DOCSLIB.ORG

Hovercraft Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hovercraft Feasibility Study Hovercraft Feasibility Study San Francisco Water Emergency Transportation Authority AECOM Project number: 60617240 WETA Contract number: 19-008 November 30, 2020 Hovercraft Feasibility Study Prepared for: San Francisco Water Emergency Transportation Authority Pier 9 The Embarcadero #111 San Francisco, CA 94111 Prepared by: AECOM 300 Lakeside Drive Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 aecom.com San Francisco Water Emergency Transportation Authority AECOM Hovercraft Feasibility Study Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Stakeholder Outreach ............................................................................................................... 2 2. Hovercraft Technology ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Overview of Hovercraft Technology Update ............................................................................. 4 2.2 Commercial Hovercraft Models, Costs, and Fuel Consumption .............................................. 4 2.3 Hovercraft Maintenance Costs ................................................................................................. 5 2.4 Crew Size ................................................................................................................................. 6 3. Phase 2 Routes and Operating Cost Modeling .................................................................................. 7 3.1 Phase 2 Routes ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Travel Speeds and Times ......................................................................................................... 7 3.3 Refined Operating Cost Analysis .............................................................................................. 9 4. Ridership, Fare, and Annual Cost Analysis ...................................................................................... 11 4.1 Ridership Analysis .................................................................................................................. 11 4.2 Fares ....................................................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Annual Operating Cost per Route .......................................................................................... 12 5. Environmental Considerations .......................................................................................................... 13 5.1 Engine Requirements ............................................................................................................. 13 5.2 Emissions Analysis ................................................................................................................. 13 5.3 Noise and Habitat Impacts in Phases 1 and 2 ....................................................................... 14 6. Capital Costs and Site Selection ...................................................................................................... 15 6.1 Terminal Site Locations and Capital Costs ............................................................................. 15 6.2 Maintenance and Overnight Storage Facility Needs and Capital Costs ................................ 24 6.3 Hovercraft Purchase Capital Costs ........................................................................................ 25 7. Certification Processes and Project Timelines ................................................................................. 26 7.1 Staff Training and Certification ............................................................................................... 26 7.2 Craft Certification Process ...................................................................................................... 26 7.3 Hovercraft Project Timeline .................................................................................................... 26 8. Funding and Financing Analysis ....................................................................................................... 28 8.1 Funding and Financing a Hovercraft Service ......................................................................... 28 8.2 Public Funding and Financing Opportunities .......................................................................... 30 8.3 Case Studies of Public-Private Partnerships in Public Transit Delivery ................................. 35 8.4 Funding and Financing Scenario Modeling ............................................................................ 37 9. Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................... 40 – WETA Recent Operating Costs ............................................................................................ 41 – Initial Long List of Routes in Phase 1 ................................................................................... 43 B.1 Vallejo ..................................................................................................................................... 44 B.2 Martinez/Antioch (Carquinez Strait) ....................................................................................... 44 B.3 Hercules/Pinole Area .............................................................................................................. 44 B.4 Richmond ................................................................................................................................ 