Nankai Trough Seismogenic : The Nankai Trough Seismogenic Z E i tZ E i tZone ExperimentZone Experiment

A ltiA lti t ff t tt ff t tA multiA multi--stage effort tostage effort tosample sample and and instrument instrument thethel t b d f ltl t b d f ltplate boundary fault zone plate boundary fault zone acrossacross

the upthe up--dip end of locking and rupturedip end of locking and rupture

NanTroSEIZE Drilling TransectNanTroSEIZE Drilling Transect

2007 – 2014: 10 expeditions More than 195 scientists from 15 countries 13 main sites 13 main sites

Max depth 3058 meters bsf – target 5200 m bsf Most extensive LWD program and downhole stress pressure Most extensive LWD program and downhole stress, pressure Most advanced seafloor borehole monitoring system achieved,

now streaming data in real-time to land g More than 100 papers published and counting…

Age of formation and of accretionAge of formation and of accretion

Incoming plateOuter wedgeInner wedge g

Basement18 – 20 Ma

g

Depositional age:0 – 2 Ma (cover)

g

0 – 2 Ma (forearc basin cover)2.5 – 3.6 Ma (basin/wedge 18 20 Ma

Sediments0 -15 Ma

0 2 Ma (cover)2 ~ 6 Ma (accreted)Max age not known

2.5 3.6 Ma (basin/wedge boundary)5 Ma – 7 Ma upper wedge)

0 -15 MaMax age not known, but decollement position is in 5 – 7 Ma seds

At 2500 – 3000 m depth:~ 10 Ma (preliminary sed age)

Plio-Pleistocene to

Ma seds

Deformation age: Plio-Pleistocene to

Wedge deformation is late MioceneWedge deformation is late Miocene

Reconstruction of splay fault history

Strasser et al., 2009

~2 million years of fault activity ~2 million years of fault activity

Activity of splay fault varies through time

What controls rupture area?

Hyodo & Hori, 2013

Who is the principal criminal?Who is the principal criminal?worst criminal → ʻevolved upper plateʼother criminals → subducting plate?other criminals → subducting plate?→ plate interface=plate boundary fault with water?

Shallow fault zones: frontal thrust and upShallow fault zones: frontal thrust and up--dip end of dip end of l f lt tl f lt tmegamega--splay fault systemsplay fault system

Documented history of shallow localized, likely Documented history of shallow localized, likely y , yy , yseismic slip to the trench (like Tohoku?)seismic slip to the trench (like Tohoku?)

Frontal Thrust Site C0007Splay OOST fault Site p yC0004

Strongly localized into thin microbreccia/fault gouge band

d d b dsurrounded by damage zone

Wallrock is weak muddy sediment, yet heavily fractured

No porewater chemical evidence pfor substantial fault-controlled fluid flow

Ujiie & Kimura, 2014

Vitrinite Reflectance (thermal) anomaly associated with mm‐thick fault zonesSuggests high velocity or seismic slip

iocene

Pl

Pliocene

DarkLayer

Dark Layer

Pl iPleistocene

nePleistocen

P

Sakaguchi et al., Geology, 2011Sakaguchi et al., Geology,2011

XRF scanner mapping of C0004 (splay fault)C0004 (splay fault) microbreccia fault zone

- Fault zone enriched in Al, K, Fe, depleted in Ca, Sr, p ,

- Increased illitization relative to surrounding host rocksurrounding host rock

Represents additional evidence of possible frictional heating andpossible frictional heating and mechano-chemical clay mineral alteration even in shallow (~ 400

) fm) fault.

Co-seismic slip Co seismic slip

Y hi t l G l 2011Yamaguchi et al., Geology, 2011

Shallow Shallow Fault Slip Fault Slip –– ResultsResults fromfrom IODP IODP NanTroSEIZENanTroSEIZE

Lab lowLab low--velocity velocity friction studies on friction studies on friction studies on friction studies on IODP samples IODP samples confirm shallow faults confirm shallow faults are velocity are velocity strengthening…strengthening…

…BUT…BUTIkari et al., 2009

Tsutsumi et al., 2011

Dynamic rupture may Dynamic rupture may cause rapid cause rapid weakeningweakeningweakeningweakening

And new mechanics And new mechanics discussed for discussed for facilitating slow slip facilitating slow slip earthquakesearthquakesearthquakesearthquakes

Ikari et al., 2013

Present state of stress across NanTroSEIZE transect

breakoutsbreakouts

Lin et al., 2011, GRL

(Sibson, 1992; Fault-Valve model)

Borehole observation

C0002

timeSHmax

Still normal fault regime?When are we now?

g

Ab l fl id ti l th l t b dAbnormal fluid pressure ratio along the plate boundary(Tsuji et al., 2014 EPSL)

VLF earthquakes and up-dip VLF earthquakes and up-dip ea qua es a d up d ptremor coincide with

NanTroSEIZE transect

ea qua es a d up d ptremor coincide with

NanTroSEIZE transect

low-angle thrust mechanismslow-angle thrust mechanismsg

in prism or on plate boundary

g

in prism or on plate boundary

Sugioka et al., 2011g ,

CORKs and longCORKs and long--term monitoring systemsterm monitoring systemsDONET seafloor network

Wiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoringWiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoringWiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoring Wiring the Megathrust: a 3D monitoring observatoryobservatory•• Borehole CORKs part of larger DONET networkBorehole CORKs part of larger DONET network•• Borehole CORKs part of larger DONET networkBorehole CORKs part of larger DONET network•• Seismic, strain, tilt, pore pressure, temperatureSeismic, strain, tilt, pore pressure, temperature

Long‐Term monitoring of downhole properties  (Zhang & Saffer, AGU, 2013)

What remains: UltraWhat remains: Ultra--deep riser drilling across the deep riser drilling across the l t b d f ltl t b d f ltplate boundary fault zoneplate boundary fault zone

•• Main deep “megaMain deep “mega splay” / main thrust reflectorsplay” / main thrust reflector•• Main deep megaMain deep mega--splay / main thrust reflectorsplay / main thrust reflector

Key ResultsKey Resultsyy Frontal thrust and splay fault systems show Frontal thrust and splay fault systems show p y y

evidence of very strong slip localization and rapid slip even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea

p y yevidence of very strong slip localization and rapid slip even at shallow position (< 1 km below seaslip, even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea floor) like Tohoku??slip, even at shallow position (< 1 km below sea floor) like Tohoku??

