                           UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                        Port Access Route Study (PARS):
                     Approaches to the Chesapeake Bay, VA
                                       
                                       
                                 Draft Report
                                       
                                       
                         Docket Number USCG-2019-0862

                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

 Table of Contents
A.	Executive Summary	5
B.	Purpose and Authority	7
C.	Background	9
Area of Analysis	9
Previous Studies	10
Study Methodology	11
Consultations and Outreach Efforts	11
D.	Key Port and Waterway Features	15
Major Ports	15
Military Installations	16
Military Operating Areas	19
Offshore Renewable Energy Installations	21
Routing Measures	23
E.	Maritime Data, Trends and Analysis	25
Meteorological Data	25
Coast Guard Activity	30
Commercial Fishing Vessel Activity	34
Recreational Boating Activity	35
Global Shipping Trends	36
AIS Vessel Traffic Analysis	37
AIS Vessel Traffic Densities and Routes	37
Navigational Safety Risk Assessment Methodology	39
F.	Recommendations and Conclusions	41
G.	Appendices	49
1.  Definitions	49
2.  Table of Abbreviations	51
H.	Enclosures	53
1.  Coast Guard Navigation Center Traffic Analysis	53
2. IALA Waterway Risk Assessment Program (IWRAP) Analysis	55
3. Coast Guard Navigation Center Tug and Tow Analysis	57
I.	Bibliography	59

                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

    Executive Summary
The Port Access Route Study (PARS) analyzes navigation routes to/from the Chesapeake Bay, VA, to the proposed fairways outlined in the Shipping Safety Fairways along the Atlantic Coast Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) and international routes to/from the United States.  The Fifth Coast Guard District considered and assessed current capabilities and planned improvements to handle maritime conveyances in this draft report.  We will consider public comments on this draft report before submitting the final report of study to Coast Guard Headquarters for potential rulemaking and international resolution.
This study considers whether existing or additional routing measures or shipping safety fairways are adequate or require modification(s) to improve navigation safety due to factors such as planned or potential offshore development, current port capabilities and planned improvements, increased vessel traffic, changing vessel traffic patterns, weather conditions, or navigational difficulty.  Vessel routing measures aim to reduce the risk of casualties and include, among others, traffic separation schemes (TSS), two-way routes, recommended tracks, deepwater routes, precautionary areas, and areas to be avoided.  Appendix A contains a complete list of routing measures and their definitions.  In addition, this study considers whether existing safety zones, security zones, or regulated navigation areas should be modified or new ones established.
The study area extends approximately 220 nautical miles seaward of the Chesapeake Bay, between Ocean City, MD and Cape Hatteras, NC. 
This report recommends a combination of formal routing measures, a precautionary area and a two-way route, as defined by the International Maritime Organization (IMO); and fairway modifications to the ANPRM to ensure safe navigation of vessel traffic around planned offshore development based on current traffic patterns.  Figure A.1 illustrates these alternatives in a red crosshatch pattern.  Conclusions contained in Section F provide supporting analysis and a more detailed assessment of these recommendations and other alternatives assessed.
This study supports the implementation of vessel routing measures and modification to proposed shipping safety fairways.  These recommendations will improve and ensure safe navigation and preservation of the Marine Transportation System by updating IMO Ships Routeing and modifying shipping safety fairways proposed under the ANPRM.
                                       
                                       
Figure A.1  -  Recommended changes to routing measures and fairways in the study area
    Purpose and Authority
Under Section 70003 of Title 46 of the United States Code, the Commandant of the Coast Guard may designate necessary fairways and traffic separation schemes (TSSs) to provide safe access routes for vessels proceeding to and from U.S. ports.  The designation of fairways and TSSs recognizes the paramount right of navigation over all other uses in the designated areas.
Before establishing or adjusting fairways or TSSs, the Coast Guard must conduct a PARS, i.e., a study of potential traffic density and the need for safe access routes for vessels.  Through the study process, the Coast Guard must coordinate with federal, state, and foreign governmental agencies (as appropriate) and consider the views of maritime community representatives, environmental groups, and other interested stakeholders.  The primary purpose of this coordination is, to the extent practicable, to reconcile the need for safe access routes with other reasonable waterway uses such as construction and operation of renewable energy facilities and other uses of the waters within the study area. 

                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

    Background
Area of Analysis
Figure C.1 is the study area, an area bounded by a line connecting the following geographic positions:
   38°16′ N, 	71°16′ W;
   35°19′ N, 	71°16′ W;
   35°19′ N,	75°21′ W;
   36°56′ N, 	76°03′ W;
   38°16′ N, 	75°16′ W.

Figure C.1

Previous Studies
The Coast Guard last studied the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay, VA in 2002, and published a Port Access Route Study, (69 Fed. Reg. 3869 (Jan. 27, 2004)).  The study, conducted in response to the slow continuous southward movement of the Nautilus Shoal, primarily examined the location of the Eastern Approach to determine a location that would better accommodate vessels.  The study recommended the existing TSS be modified to accommodate vessels drafting 42' or more to avoid the encroaching shoal to the north and that an anchorage area be established.  These recommendations were later implemented.

In 2016, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Study for the Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study (ACPARS) (81 Fed. Reg. 13307 (March 14, 2016)).  The ACPARS analyzed Atlantic Coast waters seaward of existing port approaches within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and announced the report as final in 2017.  See final report, 82 Fed. Reg. 16510 (April 5, 2017).  This multi-year study began in 2011, included public participation, and Figure C.2
evaluated potential navigational safety risks associated with developing offshore renewable energy installations (OREI).  The ACPARS identified navigation safety corridors along the Atlantic Coast necessary to ensure safe navigation (see figure C.2).  The ACPARS identified deep draft routes for navigation and recommended that they be given priority consideration over other uses consistent with the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea.  The ACPARS also identified coastal navigation routes and safety corridors of an appropriate width for seagoing tows, and clarified the necessary sea space for vessels to maneuver in compliance with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) that led to the development of marine planning guidelines.  The ACPARS did not consider detailed navigation routes to or from ports or international routes destined for the United States that are integral to a safe and efficient transportation infrastructure.
In 2019, the Coast Guard announced a new study of routes used by ships to access ports on the Atlantic Coast of the United States.  See Port Access Route Study, 84 Fed. Reg. 9541 (March 15, 2019).  This new study of routes supplements and builds on the ACPARS by concentrating on the navigation routes to and from U.S. ports, and their interconnectedness to the Atlantic Coast routes.  As part of the new study, the Coast Guard will conduct several PARS to examine East Coast ports that are economically significant and/or support military operations or critical national defense.  This study, supplemental to the ACPARS, examines the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia, and the interconnectedness to the Atlantic Coast routes.

In 2020, the Coast Guard published an ANPRM (85 Fed. Reg. 37034 (June 19, 2020)) seeking public comment regarding the possible development of the navigation safety corridors identified in the ACPARS into shipping safety fairways.  This rulemaking is related to this study in that it intends to implement the recommendations of the ACPARS, to which this study supplements.  Any routing measures proposed by this study may lead to future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements. 
Study Methodology
This study was conducted in accordance with Appendix D of the Coast Guard's Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System (MTS) and Implement National Policy, Commandant Instruction 16003.2B.
Consultations and Outreach Efforts
Throughout this study, the Coast Guard coordinated with other governmental agencies and considered the views of maritime community representatives, environmental groups, and interested stakeholders. 

Prior to announcing the study and with the intent to aid public review and participation, the Fifth Coast Guard District worked with the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council on the Ocean to make the study area available on the Mid-Atlantic Ocean Data Portal at http://portal.midatlanticocean.org/visualize/. 

On November 14, 2019, the Coast Guard attended a roundtable discussion hosted by the Virginia Maritime Association to discuss the upcoming study. Attendees included representatives from the Virginia Maritime Association, the Virginia Pilots Association, Maersk Line Limited, the Port of Virginia, U.S. Navy Fleet Forces Command, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The Coast Guard published a notice of study and request for comments in the Federal Register on November 27, 2019. See 84 Fed. Reg. 65398.  In the announcement, commenters were asked to address impacts to navigation in the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay resulting from factors such as planned or potential offshore development, current port capabilities and planned improvements, increased vessel traffic, changing vessel traffic patterns, weather conditions, or navigational difficulty.  Table C.1 provides an overview of the comments received, as well as the Coast Guard's response where appropriate.
Comment
Coast Guard Response
                Comments of general support or dissatisfaction:
The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy supports current wind energy areas and future expansion potential.