44 B.5 Berkeley .................................................................................................................................. 45 B.6 Oakland/Alameda ................................................................................................................... 45 B.7 Downtown San Francisco ....................................................................................................... 46 B.8 San Francisco and Oakland Airports ...................................................................................... 48 B.9 South San Francisco .............................................................................................................. 48 San Francisco Water Emergency Transportation Authority AECOM i Hovercraft Feasibility Study B.10 San Leandro ........................................................................................................................... 49 B.11 Foster City .............................................................................................................................. 49 B.12 East Dumbarton Bridge .......................................................................................................... 49 B.13 West Dumbarton Bridge and Cooley Landing ........................................................................ 50 B.14 Mountain View Area ................................................................................................................ 51 B.15 Alviso ...................................................................................................................................... 52 B.16 Coyote Creek/Mud Slough ..................................................................................................... 52 – Ridership Model Validation and Initial Forecasts ................................................................. 53 C.1 2010 Validation ....................................................................................................................... 53 C.2 2020 Validation ....................................................................................................................... 53 C.3 Initial Forecasts....................................................................................................................... 54 – Noise Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 58 D.1 Airborne Sound ....................................................................................................................... 58 D.2 Possible Impacts of Airborne Noise ........................................................................................ 58 D.3 Underwater Sound .................................................................................................................. 61 D.4 Effects on Birds ....................................................................................................................... 61 D.5 Hydroacoustic Threshold Criteria for Fish Species ................................................................ 62 D.6 Hydroacoustic Threshold Criteria for Marine Mammals ......................................................... 63 – South Bay Environmental Constraints .................................................................................. 65 E.1 Site Specific Environmental Constraints: Protected Species and Habitat ............................. 66 – Emissions Analysis ............................................................................................................... 68 F.1 Emissions Methodologies ....................................................................................................... 68 F.2 Emissions Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 69
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Program Environmental Impact Report
    Executive Summary Final Program Environmental Impact Report Expansion of Ferry Transit Service in the San Francisco Bay Area Prepared by: URS Corporation June 2003 Prepared for: Executive Summary ES.1 INTRODUCTION This document is a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addressing the San Francisco Water Transit Authority’s (WTA) Proposed Project to implement expanded ferry service in the Bay Area. The WTA began operation as a new regional agency in 2000, with the directive of evaluating options to improve and expand Bay Area ferry service and to report back to the California Legislature with a recommended plan of action. As a result, the preparation of WTA’s Implementation and Operations Plan (IOP) initiated a wide range of studies, consultation, and public outreach that provided input to the decision-making process of developing the plan. From August 2002 through January 2003, the WTA circulated a Draft Program EIR for public review and comment. That EIR did not identify a proposed project or preferred alternative; rather, it addressed a range of alternatives for expanding ferry service in the Bay Area. In March 2003, the WTA recirculated the Draft EIR in order to include analysis of the IOP Alternative, which is now identified as the Proposed Project, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. ES.2 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES/NEED ES.2.1 Purpose and Objectives The primary purpose of the WTA system IOP is to increase Bay Area regional mobility and transportation options by providing new and expanded water transit services and related ground transportation terminal access in the Bay Area. ES.2.2 Need The Bay Area is home to a highly diverse population and historically strong economy that is served by a complex transportation network.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Network
