DO33 As a data user I want to be able to differentiate between times for potential occurrence of licensed activities and actual licensed activities happening (or scheduled to happen) so that I can access real threshold calculations and avoid the creation of headroom from broad estimations of noisy activity

[LynnHeeley]

Licence duration for a noisy activity (e.g. UXO clearance) may be for a year in length. However actual works may only take 6 weeks (giving time for other noisy activities to take place).

[scsmendes]

Also, within a summer or winter season (6 months) it is possible that some activities at the start of the period might have already taken place and submitted to the MNR a close out. This updated close-out information would be more accurate for calculations of the seasonal threshold than the planned/proposed data and so should be available for planning and marked as such

[robanga-jncc]

If developers are aware of this feature, for the close out report - when this is submitted for the MNR to be immediately updated with real data.

Or perhaps add a "close-out condition" for updating the MNR as soon as possible with a more refined idea of when the activity is likely to occur. (this is outside the project, but be able to set up in the system for operators to be able to learly state "this activity is complete" or "activity is

Current MNR system doesn't allow closeout until ALL data is submitted. Whereas if the MNR had a function for a first step closeout where more accurate information on activity dates could be added without needing to fully closeout.

[robanga-jncc]

Lots of questions on the strategic and management of sites. So maybe needs more discussion on this overarching issue, but ultimately this concept is clearly important and this information is fairly essential to effective management of sites in future (especially north sea)