1. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study (ACPARS) Slide developed and provided by NOAA NOAA’S HSRP MAY 8, 2013

2. AGENDA Definition of PARS Background Interim ACPARS Report ACPARS Process Overview Phases 1 and 2 Summary and Conclusions AIS Phase 3 - Modeling and Analysis Future

3. PORT ACCESS ROUTE STUDY (PARS) PWSA requires Coast Guard to conduct a PARS before establishing new or adjusting existing fairways or TSS’s. Consult/coordinate with Federal, State, and foreign state agencies (as appropriate) and maritime community representatives, environmental groups, and other interested stakeholders. Primary purpose of this coordination is, to the extent practicable, to reconcile the need for safe access routes with other reasonable waterway uses. PARS process (complete or modified) may be used to determine and justify if safety zones, security zones, recommended routes, regulated navigation areas and other routing measures should be should be created.

4. Marine Spatial Planning -Characterize existing MTS/Shipping Routes -Balance multiple uses -Ensure safe access routes Wind Energy Initiatives -Cooperating Agency -Navigational Conflicts -Cumulative Impacts 4 ATLANTIC COAST PARS Source: NOAA

6. INTERIM ACPARS REPORT Interim report finished Announced in Federal Register on 11 SEP 2012 -30 day comment period ended on 11 OCT 2012 Is available on website www.uscg.mil/LANTAREA/ACPARSwww.uscg.mil/LANTAREA/ACPARS Comments directly to ACPARS@USCG.MILACPARS@USCG.MIL Report shared with government partners before announcement Report shared with stakeholders

7. ACPARS PROCESS OVERVIEW Phase 1 - Data Gathering Phase 2 - Determine existing shipping routes and apply the R-Y-G Methodology Phase 3 - Modeling and Analysis Phase 4 - Implementation of Study Results

8. PHASE 1- DATA GATHERING AIS- Primary source of vessel transit data GIS Products- Heat Maps, Density Plots, Trackline plots Capability/Capacity shortfalls (VMS Data) Determine Shipping Routes-AIS data Two Public Comment periods Received 128 submissions total 40% outside scope Public Comments Sector- port level meetings Industry Organizations Targeted outreach to towing vessel community Outreach Importance of the MTS MARAD Marine Highways Program Panama Canal Expansion Energy Development Gather MTS Data

9. HISTORIC ROUTES

10. PHASE 2- APPLY R-Y-G METHODOLOGY Determine port & coastal shipping routes Apply maritime risk guidance from UK MGN-371 Deliverable – R-Y-G determinations (pending more detailed analysis)

11. UK Maritime Guidance Note MGN-371 DistanceFactorsRisk < 0.25 NMInter-turbine spacing = only small craft recommended Very High 0.5 NMMariner’s high traffic density domainHigh 1.0 NMMinimum distance to parallel boundary of TSSMedium 1.5 NMS band radar interference - ARPA affectedMedium 2.0 NMCompliance with COLREGS becomes less challenging Medium > 2.0 NMBut not near a TSSLow 5.0 NMAdjacent wind farm introduces cumulative effect. Distance from TSS entry/exit Very Low 10.0 NMNo other wind farmsVery Low RED YELLOW GREEN

12. NORTH CAROLINA - KITTY HAWK AREA

13. NORTH CAROLINA - WILMINGTON

14. IMPACTS TO NAVIGATION Navigational Impacts Safety Collisions Allisions Groundings Environmental Loss of cargo/fuel into environment Emissions Economic Time/Distance=$

15. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Impact to Shipping Will increase risk of allision May increase risk of collision May increase risk of grounding Establishment of WEAs R-Y-G is defensible Leaves moderate conflicts available for further study Highlights area of concern Cumulative Impacts of Wind Farms A primary objective of ACPARS assess cumulative impacts to MTS Displacement, Funneling, Increased Density Cascading effects

16. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Establishment of Routing Measures Existing system of traditional routes is complex Determining nav impacts as a result of a significant change to routing is beyond capabilities of the WG Routes should not be created without full analysis Tug and Barge Routes Most direct and safe route Vary based on weather, sea state and depth of water WEAs could force tug and barges further inshore or offshore ― Increase congestion at port entrances ― Higher sea states offshore ― Mixing of vessel types (slow vs. fast moving)

17. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Deep Draft Routes Coastwise routes further offshore ― Higher conflict with next round Higher conflict at harbor approaches Proposed WEAs would require modification or elimination of some routes Risks of Postponing Assessment of Navigational Impacts EA for leases only evaluates impacts due to site assessment & site characterization activities Navigation Safety Risk Assessment → COP Removal of areas late in process could hamper wind development efforts USCG has recommended impacts be evaluated prior to establishing WEAs Other Offshore Energy Installations Emphasis currently on Wind Future “All of the Above Approach” for Oil/Gas, hydrokinetics, other uses

18. PHASE 3- MODELING AND ANALYSIS Develop a GIS based model to predict traffic density and traffic patterns given alternative siting scenarios Determine the resultant nav safety risk  Increased density  Mixing of vessel types  Risk of allision  Risk of collision  Evaluate mitigation measures Has commenced – PNNL -BOEM funded -USCG provided AIS data for 2010, 2011, and 2012 Expert panel for PNNL modeling and analysis Technical panel for PNNL modeling and analysis

19. PNNL Deliverables and Milestones Data Analysis Model Setup Decision Tree and Scenario Development Presentation of interim results – -May - June 2013, Washington, DC Deliverables – November 2013 -Processed AIS Data -Visual displays of existing shipping routes and operational areas, with BOEM lease blocks -Numerical model in executable form -Final report -Presentation of final results – Washington, DC

20. FUTURE Publish 2 nd Interim Report/comment period after PNNL interim results PNNL finishes analysis and modeling tool (Phase 3) Publish Final ACPARS report/comment period Public outreach to present report/gather input concerning recommendations Provide input to BOEM concerning all the WEAs PHASE FOUR - Implement study recommendations -Routing measures -IMO papers -Regulations -Other mitigation measures

21. QUESTIONS “We Help Mariners Get There” George Detweiler George.H.Detweiler@uscg.mil 202-372-1566 (office) 202-372-1991 (fax) COMMANDANT (CG-NAV-3) ATTN: NAVIGATION STANDARDS DIVISION US COAST GUARD 2100 2ND ST SW STOP 7580 WASHINGTON, DC 20593-7580