Shallow faults are in stable sliding (non-i i ) i i ti l l b

Shallow faults are in stable sliding (non-i i ) i i ti l l bseismogenic) regime in conventional lab

experiments, but high-velocity behavior likely weakseismogenic) regime in conventional lab experiments, but high-velocity behavior likely weakand velocity weakening. and velocity weakening.

No evidence so far for fault hosted anomalous fluid chemistry.

No evidence so far for fault hosted anomalous fluid chemistry.y

Principal stress axis orientations are controlled by

y

Principal stress axis orientations are controlled by

Riser Hole Riser Hole C0002 planC0002 plan

Expedition 348:- drilled, logged, and

cased hole to 3000cased hole to ~3000 meters bsf

- Cored 63 meters

Planned for future (2016?)Planned for future (2016?) expedition: - drill, log, and case , g,

across megasplay fault reflector at ~5000 meters bsfmeters bsf

- Core ~ 400 meters

- Prepare hole for future deep observatory

15 Chik B d t O i d15． Chikyu Budgetary Overview and Outline of Operation ScheduleOutline of Operation Schedule 

for JFY2014 – 2016

Planning and Coordination Dept. Shinya GotoShinya Goto

● JPFY2014～2015 will be the most difficult years because  :

15‐1. Background of Chikyu Operation

Regulatory shipyard maintenance and BOP special survey is planed in 

USD300m

USD350m(*)USDJPY@120

mid. 2015 which will cost more than USD40m+.

As the new “5 years mid termUSD250m

USD300m

As the new  5 years mid term business Plan” period has just started from JPFY2014, JAMSTEC do not have any carry forward fund from Gov. Fund Gov Fund Gov FundUSD150

USD200m

Continuous budget cut by 

not have any carry forward fund from previous period. USD279m

(¥335b)

Gov. Fund

USD272m(¥326b)

Gov. Fund

USD264m(¥316b)

Gov. Fund

USD256m(¥307b)

Gov. Fund

USD248m(¥297b)USD100m

USD150m

Japanese Government.

USD0

USD50m

In addition 

● d d b ( )

(JAMSTEC Budget Forecast)Government funding for operating expenses 

USD0mJPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016 JPFY2017 JPFY2018

● Japanese Yen depreciated by 20(%) .

● Crude Oil Market collapsed! 

(excl. mission specific fund and supplementary budget)  

120WTI(USD/bbl)

15‐2. Market conditions surrounding Chikyu Operation(USDJPY)

100

110120

80

90 115

60

70110

50

60105

40

JPY depreciated by 20(%) against USD.Crude Oil Market collapsed.

100

p Our main source of fund (Gov. Fund) is 

denominated in JPY, however major part of our expenditures, such as R&M,

Less opportunity for commercial work. Fuel is much cheaper.  

of our expenditures, such as R&M, equipment and Expats(Crew), are in USD. Day rate will be much lower.  

Pros and Cons, however, overall impact on Chikyu Operation is negative 

JPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016

1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q

15‐3. CHIKYU Operation Plan for JPFY 2014～2016 (*)USDJPY@120

1QApr – Jun2014

2QJuly – Sep2014

3QOct – Dec2014

4QJan – Mar2015

1QApr – Jun 2015

2QJuly – Sep2015

3QOct – Dec2015

4QJan – Mar2016

1QApr – Jun 2016

2QJuly – Sep2016

3QOct – Dec2016

4QJan – Mar2017

2014 2015 2016

①① DOR ‐5 DOR

② Non IODP Exp

③ Standby Standby

3rd CIB

③ Standby Standby

④ DOR ‐6 DOR India NGHP‐02 

⑤ 5 year Inspection Dry Dock⑤ 5 year Inspection y

⑥ Non IODP

⑦ IODP Riser less IODP

⑧ Non IODP

⑨ IODP Riser less Subject to fund availability IODP

(Utilization as of 31st Mar, 2015)

IODP Drilling 0 (%) 2 (%)  ⑦ 8 (%)  ⑦

Non‐IODP Drilling  32 (%) ①+②+④ 50 (%) ④+⑥ ‐

(Total) 32 (%) 52 (%) ‐

15‐4. CHIKYU Funding Structure for JPFY 2014 (Source of Fund)

(1) Gov. Fund （Budget for JPFY 2014)(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees 

‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)

（Budget for JPFY 2014)

USD59m ( )‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)

‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m～)(4)  DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation

(USD71m @ USDJPY100)

(Budget Amount)

DOR Non IODP DOR

( g )

Paid(2) 

Paid

Variable cost(Drilling Cost)

by

Oil Company

Mission SpecificFund

by

Oil Company

(1) Gov. Fund 

USD40m Base Cost

(4) DOR

USD8m(4) DOR

USD11m CF

(3) Chikyu Member Fees 

Apr             May             Jun             July             Aug             Sep              Oct              Nov     Dec            Jan /2015    Feb/2015   Mar/2015(*)USDJPY@120

15‐5. CHIKYU Funding Structure for JPFY 2015 (Source of Fund)

(1) Gov. Fund （Budget for JPFY 2015)(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees 

‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)

（Budget for JPFY 2015)

USD99m( )‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)

‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m～)(4)  DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation

(USD119m @ USDJPY100)

(Budget Amount)

DOR Non IODP IODP5 year Inspection

(incl. Dry Dock)

( g )

bl

Paid(2)  or (4) (3)

+(1)

(1) Gov. Fund

Variable cost(Drilling Cost) by

Oil CompanyNon‐IODP

( )

USD3m 

5 year Inspection + BOP Special Survey

USD33m +

(1) Gov. Fund 

USD40m Base Cost

(4) DOR

USD23m

(3) Chikyu Member Fees 

Apr             May             Jun             July             Aug             Sep              Oct              Nov     Dec            Jan /2016    Feb/2016   Mar/2016(*)USDJPY@120

