### 0203.02.002

December 18, 2006

Mr. John Mueller Office of Transportation and Air Quality 2000 Traverwood Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48105

Dear John:
Enclosed for your review is the Updated Draft Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity Report. Please give me a call at (919) 468-7812 with any questions or comments you may have about this report.
Sincerely,

Richard Billings Project Manager
RSB/jt

Enclosures
cc: Penny Carey, EPA/OTAQ Leigh Roller, ERG/ Chantilly Sam Wells, Consultant Roger Chang, ERG/Morrisville WA 2-02 File/ Category 2 Vessel Census Activity Reportrv1.wpd

## CATEGORY 2 VESSEL CENS US AND ACTIVITY

DRAFT REPORT

Prepared for:
John Mueller and Penny Carey Office of Transportation and Air Quality

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ann Arbor, MI 48105

Prepared by:
Eastern Research Group, Inc.

1600 Perimeter Park Drive Morrisville, NC 27560

December 18, 20060203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### i 

## Table of Contents

Section Page

1.0 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................... . 1-1

2.0 CATEGORY 2 VESSEL CE NSUS EVALUATION...................................................... 2-1
2.1 Tugboat ................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.1 Tugboat Data Sources.............................................................................. 2-1 2.1.2 Initial Coding of WTLUS Data................................................................ 2-2 2.1.3 Determination of EPA Category.............................................................. 2-5 2.1.4 Analysis of Tugboat Data ........................................................................ 2-8 2.1.5 Tugboat References ................................................................................. 2-9

2.2 Commercial Fish ing Vessels................................................................................ 2-9 2.2.1 Commercial Fishing Ve ssel Data Sources............................................... 2-9 2.2.2 Analysis of Commercial Fishing Vessel Data ....................................... 2-12 2.2.3 Commercial Fishing Ve ssel References ................................................ 2-15

2.3 Coast Guard Vessels .......................................................................................... 2-15 2.3.1 Coast Guard Data Source....................................................................... 2-16 2.3.2 Analysis of Coast Guard Data................................................................ 2-16 2.3.3 Coast Guard Reference .......................................................................... 2-16
2.4 Ferry Vessels...................................................................................................... 2-16 2.4.1 Ferry Vessel Data Sources..................................................................... 2-16 2.4.2 Analysis of Ferry Data........................................................................... 2-17 2.4.3 Ferry References .................................................................................... 2-18
2.5 Deep Water Cargo Vessels ................................................................................ 2-19 2.5.1 Deep Water Carbon Vessel Data Sources.............................................. 2-19 2.5.2 Analysis of Deep Water Cargo Vessel Data.......................................... 2-19 2.5.3 Deep Water Cargo Vessel References ................................................... 2-19

2.6 Research Vessels................................................................................................ 2-19 2.6.1 Research Vessel Data Sources............................................................... 2-20 2.6.2 Analysis of Research Vessel Data ......................................................... 2-20 2.6.3 Research Vessel References .................................................................. 2-20
2.7 Offshore Support Vessels .................................................................................. 2-20 2.7.1 Offshore Support Vessel Data Sources.................................................. 2-21 2.7.2 Support Vessel Analysis ........................................................................ 2-21 2.7.3 Offshore Support Vessel References ..................................................... 2-270203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### ii 

## Table of Contents (Continued)

Section Page

2.8 Great Lake Vessels and Vessels Not Otherwise Included................................. 2-28 2.8.1 Remaining Vessel Data Sources ............................................................ 2-28 2.8.2 Analysis of Remaining Vessel Data ...................................................... 2-29 2.8.3 Remaining Vessels References.............................................................. 2-31

3.0 CATEGORY 2 VESSEL ACTI VITY ASSESSMENT................................................... 3-1
3.1 Vessel Population and Characteristics................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Operating Days and Load Factors........................................................................ 3-3
3.3 Horsepower Hours ............................................................................................... 3-7
3.4 Vessel Activity References................................................................................ 3-12

4.0 IN-PORT / AT-SEA SPLITS........................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 In-Port / At-Sea Methodology ............................................................................. 4-1
4.3 Vessel Type Overview......................................................................................... 4-2 4.3.1 Tugs/Towboats......................................................................................... 4-2 4.3.2 Commercial Fishing................................................................................. 4-3 4.3.3 Offshore Support Vessels ........................................................................ 4-3 4.3.4 Ferries ...................................................................................................... 4-3 4.3.5 Deep Water Vessels ................................................................................. 4-3 4.3.6 Research................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.7 Great Lakes and Other Vessels................................................................ 4-4 4.3.8 Government Vessels ................................................................................ 4-4
4.4 Summary.............................................................................................................. 4-5

4.5 References............................................................................................................ 4-6

5.0 CATEGORY 2 SPATIAL ALLOCATIONS .................................................................. 5-1
5.1 Vessel Type Overview......................................................................................... 5-3 5.1.1 Tugs/Towboats......................................................................................... 5-3 5.1.2 Commercial Fishing................................................................................. 5-5 5.1.3 Offshore Support Vessels ........................................................................ 5-7 5.1.4 Ferries .................................................................................................... 5-100203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### iii 

## Table of Contents (Continued)

Section Page
5.1.5 Deep Water Vessels ............................................................................... 5-11 5.1.6 Research Vessels.................................................................................... 5-13 5.1.7 Great Lakes and Other Vessels.............................................................. 5-16 5.1.8 Government Vessels .............................................................................. 5-18
5.2 Summary............................................................................................................ 5-20

5.3 References.......................................................................................................... 5-23

6.0 CATEGORY 2 VESSEL DATABASE........................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Data Matching...................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Data Augmentation and Assurance...................................................................... 6-3
6.3 Compiled Database Structure .............................................................................. 6-4
Appendix A – Identified Categor y 2 Marine Diesel Engines
Appendix B – Summary of Monte Carlo Input and Output Data
Appendix C – Category 2 In-Port / At-Sea Splits
Appendix D – Category 1 In-Port / At-Sea Splits0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### iv 

## List of Tables and Figures

Tables Page
1-1 Vessel Type Base Year .................................................................................................... 1- 3 1-2 Category 2 Summary ....................................................................................................... 1- 4 1-3 Category 2 Propulsion Horsepow er Hours by Vessel Type ............................................ 1-5 1-4 Average In-Port and At-Sea Fraction by Vessel Type for Vessels Equipped with 2 Propulsion Engines .......................................................................................................... 1- 5 2-1 Available Databases........................................................................................................ . 2-1 2-2 Industry and Region Query of the Operator Database..................................................... 2-3 2-3 Regional Breakdown Using Po rt District Codes ............................................................. 2-5 2-4 Vessel Matching............................................................................................................ ... 2-7 2-5 Category 1 and 2 Hulls and Engines................................................................................ 2-8 2-6 State Fishing Vessel Re gistration Comparisons ............................................................ 2-10 2-7 Commercial Fishing Vessel Category Assumptions...................................................... 2-11 2-8 Summary of Commercial Fi shing Vessel Data Sources................................................ 2-11 2-9 Summary of Commercial Fi shing Vessel Categories .................................................... 2-12 2-10 Commercial Fishing Vess els Sorted by Length and Horsepower Groupings................ 2-13 2-11 Commercial Fishing Ve ssels by Horsepower................................................................ 2-14 2-12 Ferry Population by Engine Category............................................................................ 2-17 2-13 Distribution of Fe rries by State...................................................................................... 2-18 2-14 OMSA U.S. Flagged Vessel Populat ion by Offshore Vessel Type for the Gulf of Mexico............................................................................................................... 2 -22 2-15 OMSA U.S. Vessel Population by Offshore Vessel Type for the Gulf of Mexico............................................................................................................... 2 -23 2-16 Results from Matching Vessels to Engine Characteristics ............................................ 2-25 2-17 Support Vessel Category Mix........................................................................................ 2-25 2-18 Category Mix of Support Vessel Type .......................................................................... 2-26 2-19 U.S. Flagged Category 2 Vessel Population.................................................................. 2-27 2-20 Summary of Remaining Vesse l Engine Classification .................................................. 2-29 2-21 Average HP for Missing Boats ...................................................................................... 2-30 2-22 Allocation of Missing Vessels ....................................................................................... 2-30
3-1 Vessel Population and Characteristics............................................................................. 3-2 3-2 Operating Days and Load Factors.................................................................................... 3-5 3-3 Category 2 Propulsion Horsepow er Hours by Vessel Type ............................................ 3-7
4-1 Average In-Port and At-Sea Fraction by Vessel Type for Vessels Equipped with Category 1 and 2 Propulsion Engines...................................................................... 4-5
5-1 Summary of Spatial Allocation Approaches Used .......................................................... 5-1 5-2 List of Ferry Ports ........................................................................................................ .. 5-10
6-1 Mapping of Database Field Names by Vessel Type........................................................ 6-20203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### v Figures Page
1-1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................... .. 1-2 1-2 Combined In-Port and At-Sea Acti vities for Category 2 Vessels.................................... 1-6
2-1 Organization of Towboat Data......................................................................................... 2-6 2-2 Distribution of Test Matc hed by Count and HP-Tonnage............................................... 2-8 2-3 Vessel Sale Data ........................................................................................................... . 2-14
3-1 Underway, Idling, and In Port Fractions by Vessel Type ............................................... 3-6 3-2 Deep Water Vessel HP-HR Calc ulation Frequency Chart ............................................. 3-8 3-3 Tow Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart ......................................................... 3-9 3-4 Ferry Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart ........................................................ 3-9 3-5 Commercial Fishing Vessel HP-H R Calculation Frequency Chart .............................. 3-10 3-6 Great Lakes Vessel HP-HR Calc ulation Frequency Chart ........................................... 3-10 3-7 Coast Guard Vessel HP-HR Calc ulation Frequency Chart ........................................... 3-11 3-8 Offshore Vessel HP-HR Calcul ation Frequency Chart ................................................ 3-11 3-9 Research Vessel HP-HR Calc ulation Frequency Chart ................................................ 3-12
5-1 Overview of Approach Used to Devel op and Spatially Alloca te Annual Activity of Vessels Equipped with Ca tegory 2 Engines ................................................................... 5-2 5-2 Tug/Towboat In-Port Activity ......................................................................................... 5-4 5-3 Tug/Towboat At-Sea Activity.......................................................................................... 5-4 5-4 Commercial Fishing In-Port Activity .............................................................................. 5-6 5-5 Commercial Fishi ng At-Sea Activity............................................................................... 5-7 5-6 Offshore Support Vessel In-Port Activity........................................................................ 5-8 5-7 Offshore Support Vessel At-Sea Activity........................................................................ 5-9 5-8 Ferry In-Port and At-Sea Activity.................................................................................. 5-11 5-9 Deep Water Vessel In-Port Activity .............................................................................. 5-12 5-10 Deep Water Vesse l At-Sea Activity .............................................................................. 5-13 5-11 Research Vessel In-Port Activity................................................................................... 5-14 5-12 Research Vessel At-Sea Activity................................................................................... 5-15 5-13 Great Lake and Other Ve ssel In-Port Activity............................................................... 5-17 5-14 Great Lake and Other Ve ssel At-Sea Activity............................................................... 5-18 5-15 Coast Guard In-Port Activity......................................................................................... 5-19 5-16 Coast Guard At-Sea Activity ......................................................................................... 5-20 5-17 Combined Category 2 In-Port Activities ....................................................................... 5-21 5-18 Combined Category 2 At-Sea Activities........................................................................ 5-22 5-19 Combined In-Port and At-Sea Acti vities for Category 2 Vessels.................................. 5-220203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-1 1.0 OVERVIEW
For this project, data were compiled from a variet y of sources to identify vessels equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines. In itially, the project focused on Category 2 vessels operating within port areas, but the project objectives change d to encompass all navigable waterways in the U.S.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defi nes the three engine categories for commercial marine vessels’ main propulsion engines and auxiliary engines as:

• Category 1: 1-5 liters per cylinder displacement

• Category 2: 5-30 liters per cylinder displacement

• Category 3: over 30 liters per cylinder displacement
Category 2 is a transitional engine category be tween Category 1 engines (used by most harbor and fishing vessels) and Category 3 engines (u sed by larger ocean going vessels). Previous studies have accounted for vessels with Category 1 and 3 engines nationwide, but vessels with Category 2 engines have not been studied as thoroughly.
One of the first tasks for this study is to identif y databases and sources th at will help identify the vessels with Category 2 marine diesel propulsion engines in the contiguous states as well as Alaska, and Hawaii. It was discove red early in the project that there is no single data base that tracks vessels that are equipped with these engi nes. In order to captu re the Category 2 vessel population, multiple data sources needed to be reviewed, compiled, and analyzed.

As the available data for the different vessel t ypes can be significantly different, the project evaluated the available data for the following eight vessel types separately:

• Towboats;

• Offshore Support Vessels;

• Commercial Fishing Vessels;

• Coast Guard Vessels;

• Ferry Vessels;

• Deep Water Cargo Vessels;

• Research Vessels; and

• Great Lakes Vessels and Vesse ls Not Otherwise Included.
Most of these vessels are not ocean going vesse ls (except the deep water cargo vessels) as defined in the EPA’s Current Methodologies and Best Managem ent Practices in Preparing Port Emission Inventories. Most of these vessel types would be c onsidered harbor craft as defined in the above report. Tow boats include push boats and tug boats that operate within and outside the port. Coast Guard vessels are a subset of government vessels. In this study, offshore vessels include both crew boats and work boats. Research vessels discu ssed in this Category 2 study are a subset of workboats.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-2 The first objective of this project is to implem ent a Census of Category 2 vessels operating in U.S. waters. As noted in Section 2 of this repor t, estimates of activity for each vessel type are developed in Section 3 of this study. The in-por t / at-sea splits developed in Section 4 will be used to apportion the estimate d hours of operation developed in Section 3 to port and underway activities as noted in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1. Project Overview
The port activities will be sp atially allocated in Section 5 to individual ports base on an appropriate surrogate such as the amount of cargo handled (for tow boats, deepwater cargo vessels and Great Lakes vessels), fish catch processed (for co mmercial fishing boats) and the vessel’s home port (for offshore, research and government vessels and ferries).
Underway activities will be spatially allocated to shipping lanes (for tow boats, deepwater vessels, Great Lakes vessels), fishing zones (for commercial fishing), coas t guard districts (for A ctivity by Vessel Type

In- Port A t -Sea

Allocated to Individual Ports Based on:



### • Cargo Handled



### • Fish Catch Processed



### • Vessel Home Port A llocate to:



### • Shipping Lane



### • Fishing Zone



### • Coast Guard District



### • Offshore Oil Platforms



### • Research Area

A pplied to GIS Map Overlaid with County/Federal Boundary Shape

County Level

Activity by Vessel Type0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-3 government vessels), offshore oil platforms (for o ffshore support vessels) a nd research areas (for research vessels).
The port and underway activities will be mapped using Geographic Information Systems tools. County and Federal boundaries will be mapped on top of the port and underway activities to allow for aggregation of activity estimates to the county level.
Where ever possible, vessel spec ific data such as the make and model number of the propulsion engines were evaluated individually to accurately identify Category 2 vessels. Unfortunately, for most vessels such data proved to be difficult to identify. Instead information was pieced together by appropriately linking the differe nt data sets that were comp iled. For example, when vessel identification data were provided, these data were linked to the Ll oyd’s Registry of Ships (ROS), American Bureau of Ships (ABS), or Bureau Ver itas vessel classification data files to get vessel characteristics data. These vessel characteristics were either used directly to calculate the cylinder volume or they could be linked up to a dataset of Category 2 propulsion engines that was developed for this project and is included in Appendix A of this report.
To implement this study, data from a variety of sources were used. Through every attempt was made to obtain the most recent data available, th e compiled data represents different base years as noted in Table 1-1.
Table 1-1. Vessel Type Base Year

Vessel Type Base Year of Population and Activity Data Towboats 2002-2004 Offshore Support Vessels 2005 Commercial Fishing Vessels 2000-2004 Coast Guard 2004 Ferry 2000-2004 Deep Water Cargo Vessels 2005 Research Vessels 2004 Great Lake Vessels and Others 2004

Where engine displacement data were not readily available, seve ral different methods were used to estimate the engine category of a vessel. This included evaluating the relationship of a variety of variables such as engine hor sepower, vessel gross ton weight (GTW), and vessel length so as to identify correlations what would help categor ize the vessel’s propulsio n engine classification.
Table 1-2 summarizes the Category 2 vessel populati on based on this compila tion and analysis of available data. Towboats and Offshore vessels re present the most significant Category 2 vessel groups and as such considerable resources were applied to these components of the study to develop the most accurate vessel inventor y possible with publicly available data.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-4 Table 1-2. Category 2 Summary

Vessel Type Category 2 Vessel Count Percent of Total Towboats 1,057 42.6 Offshore Support Vessels 603 24.3 Commercial Fishing Vessels 333 13.4 Coast Guard Vessels 157 6.3 Ferry Vessels 99 4.0 Deep water cargo vessels 89 3.6 Research Vessels 31 1.3 Great Lake Vessels and Vessels Not Otherwise Included 112 4.5 Total 2,481 100
Identification of Category 2 fishing vessels was particularly challenging. The data sources for this fleet are difficult to evaluate due to limite d information available to characterize fishing vessels and the fact that there are over 30,000 U.S. flagged fishing ships currently in operation.
For some of the vessel type categor ies, there were national database s of vessels, such as for deep water cargo vessels, ferries, research ships, offshore support vessels, and Coast Guard vessels, which made a good starting point to identify ve ssels that are potentially equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines.
Section 2 of this report summarizes the data so urces analyzed in this study, the methods used, and population estimates developed for each vessel type. Some of these summaries are brief, as the data to perform this analysis were read ily available and the methods used to identify Category 2 powered vessels were reasonably simple.
Section 3 of this study compiles the vessel census and characteristics da ta into a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate activity for each vessel ty pe. Activity in this report is defined as horsepower hours of operation for th e Category 2 propulsion engines.
Results from this analysis are noted in Tabl e 1-3. As Table 1-3 indicates, offshore vessels account for a large portion of Category 2 vessel activity.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-5 Table 1-3. Category 2 Propulsion Horsepower Hours by Vessel Type

Vessel Type Mean Values (million hp-hrs) Standard Deviation (million hp-hrs) Deep Water 1,300 339 Towboat 7,920 3,020 Ferry 1,464 443 Fishing 3,413 1,143 Great Lakes 1,393 405 Coast Guard 1,441 496 Offshore 27,810 11,933 Research 654 217

This activity data were split for each vessel type into in-port a nd at sea components. The splits developed for this study are presented in Table 1-4. The in-port time for some of these vessel types is relatively small, as the propulsion engi nes for these vessels are shut off while dockside. Section 4 discusses how these in-por t and at-sea splits were developed.
Table 1-4. Average In-Port and At-Sea Fraction by Vessel Type for Vessels Equipped with 2 Propulsion Engines
Vessel Type In-Port At-Sea Towboats 17% 83% Fishing 5% 95% Offshore 4% 96% Ferries 65% 35% Deepwater 1% 99% Research 1% 99% Great Lakes 1% 99% Government 59% 41% Weighted Average 10% 90%
Once activity data could be disaggregated into the in-port and at-sea components, then the activity data were further disagg regated into county and federal lease blocks. Section 5 discusses the techniques and surrogate data used to spatially allocate Cate gory 2 activity by vessel type to individual counties and federal l ease blocks as presented in Figure 1-2. This figure shows total Category 2 activity for in-port and at-sea operations. It should be not ed that county waters in the Great Lakes represent significant larger areas th an coastal county blocks which only extend three to seven miles to the state/federal water bounda ry. This difference in the block size makes it difficult to visually compare activity levels in the Great Lakes with activity levels in coastal

areas.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 1-6 Figure 1-2. Combined In-Port and At-Sea Activities for Category 2 Vessels
In addition to this report, this project produced a set of data files that contain the compiled county and federal lease block activity data devel oped for this project. The database structure used for this study is discussed in Section 6 of th is report. Note that the data included in the database are vessel specific. Because the EPA’s category determinations are based on the volume of the marine diesel engine cylinder, and such da ta are generally not readily available for all U.S. flagged vessels, assumptions had to be made base d on statistical review of the compiled data and engineering judgment. Given that detailed engine data were not al ways available, some of the individual vessels included in th is data base may not actual be e quipped with Category 2 engines. Some vessels which do have Category 2 engines may be missing. This vessel listing should be considered a preliminary census, which should be validated in the future with a detailed commercial marine vessel survey.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-1 2.0 VESSEL TYPE EVALUATION
2.1 Tugboat
One of the objectives of this pr oject was to identify the populati on of all tugboats registered in the U.S. and estimate the number of Category 2 engines. Previous inve ntories of tug-related emissions were mainly based on fuel consumpti on, a ton-mile method, or other surrogates that did not relate very well to identifying tugboat emissions.
Technically, there are two kinds of towboats that are commonly re ferred to as tugboats. One type has a rounded bow at the front of the vessel (towboat) and the other a square bow used exclusively for pushing barges (pushboat). Th e terms tugboat and towboat are often used interchangeably. Specialized types of towboats, su ch as the integrated tug-barge (ITB), are not considered to be true towboats, but rather o cean-going vessels as they carry cargo on the open

seas. According to the American Waterways Operat ors (AWO), the main industry group, towboats and barges moved 20 percent of America’s coal, 60 percent of U.S. gain exports, and most of the heating oil in the Northeast.
Statistics from the AWO indicate approximately 4,000 line-haul vessels. A line haul vessel is one that pushes or pulls barges. There are a smaller, but significant number of towboats engaged in ship maneuvering, channel dredgi ng, and constructi on activities.
The EPA categorizes towboats as being harbor ve ssels so as to distinguish them from oceangoing ships. Although most of the tra ffic is restricted to U.S. territo rial waters, it should be noted that towboats can travel hundreds of miles, and so me are considered to be more similar to ships such as the ITB or ocean-going salvage tugs.
2.1.1 Tugboat Data Sources
Most of the key data is from the U.S. Army Corp s of Engineers and is av ailable on their Internet site. Other sources include the U.S. Coast Gu ard’s Merchant Vessels of the U.S. Lloyd’s Register of Ships. Available data used in th is study are summarized below in Table 2-1 and discussed in greater detail below.

Table 2-1. Available Databases

Data Source Records Notes Merchant Vessels of the U.S. 6,61 9 2004 data may contain workboats Waterborne Transportation Lines of the U.S. 5,180 2002 baseline Merged WTLUS Operators File 4,711 397 did not match Inland River Record 3,280 Mississippi and Gulf Intracoastal Lloyd’s Register of Ships 864 International vessel records American Bureau of Shipping 414 Mainly U.S. vessel records Bureau Veritas < 20 Mostly foreign ships0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-2 • Merchant Vessels of the U.S. (MVUS) – This reference is prepared by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and reflects all documented vesse ls in the U.S., excluding any foreign or non-documented vessels, in accordance with U.S. laws. The database contains some limited horsepower data, but is mainly orie nted towards hull specifications and owner information. It is thought that the code for “towing vessels” used in this database may include more than CMV towboats and pushboats.

• Waterborne Transportation Line s of the U.S. (WTLUS) – This reference serves as the basis for documenting the numbe r of active and in active towboats and pushboats in the U.S., as compiled by the U.S. Army Corps of En gineers. Once the vessel file was merged with the operator/owner file th ere was a slight loss of in formation, but the merge proved useful to assign tugboats to i ndustry types and geographic area.

• Inland River Record (IRR) – This refere nce contains all towboats and pushboats operating on the waterways of th e Mississippi, its tributaries, and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. This accounts for approximately half of the tug population in the U.S. It has very good records, but the text format was a challenge to convert into in a database format.

• Lloyd’s Register of Ships (ROS) – Tugboats flag ged in the U.S. were queried from a very large file containing over 70,000 international vessels. Lloyd’s is a marine research company as well as a vessel classifica tion, similar to the next two entries.

• American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) – Si milar to the ROS although this data only includes those vessels classifi ed by its company standards.