    Milton Keynes, London Birmingham and the North Victoria Watford Junction London Brentford Waterloo Syon Lane Windsor & Shepherd’s Bush Eton Riverside Isleworth Hounslow Kew Bridge Kensington (Olympia) Datchet Heathrow Chiswick Vauxhall Airport Virginia Water Sunnymeads Egham Barnes Bridge Queenstown Wraysbury Road Longcross Sunningdale Whitton TwickenhamSt. MargaretsRichmondNorth Sheen BarnesPutneyWandsworthTown Clapham Junction Staines Ashford Feltham Mortlake Wimbledon Martins Heron Strawberry Earlsfield Ascot Hill Croydon Tramlink Raynes Park Bracknell Winnersh Triangle Wokingham SheppertonUpper HallifordSunbury Kempton HamptonPark Fulwell Teddington Hampton KingstonWick Norbiton New Oxford, Birmingham Winnersh and the North Hampton Court Malden Thames Ditton Berrylands Chertsey Surbiton Malden Motspur Reading to Gatwick Airport Chessington Earley Bagshot Esher TolworthManor Park Hersham Crowthorne Addlestone Walton-on- Bath, Bristol, South Wales Reading Thames North and the West Country Camberley Hinchley Worcester Beckenham Oldfield Park Wood Park Junction South Wales, Keynsham Trowbridge Byfleet & Bradford- Westbury Brookwood Birmingham Bath Spaon-Avon Newbury Sandhurst New Haw Weybridge Stoneleigh and the North Reading West Frimley Elmers End Claygate Farnborough Chessington Ewell West Byfleet South New Bristol Mortimer Blackwater West Woking West East Addington Temple Meads Bramley (Main) Oxshott Croydon Croydon Frome Epsom Taunton, Farnborough North Exeter and the Warminster Worplesdon West Country Bristol Airport Bruton Templecombe
    [Show full text]
  • Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority
    Steering Committee Draft | Ocotber 2020 Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority Steering Committee Draft | Ocotber 2020 Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan Contra Costa Transportation Authority Prepared By: 1625 Shattuck Avenue Suite 300 Berkeley, California 94709 510.848.3815 ORANGE COUNTY • BAY AREA • SACRAMENTO • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE • SAN DIEGO www.placeworks.com Table of Contents List of Figures & Tables ii Executive Summary 3 1. Introduction 13 1.1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Lifeline Transportation Program 13 1.2 CBTP Guidelines 14 1.3 2004 Richmond-Area CBTP 15 1.4 Current Richmond Area CBTP 15 1.5 COVID-19 and CBTP Development 17 2. Study Area Profile 18 2.1 Demographic Analysis 18 2.2 Transportation Patterns 24 2.3 Transportation Network 28 3. Previous Studies and Mobility Gaps 33 3.1 Local Studies 33 3.2 Countywide Studies 37 3.3 Current Studies 39 3.4 Thematic Mobility Challenges 40 4. Outreach and Engagement Summary 43 4.1 CBTP Advisor Groups 43 4.2 Outreach Strategy 44 4.3 Outreach Awareness 44 4.4 Outreach Results 46 4.5 Outreach Summary 54 5. Methodology and Recommendations 56 5.1 COVID-19 and CBTP Development 56 5.2 Evaluation Criteria 57 5.3 Evaluation Process 60 5.4 Recommended Projects and Plans 62 Appendix A Existing Conditions Report Appendix B Outreach Materials and Results Appendix C Recommendations Scoring Results Richmond Area Community-Based Transportation Plan i Contra Costa Transportation Authority List of Figures
    [Show full text]
  • About WETA Present Future a Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service
    About WETA Maintenance Facility will consolidate Central and South Bay fleet operations, include a fueling facility with emergency fuel The San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation storage capacity, and provide an alternative EOC location, Authority (WETA) is a regional public transit agency tasked with thereby significantly expanding WETA’s emergency response operating and expanding ferry service on the San Francisco and recovery capabilities. Bay, and is responsible for coordinating the water transit response to regional emergencies. Future Present WETA is planning for a system that seamlessly connects cities in the greater Bay Area with San Francisco, using Today, WETA operates daily passenger ferry service to the fast, environmentally responsible vessels, with wait times cities of Alameda, Oakland, San Francisco, Vallejo, and South of 15 minutes or less during peak commute hours. WETA’s San Francisco, carr4$)"(*- /#)тѵр million passengers 2035 vision would expand service throughout the Bay Area, annually under the San Francisco Bay Ferry brand. Over the operating 12 services at 16 terminals with a fleet of 44 vessels. last five years, SF Bay Ferry ridership has grown чф percent. In the near term, WETA will launch a Richmond/San Francisco route (201ш) and new service to Treasure Island. Other By the Numbers terminal sites such as Seaplane Lagoon in Alameda, Berkeley, Mission Bay, Redwood City, the South Bay, and the Carquinez *- /#)ǔǹǒ --$ ./-).+*-/0+ Strait are on the not-too-distant horizon. ($''$*)-$ -. /*ǗǕǑ$& .-*.. 0. 4 --4 /# 4 #4ǹ 1 -44 -ǹ A Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service --4-$ -.#$+ 1 )! --$ . Vallejo #.$)- . /*!' / /2 )ǓǑǒǘ CARQUINEZ STRAIT Ǚǖʞ.$) ǓǑǒǓǹ )ǓǑǓǑǹ Hercules WETA Expansion Targets Richmond Funded Traveling by ferry has become increasingly more popular in • Richmond Berkeley the Bay Area, as the economy continues to improve and the • Treasure Island Partially Funded Pier 41 Treasure Island population grows.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Packet Is Available for Download at Weta.Sanfranciscobayferry.Com