JPFY2014 JPFY2015 JPFY2016 JPFY2017 JPFY2018

(Back up) 15‐6.  CHIKYU Long Term Operation Plan

1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

① DOR ‐5

②

3rd CIB

② Non IODP

③ Standby Standby

④ DOR ‐6 IndiaNGHP‐02

⑤ 5 year Inspection DryDock

⑥ Non IODP

⑦ IODP Riser less RiserL⑦ IODP Riser less Less

⑧ Non IODP Non ‐ IODP

⑨ IODP Riser less RiserLess

⑩ Non IODP Non IODP⑩ Non IODP Non ‐ IODP

⑪ IODP Riser Riser

⑫ Non‐IODP Non ‐ IODP

Chikyu Proposal Chikyu Project : Nantro SEIZE C2 (Riser)/ C10,C6 (Riser less)CRISP (Riser)IBM(Riser)

N P l 865 F ll N k i T h T Li it (Ri l )New Proposal : 865‐Full Nankai Trough T Limit (Riser less)871‐Pre Lord Howe Rise (Riser)876‐Pre Bend‐Fault Serpentinization (Riser)

(Back up) CHIKYU Funding Structure(Source of Fund)

(1) Gov. Fund(2) Gov. Fund (Mission Specific)(3) Chikyu member Fees 

‐ Regular Member Fee (USD1m)Partnership Fee(USD300k)‐ Partnership Fee(USD300k)

‐ Project Member Fee(USD10m～)(4)  DOR(Commercial Drilling)(5) Donation

(Budget Amount)

IODP Expedition Non‐IODP Operation（including Commercial Drilling)

(3) Chikyu Regular Member Fee(5) Chikyu Project Member Fee      

( g )

(1) G F d (2) Gov. Fund (Mission  Specific)     

Drilling Cost(variable cost)

(1) Gov. Fund(Subject to Fund Availability)

USD50m ~

(1) Gov. Fund                                                                                       (6) DOR (Commercial Drilling)Rig Cost(Base Cost)

Contribution

(Total Rig Cost)  USD70m~(4) Chikyu Partnership member Fee

Chik I l t ti P liChikyu Implementation Policy

• For the best Science, JAMSTEC shall take a ibilit f ti Chik b lresponsibility for operating Chikyu by close 

collaboration with the international scientific community of IODP.h k ’ h h d ll• Chikyu’s highest priority upon riser drilling. 

Riser‐less drilling also important to accomplish g p pIODP objectives, which can only be achieved b tili i Chik bilitiby utilizing Chikyu capabilities.

Chik B i PlChikyu Business Plan

• Chikyu will operate 5 months for scientific drilling, 5 months for other non‐scientific drilling, and 25 months for other non scientific drilling, and 2 months for maintenance per annum as a general business plan. This business plan could be p pchanged due to unforeseeable budgetary situation.

• Rather large scientific project implementation requires additional funds.requires additional funds.

• Soliciting Chikyu project members and project donations are essential to implement largedonations are essential to implement large projects.

Chikyu Implementation PolicyChikyu Implementation Policy• Maximize science output and outcome

– Increase IODP Operation Windows (not limited to riser drilling)riser drilling)

– Flexible adaptation of other source of fundingi JFAST• ie. JFAST

– Co‐develop CPP‐like project• ie. Shimokita‐Hachinohe

– Build Robust Funding Structureg• Non‐IODP (commercial) operation is not always available• International project promotion neededInternational project promotion needed

Chikyu IODP Long‐term Planningy g g(presented in the last CIB meeting, July 2014)

JPFY Planned Implementation items

2014 NanTroSEIZE C10 observatory (1 month)

2015 NanTroSEIZE C6 observatory(1 month), 5 year Inspection in dock(4 months)NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser 

2016 NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser(5 months)

2017 NanTroSEIZE C2 Riser(5 months)

2018 Post NanTroSEIZE?

*The above long term schedule will be forced to change depending on whether thereThe above long term schedule will be forced to change depending on whether there will be commercial works for each fiscal year. 

Reasons WHY?1) Total budget sealing for JAMSTEC and serious budget cut in JAMSTEC2) No carry forward from previous FY because of the boundary of 5‐years Implementation Plan3) Unpredicted Riser and BOP repair and maintenance cost3) Unpredicted Riser and BOP repair and maintenance cost4) Significant delay of non‐IODP operation schedule5) Un‐predictable matters, ie. exchange rate, oil price, procurement and service cost, etc.

A il M J J l A t S t b O t b N b D b J F b M h

10 year Actual Performance of Chikyu Operation

April May June July August September October November December January February March

2005 Shakedown Cruise 1

2006 ll h k d2006(AF 98%)

R&M Shimokita Shakedown Cruise 2 Overseas Drilling Shakedown@Kenya

2007(AF 79%)

DOR@Australia AnnualSurvey

IODP Exp.314/315/316NanTro SEIZE

AnnualSurvey(AF 79%) Survey NanTro SEIZE Survey

2008(AF 0%)

Production of Azimuth Thruster GearOutreach Activity Construction of Azimuth Thruster Gear Shakedown

Cruise

2009(AF 42%)

IODP Exp319/322NanTro SEIZE

ShakedownCruise

MaintenanceOperation Training

2010 IODP E 326 IODP E 331 IODP E 332 DOR Tohoku2010(AF 48%)

Regular Inspection Shakedown Cruise

IODP Exp.326NanTro SEIZE C2

IODP Exp.331Deep Hot Biosphere

IODP Exp.332NamTro SEIZE

DOR@Japan

Tohoku Earthquake

2011 Construction of repairing ship’s bottom DOR@Sri Lanka DOR@Japan(AF 53%)

Construction of repairing ship s bottom DOR@Sri Lanka DOR@Japan

2012(AF 89%)

IODP Exp.343(JFAST）

R&MExp343JFAST2

IODP Exp.337Shimokita

IODP Exp.338NanTro SEIZE C2 DOR@Japan

2013(AF 82%)

DOR@Japan DOR@JapanIODP Exp.348

NanTro SEIZE C2 Maintenance

2014(AF 22%)

DOR@Japan SIPOkinawa

Maintenance DOR@India

Science Theme Categorizationg@ Chikyu+10 WS

Science Theme Flagship (Large) Project Discovery (Small) Project Other Opportunities