• Bureau Veritas (BV) – This database was pur chased in order to develop a comprehensive dataset of vessel characteristic s. Unfortunately, very few U.S. tugboats were found in this data set.
2.1.2 Initial Coding of WTLUS Data
Initially, the WTLUS was coded by visually inspecti ng the data and creating separate data fields for industry type and geographical area of operati on. This was a subjective task. Since there were many empty (or “null”) values for industry type, the default was set to all boats being engaged in towing, a generic term used in the industry for pulling or pushing barges over long stretches of water. The following industry types were used in this study:

• Assisting – pushing large ocean-going ships to or from the dock;

• Bunkering – providing fuel barge service to refuel large, ocean-going ships;

• Charter – these are towboats that are fo r rent by the day, week, month, or year;

• Construction – engaged in hauling c onstruction materials and machinery;

• Dredging – related to assis ting non-propelled dredges;

• Fleeting – moving around barges within a harbor or short waterway segment;

• Idle – not working;

• Logging – more common to the Northwest a nd Alaska, includes shifting log rafts;0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-3 • Oil and Gas – services inland or offs hore oil and gas production platforms;

• Passenger – tugs that push passengers on barges; and

• Towing – called “line haul barge units, ” these are by far the most common.
While all companies tend to have a preferred ma rket such as hauling petrochemicals, grain, or coal, the industry type assignments should be view ed with a certain caution: a line haul towboat can also be used for ship assisting, salvage work , shipyard work, or a number of other duties.
Geographic variables were also in cluded in our data set. Assi gning vessels to geographic areas was a cumbersome task because the WTLUS has th ree separate data sources that had to be integrated into our data set. These data sources included:

1. WTLUS of the Great Lakes 2. WTLUS of the Mississippi River System and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway 3. WTLUS of the Atlantic, Gu lf, and Pacific coasts

The Great Lakes data included a small number of towboats in a relatively small domain. The Mississippi and Intracoastal waterways had the hi ghest number of towboats, but all operated on known shipping channels. The third section was fa r more complex, since the terms “offshore” or “coastwise” simply do not fit. Many of these boats were in fact in -shore towboats or even river pushboats (e.g., Delaware Bay in the east or the Co lumbia/Snake rivers in the west). What was missing was a descriptor for inland versus offs hore Atlantic/Gulf/Pacific towboats, which is important because the offshore vess els tended to have larger engi nes and with presumably more EPA Category 2 engines relative to the in-shore towboats.
To get a sense of the magnitude of where t ugboats are operating and wh at they are doing, an initial pass was taken from the WTLUS towboa t data, stratifying boats into industry and geographical types, as shown in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2. Industry and Region Query of the Operator Database

JOB Lakers Inland Coastwise Total ASSIST 0 25 66 91 BUNKERING 0 16 16 32 CHARTER 1 71 43 115 CONSTRUCTION 22 115 114 251 DREDGING 5 9 41 55 FLEETING 1 153 8 162 IDLE 0 28 19 47 LOGGING 0 0 73 73 OIL_GAS 0 144 29 173 PASSENGER 0 34 6 40 TOWING 102 2691 1348 4141 131 3,286 1,763 5,1800203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-4 It is evident that the majority of the tugboats are invol ved in line-haul barge transportation in the inland and coastal regions. According to the U. S. ACE, there were 5,180 towboats and pushboats operating in 2002 in the U.S. that were tracked fo r the purposes of regulatory compliance. As is also indicated by the “IDLE” entry, some co mpanies have vessels which were inactive.

Further evaluation of the WTLU S data identified an additiona l 400 vessels that could be undocumented, working overseas, or were coded with invalid codes. As is recorded in Table 2-1, 397 vessels did not match with the WTLUS towboat data which lists each specific towboat or pushboat. This is probably due to the reporting of incorrect operator identification codes. It should be noted that many of these 397 vessels are engaged in oceanic traffic such as moving cargo to and from Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. territories.
These tugboat estimates are cons istent with estimates devel oped by the American Waterway Operators (AWO). The AWO estim ates that there are 4,000 to 5,000 towboats operating in U.S. waters.
Additional geographic differentiations are summar ized in Table 5 for the following geographic

areas:

• Lakers – The Great Lakes. No Canadian tow boats are included here. Some boats operate on inland waterways connected to the Ohio a nd Mississippi rivers, the Erie canal, etc.

• Inland – Mainly the Mississippi River and Ohio River, the largest concentration of towboats in the U.S.

• Atlantic – The entire seaboard between Ke y West, Florida and upper Maine. The U.S. ACE database was not coded to determine inland versus offshore towboats.

• Gulf Inland – These are mainly towboats ope rating on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) between Brownsville, Texas and Mobile, Alabama.

• Gulf Offshore – The U.S. ACE dataset did a llow us to distinguish between “inland” and “offshore” where the primary area was “Gulf of Mexico.”

• Pacific – This region covers the area betw een San Diego and the Puget Sound; again, there is no available code for “inland” opera tions such as on the Columbia-Snake River waterways.

The statistics shown in Table 2-3 should be viewed with caution because the industry type code is related to the entire towboa t company, not individual towboats . For example, we know that bunkering occurs very often in the harbors near Los Angeles and New York, but the companies involved with bunkering were primarily e ngaged in assisting or harbor towing.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-5 Table 2-3. Regional Breakdown Using Port District Codes

JOB Lakers Inland Atlantic Gulf_Inland Gulf_Offshore Pacific Total ASSIST 0 27 39 20 0 5 91 BUNKERING 0 15 1 16 0 0 32 CHARTER 1 61 25 14 11 3 115 CONSTRUCTION 22 119 47 39 3 21 251 DREDGING 5 25 15 1 6 3 55 FLEETING 1 129 0 32 0 0 162 IDLE 0 20 1 15 0 11 47 LOGGING 0 0 0 0 0 73 73 OIL_GAS 0 2 0 142 29 0 173 PASSENGER 0 32 3 5 0 0 40 TOWING 102 1804 277 1360 106 492 4141 131 2234 408 1644 155 608 5180



### 2.1.3 Determination of EPA Category
Significant work was required to determine the e ngine category of identified towboats. After combining the U.S. ACE operator and vessel files, vessel identifying codes such as Coast Guard number or IMO number were used to match vessel characteristics data to individual vessels. For example, both the ROS and ABS data sets had engine make and model information, which was useful in determining the EPA category. The ROS data also contained valid cylinder bore and stroke information in case the engine make and model could not be matched to engines in the Category 2 engine database. Figure 2-1 shows how the different data elements were linked.
The method to determine a vessel’s EPA engine category is based on cy linder displacement, which requires specifications for bore (piston diam eter) and stroke (piston travel). The equation for estimating the volume of a cylinder was used to calculate cylinder displacement:

π r 2 

### h
Disp = π x (bore/2) 2 

### x stroke

In the cases where this information was not av ailable from ROS, engine specifications were obtained over the Internet and bore and stroke values were app lied to the spreadsheet. It became evident that one could identify estimate engine characteristics by collecting data on an engine family rather than each variant of the engine model. For exampl e, all Caterpillar engines were Category 1 with the exception of the 3600 series (3606, 3608, and 3612).
An attempt was made to use horsepower (HP) to help make engine category determinations about towboats that did not have a known engine make and model, but this approach was not always accurate. The California Air Resource Bo ard uses a cut-point of 750 HP, below which engines are classified as Categor y 1. This approach misidentifies many large Category 1 engines, such as the larger engines in the Caterpillar 3500 series, as be ing Category 2 engines. Using a cut-off such as 2,000 HP would be similarly inaccurate because there are many Category 2 engines below 2,000 HP, includi ng popular models such as:0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-6 Inland Rive r Record USACE Operator File USACE Vessel File

A merican Bureau o f Shipping Lloyd’s o f London Register o f Ships Matched



### Engine Make Category Type Developed Category Surrogate (HP

- Tonnage)

Tow Boat Compile Dataset

with Category Type and Geographic Area USCG Boat Numbe r or IMO Identification



### Inland Rive r Record



### Figure 2-1. Organization of Towboat Data USACE Operator File USACE Vessel File

A merican Bureau o f Shipping Lloyd’s o f London Register o f Ships Matched



### Engine Make Category Type Developed Category Surrogate (HP

- Tonnage)

Tow Boat Compile Dataset

with Category Type and Geographic Area USCG Boat Numbe r or IMO Identification0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-7 • Fairbanks 6-38 and 8-38 series

• EMD 12-278 and 16-278 series

• Some EMD 12-645 models
After concluding that individual cylinder displacement has little relationship to horsepower, it was decided that a more complex profiling approach was needed.
Use of HP and Hull Displacement Metric
After removing vessels that are included in ot her vessel categories and then matching engine models to known EPA categories there were a si gnificant number of “Unmatched Boats,” as is reported in Table 2-4.
Table 2-4. Vessel Matching

A new approach was developed to help determin e whether a vessel was Ca tegory 1 or 2 based on total towboat HP and hull displacem ent (in net registered tons). In this approach, vessel HP is multiplied by hull displacement and divided by 1,000. Figure 2-2 shows the results of the calculation for matched vessels where the EPA engine category was known.
The vast majority of boats with HP-Tonnage sc ores below 250 were Category 1 vessels. Those with HP-Tonnage values above 1,000 were most ly Category 2 vessels. The area in between 250 and 1,000 was problematic, but only seemed to account for 10 percent of the fleet. Efforts to further refine the cutpoint base d on number of installed engines, hull design (model towboat or pushboat), and vessel length were not successful. A preliminary decision to use 250 as the cutpoint was made knowing that this could conceivably overestim ate the number of Category 2 engines – although there seemed little basis to apply probability statistics in this case. It should be emphasized that the surrogate HP-Tonnage me thod was only applied to the unmatched boats, which represented about 31 percent of the fleet. Thus the gross erro r was plus or minus 5 percent for the unmatched vessels or +/- 2 percent fo r the matched and unmatched data combined.
Database preparation also included gap filling. In a limited number of cases inspection of the data revealed a few (50-80) duplicate rows. This can be explained in part because a towboat could have two different engine models on board , as well as a function of how the data were merged. Given the low gross error rate and the fa ct that it was unclear which records should be removed, these few boats were retained in the tugboat database. Data Count Percent Matched 2,883 68% Remaining 1,338 32% 4,2210203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-8 

## H P * T o n n a g e M e tric

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

5 0 1 0

0 150 2

0 0 350 3

0

0

350 400 450 5

0

0

1

0

0

0 999 9

9Raw Count 

### C a t1 C a t2

Figure 2-2. Distribution of Test Matched by Count and HP-Tonnage

2.1.4 Analysis of Tugboat Data

Table 2-5 below summarizes the commercial towboat fl eet in the U.S., stratified by operating

area. Table 2-5. Category 1 and 2 Hulls and Engines

Area C1Boats C2Boats Total Towboats Atlantic 247 103 350 Great Lakes 88 21 109 Gulf Inland 1,281 251 1,532 Inland 1,135 441 1,576 Offshore Gulf 69 70 139 Pacific 344 171 515 Total 3,164 1,057 4,221

The last two columns sum up Category 1 a nd 2 towboats and engines, respectively. Approximately 27 percent of the fleet of towboa ts was classified as having Category 2 main propulsion engines. Note that no Category 3 engines were found.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-9 The authors wish to acknowledge Mr. Doug Scheff ler of the AWO for his suggestions regarding use of the U.S. ACE databases. Our findi ng of 4,221 active towboats, of which 1,057 are identified as being Category 2 equipped, is consistent with AWO pr ojections for the U.S. towboat fleet.
2.1.5 Tugboat References
American Bureau of Shipping Bureau – 2004 Data query available by negotiation only, http://www.eagle.org/

. American Waterways Operators, call with Mr. Sam Wells and Mr. Doug Scheffler, 2004.
Bureau Veritas – 2004 Data query availa ble by negotiation only, Paris, France, 2004.
California Air Resource Board, call with Sam We lls of Starcrest and Kirk Rosenkranz of ARB June 6, 2004.
Inland River Record – The Waterways Journal, In c., 319 N. Fourth Street, Suite 650, St. Louis, MO, 2004.
Lloyd’s Register of Ships, Fairplay, Ltd. 8410 N.W. 53 rd 

### Terrace, Suite 207, Miami, FL, 2004.
U.S. Coast Guard, Merchant Vessels of the U.S., NTIS, (CG 408), 2004.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Stat istics Division, Waterbor ne Transportation Lines of the U.S., New Orleans, LA. 2004 http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/wcsc.htm
2.2 Commercial Fishing Vessels
Commercial fishing vessels are self-propelled sh ips dedicated to procuring fish for the purpose of sale at a market. There are various kinds of fi shing vessels that use di fferent types of fishing gear. The main kinds of gear include seine nets, crab pots, trolling lines, otter net trawling, gill netting, and long-lines. The main distinction betw een fishing vessels is whether the boat tows a net or is engaged in “hook and line” fisheries, or falls into a miscellaneous category that can include dive boats, clam dredges, and even aqua culture support vessels. Gear type is not a good predictor of horsepower requireme nts or the category classificati on of the propulsion engine. In fact, many fishing boats are “multi-purpose” so as to be able to participate in as many different fishing activities as possible. In addition to sma ller fishing vessels, there are a number of large, ocean-going vessels that serve as factory ships and are equipped with blast freezers, some of which are capable of processing over a hundred metr ic tons of fish per day. The fishing vessel fleet varies from port to port in si ze, design, and targeted fish species.
2.2.1 Commercial Fishing Vessel Data Sources
The principal data source for the commercial fish ing vessels is the MVUS database. By law, the vessels need to be registered with the U.S. Coast Guard. The database was queried for0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-10 “commercial fishing vessels” and this file was used as the starting po int. Out of a total 29,679 commercial fishing vessels found in the file, roughly 3,000 vessels had horsepower data. If we assume that the port of registry is a surrogate for where the boat is based, the states with the most commercial fishing vessels are listed in Table 2-6. Because fishing boats move seasonally with fish populations, their area of operation are typically large areas and they visit several different ports.
Table 2-6. State Fishing Vessel Registration Comparisons

State Percentage of National Registered Fishing Vessels Fleet Alaska 18% Washington 8% Texas 8% California 7% Florida 7% Louisiana 7% Maine 7% Massachusetts 6% Maryland 4% Oregon 4% Virginia 4% North Carolina 3% Mississippi 2% New York 2% Others 13%

The MVUS database documented U.S. commercial fishing vessels, but it could not be used solely to identify vessels with EPA Categor y 2 propulsion engines since it has limited horsepower data and no engine ma ke and model data. In fact, no data source was identified that included engine make and model fo r registered commercial fishing ve ssels. Therefore, the engine category identification could not be based on en gine specific data. In stead, horsepower, vessel length, geographic area, and type of fishing activities were considered in determining the engine category.
In evaluating the approximately 30,000 rows of da ta, the vessels were given category codes based on classifications noted in Table 2-7.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-11 Table 2-7. Commercial Fishing Vessel Category Assumptions
Category Description Vessel Count 0 0 HP 101 1 Rated HP less than 1,000 2,818 Possible 1 HP not given; leng th less than 100’ length 26,103 2 Rated HP greater than 1,000 301 Possible 2 HP not given; length greater than 100’ 356 Total 29,679
The 1,000 HP and 100 foot length break-points were used to help sort the data and divide it into manageable groups. From previous experience w ith commercial fishing vessel surveys, it was assumed that vessels with less than 1,000 HP and less than 100 foot in length were generally Category 1 vessels.

Alternative data sources were identified to ad dress the data gap for the horsepower field. The databases that have detailed commercial fishi ng vessel data and were us ed in this study are summarized in Table 2-8, and are discussed in great detail below.
Table 2-8. Summary of Commercia l Fishing Vessel Data Sources

Data Source Vessel Count Comments Merchant Vessels of the U.S. Approximately 30,000 vessels Used as primary file
American Bureau Shipping Matche d 10 vessels Vessel classification database California Commercial Fishing File Approximately 300 fishing vessels identified of which 25 to 30 had horsepower data that could be used to evaluate engine category Matched for Los Angeles

area

Alaska CFEC 2003 Permits 23,000 permits matched to 5,000 vessels Matched for Alaska and Pacific NW Washington Department Fish and Wildlife Matched approximately 700 vessels Matched for Washington Coastal fishing operations

An internet search was done for the main fishi ng states to find usable vessel data files. A downloadable file from the State of Alaska’s Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) was found and matched to the existing commercial fishing vessel file. The CFEC keeps track of individual permits and vessel information by year for the state of Alaska and has downloadable comma separated data files that can be used in spreadsheets. The 2003 year data were downloaded and approximately 23,000 permits for re sident and non-resident s were compared to the project’s commercial fi shing vessel database.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-12 The Washington Department of Fish and Wild life (WDFW) was contacted for information on their commercial fishing permits since the state of Washington had the highest percentage of vessels with possible Category 2 engines. The WDFW provided us with a list of commercial fishing vessels that had applied for permits. The commercial fishing vessel project database was compared to the WDFW file to append the mi ssing horsepower data and determine whether the vessel was equipped with a gas or diesel engine. Th ese data were used to help fill in the missing horsepower data for over 700 vessels. A total of 431 vessels with known gasoline engines were deleted from the project databa se and a new “Excluded” code was added for vessels from territories outside the project’s area of interest (e.g., Guam, Sa moa, U.S. Virgin Islands).
This matching of vessels of data from the MVUS with local state and vess el classification data was continued on a smaller scale by incorpora ting data from the ABS and the Los Angeles inventories. The final vessel matching is summarized in Table 2-9 below:
Table 2-9. Summary of Commercia l Fishing Vessel Categories
Category Vessel Count HP 0 110 Definite 1 8,130 Possible 1 21,328 Definite 2 412 Possible 2 227 Excluded 48 Total 30,255

It is unclear what the “HP 0” represents in th ese databases. Initially it was assumed that the vessels were not self-propelled, bu t further study revealed that this was not the case. Given that the HP 0 group is such a small portion of the fleet and the Category 2 vessels represent the largest vessels in the fishing fleet, it was a ssumed that these HP 0 vessel were probably Category 1 ships and were not included in this analysis.
Even after removing the gasoline powered vessels, the total number of ve ssels went up by about 500 because commercial fishing vessels with vali d permits from the states of Alaska and Washington were added to the project database. It is unclear if th ese were foreign boats such as ones from Canada or if the (USCG) database was missing some vessels that should have been classified as “fishing” instead of anot her vessel type, such as “recreational.”
2.2.2 Analysis of Commercia l Fishing Vessel Data
After further review of the data, the definite Category 2 and possible Category 2 vessels were separated from the rest of the file for furthe r study. This separate list contained about 639 vessels. Table 2-10 shows the vessels so rted by the length and horsepower groups.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-13 Table 2-10. Commercial Fishing Vessels Sort ed by Length and Horsepower Groupings

Total HP under 100’ 100-124’ 125-149’ 150-199’ 200+ 1000-2000 137 79 52 51 5 2000-3000 2 0 4 24 8 3000-4000 2 0 0 8 5 4000-5000 0 0 1 3 6 5000+ 0 0 0 6 12 Blank 0 78 41 86 24 Total 141 157 98 178 60

In order to make a better determination of whic h of the above vessels had Category 2 engines, the national brokerage websites th at post commercial fishing vessels for sale were researched for vessels with known engine make and model data. These websites post vessel specifications such as length, main engine make and model, and sometimes horsepower. They do not list names of vessel or any Coast Guard or IMO number that could be linked to a particular vessel characteristic. Numerous nationa l and international websites we re reviewed to see if the information provided could help in determining e ngine categories based on vessel characteristics. Some websites contained vessels from around the world, which showed the difference in engine manufacturers between U.S. and foreign flagged vessels. American commercial fishing vessels tend to have main engines manufactured in the United States, such as Caterpillar, Cummins, Detroit Diesel, and Perkin Engines.
The brokerage website data verified the assump tion that vessels equipped with engines rated with less than 1,000 HP were Category 1 engines. A spreadsheet of U.S. vessels for sale that had a total engine horsepower of 1,000 HP or greater was compiled. The 103 vessels for sale with known engine make and model data found in the we b search were sorted into engine category, vessel length, and horsepower. The results showed that U.S. commercial fishing vessels under 100 feet in length typically contained one main Category 1 engine. Vessels with lengths between 100 and 125 feet are generally equipped with on e or two Category 1 engines. In the 125 to 200 feet length range, the vessels were equipped mostly with one or more Category 2 engines. There were a few exceptions for larger vessels th at were equipped with twin Category 1 engines in the 1,000-2,000 total horsepower range. All ve ssels over 200 feet l ong were Category 2 engines with more than 1 engine per vessel. Th e vessels over 200 feet in length found for sale were mostly fish processors, while the vesse ls with lengths between 125 and 200 feet were mostly trawlers.
Figure 2-3 summarizes the resu lts from the 103 vessels for sale with know engine make and model:0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-14 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

50 100 125 150 200 Length GroupVessel Count
Cat 1 Cat 2



### Figure 2-3. Vessel Sale Data

From the main engine information gathered a bout the vessels from brokerage websites, it was assumed that the 144 vessels with lengths unde r 100 feet and the 157 vessels with lengths between 100 and 124 feet (noted in Table 12) have Category 1 engines. The 333 vessels with lengths greater than 125 feet ar e likely to have Category 2 engi nes. These assumptions are not inconsistent with the horsepow er data reported in Table 2-10 and summarized in Table 2-11.

Table 2-11. Commercial Fishin g Vessels by Horsepower

Total HP Category 1 Category 2 1000-2000 219 105 2000-3000 2 36 3000-4000 2 13 4000-5000 0 10 5000+ 0 18 Unknown 78 151 Total 301 333

This analysis shows that approximately 1 per cent of the total commercial fishing vessels are equipped with Category 2 engines. The possible Category 2 list was also sorted by state and region. The state of Washington had the most commercial fishing vessels with Category 2 engines (46%), followed by the states of Louisi ana (14%), Alaska (8%), and California (6%). The Pacific Coast accounts for 64 percent of the Category 2 commerci al fishing vessels, followed by the Gulf region with 19 percent, and the Atlantic coast with 14 percent.
Our data did not allow us to investigate forei gn ships that may be fishing within the U.S. territorial waters, legally or otherwise. It is common for vessels within the U.S. water to be U.S.- flagged, but this is not always true; for example, it is possible to obtain permits to fish in the0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-15 waters of Mexico, which typically occurs when U. S. waters are closed (e .g., charter boat snapper fishery).
In conclusion, a few commercial fishing vessels that resemble factory proce ssors were identified as having Category 2 main engines. However, the t ypical fishing vessel in the U.S. is quite small, generally 30 to 50 feet in length and powered by Category 1 diesel engines.
2.2.3 Commercial Fishing Vessel References
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) database.
Eastern Research Group (ERG) (2004), Update to the Commercial Marine Inventory for Texas to Review Emissions Factors, Consider a Ton-Mi le EI Method, and Revise Emissions for the Beaumont-Port Arthur Non-Attainment Area.
Research Fishing Vessels website.
Starcrest (2000), Houston-Galveston Ar ea Vessel Emissions Inventory (HGAVEI).
Starcrest (2004), Port of Los Angeles Port-W ide Baseline Air Emissions Inventory (PWBAEI).
State of Alaska, Commerci al Fisheries Entry Commission, 2003 permit database, see www.cfec.state.ak.us/veslist.
State of Washington, Department of Fish and Wildlife commercial fishing license database.
U.S. Coast Guard, Merchant Vessels of the U.S. database.

Websites used : Alaskan Leader National Fisherman Ocean Marine Ships USA Trident Seafoods Tidewater Brokerage

2.3 Coast Guard Vessels
To account for all Category 2 military vessels, it is necessary to include all branches of the military service that operate marine vessels. This would include the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard. To include naval data is particul arly challenging as it is necessar y to consider only those vessels that are operating in navigable waters of the U.S., which requi res detailed information about vessels and their location. Unfortunately, detail s concerning the Naval fl eet are currently not publicly available and therefore can not be included in this analysis. Only data from the U.S. Coast Guard could be considered in this report. The actual military fleet of vessels equipped with Category 2 engines operating in U.S. wate rs is underestimated in this study.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-16 The U.S. Coast Guard uses a variety of vessels throughout the United States to conduct its daily business. The vessels can be separa ted into cutters and small boats.
The 1,400 small boats that range in length from 12’ to 64’ and operate close to shore were determined to be equipped with Category 1 engine s and therefore were not included in the list of vessels that required more detail ed research. These small boats include motor lifeboats and surf boats, utility, rescue, and Port security boats.

