Scope and Technical Report: Navigational Aids
November 2012
PNG: Maritime and Waterways Safety Project
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 5 November 2012)
Currency unit – kina (K)
K1.00 = $0.49 $1.00 = K2.06
ABBREVIATIONS
ADB – Asian Development Bank AIS – Automatic Identification System AUS – Australian CD – Chart datum CAPEX – Capital expenditure CHS – Circular hollow steel pile DBR – Design basis report GPS – Global Positioning System HWL – High Water Level (assumed to be mean spring high water) IALA – International Association of Lighthouse Authorities IMO – International Maritime Organization IPCC – International Panel on Climate Change Control LWL – Low water level (assumed to be mean spring low water level) LOA – Length overall (vessel) MSL – Mean sea level Navaid – Navigational aid NMSA – National Maritime Safety Authority OPEX – Operating expense PCI – Precast concrete PIANC – Permanent International Association of Navigation Congress PISR – Pre-Installation Survey Report PNG – Papua New Guinea PPTA – Project preparation technical assistance RC – Reinforced concrete SOLAS – Safety of life at sea SS – Stainless steel TOR – Terms of reference
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
cm – centimeter dia – Diameter of a pile in millimeter μm – micrometer mm – millimeter nm – nautical mile (= 1.852 kilometers) wt – Pile wall thickness in mm
ii
GLOSSARY
daymark – Navigation aid with no light beacon, in water or on land topmark – Visible colored mark to denote port, starboard or other passage
NOTE
In this report, "$" refers to US dollars unless otherwise stated.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS ADB NAVAID PROJECT 1 A. Overview 2 B. Major Shipping Routes and Navaids as of August 2000 3 C. Summary 5 III. NEED FOR NAVAIDS 5 A. Navaid Demand Based on Vessel Traffic 6 B. Navaid Demand Based on Shipping Lanes 9 IV. NAVAIDS AS OF MAY 2012 10 V. PROPOSED NAVAIDS WORKS 12 A. Navaids Priority 13 B. 99 Replacement of Navaids 13 C. Additional 33 Navaids 18 D. Summary of Additional Navaids 20 VI. CIVIL WORKS WORKFLOW 22 A. Workflow 22 B. Site Project 22 C. Navaid Alternatives 23 D. Community Security and Maintenance Agreements 23 VII. SAMPLE SITE PROJECT 23 A. Site Visit 23 B. Existing Navaids – China Straits 24 C. New Navaids – China Straits 24 VIII. APPLICATION OF WORKFLOW: CHINA STRAIT 25 A. Site Conditions 25 B. Pre-Installation Survey 33 IX. NAVAIDS ASSESSMENT 33 A. Navaids Design 33 B. Navaids Alternatives Assessment 35 C. Preferred Alternative 42 X. OVERALL PROJECT 42 A. Costs 42 B. Construction Program 46 APPENDIX A. COST ESTIMATES 48
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Since 14 out of 22 provinces in Papua New Guinea (PNG) are coastal, about 60% of the population resides on the coast or near rivers suitable for water transportation and their livelihood depends on water transportation. To provide safe, reliable and affordable transport systems for the movement of goods and people, and delivery of health and education services, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has supported the implementation of a franchise shipping scheme in the country. However, many of the country’s navigational aids (navaids, including lighthouses, hazard markers, and channel markers) have deteriorated due to insufficient maintenance, weather damage, volcanic damage and vandalism.
2. The Rehabilitation of the Maritime Navigation Aids System Project, funded by ADB and established in 2005, proactively improved the shipping service environment by repairing, upgrading or newly constructing 211 navaids along mainly international shipping routes by March 2008. The number of maritime accidents, especially groundings of commercial vessels, was reported to have diminished.
3. By late 2005, the project also contributed to the establishment of the National Maritime Safety Authority (NMSA), including a hydrographic unit and a community engagement unit, which is responsible for maintenance and operation of navaids. NMSA took over from the Department of Transport in 2006. Under the community engagement program, Provincial and Community Lighthouse Committees of all the navaids sites conduct basic maintenance while being given adequate training, with community land use fees and maintenance costs by NMSA.
4. The program contributes to reducing vandalism and increasing community ownership of navaids by providing socially-centered activities for both community welfare and income generation, as well as gender equity. The operational status of the navaids provided by the project was stated to be in good condition.
5. NMSA has identified navaids mainly along coastlines including 162 small day-markers and light beacons, to be replaced to scale up the safe and efficient environment for maritime and waterways transport. Of the162 identified navaids, 63 have been replaced as of June 2012.
6. NMSA also requires an improved transport control, monitoring and surveillance system (i.e., automatic identification system), tide gauges and wider coverage of hydrographic charts to reduce the risk of accidents (including loss of life at sea), negative environmental impacts, and the costs of shipping services as traffic volume increases. To operate the new systems and increase the chart coverage, NSMA will need to upgrade technical and management skills and establish rigorous and quantitative monitoring systems and this project is to respond to these requirements. Further, this project is also expected to produce benefits to PNG’s people as well international trade which relies on safe and efficient shipping services through PNG waters.
II. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS ADB NAVAID PROJECT
7. The following is a synopsis of the situation as reported in the previous ADB project1 documentation and as reviewed in conjunction with NMSA.
1 ADB. 2000. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Loan to Papua New Guinea for the Rehabilitation of the Maritime Navigation Aids System Project. Manila (Loan 1754). 2
8. As of the year 2000, there were 96 navigation operation navaids out of a total of 166. The non-operational navaids totaled 70 numbers, and these were divided as follows:
14 in Bougainville damaged; 43 navaids discontinued due to sustained vandalism (i.e., all equipment repeatedly removed, stolen, or damaged); 9 navaids with weather or volcanic activity-related deterioration; and 4 out of service due to faulty equipment.
9. It was noted that most navaids were in poor condition due to vandalism, environmental deterioration, and age of the installation, inappropriate design, or inadequate maintenance. The level of vandalism and environmental deterioration correlated with the geographic location, with some areas suffering losses from persistent community vandalism, while other areas were subject to severe annual weather patterns that accelerated deterioration rates.
10. Most navaids were well below the expectations of mariners and the needs of the maritime transport system in PNG. Also, most of the damaged aids were on PNG’s critical maritime routes. The system of day-marks was not adequate to facilitate safe maritime travel by the island communities. Many of these were in need of severe rehabilitation (i.e., replacement).
A. Overview
11. PNG shipping can be categorized as (i) international through traffic, (ii) coastal traffic between the major ports, and (iii) small vessel traffic serving numerous minor ports.
12. In 2000, it was reported that about 2,850 vessels per year pass through eastern and northern PNG waters on voyages to Asian ports in the People’s Republic of China, Japan, and Republic of Korea. This traffic was principally bulk carriers, container vessels, and general cargo vessels. There was no traffic in crude oil on these routes.
13. To pass through the north Coral Sea, traffic was evenly divided between two principal routes: through Jomard Entrance or around Rossel Island. Given the vessel traffic through these principal routes, it was deemed that navaids along these tracks were vital and required attention.
14. The most frequently used routes were:
Jomard–Vitiaz Strait for vessels heading northwest to Hong Kong, China and the Philippines; Jomard–Vitiaz Strait west of Manus Province for vessels going to the Republic of Korea and southwest Japan; and Jomard–Saint Georges Channel and Rossell northeast of New Ireland Province for vessels on route to Japan.
15. It is noted that the above routes remain the most frequently used to this day. Presently, these routes are reasonably well served with navaids and charts. Vessels using these routes usually carry radar and GPS, and are subject to inspection by safety authorities.
16. Petroleum products were shipped from the Kumul oil terminal in the Gulf of Papua in 2000 and this remains the present case. It is noted that petroleum product tankers depart PNG waters through the Torres Straits en route to destinations elsewhere. 3
17. The coastal routes between the PNG’s major ports were used by about seven overseas and three major local shipping companies. The most frequently travelled route was that between Port Moresby and Lae with a recorded 230 ship movements in 1998. Significant effort was stated to be required to restore the navaids on these routes and new aids were required to rectify deficiencies and gaps.
B. Major Shipping Routes and Navaids as of August 2000
1. Southwest PNG
18. The navaids on the Fly River were supplied, installed and are presumably maintained by private mining and oil companies. It was noted that the navaids at Daru and Bristow were stated to be adequate for traffic entering the Fly River from the Gulf.
19. The Kumul oil terminal and Bramble Cay were stated to have good lights. It was noted that there was adequate sea-room between the route used from Kumul oil terminal to Bramble Cay and Torres Straights, and the seaward limit of the river bank. Marking the seaward bank was stated to be not practicable due to the shifting nature of the bank. Eastward, Gouri was used as a timber port and required a new navaid. It was also noted that lesser ports used by coastal traffic need hydrographic charts prior to installation of aids.
2. Port Moresby West
20. The majority of coastal vessels used a difficult and narrow inshore route past Haidana Island and Boera Head and the hydrographic charts and navaids on this route required considerable improvement. The route from Port Moresby to Ava Point was hazardous with numerous seaward reefs, and while large container bulk and tanker vessels steered far seaward to avoid these dangers, smaller vessels suffered from risks posed by strong southeastern trade winds for eight months of the year. Both the hydrographic charts and the navaids for this route required significant attention.
3. Southern Approach to the China Straits
21. It was noted that most traffic used the south eastern approach of mainland PNG through the China Straits and that this area was subject to risks through deficient navigation conditions. Hydrographic survey on this submerged reef was carried out in 1945, however many areas remain uncharted. It was noted that hydrographic survey would be needed to precede installation of new navaids.
22. The China Straits were regularly used by container vessels on route from Port Moresby to Lae, the two most important ports in the country. The Straits needed to be improved with new and refurbished navaids.
4. Raven Channel and Nuakata Channel
23. The Raven Channel, Nuakata Passage and the new Nuakata Channel that runs north south and to the west of Nuakata Island was found on the navigation chart AUS 508.
24. The Raven Channel was noted to be one of the two most important shipping routes in PNG waters. This extremely narrow channel had been adequate marked with navaids, however it was still subject to strong tidal streams and risks were increased by uncharted nearby reefs 4
and shoals. It was noted that, even if fully marked with navaids, this channel would be hazardous due to its narrow width, poor angles of approach, and vigorous tidal streams. Only vessels on route to Europe can avoid Raven Channel by taking the similarly risky Bright Island Passage. This passage needed additional navaids to improve safety
25. It was noted that the Raven Channel could be bypassed by way of a north-south route west of Nuakata Channel. The new Nuakata Channel is significantly wider and straighter, hence greatly reducing the navigational risk. Chart for the Nuakata Channel were made available in mid-2000.
5. Goshen Strait
26. The navaids needed upgrading to meet their objectives on the Goshen Strait, one of the principle routes north between the mainland’s eastern tip and Norman by Island. The route to Lae from Goshen Channel needed a new hydrographic survey because the route comes within one nautical mile (nm) of navigational hazards. This route serves all coastal vessel traffic between the two main population centers.
6. Star Reef Passage
27. The Start Reef passage offered a wider route to Lae with only 20nm of confined inshore waters instead of 70nm on the Goshen Channel. It offered no distance savings, but with new navaids and increasing installation of GPS, it offers increased safety to mariners.