Dynamic Fault Behavior NanTroSEIZECRISP

Japan TrenchKAP

Faulting in Oceanic CrustMonitoringCRISP

Hikurangi MarginKAP Monitoring

Nicoya Peninsula

Ocean Crust & Earth’s Mantle M2MLife Cycle of the Oceanic Lithosphere

Atlantis BankOntong Java PlateauIBMGodzilla Megamullion

Deep Life & Hydrothermal System (Habitable Zone Drilling) 4500 m hole off HachinoheShikoku Basin (High Temp.)Décollement Hydrology (JFAST)Mud Volcano in the Kumano BasinMud Volcano in the Kumano BasinBrothers Volcano (Kermadec Arc)Eastern Manus BasinSerpentinization System

Continent Formation IBM Aleutian

Sediment Secrets Mediterranean Salinity Crisis (DREAM)

Lord Howe RiseChallenger PlateauPegasus BasinSouth China Sea

Pacific GuyotsDeep PacificSomali BasinEastern MediterraneanSouth China Sea

Santos BasinBering Sea

Eastern MediterraneanSanta Barbara BasinWest Caroline BasinBohai BasinDronning Maud Land

Chikyu IODP Long‐term Planningy g g4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

JFY2014

non‐IODPCommercial

R&M R&Mnon‐IODPScience2014

2015

Commercial

R&M (@Doc BOP Riser)

Science

non‐IODP non‐IODP2015

2016

R&M (@Doc, BOP, Riser)

IODP

non IODPCommercial Science

2016 IODPC10 IODP Riserless

2017IODP C2?

2018

E t l F di SExternal Funding Sources

• Project‐base approach …may much acceptable for f d ( i d i i f d i ?)funders (governments, industries, science foundations?)

ie.

– Mantle DrillingMediterranean Sea Drilling– Mediterranean Sea Drilling

– Lord Howe Rise Drilling

• In‐kind ContributionsC i i d l (D W Ri– Co‐engineering development (Deep Water Riser, High‐Temp. Tools, Mud, Bit, DP, etc)

17. Mantle Drilling Working Group

Shin’ichi KuramotoShin ichi Kuramoto

CIB Consensus 0714 05CIB Consensus 0714‐05To support existing proposals for full crustal penetration to the mantle, pp g p p p ,the CIB recommends the formation of a Working Group, which focuses on: • compile and assess existing engineering studies• compile and assess existing engineering studies • specify technological development needed for a drill hole to the

mantle depending on different scenarios in discussion by the scientific community

• assess feasibility of technological developments • assess potential risks• assess potential risks • assess financial implications The group will consist of xx proponents, xx CDEX representative and g p p p , pxx members of TAT. Travel costs are covered by CDEX. The Working Group will meet for the first time in 2014 and report to CIB in the next CIB meetingin the next CIB meeting.

DRAFT Terms of ReferenceDRAFT Terms of Reference(see the Agenda Book)

1. Compile and assess existing engineering studies. p g g gThe group shall review the “Mohole Initial Feasibility Study Report” (Blade Energy, 2011), and identify expected engineering difficulties and challenges. 

2. Specify technological development needed for a drill hole to the mantle depending on different scenarios in discussion by the scientific community. The group shall define necessary engineering developments as project wide and proposed site‐specific. Advantages and disadvantages of each proposed site location shall be discussed and will also consider balance between each site, in terms of science and engineering development. 

3. Assess feasibility of technological developments. Based on the above two assessments, the group shall discuss a time‐ line of necessary technological development. The group also seeks for existing technologies in industry that may fulfill technological requirements of this mission. A t l f ibilit t ld t k l i l t tActual feasibility assessment could take place in a later stage. 

4. Assess potential risks. The group shall assess potential risks: not only operational, but also scientific, risks, e g what can be achieved if the full penetration of the crust does not take placee.g., what can be achieved if the full penetration of the crust does not take place. 

5. Assess financial implications. 

BEAM activities in IODP(~2013)BEAM activities in IODP( 2013)B h l i t E th’ M tl (BEAM) j t h d i tifi• Borehole into Earth’s Mantle (BEAM) project had scientific workshops, a high‐level roundtable discussion, engineering studies by a 3rd party company and reported.

• BEAM roundtable (leaded by D. James Baker, The William J. Clinton Foundation) recommended the following points, Founding Public Awareness Community RelationsFounding, Public Awareness, Community Relations (Science/Political), Technology/Engineering Development, Appropriate Program Structure, Science Planning, Risk: Black Swans/Perfect Storms And possible meetings wereBlack Swans/Perfect Storms. And possible meetings were 1) A workshop to better define the program2) A workshop to have professionals listen to the scientists2) A workshop to have professionals listen to the scientistsand translate the science goals into exiting language3) A funding meeting

Step into the next level of Project Approach• Science

– Needs M2M proposal update

Step into the next level of Project Approach

Needs M2M proposal update• Conduct actual site surveys in the 3 potential areas. • JAMSTEC and Univ. Hawaii are preparing a site survey off Hawaii.• More interdisciplinary research collaboration must be neededMore interdisciplinary research collaboration must be needed.

• Engineering Development– Deep water, deep penetration and high temperature 

t l / t i l d dtools/materials needed.• Can we share the horizons with industries? New resources must be involved.S ll i t h b l d d t k i JAMSTEC• Small experiments have been already undertaken in JAMSTEC.

• Funding– Approach governments, inter‐government organizations, private pp g , g g , p

founders.• The project must be designated.

• Outreach/PROutreach/PR– Must be supported by tax payers.

• Shows how exiting program it is.

JAMSTEC’s Current Eng ApproachJAMSTEC s Current Eng. Approach• Deep Water Operation 

T h l

CFRP Riser

12 000

Technology– Deep Water Riser System 

(4000m class)• Deep Penetration Technology

Turbine Motor

12,000 DP– Long‐Life Drill Bit

– Turbine Motor Drilling System– High Temperature (~300℃) 

Tools

Core B.

• Logging• Coring• Drilling Fluid

– Tough Drill Pipe (12,000 m l )

Long-life DB

class)

Small scale CFRP riser pipe test DP test Turbine Motor

Discussion(just a personal idea)

• ScienceK i i l

*simultaneously approach

– Keeping eyes on site survey results.– Encourage WS to involve variety of scientists.