The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy request a public meeting.
The department withdrew their request after the Coast Guard explained the additional outreach conducted via a Marine Safety Information Bulletin and Local Notice to Mariners. 
             Comments regarding applicability of routing measures:
Three entities (CMA CGM America, LLC, Virginia Maritime Association, and Virginia Port Authority) requested the establishment of vessel fairways to route traffic around wind energy areas.
This study identifies potential navigational conflicts and makes recommendations that aim to strike a balance between protecting safe access to the Chesapeake Bay and its ports and offshore development.  The recommendations of this study may lead to future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements.
One entity (American Waterways Operators) requested the Atlantic Coast Fairways be established and finalized as recommended in the ACPARS.
In 2020, the Coast Guard published an ANPRM seeking public comment regarding the possible establishment of shipping safety fairways as per the ACPARS.  This rulemaking is separate but related to this study in that it is intended to implement the recommendations of the ACPARS, to which this study supplements.  Any routing measures proposed by this PARS may lead to future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements.

                       Comments regarding collaboration:
The Commonwealth of Virginia requests compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the completion of an Environmental Impact Statement and provided resources in support.
This study is academic in nature and does not impact the environment. Any future rulemaking to implement the recommendations of this study will be completed in compliance with NEPA.

            Comments regarding impacts to wildlife and environment:
The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation suggests coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries for biotic data and environmental impact of wind energy areas, and with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure protected species are considered and studied.
This study is academic in nature and does not impact the environment.  Any future rulemaking to implement the recommendations of this study will be completed in compliance with NEPA.  Environmental analysis specific to wind energy areas and their development are the responsibility of the lead federal agency, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The Coast Guard, as a cooperating agency, provides input to the BOEM during the analysis.
Table C.1
On December 2, 2019, Coast Guard Sector Virginia (previously named Sector Hampton Roads) issued Marine Safety Information Bulletin 19-301, announcing the study to approximately 1,300 subscribers who follow their bulletins via govdelivery.com. 
From December 2, 2019 through January 6, 2020, the Fifth Coast Guard District advertised the study in the Fifth District's Local Notice to Mariners distributed weekly to more than 5,000 subscribers, and publicly available on the Coast Guard Navigation Center's website, www.navcen.uscg.mil.
In November 2020, discussions regarding the study's assumptions were held and data analysis was shared with the following local fishing community representatives: Virginia Beach Sport Fisherman - Rick Robins; Virginia Beach Charter Boat Captain - Skip Feller; Virginia Beach Fish Dealer - Scott McDonald; and North Carolina Fisherman's Association - Brent Fulcher.

On December 7 and December 16, 2020, the Coast Guard attended roundtable discussions hosted by the Virginia Maritime Association to discuss the potential routing measures. Attendees included representatives from the Virginia Maritime Association, the Virginia Pilots Association, CMA/CGM Operations Department, the Port of Virginia, U.S. Navy Fleet Forces, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Over the course of the study, sections of this report were reviewed by the following port agents and military representatives: Maryland Port Administration; U.S. Navy Fleet Forces; Virginia Maritime Association; and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Over the course of the study, the Coast Guard's data and analysis were reviewed and discussed with various key stakeholders. These include: 
National Weather Service: Wakefield, VA  -  Larry Brown
Virginia Maritime Association: Norfolk, VA  -  Will Fediw, David White 
Virginia Pilots Association - CAPT Whiting Chisman
Maryland Port Administration: Baltimore, MD  -  Brian Miller
NOAA Port Agent: Norfolk, VA  -  Steve Ellis
NOAA VMS  -  William Semarau
NOAA NMFS Permits  -  Jeannette Dudley
U.S. Fleet Forces (DoD)  -  Jim Casey and Joe Atangan
Responsible Offshore Development Alliance  -  Annie Hawkins and Fiona Hogan

No tribal consultations were conducted due to the study area's distance from known tribes.

    Key Port and Waterway Features

This section provides an overview of key features or factors (non-environmental) which have a role in influencing or dictating the movement of vessels in the study area (e.g., current port infrastructure, capabilities and planned improvements; planned or potential offshore development, etc.).
Major Ports
The Port of Virginia
The Port of Virginia shelters the largest shipbuilding and repair industrial base; a thriving export coal and bulk trade and the sixth largest containerized operation in the United States.  It is the second largest port on the East Coast by tonnage, due in large part to the export of coal, and the third largest port on the East Coast by container volume with more than 2.9 million twenty-foot equivalent container units (TEU) of cargo moving through its container terminals in 2019.  The port consists of over 55 public and private marine terminals with the Virginia Port Authority (VPA) operating four deep-water marine terminals, an upriver terminal and an inland intermodal terminal.  Virginia's 50-foot channels and unobstructed terminal access have allowed the size of the vessels calling at the Port of Virginia to increase significantly.  The Port of Virginia has authorization to dredge its shipping channels to at least 55 feet deep, with deeper ocean approaches, and widening them from 1,000 feet up to 1,400 feet in specific areas. In 2024, at 55-feet, the Port of Virginia will be the deepest port on the East Coast, and the State estimates this would bring another 1,000,000 containers to the port, increasing its capacity by 40 percent.
Nearly 30 international shipping lines offer direct, dedicated service to and from Virginia, with connections to more than 200 countries around the world. In an average week, more than 40 international container, breakbulk, bulk, tanker, and roll-on/roll-off vessels are serviced at the port's marine terminals. In 2018, more than 2,500 commercial ships called on the Port of Virginia, with 2,327 calling in 2019. This reduction in calls is mostly due to the increased size of vessels calling on the port, increasing efficiencies.
The VPA's container trade balance is 53 percent imports and 47 percent exports.  This balance allows containers with varied products coming into Virginia to get unloaded, repacked with American-made goods and sent back overseas using the same route.  Since 2010, the Port of Virginia has gone from being the fifth largest exporter on the East Coast to the second largest exporter, due to a combination of container and bulk cargoes. 
In 2016, the Neo-Panamax vessel, MOL Benefactor, was the first, and largest, container ship to transit the expanded Panama Canal and call on Virginia.  The arrival of that ship signaled the start of a new era at the port.  Since then, calls by New-Panamax vessels have increased significantly in number and call at the port multiple times each week.
The Port of Baltimore
The Port of Baltimore offers the deepest harbor in the Maryland waters of the Chesapeake Bay.  Closer to the Midwest than any other East Coast port, the Port in Baltimore City is within an overnight drive of one-third of the nation's population.  Handling port traffic are five public and thirty private terminals, as well as seven post-Panamax cranes and four super-post-Panamax cranes.  Public terminals include Dundalk, Fairfield, North Locust Point, Seagirt, and South Locust Point.
Baltimore is one of only four Eastern U.S. ports with a 50-foot shipping channel and a 50-foot container berth, allowing it to accommodate some of the largest container ships in the world.  On July 19, 2016, the Ever Lambent, a cargo-carrier from Taiwan, was the first supersized container ship to reach Baltimore through the Panama Canal.
In the first quarter of 2019, the Port of Baltimore's public terminals handled 335,638 tons of roll-on/roll-off cargo, a 32.5 percent increase from the same period in 2018.  In the second quarter, the port set a new record for moving 2,873,392 tons.  In March 2019, the port set multiple records for handling the most cargo in a month, including 1,018,274 general cargo tons; 95,862 TEU containers; 96,535 tons of roll-on/roll-off cargo tons, the most since June 2012; and 59,052 vehicles, the best March for autos and light trucks.
In 2018, the Port of Baltimore handled a record 42.9 million tons of international cargo, valued at $59.7 billion, up from 38.2 million tons and $53.9 billion in 2017.  In 2019, a record-setting 11 million tons of general cargo was handled by the port's public terminals eclipsing a 2018 record-setting 10.9 million tons of general cargo was handled by the port's public terminals, up from 10.7 million tons in 2017.  For total overall dollar value of cargo, Baltimore is ranked ninth, and for international cargo tonnage, 11th.  In 2018, the port ranked second in the country for exporting coal, the port's top export commodity, based on tonnage.  The port's coal exports had a record year in 2018, surpassing 21.5 million tons. 
Military Installations
U.S. Navy (USN)
Naval Station Norfolk