28. It was noted that the 200nm of coastline from Fortification Point to Madang had no major lights. However, this stretch of coastline had ample sea room and depth (these ranged from 1,000-1,500 meters), and there were no isolated submerged dangers near or on the route. The 190nm of coastline from Madang to Wewak had four major lights, which were deemed adequate for the coastal traffic.
8. Sepik River
29. The Sepik River hosted a large number of communities. The Sepik river required a day marking system and a replacement of the single light in the estuary.
9. Lae to New Guinea Islands
30. It was noted that most international vessels trading with PNG travel to Lae, Kimbe, Kavieng, and Rabaul. To reach New Britain, vessels used a pass north of Umboi Island which required a hydrographic survey. High priority additional navaids were also needed to mark the Nessup Channel used by smaller coastal vessels.
31. Only two major navigation lights were noted on the route from Lae to Rabaul. This route was also noted to have ample sea room, deep water, and no off-lying dangers, and was navigated by vessels with radar and Global Positioning System GPS. It was noted that all navaids needed replacement on the route to Kavieng, and lights on the Gazelle Peninsula needed upgrading.
5
C. Summary
32. Several local companies operated barges and ferries to numerous minor ports. Many of these ports did not have adequate hydrographic charts or navaids and safe navigation on these routes relied heavily on local knowledge of the vessel operator. A program for installing new navaids was required, particularly on the north coast where there was significant passenger traffic. Most of the minor ports in the Gulf of Papua featured mangroves and shifting mud and sand banks, thus making the marking of these routes impracticable.
33. It was noted that the shortest route between Port Moresby and Lae is via the China Straits and Raven Channel, northeast of Milne Bay. This route was 190nm shorter than the route via Jomard Entrance and Kiriwina. As noted earlier, the Raven channel was narrow and subject to strong currents and as such, transit through this channel, particularly for large vessels, involved high navigational risk.
34. The Nessup Channel is the southern entrance to Dampier Strait at the western end of New Britain. This channel was 42 nm shorter than the route north of Umboi Island and was used by vessels heading for North New Britain, New Ireland, and Rabaul (the Rabaul route was poorly surveyed). It was noted that the Nessup Channel passed through extremely confined waters and required significant improvements. Additional navaids for the Nessup channel were required.
35. All the routes noted in 2000 remain current and are in present use. Navaids along these routes have been refurbished,2 however, new navaids are still required.
III. NEED FOR NAVAIDS
36. NMSA are the responsible agency for navaids in all PNG waters. Irrespective of the growth rate in international and local traffic, it is deemed necessary to bring all navaids to an internationally acceptable standard to reduce the risk of vessel incidents. If left unattended, vessels incidents could result in:
Groundings; partial or complete blockage of channels; physical damage to reef systems by hull impact; environmental damage from pollution by loss of fuel oil or cargo (in the case of bulk carriers); serious injury and loss of life; and Economic loss though diminished tourism and associated industry etc.
37. The waters around PNG are interspersed with numerous channels and passages through shallow reef, and tidal streams may run fast through passages. Although it is becoming more commonplace for vessels of all sizes to be equipped with GPS, navaids provide an essential visual reference to mariners by allowing:
Estimation of relative distance between edge of navigable channels and passing vessels in the event of two way traffic; and
2 The Rehabilitation of the Maritime Navigation Aids System Project, funded by ADB and established in 2005, proactively improved the shipping service environment by repairing, upgrading or newly constructing 211 navaids along mainly international shipping routes by March 2008. 6
Estimation of sideways slippage in the instances of cross currents or strong winds.
38. Navaids are required to assist with safe shipping and the quantum and position of navaids is governed by vessel traffic and traffic routes.
A. Navaid Demand Based on Vessel Traffic
39. Vessel traffic information exists for the years 1988 to 2007 inclusive on a whole of PNG basis. Vessel traffic information between 2007 and 2012 has been requested from NMSA and PNG Ports however this has not been made available at the time.
9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Figure 1: PNG Ship Calls3
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Figure 2 - PNG Cargo in Tons4
40. From the available data, it is noted that a variable number of ship visited PNG ports with a peak in 1996, but a steady increase in cargo throughput. This is most probably a reflection of the increase in ship sizes over time, a trend which is apparent generally at all ports. To what
3 Source: NMSA Cargo Throughput Report. 4 Source: NMSA vessel voyage report. 7
extent this can continue at PNG ports is unclear as port development may hinder the trend to larger ships.
41. The 2000 RRP provides a port by port breakdown (1989 to 1998) as shown in the Table 1 below.
Table 1: Cargo Throughput by Port Port Cargo TEU’s Vessel Calls Throughput5 Port Moresby 9,702,841 398,871 9,933 Daru 171,833 306 2,751 Oro Bay 1,154,926 15,659 2,975 Alotau 889,943 25,718 6,022 Lae 16,544,380 588,294 8,118 Madang 1,341,694 39,405 17,557 Wewak 884,384 31,602 3,575 Vanimo 316,169 559 1,592 Lorengau 286,087 400 1,322 Rabaul 2,833,147 96,681 5,059 Kimbe 2,794,309 20,408 12,418 Kavieng 742,714 15,709 3,673 TEU = Twenty foot Equivalent Unit.6
42. From Table 1, it is noted that Lae is the key port in terms of both cargo throughput and TEUs, whilst Madang has the highest number of vessel calls. By TEUs there has been a steady growth as shown in Figure 3 for Port Moresby (series 1) and Lae (series 2), the two largest ports by TEU’s.
5 Cargo Throughput figures are cumulative. Yearly breakdown is found in Appendix 2 of RRP (ADB. 2000. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Loan to Papua New Guinea for the Rehabilitation of the Maritime Navigation Aids System Project. Manila (Loan 1754)). 6 The twenty-foot equivalent unit (often TEU or teu) is an inexact unit of cargo capacity used to describe the capacity of container ships and container terminals. It is based on the volume of a single standard-sized 20-foot-long (6.1 m) intermodal container, which can be easily transferred between different modes of transportation, such as ships, trains and trucks. 8
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000 Port Moresby
30,000 Lae
20,000
10,000
0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
Figure 3: PNG Cargo Traffic in Tons7
43. By comparison, east coast Australian and global TEU traffic has increased at a much greater rate as illustrated below.
Figure 4: East Cost Australian and Global TEU8
44. The current data shows that the growth in PNG container trade (approximately 50%) from 1988 to 1998 lags the world and Australian trends (approximately 300%) based on the limited data.9
45. In terms of future container ship movements to PNG ports, it is noted that this is difficult to forecast with limited data. It is noted that the PNG ports are less developed than the Australian ports and by comparison:
7 NMSA shipping voyage report. 8 Source: Australian Container Trade Development Trends, G Reynolds 2012. 9 This is subject to limited data from NMSA. It is acknowledged that the recent PNG trends may have changed. 9
there is less port capacity; and the country is relatively poor with high unemployment and demand for goods is limited.
46. Currently Port Moresby containers are handled by forks and reach stackers which equate to low container transfer rates. It is unknown if container vessel size will increase at PNG ports as the current demand may not warrant larger container ships.
47. The most probable scenario is for an incremental growth in ship traffic, both for international traffic and local small ship /barge distribution. A possible exception to this would be for mining and exploration, and large scale one off developments like the LNG project just west of Port Moresby. However NMSA has advised that the LNG development just west of Port Moresby is expected to result in two LNG ship movements per week, i.e., one outgoing and one arrival.
48. In terms of international shipping transiting PNG waters NMSA has advised that there are approximately 45 ship movements per day. These comprise as follows:
Container ships on the Singapore / Malaysia run to Australia via Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne and then Sydney, Brisbane and possibly Darwin to Singapore / Malaysia transit the Torres Strait as the extent of their use of PNG waters; and Bulk carriers carrying coal mainly from the Australian east coast mines transit PNG waters via the Jomard Straits and thence to the Vitiaz Passage to China and Korea mainly.
49. There is more than 44% increase of traffic volume from 2003 to 2007 and although traffic volume data between 2007 and 2012 has not been available for this report, it is noted that due to recent Liquefied Natural Gas projects and associated activities, it is expected that the traffic volume is to increase further.
B. Navaid Demand Based on Shipping Lanes
50. Vessel traffic in PNG waters is tracked by automatic identification system (AIS) shore stations and by transponders on international ships. Figure 5 illustrates the vessel traffic paths through PNG waters and the outer islands and provides an indication of the traffic density. From the illustration, the denser tracks illustrate international shipping movements and the less dense tracks show domestic traffic. It is noted that most international movements will be to and from Australian East Coast Ports, with the largest being Melbourne, then followed by Sydney.
51. Currently, neither NMSA nor PNG Pilots were able to provide information on vessel numbers plying the shipping lanes noted in Figure 5.
10
Figure 5: Vessel Traffic through PNG Waters10
IV. NAVAIDS AS OF MAY 2012
52. As of May 2012, NMSA advised that there are:
214 international navaids working 162 coastal navaids not working.
53. Figure 6 shows the location of the 214 existing navaids.
10 Source: NMSA. 11
Figure 6: Location of 214 Existing Navaids11
54. Of the non-operational navaids (the 162), 63 were being replaced by Nawae Constructions12. The 63 Navaids had been previously identified in the 2000 RRP and are listed in Table 2 below. The works by Nawae Constructions were completed by end of June 2012.
Table 2: Navaids Replacement Contract (installed by end of June 2012) Location Number Mainland South East Coast, East of Port Moresby 19 Woodlark Island 13 Morabe 2 Madang 1 Karker Island (off Madang) 6 West New Britain, Kimbe area 10 Manus 4 Kavieng 2 East New Britain, Rabaul area 6 Total 63
11 Source: NMSA. 12 Source: NMSA - Contract for the Rehabilitation of Small Navigational Aids (Daymarkers) CSTB 2237. 12
Figure 7: Replacement of 63 Navaids by Nawae Constructions
55. The 214 international and 63 coastal navaids was the target for end of June 2012, subject to losses due to deterioration, extreme weather (such as volcanic eruptions that caused the loss of a navaid at Rabaul), and acts of vandalism.
56. As of end of June 2012, there will remain 99 navaids that require replacement plus any existing navaids that may have been damaged in the interim.
57. For the purposes of this report,, a distinction is made between ‘lit’ navaids13 (those with a navigation light on top) and ‘unlit’ navaids14. It is noted that the 63 replaced navaids have been described by others as ‘Daymarks’ which may be construed as a navaids that may be seen during the day only (i.e. unlit navaid). It is noted that this terminology is misleading as the installed “Daymarks” constitute ‘lit’ navaids which provide guidance to mariners during both day and night. On this basis, the “Daymarks” are to be referred to as navaids henceforth.
V. PROPOSED NAVAIDS WORKS
58. Following the completion of the works by Nawae Constructions (end of June 2012), there will be a remaining 99 navaids that require replacement. It is understood from NMSA that the 99 remaining navaids require replacement as, in the current state, they are either non-existent or in such poor condition as to be virtually or practically non-existent. The navaids are to be replaced based on priority as noted below.
