[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 208 (Friday, October 25, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55248-55252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-27486]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 166
[CGD 93-044]
Port Access Routes off the Coast of California
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of study results.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is publishing the results of a port access
route study which evaluated the need for vessel routing measures in the
approaches to California ports. The study concluded that the southern
approach lanes of the existing traffic separation scheme (TSS) off San
Francisco should be shifted seven miles seaward; the existing TSS in
the Santa Barbara Channel should be extended from Point Conception to
Point Arguello; and a precautionary area should be established at the
northwest end of the Santa Barbara Channel TSS. The remaining TSS
approach lanes, precautionary areas, areas to be avoided, and the
shipping safety fairways within the studied area should remain as
presently configured. No navigational need for additional offshore
routing measures was identified.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
CDR Chip Sharpe, Project Officer, Eleventh Coast Guard District at
(510) 437-2975 or Margie G. Hegy. Project Manager, Coast Guard
Headquarters at (202) 267-0415
[[Page 55249]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
The Study
The Coast Guard has concluded its port access route study to review
and analyze the vessel routing measures in the approaches to California
ports and within the offshore California national marine sanctuaries.
The study was announced in a notice published in the Federal Register
on August 24, 1993 (58 FR 44634).
The study consisted of two parts: (1) a port access route study to
evaluate the need for vessel routing measures; and (2) a joint study
with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
mandated by the National Marine Sanctuaries Program Amendments Act of
1992 (Pub. L. 102-587) (NMSPA Act of 1992) to determine what, if any,
vessel regulations are needed to protect resources in the Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary. This notice publishes only the results of
the port access route part of the study. The results of the second part
of the study will be contained in a report to Congress as required by
the NMSPA Act of 1992. The Coast Guard will announce the completion of
that report in a separate Federal Register notice.
A number of vessel routing measures, i.e., traffic separation
schemes (TSSs), precautionary areas (PA), areas to be avoided (ATBA),
and a shipping safety fairway (SSF), currently exist to mitigate
navigation safety problems for vessels entering or departing the
entrances to San Francisco Bay, Santa Barbara Channel, and the ports of
Los Angeles and Long Beach.
A traffic separation scheme is an internationally recognized
routing measure intended to minimize the risk of collision by
separating vessels into separate, opposing lanes of traffic. Vessel use
of a TSS is voluntary; however, vessels operating in or near an IMO
approved TSS are subject to Rule 10 of the International Regulations
for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS).
A precautionary area is a routing measure comprising an area within
defined limits where ships must navigate with particular caution.
Direction of traffic flow may be recommended with a precautionary area.
An area to be avoided is a voluntary routing measure comprising an
area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly
hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties. All
ships, or certain classes of ships, may be advised to avoid the area.
A shipping safety fairway is a lane or corridor in which no fixed
structures, either temporary or permanent, are permitted. Shipping
safety fairways are routing measures which provide safe port access
routes for vessels where the primary risk to vessels is collision with
offshore structures. Vessel use of shipping safety fairways is
voluntary and the direction of traffic flow within a shipping safety
fairway may be recommended.
Existing Routing Measures
The TSS off San Francisco consists of three approaches, a main ship
channel, and a precautionary area with a separation zone in the center.
The northern approach consists of north-westbound and south-eastbound
traffic lanes and a separation zone. The southern approach consists of
northbound and southbound traffic lanes and a separation zone. The
western approach, consists of south-westbound and north-eastbound
traffic lanes and a separation zone. The main ship channel consists of
eastbound and westbound traffic lanes, and a precautionary area with a
separation zone in the center.
The TSS in the Santa Barbara Channel consists of north-westbound
and south-eastbound traffic lanes and a separation zone. The south-
eastbound traffic lanes link the Santa Barbara Channel TSS to the
western approach of the Los Angeles/Long Beach TSS.
The Los Angeles/Long Beach TSS consists of western and southern
approaches and a precautionary area. The western approach consists of
northbound and southbound traffic lanes and a separation zone. The
southern approach consists of southbound and northbound traffic lanes
and a separation zone. The two approaches converge into a precautionary
area immediately offshore from the port complex.
A shipping safety fairway provides unobstructed vessel access to
Port Hueneme.
Study Data
The Coast Guard reviewed studies and data collected both in-house
and by other organizations on vessel traffic patterns and density.
Coast Guard sources included: The Coast Guard's ``Evaluation of Oil
Tanker Routing'' (Tanker Free Zone Study) report to Congress mandated
by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90); the draft report to Congress
on ``Regulating Vessel Traffic in the Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary'' prepared by the Coast Guard and the National Oceanic
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the Eleventh Coast Guard
District's collection of vessel position information during law
enforcement patrols (``Operation Crystal Ball'').
The Coast Guard's Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) in San Francisco
recorded the number of vessels transiting the three approaches to the
TSS when entering and leaving the ports in San Francisco Bay in 1994.