Naval Station Norfolk and its regional Hampton Roads Navy and Marine Corps installations is home to the United States Fleet Forces Command (USFF).  USFF trains, certifies, and provides combat ready Naval forces to combatant commanders worldwide in support of U.S. national interests. Norfolk Naval Station is the world's largest naval base and hosts the USN's greatest concentration of maritime forces, including 75 ships alongside 14 piers, and 134 tactical aircraft and 11 hangers at the co-located Chambers Field Naval Air Station. Naval Station Norfolk's Port Services Division annually controls over 3,100 ship movements in support of overseas logistics requirements for deployment to the European, Central, and Southern Command area of operations. 
Naval Air Station (NAS) Oceana

NAS Oceana is home to all Navy East Coast Strike-Fighter Airwings consisting of 16 squadrons and over 180 tactical aircraft.  Assigned units train and operate throughout the Virginia Capes Operating Area (VACAPES OPAREA).  Events include air combat maneuver, anti-submarine warfare training, mine countermeasures training, and a wide range of weapons employment to include live and inert ordnance delivery from both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft.

Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story

Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek - Fort Story (JEBLCFS) was created by combining U.S Army Post Fort Story and Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek.  JEBLCFS is the major operating base for the amphibious forces in the USN's Atlantic Fleet.  JEBLCFS offers a unique combination of features including dunes, beaches, sand, surf, deep-water anchorage, variable tide conditions, maritime forest and open land providing a prime location and training environment for both Army and Navy amphibious operations and Joint Logistics-Over-the-Shore training events.

U.S. Coast Guard
Several different Coast Guard commands and assets conduct operations in the study area. Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, and Commander, Coast Guard Atlantic Area, and their staffs, including 24-hour command center personnel, are located in the Portsmouth Federal Building in Portsmouth, VA.  
Coast Guard commands and assets in proximity to and which conduct operations within the study area are as follows:
Commander, Coast Guard Atlantic Area
Seven 270' medium endurance cutters are currently homeported in Portsmouth, VA with an additional two scheduled to arrive summer 2021.
 USCGC BEAR
 USCGC SENECA
 USCGC HARRIET LANE
 USCGC FORWARD
 USCGC TAMPA
 USCGC LEGARE
 USCGC NORTHLAND
 USCGC ESCANABA (arriving summer 2021)
 USCGC SPENCER (arriving summer 2021)
Two 210' medium endurance cutters are located at Joint Base Little Creek in Virginia Beach, VA.
 USCGC VIGOROUS
 USCGC DEPENDABLE
Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District
Aid to Navigation Cutters and Construction Tenders homeported within the study area include:
 USCGC FRANK DREW  -  Portsmouth, VA
 USCGC KENNEBEC  -  Portsmouth, VA
 USCGC SLEDGE  -  Baltimore, MD
 USCGC JAMES RANKIN  -  Baltimore, MD
 USCGC WILLIAM TATE  -  Philadelphia, PA
Fast Response Cutters that operate within the study area yet are homeported outside the area include:
 USCGC NATHAN BRUCKENTHAL  -  Ft. Macon, NC
 USCGC RICHARD SNYDER  -  Ft. Macon, NC
 USCGC ANGELA MC SHAN  -  Cape May, NJ
 USCGC ROLLIN FRITCH  -  Cape May, NJ
 USCGC LAWRENCE LAWSON  -  Cape May, NJ
Aid to Navigation Tenders that operate within the study area yet are homeported outside the area include:
 USCGC SMILAX  -  Ft. Macon, NC
 USCGC MAPLE  -  Ft. Macon, NC
Operational units known as Sectors and Air Stations are subunits of the Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.  Sector Commands oversee search and rescue stations and 87' patrol boats.  Air Stations house Search and Rescue aircraft and personnel.
Sector Virginia 
Sector Virginia personnel are located on Base Portsmouth and in the downtown Norfolk Federal Building.  Sector Virginia sub-units include:
       Six multi-mission boat stations (Portsmouth, Little Creek, Cape Charles, Wachapreague, Milford Haven and Chincoteague, VA)
       Five 87' patrol boats located at Stations Little Creek and Portsmouth
       Three Aids-To-Navigation Teams (Hampton Roads, Milford Haven and Chincoteague, VA)
       Sector Field Office in Chincoteague, VA
      
Sector Maryland  -  National Capital Region (MD-NCR)
Sector Maryland  -  National Capital Region (MD-NCR) personnel are located on the Coast Guard Yard in Baltimore, MD.  Sector MD-NCR sub-units include:
       Three Aids-To-Navigation Teams (Baltimore, Crisfield, and Potomac, MD)
       Eight multi-mission boat stations (Annapolis, Crisfield, Curtis Bay, Stillpond, Ocean City, Oxford, St. Inigoes, MD and Washington D.C.)
       One 65' ice breaking tug 
      
Sector North Carolina 
Sector North Carolina personnel are located in downtown Wilmington, NC and Field Offices at Cape Hatteras and Fort Macon, NC.  Sector North Carolina sub-units include: 
       Three Aids-To-Navigation Teams (Fort Macon, Oak Island, and Wanchese, NC)
       Two Sector Field Offices (Cape Hatteras and Fort Macon, NC)
       Eight multi-mission boat stations (Elizabeth City, Oregon Inlet, Hatteras Inlet, Hobucken, Fort Macon, Emerald Isle, Wrightsville Beach, and Oak Island, NC)
       One 65' inland buoy tender 
      
Air Station Elizabeth City 
Air Station Elizabeth City personnel are located on Base Elizabeth City in Elizabeth City, NC.  Air Station assets include medium range MH-60 helicopters and long range C-130-J aircraft for search and rescue operations in the study area.  The Atlantic Area and Fifth District Commanders direct aviation assets at the request of local Sector Commanders in support of SAR cases.
Military Operating Areas
Virginia Capes Operating Area (VACAPES)
The VACAPES OPAREA is an expansive geographic region in coastal waters offshore Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina and consists of specific air, surface, and subsurface operating space that supports a wide range of Atlantic Fleet and Naval Systems Command military test and training activities. 
Fleet Area Control and Surveillance Facility, Virginia Capes, known as FACSFAC VACAPES located at NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach, VA, manages VACAPES OPAREA. FACSFAC VACAPES controls Special Use Airspace (SUA), which consists of Warning and Restricted Areas, Military Operating Areas (MOA), Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA), and Surface and Subsurface Operating Areas. The VACAPES Complex includes the Navy's Surface Combat Systems Center (SCSC) on the Eastern Shore of Virginia and the Shipboard Electronic Systems Evaluation Facility (SESEF) located at the Navy's Joint Expeditionary Base Fort Story in Virginia Beach, VA. Both facilities support development, testing, and calibration of naval combat systems, sensors, and navigation equipment.  SCSC operations include various offshore surface-to-surface and surface-to-air weapons employment, in particular, long-range missile tests.  SESEF operations in seaspace east of Ft. Story include functional checks and measurement of shipboard tactical instrumentation systems.  Accurate calibration and standardization requires precise pre-planned timing, location, and uninterrupted movement of combatant vessels to complete onboard instrumentation assessments and analysis. 
Navy and Marine Corps training occurs daily throughout the VACAPES OPAREA. Events and activities include small, unit level training, up to large, full-scale exercise and certification events, consisting of Carrier and Expeditionary Strike Groups and accompanying air, surface, and submarine component tactical platforms and opposing force assets. 
Test and training throughout the VACAPES OPAREA includes a wide range of simulated, inert, and live fire weapons employment in support of all naval warfare missions and pre-deployment combat certification requirements.  In summary, the VACAPES OPAREA remains an invaluable resource in support of naval units assigned to and stationed within the USN's fleet concentration area of Hampton Roads
Offshore Renewable Energy Installations
Figure D.1
Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Pilot (CVOW Pilot)
Dominion Energy's CVOW Pilot project is the second offshore wind project in the nation, the first constructed in federal waters, and the first owned by an electric utility company.  The CVOW Pilot constructed two six-megawatt wind turbines, on a site leased by the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME), 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, VA.  In addition to the two turbines, the CVOW Pilot includes a subesea cable buried under the seabed landing ashore through a 1,000-meter conduit installed under the beach.  As of October 2020, the two turbines in the CVOW Pilot project have been installed, are operating and delivering power to the onshore electric grid.  Dominion Energy is awaiting a full technical review with Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) at which point full commercial operations will be declared.
Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Commercial (CVOWC)  -  OCS-A 0483
Dominion Energy intends to build the nation's largest offshore wind farm off the coast of Virginia  --  a 220-turbine installation that would power 650,000 homes at peak wind.  If it gains state and federal approvals, the $7.8 billion project would deliver 880 megawatts of energy by 2024 and a total of 2,600 megawatts by 2026.  The turbines would be constructed on 112,800 acres Dominion is leasing from the federal government 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, VA. 
In September 2019, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam signed Executive Order Forty-Three directing the DMME to develop a plan of action to produce one hundred percent of Virginia's electricity from carbon-free energy sources by 2050.  On April 12, 2020, the Clean Economy Act was signed and "establishes requirements regarding the development by Dominion Energy Virginia of qualified offshore wind projects having an aggregate rated capacity of not less than 5,200 megawatts by January 1, 2034."
The CVOWC project plans installation in three phases of approximately 880MW each.  Dominion Energy submitted a Construction and Operations Plan to BOEM on December 17, 2020 for sufficiency review and subsequent approval.  On April 19, 2021, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council posted to the Permitting Dashboard a comprehensive Federal permitting timetable for CVOWC.  According to the permitting timetable, CVOWC will complete federal review and permitting in September 2023.  Pending regulatory approval, the first phase is expected to begin delivery of renewable energy in 2024, with additional phases coming online in 2025 and 2026.
 