13 ‘Lit’ Navaids – Navigation aid with a light/beacon. 14 ‘Unlit’ Navaids – Navigation aid with lead marker (coloured plate). The lead marker is colored green or red (or other) to denote the starboard or port side of the channel as per the IALA convention requirements. 13
A. Navaids Priority
59. The navaid priority levels have been determined by NMSA. The priority process has been completed with the assistance of ArcGIS mapping software, Navigational Charts, Ship tracks (Automatic Identification System: AIS/Long-range Identification and Tracking: LRIT) and existing navaids in GIS environment.
60. NMSA’s priority levels for navaids are described as follows:
Priority 1: A navaid or a system of navaids considered of vital navigational significance and as such requires primary priority. For example, lighted aids to navigation that are considered essential for marking landfalls, primary routes, channels, waterways, dangers or the protection of the marine environment. Priority 2: A navaid or a system of navaids that is considered to be of important navigational significance. For example, it may include any lighted aids to navigation that mark secondary routes and those used to supplement the marking of primary routes. Priority 3: A navaid or a system of navaids that is considered to be of necessary navigational significance.
61. NMSA’s criteria to determine the priority for each navaid includes the following:
Ship Traffic density based on AIS/LRIT tracks; General navigation practice and guidelines; Existing navaids network; Environmental Conditions; Configuration of reefs/coastline, Passage Ways/Entrances; Bays/Harbors; Proposed sites within PNG Port Limits & Private Port of Basamuk are categorized as Priority 3 on basis that places more responsibility on the Port Authority.
62. In addition, the following criteria will be considered to determine eligible sites for the project:
No outstanding past occupancy fee for proposed navaid sites; and No significant expected environmental impact (i.e., less than category A).
63. NMSA has advised that no further prioritization is required.
B. 99 Replacement of Navaids
64. The 99 remaining navaids requiring replacement are listed in Table 3. The priority of replacement is as noted above.
65. It is noted that Saibai Island (position 90 in Table 3) is under Australia’s jurisdiction and may not be required. This is to be confirmed by NMSA.
14
Table 3: Navaids to be Replaced
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 1 WSP Aitape Monopile in AUS652 2 41.662 -2.69437 S 141 19.64 141.32727 E 3 water, 2nm Lt 2 ESP Wewak Monopile in AUS651 3 33.8 -3.56333 S 143 39.8 143.66333 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 3 Madang Panab Island Monopile in AUS646 5 10.25 -5.17083 S 145 48.52 145.80872 E 3 [W] water, 1nm Lt 4 Madang Beacon [WR] Monopile in AUS646 5 9.559 -5.15932 S 145 49.35 145.82245 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 5 Madang Pommern Bay Monopile in AUS645 5 32.314 -5.53857 S 146 8.739 146.14565 E 3 (E) water, 1nm Lt 6 Madang Pommern Bay Monopile in AUS645 5 32.321 -5.53868 S 146 8.393 146.13988 E 3 (W) water, 1nm Lt 7 Oro Wanigela Reef Monopile in AUS520 9 20.97 -9.3495 S 149 11.47 149.19112 E 2 (No 18) water, 10nm Lt 8 Oro Rainu Reef Monopile in AUS520 9 20.18 -9.33633 S 149 11.59 149.19312 E 2 (17-G) water, 1nm Lt 9 Oro Rainu Reef ( Monopile in AUS520 9 20.104 -9.33507 S 149 12.03 149.20057 E 2 16-R) water, 1nm Lt 10 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 19.476 -9.3246 S 149 12.78 149.21292 E 2 15-G) water, 1nm Lt 11 Oro Rainu Reef Monopile in AUS520 9 19.714 -9.32857 S 149 12.94 149.21565 E 2 (No14-R) water, 1nm Lt 12 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 18.935 -9.31558 S 149 13.69 149.22818 E 2 13-G) water, 1nm Lt 13 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 18.87 -9.3145 S 149 13.97 149.2329 E 2 12-R) water, 1nm Lt 14 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 18.134 -9.30223 S 149 13.74 149.22892 E 2 11-G) water, 1nm Lt 15 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 18.513 -9.30855 S 149 13.84 149.23073 E 2 10-R) water, 1nm Lt 16 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 17.798 -9.29663 S 149 13.76 149.22927 E 2 9-G) water, 1nm Lt 17 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 17.419 -9.29032 S 149 14.2 149.23672 E 2 8-R) water, 1nm Lt 18 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 17.246 -9.28743 S 149 14.05 149.23418 E 2 7-G) water, 1nm Lt 19 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 17.054 -9.28423 S 149 14.32 149.23867 E 2 6-R) water, 1nm Lt 20 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 16.932 -9.2822 S 149 14.17 149.23618 E 2 5-G) water, 5nm Lt 21 Oro Rainu Reef (No Monopile in AUS520 9 15.98 -9.26633 S 149 15.09 149.25143 E 1 3-G) water, 5nm Lt 22 Oro Rainu Reef No Monopile in AUS520 9 10.533 -9.17555 S 149 19.48 149.32465 E 2 1 water, 1nm Lt 23 Oro Cape Killerton Monopile in AUS520 8 37.185 -8.61975 S 148 20.63 148.34375 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 24 Oro Beacon West Monopile in AUS521 8 37.098 -8.6183 S 148 20.76 148.34593 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 25 Oro Beacon East Monopile in AUS521 8 37.109 -8.61848 S 148 20.93 148.34883 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 26 Milne Bay Muwo Island Monopile in AUS 629 10 44.19 -10.7365 S 150 58.85 150.9809 E 3 water, 4nm Lt 27 Milne Bay Panaete Is [W] Monopile in AUS 382 10 42.638 -10.7106 S 152 21.34 152.35567 E 1 water, 5nm Lt 28 Milne Bay Panpompom Is Monopile in AUS 382 10 45.16 -10.7527 S 152 24.31 152.40523 E 2 North-end [W] water, 1nm Lt 29 Milne Bay Panapompom Monopile in AUS 382 10 45.68 -10.7613 S 152 25.07 152.41775 E 2 Is South-end water, 1nm Lt [W] 15
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 30 Milne Bay Losai Islet [W] Monopile in AUS 382 10 45.161 -10.7527 S 152 26.57 152.44282 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 31 Milne Bay Nivani Islet Monopile in AUS 382 10 47.293 -10.7882 S 152 23.4 152.38997 E 1 West-end water, 1nm Lt 32 Milne Bay Nivani Islet Monopile in AUS 382 10 47.293 -10.7882 S 152 23.95 152.39923 E 2 East-end water, 1nm Lt 33 Milne Bay Deboyne Monopile in AUS 382 10 47.424 -10.7904 S 152 26.99 152.44988 E 2 Lagoon water, 1nm Lt 34 Milne Bay Redlick Monopile in AUS 382 10 47.102 -10.785 S 152 29.38 152.48965 E 1 Passage water, 1nm Lt South-end 35 Milne Bay Redlick Monopile in AUS 382 10 47.457 -10.791 S 152 29.38 152.48965 E 1 Passage water, 1nm Lt South-end [W] 36 Milne Bay Rara Islet [W] Monopile in AUS 382 10 49.75 -10.8292 S 152 23.44 152.39073 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 37 Milne Bay South Passage Monopile in AUS 382 10 51.141 -10.8524 S 152 28.79 152.47983 E 2 [R] water, 1nm Lt 38 Milne Bay South Passage Monopile in AUS 382 10 50.657 -10.8443 S 152 30.13 152.50217 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 39 Milne Bay Nibub Pass Monopile in AUS 382 10 50.236 -10.8373 S 152 26.54 152.44225 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 40 Milne Bay Nivani Pass [R] Monopile in AUS 382 10 49.685 -10.8281 S 152 23.63 152.39378 E 1 water, 1nm Lt 41 Milne Bay Kitava Island Monopile in AUS 384 8 37.571 -8.62618 S 151 18.59 151.3099 E 1 water, 10nm Lt 42 Milne Bay Bwagoia Monopile in AUS 512 10 41.422 -10.6904 S 152 50.81 152.84687 E 2 Harbor water, 1nm Lt 43 Milne Bay Bwagoia Monopile in AUS 512 10 41.277 -10.688 S 152 50.86 152.84768 E 2 Harbor water, 1nm Lt 44 Central Round Point Monopile in AUS505 9 51.748 -9.86247 S 147 30.22 147.50362 E 2 Entrance West water, 1nm Lt 45 Central Round Point Monopile in AUS505 9 51.731 -9.86218 S 147 30.41 147.50688 E 2 Entrance East water, 1nm Lt 46 Central Gabagaba 1 Monopile in AUS505 9 49.569 -9.82615 S 147 27.49 147.4582 E 1 water, 2nm Lt 47 Central Gabagaba 2 Monopile in AUS505 9 49.785 -9.82975 S 147 27.65 147.46075 E 1 water, 2nm Lt 48 Central Gabagaba 3 Monopile in AUS505 9 49.158 -9.8193 S 147 28.52 147.47528 E 1 water, 1nm Lt 49 Central Gabagaba 4 Monopile in AUS505 9 50.185 -9.83642 S 147 30.25 147.50417 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 50 Central Gabagaba 5 Monopile in AUS505 9 48.585 -9.80975 S 147 30.22 147.50362 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 51 Central Gabagaba 6 Monopile in AUS505 9 46.174 -9.76957 S 147 28.71 147.47853 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 52 Central Wolverine Monopile in AUS506 10 5.377 -10.0896 S 147 40.26 147.67095 E 3 Entrance water, 1nm Lt 53 Central Wolverine Monopile in AUS506 10 5.591 -10.0932 S 147 40.03 147.66715 E 1 Entrance 2 water, 1nm Lt 54 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 6.154 -10.1026 S 148 10.43 148.1738 E 2 Harbor - water, 2nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 1- R 55 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 6.095 -10.1016 S 148 10.31 148.17178 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 2- G 16
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 56 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 4.717 -10.0786 S 148 10.51 148.17508 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 3- R 57 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 5.937 -10.099 S 148 10.34 148.17233 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 4- G 58 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 4.414 -10.0736 S 148 10.45 148.17408 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 5- R 59 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 5.764 -10.0961 S 148 10.29 148.17142 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 6- G 60 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.997 -10.0666 S 148 11.09 148.18485 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 7- R 61 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 5.563 -10.0927 S 148 10.2 148.17005 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 8- G 62 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 4.94 -10.0823 S 148 10.65 148.17745 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 9- R 63 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 5.167 -10.0861 S 148 10.36 148.17262 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 10- G 64 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.948 -10.0658 S 148 11.27 148.18777 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 11- R 65 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 5.016 -10.0836 S 148 10.39 148.17317 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 12- G 66 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.796 -10.0633 S 148 11.38 148.1896 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 13- R 67 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 4.761 -10.0794 S 148 10.36 148.17262 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 14- G 17