A cutter is a Coast Guard vessel that is at least 65’ in length. For this study, the cutters were researched to determine their engine category. Cutte rs include icebreakers, river, inland, coastal, and seagoing buoy tenders, construction tenders, large patrol boats, and harbor tugs. Twelve Coast Guard vessels that are equipped with gas tu rbine engines were removed from this analysis as they do not meet the Category 2 definition.

2.3.1 Coast Guard Data Source

The main source of information for this U.S. Coast Guard fleet was the U.S. Coast Guard webpage ( www.uscg.mil/datasheet/dataindx.htm ) which lists its fleet of cutters, small boats and airplanes. The cutters are pres ented individually grouped by their vessel class. Many had their own websites that provided information needed to make an engine category determination. The websites also provided other vess el characteristics data includ ing vessel horsepower and the districts where they patrol. Where data were missing, vessel characteristics were estimated by matching the vessels to other vessels in the same class which did report vessel characteristics.
2.3.2 Analysis of Coast Guard Data
Approximately 158 of the 235 cutters curren tly in service had Category 2 engines.

2.3.3 Coast Guard Reference

Coast Guard official website - www.uscg.mil/datasheet/dataindx.htm

. 2.4 Ferry Vessels
Ferries are self-propelled vessels th at carry passengers from one location to another. Some ferries have the capability to also carry motor vehi cles. These vessels are owned and operated by both State Agencies, usually State Department of Transportation, and private firms.
2.4.1 Ferry Vessel Data Sources

The main data source for ferries was the 2000 Bu reau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Ferry Database. There were a total of 680 vessels included in the National Ferry Database. The database provided vessel horsepower, the name of the vessel, and the city and state were the vessel operates. Main engine make and model data for individual fe rries were not included in the BTS database, and so a number of other source s were used to determine the engine category.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-17 The data sources used to determine engine ca tegory included the IRR that listed passenger vessels operating along the Mississippi River and Gulf Coast, and the ABS dataset that listed registered ferries. Appropriate we bsites were also identified a nd lists of ferries with engine specifications were downloaded. Information about ferries at several of the major ports was obtained from published studies. To address the remaining data gaps, it was necessary to contact individual ferry operators to obt ain readily available information about their vessel s. New ferries built and operated since 2000 and containing Ca tegory 2 main engines were added to the project’s ferry database.
2.4.2 Analysis of Ferry Data
The original BTS database included 685 ferries. The non-Category 2 vessels were identified and flagged based on knowledge of the ferry fleet obt ained from work performed at major ports. Where engine make and model data were identifie d, these engine data were compared with the engine database developed for this project. Vessel s were also flagged that are not self-propelled or do not use diesel fuel. Lastly vessels operating in the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. protectorates were noted as they were not included in th e project’s scope of work. For 53 vessels there was insufficient data to determin e the engine category. For these vessels, calls were made to the operators which revealed that 16 of the 53 remaining ferries were equipped with Category 2 engines.

Table 2-12 summarizes the vessel category profile for ferries. Note that “0” represents ferries that are not self-propelled and “excluded” repres ents ferries operating outside the study area, such as the U.S. Virgin Islands and Mariana Isla nds, or were duplicates w ith vessels reported in the deep water vessel category.
Table 2-12. Ferry Population by Engine Category
Engine Category No. of Vessels Not self-propelled 44 1 508 2 99 Excluded 34 Total 685

Out of the 685 ferries, 99 ferries (14%) had Ca tegory 2 engines. The states with the most Category 2 ferries are summarized in Table 2-13.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-18 Table 2-13. Distribution of Ferries by State

State Percentage Washington 19 California 12 New York 11 Connecticut 10 Massachusetts 9 Alaska 8 Delaware 5 Texas 5

2.4.3 Ferry References
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) database.
Bureau of Transportation ( 2000), National Ferry Database.
Corbett, J.J. et al (2003), Air Pollution from Passenger Ferries in New York Harbor.
Inland River Record (IRR) (2004).
Starcrest (2003), New York, Northern New Jers ey, Long Island Nonattain ment Area Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions Invent ory (PANYNJ CMVEI), Volume 1.
Starcrest (2000), Houston-Galveston Ar ea Vessel Emissions Inventory (HGAVEI).
Starcrest (2004), Port of Los Angeles Port-W ide Baseline Air Emissions Inventory (PWBAEI).

Cities and States contacted: City of Vallejo State of Alaska State of North Carolina State of Washington
Companies contacted: Cross Sound Ferries Bridgeport & Port Jefferson Steamboat Company Catalina Clipper Blue & Gold Fleet Miller Boat Line Hydrolines Express, Inc. Jet Express0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-19 2.5 Deep Water Cargo Vessels
Ocean going vessels carry intern ational cargo and passengers to and from major ports around the world. Category 2 vessels account for approximately 8 percent of international ship trips.
2.5.1 Deep Water Cargo Vessel Data Sources
In an earlier project, vessels included in the U.S. ACE Clearan ce and Entrance (C&E) data set were matched to vessel characteristics from the ROS, ABS, and Bureau Veritas databases. These files include data flags for the different engine categories as derived from cylinder displacement data as discussed in the tugboat section of this memorandum. All deep water cargo vessels that have been identified as being equipped with Category 2 engines have been extracted from the U.S. ACE C&E data set and pulled into this project’s database.
2.5.2 Analysis of Deep Water Cargo Vessel Data
The matching of the C&E data with vessel char acteristic data from vessel classification companies identified 520 deep water cargo vessel s that are equipped with Category 2 Engines. 300 foreign flagged vessels were removed when th e data for each of the vessels types were combined into the database discussed in Section 3 of this report, the d eep water vessel listing was compared with the other vessel data to ensu re that no vessels were double counted in this project. Special attention was give n to vessel types such as tugs and Great Lakes Vessels as they were likely to have duplicate vessel data. When duplicates were removed, 89 vessels were remaining. Because the data provided by the U.S. ACE is vessel specific, additional analysis of the engine category was not necessary.
2.5.3 Deep Water Cargo Vessel References
American Bureau of Shipping Bureau – 2004 Data query available by negotiation only, http://www.eagle.org/

. Bureau Veritas – 2004 Data query availa ble by negotiation only, Paris, France, 2004.
Lloyd’s Register of Ships, Fairplay, Ltd. 8410 N.W. 53 rd 

### Terrace, Suite 207, Miami, FL, 2004.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vessel Cleara nce and Entrance Data, Waterborne Statistics Division, New Orleans, LA. 2006

2.6 Research Vessels
A variety of marine research vessels ply the co astal waters of the United States. These vessels are equipped with a wide range of scientific equipment used to track marine wildlife, map geographic formations, monitor coastal coral reefs, investigate changing meteorological conditions, and test water quality parameters. Some of these vessels are fair ly large and would be equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-20 2.6.1 Research Vessel Data Sources
The University of Delaware maintains an inventor y of U.S. flagged research vessels operating in the U.S. This University of Delaware database was an excellent starting point as it includes many, though not all, research vessels. The vessels that were included in the database were matched with research vessels included in the ROS and ABS databases. For the matched research ships engine specific da ta were associated with these vessels to accurately flag the Category 2 vessel population.
These data were supplemented with data obtaine d from internet web searches. The UniversityNational Oceanographic Labor atory System (UNOLS) website was particularly usef ul as it listed other research vessels besides those included in the University of Delaware’s database. Many smaller research vessels were id entified but not include d in the database as the focus of this project is Category 2 powered vesse ls. Vessels were also evaluate d to ensure only active ships are included, this led to the Removal of Vessels that have been decommissional or are in cold storage. An addition research vesse l was also removed as it spend al l of its time in antartica and is outside U.S. waters.
2.6.2 Analysis of Research Vessel Data
Through this effort 31 research vessels were id entified as equipped with Category 2 engines.

2.6.3 Research Vessel References

The UNOLS website is found at www.unols.org . It has a research vessel index found at www.unols.org/info/vessels.htm
2.7 Offshore Support Vessels
Most offshore vessels represent a variety of boats that provided different support services to the offshore oil platforms. These services include ge ophysical surveys, explorat ory drilling, platform construction and removal, pipeline construction and maintenance, and continuous transfer of people, equipment and supplies to and from the platforms. These activities use the following vessel types:

• Anchor handling tugs;

• Crew boats;

• Drilling rigs;

• Lightering escort vessels;

• General purpose tugs;

• Liftboats;

• Pipe laying vessels;

• Supply boats;

• Support vessels; and

• Survey vessels.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-21 Because offshore oil platform needs vary, the support vessel fleet composition includes boats with a wide range of propulsion engine sizes and operating speeds with approximately half of fleet equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines.
2.7.1 Offshore Support Vessel Data Sources
As with the other vessel type s included in previous Categor y 2 studies, there is no single comprehensive database that includes a complete listing of all active s upport vessels and their engine characteristics. The O ffshore Marine Service Associati on (OMSA), which is the trade organization for offshore support vessel operators, maintain records of th e number of American flagged vessels currently operati ng the Gulf of Mexico, unfortuna tely, they do not have detailed data about the propulsion engines for each vessel. The Oilfield Publications Limited’s (OPL) A-Z Offshore Support Vessels of the World Data Set , contain detailed data on specific offshore vessels; but unfortunately, this data set did not identify which vessels are actually operating in U.S. waters.
A two phase approach was developed that used these complementary data sets to quantify the population of U.S. flagged Categor y 2 offshore vessels operating in U.S. waters. In the first phase, national estimates were developed for each vessel type for U.S. flagged support vessels by extrapolating the OMSA Gulf of Mexico data. In the second phase, detailed vessel specific data were obtained from the OPL and evaluated to develop estimates of the proportion of each offshore vessel type that is e quipped with Category 2 propulsi on engines. These Category 2 ratios were applied to the offshore vessel populati on data providing reason able estimates of the Category 2 offshore vessels. The fo llowing sections of this me morandum discusses in greater detail the approaches used in this study.
2.7.2 Support Vessel Analysis
During the course of this study two offshore vessel types were investigated and discovered to not be equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines and were not included in this study. These two non-Category 2 vessel types included dr illing rigs and escort vessels.
Once a survey vessel has identified an area that may have oil bearing strata, a drilling rig is commissioned and sent to the si te. Drilling rigs are sometimes considered to be offshore vessels as they operate in shallow as well as deep wa ters. Some drilling rigs are self-propelled, while others are towable. Drilling rigs were not included in any of the other Category 2 vessel groups, but were considered in this study due to their involvement with offshore oil exploration. There are several different types of drilling rigs, from drill barges that operate in shallow waters, jackups that operate in waters with depths less than 100 meters, se mi-submersibles that operate in water depths greater than 300 meters, and drill ships that oper ate in waters with depths up to 1,200 meters. Though all drilling rigs are equi pped with large diesel engines, only semisubmersibles and drilling ship s are self-propelled, all of the others are towed to the site using oceangoing support tugs.
The self-propelled drilling rig population for the Gulf of Mexi co, Alaska, and California was obtained from RigZone, which is a trade group that monitors global activity of individual drilling0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-22 rigs. It should be noted that no self-propelled drilling rigs were identified operating in Californian or Alaskan wate rs and 16 drill ships and semisubmersible rigs were identified as operating in the Gulf of Mexico. Upon further study of the propulsion engi nes associated with the self propelled drilling rigs, three of these vessels could be match to propulsion engine characteristics and all three used Category 3 diesel engines for propulsion; therefore it was decided to exclude drilling rigs as a ve ssel type from this offshore assessment.
Similarly, escort vessels were also excluded from this study as all identified escort vessels were equipped with Category 3 propulsion engines. Escort vessels are offshore vessels that shuttle products to and from tankers afloat in the Coas t Guard monitored lightering zones. These tankers may be too large to safely operate in a port area or they may chose to offload their product to escort vessels in a lighter zone to avoid congest ed harbors. Such escort vessels tend to have Category 3 engines in order to quickly move pr oduct to shore and return to the tanker for additional transfers.
As noted earlier, the OMSA provided an estimate of U.S. flagged vessels currently operating in the Gulf of Mexico. Crew boats, supply and suppor t vessels, and utility boats were combined in this report as these vessels often provide multiple overlapping services and needed to be match to the vessel categories used in the OPL dataset. The OMSA vessel populati on data are summarized in Table 2-14.

Table 2-14. OMSA U.S. Flagged Vessel Popul ation by Offshore Vessel Type for the Gulf of Mexico

Offshore Vessel Type Minimum Horsepower Maximum Horsepower Vessel Count Anchor Handling Vessels 10,000 14,000 25 Crew/Supply/ Support/Utility Boats 900 6,000 660 Lift Boats 1,000 1,500 113 Tugs/Towing 1,000 5,000 200 Total 998
These OMSA offshore vessel population estimates only cover the Gulf of Mexico. Though more than 90% of the offshore oil and gas comes from platforms in the Gulf, there are active platforms in Alaskan waters and off the coast of Californi a. Offshore oil production data for each region were obtained from the Department of Interio r’s Mineral Management Services’ Offshore Oil Program. These oil production values were compar ed to the Gulf’s U.S. flagged offshore vessel fleet estimates to approximate the U.S. fl agged vessel population in each region using the following equation:

VP ij 

### = OP i 

### /OP g 

### ×VT gj0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-23 Where:

VP ij 

### = Population for vessel ty pe j in geographic area i OP i 

### = Offshore oil production for geograp hic area i (millions of barrels ) OP g 

### = Offshore oil production for the Gulf of Mexico (millions of barrels) VT gj 

### = the population of vessel type j in the Gulf of Mexico – Table 2-14 i = Geographic area (i.e ., Pacific or Alaska) j = Vessel type (i.e., anchor handling ve ssels, crew boats, lift boats, supply vessels, tugs, utility boats) g = Gulf of Mexico
Result of these vessel population equa tions are summarized in Table 2-15.

Table 2-15. OMSA U.S. Vessel Po pulation by Offshore Vessel Ty pe for the Gulf of Mexico

Vessel Count

Offshore Vessel Type Gulf of Mexico Pacific Alaska U.S. Waters (Unknown Location) 

### Total 2004 Oil Production (Million of Barrels) 534.969 27.510 25.078 --- 585.557 Anchor Handling Vessels 25 1 1 --- 27 Crew/Supply/ Support/Utility Boats 660 33 31 --- 724 Lift Boats 113 6 5 --- 124 Tugs/Towing 200 10 9 --- 219 Survey --- --- --- 62 62 Pipe/Cable laying --- --- --- 24 24 Total 998 50 46 86 1,180
Survey vessels and pipe laying vessels were ha ndled differently than the other offshore vessel types. The survey vessels include geotechnical, hydrographic, and seismi c vessels, therefore the survey vessels are not limited to the oil and ga s industry activities a nd can be found in many navigable waters. The vessel popula tion data for survey vessels were obtained from the OPL database.
Similarly for pipe laying vessels , research concerning th e design and uses of pipe laying vessels indicated that pipe laying and cable laying vessels are essentially the same type of vessels and can be quickly modified to perform any laying activ ity. Basically only the material being laid has to be changed out and most of the remaining equipment stays the same. Because of this, pipe laying and cable-laying vessels are consider ed together. The vesse l population data for pipe/cable laying vessels was obt ained from the OPL database. As the survey vessel and pipe laying categories may operate outside the areas where offshore oil platforms operate, only national total numbers were used for this study.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-24 During Work Assignment 4-02 under Contract 68-C-00-112 entitled Category 2 Commercial Marine Propulsion Engine Population Estimation , ERG ordered a copy of the OPL data set to help quantify the Category 2 offshore vessel pop ulations. Unfortunately, the OPL data did not arrive during the project’s period of perfor mance. Upon reviewing the OPL data set, 1,407 vessels were identified that may operate in U.S. waters. This determination was based on vessels that were flagge d as U.S. vessels or listed the vessel manager’s address as being in the United States. This data set may over represent U. S. flagged vessels as it includes vessels that may not necessarily be operating in U.S. waters.
Offshore vessels use a large number of tugs to to w drilling rigs and components of the platforms for construction or removal. Tugs and barges also are used to carry supplies and equipment to the offshore platforms. The vessels included in th e OPL listing were matched with vessels in the Category 2 tug data set, developed under Wo rk Assignment 4-02. Nineteen vessels were identified as being in both data sets and were removed from Towboat dataset to eliminate any double counting of vessels.
After drilling rigs, and escort vessels were removed from the OPL data, the offshore vessel population was 1,254, which is similar to, but sli ghtly higher than the adjusted OMSA vessel population data. The difference between these two values represent the uncertainty associated with the number of U.S ve ssels operating overseas.
The remaining OPL offshore vessels we re compared to the Coast Guard’s Marine Vessel Register to pull in as many vessel ID codes as possible and obtain any available engine propulsion data to identify t hose vessels equipped with Cate gory 2 propulsion engines. The primary engine data that were sought were the en gine’s bore and stroke dimensions. These data were used to calculate the cylinder displacement.
If engine bore and stroke data were not avai lable, engine make and model information was compared to records in the Category 2 engine database developed for Work Assignment 4-02. This database lists all known Category 2 engines.
The vessels were matched by name, gross tonnage, and year of construction or modification. Of the 1,254 OPL vessels, 205 had engine data in the Marine Vessel Registry.

The vessels identification codes obtained from th e OPL data set and the Marine Vessel Registry were used to link the vessels to data obtaine d in Work Assignment 4-02, from the American Bureau of Shipping, Bureau Vertas , and Lloyds Register of Ships to get bore and stroke data or engine make and model information.

Table 2-16 summarizes the vessel engine data compiled for offs hore support vessels. As this table indicates, approximately half of the vesse ls could be matched to their propulsion engine characteristics. Most (>80%) of the matched vesse ls were matched to data in the Marine Vessel Registry and the American Bureau of Shipping’s data.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-25 Table 2-16. Results from Matching Ve ssels to Engine Characteristics

Data Source Vessel Count with Engine Data Percentage of Total Percentage of Total Excluding Blanks Unknown Engines 609 48.6 --- Marine Vessel Registry 205 16.3 31.8

American Bureau of Shipping 318 25.4 49.3
Lloyds Registry of Ships 121 9.6 18.8

Bureau Veritas 1 0.1 0.2 Total Excluding Tug Data Set 1,254 100 ---
Total Excluding Unknown Engines 645 --- 100

Based on the compiled engine characteristic data , the split between Category 1, 2, and 3 engines can be summarized in Table 2-17.

Table 2-17. Support Vessel Category Mix

Vessel Count Percentage of Total Percentage of Total Excluding Blank or Invalid Unknown Categories 812 64.8 --- Category 1 198 15.8 44.8 Category 2 226 18 51.1 Category 3 18 1.4 4.1 Total 1,254 100 --- Total Excluding Unknown Categories 442 --- 100

As Table 2-17 indicates approximately half of th e offshore vessel fleet is composed of vessels equipped with Category 2 engines. It should be noted that this value is based on matching of 35.2 percent of the vessels. For the purpose of this st udy it is assumed that he unmatched vessels have the same category profile as the matched vesse ls. Alternatively, the unmatched vessels may include a larger fraction of smalle r boats, that may not be Categor y 2 vessels, and are not insured through the three larger vessel classification comp anies, which was the data source for this component of the study. Additional data could not be obtained that would validate or negate the assumption used in this study.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-26 The larger value was not seen as surprising as many of these offshore support vessels are designed to carry large loads and travel up to two hundred miles offshore for extended periods of time. Instead of using the aggregated value, a somewhat more accurate estimate was developed by disaggregating the data by offshore ve ssel types as noted in Table 2-18.
Table 2-18. Category Mix by Support Vessel Type

Type Count Category Percent 343 Unknown -- Unknown Vessel Type 2 Category 3 -- 22 Unknown -- 7 Category 1 15.9 34 Category 2 77.3 Anchor Handling 3 Category 3 6.8 98 Unknown -- 1 Category 1 33.3 Liftboat 2 Category 2 66.7 18 Unknown -- 1 Category 1 20.0 3 Category 2 60.0 Pipe/Cable Laying 1 Category 3 20.0 232 Unknown -- 176 Category 1 60.1 116 Category 2 39.6 Crew/Supply/ Support/Utility Boats 1 Category 3 0.3 49 Unknown 6 Category 1 46.2 5 Category 2 38.5 Survey 2 Category 3 15.4 50 Unknown -- 7 Category 1 8.5 66 Category 2 80.5 Tugs/Tow 9 Category 3 11.0

It is appreciated that for some of the categorie s a large number of vessels could not be matched to propulsion engine categories. These vessel cate gories, such as survey vessels, lift boats, and pipelaying vessels, had relatively small vessel populati ons therefore the overall error in the Category 2 fleet population estimate will be relatively small. Acco rding to OMSA most of the Gulf support vessels are crew/s upply/support vessels, where engi ne matches were somewhat better. By disaggregating the fleet into individual vessel types, slightly more accurate Category 2 vessel population estimates were possible, than if the general Category 2 split noted in Table 2- 17 was used.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-27 The Category 2 percentages from Table 2-18 we re applied to the ve ssel population data summarized in Table 2-15 to estimate the number of Category 2 vessels in each geographic area using the following equation:

OC i 

### = (CP i 

### /100)×VP i


### Where:

OC i 

### = The population of offshore s upport vessel type i equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines CP i 

### = The percentage of offshore support vessel type i equipped with Category 2 propulsion engi nes (%) – Table 2-18 VP i 

### = The population of U.S. flagged offs hore support vessels for vessel type i – Table 2-15

i 

### = Offshore support vessel type (e .g., anchor handling, liftboat, pipe laying, supply/crew boats, survey vessels, tugs/tow boats
Results from the application of this equation are presented in Table 2-19.
Table 2-19. U.S. Flagged Category 2 Vessel Populations

Vessel Type Gulf of Mexico California Alaska Unknown Location Total Anchor Handling 19 1 1 --- 21 Liftboat 75 4 3 --- 82 Pipe/Cable Laying --- --- --- 14 14 Crew/Supply/ Support/Utility Boats 261 13 12 --- 286 Survey --- --- --- 24 24 Tugs/Tow 161 8 7 --- 176 Total 516 26 23 38 603

2.7.3 Offshore Support Vessel References
American Bureau of Shipping, 2004 Vessel Information , Houston Texas.
Fairplay, Ltd. 2004, Lloyd’s Register of Ships, Miami, FL.

Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA), 2006, 2005 Offshore Vessel Population and Activities , Harahan, LA.
Oilfield Publications Limited (OPL) 2004, A-Z of Offshore Support Vessels of the World – Second Edition , Houston, Texas.
RigZone, 2006 Drilling Rig Regional Summary . Houston, TX, http://www.rigzone.com/data/0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-28 U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Ma nagement Service (MMS). 2006. Oil and Gas Production. http://www.mms.gov/stats/xl sExcel/OCS%20Production-Sep05.xls

U.S. Coast Guard/Office of Info rmation Resources, October 2004, Merchant Vessels of the United States , NTIS No PB2004-594361, Springfield, Virginia. U.S. DOI, Minerals Management Service (MMS). 2004b. Gulfwide Emi ssion Inventory Study for the Regional Haze and Ozone Modeling Effort: Final Report. New Orleans, LA. OCS Study MMS 2004-072.
U.S. Department of Interior, Minera ls Management Service (MMS). 1995. Gulf of Mexico Air Quality Study: Final Report, Volumes I-III. New Orleans, LA. OCS Study MMS 95-0038, 95-0039, and 95-0040.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), December 2004, Category 2 Vessel Census – Draft Report , Ann Arbor, MI.
Workboat Publications, 2006, Mandeville, LA.

2.8 Great Lake Vessels and Vessels Not Otherwise Included
The Great Lake Vessels includes a variety of ship s that are designed speci fically to operate in that area and navigate the lochs of the St. Lawr ence Seaway, the Welland Canal, and the St. Clair River. The “Laker” vessel design is also particularly appropriate for the unique regional products that they transport. The Great Lake ship traffi c also includes ocean going vessels that are not restricted to operating in the Great Lakes. Thes e vessels transport cargo internationally or to domestic ports on the East coast of the U.S. Given the diverse population of vessels, it became necessary to develop an approach that would capture a wide range of vessel types, several of which were not included in th e vessel types discussed above.