In addition to Coast Guard efforts, the Western States Petroleum
Association's (WSPA) 1992 report, ``Tanker and Barge Movements Along
the California Coast'' provided general information regarding vessel
transit routes. Crowley Marine Services, Inc. and Pacific Gas and
Electric Company also provided information on their vessel transits.
Vessel density data were obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' publications ``Waterborne Commerce of the United States,''
and ``Pacific Region Freight Traffic Tables'' for calendar years 1990-
1992. Lastly, the California Coastal Commission made several local area
reports available for review.
The Center for Marine Conservation's ``Safe Passage: Preventing Oil
Spills in Our Marine Sanctuaries'' and ``Unsafe Havens: The Threat to
California's Marine Sanctuaries From Vessel Traffic'' provided
environmental information and recommendations for vessel traffic
measures. CMC's recommendations were also addressed by the Council of
American Master Mariners, San Francisco Chapter (CAMMSF) and WSPA.
California's Office of Oil Spill Protection and Response (OSPR)
completed a statewide coastal protection review which focused on the
risk to California's coastline and the overall state of response
preparedness.
Public Comments
Over 400 written comments were received in response to the notice
of study. Of these comments, approximately one-third focused
exclusively on sanctuary issues not related to vessel routing. These
comments will be discussed in the report to Congress on ``Regulating
Vessel Traffic in Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary''.
Several comments addressed user fees, increased fines for
violations and spills, and increased regulation of vessels and vessel
traffic. These comments did not address the specific routing of vessels
between ports and are not discussed.
Public comments frequently recommended additional regulation of
vessels and the routing of tankers, or all vessels, from 10 to 60 miles
offshore. These comments expressed the belief
[[Page 55250]]
that keeping vessels further offshore would provide more time for
response in the event of an oil spill. These comments also suggested
that greater distances offshore naturally improved navigational safety.
However, the comments contained no specific recommendations for
increased navigational safety or spill prevention.
Vessel Regulation
There currently exists an extensive body of regulation governing
the operation of tankers and other commercial vessels. These
regulations include licensing of vessel operators and vessel crews,
equipment carriage and training requirements, vessel response plans,
and numerous operating requirements. The Coast Guard inspects vessels
to ensure compliance and has initiated a Port State Control Program to
target their inspection efforts on high risk vessels, often those under
foreign flag.
In addition, the Coast Guard's Prevention Through People (PTP)
program focuses on the human element, which has been found to be the
cause of 80 percent of vessel casualties. In PTP, industry and the
Coast Guard establish cooperative relationships to identify and
implement effective human element programs which address: (1)
management's commitment to safe operations; (2) external factors in the
work environment that influence worker's capabilities, judgment, and
effectiveness; (3) behavior influenced by factors such as stress,
attitude, knowledge, awareness, health and experience; and, (4) the
application of new technology with human capability and limitations in
mind.
The existing regulations are adequate, and no additional
regulations are needed at this time.
Offshore Routing
The coastwise transit between California ports is not
navigationally difficult or hazardous. The areas that do involve
significant navigational risk, the port approaches, have numerous
effective waterways management measures, i.e. VTS, TSS, pilotage, and
regulated navigation areas (RNA) in place. Simply defining an outer
limit or minimum offshore distance that vessels must transit, as was
often suggested by the comments, would increase collision risk by
reducing the water area available for transit and artificially
constricting the conventional coastwise traffic streams.
CMC Recommendations
Over fifty percent of the public comments supported the
recommendations made by the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) in its
``Safe Passage: Preventing Oil Spills in Our Marine Sanctuaries''
report. CMC's significant navigational recommendations include: (1)
establishing an ATBA along the northern and central California coast;
(2) reconfiguring the TSS in the approaches to San Francisco Bay to
contain only one set of lanes approaching the bay from the southwest
and extending seaward of the Farallon Islands; (3) making VTS San
Francisco mandatory; (4) extending VTS authority and area of
responsibility to include the entire area of the California national
marine sanctuaries; and, (5) requiring transponders and automated
dependent surveillance shipboard equipment (ADSSE) on all large
commercial vessels.
Through advocating resource protection, the CMC report does not
address the international, statutory, and economic ramifications of
their comments, or the impact on navigation safety. These are discussed
below.
(1) Coastal ATBA
An ATBA, encompassing the northern and central California coast, is
inappropriate because transit through these areas is necessary to
access ports between San Francisco and Port Hueneme. Such an ATBA
would, in effect, shut off access to major ports such as San Francisco.
It would also increase navigation risk by concentrating vessels along
the outer boundary of an ATBA because vessels would not be expected to
transit further off the coast than required by ATBA boundaries.