• Engineering Development– Continue TAT’s advices/discussion– Increase TAT member for deep drilling technology

• Funding– Appropriate cost estimation and management planmust be drafted by JAMSTEC first and reviewed by the CIB.

• Outreach/PR– Once above issues reached visible stage, small WS should be held by experienced people.

Usage of Membership FeeUsage of Membership Fee

• Membership Fee is secured in separate account of JAMSTEC– Carry over to next FY if not used within the mid‐term project periodterm project period

– Use scientific operation (like a SOC in previous IODP scheme)IODP scheme)

– Use platform operation

Agenda 18

Nagoya Protocol g yon ABSits effect to IODP

Convention on Biological Diversity: http://www.cbd.int/abs/

Access and benefit-sharingIntroduction on access and benefit-sharingWhere the Nagoya protocol be applied? ‐> EEZ

United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea (UNCLOS)PART V. EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE 

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:

United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has: (a)Sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the 

natural resources, whether living or non‐living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic , gexploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the ….

(b)Jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention with regard to:(ii) marine scientific research;

“The Nagoya Protocol” is applied in combination with “UNCLOS”,i d illi EEZ h i i l i fli.e. drilling at EEZ has critical influence.

Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resources

Prior Informed Consent (PIC)Prior Informed Consent (PIC)

User of GR(& associated TK):

i d t

Provider of GR Provider of GR (& associated TK): Exp. 353; JR is drilling at Indian EEZ, no requested microbiology e.g. industry,

research institutes, universities

e.g. National Competent Authority

p ; g , q gysample are not taken from EEZ because of this issue

Mutually Agreed Terms Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) between provider and user

• Non-commercial or commercial utilization of GR (& associated TK): e.g. basic research, research and development development of new pharmaceuticals development, development of new pharmaceuticals,

biotechnological products

• Benefit-Sharing (monetary & non-monetary): e.g. e e t S a g ( o eta y & o o eta y) e groyalties, technology transfer, training

Convention on Biological Diversity: http://www.cbd.int/abs/

Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resourcesMessage to CIB

• Recognition of this critical issue is great first step• Recognition of this critical issue is great first step forward

• Policy for responsibility (who should take action for• Policy for responsibility (who should take action for getting permission?) has not been established yet

• All biosphere-related objectives in proposal are affectedAll biosphere related objectives in proposal are affected• The permission often to be “PRIOR”, thus proper and

advance-enough notification to the proponents are g p pnecessary

• Not only for the objectives, but microbiologist may apply for sail to non-biosphere-oriented cruise, information dissemination to the potential applicant is of critical importanceimportance

Access and benefit-sharingUses of genetic resourcesIn reality…

• It often take more than half a year to get through proper process for permission -> for onboard scientists, it would b t l t t l ft tti i it tibe too late to apply after getting invitation

• The application scheme is complicated and differ for countries > support by IODP policy as well as operationcountries -> support by IODP policy as well as operation side will be critically required

• Nagoya protocol has not yet been common for evenNagoya protocol has not yet been common for even microbiologists, notification to proponents of IODP proposal is requiredp p q

General information can be found at here

http://www.cbd.int/abs/

Information on national focal points il blare available

https://absch.cbd.int/find?commonFormat=focalPoint

Kochi Core center (KCC)Kochi Core center (KCC)Established in 2005

Seeking for the Frontier Sciences & Services on core samplesSeeking for the Frontier Sciences & Services on core samples

KCC

KCC’s Role & ResponsibilityKCC s Role & Responsibility

A b f CIB t KCC d t f ll i t kAs a member of CIB, we at KCC conduct following tasks: 

• Curation of samples according to the geographical model– Legacy & IODP cores – Cores, cuttings and DeepBIOS

• Chikyu Mirror siteChikyu Mirror site– Complement sampling & measurements pending from Chikyu expeditions

• Encourage intensive use of core and related informationC i t Vi t l C Vi d S l il bilit– Core inventory, Virtual Core Viewer, and Sample availability

• Curation‐specific researches– Monitoring core quality for long‐term effects of storage temperature

• Facilitate access to analytical facility of KCC for IODP core study

• Contribute in Pre‐cruise training Sakura Science School & J‐DESC coreContribute in Pre cruise training, Sakura Science School & J DESC core school

C ti t kCuration tasks

Core storage management

Sample request evaluation

Sampling plan

Organize sampling party Organize sampling party

Sample data managementp g

Education & Outreach

Curation of core material (JPFY2013)

IODP Expedition  IODP core curation Including Legacy core curation

DSDP22%

IODP17%

New IODP1% ca. 102 km of core

22%17%

ODP60% IODP‐related curation budget 

$

d

~$500k/year

Non‐IODP Expedition  JAMSTEC core curationincluding Chikyu shakedown cruises 

Curation of core material (as of Jan 2015)

IODP Expedition  IODP core curation (includes Legacy cores)

ca. 105 km of coreDSDP21%

IODP16%

New IODP5%

21%16%

ODP58%

d Non‐IODP Expedition  JAMSTEC core curationincluding Chikyu shakedown cruises 

IODP core curationIODP core curation

• IODP Sample, Data & Obligations Policy

• Geographic model of core distributionGeographic model of core distribution

• Curation of cores, cuttings & DeepBIOS

C ll b i h 2 h IODP i i• Collaborate with 2 other IODP core repositories: BCR and GCR

• Facilitate access to analytical facility of KCC by IODP researchers from abroad

• Pre‐cruise training, Sakura Science School, and J‐DESC core school

IODP Sample Data & Obligation PolicyImplementation plan

• KCC accepted and implemented the new IODP policy d b th 3 FBapproved by the 3 FBs

• Curatorial Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) madeCuratorial Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) made available through the KCC website

http://www.kochi‐core.jp/en/iodp‐curation/curation‐sop.htmlhttp://www.kochi core.jp/en/iodp curation/curation sop.html

Gulf Coast RepositoryBremen Core Repository Kochi Core Center

ASIA

KCC

Geographic model: 3 oceanic regions, 3 IODP core repositories

IODP & Legacy (ODP/DSDP) coresIODP & Legacy (ODP/DSDP) cores

Repository Institution Amount of coreRepository Institution Amount of core

University ofBCR

University of Bremen

154 km

GCRTexas A&M University

128 km

KCCJAMSTEC & Kochi University

105 km

NJ Geological Survey

Rutgers University0.62 km

ODP Leg 150X

Curation of core material

1 5 m long core sections (AH & WH) 10 cm long whole rounds

Cuttingsat +4˚C, ~80% humidity1242 nos1.5 m long core sections (AH & WH)

at +4˚C, ~80% humidityca. 105 km

10 cm long whole rounds (DeepBIOS) at ‐80˚C296 nos.