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 68 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.536 -10.0589 S 148 11.47 148.19123 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 15- R 69 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 4.316 -10.0719 S 148 10.32 148.17207 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 16- G 70 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.46 -10.0577 S 148 11.56 148.19262 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 17- R 71 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.975 -10.0663 S 148 11 148.18338 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 18- G 72 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.384 -10.0564 S 148 11.58 148.19307 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 19- R 73 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.791 -10.0632 S 148 11.29 148.18823 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 20- G 74 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.314 -10.0552 S 148 11.51 148.19183 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 21- R 75 Central McFarlane Monopile in AUS623 10 3.433 -10.0572 S 148 11.45 148.19078 E 2 Harbor - water, 1nm Lt Marshall Lagoon No. 22- G 76 Central Aroma Monopile in AUS506 10 10.506 -10.1751 S 147 59.76 147.99593 E 3 Passage 2 water, 1nm Lt 77 Central Aroma Monopile in AUS506 10 10.156 -10.1693 S 147 59.85 147.99748 E 2 Passage 3 water, 1nm Lt 78 Central Aroma Monopile in AUS506 10 10.043 -10.1674 S 147 59.96 147.99932 E 2 Passage 4 water, 1nm Lt 79 Central Aroma Monopile in AUS506 10 9.902 -10.165 S 147 59.89 147.99822 E 3 Passage 5 water, 1nm Lt 80 Central Buruma Point Monopile in AUS506 10 8.552 -10.1425 S 148 18.77 148.31283 E 3 (G) water, 1nm Lt 81 Central Beacon (R) Monopile in AUS506 10 8.622 -10.1437 S 148 18.87 148.31447 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 82 Central Beacon (B) Monopile in AUS506 10 8.568 -10.1428 S 148 18.93 148.31557 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 83 Central Baibara Island Monopile in AUS380 10 21.35 -10.3558 S 149 36.23 149.60383 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 84 NCD Vahunabada Monopile in AUS621 9 27.396 -9.4566 S 147 8.17 147.13617 E 3 Reef North water, 1nm Lt 85 NCD Vahunabada Monopile in AUS621 9 27.546 -9.4591 S 147 8.334 147.1389 E 3 Reef South water, 1nm Lt 86 NCD Padana Nahua Monopile in AUS621 9 35.717 -9.59528 S 147 17.06 147.28427 E 1 Passage water, 2nm Lt 18
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 87 NCD Bootless Inlet1 Monopile in AUS621 9 29.225 -9.48708 S 147 14.78 147.2464 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 88 NCD Bootless Inlet2 Monopile in AUS621 9 29.187 -9.48645 S 147 14.78 147.2464 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 89 NCD Esade Motu Monopile in AUS621 9 27.161 -9.45268 S 147 7.149 147.11915 E 3 Motu water, 1nm Lt 90 Western Saibai Island Monopile in AUS840 9 22.429 -9.37382 S 142 36.58 142.60965 E X water, 1nm Lt 91 Bougainville Beacon [G] Monopile in AUS684 5 27.005 -5.45008 S 154 37.7 154.62833 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 92 Bougainville Beacon [R] Monopile in AUS684 5 26.834 -5.44723 S 154 38.92 154.64865 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 93 Bougainville Minan Island Monopile in AUS684 5 26.848 -5.44747 S 154 39.09 154.65148 E 3 [G] water, 1nm Lt 94 Bougainville Beacon [R] Monopile in AUS684 5 26.701 -5.44502 S 154 39.37 154.65622 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 95 Bougainville Beacon Monopile in AUS684 5 9.985 -5.16642 S 154 33.36 154.55603 E 2 water, 1nm Lt 96 Bougainville Beacon Monopile in AUS684 5 8.701 -5.14502 S 154 33.48 154.55792 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 97 Bougainville Beacon Monopile in AUS684 5 9.14 -5.15233 S 154 33.38 154.5563 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 98 Bougainville Beacon Monopile in AUS684 5 8.264 -5.13773 S 154 32.5 154.54167 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 99 Bougainville Beacon Monopile in AUS684 5 8.223 -5.13705 S 154 32.87 154.5479 E 3 water, 1nm Lt ESP = East Sepik Province, NCD = National Capital District, WSP = Western Sepik Province.
C. Additional 33 Navaids
66. The provision of navaids in PNG waters is relatively sparse and there is a need to install additional navaids to reduce the noted risks and to make shipping and coastal trade safer.
67. Key passages and channels that are highly trafficked such as the Jomar Channel, China Straits, the Nessup Channel and the Star Reef Passage have few navaids considering the risks of straying outside the channels and reliance on local knowledge augmented by GPS.
68. NMSA have advised that additional visible marks are required to help mariners guide and reduce the reliance on electronic positioning equipment (equipment that may fail or provide erroneous data to inexperienced mariners that fail to interpret the information correctly). Navaids are considered to be a valuable visual reference to mariners and their value should not be under estimated.
69. The key rivers have virtually no navaids apart from those installed by mining companies near their wharves. For these rivers, there is a reliance on local knowledge and a reasonably high risk of groundings for river users. Additional navaids are required to better define the rivers, however, it is noted that river navigation is not part of this project.
70. The lack of navigation information inhibits uses. For example, cruise ships would be adverse to entering any area that is not well charted and marked with navaids. This lack of maritime infrastructure is an impediment to both safe use of the waterways and development of improved transport and development of tourism and resources.
19
71. The key ports of Madang and Rabaul have minimal navaids to assist vessels on the approach to these busy harbors. Additional navaids are required to better define channels and extent of clear water and the approaches to harbors. The additional coastal navaid locations have been identified as follows.
1. Nessup Channel
72. The southern approach has numerous isolated shoals and 3 additional navaids are required to mark shoals (two of these navaids are replacements for floating buoys – refer to Chart AUS 387)
2. Star Reef Passage
73. Star Reef Passage offers deep water with the passage being typically over 1nm wide (refer chart AUS 519).
74. To minimize risk and reliance on GPS, 6 additional navaids are suggested to mark the western edge of the Star Passage and the southern entrance to the passage.
3. Jomard Entrance
75. The Jomard channel is a major international route and at present the entrance is marked by a single 10nm light on Panuwayayapuna Island. Four additional navaids are suggested to better mark the entrance to the heavily trafficked Jomard channel (refer chart AUS 510). The entrance is subject to unusually bad weather and the area is littered with sunken ship wrecks.
4. Liljeblad Passage
76. The passage is heavily used by smaller vessels entering the Port Of Moresby, especially from the west where there is increasing shipping to and from the Fly River associated with mining and mineral exploration. There is a single lead navaid on Haidana Island to show the entrance lead but additional navaids to mark the land and shoal areas each side of the actual entrance have been requested by the shipping industry.
5. Wutung Lighthouse
77. Wutung Lighthouse is to be relocated to a more open area to make the lighthouse (GRP tower) more visible. The co-ordinates are at 02°36.299’S and 141° 00.110’E.
6. Louisia
78. Three new navaids are required to mark the small boat channel into the Louisia channel area.
7. Kila Front Light
79. A new navaid is required for the front light marking the channel.
20
8. Madang Port
80. The Madang Port channel curves and is subject to shoals on both sides of the channel (refer chart AUS 646). At present the channel is marked by 2 leading lights only at each end of the channel and 5 additional navaids are desirable to mark the extremities of the channel.
9. Rabaul
81. Three additional piled navaids are suggested to improve safety of access to Blanche Bay and Simpson Harbor (refer chart AUS 680).
10. China Straits
82. A new Chart AUS 508 was published in 2008. The channel is narrow being typically 0.5nm wide and curves around the south east tip of the mainland. The southern approach is marked by shoals and additional navigational aides are desirable to minimize risk of grounding.
D. Summary of additional navaids
83. In summary, the additional navaids required are as noted in Table 4 below. The priority of replacement is as noted in section V.A.
Table 4: Additional Navaids
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 1 WNB Nessup Monopile in Aus 673 5 53.931 -5.89885 S 148 9.063 148.15105 E 1 Channel pile water, 10nm Lt 2 WNB Nessup Monopile in Aus 673 5 53.272 -5.88787 S 148 8.7 148.145 E 1 Channel pile water, 10nm Lt 3 WNB Nessup Monopile in Aus 673 5 51 -5.85 S 148 10.2 148.17 E 1 Channel pile water, 10nm Lt 4 WSP Wutung Monopile in Aus 389 2 36.299 -2.60498 S 141 0.11 141.00183 E 2 Lighthouse water, 10nm Lt (GRP tower) relocation 5 Milne Bay Louisia pile 2 Monopile in Aus 516 8 33.234 -8.5539 S 151 1.562 151.02603 E 1 water, 1nm Lt 6 Milne Bay Louisia pile 6 Monopile in Aus 516 8 33.091 -8.55152 S 151 2.261 151.03768 E 1 water, 1nm Lt 7 Milne Bay Louisia pile 10 Monopile in Aus 516 8 33.087 -8.55145 S 151 2.682 151.0447 E 1 water, 1nm Lt 8 ENB Matupit Island Monopile in Aus 680 4 14.8 -4.24667 S 152 10.9 152.18167 E 1 light water, 4nm Lt 9 NCD Kila Front light Monopile in Aus 621 9 29.941 -9.49902 S 147 11.11 147.18522 E 1 water, 18nm Lt 10 Madang Madang Port Monopile in Aus 646 5 12.425 -5.20708 S 145 48.61 145.81017 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 11 Madang Madang Port Monopile in Aus 646 5 12.3 -5.205 S 145 48.24 145.804 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 12 Madang Madang Port Monopile in Aus 646 5 12.33 -5.2055 S 145 48.03 145.8005 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 13 Madang Madang Port Monopile in Aus 646 5 12.4 -5.20667 S 145 48.9 145.815 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 14 Madang Madang Port Monopile in Aus 646 5 12.685 -5.21142 S 145 48.05 145.8008 E 3 water, 1nm Lt 21
Location Type Chart Latitude Longitude Priority # Province Site Name 15 ENB Rabaul Harbor Monopile in Aus 680 4 17.4 -4.29 S 152 12.8 152.21333 E 3 approach water, 4nm Lt 16 ENB Rabaul Harbor Monopile in Aus 680 4 15.79 -4.26317 S 152 10.44 152.174 E 2 approach water, 4nm Lt 17 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 38.2 -8.63667 S 149 48.5 149.80833 E 2 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 18 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 38.2 -8.63667 S 149 51.1 149.85167 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 19 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 32.4 -8.54 S 149 48.5 149.80833 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 20 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 27 -8.45 S 149 45.5 149.75833 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 21 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 18.2 -8.30333 S 149 38.5 149.64167 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 22 Oro Star Reef Monopile in Aus 520, 8 20.8 -8.34667 S 149 41.8 149.69667 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt Aus 519 23 Milne Bay China Straits Monopile in Aus 625 10 37.9 -10.6317 S 150 34.4 150.57333 E 1 water, 6nm Lt 24 Milne Bay China Straits Monopile in Aus 625 10 38 -10.6333 S 150 35.2 150.58667 E 1 water, 6nm Lt 25 Milne Bay China Straits Monopile in Aus 625 10 36.3 -10.605 S 150 37.5 150.625 E 1 water, 6nm Lt 26 Milne Bay China Straits Monopile in Aus 625 10 33.4 -10.5567 S 150 38.8 150.64667 E 1 water, 6nm Lt 27 Milne Bay China Straits Monopile in Aus 625 10 33 -10.55 S 150 42.6 150.71 E 1 water, 6nm Lt 28 Milne Bay Jomard Monopile in Aus 509 11 15.726 -11.2621 S 152 4.973 152.08288 E 1 Entrance water, 10nm Lt 29 Milne Bay Jomard Monopile in Aus 509 11 13.935 -11.2323 S 152 10.19 152.16982 E 1 Entrance water, 10nm Lt 30 Milne Bay Jomard Monopile in Aus 509 11 11.28 -11.188 S 152 4.351 152.07252 E 1 Entrance water, 10nm Lt 31 Milne Bay Jomard Monopile in Aus 509 11 15.969 -11.2662 S 152 11.04 152.18398 E 1 Entrance water, 10nm Lt 32 NCD Liljeblad Monopile in Aus 505 9 27.136 -9.45227 S 146 59.6 146.9933 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt 33 NCD Liljeblad Monopile in Aus 505 9 27.477 -9.45795 S 146 59.37 146.98942 E 1 Passage water, 10nm Lt ENB = East New Britain, NCD = National Capital District, WNB = West New Britain, WSP = Western Sepik Province.