Kitty Hawk Wind Energy Area  -  OCS-A 0508
On August 11, 2014, BOEM announced that it had identified three Wind Energy Areas (WEA) offshore North Carolina, the Kitty Hawk WEA was located about 24 nm east of Kitty Hawk, NC and extended approximately 25.7 nm in a general southeast direction.
On January 17, 2017, BOEM announced the publication of the Final Sale Notice (FSN) for a lease sale in the Kitty Hawk WEA to Avangrid Renewables, LLC, hereinafter Avangrid.  On September 18, 2019, Avangrid submitted a Site Assessment Plan (SAP) for commercial wind lease OCS-A 0508.  BOEM has deemed the SAP complete and sufficient and will approve, disapprove, or approve with modifications the proposed site assessment activities.  On December 11, 2020, Avangrid submitted a Construction and Operations Plan to BOEM for sufficiency review and subsequent approval.  On April 19, 2021, the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council posted to the Permitting Dashboard a comprehensive Federal permitting timetable for Kitty Hawk Wind.  According to the permitting timetable, Kitty Hawk will complete federal review and permitting in December 2024.
Routing Measures
International Maritime Organization Routing Measures
In the study area, existing routing measures, "In the Approaches to Chesapeake Bay", include two TSS and one precautionary area.  The TSS are designed to aid navigation safety and the prevention of collisions at the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay.  The routes are split into an eastern approach and a southern approach.  It is recommended that vessels entering or departing from the Chesapeake Bay use these routes.  Following the PARS conducted in 2002, the southern approach deep water route was recommended for ships drawing greater than 42 feet and naval aircraft carriers.  It is noted that the results of this PARS finds this recommendation is not always followed and there is deep draft traffic (ships with greater than 45 foot draft) that use the eastern approach TSS.  The precautionary area is located between the TSS and the Thimble Shoal and Chesapeake Channels.
Pilotage
Virginia state law governs the pilotage requirements for the approach to the Chesapeake Bay.  Virginia Code Title 54.1 states "The master of every vessel, other than vessels exclusively engaged in the coastwise trade and those made exempt by United States statutes, inward bound from sea to any port in Virginia or any intermediate or other point in Hampton Roads, the Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay, or in any navigable river in Virginia which flows into Chesapeake Bay or Hampton Roads, shall take the first Virginia pilot that offers his services."  The normal pilot boarding area is located within the precautionary area between the TSS and the Thimble Shoal and Chesapeake Channels.
Regulated Navigation Area
The Coast Guard has defined a regulated navigation area (RNA) for the Chesapeake Bay entrance in Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations 165.501.  The offshore zone lies within the study area.  The RNA requirements apply to most vessels operating within the area except vessels engaged in law enforcement, aid to navigation service and waterways survey and maintenance activities.
Danger Zones
There are two danger zones within the PARS area.  A danger zone south of the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay is defined in 33 CFR 334.380 to alert vessels to the presence of a naval firing range in the Atlantic Ocean off Virginia Beach, VA.  Vessels are directed to proceed with caution and proceed directly without delay through the area. 
A second danger zone in the Atlantic Ocean off Wallops Island and Chincoteague Inlet, VA is defined in 33 CFR 334.130.  This danger zone prohibits persons and vessels from entering the zone when rocket launches are conducted.  Advance notice of scheduled launch operations are issued via weekly Notice to Mariners.
Proposed Shipping Safety Fairways
The ANPRM published in 2020 proposed fairways along the Atlantic Coast from Florida to Maine.  The fairway system detailed in the ANPRM was heavily considered and is represented in all the traffic analysis and risk modeling conducted for this study.  Although these fairways are still in a proposed status, it is assumed that they will be refined and implemented and therefore traffic densities within were factored into the analysis conducted by this study.  Figure D.2 illustrates the proposed fairways in the study area.
                                       
Figure D.2
    Maritime Data, Trends and Analysis
Meteorological Data
The Fifth Coast Guard District judges the implementation of routing measures or fairways will not mitigate weather related impacts to navigation safety.  There are diurnal tides and stable bottom conditions within the study area.  Seasonal heavy weather occurs in the late summer and mid-winter.  The Port of Virginia has been shut down due to severe weather a total of eight times during the period from 2015-2019, ranging from zero to three days in any given year.  Historical data from weather buoys and historic hurricane tracks follow in figures E.1 through E.7.

National Buoy Data Center Station 44014 located at Cape Henry, Virginia Beach
                                       
Figure E.1
National Ocean Service Buoy 44064 located at the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel
                                       
Figure E.2

                                       
Figure E.3
Historical charts of North Atlantic Hurricane tracking 2016-2019
                                       
		Figure E.4
                                       
		Figure E.5
                                       
                                       
		Figure E.6
                                       
		Figure E.7
Coast Guard Activity 
Coast Guard activities within the study area include: search and rescue, maritime law enforcement, high value asset escorts, high interest vessel boardings, living marine resource enforcement, aids to navigation maintenance, and marine casualty/accident investigations.  With an increase in activity due to the construction and maintenance of OREI, we anticipate a moderate increase in all activities; however, not enough to affect study conclusions related to port access.  We recognize Coast Guard missions will continue to occur with the same guidance and practical operations despite any changes in the marine transportation system, world shipping patterns and future offshore development.
Search and Rescue Activity Data
Coast Guard search and rescue cases offshore are coordinated by the District Command Center in Portsmouth, Virginia and local units from the appropriate Sector and Air Station are used in these cases.  A detailed graphic of SAR case locations during the period 2010-2019 is included in the appendices.  The annual SAR case count for activities within the study area is in Table E.1.  
                                SAR ACTIVITIES
Year
Case Count
2010
28
2011
24
2012
40
2013
31
2014
26
2015
65
2016
84
2017
101
2018
95
2019
102
Grand Total
596
                                   Table E.1
This PARS further analyzed the nature of the distress which initiated the search and rescue case.  The causes were broken into general casualty types listed in Table E.2 below and counted by type and year.
Case Type
                                                                           2010
                                                                           2011
                                                                           2012
                                                                           2013
                                                                           2014
                                                                           2015
                                                                           2016
                                                                           2017
                                                                           2018
                                                                           2019
Total
Adrift
 
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              3
                                                                              8
Allision
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
Beset
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              5
                                                                              3
                                                                              3
                                                                              4
                                                                             19
Capsize
 
 
                                                                              4
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              3
                                                                              4
                                                                              3
                                                                              4
                                                                             19
Collision
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
 