• Auto Carriers;

• Break Bulkers;

• Containerships;

• Cruise/Passenger Vessels;

• General Cargo Ships;

• Special Carriers;

• Roll On/Roll Off; and

• Tankers.
2.8.1 Remaining Vessel Data Sources
In order to identify the U.S. flagged vessels oper ating in the Great Lakes, the U.S. ACE database for self-propelled vessels was queried and boa ts under 100 tons were removed. The 100 tons threshold was used so as to reduce the overall impact of smaller, Category 1 harbor craft. Fishing, offshore, and self-propelled barges were also filtered out as th ey are accounted for in other components of this study. Y achts (recreational vesse ls) were also removed. This left over 500 vessels that have yet to be evaluated to determine their EPA category. Note that this0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-29 approach not only includes Great Lake vessels, but other vessels that were not captured by the other vessel types incl uded in this study.
This data set of “Remaining Vessels” was merged with ROS by ship name. Matching the vessels using IMO numbers was not practical as the vast majority of thes e vessels are considered to be part of the domestic fleet and therefore do not tr avel in international shipping lanes. As their activities are limited to domestic shipping la nes, they would not have an IMO number. Conversely, any ship included in this group of vessels that did not have a Coast Guard identification number was deleted as they were assumed to be a foreign cargo vessel and would have already been included in the U.S. ACE’s E& C data set. Once the foreign cargo vessels have been removed the number of Remaining Vessels amounted to 514 ships.
2.8.2 Analysis of Remaining Vessel Data

Where the vessels could be matched to the ROS data, the EPA engine category was determined for each vessel by the volume of the cylinder in li ters as described earlier in this report. There were 264 vessels (51%) that could be matched a nd 250 (49%) that could not be matched. Results of this analysis of remaining vessel engine categories are summarized in Table 2-20. Vessel characteristics data from ABS were evaluated, but no additional vessel matches were identified.
Table 2-20. Summary of Remaining Vessel Engine Classification

Matched Vessels Type C1 C2 C3 Steam Unmatched Vessels Total Auto 0 0 1 0 0 1 Bulk 1 19 20 18 12 70 Containership 1 2 46 19 7 75 Cruise 0 1 0 0 20 21 General Cargo 5 4 10 3 72 94 RORO 1 1 5 5 20 32 Special Carrier 6 23 7 0 94 130 Tanker 4 6 28 28 25 91 Totals 18 56 117 73 250 514 Percentage of Total 3.5% 10.9% 22.8% 14.2% 48.6% Combined total Percentage 51.4%

As is evident in this table, the matching for gene ral cargo and special carriers is especially poor. Further investigation revealed that many of these vessels had low horsepower levels, indicating that they were more similar to small harbor craf ts rather than ocean-going ships. A preliminary analysis using average horsepower is presented in Table 2-21. It should be noted the standard deviation for these averages would be expected to be reasonably large.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-30 Table 2-21. Average HP for Missing Boats

Type Avg_HP Bulk 1,534 Cruise 1,582 General Cargo 2,087 RORO 1,830 Special Carrier 1,498 Tanker 1,565 1,683


### Total horsepower data for each vessel were extrac ted from the U.S. ACE data set and was used to evaluate the vessel engine category for the 250 unmatched vessels. After some analysis, the threshold between Category 1 and Category 2 was determined to be 2,000 HP and the threshold between Category 2 and Category 3 was establishe d at 7,500 HP. Such values were admittedly subjective, as many ships probably had more than one engine and the U.S. ACE did not report the number of propulsion engines.

For the few entries that did have a valid CG Number but no horsepower rating, if deadweight tonnage was over 12,000 short tons the vessel was cl assified as being Category 3; otherwise the few (less than 15) remaining vessels were classi fied as Category 1 vessels. These vessels were compared to the other vessel categories and 29 sh ips were removed because they were duplicates with deep water vessels and tow boats. After these fixes, Table 2-22 summarizes the likely distribution of commerci al marine vessels by EPA engine category:
Table 2-22. Allocation of Missing Vessels

Further research is recommended for this category to help refine these estimates as they include a very diverse vessel fleet which poorly matches available vessel specif ic characteristics. Type C1 C2 C3 STEAM Total Auto 0 0101 Bul k 6 18 23 18 65 Containership 1 2 53 19 75 Cruise 14 5 1 0 20 General Cargo 36 35 11 3 85 RORO 6 2 18 5 31 Special Carrier 68 43 8 0 119 Tanker 9 7 45 28 89 140 112 160 73 485 28.8% 23.1% 33.0% 15.1% 100.0%0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 2-31 2.8.3 Remaining Vessels References
Lloyd’s Register of Ships, Fairplay, Ltd. 8410 N.W. 53 rd 

### Terrace, Suite 207, Miami, FL, 2004.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Stat istics Division, Waterbor ne Transportation Lines of the U.S., New Orleans, LA. 2004 http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/wcsc.htm0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-1 3.0 CATEGORY 2 VESSEL ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT
Category 2 vessel activity is defined as the to tal horsepower hours associ ated with each vessel type. Total horsepower hours primarily takes into consideration the days of operation, the vessel horsepower, and appropriate engine load factors. The basic equation used to estimate total horsepower hours for this study is noted below:
Thp-hr ij 

### = VP i 

### ×UR i 

### × EN i 

### × HP ij 

### ×DO ij 

### × 24 × LF ij


### Where:
Thp-hr ij 

### = Total horsepower hours fo r vessel type i in mode j VP i 

### = Population of vessel type i UR i 

### = Utilization rate for vessel fleet i EN i 

### = Average number of engines on vessel type i HP ij 

### = Horsepower of vessel type i DO ij 

### = Days of operation for vessel type i in mode j 24 = hours per day LF ij 

### = Load factor of vessel type i propulsion engines in mode j i = Vessel type (i.e., deep water, tow, ferries commercial fishing, Great Lakes, Coast Guard, offshore support, and research) j = Mode of operation (i.e, underway cruise, underway idle)
The following section explains the data sources used to quantify these variables and limitations associated with their use. Normal variance is one of the more significant data limitations encountered in estimating total horsepower hours for each vessel type. For example, Category 2 engines can have a horsepower rating from 500 to 8,600. Similarly, engine operating days can vary significantly between the diffe rent vessel types. To account for the variance intrinsic in this calculation, a Monte Carlo simulation was used to define the range of possible total propulsion horse power hours. Note, in this Monte Carlo an alysis, horsepower and days of operation were varied based on the minimum, ma ximum, and most likely values. Other variables in the above equation change by vessel type or mode of opera tion, but they were held constant for a given vessel type in the Monte Carlo analysis.
3.1 Vessel Population and Characteristics
To calculate the total horsepower hours, the Category 2 vessel populat ion used in this calculation was quantified as described in Section 2 of th is report and these vesse l population values are summarized in Table 3-1. It is recognized that th ere is some uncertainty associated with these population figures, but the estimates provided in this report represent a reasonable approximation of the Category 2 vessel population.
Engine horsepower data were comp iled into the project database during the data collection phase of the project for each vessel type. The horsepower data were reviewed to insure that all data were reasonable. A number of values were cons idered inappropriate fo r Category 2 engines and were removed from this analysis. For example, a number of deep wate r vessels had engines0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-2 Table 3-1. Vessel Population and Characteristics

Engines Horsepower Vessel Type Vessel Population Utilization Rate Equivalent Vessels Avg # Total Min Likely Max Displacement (cu l/cyl) Deep Water Cargo 89 80% 89 2.09 148 1,860 3,603 7,200 10.75 Tow Boats 1,057 74% 782 1.96 1,533 900 2,207 7,420 Ferries 99 85% 84 2.2 185 865 2,412 4,400 Commercial Fishing 333 85% 283 1.21 342 1,000 1,924 4,313 10.55
Great Lake 112 85% 95 2.43 231 518 2,505 3,600 11.16 Coast Guard 157 100% 157 2.04 320 1,250 2,289 3,650 Offshore 603 97% 585 2.22 1,299 740 2,016 7,502 12.05 Research 31 100% 31 1.95 60 600 1,622 3,750 Total 2,481 2,106 4,118 Weighted Average 87% 2.08 891 2,227 7,007 11.45


### with a horsepower rating less th en 500 horsepower were considered too small for a Category 2 engine and were probably a data entry error. Deepwater vessel horsepower data was obtained from one of the major tow boat companies (as the majority of the Deepwater vessels were towboats). Additionally, many of the fishing vessel horsepower ra tings pulled into the project database were for total vessel horsepower (po ssibly including auxiliary engines). Where total horsepower could not be disaggregated into individual propulsion engines, these horsepower ratings were flagged as possibly incorrect values and not used in this analysis. Fishing vessel horsepower data from vessel clas sification databases were extr acted for vessels that were classified as Category 2 vessels and used to characterize th e range of horsepower ratings associated with the fishing fleet.
Vessels equipped with Category 2 propulsion engi nes could have a horsepower rating from 500 to 8,600, therefore, horsepower was considered a variable in the Mont e Carlo analysis. The horsepower profile varied by ve ssel type. Table 3-1 shows the minimum, maximum, and likely values used for each vessel type. The likely values are averages of the valid compiled horsepower ratings.
The number of propulsion engines for different Ca tegory 2 vessels were compiled for each vessel type during the data collection pha se of this project. The number of engines associated with a specific vessel was not always provided. Thus, the number of propulsion engines by vessel type was evaluated using only the records in the project database that had this data field populated. Some large ferries in the Seattle area have f our propulsion engines 10 of these ferries were identified in this study and are included in the average of e ngines. Although the numbers of propulsion engines varied between individual vessels, most ve ssels were equipped with two propulsion engines, therefore, fo r the purpose of this project th e average number of propulsion engines was used, as noted in Table 3-1. Fishi ng vessels are an exception, for vessels with engines with HP rating greater th an 1,500 it was assumed that thes e ships are equipped with two propulsion engines. For vessels wi th engines rated below 1,500 it was assumed that those vessels have one engine.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-3 To quantify the total number of annual horsepo wer hours that Category 2 propulsion engines operate, it was necessary to determine the percenta ge of the fleet that is active—this is often referred to as the utilization ra te. Utilization rates for the diffe rent vessel types were obtained from a variety of sources. For example, the publication Workboat reports monthly fleet utilization values for a variety of offshore vessel types. For vessels such as ferries, research vessels and U.S. Coast Guard ships, the utili zation rate was assumed to be high. The data collection approach used for deep water vessels used for this study cap tured only those vessels that were actually visiting ports and transferring cargo through customs, vessels that were not active were not included in the dataset, theref ore the deepwater vessel data were obtained only for the utilized portion of the deepwater fleet. For towboats, the utilization rate was provided by Doug Schaffer of the American Waterways Operat ors Association. For fish ing vessels and Great Lakes and other vessels, data on vessel utilization was not readily available, instead a default value of 85 percent was used. This value of 85 percent was considered a conservative value because it represents a low utilization rate at wh ich point the fleet is over capitalized and there are a surplus of vessels. Actual utilization rates may be higher, particularly for the Great Lakes and in water around other vessels category, or lowe r for fishing vessels operating in restricted fishing zones, such as in waters around New England.
Within a vessel type, utilization rates vary rela tive to geography, changes in the industry and weather events. For example, offshore vessel ut ilization rates increased significantly between 2001 and 2004 when some of the larger offshore vesse l service providers reduced their fleet size, scrapping or putting vessels into storage. Utili zation rates further increased in 2005, when two major hurricanes swept through the Gulf of Mexico, destroying 115 platforms and damaging 52 platforms and 183 pipeline segments. These storms increased the demand for offshore support vessel, which did not occur in California or Al aska where offshore platforms also exist. The utilization rates used in this study are presente d in Table 3-1. These rate s were applied to the vessel population estimates to approximate the numb er of vessels currently operating, referred to in Table 3-1 as the equivalent vessels.
3.2 Operating Days and Load Factors
Vessel operators and groups that monitor vessel activ ities, tend to track the number of days that vessels operate rather than actual hours. The days of ope ration were compiled and later converted to hours of operation based on the assu mption that a vessel equipped with Category 2 engines can operate 24 hours per day. The hours of operation should be considered conservative; actual hours of operation ma y be somewhat less.
Operating days for each vessel type were obtained from a variety of data sources. For example, because most of the deepwater vessels equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines were ocean going tugs similar to large tow boats, the sa me operating days value was used for both categories. The average value reported in Tabl e 3-2 for deep water t ugs and tow boats was obtained from one of the larger tug companies. These operation data were adjusted for the Great Lakes vessel category to reflect the period of time when the Great Lakes are frozen and vessel activity are temporarily stopped.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-4 The annual underway days for ferries was obtained from Corbett, J.J., J. J. Winebrake, and P. Woods, An Evaluation of Public-P rivate Incentives to Reduce Emi ssions from Regional Ferries: Synthesis Report, pp. 15, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey and University of Delaware, New Brunswick, NJ, 2005. and Winebrake, J.J., J. J. Corbett, C. Wang, A.E. Farrell, and P. Woods, Optimal Fleetwide Emissions Reductions fo r Passenger Ferries: An Application of a Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming Model for the New York-New Jersey Harbor, Journal of Air and Waste Management , 55 (4), 458–466, 2005.
Ferries operating in Alaska may ha ve a significantly different sche dule than vessels operating in the New York harbor area; for example the Alas kan ferries may spend more time at sea than New York harbor ferries. At this time there we re insufficient data to account for Alaska’s unique ferry operations.
Days of operation for fishing vessels were obtained from a study by Corbett and Koehler, Considering Alternative Input Parameters in an Activity-based Ship Fuel Consumption and Emissions Model: Reply to Co mments by Øyvind Endresen et al. on “Updated Emissions from Ocean Shipping” (2004). These fishing vessel values ma y under-represent the activity levels of larger commercial fishing vessels equipped with Category 2 engines as th ese larger vessels tend to remain at sea for longer periods of time. The Coast Guard provided estimates for the number of days per year that individual vessels operate at sea for the past 8 years, these vessels were matched with the list of Category 2 Coast Guar d vessels that was deve loped as described in Section 2.0. Only those vessels that were match to the Category 2 vessel list was used in this evaluation of days of operation.
The estimate for days of operation for offshor e support vessels was provided by James Mcgill, Coast Guard Technical Representative for the National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee (NOSAC). Mr. Mcgill has worked on offshore vessel activities for over 18 years and has considerable insight into thei r operations. In addition, Dr. Tommy Dickey, Dr. Grace Chang and Frank Spada of the Ocean Physics Laboratory (O PL) at the University of California – Santa Barbara provided the estimates of typical operati ng schedules for research vessels for which they are familiar. Dr. Dickey, Dr. Chang and Mr. Spad a are involved with inter-university research vessel planning and are very knowledgeable ab out research vessel operations. These vessel operating day data are summarized in Table 3-1.
Operating days can vary significantly for indivi dual vessels depending upon the activity, market force, and local fleet operating characteristic s. For these reasons days of operation was considered a variable in the Monte Carlo analysis.
When Category 2 vessels come to port they tend to shut off propulsion engines to reduce cost and use only auxiliary engines to ge nerate electricity, run refrigerati on units, or assist in loading and offloading. Therefore, there are no operati ng days for the propulsion engines while the vessels are hoteling in port.
Vessels such as offshore support vessels, research vessels, fishing boats, and Coast Guard ships spend some time idling at sea. Idling at sea is si gnificant because these ve ssels operate at lower load factors than they do while cruising at sea. Offshore support vessels are not allowed to come0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-5 in contact with drilling rigs or platforms. Th erefore, they must run their propulsion engines during unloading and loading operations, which run from 4 to 6 hours per trip, based on information provided by Mr. Mcgill. Research ve ssels also idle at sea depending on the study being implemented. Staff at OPL provided an estimate of the typical period that research vessels spend idling at sea. Fishing boats idle at sea when nets or lines are being hauled in and the catch is moved to storage. Coast Guard vessels idle at sea while inspecting cargo ships or during search and rescue operations. Fo r fishing vessels and Coast Guar d ships, idling at sea values were not readily available and were develope d based on professional j udgment. The period of time that vessels idle at sea are summarized in Table 3-2 and pr esented in Figure 3-1.

Table 3-2. Operating Days and Load Factors

Activity data for days of operation were also used to quantify the amount of time vessels equipped with Category 2 engines spend in port, as presented in Figure 3-1. The time spent in port includes seasonal down time, normal maintenance activities, time spent loading or discharging cargo, or in-port dela ys associated with weather or vessel traffic. These values should be considered rough appr oximations; actual time spent underw ay and in port for specific vessels may be significantly more or less than that shown in Figure 3-1.
Load factors were also derived from a variety of references. In many cases, the data source for load factors was the same as the data source fo r operating days. Load factors for tugs were provided by Doug Schaffer of the American Waterw ays Operators. Load factors for ferries were obtained from Corbett, et al ( 2003). These ferry load factors were considered appropriate for use for Great Lakes vessels. Typical lo ad factors for fishing vessels were obtained from Corbett and Koehler (2004). The load factor estimates fo r offshore support vessels were provided by James Mcgill and staff at OPL provided load factors for research ve ssels. In some cases, vessel type specific load factors were not readily available, such as for deep water vessels and Coast Guard ships. Typical load factors found in other EPA documents were used for this study. These load factor estimates should be seen as rough approximations of actua l engine loads. It should be Annual Underway Underway Idling Load Factor
Vessel Type Min Days Likely Days Max Days Percentage Likely Days Annual Port Days Min Likely Max Deep Water Cargo 219 0 0 146 0.10 0.80 0.90 Tow Boats 219 0 0 146 0.10 0.44 0.90 Ferries 152 174 243 0 0 137 0.53 0.68 0.80 Commercial Fishing 250 271 292 30 81 94 0.27 0.70 0.80 Great Lake 136 0 0 229 0.53 0.84 0.84 Coast Guard 29 88 157 20 18 277 0.10 0.80 0.90 Offshore 280 299 317 22 66 31 0.10 0.85 0.87 Research 220 40 88 145 0.10 0.85 0.900203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-6 Figure 3-1. Underway, Idling, and In Port Fractions by Vessel Type

noted that the California Air Res ource Board has developed load f actors for a variety of different vessels that are significantly lo wer than the load factors used in this study. The California load factors were not used as they include vessels ot her than Category 2 vessels that have different usage and operation patterns.
As noted earlier, Category 2 vessels do not run th eir propulsion engines wh ile hoteling in port. During the period in port that vessels are ma neuvering, their propulsion engines operate under a wide variety of loads. The period that these la rger Category 2 vessels spend maneuvering is not easily documented, and is assumed to be a short period relative to the period of time that Category 2 vessels are underwa y, therefore, the maneuvering pe riod is not included in this assessment. It is assumed that amount of in port activity and associated emissions from the propulsion engines is small.
When Category 2 vessels are cruising underway, they tend to operate at th e most fuel efficient load, which is around 80 percent. Vessels can operate at maximum load levels briefly to negotiate a difficult turn in a river or avoid an accident; again these episodes tend to be relatively short and were not included in th is analysis. For the purpose of th is study, the likely load factors noted in Table 3-2 were used in the calcul ation of the horsepower hours while vessels are cruising under way, and the minimum load factors were used while vessels were idling at sea. 36.2% 63.8% 19.2% 37.2% 51.9% 62.5% 60.0% 60.0%

24.1% 18.0% 4.9% 22.3%

39.7% 18.2% 75.9% 62.8% 25.8% 37.5% 40.0% 40.0%



### 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 

### Research Offshore Coast Guard Great Lake Commercial Fishing Ferries Tow Boats Deep Wate r Cargo

% Underway % Underway Idling % In Port0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-7 The load factor was not considered a variable in the Monte Carlo anal ysis, though it was varied by vessel type.
3.3 Horsepower Hours
The equation used to calculate horsepower hours is provided in Section 4.0. To use this equation all operating days were convert ed to hours by assuming that an operating day is equivalent to 24 hours. As mentioned earlier, this equation was applied to a Monte Carl o analysis. The Monte Carlo methodology is a system that incorporates vari able data that have a uniform distribution in order to measure the level of un certainty associated with a calc ulated value. This is done by running the model repeatedly usi ng values from the identified di stribution for each variable. In this project we used a triangl e distribution for our variables based on the minimum, maximum and most likely values for horsepower and opera tion days. These minimum, maximum, and most likely values for horsepower and operating da ys are presented in Tables 3-1 and 3-2, respectively. Graphic representati ons of these distributions are also presented in Appendix B. Crystal Ball ® 

### software was used in this analysis. Th e model was set to run 10,000 trials for each vessel type. The distribution of the calculated horsepower hour s are presented in Figures 3-2 through 3-9 and summarized in Table 3-3. Summar y output statistics are also provided in Appendix B.
As Table 3-3 suggests, given the variance with in the input data, the distribution of total horsepower hours is fairly large ranging from ± 26 percent for Deep Water Ships to ± 43 percent for offshore vessels. The sensitivit y analysis included in Appendi x B, notes that most of the variance is due to the wide range of horsepower ratings that vessels equipped with Category 2 engines represent. The exception to this obser vation concerns Coast Guard vessels, where the operating days accounted for a similar am ount of variance as horsepower rating.
Quantifying the underlying level of uncertainty is important because it helps define the likely range of activity associated with Category 2 vessels. In the future, uncertainty may be able to be reduced by using disaggregated horsepower categor ies for each vessel type and compiling better days of operation for each of the horsepower categories.
Table 3-3. Category 2 Propulsion Horsepower Hours by Vessel Type

Vessel Type Mean Values (million hp-hrs) Standard Deviation (million hp-hrs) Deep Water 2,666 698 Towboat 7,920 3,020 Ferry 1,464 443 Fishing 3,413 1,143 Great Lakes 1,393 405 Coast Guard 1,441 496 Offshore 27,810 11,933 Research 654 2170203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-8 As a quality check for this vessel activity asse ssment, data from the California Air Resource Board’s (CARB) Commercial Harbor Craft Survey were compared to da ta in this study. The comparison showed differences in operating hours and load factors. Some of the differences could be explained due to the different vesse ls included in each inventory. The CARB study includes all vessel types and sizes, while this report only considered vessels equipped with Category 2 propulsion engines. The CARB study also only considered vessels that operate within surrounding waters and should be considered Californ ia-specific data, while this report attempted to capture vessels used throughout the country. An example of this difference is offshore support vessels; California has relatively few of these vess els, while states like Texas and Louisiana have a large number of these vessels b ecause the vast majority of offs hore oil platforms operate in the Gulf of Mexico. Considering these observations, it appears that the estimates included in this study, particularly with regard to the load factors, are hi gher than the CARB data. CARB developed their load factors from fu el usage reported in their surve y, as such the estimate of total horsepower hours are higher than sim ilar estimates developed by CARB.

Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .010 .015 .020

0 50.75 101.5 152.2 203

1,191,707,853 2,003,905,237 2,816,102,622 3,628,300,007 4,440,497,391 10,000 Trials 9,994 Display ed Forecast: Deep Water HP-HR 

### Figure 3-2 - Deep Water Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-9 Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .011 .016 .022

0 53.75 107.5 161.2 215

3,243,495,839 6,368,463,929 9,493,432,019 12,618,400,110 15,743,368,200 10,000 Trials 9,807 Displayed Forecast: Towboats HP-HR

Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .010 .015 .020

0 50.25 100.5 150.7 201

537,632,473 1,067,786,214 1,597,939,956 2,128,093,697 2,658,247,438 10,000 Trials 9,914 Displayed Forecast: Ferries HP-HR 

### Figure 3-3 - Tow Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart

Figure 3-4 - Ferry Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-10 Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .010 .015 .021

0 51.25 102.5 153.7 205

376,459,662 841,982,144 1,307,504,627 1,773,027,109 2,238,549,592 10,000 Trials 9,975 Displayed Forecast: Great Lakes HP-HR Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .006 .011 .017 .022

0 55 110 165 220

1,733,197,125 2,894,035,450 4,054,873,775 5,215,712,099 6,376,550,424 10,000 Trials 9,792 Displayed Forecast: Commerical Fishing HP-HR 

### Figure 3-5 - Commercial Fishing Vessel

HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart

Figure 3-6 - Great Lakes Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-11 Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .010 .016 .021

0 51.75 103.5 155.2 207

7,660,583,858 20,890,281,606 34,119,979,354 47,349,677,102 60,579,374,850 10,000 Trials 9,951 Displayed Forecast: Offshore HP-HR Frequency Chart

Hp-HR .000 .005 .010 .015 .020

0 50.25 100.5 150.7 201

403,019,387 984,966,086 1,566,912,786 2,148,859,485 2,730,806,185 10,000 Trials 9,876 Displayed Forecast: Coast Guard HP-HR 

### Figure 3-7 - Coast Guard Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart

Figure 3-8 - Offshore Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 3-12 3.4 Vessel Activity References
American Waterways Operators, call with Roger Chang and Mr. Doug Scheffler, April 2006.
Corbett, J.J., J.J. Winebrake, and P. Woods, An Evaluation of Public-Private Incentives to Reduce Emissions from Regional Ferries: Synthesis Report, pp. 15, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey and University of Delaware, New Brunswick, NJ, 2005.
Corbett, Jim and Horst Koehler, Considering Alternative Input Pa rameters in an Activity-based Ship Fuel Consumption and Emission s Model: Reply to Comments by Øyvind Endresen et al.on “Updated Emissions from Ocean Shipping” , Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol 109, D23303 (2004).
Ocean Physics Laboratory (OPL), University of California - Santa Barbara, call with Roger Chang and Dr. Tommy Dickey, Dr. Gr ace Chang, and Frank Spada, April 2006.
American Public Transportation Association, Public Transportati on Fact Book – Ferry Boats, http:www.apta.com/rearch /stats/factbook/index.cfm . May 8, 2006.
U.S. Coast Guard /National Offshore Safety Advi sory Committee, call with Richard Billings and James Mcgill, April 2006.
Winebrake, J.J., J.J. Corbett, C. Wang, A.E. Farrell, and P. Woods, Optimal Fleetwide Emissions Reductions for Passenger Ferries: An Applicati on of a Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming Model for the New York-New Jersey Harbor, Journal of Air and Waste Management , 55 (4), 458–466, 2005. Frequency Chart

HP-HR .000 .005 .010 .015 .020

0 49.25 98.5 147.7 197

222,501,388 470,656,327 718,811,265 966,966,204 1,215,121,143 10,000 Trials 9,973 Displayed Forecast: Research HP-HR 

### Figure 3-9 - Research Vessel HP-HR Calculation Frequency Chart0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-1 4.0 IN-PORT / AT-SEA SPLITS

4.1 Introduction

Vessel activities can be divided between in-port and at-sea activities. The in-port activities include approaching or departing the port, maneuvering within the port area and between terminals, and hoteling operations while cargo is being removed or added to the vessel. At-sea activities are dominated by underw ay operations. For the purposes of this study the port area includes the area within a 25 mile radius from the outer edge of the harbor where vessels dock at terminals and shift cargo. This de finition of a port area works r easonably well for coastal ports, but can be problematic for inland ports where ad jacent ports are less than 25 miles away, such that the port areas conflict. For Category 2 vessels , that tend to shut off their propulsion engines while at dock, in port propulsion engine activity is limited to time spent maneuvering up to and within the port area. The data obtained to es timate propulsion engines operating within the port area were all in terms of time spent manueuveri ng. It should be noted that actual maneuvering times vary significantly between individual ports.
The Category 2 vessel list primarily includes medi um to large commercial vessels and as such this listing excludes certain Cate gory 1 vessel types such as sma ller excursion vessels and private recreational boats.
4.2 In-Port / At-Sea Methodology
In developing the in-port / at-sea splits for Cate gory 1 and Category 2 vessels, each vessel type was evaluated separately as the operations for eac h vessel type can be signi ficantly different. The data sources used to estimate the splits also varied by vessel type and are discussed in greater detail in Section 3 of this re port. For most vessels, in-port propulsion engine operations are limited to the amount of time vessels spending ma neuvering. While at dockside auxiliary engines are used to maintain power or assist in the loading and unloading. Operation of these auxiliary engines was not included in this evaluation.
The period of time that propulsion engines were involved in in-port maneuvering was estimated for each vessel type and converted to a percenta ge based on a typical vessel’s total propulsion operating hours. This value was used to estimate the at-sea percentage can using the following equation:

AS i 

### = (1-(IP i 

### / TH i 

### )) ×100

Where:

AS i 

### = At-sea hours of operation for vessel type i IP i 

### = In-port hours of ope ration for vessel type i TH i 

### = Total vessel hours of op eration for vessel type i i = Vessel type i (e.g, tug/towboa t, commercial fishing vessel, offshore support vessel)0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-2 For many of the vessel types included in this st udy, there are sub-types that have significantly different operations. For example, assist tugs help bring larger ve ssels into port, so their in-port activities are significantly more than line haul an d ocean going tugs that shift barges from portto-port and operate their propulsi on engines within a port for rela tively short periods of time. Where possible, this evaluation was preformed at the sub-vessel type level. To calculate a weighted average for the vessel type that takes into consideration differe nces at the sub-type level the fractions were weighted relative to the vessel populations using the following equations:

WAS i 

### = ∑ AS ij 

### × ST ij


### Where:

WAS i 

### = Weighted at-sea split for vessel type i; AS ij 

### = At-sea percentage for vessel type i and subtype j; ST ij 

### = The percentage of the vessel population for type i and subtype j; i = Vessel type (e.g, tug/towboat, commercial fishing vessel, offshore support vessel); j = Vessel subtype (e.g., ocean going tug, line haul tug, assist tug, dredge support tugs).
These procedures were repeated for in-port weig hted splits. The in-port and at-sea splits were checked to ensure that they summed to 100 percent.
Activity data at the subtype level would have been preferred for weighting purposes, but were not available at the vessel sub-type level. Th e calculations by vessel subtype are noted in Appendix C for Category 1 vessels an d Appendix D for Category 2 Vessels.
It should be noted that innocent passage of ve ssel through a port area without stopping was not considered in this assessment. Vessels at-sea are to be allocated relative to shipping lane segment and therefore will be included in the overall calculation, but we re not handled as an in-port activity.
4.3 Vessel Type Overview
The following sections discuss the vessel population data used in th is analysis and the basis for the in-port / at-sea split for each vessel type.
4.3.1 Tugs/Towboats
The Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity Report quantified that there are approximately 3,164 Category 1 tugs and towboats and 1,057 Category 2 tugs and tow boats.
For in-port maneuvering, the European Commissi on report estimate 300 annual hours was used. This value combined with the assumption that propulsion engines for these vessels operate 2,000 hours per year, as noted in the CARB harbor stud y to provide and in-port fraction of 15%. Assist0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-3 tugs and support vessels for dredgi ng activities mostly occur within or near ports, so their in-port fractions were adjusted to reflect the increase in the import activity.
4.3.2 Commercial Fishing
As noted in the Category 2 Vessel Census and Ac tivity report, commercial fishing is dominated by 29,346 smaller crafts equipped with Category 1 propulsion engine s; many of these are smaller fishing boats and charter fishing operations. The Category 2 commerci al fishing vessel population noted in the Category 2 Vessel Ce nsus and Activity report was 333 vessels.
The commercial fishing in-port activity was obt ained from the CARB harbor study; 62 % of smaller fishing vessels (Category 1) and 5% of larger fishing vessels (Category 2) propulsion engine operations occur within the port area. The nature of the Category 1 fishing vessels represent a mixture of input maneuvering and activ e fishing operations within the 25 mile area considered to be the port.
4.3.3 Offshore Support Vessels
The Category 2 vessel population was obtained from the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report. The report also noted that the Category 1 fleet was approximately 87% of the Category 2 value; therefore the Category 1 vessel population was estimated for each offshore category based on this assumption.
To estimate time spent maneuvering in-port the a ssumption in European Commission report that support vessels require two hours per trip and ot her offshore vessels require 0.5 hours was used. The estimate for typical number of trips for o ffshore vessels was derived from information provided from the Coast Guard’s offshore vessel consultant. Typical ly an offshore support vessel cycle to and from the ports is between one and two days.

4.3.4 Ferries
The Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity repor t identified 508 Category 1 and 99 Category 2 ferries. The in-port value of 65% was obtained fr om the ARB Harbor study. It was assumed that smaller Category 1 ferries probably spend more time operating in-port than the Category 2 vessels, so the in-port frac tion was increased to 80%.
4.3.5 Deep Water Vessels
The vast majority of deep water vessels are la rger Category 3 vessels, but in developing the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report, 23 Category 1 and 45 Category 2 vessels were identified. These deep water vessels are primaril y oceangoing tugs and gene ral cargo vessels that go through U. S. Customs entrance and clearance procedures. Given thei r relative size these vessels are probably visiting adja cent countries such as Canada, Mexico, other Central and South American countries and the Caribbean islands.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-4 It was assumed that the majority of these vessel s probably operate on a seven day cycle with five days at-sea followed by two days in-port load ing and unloading, providing a rough estimate of 52 trips per year. Many of these vessels shut o ff their main propulsion engines while hoteling at dockside. The European Commission report estimat es that such vessels maneuver in-port an average of 1.1 hours per trip. Assuming these ve ssels’ propulsion engines operate approximately 6,240 hours per year than the in-port /at-sea frac tion for the propulsion engi nes is approximately 1% / 99%, respectively.

4.3.6 Research
For research vessels, 107 Category 1 vessels a nd 31 Category 2 vessels were identified in the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report.
Data from the European Commi ssion report were used that sugge sted that research vessels maneuver in-port between 0.5 ( likely to be Category 1 vessels) and 1.3 (Category 2 vessels) hours per port trip. Activ ity data from the research vesse l database were evaluated and it was estimated that Category 1 vessels make 27.5 tr ips per year and Category 2 vessels make 16. Assuming an annual hours of operation of 5,280 as provided in the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report, this provide s an in-port fraction of 0.3 % for Category 1 vessels and 0.4% for Category 2 vessels. These values were rounde d to 1% to reflect th e relative accuracy of assumptions used in this calculation.

4.3.7 Great Lakes and Other Vessels
The Category 1 and 2 vessel population estimates were taken directly from the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report

. 

### It was assumed that the Great Lakes vessels would be similar to deepwater vessels so their in- port/at-sea split was 1% / 99%.

4.3.8 Government Vessels
The Coast Guards web site provided an estima te of 291 smaller diesel powered patrol boats which are likely to be Category 1 vessels. Unfort unately the list did not include navigational aid vessels or harbor tugs and as such, this esti mate for Category 1 Coast Guard boats should be considered an underestimation of the vessel popul ation; the actual Catego ry 1 vessel count is probably significantly higher th an the value reported here.
There are also a number of pilot boats, police ve ssels, and firefighting bo ats that probably are equipped with Category 1 engines, but were not evaluated in this effort.
For the purpose of the assessment, it is assumed th at patrol boats and buoy tenders operate in and around the harbor area. The bigger cruisers and smaller icebreakers probably maneuver to and from the dock, but once at the dock, their main pr opulsion engines are shut off so their in-port fraction is much less than patrol boats and buoy tenders.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-5 4.4 Summary
Appendix C compiles the calculations developed fo r the Category 2 vessel types in-port/at-sea splits, while Appendix D compiles the calculations for the Category 1 vessel in-port/at-sea splits. Table 4-1 below summarizes the in -port and at-sea activity splits by vessel type for vessels equipped with Category 1 and 2 pr opulsion engines. Averages we re provided by vessel type and aggregated averages for each vessel category for state and local agencies to use to estimate vessel activity where detailed da ta are not readily available.
Table 4-1. Average In-Port and At-Sea Fraction by Vessel Type for Vessels Equipped with Category 1 and 2 Propulsion Engines
Vessel Type In-Port At-Sea Category 1 Towboats 15% 85% Fishing 62% 38% Offshore 4% 96% Ferries 80% 20% Deepwater 1% 99% Research 1% 99% Great Lakes 1% 99% Government 95% 5% Average 32% 68% Category 2 Towboats 17% 83% Fishing 5% 95% Offshore 4% 96% Ferries 65% 35% Deepwater 1% 99% Research 1% 99% Great Lakes 1% 99% Government 59% 41% Weighted Average 10% 90%

The averages developed for Category 1 vessels wa s a straight average based on vessel type data. The straight average was considered a more useful value for state and local agencies as weighted average had a significant bias towa rd fishing vessels as they repr esent a very large portion of the Category I fleet. It is recognized that fishing vessel activity is not uniformly distributed through out the United States, furthermore activity levels can vary significantly from year-to-year for a specific port. It is recommended that port spec ific estimates be developed for ports with significant Category 1 commercial fishing vessel traffic.
For Category 2 vessels, weighted averages were cal culated based on activity level of each vessel type as estimated in the Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity report using the following equation:0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-6 AAS i 

### = ∑ WAS i 

### × ST i


### Where:

AAS i 

### = Activity weighted at-sea split for vessel type i; WAS i 

### = Weighted at-sea perc entage for vessel type i; ST i 

### = The percentage of activity a ssociated with vessel type i; i = Vessel type (e.g, tug/towboat, commercial fishing vessel, offshore support vessel);
The data used for these calculations are provide d in Appendix C. These steps were repeated to estimate the in-port fractions. In- port and at-sea values were checked to insure that they sum to 100 percent.
The uncertainly associated with the Category 1 data is much greater than the uncertainty associated with the Category 2 data and as such the Category 1 in-port and at-sea values should be viewed as rough approximation of the actual in-port / at-sea activity.

It should be noted that these valu es are intended for use in deve loping national activity data sets and as such do not necessarily reflect in-port a nd at-sea splits for a specific port. Where a port has non-typical traffic patterns such as a large amount of fishing boat traffic or offshore support vessel traffic, in-port and at-sea splits should be developed for these ports using local data.

4.5 References
California Air Resource Board, 2002 Statewide Commercial Harbor Craft Survey – Draft Report . December 2003.
European Commission, Quantification of Emissions From Ships Associated with Ship Movements between Ports in the European Community . Brussels, Belgium. 2002.
Fairplay, Ltd Lloyd’s Register of Ships . 8410 N.W. 53 rd 

### Terrace, Suite 207, Miami, FL. 2004.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers / Waterborne Statistics Division, Vessel Clearance and Entrance Data . New Orleans, LA. 2006.

U.S. Coast Guard official website - www.uscg.mil/datasheet/dataindx.htm
U.S. Coast Guard /National Offshore Safety Advi sory Committee, call with Richard Billings and James Mcgill, April 2006.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bu reau of Transportation Statistics, National Ferry Database . 2000.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 4-7 University National Oceanographi c Laboratory System website - www.unols.org/info/vessels.htm
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 15, 2006, Category 2 Vessel Census and Activity– Draft Report , Ann Arbor, MI.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-1 5.0 CATEGORY SPATIAL ALLOCATIONS

This section discusses how the in-port and at-sea components were spatially allocated to county and federal waters. County waters include all navigable waterways with in and surrounding all 50 states, including Hawaii and Alaska. In some of the figures Hawaii and Alaska are not shown due to space limitations or the source category is not associated with these states (e.g., Great Lakes Vessels, Tugs and Towboats). Federal Wa terways extend from the boundary of the state waters 200 miles out to sea, including the area around Hawaii.
In general, the port activities were spatially allo cated to individual ports based on surrogate data such as the amount of cargo handled for tow boats, deepwater cargo vessels and Great Lakes vessels; fish catch processed for commercial fishing boats; and th e vessel’s home port for offshore, research and government vessels, and fe rries. At-sea activities were spatially allocated to shipping lanes for tow boats, deepwater vess els, and Great Lakes vessels; fishing zones for commercial fishing; Coast Guard districts for Coast Guard vessel s; active offshore oil platforms for offshore support vessels; and research areas fo r research vessels. The allocation approaches for each vessel type are summarized in Table 5- 1 and discussed in grea ter detail in Section 5.1.
Table 5-1. Summary of Spatial Allocation Approaches Used

Memo Section Vessel Type In-Port Approach At-Sea Approach
2.1 Tugs/Towboats Cargo handled at individual ports Ship traffic on commercial shipping lanes
2.2 Commercial Fishing Annual commercial landings at individual fishing ports State and federal waters by fishing zone
2.3 Offshore Support Vessels Equally to ports that provide services to offshore support vessels Active lease blocks based on number of offshore oil platforms
2.4 Ferries Home port associated with individual vessels Same county as home port 2.5 Deepwater Ports calls for individual vessels at individual ports Individual commercial shipping lanes
2.6 Research Ports that individual vessels visit Distributed to research districts

2.7 Great Lakes & Others Cargo handled at individual ports in the Great Lakes area Ship traffic on Great Lakes commercial shipping lanes
2.8 Government Home port of individual vessels Distributed to Coast Guard districts



### The in-port and at-sea activities were mapped using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) tools. County and federal boundaries were de veloped and mapped on top of the port and underway activities to allow for aggregation of act ivity estimates to the county level. The GIS map projection used for this project was the No rth America Albers Equal Area Conic projection.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-2 Figure 5-1 summarizes the appro ach used to disaggregate nationa l activity data to individual county and federal waters.

Figure 5-1. Overview of Approach Used to Develop and Spatially Allocate Annual Activity of Vessels Equippe d with Category 2 Engines
The county waterway boundary file was develope d based on Census Department’s county maps. To disaggregate federal waters into smaller gr ids, the Department of Interior’s Mineral Management Services’ (MMS) “lease blocks” were used. This lease bloc k system of geographic blocks is used to identify offshore locations for the installation of offshore oil platforms. These blocks extend from the state waters boundary to 200 miles out and include all U.S. coastal waters, except surrounding the Ha waiian Islands. As these are no lease blocks associated with the Hawaiian Islands, a single area extends 200 mile s from the shore was used. Each block has a unique identifier, which vessel acti vity data can be linked to in the GIS metafile. The MMS lease block shape file is readily available from MMS’s Web site. A ctivity by Vessel Type

In-Port A t-Sea

Allocated to Individual Ports Based on:



### • Cargo Handled



### • Fish Landings



### • Vessel Home Port/Visited Ports A llocated to:



### • Shipping Lane



### • Fishing Zone



### • Coast Guard District



### • Offshore Oil Platforms



### • Research Districts



### • Home Ports

A pplied to GIS Map Overlaid with Count y /Federal

County Level

Activity by Vessel Type0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-3 Each vessel type was handled sepa rately in order to apply the most appropriate spatial surrogate to the vessel’s activity. Section 5.1 discusses the surrogates used for each vessel type. The surrogate data are the latest public ly available data. This section al so presents the derived in-port and at-sea activity maps. Secti on 5.2 summarizes the results a nd provides national maps that include all vessel activities.
5.1 Vessel Type Overview
The following sections discuss the approach us ed to spatially disaggregate the national or regional activity to individual po rts, shipping lanes, counties, or federal blocks. In general, activity is disaggregated by using an appropriate surrogate. Use of surrogate data intrinsically has limitations and bias because the actual activity level may be greater th an or less than that estimated using the surrogate. These li mitations are noted in each section.
5.1.1 Tugs/Towboats
In-Port – Tugs/Towboat
Tug and towboat activity in the port area was estimated by apportioning the national tug/towboat in-port hours of operation to i ndividual ports based on the am ount of cargo handled at the designated port. The port cargo handling data we re obtained from the U.S Army Corps of Engineers and included cargo da ta for the top 150 ports.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
TTip a 

### = HOttip × CH a 

### / CH n


### Where:
TTip a 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for tugs a nd towboats for port a (hp-hrs/year) HOttip = National estimate of 2004 in-por t hours of operation for tugs and towboats (hp-hrs/year) CH a 

### = Amount of cargo handled at port a in 2004 (tons per year) CH n 

### = Amount of cargo handled at a ll ports in 2004 (tons per year) a = Port a
The county in which each cargo port is located was identified for each cargo port included in this study. County FIPS codes were matched to each c ounty and retained in the project database. Three ports, Matagorda Ship Channel, Duluth, a nd Camden/Gloucester, crossed county or state lines, so their activity was split equally between the adjacent coun ties. Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-2 and the associated data are included in the project database.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-4 Figure 5-2. Tug/Towboat In-Port Activity
At-Sea – Tugs/Towboats
Tug and towboat activity while at sea was estim ated by apportioning the national tug/towboat atsea hours of operation to indivi dual shipping lanes based on the amount of cargo traffic associated with the shipping lane segment. The shipping lane GIS data were obtained from the Department of Transportation and the cargo traffic data were obtai ned from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The following equation was used to alloca te tug and towboat at-sea activity:

TTas i 

### = HOttas × CT i 

### / CT n


### Where:

TTas i 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for tugs and towboats for sea shipping lane segment i (hp-hrs/year) HOttas = National estimate of 2004 at-sea hours of operation for tugs and towboats (hp-hrs/year) CT i 

### = Amount of cargo traffic for at-sea shipping lane segment I for 2004 (tons) CT n 

### = Amount of cargo traffic for all at-sea shipping lanes for 2004 (tons) i = At-sea shipping lane segment i0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-5 Some of the tugs and towboats incl uded in this study are assist t ugs or fleeting tugs that remain in port longer than other tugs such that actual activity may be slightly overestimated along shipping lanes and underestimated near major ports . Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-3 and the associated data ar e included in the project database.

Figure 5-3. Tug/Towboat At-Sea Activity

5.1.2 Commercial Fishing
In-Port – Commercial Fishing
Commercial fishing activity in the port area was estimated by apportioning the national commercial fishing in-port hours of operation to individual ports based on the annual commercial fishing landing statisti cs at a designated port. The fi sh landing data include 715 fish species handled at 97 ports. The annual commerci al fish landings data were obtained from the National Marine Fisheries Service.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
CFip a 

### = HOcfip × FH a 

### / FH n


### Where:
CFip a 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for commercial fishing for port a (hp- hrs/year)0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-6 HOcfip = National estimate of 2004 in- port hours of operation for commercial fishing (hp-hrs/year) FH a 

### = Annual commercial fish landing at port a in 2004 (tons per year) FH n 

### = Amount of fish handled at all ports in 2004 (tons per year) a = Port a
The county was identified for each fishing port included in this study. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the project database.
Category 2 vessels tend to be larg e commercial fishing ships and may not be visiting all 97 ports included in the National Marine Fisheries Service data. Thus, act ual activity at major ports may be underestimated, while activity at smaller ports may be overestimated. Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-4 and the associated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-4. Commercial Fish ing In-Port Activity

At-Sea – Commercial Fishing
Commercial fishing activity while at sea was estimated by apportioning the national commercial fishing at-sea hours of operation to state or fede ral fishing waters based on the amount of fish catches associated with each area. The at-sea fish catch data were obtained from National Marine Fisheries Service.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:

CFas j 

### = HOcfas × FC j 

### / FC n0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-7 Where:

CFas j 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for commercial fishing at sea for fishing area j (hp-hrs/year) HOcfas= National estimate of 2004 at-sea activity for commercial fishing (hp- hrs/year) FC j 

### = Amount of fish caught for fishing area j in 2004 (tons) FC n 

### = Amount of fish caught for all fishing areas for 2004 (tons) j = At-sea fishing area j
Some fishing areas restrict or ban fishing and these areas were not identified by the National Marine Fisheries Service and could not be considered in this anal ysis. Thus; at-sea activities in these areas may be overestimated and activity levels in other areas may be slightly underestimated. Results of this a pproach are presented in Figure 5-5 and the associated data are included in the project database. This map cl early notes a reduction in commercial fishing activities around the areas in the Gulf where oil platforms are operating.