    Members of the Board SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA WATER EMERGENCY TRANSPORATION AUTHORITY James Wunderman, Chair BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING Jessica Alba Thursday, May 20, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. Jeffrey DelBono Anthony J. Intintoli, Jr. VIDEOCONFERENCE Monique Moyer Join WETA BOD Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89718217408 Meeting ID: 897 1821 7408 Password: 33779 Dial by your location +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) The full agenda packet is available for download at weta.sanfranciscobayferry.com AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVE FY 2022-2024 TITLE VI PROGRAM Action 4. PRELIMINARY FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 OPERATING AND CAPITAL Information BUDGETS 5. WETA BUSINESS PLAN CONCEPT AND ORGANIZATION Information ADJOURNMENT All items appearing on the agenda are subject to action by the Board of Directors. Staff recommendations are subject to action and change by the Board of Directors. CHANGES RELATED TO COVID-19 Consistent with Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-29-20, effective immediately and until further notice, meetings will be conducted through virtual participation to promote social distancing and reduce the chance of COVID-19 transmission. PUBLIC COMMENTS As this is a special meeting of the Board, public comments are limited to the listed agenda items. If you know in advance that you would like to make a public comment during the videoconference, please email [email protected] with your name and item number you would like to provide comment on no later than 15 Water Emergency Transportation Authority May 20, 2021 Meeting of the Board of Directors minutes after the start of the meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • West Contra Costa/Albany Transit Wayfinding Plan
    FINAL WEST CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN and WEST CONTRA COSTA/ALBANY TRANSIT WAYFINDING PLAN Prepared for: West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee October 2011 Acknowledgements WCCTAC BOARD City of El Cerrito Janet Abelson, Vice Chair City of Hercules Donald Kuehne City of Pinole Roy Swearingen, Chair City of Richmond Courtland “Corky” Boozé City of Richmond Thomas Butt City of Richmond Jeff Ritterman City of San Pablo Genoveva Calloway AC Transit Joe Wallace BART Joel Keller WestCAT Tom Hansen Contra Costa County John Gioia WCCTAC STAFF Christina Atienza, Executive Director Linda Young John Rudolph Joanna Pollock WCCTAC WORKING GROUP City of El Cerrito Yvetteh Ortiz City of Hercules Robert Reber City of Pinole Winston Rhodes City of Richmond Chad Smalley, Hector Rojas, Steven Tam City of San Pablo Kanwal Sandhu, Adele Ho AC Transit Nathan Landau, Puja Sarna, Aaron Priven BART Diedre Heitman WestCAT Rob Thompson Contra Costa County Jamar Stamps MTC Jay Stagi CONSULTANT TEAM Fehr & Peers Nelson/Nygaard Bob Grandy (Project Manager) Linda Rhine Brooke DuBose (Deputy PM) Joey Goldman Matthew Ridgway Meghan Mitman Studio L’Image Ellen Poling Sue Labouvie Josh Peterman Max Heim Steve Rhyne Carrie Carsell Eisen Letunic Nikki Hervol Niko Letunic Nikki Foletta table of contents I Introduction II Study Locations III Community Participation IV Travel Demand Management & Parking Strategies V Richmond BART Transit Center Enhancement Strategies VI Richmond Parkway Transit Center Enhancement Strategies VII El Cerrito Del
    [Show full text]
  • The Stepped Hull Hybrid Hydrofoil
    The Stepped Hull Hybrid Hydrofoil Christopher D. Barry, Bryan Duffty Planing @brid hydrofoils or partially hydrofoil supported planing boat are hydrofoils that intentionally operate in what would be the takeoff condition for a norma[ hydrofoil. They ofler a compromise ofperformance and cost that might be appropriate for ferq missions. The stepped hybrid configuration has made appearances in the high speed boat scene as early as 1938. It is a solution to the problems of instability and inefficiency that has limited other type of hybrids. It can be configured to have good seakeeping as well, but the concept has not been used as widely as would be justified by its merits. The purpose of this paper is to reintroduce this concept to the marine community, particularly for small, fast ferries. We have performed analytic studies, simple model experiments and manned experiments, andfiom them have determined some specljic problems and issues for the practical implementation of this concept. This paper presents background information, discusses key concepts including resistance, stability, seakeeping, and propulsion and suggests solutions to what we believe are the problems that have limited the widespread acceptance of this concept. Finally we propose a “strawman” design for a ferry in a particular service using this technology. BACKGROUND Partially hydrofoil supported planing hulls mix hydrofoil support and planing lift. The most obvious A hybrid hydrofoil is a vehicle combining the version of this concept is a planing hull with a dynamic lift of hydrofoils with a significant amount of hydrofoil more or less under the center of gravity. lit? tiom some other source, generally either buoyancy Karafiath (1974) studied this concept and ran model or planing lift.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodland Ferry History