22
Figure 8 Proposed Navaid Location
VI. CIVIL WORKS WORKFLOW
A. Workflow
84. The civil works workflow applicable to the design and installation of Navaids is generally described as follows:
Conduct site assessment/Pre-survey and establish site conditions; Establish navaids design criteria including; Tidal planes; Currents; Wind and wave climate; Climate change effects; Complete design of navaids; Prepare construction tender documentation and call for tenders; Tender award for site project; and Construction works.
B. Site Project
85. The proposed project(s) would be pursued using a sector approach, which is deemed appropriate given the available data and limited time of the investigation phase. 23
86. Under this approach, the following is to be achieved:
Establish general criteria for the establishment of additional site projects; and Subject one or more representative site projects to technical, economic, financial, environmental, and social analyses.
87. The approach of the scoping study will be used as a framework for developing the design of site projects.
C. Navaid Alternatives
88. The navaids alternatives to be assessed include the following:
Floating Buoys; and Monopiles.
89. The assessment of navaids alternatives may be found under Section IX.A.1 of this report.
D. Community Security and Maintenance Agreements
90. All new and pre-existing navaids are required to have negotiated agreements in place. It is understood that these agreements are yet to be completed
91. The Agreements are a conciliatory resolution considering the Freedom of Waters Act which permits the installation of navaids and the Land Owners Customary Use Act which gives the landowners rights over the land and seabed out to an unspecified depth or extent.
92. Although this will result in negotiations over an estimated 5 years (as advised by NMSA), this should not delay construction as the implementation and negotiation phases can proceed in parallel.
93. As part of the Agreements, Community Lighthouse Committees will be encouraged to undertake basic maintenance of navaids and will be additionally rewarded for navaids that are not vandalized. Hence the agreements should assist NMSA in reducing their maintenance costs. These agreements are discussed in detail elsewhere
VII. SAMPLE SITE PROJECT
94. As noted in section VI.B of this report, the works would be pursued using a sector project approach. A sample site project for China Straits has been included to show the approach and to define design, costs and work methodology which may be replicated in other site projects.
A. Site Visit
95. A site visit to China Strait was conducted on 14 June 2012. The visit was performed and consisted of the following project preparatory technical assistance (PPTA) consultants:15
Maritime Systems Specialist and Team Leader; Transport/Civil Engineer;
15ADB. 2011. Technical Assistance to Papua New Guinea for Maritime and Waterways Safety Project. Manila. 24
Environmental Specialist; and Social and Poverty Specialist.
96. The purpose of the site visit was to obtain an appreciation of the site and the likely conditions to be encountered by prospective contractors.
97. It should be noted that the Social and Poverty specialist realized a visit from 11 June to 14 June. The Social and Poverty findings are to be found in the Social and Poverty report. Only one site was accessible (Gesila Island) and this was visited by the design team to gauge Navaid position and line of sight, foundation material and construction access.
B. Existing Navaids– China Straits
98. Given the limited timing of the visit, the existing navaid sites in China Straits could not be inspected. It is understood that the existing navaids are fiberglass huts/enclosures mounted on slabs on ground. In the case of Weku Una, the hut is mounted on a concrete monopile which is anchored on exposed rock. The inspection records16 of the existing navaids have been sited at it appears that, notwithstanding vandalism, the infrastructure (huts and supporting elements) remain in sound condition.
99. It is understood that, of the four existing Navaids, two of these (Kabu Eru Eru and Isulailai Point) have been recently vandalized with the lights and/or batteries removed.
Figure 9: Isulailai Point Navaid (photo Figure 10: Weku Una Navaid (photo courtesy Nawae courtesy Nawae Constructions) Constructions)
C. New Navaids – China Straits
100. From discussions with NMSA, it is understood that the new navaids are intended to be installed over water (monopole or alternative). From the sites visited, the installation over water would be preferred for the following reasons:
There appears to be restricted access for land based plant; Installation on Navaids on land would require the construction of slab-on ground type foundation. This is likely to be costly when considering plant and materials required; A navaid structure over water may be easier to install using conventional driving plant; and
16 Inspection records for Navaids have been sourced from NAWAE Constructions. 25
A new navaid would be harder to vandalize if located on water.
Figure 11: Gesila Island headland – Figure 12: Line of sight from Gesila location for new navaid Island headland
101. From the expected geology, it is understood that the installation of the new navaids are to be in sandy areas with sufficient sand depth. However, given the likely proximity to the shore, it is possible that the navaids foundation may be founded in basaltic bedrock.
VIII. APPLICATION OF WORKFLOW: CHINA STRAIT
102. This section will feature the application of the suggested site project workflow as described in Section VI.
A. Site Conditions
103. The China Strait is narrow deep water navigable channel in the Milne Bay Province of Papua New Guinea situated in the south eastern end of mainland PNG between Samarai Island and Sariba Island. The strait is regularly used by container and break bulk vessels on route from Port Moresby to Lae, the two most important ports in the country.
104. The Strait is 4 nautical miles (7 km) in length and 0.75 nautical miles (1 km) wide and curves around the south east tip of the mainland connecting the Solomon Sea with the Coral Sea. Although the strait is marked by shoals and strong currents it is nonetheless considered to be a key passage for local shipping between Port Moresby and Lae.
105. There are a total of four existing Navaids along the Strait. Three of these are to be found in the channel (Samarai Island, Kabu Eru Eru and Isulailai Point) and one in the approach (Weku Una). These Navaids were subject to inspection during on the previous navaids refurbishment project works in 2005.
106. The nature of the waterway (bathymetry and geography) as well as the through shipping (existing and projected) has noted the need for five additional navaids to be installed. These additional navaids would be distributed as follows:
Approach – Two additional navaids – (1) off at the Mount Bossim peninsula and (1) off at the 8m shoal offshore to the east. 26
Channel – Three additional navaids - (1) off at the northern tip of Kwato island, (1) off on the southern tip of Gesila Island, and (1) off on the NW tip of Kui (Mekinley) island.
107. The location of the additional (and existing) navaids is as noted in Figure 13 below. Existing navaids are noted as ”ᴉ“, whilst proposed new navaids are noted as ”◊”.
Figure 13: China Strait Navaids
108. The China Strait passage is highly trafficked and, considering the risks of straying outside the channels and reliance on local knowledge, the existence of few navaids coupled with ongoing vandalism, augments the risks of vessel groundings with potentially serious environmental and social impacts. On this basis, the passage requires improvement with the refurbished of existing and the installation of additional navaids as noted in Figure 13 above.
1. Tidal Planes
109. The tidal planes for China Straits have been extracted from Admiralty Chart AU625 (published 02 June 2011). Tidal Levels have been referred to datum of soundings for Samarai Island and Doni Island with heights measured above Chart Datum. Chart Datum (CD) is the Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT). Tidal levels are noted in Table 5.
27
Table 5: Tidal Plane Data for China Strait
Height in meters above Chart Datum Description Samarai Island Doini Island
Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) 1.6 2.0
Mean High High Water (MHHW) 1.4 1.7
Mean Low High Water (MLHW) 0.9 1.1
Mean Sea Level (MSL) 0.8 1.0
Mean High Low Water (MHLW) 0.6 0.9
Mean Low Low Water (MLLW) 0.1 0.3
Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT) (Chart 0 0 Datum)
Tidal Range 1.6 1.7
2. Currents
110. Current data has been have been extracted from Admiralty Chart AU625 (published 02 June 2011). From this chart it is noted that the surface currents may range from 2- 6 knots. The magnitude of these currents is deemed significant and need to be considered in terms of navigation, safety and the construction of any new structures.
3. Wind Climate
111. Papua New Guinea is situated within the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). This zone is subject cyclone events which would generally be responsible for extreme wind climate in the area. China Strait is in a cyclonic wind region and under these conditions wind will act on projecting structures (such as navaids) as well as vessels. No wind data is available at this stage.
4. Wave Climate
112. No wave data is available for this area and wave modeling would be recommended. The wave climate will be heavily influenced by prevailing winds. Milne bay is subject to cyclonic winds and wave modeling, including cyclonic conditions, is recommended in order to determine wave parameters to be used for navigation as well as structures.
5. Climate Change
113. It is now generally accepted in the scientific community that climate change is happening. However, the reason why it is happening is still a matter for debate. Climate change contributes to sea-level rise in two ways:
Ice melt that is stored in glaciers and the polar ice sheets; and Thermal expansion. 28
114. The average global sea levels have risen by 1.8 mm per year between 1961 and 2003 and have accelerated to 3.1 mm per year between 1993 and 200017. To date, most of the sea level rise that has occurred has come from thermal expansion and the melting of glaciers and ice caps, however it is expected that sea level rise due to melting ice sheets from Greenland and West Antarctica will increase over time.
Figure 14: Change in Global Sea Level since 188018
115. AS 4997 – 2005 Design of Maritime Structures, provides sea level rise recommendations based on the mid-scenario from the International Panel on Climate Change Control (IPCC) in 2001 as follows:
25 year design life = 0.1 m sea level rise; 50 year design life = 0.2 m sea level rise; and 100 year design life = 04 m sea level rise.
116. The IPCC in 2007 updated their 2001 document with more scientific information and therefore these AS4997 estimates have been superseded by the latest IPCC estimates.
117. The Australian Government publication Current and Future climate of Papua New Guinea 2011 states that satellite data indicates that the sea level has risen near PNG by about 7mm per year since 1993. This is larger than the global average of 2.8 – 3.6 mm per year. This higher rate of rise may be partly related to natural fluctuations that take place year to year or decade to decade caused by phenomena such as the El Nino – Southern Oscillation.
17 Source: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 18 Source: Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). 29
Figure 15: Observed and Projected Relative Sea-Level Change Near PNG19
118. Figure 15 shows the observed sea-level records near PNG. The relative sea levels are indicated in dark blue (relative tide-gauge observations) and light blue (the satellite record since 1993). Reconstructed estimates of sea level Papua New Guinea (since 1950) are shown in purple. The projections for A1B (medium) emissions scenario (representing 90% of the range of models) are shown by the shaded green region from 1990 to 2100. The dashed lines are an estimate of 90% of the range of natural year-to-year variability in sea level.
119. Sea level is expected to continue to rise in PNG By 2030, under a high emissions scenario, this rise in sea level is projected to be in the range of 4-15 centimeters (cm).
120. Table 6 shows sea level rise projections for three emission scenarios and three time periods. Values represent 90% of the range of the models and changes are relative to the average of the period 1980-1999.