1242 nos.

Shipboard sample residues and unused samples returned by sample requestersp p p y p qStored in +4˚C reefer and air‐conditioned container

Sample Request decision makingSample Request decision making

Expedition SpecificExpedition Specific~ 6 months pre-expedition

to 12 months post expedition

Post-moratorium> 12 months post expedition

Advice, AppealAdvice, Appeal, Permanent Archiverequests and long

CAB

IODP Curator

requests and long term loans

Ad i Ti b k A l

Onboard SAC

IODP CuratorAdvice, Tie-breaker, AppealAppeal

Feasibility of proposed researchConflict with other sample requests

InvestigatorConflict with other sample requestsSample volume / frequency

SAC : Sample Allocation Committee

CAB : Curatorial Advisory Board

Sample requestsSample requestsLegacy core IODP core L IODP Chik E

100

120

Legacy core IODP core

250

300

Legacy core IODP core Chikyu Exp.

60

80

150

200

20

40

50

100

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

T t l 1532Total 812

US FY US FY

(as of Jan. 2015)

Total 1532

Samples shipped

Legacy IODP

Samples shipped

15000

Legacy  IODP

61478 34782 Large number due to 

sampling party: 

9000

12000Exp. 323 & 346

6000

9000

3000

02007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

US FY

(as of Jan. 2015)Total 144,471

VisitorsVisitors

J Ab d L IODP

100

Japan Abroad

100

Legacy IODP

50

75

50

75

25

50

25

50

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

US FY

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

US FY

T t l 315

US FY US FY

(as of Jan. 2015)

Total 315

Core Summary

Keyword based search, overview and links to reports of all cores being curated in the KCC (http://www.kochi-core.jp/cs/)curated in the KCC (http://www.kochi core.jp/cs/)

WH sample availability

Check the amount of core material available in Working Half (WH)

http://www kochi core jp/sample availability/http://www.kochi-core.jp/sample-availability/

Virtual Core Viewer

3D rendering of XCT images of cores on PC, tablet & smart-phoneColoring based on CT valuesSlice 3D image vertically Sh i th h SNS i (T itt F b k t )Share image through SNS services (Twitter, Facebook etc.)Annotation/marking possible, similar to Google map

Analytical facility for IODP researchersAnalytical facility for IODP researchers 

• Opened for IODP community outside Japan since June 2012

• Logging equipment : XCT scannerLogging equipment : XCT scanner

• MSCL-S, -color, -NGR

• XRF core scanner

• Core Image Scanner

Some showed interest in utilizing it; some have actually utilized it.

Core Logging Instruments (non‐destructive measurements for physical properties and elemental composition)physical properties and elemental composition) 

X‐ray CT Digital Color measurement

MSCL (Density, Mag‐Sus,  etc) XRF Core Scanner (elemental composition)

Education and TrainingEducation and Training

About IODP policy and shipboard measurements

P i t i i

About IODP policy and shipboard measurements

• Pre‐cruise training

IODP Expeditions: 346, 348, 353, 354, 355

• J‐DESC core schoolJ DESC core school

Once every year

• Sakura Science School

Once every year

Japan-Asia Youth Exchange Program in Science (SAKURA Exchange Program in Science 2014)

•Core Curation and Basic Analyses Course Program for Graduate Students and Post-Doc Researchers•Learn curatorial and analyses methods for scientific drilling core samples: A key to unravel the Earth’s past, present and future.

•10 visitors from China, Taiwan, S. Korea, Indonesia and Vietnam•Nov. 10 – Nov. 22, 2014•The school program included: p g

•Core sample curation method•Non-destructive measurements•core description including microscopic observation (e.g., smear slides)p g p ( g , )•Field Trip•Oral Presentation

21

New cores and sampling parties p g pin KCC in 2015

JOIDES Resolution 

IODP Exp. 353  (Indian Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in July 2015

IODP Exp. 354  (Bengal Fan) ‐‐‐‐ Some sampling onshore ?

IODP Exp. 355 (Arabian Sea Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in Oct. 2015 ?

IODP Exp. 356 (Indonesian Through Flow) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in 2016 ?

IODP Exp. 359 (Maldives Monsoon) ‐‐‐‐ Sampling party in 2016

Chikyu 

IODP Exp. 358 ?

Additional repository since October 2014

Core repository

K  C  CNew

repository

Core repository

New reefer

Oct. 2014 onwards :

Transferred new IODP cores from existing reefers gto the new reefer 

Cleared backlog of >50 sample requests 

Plan transfer of DSDP/ODP/IODP cores to new reefer

Curatorial budgetCuratorial budgetespecially for the Legacy and JR cores

Last US FY : Consortium for Ocean Leadership, USA

Current : multi year contract with the IODP/TAMU USACurrent : multi‐year contract with the IODP/TAMU, USA 

~ US$ 400k per year

See How we are related to each other.

KCCKochi UniversityCenter for Advenced Marine Core Research Building

JAMSTECKochi Inst. Core Sample Res.Core Research Building

LandOwner

p

Sci

Sci.Tech.

Gran

Grant

EquipmeMaintenance …

Equipments

Sci.Tech.

Contract.

JAMSTEC core

t Equipments

Joint UseCore

Repository

Univ. Core

Curation/Sampling/Measure

IODP Core

Joint Use p yIODP curator JAMSTEC curator

CDEXUniv. researchers NSF

Legacy CoreIODP res. Researchers

MEXT

CDEX

Joint Use

¥¥$$ core TaskFac. Org.

New Director: Dr. Ishikawa

KCCKochi UniversityCenter for Advenced Marine Core Research Building

JAMSTECKochi Inst. Core Sample Res.Core Research Building

LandOwner

p

Sci

Sci.Tech.