                                                                              3
Disabled
                                                                              7
                                                                             11
                                                                             14
                                                                             14
                                                                              5
                                                                             23
                                                                             34
                                                                             44
                                                                             34
                                                                             34
                                                                            220
Distress
                                                                              8
                                                                              5
                                                                              8
                                                                              4
                                                                              6
                                                                             10
                                                                              9
                                                                             10
                                                                             11
                                                                             20
                                                                             91
Escort
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              1
                                                                             12
                                                                              2
                                                                             16
Fire
                                                                              2
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              3
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              8
Grounding
                                                                              4
                                                                              4
                                                                              9
                                                                              4
                                                                              7
                                                                             13
                                                                              7
                                                                              9
                                                                              8
                                                                              7
                                                                             72
Law Enforcement
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              3
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              5
Medical
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              3
                                                                              5
                                                                              7
                                                                              6
                                                                              3
                                                                              6
                                                                             36
Person In the Water
                                                                              3
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              5
                                                                              5
                                                                             10
                                                                              8
                                                                              7
                                                                             40
Taking on Water
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              4
                                                                              3
                                                                              2
                                                                              4
                                                                             12
                                                                              8
                                                                              9
                                                                             13
                                                                             57
Total
                                                                             28
                                                                             24
                                                                             40
                                                                             31
                                                                             26
                                                                             65
                                                                             84
                                                                            101
                                                                             95
                                                                            102
                                                                            596
Table E.2

An analysis of Coast Guard search and rescue cases from District Five, Sector Virginia and Sector North Carolina command centers resulted in the scatter plot of locations in Figure E.8.  The majority of these cases are within the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay.  Historical evidence and frequency does not provide statistically significant data to show that current routing measures nor future revisions to the routing measures would lessen the frequency of the need for CG assets to conduct a search or rescue.  The Fifth Coast Guard District anticipates a possible increase in search and rescue cases within the OREI with a possible rise in recreational boating activity when offshore structures create underwater habitats.

Figure E.8


Marine Casualty Data
Marine casualty cases are conducted when a casualty or accident defined in 46 CFR 4.03-1 occurs in federal waters.  These cases are investigated by Sector personnel and their details are documented in the Coast Guard database, Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE).  The case files from Sectors Virginia and North Carolina within the study area were analyzed.  A lack of standardization in data entry hampered analysis.  To refine the data and resolve the disparity, pollution cases, medical evacuation, law enforcement and personnel action case files were removed from the dataset as unrelated to the PARS.  Remaining case files were plotted on a chart of the study area, categorized by initial event type (e.g. Fire, Flooding, Allision, etc).  Case narratives were provided by Coast Guard Office of Investigations, CG-INV-2, to further determine if there were any casualty patterns in the data that provided guiding direction to the study focus with respect to port approach needs.  Cases in and around the approaches to Chesapeake Bay and the proposed OREI leases were further analyzed as pertinent to the study.  Historic data shows material failures as the most frequent initiating event and represents the highest number of cases.  Study of the past ten years (2010-2019) of marine casualty data in Table E.3 illustrates no clear pattern nor does it indicate any predominant case type in the future.  There were no casualties actually plotted in the OREI areas and in the areas surrounding the OREI, there are less than ten activities to consider.
Casualty Type
                                                                           2010
                                                                           2011
                                                                           2012
                                                                           2013
                                                                           2014
                                                                           2015
                                                                           2016
                                                                           2017
                                                                           2018
                                                                           2019
Total
Allision
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              8
Capsize
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
Collision
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              2
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              4
Fire - Initial
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              2
Flooding - Initial
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              3
Flooding - Progressive
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
Grounding
                                                                              6
                                                                              3
                                                                              2
                                                                              3
                                                                              3
                                                                              3
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              3
                                                                             24
Loss of Electrical Power
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              3
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              5
Loss/Reduction of Vessel Propulsion/Steering
                                                                              1
                                                                              3
 
                                                                              1
 
 
 
 
                                                                              2
                                                                              2
                                                                              9
Material Failure/Malfunction
                                                                             11
                                                                              9
                                                                              4
                                                                             11
                                                                             12
                                                                              8
                                                                              2
 
                                                                             13
                                                                             10
                                                                             80
Sinking
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
Vessel Maneuver
 
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
 
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              2
 
                                                                              1
                                                                              7
Wave(s) Strikes/Impacts
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                              1
 
                                                                              1
Total
                                                                             21
                                                                             21
                                                                             12
                                                                             18
                                                                             17
                                                                             13
                                                                              3
                                                                              5
                                                                             17
                                                                             19
                                                                            146
Table E.3

Further analysis identified case types for the marine casualties that occurred within the study area over the last five years and is plotted in Figure E.9.  The predominant types of casualties near the CVOWC project and the approaches to the existing TSS were loss of maneuverability, electrical power or propulsion.  
Current data indicates large vessel traffic proceeds through the OREI lease areas.  It is assumed when the OREI structures are built, large vessels will route around the OREI.  Merging traffic around the OREI projects may increase the risk of marine casualties due to collision or allision.  Enclosure 2 models this traffic pattern change.  The Fifth Coast Guard District considers future routing measure establishment will mitigate this risk to an acceptable level.

Figure E.9

Commercial Fishing Vessel Activity 
Interviews with local fishing vessel operators reveal that commercial fishing predominant in the study area includes gill netters who operate between five and 13 miles offshore and fixed pot fishers that operate seasonally.  It was suggested that fixed pot fishers may utilize the areas within future wind turbine fields to prevent gear loss or damage from ship strikes.  Transiting vessels may enter the turbine fields at their own risk using prudent seamanship to determine safe routes from port to offshore grounds. 
Seasonal variability was investigated for pleasure and fishing vessel types.  Commercial fishing vessel (CFV) transits of Chesapeake Bay entrance tended to peak in the fall (October through December) and reached minimum values in winter (January through February.)  Additionally, the distribution of track directions were seen to vary over the course of the year with a majority of track lines trending southeasterly from the mouth of the bay along the coast earlier in the year and northeasterly later in the year.

Automatic Identification System (AIS) data shows some of the fishing activity within the OREI leases; however AIS data is not comprehensive of all CFVs in the study area.  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) data from Mid Atlantic Regional Council on the Ocean data portal shows no significant fishing activity (track lines <5 knots for any species) in the CVOWC or Kitty Hawk project areas.  Transit paths show CFVs transit around the OREI and therefore pose minimal increased risk to navigation safety.

The Fifth Coast Guard District confirmed the analysis in BOEM 2016-040, Collaborative Fisheries Planning for Virginia's Offshore Wind Energy Area  with local CFV operators that fishing vessel activity is not expected to increase significantly.  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes that CFV operators will not be significantly impacted by and may navigate to avoid the OREI.  This avoidance and the size of CFVs in the study area contribute to our consideration that no further routing measures are necessary to address navigation safety related to CFV activity.  Should fishing activity significantly change as the result of these OREIs, the Fifth Coast Guard District may revisit this conclusion.
Recreational Boating Activity
Pleasure vessel transits of Chesapeake Bay Entrance peak late summer through early autumn (August through October) with minimal values in winter and early spring (January through April).  AIS data for pleasure craft equipped with transponders is included in the traffic analysis found in Enclosure 1.

Based on interviews with local sport fishermen, the Fifth Coast Guard District concludes that an OREI will result in an increase of recreational boating activity within the area.  Wrecks and other seabed habitats targeted by recreational fishermen are found within the CVOWC project in a designated fish haven.  The study also confirmed transits from the Chesapeake Bay and Rudee Inlet, VA to an offshore fishing ground approximately 27 nm east of the lease area as noted on the Mid-Atlantic Ocean Data Portal.