Figure 5-5. Commercial Fish ing At-Sea Activity

5.1.3 Offshore Support Vessels
In-Port – Support Vessels
Twenty ports were identified that provide se rvices to offshore support vessels. Support vessel activity in the port area was es timated by apportioning the regional offshore in-port hours of operation equally to individual po rts. For the Gulf of Mexico, listing of offshore support vessel0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-8 ports was provided by Tidewater, one of the larg er offshore support vessel companies. As most of the offshore platforms in Alaska are in the Prudhoe Bay area, all Alaskan offshore vessel activity was assigned to the port of Barrow. For California, most of the oil platforms are located off the coast of Ventura and Santa Barbara countie s, therefore, port activi ties were split equally between the ports of Ventura and Santa Barbara.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
OSip a 

### = HOosip / OSp r


### Where:
OSip r 

### = Average activity for an offshore s upport vessel for port in region r (hp- hrs/year-port) HOosip r 

### = Estimate of 2005 in-port hours of operation for offshore support vessels in region r (hp-hrs/year) OSp r 

### = Number of ports in region r r = Region r (Gulf of Mexic o, Alaska, and California)
These port averages were assigned to each port in the region. The county was identified for each offshore support vessel port included in this study. County Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) codes were matched to each count y and retained in the project database. Some ports such as Houston probably have considerab ly more offshore vessel traffic than smaller ports, suggesting that activity is underestimated at large ports a nd overestimated at smaller ports. Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-6 and the associ ated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-6. Offshore Support Vessel In-Port Activity0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-9 At-Sea – Offshore Support Vessels
Offshore support vessel activity while at sea was estimated by apportioning the regional offshore support vessel at-sea hours of operation to lease blocks based on the number of active offshore oil platforms operating in a given lease block. The offshore oil platform data were obtained from the MMS.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:

OSas kr 

### = HOosas × OP k 

### / OP r


### Where:

OSas k 

### = Estimate of 2005 activity for offshore support vessels at sea for lease block k in region r(hp-hrs/year) HOosas = National 2005 estimate of at-s ea hours of operation for offshore support vessels (hp-hrs/year) OP k 

### = Number of active offshore oil platforms operating in lease block k in 2005 for region r OP r 

### = Total number of active offshore oil platforms operating in region r for 2005 k = At-sea lease bloc k or county area k r = Region (Gulf of Mexico, California, Alaska)
Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-7 and the associ ated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-7. Offshore Support Vessel At-Sea Activity0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-10 5.1.4 Ferries
Ferry activity for both in-port a nd at-sea were assigned to the c ounty in which the ferry provides services which was defined by the vessel’s hom e port. The ferry boat population was obtained from Bureau of Transportations National Ferry Database and the American Public Transportation Association. Thirty-f our (34) ports were identified that provide services using Category 2 propelled vessels and are listed in Table 5-2. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the project databa se. Ferry activity was apportioned to individual counties by developing an averag e hours of operation and applyi ng those hours to each vessel using the following equation:

AF = HOf / FP

Where:
AF = Average activity per ferry for 2004 (hp-hrs/year-vessel) HOf = National 2004 estimate of in-por t and at-sea hours of operation for ferries (hp-hrs/year) FP = National ferry population for 2004
Table 5-2. List of Ferry Ports
Alameda, CA Orient Point, NY Balboa, CA Port Clinton, OH Bellevue, WA Port Jefferson, NY Charlottetown, ME Portland, ME Chatham, Ontario, Canada Port Townsend, WA Columbus, OH Provincetown, MA Freeland, WA Riviera, FL Galveston, TX Salt Lake City, UT Highlands, NJ San Francisco, CA Hyannis, MA San Juan, PR Juneau, AK San Pedro, CA Larkspur, CA Seattle, WA Little Falls, NJ Staten Island, NY Ludington, MI Surry, VA Mackinac Island, MI Vallejo, CA New London, CT Wilmington, DE Newburyport, MA Woods Hole, MA

The average annual activity was applied to each vessel. The estimated activity levels of multiple ferries that service a port were su mmed to get a port total. Similarly, multiple ports within the same county were summed to get a c ounty total of Category 2 ferry activity.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-11 Some larger ferries travel outside of the home port area or to adjacent counties, thus the activity estimates for a given county may be overestimate d. Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-8 and the associated data ar e included in the project database.

Figure 5-8. Ferry In-Port and At-Sea Activity

5.1.5 Deep Water Vessels
In-Port – Deep Water Vessels
Deep water vessel activity in the port area wa s estimated by developing average vessel in-port hours of operation for a port call. The U.S. Ma ritime Administration (MARAD) 2005 entrance and clearance data were used to quantify th e number of calls to each port for each vessel identified as being equipped with Category 2 engines. The average in-port hours of operation were applied to the number of Category 2 vesse l calls to estimate deep water vessel in-port activity for each of the 80 deep water ports. Th e 80 deep water ports are located in 78 counties that were identified as having Category 2 traffic.
The following equation was used for th is deep water a llocation approach:
DWip a 

### = ∑ (HOdwip n 

### / VC n 

### ) ×VC aq


### Where:
DWip a 

### = Estimate of 2005 activity for deep water vessels for port a (hp- hrs/year)0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-12 HOdwip n 

### = National estimate of 2005 in-por t hours of operation for deep water vessels (hp-hrs/year) VC n 

### = National number of vessel calls to all ports in 2005 VC aq 

### = Number of vessel calls for vessel q at port a in 2005 q = Specific vessel equipped with category 2 engines a = Port a
The county was identified for each port where deep water vessels comply with U.S. entrance and clearance requirements. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the project database. In-port maneuvering times vary significantly between ports and type of cargo being handled, thus actual hours of operation for a specific port may be higher or lower than the average value used in this assessment. Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-9 and the associated data are incl uded in the project database.
At-Sea – Deep Water Vessels
Deep water vessel activity while at sea was es timated by apportioning the national deep water vessel at-sea hours of operation to individual shipping la nes based on the amount of cargo traffic associated with the shipping lane segment. The shipping lane GIS data were obtained from the Department of Transportation a nd the cargo traffic data were obt ained from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Figure 5-9. Deep Water Vessel In-Port Activity

The following equation was used to allocate deep water at-sea activity to individual shipping lanes:0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-13 DWas i 

### = HOdwas × CT i 

### / CT n


### Where:

DWas i 

### = 2005 estimate of activity for deep wa ter vessels for at-sea shipping lane segment i (hp-hrs/year) HOdwas = National 2005 estimate of at-s ea hours of operation for deep water vessels (hp-hrs/year) CT i 

### = Amount of 2005 cargo traffic for at-sea shipping lane segment i (tons) CT n 

### = Amount of cargo traffic for all at-sea shipping lanes for 2005 (tons) i = At-sea shipping lane segment i
Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-10 and the associated data are included in the project database. It should be noted that some counties, specifically in the Great Lakes, have relatively large areas of water that include a larger number of shipping lanes compared with coastal areas where state waters only extend from 3-7 miles.

Figure 5-10. Deep Water Vessel At-Sea Activity

5.1.6 Research Vessels
In-port – Research
Research vessel activity in th e port area was estimated by apportioning the national research vessel in-port hours of operation to individual ports based on the ports that research vessels visit.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-14 The research vessel port data was obtained from the University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS). This system identi fied 12 ports that rese arch vessels frequent. Note that the available port da ta were project specific and th e number of port calls was not directly quantified; thus, if a vessel had a proj ect that extended over a long period of time, the port was identified, but not the number of visits. If a vessel had a different project every time it left the port, each port call woul d be identified. Also note that the UNOLS research vessel port data did not seem to be complete. Because a lternative data were not readily available and because research vessels represent a small por tion of the fleet of vessels equipped with Category 2 engines, the UNOLS data was used to estimate in-port hours of operation, despite its limitations.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
RVip a 

### = (HOrvip n 

### / RV n 

### ) *VC a


### Where:
RVip a 

### = Estimate of 2004 in-port activity fo r research vessels for port a (hp- hrs/year) HOrvip n 

### = National estimate of 2004 in-por t hours of operation for research vessels (hp-hrs/year) RV n 

### = Total number of research vessels operating in 2004 VC a 

### = Number of vessel th at visit port a in 2004 a = Port a
The county was identified for each port from whic h research vessels operate. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the project database. Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-11 and the associated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-11. Research Vessel In-Port Activity0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-15 At-Sea – Research
Research vessel activity while at sea was estimated by apportioni ng the national research vessel at-sea hours of operation to broa d study areas based on the surface area of the study district. The research vessel study area data were obtained from UNOLS.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:

RVas l 

### = HOrvas × CT p 

### / CT n


### Where:

RVas l 

### = Estimate of 2004 research vessel activ ity at sea for research area l (hp-hrs/year) HOrvas = National estimate of 2004 at-sea hours of operation for research vessels (hp-hrs/year) CT p 

### = Surface area of study distri cts p (square kilometers) CT n 

### = Total area of all study districts (square kilometers) p = At-sea research study area l.
Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-12 and the associ ated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-12. Research Vessel At-Sea Activity0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-16 5.1.7 Great Lakes and Other Vessels
In-port – Great Lakes and Other Vessels

Great Lake and other vessel activ ity in the port area was estimated by apportioning the national Great Lake in-port hours of ope ration to individual ports based on the amount of cargo handled at the designated Great Lake ports. The U.S. Ar my Corps of Engineers provided cargo handling data for 35 ports on the Great Lakes.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
GLip a 

### = HOglip × CH a 

### / CH n


### Where:
GLip a 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for Great Lake vessels for port a (hp- hrs/year) HOglip = National estimate of 2004 n-port hours of operation for Great Lake vessels (hp-hrs/year) CH a 

### = Amount of cargo handled at port a in 2004 (tons) CH n 

### = Amount of cargo handled at a ll Great Lake ports in 2004 (tons) a = Port a
The county was identified for each Great Lake port included in this study. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the pr oject database. Note that even though the tugs and towboat in-port activity da ta overlap with the Great Lake vessel data, there is no double counting of activity as duplicate tug/towboats and Great Lake vessels were identified and removed. Results of this appro ach are presented in Figure 5-13 and the associated data are included in the project database.

At-Sea – Great Lakes and Other Vessels
Great Lake vessel activity while at sea was estimated by apportio ning the national Great Lake atsea hours of operation to individu al shipping lanes in the Great Lakes based on the amount of cargo traffic associated with the shipping lane segment. The shipping lane GIS data were obtained from the Department of Transportation and the cargo traffic data were obtained from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-17 Figure 5-13. Great Lake and Other Vessel In-Port Activity

The following equation was used for this allocation approach:

GLas i 

### = HOglas × CT i 

### / CT n


### Where:

GLas i 

### = Estimate of 2004 activity for Great Lakes vessels for at sea shipping lane segment i (hp-hrs/year) HOglas = National estimate of 2004 at-sea hours of operation for Great Lake Vessels (hp-hrs/year) CT i 

### = Amount of cargo traffic for at-sea shipping lane segment i in the Great Lakes for 2005 (tons) CT n 

### = Amount of cargo traffic for all at-sea shipping lanes for 2005 in the Great Lakes (tons) i = At-sea shipping lane segment i in the Great Lakes.
Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-14 and the associ ated data are included in the project database. Note that some counties that have relatively large areas of water include a larger number of shipping lanes than counties with smaller areas of water. Also note in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s shipping lane data, ve ssel activity is not quant ified for shipping lanes in Canadian waters, specifically vessels travel through the Sain t Lawrence Seaway; such that, there are counties in New York that are adjacen t to Lake Eire, Lake Ontario, and the Saint Lawrence River that do not have ma rine vessel activities as ship traffic is shifted to Canadian waters.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-18 5.1.8 Government Vessels

In-Port – Government Vessels
Coast Guard activity in the port area was estimat ed by apportioning the national Coast Guard inport hours of operation to indivi dual ports based on each vessel ’s home port of call. The home port for each Category 2 Coast Guard vessel wa s obtained from the Coast Guard Web site. Eighty-three (83) ports were identified as havi ng Category 2 Coast Guar d vessels. Note that a home port was not identified for 10 percent of th e Category 2 Coast Guard vessels. Activity from these ports was allocated equally to the other home ports where Coast Guard vessels operate.

Figure 5-14. Great Lakes and Other Vessel At-Sea Activity

The following equation was used for this allocation approach:
CGip a 

### = (HOcgip n 

### / CG n 

### ) ×CG a


### Where:
CGip a 

### = Estimate of 2005 activity for Co ast Guard vessels for port a (hp- hrs/year) HOcgip n 

### = National estimate of 2005 in-port hours of operation for Coast Guard vessels (hp-hrs/year) CG n 

### = Total national Category 2 Co ast Guard Vessels operating in 2005 CG a 

### = Number of Coast Guard vessels associated in port a a = Port a0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-19 This average in-port estimate of activity was applied to each Category 2 Coast Guard vessel’s home port. The county was identified for each Coast Guard home port included in this study. County FIPS codes were matched to each county and retained in the project database. Coast Guard vessels sometimes visit multiple ports in a district; thus in-port activity may be overestimated for the home port and underestimated fo r other ports that thes e vessels visit. More detailed data on Coast Guard vessel activities were not readily available due to security concerns. Results of this approach are pres ented in Figure 5-15 and the associ ated data are included in the project database.

Figure 5-15. Coast Guard In-Port Activity

At-Sea – Government Vessels
Category 2 U.S. Coast Guard vessel activity wh ile at sea was estimated by apportioning the national Coast Guard at-sea hours of operation to individual districts based on the water surface area of each district. Currently, th ere are nine U.S. Coast Guard districts, District 1 includes waters from Maine to New Jersey, the 5 th 

### District includes the mi d-Atlantic states, the 7 th 

### District includes the southeastern states, the 8 th 

### District includes the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi River Basin, the 9 th 

### District includes the Great Lakes, the 11 th 

### District includes California, while the 13 th 

### District contains the Pacific Northwest, the 14 th 

### District is Hawaii, and the 17 th 

### District is Alaska. Information about vessels assignments to each district and the geographic area of each district was obtai ned from Coast Guard Web sites.
The following equation was used for this allocation approach:

CGas d 

### = HOcgas × SA d 

### / SA n0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-20 Where:

CGas d 

### = Estimate of 2005 activity for Coast Guard Vessels while at sea for District D (hp-hrs/year) HOcgas = National estimate of 2005 at-sea hours of operation for Coast Guard Vessels (hp-hrs/year) SA d 

### = Surface area of Coast Guard di strict d (square kilometers) SA n 

### = Total surface area of all Coast Guard Districts (square kilometers) d = District d
Some of the districts are very la rge and it is likely that vessels do not transit the whole district. Vessels may actually spend slightly more time clos er to shore, thus deep water activity may be overestimated and coastal activity may be underes timated using this approach. More detailed data on Coast Guard vessel activities were not read ily available due to secu rity concerns. Results of this approach are presented in Figure 5-16 an d the associated data ar e included in the project database.

Figure 5-16. Coast Guard At-Sea Activity
5.2 Summary
The county waterway boundary file was develo ped based on Census Department county and state maps. County boundaries were extended perpendicular to the coast out to the state water boundary. Where adjacent counties shared an in land waterway, the boundary was considered to be at mid-stream running parallel to the shore. If the shared boundary wa s in a larger body of water such as a bay, the area wa s split between the two counties based on the amount of shore associated with each county.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-21 To disaggregate federal waters into smaller gr ids, the Department of Interior’s Mineral Management Services’ lease blocks were use d. The MMS lease block sh ape file is readily available from MMS’s Web site. Le ase blocks are located in all U.S. coastal waters, regardless of whether or not there are active oil and gas activities occurring in the area. Lease blocks extend from the state waters boundary to 200 miles out to sea. The areas around Hawaii and U.S. protectorates such as Puerto Rico and the U. S. Virgin Islands do not have lease blocks.
This approach using MMS lease blocks in co njunction with state county boundary data matched up well for all states except Alaska, where a slig ht gap between federal and state boundaries. The gap was noticeable, but not considered significant.
The spatial allocations discussed in Section 2 were developed as GIS shape files and the state/county and lease block bounda ry files were applied to them . Activity within a county or lease block boundary was summed by vessel type and activity. Each county/lease block has a unique identifier; for counties, the county iden tifier is the associated county FIPS code.
Vessel activity data were linked by the unique county/lease block c ode in the GIS metafile. Such that some county blocks include port and unde rway activities for each of the vessel types included in this study. Lease blocks are in Fe deral waters and tend to include only at-sea activities.
Summary results from combining all of the Cate gory 2 vessel type data are presented in the following maps. Figure 5-17 shows combined port activities for all vessel types.

Figure 5-17. Combine Category 2 In-Port Activities0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-22 Figure 5-18 shows combined at-sea activities for all vessel types. Again, the Great Lakes appear elevated due to the size of the county waters in comparison to coastal state and federal lease blocks which represent significantly smaller ones.

Figure 5-18. Combined Category 2 At-Sea Activities
Figure 5-19 shows what the Category 2 vessel activity looks like when in-port and at-sea activities are combined.

Figure 5-19. Combined In-Port and At-S ea Activities for Category 2 Vessels0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 5-23 5.3 References
U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD), O ffice of Data and Economic Analysis, Vessel Movement 2005 Database . July 2006.
National Oceanic and Atmospheri c Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Annual Commercial Landings by Group. Downloaded June 2006 http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/commer cial/landings/gc_runc.html
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administ ration, National Marine Fisheries Service , 2004 United States Commercial Landings . 2006.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers / Waterborne Statistics Division, Vessel Clearance and Entrance Data . New Orleans, LA. 2004.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineer s, Navigation Data Center, Waterway Network Link Commodity Data. Downloaded September 2006.
U.S. Coast Guard official Web site. Downloaded August 2006; www.uscg.mil/datasheet/dataindx.htm
U.S. Department of Census, GIS maps Downloaded June 2006; http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cob/cs2000.html U.S. Department of Interior, Mineral Manageme nt Services, Digital Geographic Mapping Data. downloaded September 2006. http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/pubi nfo/repcat/arcinfo/index.html
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bu reau of Transportation Statistics, National Ferry Database . 2000.
University National Oceanogr aphic Laboratory System We b site. Downloaded May 2006. www.unols.org/info/vessels.htm0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 6-1 6.0 CATEGORY 2 VESSEL DATABASE
To organize the compiled data it was necessary to merge the data into a single database. This data merge was challenging because the different vessel types had different data sources that included different data fields in different formats. The data we re reviewed to see how all the fields could be aggregated into common field names. In the end the data were compiled into a database containing 28 fields. It was important to retain a ny data fields dealing with identification of the vessels, th e vessel characteristics, the engi ne identification, and the engine characteristics.
6.1 Data Matching

Table 6-1 shows how the different data sources we re matched into the aggregated database. It should also be noted that not all the data fields were populated, th is generally indicates that the data source used to quantify th e Category 2 vessels population did not compile all of the same data elements. Those fields that were not filled are denoted with NA’s in Table 6-1.
The group type field was populated to mirror the vessel types discussed in Section 2 of this report. This field included the following vessel types codes: “fishing,” “ferry,” “deepwater,” “offshore,” “research,” “tug,” “US CG,” or “Great Lakes and others.”
Data elements from the individual vessel type databases were occasionally in different units. These units had to be converted so that they were reported consisten tly in the aggregated database. This occurred for length, draft, and br eadth. Most sources were in feet. However, ocean going vessels were in meters. Therefore, ocean go ing vessels were converted to be consistent with the other data sources.
It should be noted that data gaps for individual vessels that exis ted in the individual database were carried over into the aggreg ated database. One example is Great Lakes Vessels did not have the displacement filled in for all of its entries. And in another case, U.S. Coast Guard vessels had gross tons as one of their data fi elds, but it was blank for all of its entries. As in the Coast Guard example, the data fields or entries that were bl ank were retained in the aggregated database to maintain consistency in the database structure.

### 6-2Table 6-1. Mapping of DatabaseField Names by Vessel TypeAggregatedTowboatsOffshoreComm ercialFishingUS CGFerryDeepwaterResearchGreat Lakes & OtherVesselsEng CatCategory Category Eng Cat Eng Cat EngCat Revised Category Eng Cat CategoryGroup Type"Tug" Offshore "Fishing" "US CG" "Ferry" "Ocean Going""Research" "Other"Vessel IDNA NAVessel ID Vessel ID Vessel IDNA NA NACG NumberUSACE_CG_No CG Number CG Number CG_Number USCGNumberNA NACG NumberIMO NumberNAIMO Number IMO Number IMO_NumberNAIMONAIMOCall SignNACall SignNA NACallsignCG Call Sign Call SignNAVessel NameVS Name Name Vessel Name Vessel Name Vessel Name Ship Name ShipName NameVessel TypeJob Type 2 Vessel Type Vessel TypeNAShipTypeNATypeHPHP NA HP HP HorsePowerCGNAEngine Power HPTotal KwNATotal KwNA NA NATotal PowerNATotal PowerLength (ft)NA NALength Length RegisteredLengthCG Length LengthNAFuel TypeNA Fuel NA NA NARevised FuelNA NAPropulsion TypeNANAPropulsion PropulsionNAPropulsion TypeNAEngine TypeGross TonNTNAGross Ton Gross Tons RegisteredGrossTonsCG Deadweight Gross Tons DeadweightBuildMYNA NA NA NADate of Build Year BuiltNAEngine NumberEngine NANANotesNAMains Engine Number MainsEngine MakeNAEngine BuilderNA NA NAEngine Builder Engine MakeNAEngine ModelModel Engine DesignationNA NA NAEngineDesignationEngine ModelNAStateNA NAPort State Port State State NMNA NA NAPortNA NAPort Name Port Name CityNA NA NAAreaArea NA RegionNA NAFlag Country AreaSpeed (kph)NA NA NA NASpeed Typical Speed Speed CruiseNANotesHullNAComment NotesNA NA NA NASourceDataNANA NA NA NA NASourceDisplacementNADisplaceNA NADisplaceNADisplaceDraft (ft)NA NARegisteredDepthCG Draft DraftNA NA NABreadth (ft)NA NARegisteredBreadthCGNABeamNA NA NA0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 6-3 6.2 Data Augmentation and Assurance
Once all of the data sources were compiled into one database, the data were checked for quality assurance. In checking the database, certain data were also augmented to fill in blanks, when possible. It should also be noted that at this point, the data had already been checked by the people who obtained and formatted the data and reviewed by the project manager.
The quality assurance at this stage dealt mostly with checking for duplicates in the database. Vessels from one vessel type may overlap with vessels from another, but this might not be apparent until all of the data are merged. For example, tugs or fishing vessels may be ocean going tugs or ocean going fishing vessels and be included in both the tug or fishing vessel database and ocean going vessel database. Duplic ates were matched based on the identification data, which included Vessel ID, CG Number , IMO Number, Call Sign, and Vessel Name. Identified duplicates were double checked to make sure they were in fact duplicates. Duplicates were confirmed by checking other data fields to see if the vessels were actually the same. The other fields usually included th e engine characteristics and/or the engine make and model.

Vessels sometimes had Coast Guard identificatio n numbers, IMO numbers, or Call Signs. These identification numbers are unique and useful in flagging duplicates . But, there were also other vessel identification numbers provided by the refe rence which were not necessarily unique and sometimes conflicted with other data sources, ther efore these vessels IDs could not be used to identify duplicates. Where the same name is attributed to a vessel also did not necessarily indicate a duplicate. When it wa s unclear if the matches were actually the same vessel, the entries were kept. Whereas, matches between the IMO number, the CG Number, and the Call Signs were actually duplicates.
When duplicates were found the data fields were merged to ensure that the retained data contained was as complete as possible. At this point the duplicate entry was deleted. For example, in most cases the ocean going vessels had more vessel and engine characteristics than the other datasets so those entries were reta ined, but some of the duplicate data included geographic information, so these data elements were first appended to the ocean going data before being deleted.
Once all of the duplicates were removed, the rest of the data were cleaned up so the data could be easily grouped and summarized. For example port names like Boston and Boston, MA were changed to Boston. The state names were changed into their abbreviations for consistency. When the area field was empty, it was filled in with appropriate data for the state and port where the vessel operated. States on the East coast were identified as Atlantic, the West coast states were identified as Pacific, Gulf states were identifi ed as Gulf, Great Lake states were identified as Great Lakes, and depending on which side of Florid a vessels were identifie d as being based, they were either flagged as Atlantic (east coast of Florida) or Gulf (west coast of Florida).
Finally the data were checked to make sure that only commercial Category two domestic vessels were included in the compiled da tabase. Other vessels, like yachts , foreign vessels, or Category 1 vessels, were deleted.0203.02.002.001\Category 2 Vessel Census-Activity Report 

### 6-4 As noted above, not all of the data fields were filled in. The quality of the database could be improved significantly if more time and resources were made available to implement a formal survey of the vessel owners for the missing information.
6.3 Compiled Database Structure
The Category2Activiy_FINAL database is comprised of 17 separate tables.
There are two tables, one for port activity and one for sea (underway) activity for the each of the 8 different vessel types, in the final project database. The 8 vesse l types are: deepwater vessels, ferries, fishing vessels, government vessels, Gr eat Lake vessels, offshore vessels, research vessels, and tugs. All 16 of these tables have the same format and have the same naming convention, Vessel Type_Operating Area. There ar e only two fields for these tables: BLOCKID and Activity. The BLOCKID links to the BLOCKID used in the GIS files. The activity field is the total hp-hr for that BLOCKID and vessel type.
The final table is a summary table called ALL Activity Summary Table, which has 7 fields: Type, In Port %, At Sea %, Port Activity, Sea Activity, and Total Activity. Type is the vessel type. In Port % and At Sea % are the percent time the vessel type operates in port or at sea. The percent adds up to 100% in all cases and the port activity and sea activity are derived on the percentages. The activity data are all in hp-hrs.