Table 6: Sea Level Rise Projection Year 2030 Year 2055 Year 2090 Low emissions 4-14 cm 10-26 cm 17-46 cm scenario Medium emissions 5-14 cm 9-30 cm 20-58 cm scenario High emissions 4-15 cm 10-29 cm 22-60 cm scenario
121. It is the combined effects of sea level rise, the impact of tides, storm surges, wave processes and local conditions such as topography, elevation and geology that will produce climate change impacts and risks in coastal areas.
19 Source: 2011 International Climate Change Adaptation Initiative - Pacific Climate Change Science Program ‘Current and future climate of Papua New Guinea.’ 30
Figure 16: Impact of Tides, Storm Surge and Wave Processes on Mean Sea Level
122. The report Current and Future climate of Papua New Guinea 2011 also indicates that tropical cyclones affect southern PNG between November and April. Further, between 1969 and 2010, 23 tropical cyclones passed within 400 km of Port Moresby. This is shown in the following figure extracted from the report.
Figure 17: PNG Tropical Cyclones20
123. The report states further that in the PNG region, projections tend to show a decrease in the frequency of tropical cyclones by the late 21st century and an increase in the proportion of the more intense storms.
124. The present occurrence of cyclones or typhoons is at variance with the Admiralty Sailing Directions, Pacific Islands Pilot, Volume 1, Eleventh Edition 2007.
125. The following extract from the Pilot shows the historical tracks of cyclones and it is seen that only one cyclone came near the PNG coast just east of Port Moresby. Other than this single occurrence there have in fact been no cyclones in PNG or PNG waters.
20 Source: 2011 International Climate Change Adaptation Initiative - Pacific Climate Change Science Program ‘Current and future climate of Papua New Guinea.’ 31
Figure 18: PNG Tropical Cyclones Tracks
126. In the lifetime of the navaids, of up to 50 years, the mean sea level is expected to rise by at least 0.14m and possibly up to 0.3m or thereabouts, assuming the medium emissions scenario, and adopting the upper range forecast. According to the existing information and forecasts, the navaids need not be designed to withstand cyclonic events.
127. The impact of climate changes is quite difficult to quantify as the impacts will be far reaching and much more than just a sea level rise. Increased water temperatures may result in the death of corals and the gradual decay of reef areas, leaving the remaining sand much less constrained and able to be transported by tidal currents and waves. Similarly the rise in sea level will flood low lying lands and allow waves to attack more of the coast, leading to a probable erosion of the coastline. The quantum of setback will depend on the geotechnical properties of the soil and the ability of surviving and adapting vegetation to bind the soils together. As a general guide, coastal setback of at least 10m should be expected for the forecast 0.3m sea level rise.
128. The great unknown is the possible climate changes that may occur. These are presently undefined by IPCC and others. It is generally thought that storms and extreme events will become more frequent and be more severe. At the coast higher winds blowing towards the 32
coast will raise local water levels and generate larger waves. When these occur with the higher astronomic tides, the waves will be able to attack the shoreline with greater energy and result in greater shoreline erosion and cut back of the shore.
129. In summary the two impacts of climate change in China Straits as well as other sites are:
Sea levels will rise, and at the coast this means the coast will be eroded. Waves will attack previously virgin ground. The intensity of severe events will increase, and the frequency of severe events will increase. For example squalls will be more severe and occur more often.
130. Navaids design (on shore or over water) should therefore allow for possible climate change.
131. Navaids on shore should allow for probable shoreline erosion and undercutting of cliff faces leading to shoreline instability and then failure into the sea. Options to deal with this include design structures for minimal service life if they are likely to be in an erosion zone, and plan on replacing or relocating the structures as required. This is applicable for relatively simple structures of low cost and utilizing a simple slab foundation, or perhaps be founded on stumps or posts. The extent of the erosion zone is difficult to generalize but may be of the order of 50m in some areas, and more or less in other areas. The typical parameters that need to be considered include the soil type, extent of protective reef and exposure to the sea, vulnerability to runoff from the land etc. If vulnerable to erosion the structure may need to be piled rather than a simple onground slab foundation. The opinion of an experienced coastal engineer should be sought where necessary. In Australia it is becoming more common for statutory planning authorities to require developers to undertake a coastal vulnerability hazard assessment for major developments within 1km of the coast and where the land is less than 5m above sea level.
132. Design structures for a longer service life, e.g., 25 to 50 years, especially where the structure needs to be large and there is significant capital expenditure required. The foundations of these structures could be on a slab, but are more likely to be piled. A whole of life cost analysis should be undertaken to assess the risks and costs of this approach.
133. Navaids in the sea should be designed for at least a 25 to 50 year service life as the costs of driving piles is relatively high and it is desirable to maximize the life of the pile. There are presently no design guidelines for engineers as the IPCC and design standards are silent on forecast climate change impacts and loads on structures respectively. Hence it is up to the designer to assume a reasonable approach for possible increased loadings from higher winds, higher wave heights and slightly deeper water. Again a whole of life cost analysis should be undertaken to assess the risks and costs of this approach.
6. Geology
134. The geology in the vicinity of the China Straits features Normaby Volcanics including olivine basalts and basaltic agglomerates. From existing records21 the bedrock appears to be overlain by alluvial soils and deep sand beds.
21 Site records for Navaid installation have been sourced from NAWAE Constructions. 33
135. Presently, the bedrock levels are unknown however, given the channel bathymetry, is it suspected that the rock surface rises and is to be found closer to the seabed in areas near the shoreline. The stratigraphic boundaries between founding materials is unknown and it is recommended that some testing be undertaken (such as seismic testing) to determine the composition of founding materials at the location of proposed Navaids.
7. Coastal Field Surveys
136. NMSA does not have a standard design for shore-based navaids and as a result, these vary considerably from site to site. A reason for the early demise of coastal navaids structures has been their location close to the shore especially when coastal erosion has occurred undermining the foundation. Hence these sites, where coastal erosion may occur, should be inspected by a suitably experienced and qualified coastal engineer for site suitability and recommendation on the type of foundation for the structure.
137. At all sites, the risk of damage by sea, storm, coastal erosion, fluvial action or other natural events (including volcanic activity) should be considered.
B. Pre-Installation Survey
138. It is necessary to identify all necessary aspects for preliminary design through field surveys. Under NMSA’s most recent contract for the installation of 63 navaids, the contractor was required to pre-visit the proposed sites and carry out a rapid assessment to determine any significant environmental values.
139. For the 132 proposed navaids, a pre-installation survey report (PISR) will be required prior the construction works. The PISR will be completed by suitable consultants on behalf of NMSA.
140. The PISR requirements are described elsewhere (Environmental Assessment).
141. Considering that NMSA may adopt a standardized design, additional engineering investigations may be undertaken. These may include inspection of works undertaken by the Contractor and assessment of conformance with design and specification, quality of construction, quality of installation, final assembly and commissioning.
IX. NAVAIDS ASSESSMENT
A. Navaids Design
1. Description of Navaids
142. Navaids may be described as any sort of marker which aids mariners in navigation. As noted in Section VI.C, the navaids alternatives to be assessed in this report include the following:
Floating Buoys; and Monopiles.
34
2. Floating Buoys
143. Floating buoys are common navaids used internationally in ports and waterways. For the purposes of comparison and for this report, the buoy systems considered are readily supplied by reputable buoy manufacturers.
144. A sample of a floating buoy is shown in Figure 19 below.
Figure 19: Floating Buoy - Typical
145. The functional requirements for buoys have been assumed as follows:
Buoys to have a focal plane of 7m (light height); Mooring system to provide chain length 3 times water depth; and Reasonable geotechnical properties of the substrate for block anchorage, i.e., sandy seabed.
35
3. Monopiles
146. As per floating buoys, monopiles are common navaids used internationally in ports and waterways. For the purposes of this report, monopiles are readily supplied by fabricators in the Asia/Oceania region. The functional requirements for monopoles have been assumed as follows:
Piles to have a focal plane of 7m (light height) above low water level; Piles to be driven 4 to 6 m depending on the water depth; and Reasonable geotechnical properties of the substrate, i.e., sandy seabed.
147. A sample of a monopile is shown in Figure 20 below.
Figure 20: Monopile - Typical
B. Navaids Alternatives Assessment
148. The alternatives have been assessed on the following basis:
Durability; 36
Geotechnical Issues; Requirements for installation and Maintenance; and Capital cost and Maintenance cost.
1. Durability of Floating Buoys
149. The materials of construction for the buoy system under consideration are summarized in Table 7 below.
Table 7: Navigation Buoy and Construction Materials Buoy Anchor Mast Structure Float Ballast Fasteners Mooring Model Block Mobilis Aluminum Galvanized UV stabilized Stainless Steel chain Cast Iron JET (6061, 5083 Steel with high and Cast iron steel and and or 9000 QI or 5086) with sacrificial medium aluminum shackles Reinforce polyurethane anode density (7075) d concrete coating under polyethylene water
150. The durability aspects of the floating buoy construction materials are discussed below including an assessment of material durability for the expected exposure conditions.
a. Durability of Aluminum Masts
151. The buoy’s mast is to be fabricated using aluminum. There are many commercially available aluminum alloys however only a few alloys are recommended for marine structures. Alloys with high percentage magnesium (alloys designated as 5xxx) generally offer improved corrosion resistance in seawater. High magnesium alloys such as 5083 and 5086 are widely used in marine applications and are suited to atmospheric and splash zone exposure.
152. Aluminum alloys designated as 6xxx, are strengthened by inclusion of up to 2% magnesium and 2% silicon. Alloy 6061 contains 0.8-1.2% magnesium and 0.4-0.8% silicon. 6061 also contains 0.15-0.4% copper and this tends to reduce corrosion resistance compared with alloys without copper, however the corrosion resistance of 6061 in seawater is lower than 5083 or 5086 as noted above and as such, the 5xxx alloys would be recommended for use.
153. Application of a polyurethane coating on aluminum will improve corrosion protection, but these coatings require regular maintenance to remain effective as any defects will result in localized corrosion.
154. It is noted that stainless steel fasteners are used with the JET buoys. Aluminum is anodic to stainless steel and the use of stainless steel fasteners in aluminum plate is acceptable in benign environments since there is a large anode/cathode ratio. However, in a marine environment, direct electrical contact between stainless steel fasteners and aluminum is likely to result in localized corrosion of the aluminum. Consequently, this type of galvanic corrosion needs to be prevented through use of insulating washers if stainless steel fasteners are used on the aluminum mast
37
b. Durability of Steel and Cast Iron (Structure, Ballast, Fasteners, Mooring, and Anchor Block)
155. The corrosion rate of low carbon steel and cast iron in seawater is similar. For continuously submerged seawater conditions, the corrosion rate of steel is typically 0.15-0.20 mm/yr. Corrosion of cast iron anchors is probably not an issue as this is unlikely to result in failure.
156. Sacrificial anodes for the submerged portions of the steel structure are often attached to reduce the corrosion rate. For steel structures in marine environments, odes are usually manufactured from zinc and require periodic replacement. Steel structures in marine environments are sometimes galvanized. The life of a galvanized coating is usually proportional to its thickness. Normally, the thickness of hot dip galvanized coatings is 85 or 125 micrometers (μm).