Gran

Grant

EquipmeMaintenance …

Equipments

Sci.Tech.

Contract.

JAMSTEC core

t Equipments

Joint UseCore

Repository

Univ. Core

Curation/Sampling/Measure

IODP Core

Joint Use p yIODP curator JAMSTEC curator

CDEXUniv. researchers NSF

Legacy CoreIODP res. Researchers

MEXT

CDEX

Joint Use

¥¥$$ core TaskFac. Org.

2015/3/31CHIKYU International Board meeting (CIB)

CDEX outreach activityJuly 2014〜March 2015

Tamano Omata

Contents

Update of CDEX outreach activityAGU fall meetingUN world conference on disaster risk reduction 2015 Sendai Japan2015, Sendai, JapanWebsite renewalMediaMedia

th iCHIKYU 10th anniversary Brief history and expedition in the decadeE t d iEvent under preparingAnniversary reportCollaboration with mediaCollaboration with mediaothers

Booth Exhibition at AGU Fall Meeting 2014 

Booth exhibition2050

Refining

2051

MicroSupp

2150 2151

Terraplus,

2350

USRA

2351

University

2352

EMERGENCY

PEDESTRIAN RAMP

FACILITY

STORAGE

KEEP CLEARSNACK BAR SEATING

KEEP CLEAR

WFPHONES

WOMEN

RESTROOMS

MEN

Booth map

odo

20'Google,

Inc.

1728

20'B

eta

Ana

lytic

Inc

1729

50'

40'

AGU Marketplace

1732

DOSECC

1734

Association

1736

Scripps

1738

Sequoia

1740

Geospace

1742

Geotech

1744

Mathworks

1745

GNSScien

1746

CAMECA

1747

Planetary

20'

'

Nature’sOwn

1839

20'

20'

Research InGermany

1844

JewellInstru

1845

KMSTechn

1846

Reserved

1847

Gasmet

20'

1929

20'

30'

Wiley

1937

20'Gur

alp

Syst

ems

1941

Renishaw

1943

National

1944

GWRInstru

1945

LittleRiver

1946

SERDP /

1947

RealWorld

20'

'

Kinemetrics,Inc.

2029

20'

20'

Picarro, Inc.

2035

Instrumenta

2036

HORIBA

2037

GeoSIG Ltd

2038

20'A

sia

Oc e

ania

2039

IOPPublis

2041

Science/AA

2042

Earth,Planet

2043

AAASScien

2044

Reserved

2045

Turner

2046

Resonon,

2047

Applied

'cros

oft

esea

rch

2129

20'

20'

Universityof Alaska -Fairbanks

2134

gempa

2135

20'

Aer

odyn

eRe

sear

ch,

2136

OSOP,S.A.

2138

OnThe

2139

Ecotech Pty

2140

MALAGeosc

2141

National

2142

College of

2144

RMYOUN

2146

Blueprint

'Kor

eatit

ute

of 20'

'

Nanometrics

2229

20'

20'

ThermoScientific

2234

20'

Nat

iona

lA

cade

mie

s

2235

20'Cla

rk

2238

National

2239

Photon

2240

American

2241

Seismologic

2243

Institut

2245

20'Oce

anN

etw

orks

'mer

ican

teor

olog

i

2329

20'

20'

Xylem, IncAanderaa /

Sontek / YSI/ Waterlog

2334

20'Jo

hns

Hop

kins

2335

50'

40'

NASA

2338

RieglUSA

2340

GEMAdvan

2342

ZongeIntern

2344

20'

Res

erve

d

2345

20'Oxf

ord

Uni

vers

ity

'NA

VCO

,In

c.

20'

'

IRISConsortium

2429

20'

20'

REF TEK (ADivision of

Trimble)Navigation

2444

National

2445

Dynamax,

2446

Columbia

2447

Spectral

'UA

HSI

2529

20'

20'

Reserved

2535

20'

Res

erve

d

2539

PPSyste

2541

Taylor&

2543

RodGriffin

2544

EssexIndust

2545

Savillex

2546

DianaMarch

2547

Reserved

'urop

ean

osci

ence

2625

ToolikField

2629

Pro-Seism

2631

Onset-

2634

Stevens

2635

ARCScien

2636 2637

Ocean

2638 2639

2640 2641

Reserved

2642

Elementar

2644

2646

University

2724

Sea-Bird

2728

Internationa

2729

2730

2734

NaturePublis

2735

27362737

27382739

27402741

Reserved

2743

2825

2827

Centerfor

2828 2829

2831

HALL C

STORAGE

STORAGE

FACILITY

To Posters

Refreshment

Refreshment Refreshment

Refreshment

POSTER

S

1704

40'

Sprin

ger

1705

20'

30'

LI-CORBiosciences

1712

Princeton 1713

20'

30'

DecagonDevices, Inc

1714

University of

1716

Isotopx Inc.

1718

2GEnterp

1720

30'

Kom

o

1721

30'

1805

20'

30'

IKON Mining&

Exploration

1813

20'

Else

vier

1817

20'

Cam

brid

geUn

iver

sity

1823

20

1905

20'

30'

Los GatosResearch

1912

20'

Huk

seflu

xUSA

, Inc

.

1913

20'Mic

ro-g

Scin

trex

1916

20'Gem

s &

Crys

tals

1917

MountSopris

1921

30'

2005

20'

20'

JapanGeoscience

Union

2011

20'Kip

p &

Zone

n U

SA

2012

20'

Cam

pbel

lSc

ient

ific,

2015

Apogee

2016

Sensors &

2017

InterMet

2019

Droplet

2023

20

2105

20'

20'

Environmental SystemsResearchInstitute,

2110

ASCScient

2111

30'

Res

erve

d

2112

SIAM-Societ

2114

Aventech

2116

Scintec

2118

MetOne

2119

20'

Del

tare

s

2123

20Mi

Re

2205

Robertson

2207

Geophysic

2210

20'

Geo

logi

cal

Soci

ety

2211

SEPMSociet

2213

TheGeolo

2214

Kongsberg

2215

ACSPublic

2217

National

2218

20'