## Appendix A. Identified Category 2 Marine Diesel Engines

### A-1 Appendix A. Identified Categor y 2 Marine Diesel Engines (U.S. and Foreign Manufacturers)

Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 1026MTBF-40 260 400 21.2 10 600.0 1820.5 1038D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 10 814.0 1293.7 1038TD-1/8 207 254 8.5 10 1854.0 10ASL25D s 250 300 14.7 10 883.3 1632.8 10DNL120/500 190 350 9.9 10 500.0 772.0 10DNL150 s 190 350 9.9 10 898.3 10DNL170/600 190 350 9.9 10 1103.0 10DNL190/600 190 350 9.9 10 1398.0 10RUB215 215 260 9.4 10 735.5 10RVB215 215 260 9.4 10 1033.5 10T23 s 225 300 11.9 10 804.5 971.2 10V28 s 280 360 22.2 10 625.7 3497.0 10V29 s 225 300 11.9 10 919.0 10VDNL150/600 190 350 9.9 10 1103.0 10VDNL190/600 190 350 9.9 10 1398.0 1226MTB s 260 400 21.2 12 600.0 1506.4 12278 s 220 267 10.2 12 893.0 1238D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 12 800.0 1487.6 1238TD-1/8 207 254 8.5 12 750.0 2158.0 12567-BC 216 254 9.3 12 825.0 846.2 12645 s 230 254 10.6 12 883.3 1258.1 12ASV25/30 250 300 14.7 12 958.3 1988.7 12ATCM 318 368 29.2 12 2276.3 12CHSP18/20 180 200 5.1 12 772.5 12CSVM 254 305 15.5 12 1398.0 12DRN23/30 230 300 12.5 12 750.0 1573.3 12DRPN23/30 230 300 12.5 12 2115.5 12DVDA 200 260 8.2 12 441.0 12GV s 220 380 14.4 12 381.3 905.6 12M282AK 240 280 12.7 12 1000.0 2163.3 12MB275 275 305 18.1 12 2869.5 12MGV28BX 280 320 19.7 12 2207.0 12NVD18/21A3 180 210 5.3 12 1500.0 1176.0 12PA4V185VG 185 210 5.6 12 1340.0 1075.5 12PA4V200 s 200 210 6.6 12 1466.7 1919.5 12PA6V280 280 290 17.9 12 1033.3 2794.9 12PBVCS12F 241 305 13.9 12 1519.0 12PSN s 260 280 14.9 12 825.0 1645.4 12PVBCS12 s 242 305 14.0 12 750.0 1280.5 12RK s 254 305 15.5 12 900.0 1664.0 12RVB215 215 260 9.4 12 950.0 1097.4 12SW280 280 300 18.5 12 1000.0 3089.3 12TD200 220 380 14.4 12 1553.8 12U28L s 280 320 19.7 12 775.0 2192.7

### A-2 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 12UEV30/40C 300 400 28.3 12 2648.0 12V1163TB62 230 280 11.6 12 2207.0 12V190ZC 190 210 6.0 12 900.0 12V20/27 200 270 8.5 12 975.0 1133.0 12V200 200 240 7.5 12 1400.0 2126.7 12V22 s 220 240 9.1 12 923.3 1615.4 12V23 s 225 300 11.9 12 757.7 1339.9 12V25 s 234 275.426 11.9 12 906.8 1729.6 12V27 275 320 19.0 12 1688.3 12V28 s 280 326.452 20.1 12 713.4 2685.7 12V32 s 320 350.159 28.2 12 739.1 4346.3 12V538TB82 185 200 5.4 12 670.0 1284.5 12V645 s 230 254 10.6 12 900.0 1103.0 12V652TB s 190 230 6.5 12 1410.0 1142.6 12VDL75/475 190 350 9.9 12 662.0 12VDNL s 190 350 9.9 12 600.0 1457.0 12VP185 185 196 5.3 12 1892.5 2209.3 12VSHTB26D 260 320 17.0 12 956.0 12YJCM 197 216 6.6 12 716.5 12YLCM 248 267 12.9 12 75.0 1083.7 12ZLST 280 340 20.9 12 2354.0 1426MTBF-40V 260 400 21.2 14 600.0 1863.7 14T23LVO 225 300 11.9 14 1390.0 14U28LVO 280 320 19.7 14 775.0 2728.5 14V s 200 270 8.5 14 610.0 1400.5 14V23 s 225 300 11.9 14 811.7 1498.1 14V28/32 280 320 19.7 14 2729.0 14VDNL150/600 190 350 9.9 14 1996.3 1626MTBF-40V 260 400 21.2 16 2118.0 16278 s 222 267 10.3 16 1187.1 16567 s 216 254 9.3 16 803.3 1261.6 16645 s 230 254 10.6 16 855.1 1681.1 16710-G7 230 279 11.6 16 900.0 3089.3 16ASV25/30 250 300 14.7 16 745.7 2904.3 16ATV25D 250 300 14.7 16 750.0 1589.0 16CSVM 254 305 15.5 16 2501.0 16DPN23/30 230 300 12.5 16 3310.0 16GV s 220 380 14.4 16 362.5 1157.3 16MB275 275 305 18.1 16 900.0 4104.0 16MGV28BXE 280 320 19.7 16 2942.0 16PA4 s 192 210 6.1 16 1432.1 2180.3 16PA5V 255 270 13.8 16 900.0 2574.0 16PA6V280 280 290 17.9 16 1016.7 4162.6 16PSN3 260 280 14.9 16 2207.0 16PVBCS12F 242 305 14.0 16 750.0 2057.1 16RK s 260 305 16.2 16 853.5 3063.4 16RP200 197 216 6.6 16 2176.0

### A-3 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 16SW280 280 300 18.5 16 4644.3 16T23LVO 225 300 11.9 16 825.0 1824.0 16TD200 220 380 14.4 16 2354.0 16U28LVO 280 320 19.7 16 775.0 2973.2 16V1163 s 230 280 11.6 16 3823.5 16V190ATC 190 230 6.5 16 1450.0 1931.0 16V22 s 220 240 9.1 16 948.3 2290.4 16V23 s 225 300 11.9 16 741.0 1646.4 16V25 s 234 274.8 11.8 16 932.1 2244.3 16V27 s 275 320 19.0 16 2930.0 16V28 s 280 320 19.7 16 747.5 3359.0 16V32 s 320 350 28.1 16 730.0 5368.2 16V358TB82 185 200 5.4 16 1710.0 1415.5 16V538TB91 185 200 5.4 16 1790.0 1986.0 16V595TE70 190 210 6.0 16 1800.0 3565.0 16V652TB s 190 230 6.5 16 1425.0 1589.4 16VBCS12F 242 305 14.0 16 2060.0 16VDNL150/600 190 350 9.9 16 1765.0 16Y s 231 250 10.8 16 1627.7 18PA6V280 280 290 17.9 18 4413.0 18RP2002 197 216 6.6 18 1550.0 3020.0 18V20/27 200 270 8.5 18 1800.0 18V200 200 240 7.5 18 3600.0 18V23 s 225 300 12.0 18 795.8 1975.1 18V251F 229 267 11.0 18 1066.7 2879.6 18V32 320 350 28.1 18 720.0 6695.8 18VDNL150/600 190 350 9.9 18 2096.5 194MARS 190 240 6.8 4 1000.0 199.0 195V12 s 195 180 5.4 12 1397.5 1314.8 195V16RVR 195 180 5.4 16 1600.0 2689.0 196/RS 190 240 6.8 6 375.0 20645 s 230 254 10.6 20 900.0 2587.3 20RK270 270 305 17.5 20 1018.8 6818.6 20V1163TB s 230 280 11.6 20 1238.9 6541.5 240G12VS 240 220 10.0 12 1442.0 240G16VS 240 220 10.0 16 1673.3 240G20VS 240 220 10.0 20 2901.5 240G8LS 240 220 10.0 8 1029.7 240V16ESHR 240 220 10.0 16 2501.5 240V20ESHR 240 220 10.0 20 3531.0 27DH42 270 420 24.0 6 662.0 2M32 210 320 11.1 2 450.0 44.0 3427 s 270 400 22.9 3 425.0 202.7 342FO 200 340 10.7 2 450.0 146.0 343 s 200 340 10.7 3 450.0 102.3 344 s 200 340 10.7 4 410.8 154.8 3606 s 280 300 18.5 6 922.2 1700.5

### A-4 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 3608 s 280 300 18.5 8 940.0 2119.8 3612 s 280 300 18.5 12 966.3 6176.0 3616 s 280 300 18.5 16 905.2 4683.1 3ACA s 280 420 25.9 3 300.0 285.4 3DCT 200 300 9.4 3 147.0 3M421 280 420 25.9 3 121.0 3TC(TL) 240 360 16.3 3 110.0 3VCBM 203 273 8.8 3 75.0 40224VO 240 400 18.1 2 375.0 93.5 403VO 230 400 16.6 3 375.0 143.0 404 s 230 400 16.6 4 376.3 197.8 40424VO 240 400 18.1 4 375.0 203.9 40426VO 260 400 21.2 4 268.5 405 s 230 400 16.6 5 375.0 236.0 40524VO 240 400 18.1 5 375.0 256.8 40526VO 260 400 21.2 5 400.0 353.4 40624VO 240 400 18.1 6 380.0 307.0 40626VO 260 400 21.2 6 403.3 443.8 406VO 230 400 16.6 6 383.3 257.7 40724VO 240 400 18.1 7 375.0 406.0 40726VO 260 400 21.2 7 413.0 532.0 40824VO 240 400 18.1 8 370.0 434.0 40826VO 260 400 21.2 8 406.5 536.0 40926VO 260 400 21.2 9 400.0 735.8 40MX-8 232 267 11.3 8 736.0 40S2X-8 232 267 11.3 8 655.0 414T 240 310 14.0 4 301.0 422VF-37 220 370 14.1 4 221.0 424TS 240 310 14.0 4 441.0 438D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 4 477.3 4427-DO s 270 400 22.9 4 425.0 264.7 4ACA 280 420 25.9 4 337.5 330.9 4CK 270 340 19.5 4 118.0 4DCT 200 300 9.4 4 230.0 4DNL190/600 190 350 9.9 4 600.0 149.0 4ED 290 450 29.7 4 164.0 4GB 220 380 14.4 4 350.0 165.0 4L20 200 280 8.8 4 1300.0 4L28A 280 360 22.2 4 600.0 1200.0 4L50/430 190 350 9.9 4 147.0 4M351A 240 350 15.8 4 4M36 215 360 13.1 4 88.0 4MS 200 280 8.8 4 88.0 4NVD262 180 260 6.6 4 750.0 99.0 4PSN3L 260 320 17.0 4 850.0 699.0 4R22 s 220 250 9.5 4 720.0 576.5 4R32 s 320 350 28.1 4 735.0 1609.3

### A-5 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 4R538 185 200 5.4 4 346.5 4S275 275 360 21.4 4 500.0 191.0 4SAC1 200 240 7.5 4 289.3 4SGAC1 220 240 9.1 4 441.0 4SN3 260 280 14.9 4 954.0 4TAD24 240 400 18.1 4 309.0 4TD24 240 400 18.1 4 221.0 4VCBM 203 273 8.8 4 100.0 4VD6A 280 400 24.6 4 330.0 145.0 4ZU421 290 420 27.7 4 368.0 524TS 240 310 14.0 5 720.0 605.0 525MTBF-40 250 400 19.6 5 327.5 526MTBF-40 260 400 21.2 5 607.0 538D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 5 635.5 5427 s 270 400 22.9 5 425.0 401.1 5ACA 280 420 25.9 5 529.2 5AR25 250 300 14.7 5 441.0 5ASL25/30 250 300 14.7 5 342.0 5D6 250 350 17.2 5 202.0 5DL75/475 190 350 9.9 5 237.0 257.0 5DNL s 190 350 9.9 5 533.3 533.2 5DR210 210 300 10.4 5 302.0 5ED 290 450 29.7 5 221.0 5EN 260 380 20.2 5 191.0 5GVH 220 380 14.4 5 239.0 5L20/27 200 270 8.5 5 966.7 438.0 5L23/30 225 300 11.9 5 825.0 612.0 5M 200 240 7.5 5 132.0 5S28LU 280 320 19.7 5 975.0 5T23LKVO 225 300 11.9 5 816.7 557.7 5VCBM 203 273 8.8 5 122.5 5VEBCZ 260 368 19.5 5 482.0 614TK 240 310 14.0 6 596.0 6190ZLC 190 210 6.0 6 1000.0 275.5 61MS28 280 400 24.6 6 400.0 552.0 6200Z 200 225 7.1 6 950.0 343.3 621MTBH-30 205 300 9.9 6 300.0 449.0 6230ZC 230 300 12.5 6 736.0 624 s 240 334 15.1 6 534.8 6250 s 250 303.6 14.9 6 714.3 591.2 6267 267 330 18.5 6 350.0 184.0 626MTBF-40 260 400 21.2 6 728.0 6275 s 275 330 19.6 6 700.0 6278 s 221 267 10.3 6 1.0 380.5 6300 300 380 26.9 6 453.3 473.8 638D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 6 720.0 735.6 6427 s 270 400 22.9 6 431.4 530.3

### A-6 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6ACA s 280 420 25.9 6 375.0 517.0 6AL s 203 243.2 7.9 6 830.0 512.6 6AP2 s 219 273 10.3 6 623.4 6AP3 s 203 273 8.8 6 642.3 6AR s 260 368 19.5 6 750.0 917.1 6ASL s 250 300 14.7 6 905.0 916.4 6AT s 313 362.8 28.1 6 760.0 1075.1 6BA22 220 320 12.2 6 177.0 6BCAH22 220 320 12.2 6 600.0 327.5 6CH25 s 250 340 16.7 6 500.0 286.5 6CHN1A30/38 300 380 26.9 6 1100.0 6CHN25/34 250 340 16.7 6 500.0 225.3 6CHN30/38 300 380 26.9 6 1076.8 6CHN31.8/33 318 330 26.2 6 740.0 736.0 6CHNSP18 s 180 220 5.6 6 221.0 211.5 6CHNSP2A18/22 180 220 5.6 6 750.0 232.0 6CHRP25/34 250 340 16.7 6 500.0 230.2 6CHSP18/22 180 220 5.6 6 141.7 6CHSP23/30 230 300 12.5 6 349.5 6CHSPN18/22 180 220 5.6 6 165.5 6CHSPN2A s 180 220 5.6 6 202.8 6CSVM 254 305 15.5 6 713.5 6D6 250 350 17.2 6 221.0 6D6DH 250 350 17.2 6 300.0 993.0 6DA 200 260 8.2 6 221.0 6DCT 200 300 9.4 6 349.5 6DH27SS 270 420 24.0 6 390.0 533.5 6DK20 200 300 9.4 6 950.0 846.0 6DKM26 260 380 20.2 6 715.5 1372.7 6DKM28 280 390 24.0 6 660.0 1504.8 6DKM32 320 360 28.9 6 720.0 1986.0 6DL20 200 260 8.2 6 515.0 6DL75/475 190 350 9.9 6 309.0 6DLM19 190 230 6.5 6 900.0 560.8 6DLM20 s 200 260 8.2 6 900.0 558.8 6DLM22 s 220 300 11.4 6 784.2 732.9 6DLM24 s 240 320 14.5 6 1208.8 818.4 6DLM26 s 260 340 18.0 6 691.2 1027.8 6DLM28 s 280 362.3 22.3 6 654.1 1194.7 6DM28FS 280 360 22.2 6 1250.0 6DNL s 190 350 9.9 6 500.0 497.0 6DRO210K 210 300 10.4 6 420.3 6DS18 180 230 5.9 6 441.0 6DS22 220 280 10.6 6 613.2 6DS26 s 260 320 17.0 6 836.8 6DS28 280 340 20.9 6 720.0 882.5 6DSM18 s 180 230 5.9 6 374.0

### A-7 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6DSM19A 190 230 6.5 6 900.0 533.5 6DSM22 s 220 280 10.6 6 900.0 756.2 6DSM26 s 260 318 16.9 6 736.9 876.1 6DSM28 s 280 340 20.9 6 668.3 1178.1 6DV26A 260 300 15.9 12 1820.0 6DVM26 s 260 313.333 16.6 12 2010.3 6DZC 256 310 16.0 6 851.1 1125.3 6EF 290 450 29.7 6 284.0 6F/SW240 240 260 11.8 6 647.3 6F24 s 240 288.571 13.1 6 500.0 440.4 6FAHD240 240 260 11.8 6 929.0 6FCHD240 240 260 11.8 6 750.0 635.3 6FDHD240 240 260 11.8 6 793.0 772.8 6FEHD240 240 260 11.8 6 950.0 758.8 6FFHD240 240 260 11.8 6 943.4 6FGHD240 240 260 11.8 6 915.0 898.8 6FHD240 s 240 260 11.8 6 898.8 858.3 6FR24TK 240 300 13.6 6 750.0 719.3 6GAET / 6GALET 240 290 13.1 6 82 0.0 919.7 6GB 220 380 14.4 6 525.0 267.6 6GDT 240 290 13.1 6 553.0 583.0 6GLDT 240 290 13.1 6 740.0 625.0 6GLET 240 290 13.1 6 858.3 6GLHT 240 290 13.1 6 570.0 6GLST 240 290 13.1 6 735.7 6GLUT 240 290 13.1 6 674.3 6GST 240 290 13.1 6 639.3 6GUT 240 290 13.1 6 625.0 6GV 220 380 14.4 6 320.0 290.7 6GVH 220 380 14.4 6 375.0 523.8 6HM1558 290 380 25.1 6 439.5 6K28FD 280 480 29.6 6 379.0 875.0 6L18CX 180 240 6.1 6 925.0 537.3 6L19HX 190 260 7.4 6 736.0 6L20 s 200 268.837 8.4 6 924.6 740.4 6L22 s 220 272.5 10.4 6 900.8 800.0 6L23 s 225 300 11.9 6 740.9 801.6 6L24 s 240 400 18.1 6 400.0 398.6 6L25 s 250 320.25 15.7 6 765.4 945.3 6L26 260 320 17.0 6 956.7 1902.2 6L26A s 260 391.579 20.8 6 593.3 550.0 6L26B s 260 400 21.2 6 396.1 498.0 6L26H s 260 312.5 16.6 6 1250.0 6L27 s 274 347.5 20.5 6 640.4 868.8 6L28 280 360 22.2 6 600.0 1200.0 6L28/32 s 280 320 19.7 6 746.0 1350.9 6L28ASH 280 430 26.5 6 390.0 566.3

### A-8 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6L28B s 280 332.5 20.5 6 689.5 1309.9 6L28HX 280 370 22.8 6 636.7 1519.5 6L28X 280 440 27.1 6 385.0 854.1 6L31 s 310 380 28.7 6 600.0 1209.1 6L32 s 320 355 28.5 6 2871.0 6L50/430 190 350 9.9 6 221.0 6LB26 s 260 440 23.4 6 387.1 523.8 6LDSR28K 280 360 22.2 6 750.0 883.0 6LH26 s 260 440 23.4 6 397.0 690.6 6LH28 s 280 460 28.2 6 353.0 811.4 6LN28G 280 480 29.6 6 1030.0 6LU24 s 240 410 18.5 6 395.0 514.7 6LU26 s 260 439.42 23.3 6 382.5 653.7 6LU28 s 280 440 27.1 6 388.8 820.2 6LUD24 s 240 410 18.5 6 400.0 514.9 6LUD26 s 260 440 23.4 6 393.8 728.4 6LUK27 270 420 24.0 6 390.0 736.0 6LUN28 s 280 480 29.6 6 361.2 916.0 6LUS24 s 240 405 18.3 6 400.0 610.2 6LUS28 s 280 440 27.1 6 392.5 874.7 6M20 200 300 9.4 6 992.5 1042.7 6M200LET 200 260 8.2 6 625.0 6M22EGT 220 380 14.4 6 392.0 6M23C s 230 260 10.8 6 613.2 6M23L 230 260 10.8 6 809.5 6M24 s 240 410 18.5 6 514.7 6M25 255 400 20.4 6 764.1 1726.6 6M26A s 260 460 24.4 6 364.0 642.7 6M26B s 260 460 24.4 6 400.0 547.1 6M26CHS 260 400 21.2 6 331.0 6M26EGT 260 460 24.4 6 625.0 6M26GX 260 440 23.4 6 380.0 956.0 6M26HET 260 460 24.4 6 405.0 680.0 6M26HS 260 400 21.2 6 385.0 417.0 6M26K s 260 400 21.2 6 373.8 491.9 6M26X 260 440 23.4 6 588.0 6M26Z s 260 400 21.2 6 377.5 529.5 6M27.5 s 275 320 19.0 6 827.3 6M281AK 240 280 12.7 6 850.0 662.0 6M282AK 240 280 12.7 6 840.0 701.8 6M28A s 280 479.149 29.5 6 376.5 816.4 6M28B s 280 479.512 29.4 6 362.6 758.7 6M28DHS 280 440 27.1 6 625.0 6M28GX 280 440 27.1 6 380.0 833.3 6M28H s 280 480 29.6 6 414.5 1072.1 6M28K s 280 440 27.1 6 380.0 685.3 6M28X 280 440 27.1 6 380.0 846.0

### A-9 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6M30 s 300 350 24.7 6 750.0 1743.0 6M322AK 240 330 14.9 6 900.0 1200.0 6M331AK 240 330 14.9 6 635.0 638.3 6M332 s 240 330 14.9 6 701.8 817.7 6MA s 200 240 7.5 6 900.0 257.3 6MADT 200 240 7.5 6 825.0 381.0 6MAHT 200 240 7.5 6 232.5 6MAL s 200 240 7.5 6 905.0 384.2 6MAUT 200 240 7.5 6 441.0 6MB275 275 305 18.1 6 1000.0 1637.4 6MBHTS 200 240 7.5 6 280.0 6MD27.5 s 275 320 19.0 6 506.2 6MD28 280 400 24.6 6 257.0 6MDX s 242 320 14.7 6 700.0 502.7 6MDZC 256 310 16.0 6 789.0 1040.8 6MG18 s 180 233.333 5.9 6 925.0 525.8 6MG19HX 190 260 7.4 6 1000.0 711.0 6MG20 s 200 260 8.2 6 775.3 507.2 6MG22 s 220 285.714 10.9 6 887.3 718.9 6MG25 s 250 321.176 15.8 6 707.0 803.7 6MG26 s 275 354.524 21.2 6 713.3 1329.2 6MG31 s 310 380 28.7 6 601.5 1332.9 6MG32CX 320 360 28.9 6 1214.0 6MH20SS 200 360 11.3 6 265.0 6MH25SSR 250 400 19.6 6 382.5 499.0 6MHL / 6MHLUT 200 240 7.5 6 611.0 539.7 6MHT s 200 240 7.5 6 742.5 273.1 6ML s 200 240 7.5 6 750.0 257.5 6MMG20HS 200 260 8.2 6 294.0 6MMG25 s 250 320 15.7 6 938.0 6MMG31EZ 310 380 28.7 6 1471.0 6MT s 200 240 7.5 6 750.0 198.7 6MU281AK 240 280 12.7 6 221.0 6MU351A s 240 350 15.8 6 350.0 279.4 6MUH28 280 340 20.9 6 630.0 1042.0 6MUT 200 240 7.5 6 368.0 6MX28 280 380 23.4 6 680.0 1498.0 6MZ28 280 420 25.9 6 405.0 6N18A s 180 280 7.1 6 900.0 698.5 6N21AEN 210 290 10.0 6 800.0 6N260 s 260 360 19.1 6 730.5 1261.9 6N280 s 280 380 23.4 6 735.0 1511.3 6NHLUT 200 240 7.5 6 552.0 6NL190 190 350 9.9 6 475.0 441.0 6NSCM 190 260 7.4 6 906.8 541.1 6NSFZ 190 260 7.4 6 268.5 6NVD 361U 240 360 16.3 6