(2) Reducing traffic lanes in San Francisco TSS
Reconfiguring the San Francisco TSS from three approaches to one
approach would also increase risk of collision. Such a reconfiguration
would create a convergence zone approximately 50 miles offshore, in
open ocean, and beyond VTS and shore station radar range. The existing
scheme is within the coverage of VTS San Francisco, as well as the San
Francisco Bar Pilots. This system provides several layers of monitoring
and radar coverage, and forms a natural boundary before vessels make
the more difficult transit into the bay. In addition, vessel speeds are
controlled naturally in the precautionary area as vessels must slow to
embark or disembark their pilot.
Vessel density data obtained by VTS San Francisco shows a
relatively even distribution of vessel traffic between the three
approaches. Reducing these three approaches to one would cause a
convergence zone out of VTS and pilot coverage, increasing the risk of
collision in the offshore area, as well as in the TSS itself because
traffic from three approaches would be in one approach.
(3) Mandatory VTS Participation
The recommendation regarding mandatory participation in VTS San
Francisco is no longer relevant as this requirement has been in place
since 1994 (59 FR 36324).
(4) Expansion of VTS
The comments regarding expansion of VTS authority and area of
responsibility to include the entire areas of the California national
marine sanctuaries are not persuasive. VTS expansion into these open
ocean areas will not significantly increase navigational safety due to
lower traffic densities and the amount of sea room in which to
navigate, when compared with port approaches.
One suggested alternative to expanded VTS coverage was for
commercial vessels to record their positioning data during transit,
which could then be inspected to ensure compliance with vessel routing
measures. Another suggested alternative was the real-time reporting of
vessel positioning information at strategically placed waypoints along
common routes. These suggestions may have merit and the Coast Guard
will continue to consider various vessel reporting systems.
(5) Transponder-Based Technology
Transponders and ADSSE are useful navigational tools and
international performance standards for these technologies are
currently under development by the International Maritime Organization
(IMO). Once developed, we anticipate the transponders will be used, not
only for reporting, but for collision avoidance as well. Absent the
international performance standards applicable to all vessels, foreign
and domestic, and absent a compelling navigation need to track vessels
during the low risk coastwise transit, it is premature to mandate any
transponder-based technology.
Summary
The public comments and recommendations illustrate an ever growing
concern for the protection of the environment and the natural resources
of the California coastline. There exists a wide divergence of opinion:
public, industry, environmental, and government on
[[Page 55251]]
what, if any, additional action is necessary or warranted to mitigate
both real and perceived risks to the California marine resources.
Findings
Offshore routing for Coastwise Transit
In light of the data, the existing body of operating requirements,
the requirements imposed on tankers as a result of OPA 90, state of
California initiatives such as the requirement for tug escorts, and the
existing waterways management measures in the major port approaches,
the Coast Guard finds that the coastwise transit does not present
significant risk to navigation safety, and does not warrant new
offshore vessel routing measures.
In 1992, nearly 9000 tanker, cargo and barge vessels called on
California's major ports, with 90 percent of these vessels calling on
the ports of San Francisco Bay and Los Angeles/Long Beach. It is
important to note that VTS and VTIS systems are already in place in
these two ports. Other commercial interests, such as fishing vessels
and passenger carriers, were not included in the data.
Information collected from a variety of sources shows that the
distances vessels transit offshore, especially between the major ports
of Los Angeles/Long Beach and San Francisco Bay, are widely varied. Of
the 2,837 crude oil tanker, petroleum product tanker, and barge trips
along the California coast during 1992, over 82 percent occurred at
least 25 miles off the coast.
The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) has coordinated an
agreement between 10 shipping companies to remain at least 50 miles
from shore when transiting from Alaska to California. Of the two major
barge companies which operate off the coast, one operates 50 miles
offshore, while the other remains 8-10 miles from shore.
San Francisco TSS
Vessel transit data gathered by the Vessel Traffic Service Center
(VTS) in San Francisco in 1994, showed a fairly even distribution of
traffic amongst the TSS approaches. The northern approach lanes
accommodated 38 percent of the traffic, followed by the southern (35
percent) and western (27 percent) approaches, respectively. These data
strongly support the need for three approaches to San Francisco Bay.
However, the current configuration of the southern approach lanes of
the San Francisco TSS does not make the best use of available water.
Rotating the southern approach seaward would increase transit
distance from shore without crowding the western approach. Centering
the southern approach between shore and the western approach would
strike a reasonable balance between reducing the risk of grounding and
the risk of collision.
In a typical coastwise transit inbound for the San Francisco Bay
via the southern approach lanes, a vessel would pass within four
nautical miles of Point Montara and within seven nautical miles of
Pigeon Point. Shifting the southern approach lanes to the west would
encourage vessels to transit further offshore when entering or
departing San Francisco, increase the minimum transit distance off
Point Montara by six nautical mile to ten nautical miles.