157. The corrosion rate of galvanized coatings in marine splash environments is typically 20- 50 μm/yr. Therefore, if the galvanized coating is 85 μm, the zinc may be consumed in approximately 2-4 years. Formation of zinc hydroxides and carbonates on the galvanized surfaces may reduce the corrosion rate somewhat. However, the galvanized coating may require additional protection with an organic or thermal spray zinc coating throughout the service life if it becomes consumed and no longer protects the steel tube structure.
158. Mooring chains and shackles are subjected to the conjoint actions of wear and corrosion. In addition, fatigue cracking is a possibility. Protection is usually provided by increasing the chain diameter and this is usually increased by 0.2 to 0.4 mm/service year to allow for corrosion. It is considered necessary to replace mooring chains when diameter of the chain with the breaking strength used in the design of the mooring is reduced by 2%. E.g. Where a breaking strength equivalent to a chain diameter of 50mm is required, a 62mm diameter chain may be used (based on a corrosion allowance of 0.4mm/year over 30 year design life) and should be replaced when diameter has reduced to 49mm.
c. Durability of Polyethylene (Float)
159. Medium and high density polyethylenes are durable materials. In the service environment the greatest risk of deterioration will be due to UV radiation. Photo degradation results in surface cracking and a decrease in elastic modulus. UV stabilizers are used to improve resistance to UV radiation.
160. Polyethylene (floats in the case of the Jet Buoy) would be expected to have a service life of at least 20+ years and may undergo slight cosmetic fading. Polyethylene would not require any maintenance such as coating and would be resistant to impact damage.
d. Durability of Reinforced Concrete (Anchor Block Alternative)
161. Concrete used for anchor blocks should have satisfactory durability. The concrete may be subject to long-term sulphate attack by seawater and this could ultimately lead to surface cracking and softening.
38
162. Sulphate attack can be mitigated by use of concrete with water/cementitious material ratio less than 0.45 in addition to use of either Type SR (sulphate resistant) cement or replacement of ordinary Portland cement with 65% blast furnace slag.
163. Durability measures for protection of steel reinforcement should include adequate cover, use of concrete with a low water/cement ratio as above and proper curing of the concrete.
e. Summary of Floating Buoy Durability Assessment
164. The floating buoy systemis durable. The recommended frequency of inspection of floating buoys is annual and more detailed inspection, including temporary retrieval of buoy onto a barge and underwater inspection of the mooring chain is recommended every three years.
2. Durability of Monopiles
165. The materials of construction for the steel monopiles are summarized in Table 8below.
Table 8: Navigation Monopile and Construction Materials
Pile Pile Protection Platform Structure Platform Protection Steel welded Denso Seashield Marine Piling Precast concrete, Steel High Build Epoxy Paint, pipe, Grade 350 Tape, High Build Epoxy Paint Galvanized Steel Sacrificial anode under water
166. The durability aspects of the steel monopiles system are discussed below and include an assessment of material durability for the expected exposure condition.
a. Durability of Steel Piles
167. The effects of corrosion can be mitigated in several ways; (a) by providing a corrosion allowance, through the use of protective coatings systems, and (b) with cathodic protection systems. These mitigation methods can be used singly or in combination. It should be noted that cathodic protection can prevent significant corrosion in seawater up to mid tide and in the seabed. Protection from mid tide to the top of piles is to be gained through the use of a coating system which may comprise high-build epoxy paint and petrolatum tape.
168. The durability of bare steel (corrosion rates) is as noted for the floating Buoy system. Additional to the protection measures noted for the Buoy system (sacrificial anodes) the protection of steel piles is usually carried out by the application of complimenting systems. It is recommended that a protective coating is applied to the piles to reduce the number, size and weight of sacrificial anodes that would otherwise be required for full cathodic protection.
169. A cathodic protection system based on sacrificial aluminum anodes would be suitable for the piles. Aluminum anodes with a service life of approximately 12 years may provide an optimal balance between current output and weight. These anodes will need to be replaced after 12 years. It should be noted that as the protective coating will slowly degrade in the seawater, more bare steel will be exposed at year 12, so additional anodes will be required when the anodes are replaced at this time.
39
170. A coating system comprising high build epoxy paint22 and petrolatum tape23 is recommended within the splash zone. The petrolatum tape is to comprise a double layer around the circumference of the pile and this to be further protected with a final wrapping of plastic vinyl over-jacket. It is noted that the vinyl jacket is there to provide mechanical protection and this is secured around the circumference of the finished pile with stainless steel fasteners. A recommended coating system to piles is as follows
Paint = Amine adduct or polyamide cured epoxy (or approved alternative) Minimum build = 350 μm DFT Minimum coats = Three coats plus a strip coat over all edges and corners Compatible with cathodic protection systems Preparation = Blast cleaned to class 2.5 in accordance with AS1627.4, producing a minimum profile suitable for the selected primer Extent = Toe to top of pile (factory applied) Damage Repair = site applied coating or protective wrap. Marine Piling Petrolatum tape = site applied double layer around the circumference of the pile. Protect with plastic/vinyl tape
171. The protective coating will degrade over time, the following procedures are recommended to provide corrosion protection to the steel tube piles (above LAT) once the original protective coating has deteriorated.
Remove all poorly adherent coating and corrosion to original bare steel substrate Apply Marine Piling Petrolatum Tape over the affected area ensuring that all the substrate is covered Circumferentially wrap plastic/vinyl tape around the pile and over the Marine Piling Tape, ensuring that a 55% overlap is achieved. Place 10mm stainless steel band around pile over the plastic/vinyl tape 1500 to ensure everything is held in place. Spacing of the bands should not exceed more than 200mm spacing.
b. Summary of Monopile Durability Assessment
172. The monopile system is durable. The recommended frequency of inspection of monopiles is every six months (twice yearly). Aluminum anodes need to be replaced after 12 years. Additional inspection of piles will be required at 12 years to ascertain the need for additional anodes.
3. Geotechnical Issues
173. The 132 navaids24 to be installed are expected to be positioned on the seabed. In the case of buoys, the fixing mechanism will be through and anchor block (concrete or coast iron). In the case of monopiles, these are likely to be driven into the seabed.
22 The splash zone is the section of pile which lies between LAT (Lowest Astronomical Tide) to HAT (Highest Astronomical Tide). 23 High Epoxy Paint is applied on treated steel surfaces in various coats. For marine applications high build paint may be specified depending on design life and expected exposure. Usual paint thickness may vary from 500 microns (0.5mm) to 2000 microns (2mm). 24 Navaids as described in sections V.B and V.C. 40
174. The depth in which a buoy anchor block will sink into the seabed will be dictated by the sites’ geology and seabed material geotech parameters.
175. It is expected that the anchor block will sink into the sandy bed over time (or will be covered with moving sediment) but this will subject to local conditions and will need to be determined. If the anchor block is expected to sink, then the section of chain and attachments that are expected to sink with the anchor block could be over-designed such that they do not require inspection over the design life of the system. On this basis, sinking shouldn’t be a concern provided there is no requirement to regularly remove the blocks for maintenance purposes.
176. The depth in which the monopiles need to be driven is dictated by environmental factors including, geotechnical parameters of seabed, wind and wave loading, self weight of the monopile and superstructure and debris impact.
177. The depth of pile embedment into the seabed will vary according to geotechnical parameters. On the basis that the seabed comprises medium to dense sand, it would be expected that the pile embedment be approximately 4m to 6m depending on water depth.
4. Requirements for Installation and Maintenance
a. Installation Requirements and Maintenance (Buoys)
178. Buoys may be transported to site either on board an installation vessel or towed behind a vessel. If the former is employed, then the installation works may require a suitable dumb barge25 or small ship with adequate lifting capacity. The vessel onboard lifting capacity – whether a mobile crane on a barge or a ship’s onboard crane, would need to cater for an anchor block (of up to 10t) during installation.
179. It is noted that the anchor blocks would be designed to remain in place and not be removed from their location during the service life of the buoy system. This would allow a smaller vessel to be used for maintenance of the system, compared to installation, with buoys being towed to and from their location during maintenance periods.
180. The recommended frequency of visual inspection of floating buoys is annual and a more detailed inspection, including buoy inspection (through temporary retrieval onto a barge) and underwater inspection of the mooring chain would be recommended every three years.
181. The anchor blocks would be inspected by divers at three year intervals – inspection works being completed at the same time as the buoys are being removed from the water.
182. The mooring chains would not be removed regularly for inspection. To this end, the chain diameter would be increased to allow for corrosion over the design life of the system. Chains would be subject to inspection for corrosion and wear on a three year cycle.
183. Based on the above activities, any maintenance vessel should be suitable for supporting a dive team for inspection and minor maintenance of the chains and for retrieval and installation of the buoys either by towing ashore or by lifting the buoys onboard the vessel.
25 A dumb barge is a flat-bottomed working boat. These boats are generally designed with absence of its own means of mechanical propulsion and need to be towed or pushed by other craft such as Tug Boat. 41
b. Installation Requirements and Maintenance (Monopiles)
184. Monopiles may be transported to site on board a dumb barge or a self-propelled construction barge. The installation works would require vessel onboard lifting capacity – whether a mobile crane on a barge or a ship’s onboard crane to pitch and drive26 the monopiles into position.
185. The pitching and driving operations requires the additional mobilization of tug boats (to assist with barge positioning) and additional supply vessels (to provide parts, accommodation, etc).
186. The recommended frequency of visual inspection of monopiles is twice yearly (every 6 months). The recommended frequency of inspection of monopiles is every six months (twice yearly). Anodes need to be replaced after 12 years at which time a detailed inspection of the piles should be carried out.
187. Based on the above activities, any maintenance vessel should be suitable for supporting a dive team for inspection of the pile anodes and minor maintenance of the protective coatings for the monopile.
5. Capital Cost and Maintenance
188. Budgetary costs to supply and install floating buoys and monopiles have been sourced from PNG local contractors. The Capital expenditure (CAPEX) and maintenance for the installation and maintenance of the alternative navaids systems in this report are noted in Table 9 below:
Table 9: CAPEX and maintenance comparison - Floating Buoys vs Monopiles
Alternative Capex (K) Maintenance(K) Total (K) Floating Buoy 403,000 60,000 463,000 Monopile 114,000 41,000 155,000
189. In regards to the figures in Table 9, the following is noted:
The comparison is based on a unit cost for the supply, installation and maintenance of the alternative navaids types; The CAPEX costs are for the supply and installation costs for a single unit. These have been based on PNG contractor supplied prices The maintenance costs are for the yearly maintenance costs of a single unit. These costs are approximate and have been supplied by PNG contractors.
190. CAPEX and maintenance costs have been supplied in Appendix A of this report
26 Pitching and driving of piles refers to the process of lifting piles into vertical position before hammering (with driving hammer) into the ground. 42
C. Preferred Alternative
191. The Monopiles are the preferred alternative for Navaids. The basis on the preferred system is as follows:
Durability – the alternatives offer equivalent durability; Geotechnical Issues – the geotechnical parameters are unknown for either alternative. It is noted that although geotechnical variation may not cause significant difference to the floating buoy, these will definitely affect the monopile solution. The variance in geotech requires contingency which may increase the direct price to approximately K 125,000. It is noted this would still be significantly less than that of floating buoys; Requirements for installation and Maintenance – The installation and maintenance for the alternatives requires the mobilization/demobilization of equivalent construction plant. On this basis the alternatives’ installation is not dissimilar. The maintenance of the alternatives is to be on a yearly basis and in the case of the monopiles, this is to be twice per year. Capital cost and Life Cycle Cost – the difference in CAPEX and maintenance between the alternatives is significant. On the basis of a single unit, the floating buoys are almost three times as expensive as the monopiles.