    Woodland Ferry: Crossing the Nanticoke River from the 1740s to the present Carolann Wicks Secretary, Department of Transportation Welcome! This short history of the Woodland Ferry, which is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, was written to mark the commissioning of a new ferryboat, the Tina Fallon, in 2008. It is an interesting and colorful story. TIMELINE 1608 Captain John Smith explores 1843 Jacob Cannon Jr. murdered at the the Nanticoke River, and encounters wharf. Brother Isaac Cannon dies one Nanticoke Indians. Native Americans month later. Ferry passes to their sister have resided in the region for thousands Luraney Boling of years 1845 Inventory of Luraney Boling’s 1734 James Cannon purchases a estate includes “one wood scow, one land tract called Cannon’s Regulation at schooner, one large old scow, two small Woodland old scows, one ferry scow, one old and worn out chain cable, one lot of old cable 1743? James Cannon starts operating a chains and two scow chains, on and ferry about the wharves” 1748 A wharf is mentioned at the 1883 Delaware General Assembly ferry passes an act authorizing the Levy Court of Sussex County to establish and 1751 James Cannon dies and his son maintain a ferry at Woodland Jacob takes over the ferry 1885 William Ellis paid an annual 1766 A tax of 1,500 lbs. of tobacco salary of $119.99 by Sussex County for is paid “to Jacob Cannon for keeping operating the ferry a Ferry over Nanticoke River the Year past” 1930 Model “T” engine attached to the wooden ferryboat 1780 Jacob Cannon dies and
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Packet Is Available for Download at Weta.Sanfranciscobayferry.Com
    Members of the Board SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA Jody Breckenridge, Chair WATER EMERGENCY TRANSPORATION AUTHORITY Jeffrey DelBono BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING Anthony J. Intintoli, Jr. Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. Nicholas Josefowitz Port of San Francisco James Wunderman, Vice Chair Pier 1 San Francisco, CA The full agenda packet is available for download at weta.sanfranciscobayferry.com AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER – BOARD CHAIR 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL 3. REPORT OF BOARD CHAIR Information 4. REPORTS OF DIRECTORS Information Directors are limited to providing information, asking clarifying questions about matters not on the agenda, responding to public comment, referring matters to committee or staff for information, or requesting a report to be made at another meeting. 5. REPORTS OF STAFF Information a. Executive Director’s Report on Agency Projects, Activities and Services b. Monthly Review of Financial Statements c. Federal and State Legislative Updates 6. CONSENT CALENDAR Action a. Board Meeting Minutes – January 10, 2019 7. STATUS OF TREASURE ISLAND TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Information 8. AUTHORIZE PUBLIC OUTREACH FOR SPECIAL EVENT FARE CHANGE Action 9. REQUEST FOR WETA TO CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY STUDY OF Information/Action HOVERCRAFT SERVICE 10. RECESS INTO CLOSED SESSION Action a. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION To Be Determined Title: Executive Director (pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) Water Emergency Transportation Authority February 7, 2019 Meeting of the Board of Directors 11. REPORT OF ACTIVITY IN CLOSED SESSION Action Chair will report any action taken in closed session that is subject to reporting To Be Determined at this time. Action may be taken on matters discussed in closed session.
    [Show full text]
  • A Strategy to Improve Public Transit with an Environmentally Friendly Ferry System
    A Strategy to Improve Public Transit with an Environmentally Friendly Ferry System Final Implementation & Operations Plan July 2003 San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Dear Governor Davis and Members of the California Legislature: After two years of work, the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Finally, as the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) Authority (WTA) is delivering an Implementation and Operations details, this system is environmentally responsible. Plan. It is a viable strategy to improve Bay Area public transit with an environmentally friendly ferry system. It is a well- From beginning to end, this plan is built on solid, conservative thought-out plan calling for a sensible transportation investment. technical data and financial assumptions. If the State of California It shows how the existing and new individual ferry routes can adopts this plan and it is funded, we can begin making expanded form a well-integrated water-transit system that provides good water transit a reality. connections to other transit. The current economy makes it tough to find funds for new When you enacted Senate Bill 428 in October 1999, the WTA programs, even those as worthy as expanded Bay Area water was formed and empowered to create a plan for new and expanded transit. The Authority understands the economic challenges it water transit services and related ground transportation faces and is already working hard to overcome that hurdle. terminal access services. It was further mandated that the Today, the Authority’s future is unclear, pending your consideration. Authority must study ridership demand, cost-effectiveness But the prospects for expanded Bay Area water transit — and and expanded water transit’s environmental impact.