BOEM 2016-040 further determined recreational vessel activity within the lease area fluctuates based on the status of the fishery.  Ground fishing will likely improve with the development of the turbine field.  This study considers that additional recreational vessel activity may lead to an increase in search and rescue events.  Proposed routing measures do not generally apply to recreational vessels; however, they illustrate areas where commercial traffic occurs.  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes that routing measures will improve recreational vessel operator awareness of the presence of this traffic in and around the OREIs and may mitigate some of this potential risk.
Global Shipping Trends
General implications of the trend towards larger ships on ports.
Industries are adapting their cargo to the container shipping method - containerization.  Commodities such as malt, peat moss, fertilizers, timber, scrap and waste products are now containerized to a greater extent.  It is likely that in the next decade 90 percent of the general global cargo will be shipped in containers.  By using a container, a door to door concept can be more efficient.  Cargo can be transported directly from the mill to the consignee, or even directly to the consumer, making it more efficient and reducing the risk of damages.
The size of the largest vessels in the world's shipping fleets have more than doubled over the past two decades.  In 2005, the largest container ships were just under 10,000 TEUs.  Today the vast majority of orders are for ships larger than 10,000 TEU.  Shipping lines are already beginning to order 22,000 TEU ships.
Many of the ships displaced by these large vessels have been scrapped, but shipping lines are deploying 6,000-10,000 TEU vessels in different ways leading to a cascading effect in which ships being replaced by larger vessels on the major trade lanes are being deployed in secondary trade routes.  The trend towards larger ships affects all ports, big and small.  Although the largest ships generally do not come to North America, U.S. ports are increasingly handling larger vessels than before.  In many ports, larger ships may lead to fewer port arrivals and departures.  Alternatively, many other ports may experience a higher frequency of transits due to lightering operations that improve port access where channel or cargo handling constraints preclude use of larger vessels.
The widening of the Panama Canal creates opportunities.  Ports of 55 feet or greater depth and port cranes that feature larger reach and higher above-deck stowage are likely to attract newer, larger generations of container ships.  Ports that are constantly improving access, waterside and shore infrastructure and offer high productivity, labor stability and supply chain efficiency will benefit significantly.  To improve competitiveness, ports are investing in bigger and wider access channels, longer quays, bigger cranes and better intermodal connections.  They are working with multiple stakeholders to ensure that the surrounding region will have the necessary warehousing and distribution centers for the super-sized loads.
Larger vessels put greater pressure on the ports and terminal operators.  In some ports, it results in conflicts and congestions and raises several operational questions.  Not all ports are designed to accommodate giant ships; they do not have the right construction for the vessels to enter the port or capacity to handle efficiently.
AIS Vessel Traffic Analysis
The full traffic analysis conducted by the Coast Guard Navigation Center is in Enclosure 1.
AIS Vessel Traffic Densities and Routes
The majority of large commercial vessel traffic entering the Chesapeake Bay is either containerized or bulk coal.  These vessels follow common track lines when entering and departing the port.  The remaining cargo traffic falls generally along similar track lines and therefore no further commercial traffic was separated out in these vessel density maps.  The following categories were determined to provide a comprehensive overview of the tracks into and out of the Chesapeake Bay entrance.  Military vessels, a major factor in this study, are categorized as Other by AIS.  
Vessel categories:
Container
Cargo (bulk carriers, tankers, Ro-Ro, other cargo)
Fishing
Towing/Pushing
Passenger
Recreational
Other

Draft categories were separated to illustrate the larger, deeper ships that are occurring more frequently as container terminals and ship capacity increases.

Draft categories:
Less than 35'
Between 35' and 45'
Greater than 45'

Traffic density maps were produced to distinguish different vessel traffic patterns, high value vessel (high capacity passenger vessels) traffic patterns, and the unique traffic patterns of the towing/pushing industry through the study area.  These density maps provide a broad overview of current traffic patterns found in the study area and are located in Enclosure 1.  Figure E.10 is an example of a traffic density map that shows all vessel routes that crossed the entrance of the Chesapeake Bay in 2019.

Each map also illustrates the shipping safety fairways along the Atlantic Coast published in the Proposed Rule, 85 Fed. Reg. 37034 (June 19, 2020).

IMO established routing measures recommend vessels with a draft greater than 42' use the southern approach TSS for entry and exit to the bay; however, heat maps show a distinct concentration of traffic in this draft concentration that uses the eastern approach.  More detailed information can be seen in the density maps found in Enclosure 1.

Figure E.10 illustrates a traffic density map for all ships in 2019 with routes that crossed the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay.

Figure E.10

Navigational Safety Risk Assessment Methodology
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) Waterway Risk Assessment Program (IWRAP)  -  IWRAP is a modeling tool developed by the IALA to assess maritime risk.  Using IWRAP, based on information about traffic volume and composition, route geometry and bathymetry, the frequency of collisions, allisions and groundings in the study area is estimated.
Existing Case Risk  -  In the Alpha case, waterway characteristics are entered and AIS data imported to determine collision frequencies with no structures in place.  Established traffic legs or routes were drawn and entered into the IWRAP (see Figure E.11).  Bell shaped curves on either side of the leg illustrate the probability that vessels of a certain size and type will transit within the defined distance either side of the leg.  The distance from the leg is illustrated by the length of the line perpendicular to the traffic leg.  Green curves illustrate inbound traffic and blue curves illustrate outbound traffic.  The existing case shows no significant change to traffic patterns from the 2011 ACPARS.
Future Case Risk  -  Three models, Bravo, Charlie and Delta, were created to assess future risk.  These models validate the proposed Atlantic Coast shipping safety fairways.
In the Bravo model, traffic was not re-routed to proposed shipping safety fairways but current routes were analyzed with the proposed OREI development in place.  The risk of allision with a fixed structure increases in this model due to the introduction of offshore structures.  Collision risk remains the same as the Alpha case because there are no assumed vessel route changes.
In the Charlie model, traffic was re-routed to proposed fairways around the OREIs.  The risk of allision with a fixed structures increases from the Alpha model; however risk is lower than the Bravo model where vessels route through the OREI.  The risk of vessel collisions increases as expected when vessels converge into a smaller amount of sea space.  The Fifth Coast Guard District proposes connector fairways to alleviate this risk by directing traffic around the OREI with minimal impact to vessel routes and a large precautionary area where this convergence occurs to reduce the risk of collision.
In the Delta model, traffic routed in a two-way route within the proposed fairways.  This results in a reduction in allision cases when half of vessel traffic moves away from fixed offshore structures.  Limitations in the model software resulted in a failure to quantify significant reduction in collision probability.  Further explanation for these results is in Enclosure 2.
Impact of Offshore Wind Energy Installations  -  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes deep draft traffic will route around the OREIs in the approach to the Chesapeake Bay.  This is current maritime practice in European waters where OREI exist and local subject matter experts (vessel operators and harbor pilots) confirm.  Enclosure 2 illustrates this by moving AIS data to new routes in the Charlie model.  This results in increased risk of collision as vessel routes converge around the OREI.  The Delta model attempted to show lower collision incidence by separating traffic in a two-way routing measure.  Enclosure 2 provides detailed quantitative analysis of these changes.  There are limitations in the model driven by the complexity of the data and changes in the patterns.  The Fifth Coast Guard District proposes a combination of measures to mitigate the risk of collision.
Shipping Safety Fairways, like those in ANPRM, 85 Fed. Reg. 37034 (June 19, 2020) ensure adequate sea space for ships to avoid collision under normal conditions.  The Fifth Coast Guard District recommends additional shipping safety fairways, described in Section F, to preserve sea space from future offshore structures in the study area.  These fairways enable vessel traffic to converge further offshore in less congested waters.  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes the recommended fairways, precautionary area, and two-way route in Section F preserve space from additional offshore development and lower the risk of vessel collisions.  This facilitates co-existence between OREI and maritime traffic in a safe manner with little impact to vessel routes.

Figure E.11
    Recommendations and Conclusions
Recommendations:
The Fifth Coast Guard District recommends two IMO routing measures (precautionary area and two-way route) and modifications to the ANPRM fairways to mitigate increased risk in the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay as a result of offshore development, mixing traffic, and future port activity.  The existing TSS should remain as charted; local mariners and port stakeholders agree no modification is needed at this time.