X. OVERALL PROJECT
A. Costs
1. Capital Costs
192. Budget costs to supply and install 132 Navaids have been compiled and may be found in APPENDIX A of this report.
193. The budget costs for the supply and installation of the total 132 navaids have been inferred on the budget estimate for a site project.
194. The site project includes the supply and installation of a minimum of 30 navaids. For the purposes of this report, the minimum number of navaids defines a site project. The minimum number of navaids is further defined as the minimum number that is required to compile a viable commercial tender. The minimum number was discussed and agreed between the PPTA consultants and NMSA.
195. The site project estimate costs are noted in Table 10 below:
Table 10: Project Capex
Item Description Total (K) 1 Pre-installation survey of navaids sites 800,000 2 Contractor preliminaries, site establishment, mobilization and demobilization 1,500,000 3 Supply and Install navaids 650,000 Contingency & Contractor Profit 1,610,000 Total Site Project 4,560,000 43
Item Description Total (K) Average per Navaid (30) 152,000 Projected total cost (132) 20,064,000
196. In regards to the costs in Table 10, the following is noted:
The cost estimate is based on 18m long 457mm diameter piles x 16mm wall thickness The cost estimate is based on site project including 30 piles (minimum project size) Mobilization /demobilization and site establishment cost is as advised by PNG marine contractors The site establishment, mobilization and demobilization assumes that the proposed works will be undertaken during a single campaign The site establishment is to be within the immediate vicinity of the site (assumed barge by contractor) The monopile supply and install includes mechanical protection (paint and petrolatum tape) and cathodic protection (sacrificial anode) The works would be awarded under competitively tendered lump sum contracts NMSA would engage individual contractors directly The design development includes a basic/limited geotechnical investigation, detailed design of the works by a lead consultant and limited survey A contract contingency of 50% has been included. This contingency is appropriate for this Order of Magnitude Cost estimates as there remain significant unknowns including . variation of monopile diameter due to environmental conditions and water depth . variation of pile length due to water depth and line of sight required; and . variation in seabed geology A Contractor’s overhead and profit of 25% has been included. This markup is as typically allowed for Order of Magnitude Cost estimates
197. In regards to the cost estimate, the following items have been excluded:
GST Project approvals (if required) Concept/reference design costs (if required) Removal and disposal of old navaids/piles for the 99 navaids works Special environmental controls (if required Monopile additional security (if required) Head Contractor / EPCM Contractor indirect costs and fees ADB/NMSA costs (including Project/Delivery Management) Contractor Staging costs (in the case of subsequent contract award) Financing & legal costs ADB /NMSA contingencies Rise and Fall Price escalation
44
2. Maintenance Cost
198. It will be necessary to have a maintenance contract in place for the ongoing regular inspection, routine maintenance and response callouts in case of failures of the rehabilitated navaids. NMSA’s current contract for 214 navaids (expires end of 2012) appears to be satisfactory. It is assumed that NMSA would seek a similar contract only for a greater number of navaids.
199. The number of navaids to be maintained is assumed to be as follows:
Currently 214 till end of 2012 when contract expires July 2012-October 2013 277 (=214+63 replaced navaids) November 2013- 409 (=277+132 [99replaced navaids+33 new navaids])
200. The current maintenance costs per navaids is approximately K 41,000 (refer to Table 9)
201. Assuming a similar contract and cost as the existing maintenance contract, on a pro-rata basis, the anticipated maintenance costs are as follows:
Currently K 8.7million (based on 214 navaids) July 2012-October 2013 K11.3million (based on 277 navaids) November 2013- K 16.6million (based on 409 navaids)
202. The above maintenance estimates exclude GST.
3. Life Cycle Cost Estimate
203. The standard navaid design, currently adopted by NMSA, comprises a circular hollow steel pile (CHS) driven into the seabed 4 to 6 meters, with corrosion protection comprising paint, petrolatum tape, and a sacrificial anode. Onto the top of the pile is welded a stainless steel (grade 316) cap, which is used to seal the pile from oxygen ingress and enable the pile to be lifted into position and finally enable bolted connection of the SS ladder, Topmark and Sealite brand solar light. This SS cap welded connection is painted over with high build epoxy paint.
204. Regardless of the service life or CHS corrosion protective system, the SS cap, Topmark, Sealite and SS ladder are required and each of the bolted on items has its own service life to consider separately.
205. Accordingly, these items that are common to any design option are excluded from the life cycle cost analysis (but are included in the overall project cost).
206. There is scope to consider pile diameter variations to the current standard design and the service life requirement of 20 to 30 years. These options include the following:
Consider a 25 year design life Consider a 50 year design life for the pile Allow for corrosion with extra steel in the wall thickness Allow for the petrolatum tape system to -1m below water level plus an anode Allow for a HDPE sleeve to seabed grouted to the pile
45
207. NMSA’s existing pile design for various water depth options has been reviewed. The pile design sensitivity has been checked against desired design life (25 years or 50 years) and the results are as follows:
Table 11: Design for variation in water depth Water Depth Pile Diameter Existing Wall Wall thickness Wall thickness (m) (mm) Thickness (mm) required for 25 year required for 50 design life year life (no protection) 2 355 9.5 16 20 4 355 9.5 16 20 6 457 12.7 16 20
208. The required wall thickness estimates allow for an annual loss of steel of 0.15 mm per year as per Australian standard AS 4997 – Maritime structures. On this basis, the analysis indicates that:
The coastal navaids structure diameter of 355 mm is acceptable. The current 9.5 mm wall thickness should be increased to 12.7 mm to reduce pile deflections. The navaids structures for the longer range lights can be reduced from the 814mm down to 457 mm.
209. NMSA has advised that all of the 99 plus 33 extra navaids may all be 355mm diameter pile size. However for completeness, the life cycle cost analysis compares the cost of the 457 pile compared to the 813 dia piles used on the 10nm navaids. The PPTA consultants’ opinion is that the 457 dia piles are sufficient for the 10nm range lights which also require a small platform to enable the service technician to safely undertake his work, provided the platform is of lightweight construction, e.g., Webforge F/G, in a stainless steel frame.
210. The life cycle cost assessment is an essential analysis to estimate the best value for expenditure. In this case the analysis is for the navaid piles and considers which structural option and corrosion protective system for the steel piles is best considering service life expectancy.
211. Table 12 below provides a comparison of the required costs of three options to provide corrosion protection to the navaid piles for two service life durations and various depths of water. Costs are for the pile and protective system only, as all other costs are common to any option.
Table 12: Required Costs for Variation in Water Depth Pile Depth 25 Year Design Life 50 Year Design Life (m) Petrolatum HDPE Sleeve Steel Petrolatum tape HDPE Sleeve Steel tape (Kina) (Kina) (Kina)) (Kina) (Kina) (Kina) 355 Pile 2 22,172 8,918 8,979 37,582 8,918 NA 4 21,862 8,965 8,979 37,272 8,965 NA 6 21,552 9,013 8,979 36,962 9,013 NA 457 Pile 2 24,811 11,855 11,540 37,582 11,855 13,826 46
Pile Depth 25 Year Design Life 50 Year Design Life (m) 4 24,435 11,922 11,540 37,582 11,922 13,826 6 24,059 11,989 11,540 37,582 11,989 13,826 813 Pile 2 34,777 NA NA 37,582 NA NA 4 34,091 NA NA 37,582 NA NA 6 33,406 NA NA 37,582 NA NA
212. It is noted that:
Petrolatum tape denotes piles wrapped in Denso Seashield (top of pile to -1m below water) and protected by sacrificial anodes. The anodes have a life of 12 years. The Denso has a claimed life of 25 years. The Denso tape design life is considered optimistic HDPE denotes piles sleeved by HDPE tubes from top of pile to seabed and grouted in place. HDPE has a claimed life of 50 years. Steel denotes piles of thicker wall thickness to provide sacrificial steel. The expected life is 21 years and 42 years depending on the wall thickness and hence this option provides slightly less than the indicated life. Costs are for the standard pile length of 18m, and assume top of pile at 8m for 2m water depth, top of pile at 7m for 4m water depth, and top of pile at 6m for 6m water depth.
213. The above table shows that the HDPE sleeved option is considerably cheaper than the Denso option for the 25 year service life followed then by the sacrificial steel option. Both of these options require no maintenance, compared to the Denso option which requires anode replacement. The observations of navaids installed in the previous project in 2005 -2007 suggest that the Denso will require maintenance before the 25 year time, but this has not been costed.
214. For the 50 year service life, the HDPE is again cheaper than the Denso option. The steel option is not possible with the 355 dia pile. Again, the sacrificial steel option is the next cheapest option. On a life cycle basis the HDPE sleeved pile offers the best solution from a service life aspect with no maintenance of the pile requirement.
B. Construction Program
215. The current contractor has advised that the best time to commence construction is in late March to early April in regards to timing for best seasonal weather, winds and sea conditions. This translates to an award of contract required in early November or preferably earlier in order to complete the necessary preliminaries, site inspections, order materials and receive same in PNG, and mobilize floating plant.
216. The indicative program indicates a nominal 6 month construction period for a typical site project. This program could be extended for the project period but this would need further review with a suitably qualified Contractor.
47
Figure 21: Indicative Program for Construction
48
APPENDIX A. COST ESTIMATES Project Estimate Sheet Project No.: 44375 Project Name: PNG Navaids - Alternatives Date: 11 Aug 2012 Disclaimer This cost estimate is based on experience and judgement by practising professional engineers familiar with the construction industry. This cost estimate can NOT be guaranteed as oprofessional engineers have no control over Contractor’s prices, market forces and competitive bids from Tenderers. This estimate is based on concept details for budgeting purposes.
Item Description Quantity Rate (Kina) Unit Total (Kina)
SCOPE - conduct cost comparison between navaids alternatives - navaids alternatives are monopiles or floating buoy - comparsion based on unit cost for supply, install and maintain - maintenance to be on a yearly basis
1 Alternative 1 - Monopiles Assume monopile - 457 OD piles x 16mm think, 18m long
1.1 CAPEX - Supply and Install Price 1 113,900 each 113,900
1.2 Opex - Maintenance 1 41,200 each 41,200
Total (Kina): 155,100
2 Alternative 2 - Floating Buoy Assume Buoy - Mobilis Jet 9000 QL PF8
2.1 CAPEX - Supply and Install Price 1 403,200 each 403,200
2.2 OPEX - Maintenance 1 60,000 each 60,000
Total (Kina): 463,200
NOTES AND ASSUMPTIONS
1 Monopile average cost based on average current contractor prices 2 Monopile average cost excludes contingency 3 Buoy model based on existing buoys (Nessup Channel) 4 Buoy supply & installation cost based on 2007 contractor cost 5 Buoy maintenance costs based on apprixmate maintenance costs as advised by PNG Maritiem contractors