    [Show full text]
  • 17 Portsmouth and Haslemere to London Waterloo
    Portsmouth and Haslemere to 17 London Waterloo London Waterloo Clapham Junction Woking (for Heathrow Airport) Worplesdon Guildford (for Heathrow Airport) Farncombe Godalming Milford Witley Haslemere Liphook Liss Petersfield Rowlands Castle Havant Bedhampton Hilsea Fratton Portsmouth & Southsea Portsmouth (for Isle of Wight) Harbour (for Isle of Wight) Southsea Hoverport Bus service Ferry/hovercraft Train times 16 May to 11 September 2021 May 2021 DL covers.indd 17 08/04/2021 10:38:10 Your timetable This timetable shows services between Portsmouth, Havant, Petersfield, Haslemere, Guildford and London Waterloo including intermediate stations and connections to Reading. Buy a ticket before you board You need to buy a valid ticket before you get on your train. We know that most of our passengers do this before travelling, and we have a duty to those passengers to make sure no-one travels without paying. This is why we run a penalty fares scheme across most of our network. If you travel without a valid ticket to or from a station within the penalty fares area, you may have to pay a penalty fare of £20 or twice the single fare to the next station your train stops at (whichever is higher). You will also have to buy a ticket for the rest of your journey. We have a policy to, wherever possible, prosecute everyone who deliberately avoids paying. Travel with Confidence If you are travelling with us, please continue to follow the Government’s advice by maintaining social distancing, where possible, and wearing a face covering at our stations and on our trains, unless exempt.
    [Show full text]
  • Conditions of Carriage of Calmac Ferries Limited
    CONDITIONS OF CARRIAGE OF CALMAC FERRIES LIMITED Preamble These Conditions of Carriage (the “Conditions”) of CalMac Ferries Limited (the “Company”) are incorporated within and form part of any and all contracts of carriage entered into by Passengers, Shippers and Users (as defi ned below) with the Company. The Conditions are set out in 5 sections as follows:- A. PRELIMINARY Definitions; Interpretation; Carriage undertaken; Principal forms of Contract of Carriage; Agency in respect of Passengers; Deemed ticketing or Deemed consignment. B. CONDITIONS IN RESPECT OF VESSELS/SERVICES Discretion as to Carriage; Variations with regard to sailing; Impediments to Loading, Carriage, etc; Compliance with C. LIABILITY, ETC Liability under the Athens Convention; Athens Convention explanatory note; Liability in other situations, Death/Personal injury; Livestock; Time Limit for Claims; Dogs and other Pet Animals; Defect/Failure of any Services; Additional loss or damage; Benefi t of all rights and exemptions; Company acting as agent; Medical attention; Refrigerated trailers; Lighterage expense/Livestock Consignment; No undertaking as to Notice of Arrival of Goods, etc; No undertaking as to safe custody of jewellery, etc; The Company’s right to hold Goods, etc; Damage caused by Passengers, Shippers and Users; Maximum protection allowed by Law/Time Limits; D. REGULATIONS IN RESPECT OF DANGEROUS GOODS AND SUBSTANCES Dangerous Goods and Substances; Shipment of Dangerous Goods and substances explanatory note; Regulations for the conveyance of petrol, fuel oil, and cylinders and cartridges of liquefi ed hydrocarbon gas in vehicles on board Vessels; Breach of Regulations; E. GENERAL MATTERS Luggage entitlement; Miscellaneous; Storekeepers/warehousemen; Instructions and searches; Ticketing Conditions, etc; Governing Law.
    [Show full text]