International Maritime Organization Routing Measures
Precautionary Area:  A precautionary area is charted to the east of the IMO adopted vessel routing system, "In the Approaches to Chesapeake Bay", approximately located between the Eastern and Southern approaches.  While charted, this precautionary area has not been adopted by IMO and was not established in 33 CFR 167.  It was established via a chart correction in Notice to Mariners 0005/1999 resulting from a collision involving a USN vessel conducting calibration tests in a maneuvering area between the TSSs.  The Fifth Coast Guard District recommends this precautionary area be expanded as described by the coordinates in Table F.1 and submitted to IMO for adoption.  This expansion will preserve the natural deep water isobath identified in Enclosure 1 between the TSSs and the proposed CVOWC project.  This new precautionary area will encompass a part of the ACPARS Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay connector fairway.  A modification to that fairway may be considered before the final rule is implemented.
Two-way route:  A two-way route intends to provide safe passage of ships through waters where navigation is difficult or dangerous by defining limits and directing traffic.  The creation of major obstructions in the OREI industry results in a congestion of large vessel traffic in the space around planned OREIs.  The ANPRM proposed fairway system along the Atlantic Coast does not include connector routes from the St. Lucie to New York shipping safety fairway in Figure F.1 to existing routing measures in the approach to the Chesapeake Bay.  The two-way route described herein adds these necessary connections and provides a clear label on all charts to indicate separation of traffic in the route.  Risk models found in Enclosure 2 show increased collision risk by routing all traffic around the OREIs.  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes professional mariners following the COLREGS within a marked two-way route will mitigate much of the increased risk.  Using a two-ways route in lieu of TSS preserves the right of fishing within the route.  Further analysis of the two-way route around the OREI found in the Delta case of the IWRAP analysis found in Enclosure 2.
ACPARS Shipping Safety Fairways
Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway:  This PARS confirmed a Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay connector route is warranted, however the angle of approach to the Delaware Bay, when modified as in Figure F.1, increases available maneuvering space for crossing vessels in the northern portion of this PARS area.  It will also provide space for offshore anchoring in the approach to the Delaware Bay.  Maritime stakeholders support the need for anchorage space.  Traffic analysis provided in Enclosure 1 supports that this modification will not significantly change current patterns and ensures existing routes are maintained and preserved.
Delaware Bay Connector Fairway:  As a result of our recommendation to modify the Chesapeake to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway, the Fifth Coast Guard District finds a modification to the Delaware Bay Connector Fairway is reasonable.  Follow on PARS for the Seacoast of New Jersey will address any further routing measure recommendations in the approach to the Delaware Bay including the existing TSS and precautionary areas.
Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway:  Modifying the nearshore tug and tow shipping safety fairway westward along the DELMARVA peninsula is supported by current traffic and vessel operators.  Traffic analysis of tug and tow transits in the Fifth Coast Guard District supports the single offshore shipping safety fairway for all large traffic transiting offshore the Delaware Bay entrance.  An additional analysis of coastwise tug and barge traffic between North Carolina and New Jersey is included as Enclosure 3 and supports a modification of the nearshore shipping safety fairway along the DELMARVA peninsula between Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay.  If a transit further offshore is preferred, mariners have the ability to use the Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway to avoid the mixing traffic in the entrance to the Delaware Bay.  Any shipping safety fairway is available for all vessel traffic and fishing is not prohibited within.
The traffic analysis provided in Enclosure 1 shows international routes connecting the approach to the Chesapeake Bay supports these fairways.  Research supports the use of fairways in voyage planning and encourages safe navigation by international and coastal shipping traffic.  The risk increase found in Enclosure 2 will be mitigated sufficiently by professional mariners following international conventions that require voyage planning and adherence to the COLREGS.  A combination of fairways and two-way routes balances the need for safety measures and space to ensure safe navigation of large commercial vessel without limiting all space from other waterway uses. 
Regulated Navigation Area
 Sector Virginia has highlighted a need to amend the existing RNA defined in Title 33 CFR 165.501.  Though the inland portion of this RNA lies outside the study area, as part of the PARS it was considered and changes are recommended.  The Fifth Coast Guard District intends to draft a subsequent rulemaking to reflect recent changes in anchorage grounds, Sector Command Center processes, and comport to local speed restrictions in the Elizabeth River.
 
 Figure F.1

Recommendation
Detailed description
IMO Precautionary Area
Expand precautionary area in the TSS approach areas connecting points:
37.1229 N	75.6819 W
36.8747 N	75.8446 W
36.8145 N	75.7903 W
36.5894 N	75.7594 W
36.5853 N	75.6477 W
36.6481 N	75.5364 W
37.0485 N	75.4999 W
36.8386 N	75.7716 W
36.8241 N	75.4999 W
IMO Two-Way Route
Establish a two-way route extending from the Delaware Bay Connector to the southern approach TSS to preserve a route that runs south of the CVOWC project. This route is bounded by the following points:
36.7220 N	75.5176 W
36.7150 N	74.6867 W
36.8233 N	74.6921 W
36.8233 N	75.4884 W
ACPARS Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway
Re-orient the Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway to the following points:
37.0115 N       75.4080 W
37.0668 N       75.5279 W
38.2666 N       74.1719 W
38.2667 N       74.2993 W
ACPARS Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway
Re-orient the Cape Charles to Montauk Fairway to the following points between Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay:
37.1271 N	75.6803 W
37.0823 N	75.5759 W
37.8488 N	75.0306 W
37.9371 N	75.0912 W
38.2593 N       74.9763 W
38.2568 N       75.0072 W

Recommendation
Detailed description
ACPARS Delaware Bay Connector Fairway
Re-orient the Delaware Bay Connector Fairway to the following points between the St. Lucie to New York Fairway and the Off Delaware Bay Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway:
36.1087 N	74.6672 W
36.7269 N	74.5172 W
38.2549 N	74.4140 W
38.1868 N	74.5296 W
Table F.1

 Conclusions: 
 The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes the increased risk of collision or allision expected in the future as shipping traffic maneuvers around offshore developments is best mitigated by a combination of IMO resolutions (precautionary area and two-way route) and shipping safety fairways found above.  The Fifth Coast Guard District recommends the Coast Guard Office of Navigation Systems (CG-NAV) incorporate these alternatives into the ANPRM for fairways and propose they be established by an IMO resolution.  Data and risk analysis provided in the enclosures suggest a need for mitigation.  The Fifth Coast Guard District concludes this combination provides a balanced approach to marine planning and ensures future safety of navigation.
Alternative Suggestions:
The Fifth Coast Guard District assessed additional alternatives proposed by public comments and stakeholder outreach.
Alternative 1:  Widen ACPARS St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Offshore Fairway to ensure safe navigation of towing vessel operators.
Assessment:  The Fifth Coast Guard District finds traffic analysis and frequency as provided in this study does not support this alternative.  The current proposed ACPARS width is adequate for safe vessel transits.
Alternative 2:  Establish additional shipping safety fairway between the two OREI (CVOWC and Kitty Hawk) in the study area.  Maritime stakeholders suggest this is necessary to preserve sea space from further offshore development and ensure safety of navigation around OREI.
Assessment:  The Fifth Coast Guard District does not agree this alternative is necessary at this time.  DoD charted OPAREAs and discussions with BOEM on future offshore development do not support a need for shipping safety fairways in this area.  Too many fairways may cause confusion and not improve the safety of navigation around the OREI in the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay.  Our current data does not support a modification to the St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay nearshore fairway at this time.  The Fifth Coast Guard District finds the shipping safety fairways as currently proposed by the ACPARS ANPRM are sufficient to ensure safe navigation as offshore development matures in the southern portion of the study area.  Stakeholder engagement suggested an alternative preserving all the space in a triangular area between the CVOWC and Kitty Hawk OREI.  The Fifth Coast Guard District deems this approach excessive and could not find similar fairways anywhere else in the world; therefore, we do not recommend.
Alternative 3: Establish additional shipping safety fairway or two-way route north of the CVOWC OREI. 
Assessment:  The Fifth Coast Guard District does not agree this alternative is necessary at this time.  Enlarging the current precautionary area preserves space in deep water between the CVOWC OREI and the TSS.  Traffic analysis on vessel routes indicates the majority of eastbound traffic departing the Chesapeake Bay transits south of the CVOWC project area.  The Fifth Coast Guard District considers too many fairways will confuse mariners in the region and not improve the safety of navigation around the OREI in the approaches to the Chesapeake Bay.