The northern and western TSS approaches to San Francisco meet the
traffic routing needs between Pt. Reyes and Cordell Bank, and near the
Farallones, respectively. Therefore, the Coast Guard is not
recommending any changes to these two approaches.
Santa Barbara Channel TSS
The current configuration of the northwestern end of the TSS in the
Santa Barbara Channel encourages vessels to transit close to the
offshore platforms of Hidalgo, Harvest, and Hermosa, as they round
Point Conception. In addition, west bound vessels leaving the scheme
are put into crossing situations with vessels entering the lanes from
the north.
Extending the TSS eighteen miles westward would increase the
distance vessels transit from the platforms and Point Conception, and
encourage greater offshore distances for coastwise transits, thereby
decreasing the risk of allision and grounding.
Adding a precautionary area at the northwest end of the TSS would
add order and predictability to the crossing traffic streams, thereby
decreasing collision risk.
Los Angeles/Long Beach TSS
Vessel transit data gathered by the Vessel Traffic Information
System (VTIS) in Los Angeles/Long Beach for 1994 also showed a fairly
even distribution of traffic using the two approach lanes. Vessels
transiting the north and west routes rely on the northern TSS (in the
Santa Barbara Channel) and its exit at Point Conception. Comments did
not suggest any changes to the TSS, nor did the study data suggest that
changes were needed.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The transit data support the Coast Guard's decision not to
implement additional routing measures along California's coastline.
Traffic lanes are established to facilitate port access. Establishing
traffic lanes parallel to the coast would not facilitate port access
and would compress vessels of different types, sizes, and speeds into a
confined area where the risk of collision would increase significantly.
Present International Regulations for Prevention of Collisions at Sea
are sufficient to regulate offshore vessel traffic and ensure safe
passage between vessels.
The study data does, however, support the following recommended
changes to existing routing measures.
San Francisco TSS
(1) That the southern approach lanes of the TSS off San Francisco
be shifted seven miles seaward as follows:
Part II: Southern Approach
(a) A separation zone bounded by a line connecting the following
geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 deg.39.10' N........................... 122 deg.40.40' W
37 deg.27.00' N........................... 122 deg.40.40' W
37 deg.27.00' N........................... 122 deg.43.00' W
37 deg.39.10' N........................... 122 deg.43.00' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) A traffic lane for northbound traffic between the separation
zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 deg.39.30' N........................... 122 deg.39.10' W
37 deg.27.00' N........................... 122 deg.39.10' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) A traffic lane for southbound traffic between the separation
zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 deg.27.00' N........................... 122 deg.44.30' W
37 deg.39.40' N........................... 122 deg.44.30' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Barbara Channel TSS
(1) That the TSS in the Santa Barbara Channel be extended from
Point Conception to Point Arguello as follows:
(a) A separation zone bounded by a line connecting the following
geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 deg.20.90' N........................... 120 deg.30.10' W
34 deg.18.90' N........................... 120 deg.30.90' W
34 deg.25.70' N........................... 120 deg.51.75' W
[[Page 55252]]
34 deg.23.75' N........................... 120 deg.52.45' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) A traffic lane for westbound traffic between the separation
zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 deg.21.80' N........................... 120 deg.29.90' W
34 deg.26.60' N........................... 120 deg.51.45' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) A traffic lane for eastbound traffic between the separation
zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 deg.18.00' N........................... 120 deg.31.10' W
34 deg.22.80' N........................... 120 deg.52.70' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) A precautionary area be established, bounded to the west by the
arc of a circle of radius four miles centered upon the following
geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 deg.25.80' N........................... 120 deg.56.50' W
and connecting the following geographical position:.....................
34 deg.22.80' N........................... 120 deg.52.70' W
34 deg.26.60' N........................... 120 deg.51.45' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The precautionary area be bounded to the east by a line connecting the
following geographical positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34 deg.22.80' N........................... 120 deg.52.70' W
34 deg.26.60' N........................... 120 deg.51.45' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the recommended changes to the San Francisco and
Santa Barbara Channel TSS's, nautical charts depicting the San
Francisco TSS should be amended to conform with approved IMO
descriptions as follows:
(1) Rename the Main Approach TSS segment as the Western Approach;
(2) Redesignate the separation zone in the center of the circular
precautionary area as an ATBA; and
(3) Define the eastern boundary of the precautionary area by a line
connecting the following geographic positions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 deg.42.70' N........................... 122 deg.34.60' W
37 deg.45.90' N........................... 122 deg.38.00' W
37 deg.50.30' N........................... 122 deg.38.00' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: NAD 83.
The Coast Guard will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register to solicit public comment on the recommended changes
to the existing routing measures, and take necessary action at IMO.
Dated: October 15, 1996.
J.C. Card,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Marine Safety and Environmental
Protection.
[FR Doc. 96-27486 Filed 10-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