Latit

ude

Engi

neer

in

2219

ESRPC &

2222

20

KIn

s

2223

20

2304

IrisInstru

2305

20'O

yoC

orpo

ratio

n

2306

Geometrics

2309

20'

Law

renc

eB

erke

ley

2310

20'

Soci

ety

ofEx

plor

atio

n

2313

USGIN2314

Reserved

2315

EarthCube

2316

ZoomDigital

2317

Elemental

2318

Copernicus

2319

Stockholm

2321

SpaceScien

2323

20Am

Met

2404

20'UC

AR

Com

mun

ity

2405

20'

20'

NationalScience

FoundationGeoscience

2408

20'NC

R-

Nat

iona

l

2411

30'

Cons

ortiu

m fo

rO

cean

Lea

ders

hip

2412

ECORD/IOD

2414

AURANatio

2416 2417

20'

UM

IAQ

2418

Radiocarbo

2420

EarthScope

2422

20UN

2423

20

2505

20'

Nat

iona

lEc

olog

ical

2509

Reserved

2510

20'

Res

erve

d

2511

LacCore/CS

2513

2514

KochiCore

2515

National

2516

20'

Ope

nTop

ogra

phy

/

2517

Intergrated

2519

NSFAntarc

2521

Critical Zone

2523

20CU

2604

SoilScien

2605

Reserved

2606

AIPPublis

2607

20'

Res

erve

d

2608

2610 2611

2612 2613

Reserved

2614 2615

Reserved

2616

Unionof

2617

Reserved

2618

20'Th

eEu

rope

an

2619

2621

Rigaku

2622

20Eu Geo

2623

TheArctic

2701

20'UM

S

2704

Agilent

2706

Reserved

2707

2708

2710

2712

Reserved

2713

2714 2715

Reserved

2716

Reserved

2717

2718 2719

2720

2722

European

2800

2801

2802

Reserved

2803

2805

Reserved

2806 2807

2809

2811

2812 2813

Reserved

2814

Reserved

2815

Reserved

2816

Reserved

2817

2818 2819

2821

2823

NSF Street

Refreshment

S

3100

University

3101

Purdue

3102

3103

Virginia Tech

3104

3105

3107

3109

3112 3114

3200

School of

3201

TexasA&M

3204

Reserved

3205

STANFORD

3206

32073208

32093210 3211

3212

3213

3214

3215

3216

3300

Earth-Life

3301

Reserved

3302

University

3303

TexasTech

3304

3305

3306

3307

3308

3309

3311

3313

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* * * * *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* LAST IN, FIRST OUT

BusinessCenter

SOUTH LOBBYTO UPPER

ENTRANCE

ACADEMIC SHOWCASE

ブース№  JAMSTEC ：2510（2ブース）  ⾼知コア：2514（1ブース）

Outreach meeting among IOsUpdate information of each IOs

JAMSTECECORD‐ICDPSchool of Rock at ECORDCHIKYU onboard opportunity(as E&O activity)

Outreach activity(July 2014‐March 2015) Ocean Leadership

(as E&O activity)

Town hall meeting at AGU 2014

Co‐organized by Ocean Leadership, CDEX, ECORD and ICDP Ab l h d d i i About several hundred participants Information about the Taira Prize

f b Face to face communication among community members

UN world conference on di t i k d ti 2015 S d i Jdisaster risk reduction 2015, Sendai, Japan

Booth exhibition( d d h ) Temporary exhibition(Sendai mediatheque) Temporary exhibition

At Tohoku Univ. museum 

Website renewal

Current structure New site structureCurrent structure New site structure

CHIKYU sitej t j / hikCHIKYU site

j t j / hik

STEC

 pSTEC

 p

www.jamstec.go.jp/chikyuwww.jamstec.go.jp/chikyu

CDEXCDEXCDEX site

www.jamstec.go.jp/chikyu

JAMS To

JAMS To www.jamstec.go.jp/cdexwww.jamstec.go.jp/cdex

IODPwww.jamstec.go.jp/iodp

IODPwww.jamstec.go.jp/iodp

Renewed Web DesignCHIKYU site CDEX site

Renewed homepage will be opened in April.

MediaTVTV

Australia ABC BS JapanTBS (Japan)

Book, newsletter and web

Book (Shincho‐sha) Web (US Santa Cruz) Book  Book 

List of outreach activityCategory Number

(international/domestic)

Detail

domestic)

Symposium (co‐organize) 0/1 Symposium for Integrated Ocean Drilling Program(with National Science Museum)

Symposium 0/1 Science session in Iwate: Mechanism of EarthquakeSymposium(with collaboration)

0/1 Science session in Iwate: Mechanism of Earthquake and Tsunami and Sea of Tohoku 4 years after 

Education(P ti l k/ Fi ld

0/4 Yokohama Science Frontier HS, Tagajo HS, Uto HS, JpGU educational session for students(Practical work/ Field 

excursion )

JpGU educational session for students

Booth exhibition  4/2 JpGU, AOGS, AGU, UN disaster meeting, Geological Society in Japan SSH in Aomori(International) Society in Japan, SSH in Aomori, 

Lecture 0/25 Meeting for school directors, Japanese society for non‐destructive inspection, etc.

Media interview 3/19 The Seattle Times, Australia ABC, NHK, TBS, Nihon TV, Yomiuri News, Sankei News, etc.

Photo and movie providing for di

7/56 Discovery Channel Canada、University CaliforniaSanta Cruz Schlumberger Advanced Magazinemedia Santa Cruz、Schlumberger、Advanced Magazine, University of Leicester, Keirinkan, Tokyo‐Shoseki, Mitsubishi Minatomirai Museum etc.

CHIKYU 10th anniversary E diti hi tExpedition history

CHIKYU history of the decade Launching

Derrick Installation Delivery

2002 2003

Open ship at Kobe Exp 331 OkinawaExp 314‐316  

2005

p p Exp 331 Okinawap 3 3 6NanTroSEIZE stage1

2008 20102007

CHIKYU +10CHIKYU +10

20112012Exp 343 JFAST 2012Exp 337 Hachinohe 2013

Plan for CHIKYU 10th anniversary 

CeremonyOpen ship at Yokohamap pWorkshops as local activitiesA i (i J )Anniversary report (in Japanese)Collaboration with media (National Geographic Japan)