                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

    Appendices
1.  Definitions
Allision: a collision between a moving vessel and a fixed or anchored object.
Area to be Avoided: an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all ships, or certain classes of ships.
Automated Identification System: automatic tracking system that supplements marine radar and is used as a method of collision avoidance and to distinguish and plot vessel traffic patterns.
Hydrokinetic Energy: energy created by the constant flow of ocean currents across the world's oceans.
Navigation Safety Corridor: Coast Guard term used to describe regular vessel traffic pattern derived from density plots using AIS information.
Offshore Renewable Energy Installation: an energy development project designed offshore to harness either wind or hydrokinetic energy for onshore consumers.
Port Approaches: navigation routes followed by vessels entering or departing from a or to a primary transit route.
Precautionary area: an area within defined limits where ships must navigate with particular caution and within which the direction of traffic flow may be recommended.
Recommended Route: a route of undefined width, for the convenience of vessels in transit, which is often marked by centerline buoys.
Regulated Navigation Area (RNA): a water area within a defined boundary for which regulations for vessels navigating within the area have been established under 33 CFR 165.
Routing System: any system of one or more routes or routing measures aimed at reducing the risk of casualties; including traffic separation schemes, two-way routes, recommended tracks, areas to be avoided, no anchoring areas, inshore traffic zones, roundabouts, precautionary areas and deep-water routes.
Shipping Safety Fairways: a lane or corridor in which no artificial island or fixed structure, whether temporary or permanent, will be permitted. Temporary underwater obstacles may be permitted under certain conditions described for specific areas in Title 33 CFR 166, Subpart B. Aids to navigation approved by the U.S. Coast Guard may be established in a fairway.
Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS): a routing measure aimed at the separation of opposing streams of traffic by appropriate means and by the establishment of traffic lanes; or other options that may be available to facilitate safe navigation.  
Two-Way Route: a route within defined limits inside which two-way traffic is established, aimed at providing safe passage of ships through waters where navigation is difficult or dangerous.
Wind Energy Areas: designated areas within the U.S. EEZ which are reserved for leasing to energy companies for the purpose of developing offshore wind turbine fields to harness wind energy.


2.  Table of Abbreviations
ACPARS
Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
AIS
Automatic Identification System
OREI
Offshore Renewable Energy Installation
BOEM
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
RNA
Regulated Navigation Area
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
SAP
Site Assessment Plan
CFV
Commercial Fishing Vessel
SAR
Search and Rescue
COP
Construction and Operations Plan
TSS
Traffic Separation Scheme
DELMARVA
Delaware-Virginia-Maryland
USCG
United States Coast Guard
IMO
International Maritime Organization
VMS
Vessel Monitoring System
MARCO
Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of the Ocean
VTR
Vessel Trip Report
NMFS
National Marine Fisheries Service
WEA
Wind Energy Area
















                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank
    Enclosures
1.  Coast Guard Navigation Center Traffic Analysis
The traffic analysis encompasses the area study area defined by the Chesapeake Bay PARS.  It evaluates annual trends and unique or significant variations relating to the quantity, characteristics, and routes of the vessels transiting the Chesapeake Bay entrance.  This analysis does not evaluate coastal traffic that does not transit the mouth of Chesapeake Bay.  The Coast Guard Navigation Center prepared this enclosure for the Fifth Coast Guard District and Coast Guard Headquarters to support this study using the following:  

 2017 and 2018 Vessel AIS track line data downloaded from Marine Cadastre
 2019 Vessel AIS five-minute aggregated point data obtained from the USCG Nationwide Automatic Identification System (NAIS)
 Marine Cadastre's ArcMAP toolbox TrackBuilder 3.1
 USCG Standard Workstation running ESRI's desktop GIS program ArcMAP 10.5.1
 Study area as defined in Agency Docket Number USCG-2019-0862 in the Federal Register

                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

2. IALA Waterway Risk Assessment Program (IWRAP) Analysis
The Coast Guard Navigation Center prepared this report to illustrate and model traffic incident frequencies using the IALA Waterways Risk Assessment Program (IWRAP) software.  The full set of case studies analyzed for this report are in the following enclosure.
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

3. Coast Guard Navigation Center Tug and Tow Analysis
The Fifth Coast Guard District enlisted the Coast Guard Navigation Center to conduct a detailed traffic analysis of tug and tow vessel transits within the study are.  This analysis extended into the adjacent PARS for the Seacoast of New Jersey including the approach to the Delaware Bay.  Data and analysis found in this enclosure support our proposed modification to the Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway westward along the DELMARVA peninsula.


                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                      This page intentionally left blank

    Bibliography
Carrier, Brandi, Nick DeLong, William Hoffman, Joseph Hoyt, and Will Sassorossi. North Carolina Collaborative Archaeological Survey: Kitty Hawk Wind Energy Area. Final Report to the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. OCS Study BOEM 2017-070. 2017. 
Huntington, H.P., et al. "Vessels, risks, and rules: Planning for safe shipping in Bering Strait".  Marine Policy 51. 2015.
Huntington, H.P., et al. "The role of areas to be avoided in the governance of shipping in the greater Bering Strait region". Marine Policy 110. 2019.
International Maritime Organization. Ship's Routeing. 2019.
International Maritime Organization, Guidelines for voyage planning. Resolution A.893 (21). Annex 25. 1999.
Mehdi, R.A. et al. "Improving coexistence of offshore wind farms and shipping: an international comparison of navigational risk assessment processes". World Maritime University, 2018.
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment and the Ministry of Economic Affairs of the Netherlands. Assessment framework for defining safe distances between shipping lanes and offshore wind farms. 2015. https://www.msp-platform.eu/practices/assessment-framework-defining-safe-distances-between-shipping-lanes-and-offshore-wind. 
Morley, H.R. Journal of Commerce. May 6, 2019. Found at https://www.joc.com/port-news/north-america-port-rankings-mexican-ports-grow-fastest_20190506.html.
Northam, R.S. Expanding access to clean energy and growing the clean energy jobs of the future. Commonwealth of Virginia Executive Order 43. September 16, 2019, found at https://www.governor.virginia.gov/media/governorvirginiagov/executive-actions/EO-43-Expanding-Access-to-Clean-Energy-and-Growing-the-Clean-Energy-Jobs-of-the-Future.pdf .
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Anchorage Grounds; Lower Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA. USCG-2015-1118. (2020).
NY Department of Environmental Conservation, NY State Energy Research and Development Authority, Responsible Offshore Development Alliance. New York Bight Transit Lanes Surveys, Workshop and Outreach Summary. 2020.
Pearson, R.L., Swan, K. S. The Fiscal Year 2018 Virginia Economic Impacts of the Port of Virginia. 2019.
PEW Charitable Trust. Arctic Vessel Traffic in the Bering Strait, key measures for developing regulatory standards. 2014. https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/media/legacy/oceans_north_legacy/arctic_vessel_for_print_200copiesmay20141.pdf "
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) as amended by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub L. 109-58).
UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency. Marine Guidance Note 543, Safety of Navigation: OREI Guidance on UK Navigational Practice, Safety and Emergency Response. 2016.
UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency. Methodology for Assessing Marine Navigational Safety & Emergency Response Risks for OREI. 2020.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Norfolk Harbor Navigation Improvements - Draft General Reevaluation Report and Environmental Assessment. 2017.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Waterborne tonnage for principal U.S. ports. 2018. Found at https://www.bts.gov/content/tonnage-top-50-us-water-ports-ranked-total-tons
U.S. Coast Guard. Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System (MTS) and Implement National Policy, COMDTINST 16003.2B. 2019.
U.S. Coast Guard. Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular No. 01-19. 2019.
U.S. Coast Guard. Port Access Route Study Approaches to Chesapeake Bay. 2002.
U.S. Coast Guard. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study. 2015.
U.S. Coast Guard. Bering Strait Port Access Route Study. 2014.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Collaborative Fisheries Planning for Virginia's Offshore Wind Energy Area. 2016, BOEM, OCS Study BOEM 2016-040. 129 pp.
U.S. Department of the Interior. Supporting National Environmental Policy Act Documentation for Offshore Wind Energy Development Related to Navigation, OCS Study BOEM 2019-011. 2019.
U.S. Department of the Interior. Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program. 2016. Collaborative Fisheries Planning for Virginia's Offshore Wind Energy Area. Herndon. 2016.
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Commerce. Virginia Collaborative Archaeological Survey, OCS Study BOEM 2015-030. 2015.
U.S. Ports and Waterways Safety Act, 33 U.S.C. §1221. 2002.
Virginia Clean Economy Act. (HB 1526). Virginia General Assembly. 2020.
Virginia Maritime Association. Virginia Ports Annual. 2020. 