### A-10 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6NVD24 175 240 5.8 6 95.5 6NVD26 s 180 260 6.6 6 778.8 255.2 6NVD36 s 240 360 16.3 6 428.9 219.9 6PA4L185VG 185 210 5.6 6 495.5 6PA4V185VG 185 210 5.6 6 625.0 6PA5 s 254 270 13.7 6 913.9 1154.3 6PA6L s 280 290 17.9 6 925.0 1523.7 6PBC512DX 241 305 13.9 6 633.0 6PBCS12C 241 305 13.9 6 390.0 6PS12F 241 305 13.9 6 397.0 6PSHT26D 260 320 17.0 6 479.1 6PSHT6M26DF 260 320 17.0 6 515.0 6PSHTB s 250 310 15.6 6 313.0 528.9 6PSHTC s 255 314.651 16.2 6 665.0 569.8 6PSN3 s 260 297.143 15.8 6 805.0 1131.3 6PST6M26D 260 320 17.0 6 340.0 6PSTB s 264 324 17.8 6 720.0 555.4 6PSTC s 235 296.364 13.3 6 800.0 435.4 6PSTLM26DLS 260 320 17.0 6 386.5 6R20 200 280 8.8 6 937.3 928.0 6R22 s 220 240 9.1 6 978.3 883.4 6R25 250 300 14.7 6 975.0 1199.2 6R26L 260 320 17.0 6 780.0 1167.0 6R32 s 320 350 28.1 6 724.5 2180.6 6RK215 215 275 10.0 6 927.0 6RK270M 270 305 17.5 6 866.7 1388.3 6RK3CM 254 305 15.5 6 976.0 6RKC s 254 305 15.5 6 900.0 814.5 6RKX 254 305 15.5 6 456.0 6S23 s 230 370 15.4 6 240.0 6S26N s 260 410 21.8 6 400.0 493.0 6S27.5 s 275 410 24.3 6 380.0 620.5 6S275 s 275 372.5 22.1 6 390.3 6S27F 270 510 29.2 6 300.0 618.0 6S28 s 277 320 19.3 6 1013.9 6SAC 200 240 7.5 6 900.0 552.0 6SD26 s 260 407.5 21.6 6 400.0 448.8 6SD27.5 s 275 410 24.3 6 669.4 6SD27BH 270 400 22.9 6 346.0 6SH20/26AC 200 260 8.2 6 306.7 6SH24AC 240 280 12.7 6 221.0 6SL28LVO 280 320 19.7 6 746.0 1079.7 6SN s 260 280 14.9 6 850.0 930.6 6SW240 240 260 11.8 6 580.0 6SW28 s 280 300 18.5 6 885.6 1561.7 6T23L s 225 300 11.9 6 800.0 603.6 6T240 s 240 310 14.0 6 750.0 662.3

### A-11 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 6T260LET 260 330 17.5 6 750.0 1103.3 6T260LST 260 330 17.5 6 720.0 956.3 6T329 290 430 28.4 6 463.0 6TD200 220 380 14.4 6 816.5 6TD24 240 400 18.1 6 331.0 6TM270 270 500 28.6 6 294.0 6TM290 290 400 26.4 6 1103.0 6TR240CO 241 305 13.9 6 1000.0 1103.0 6U28 280 340 20.9 6 720.0 1839.0 6U28AK 280 380 23.4 6 1471.0 6UAL s 200 240 7.5 6 900.0 726.3 6UAUT 200 240 7.5 6 900.0 498.4 6UHLUT 200 240 7.5 6 640.0 6UL s 200 240 7.5 6 496.5 6UST 200 240 7.5 6 750.0 437.5 6UUT 200 240 7.5 6 750.0 416.7 6VCBM / 6VCRM 203 273 8.8 6 150.0 6VD26/20A s 200 260 8.2 6 980.0 581.0 6VD29/24A s 240 290 13.1 6 850.0 946.0 6VD36/241 / 6VD36/24A1 240 360 16.3 6 500.0 423.8 6VDS24/24AL1 240 240 10.9 6 800.0 6VDS26/20AL1 200 260 8.2 6 1000.0 441.0 6VDS29/24AL2 240 290 13.1 6 1000.0 1050.0 6VEBCZM 260 368 19.5 6 600.0 633.3 6VEBXM 260 368 19.5 6 386.5 6VJMS 255 300 15.3 6 750.0 513.0 6VJS 255 300 15.3 6 485.5 6Z280A s 280 360 22.2 6 720.0 1422.3 6Z280E s 280 360 22.2 6 676.3 1268.0 6Z280L s 280 360 22.2 6 679.4 1183.9 6Z280ST 280 360 22.2 6 650.0 1317.8 6Z36 s 220 360 13.7 6 176.5 6ZDT 280 340 20.9 6 680.0 1030.0 6ZET 280 340 20.9 6 680.0 1275.0 6ZL s 280 340 20.9 6 680.0 1091.4 6ZL20/24 200 240 7.5 6 419.0 6ZST 280 340 20.9 6 1177.0 721MTBF-30 205 300 9.9 7 350.0 548.5 726MTBF s 260 400 21.2 7 600.0 886.4 7AC s 280 420 25.9 7 676.8 7ATCM 318 368 29.2 7 927.0 7DNL120/500 190 350 9.9 7 618.0 7DNL150/600 190 350 9.9 7 600.0 772.0 7DNL190/600 190 350 9.9 7 600.0 908.0 7FDM12 s 229 267 11.0 12 1839.0 7FDM16 229 267 11.0 16 1765.3

### A-12 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 7FDS12A2 229 267 11.0 12 1000.0 1618.0 7FDS16A2 229 267 11.0 16 1200.0 2832.0 7L20/27 200 270 8.5 7 705.7 548.3 7L28/32 s 280 320 19.7 7 769.9 1707.3 7L32/36 320 360 28.9 7 750.0 2589.0 7SM 250 300 14.7 7 600.0 276.0 7T23LKVO / 7T23LVO 225 300 11.9 7 803.3 763.3 7V233LH 225 300 11.9 7 800.0 7V23LVO 225 300 11.9 7 750.0 7VEBC s 260 368 19.5 7 699.3 7VEBXM 260 368 19.5 7 7VHK 230 330 13.7 7 243.0 814TK 240 310 14.0 8 750.0 794.0 8185CU 185 260 7.0 8 1000.0 588.0 823MTBF 225 300 11.9 8 721.0 824TS 240 310 14.0 8 757.5 910.9 8250 250 320 15.7 8 750.0 1030.0 826MTBF-40 260 400 21.2 8 971.0 8278 s 221 267 10.3 8 675.0 574.4 8300 300 380 26.9 8 527.2 662.2 838D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 8 1020.2 8427-HT s 270 400 22.9 8 594.3 691.4 8567 216 254 9.3 8 750.0 633.4 8645 s 230 254 10.6 8 900.0 892.3 8ACA 280 420 25.9 8 350.0 735.7 8AL20/24 200 240 7.5 8 750.0 591.5 8ASL25 s 250 300 14.7 8 930.0 1350.9 8ATC s 318 368 29.2 8 600.0 1505.8 8ATL25 s 250 300 14.7 8 1000.0 1679.5 8BAH22 220 320 12.2 8 500.0 294.5 8CHNP25/34 250 340 16.7 8 310.0 638.5 8CHNRP30/38 300 380 26.9 8 515.0 8CHNSP18/22 s 180 220 5.6 8 750.0 230.2 8CHNSP25/34 250 340 16.7 8 885.0 8CHNSP2A18/22 180 220 5.6 8 232.0 8DKM28 280 390 24.0 8 660.0 1569.3 8DKM32L 320 360 28.9 8 2427.0 8DL75/475 190 350 9.9 8 441.0 8DNL150/600 190 350 9.9 8 883.0 8DNL170/600 190 350 9.9 8 1000.0 8DNL190/600 190 350 9.9 8 8DRO21 s 210 300 10.4 8 494.1 8DS26 260 320 17.0 8 720.0 956.5 8DSM26 s 260 320 17.0 8 726.0 1149.2 8DSM28 280 340 20.9 8 720.0 1765.0 8DV26 260 320 17.0 8 720.0 1177.0 8DVM26 260 320 17.0 16 720.0 2391.0

### A-13 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 8DZC 256 310 16.0 8 1768.0 8EF 290 450 29.7 8 320.0 419.3 8F/SW240 240 260 11.8 8 794.5 8FAHD240 240 260 11.8 8 908.0 8FBHD240 240 260 11.8 8 900.0 821.0 8FCHD240 240 260 11.8 8 805.0 8FDHD240 240 260 11.8 8 1214.0 8FDM240G 240 260 11.8 8 965.0 1445.0 8FEHD240 240 260 11.8 8 1250.0 8FGHD240 240 260 11.8 8 825.0 1247.5 8FHD240 240 260 11.8 8 873.7 1025.2 8GV s 220 380 14.4 8 356.7 584.1 8H27.5 275 300 17.8 8 2104.0 8L20 s 200 275.8 8.7 8 987.8 1016.0 8L23/30 s 225 300 11.9 8 815.3 960.9 8L25 s 250 314.7 15.4 8 809.0 1267.4 8L26 260 320 17.0 8 950.0 2540.0 8L27.5 s 275 320 19.0 8 1614.7 8L27/38 270 380 21.8 8 800.0 2482.8 8L28 s 280 320 19.7 8 766.5 1759.0 8L31 s 310 380 28.7 8 600.0 1809.2 8L32 s 320 356.7 28.7 8 3090.5 8L50/430 190 350 9.9 8 8M20 200 300 9.4 8 933.8 1288.1 8M23C 230 260 10.8 8 1118.0 8M25 255 400 20.4 8 750.0 2264.0 8M27.5 275 320 19.0 8 680.0 8M281AK 240 280 12.7 8 750.0 721.8 8M282AK 240 280 12.7 8 750.0 919.5 8M331AK 240 330 14.9 8 901.0 8M332AK 240 330 14.9 8 835.7 1246.4 8M332C 240 330 14.9 8 825.0 1506.7 8MB275 275 305 18.1 8 916.7 2032.7 8MD s 251 313.8 15.5 8 850.0 1183.0 8MD27.5H 275 320 19.0 8 827.5 8MG25 s 250 320 15.7 8 705.7 1083.6 8MG28HX 280 370 22.8 8 750.0 1839.0 8MG31 s 310 380 28.7 8 600.0 1520.8 8N21A s 210 290 10.0 8 850.0 1152.3 8N280EN 280 380 23.4 8 720.0 2354.0 8NVD26 s 180 260 6.6 8 750.0 496.5 8NVD36 s 240 360 16.3 8 459.7 305.3 8NVDS36/24A1 240 360 16.3 8 500.0 494.3 8PA4V185 s 185 210 5.6 8 1475.0 798.7 8PA4V200VG 200 210 6.6 8 1337.5 1219.0 8PA5 255 270 13.8 8 986.0 1581.1 8PA6L280 280 290 17.9 8 940.0 1995.5

### A-14 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 8PBCS12 s 242 305 14.0 8 750.0 903.3 8PS12F 242 305 14.0 8 734.0 8PSHSM26D 260 320 17.0 8 736.0 8PSHT26D 260 320 17.0 8 680.0 680.5 8PSHT6M26D 260 320 17.0 8 587.3 8PSHTB26D 260 320 17.0 8 700.8 8PSHTBM26D 260 320 17.0 8 721.5 8PSHTC s 263 323.9 17.6 8 703.6 723.0 8PSHTM26D 260 320 17.0 8 736.0 8PSN3 s 260 300 15.9 8 772.5 1259.5 8PSTBM s 268 332 19.0 8 806.0 8PSTCM30 s 300 380 26.9 8 600.0 917.3 8PSTM26D 260 320 17.0 8 620.3 8PSTM30 300 380 26.9 8 978.0 8R20 200 280 8.8 8 1000.0 1160.0 8R22 s 220 242 9.2 8 966.7 1177.7 8R32 s 320 350 28.1 8 738.5 3054.9 8R530TZ 175 220 5.3 8 349.0 8RDV136 240 360 16.3 8 221.0 8RK s 255 304 15.6 8 875.0 1258.3 8S12D 241 305 13.9 8 1269.0 8S28LU 280 320 19.7 8 750.0 1496.5 8SL28LVO 280 320 19.7 8 766.7 1502.4 8SN s 258 280 14.7 8 750.0 909.9 8SW28 s 280 300 18.5 8 866.7 2177.7 8T23HU 225 300 11.9 8 782.5 8T23LVO 225 300 11.9 8 800.0 957.8 8TAD24 240 400 18.1 8 400.0 621.5 8TM270 270 500 28.6 8 380.0 660.4 8TR240CO 241 305 13.9 8 1214.0 8U28HU 280 320 19.7 8 775.0 1681.0 8V190C 190 210 6.0 8 1200.0 471.0 8V22 s 220 240 9.1 8 1000.0 1299.3 8V23 s 225 300 11.9 8 812.5 823.0 8V25 s 247 295.1 14.2 8 841.7 1636.7 8V28 s 280 360 22.2 8 597.0 2261.0 8VD26/20AL s 200 260 8.2 8 1000.0 788.0 8VD29/24AL2 240 290 13.1 8 900.0 1600.0 8VD36/24 s 240 360 16.3 8 500.0 364.9 8VDS29/24AL2 240 290 13.1 8 950.0 1736.2 8VDS36/24A1 240 360 16.3 8 442.3 8VEBCM 260 368 19.5 8 600.0 724.5 8VJMS 255 300 15.3 8 8VJS 255 300 15.3 8 485.0 8VKL60/475 190 350 9.9 8 353.0 8VSHTBM26D 260 320 17.0 16 1368.0 8YJCM 197 216 6.6 8 993.0

### A-15 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW 8YLC s 248 267 12.9 8 630.0 762.6 8Z280 s 280 360 22.2 8 566.5 1637.5 8ZST 280 340 20.9 8 680.0 1496.0 8ZU421AK 290 420 27.7 8 1030.0 938D8-1/8 207 254 8.5 9 1265.0 9ACA s 280 420 25.9 9 350.0 901.3 9ASL25/30 250 300 14.7 9 1927.0 9ATCM 318 368 29.2 9 587.5 1659.2 9DNL120/500 190 350 9.9 9 794.0 9DNL150/600 190 350 9.9 9 993.0 9DNL170/600 190 350 9.9 9 600.0 978.0 9DNL190/600 190 350 9.9 9 1260.0 9F/SW240 240 260 11.8 9 900.0 1041.9 9FBHD240 240 260 11.8 9 898.7 9FCHD240 240 260 11.8 9 983.5 9FDHD240 240 260 11.8 9 1136.8 9FHD240 s 240 260 11.8 9 918.0 1421.5 9L20 s 200 276.9 8.7 9 983.3 1322.6 9L25/30 250 300 14.7 9 1760.7 9L26 260 320 17.0 9 825.0 2811.0 9L27/38 270 380 21.8 9 3061.0 9L28/32 s 280 320 19.7 9 780.0 2209.1 9L32/36 320 360 28.9 9 750.0 3330.0 9M20 200 300 9.4 9 961.7 1402.0 9M25 255 400 20.4 9 732.0 2568.0 9R20 200 280 8.8 9 1000.0 1478.0 9R26 260 320 17.0 9 950.0 2761.7 9R32 s 320 350 28.1 9 738.0 3305.1 9SW280 280 300 18.5 9 2477.3 9VD29/24AL2 / 9VDS29/24AL2 240 290 13.1 9 1000.0 2100.0 9VDS29/24AL2 240 290 13.1 9 1000.0 2225.0 A2216VIS 220 340 12.9 16 1103.0 A230.12 s 230 270 11.2 12 1000.0 1518.5 A230.8 s 230 270 11.2 8 1000.0 963.7 A238S s 230 270 11.2 8 993.0 A24 s 240 450 20.4 6 521.0 A245 s 245 450 21.2 6 399.0 662.0 A320.12V 320 360 28.9 12 750.0 4413.0 AH25 s 250 410 20.1 6 390.0 662.0 AH27 s 270 420 24.0 6 345.0 809.0 AH28 s 280 442.5 27.2 6 379.2 966.3 B230 s 230 270 11.2 11 1100.0 1937.7 BL230 s 230 310 12.9 11 944.4 1972.3 BR218 210 300 10.4 8 276.0 BRG8 320 360 28.9 8 720.0 3370.0 BRM6 320 360 28.9 6 734.1 2427.4

### A-16 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW BRM8 320 360 28.9 8 744.0 3187.8 BRM9 320 360 28.9 9 748.2 3198.5 BV6M536 270 360 20.6 8 662.0 BVM12 320 360 28.9 12 750.0 5298.0 C25:33L s 250 330 16.2 8 900.0 2610.0 D440 s 230 270 11.2 8 600.8 D441V12 230 270 11.2 12 596.0 DB6 290 410 27.1 6 386.5 DM26K s 260 440 23.4 6 410.0 639.1 DM26R 260 440 23.4 6 405.0 551.8 DM28A s 280 460 28.3 6 400.0 862.9 DM28AR 280 460 28.3 6 390.0 927.6 DM28R 280 460 28.3 6 390.0 956.0 DM330 300 410 29.0 3 168.3 DMG36 304 381 27.6 6 936.0 DMG38 305 381 27.8 8 550.0 661.7 DMG6 305 381 27.8 6 400.0 319.0 DMG8 305 381 27.8 8 448.1 DMT330 300 410 29.0 3 254.0 DMT530 300 410 29.0 5 405.0 DMT630 300 410 29.0 6 518.5 DN6 290 410 27.1 6 331.0 DR218 210 300 10.4 8 485.0 DR329 290 410 27.1 3 154.0 DRO216K 210 300 10.4 6 383.0 DRO218 s 210 300 10.4 8 736.7 487.6 DVX12 s 185 200 5.4 12 1250.0 524.0 DY25 s 250 440 21.6 6 420.0 680.5 DY26 s 260 440 23.4 6 735.5 E6 222 292 11.3 6 900.0 368.7 E8 222 292 11.3 8 ECSL8 222 292 11.3 8 735.0 EGL6 178 229 5.7 6 177.0 EK6 270 400 22.9 6 368.0 ELS16MK2 222 292 11.3 16 1471.0 EM6 260 400 21.2 6 291.7 EMB5 216 343 12.6 5 ER4M 222 292 11.3 4 166.0 ER6 s 222 292 11.3 6 750.0 256.4 ER8 s 222 292 11.3 8 453.7 ERL4 178 229 5.7 4 ERL5 178 229 5.7 5 ERL6 178 229 5.7 6 184.0 ERMGR6 222 292 11.3 6 750.0 372.3 ERN6 178 229 5.7 6 147.0 ERS4 s 222 292 11.3 4 750.0 233.8 ERS4MGR 222 292 11.3 4 243.0

### A-17 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW ERS6 222 292 11.3 6 725.0 354.6 ERS8 s 222 292 11.3 8 696.2 474.7 ES4 s 222 292 11.3 4 243.0 ES6 222 292 11.3 6 308.8 ES8 222 292 11.3 8 660.7 632.6 ESHC629 290 440 29.1 6 370.0 662.0 ESL12M s 222 292 11.3 12 796.7 1216.7 ESL16 s 222 292 11.3 16 1153.7 1774.3 ESL4MK2 222 292 11.3 4 235.0 ESL5M s 222 292 11.3 5 900.0 515.8 ESL6 s 222 292 11.3 6 815.0 572.4 ESL8 s 222 292 11.3 8 887.0 757.4 ESL9M s 222 292 11.3 9 1333.3 1398.2 ESS4M 222 292 11.3 4 294.0 ESS6 222 292 11.3 6 415.5 ESS8 222 292 11.3 8 670.0 588.0 ESSL12 222 292 11.3 12 883.0 ETS8 222 292 11.3 8 300.0 579.3 ETSL16 222 292 11.3 16 1250.0 ETSL8 222 292 11.3 8 601.0 EV6M 222 292 11.3 6 210.0 EV8M 222 292 11.3 8 250.0 EVS4M 222 292 11.3 4 194.0 EVS6M 222 292 11.3 6 291.0 EVS8M 222 292 11.3 8 370.7 EWSL12M 222 292 11.3 12 883.0 EWSL16 s 222 292 11.3 16 1472.4 EWSL6 222 292 11.3 6 640.0 EWSL8 s 222 292 11.3 8 900.0 703.0 EWZL8 222 292 11.3 8 897.0 EZSL8 222 292 11.3 8 1000.0 758.7 F212V 250 300 14.7 12 844.4 1694.9 F216V 250 300 14.7 16 862.5 2438.7 F26R s 250 300 14.7 6 787.5 894.9 F2896D s 216 216 7.9 6 330.0 F28V 250 300 14.7 8 775.0 1190.3 F312V 250 300 14.7 12 735.0 2077.9 F316V 250 300 14.7 16 825.0 3111.7 F38V 250 300 14.7 8 825.0 1459.0 F4AUDM s 305 380.3 27.8 7 646.3 F6S27.5FH4C 275 450 26.7 6 783.5 FMD98 228 292 11.9 8 390.0 FNS626 280 400 24.6 6 405.0 FSCMGR6 305 381 27.8 6 772.0 FSHC6275 275 400 23.8 6 400.0 588.0 FSM5 305 381 27.8 5 493.0 FSM6 305 381 27.8 6 637.3

### A-18 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW FSM8 305 381 27.8 8 868.0 FSSAM6 305 381 27.8 6 853.0 FSSM6 305 381 27.8 6 772.0 G16VS240 240 220 10.0 16 2501.0 G20VS240 240 220 10.0 20 2942.0 G250E s 250 290 14.2 6 719.8 966.7 G5V235/330 s 235 330 14.3 5 392.3 G6V23/33 235 330 14.3 6 321.5 G6V235/330 s 235 330 14.3 6 365.8 G6V285/42 285 420 26.8 6 257.0 G6V42 280 420 25.9 6 375.0 G7235/330ATL 235 330 14.3 7 618.0 G7V235/330ATL 235 330 14.3 7 600.0 602.7 G7V235/33AT 235 330 14.3 7 515.0 G8V23/33 235 330 14.3 8 441.0 G8V235/33 s 235 330 14.3 8 536.8 GN24 240 410 18.5 6 410.0 478.0 GNLH623 230 410 17.0 6 552.0 GNLH624 240 410 18.5 6 410.0 527.0 GNLH625 250 420 20.6 6 400.0 736.0 GNLH6275 275 450 26.7 6 390.0 805.6 GSHC6275 275 450 26.7 6 736.0 GSLH6275 275 450 26.7 6 723.7 HGN4 267 343 19.2 4 400.0 286.0 HGN5 267 343 19.2 5 316.0 HGN6 267 343 19.2 6 345.0 412.8 HGN8 267 343 19.2 8 435.0 750.6 HGP6 267 343 19.2 6 827.5 HGP8 267 343 19.2 8 1177.0 HRL5 265 290 16.0 5 300.0 243.0 HRN4 267 343 19.2 4 300.0 235.5 HRN5 267 343 19.2 5 255.4 HRN6 267 343 19.2 6 374.3 HRN8 267 343 19.2 8 563.4 HRN9 267 343 19.2 9 651.0 HRP8 267 343 19.2 8 750.0 HS6MZ28 280 420 25.9 6 450.0 478.0 HS6NV229 290 430 28.4 6 481.8 HS6X19 240 330 14.9 6 257.0 HSC6MZ28 280 420 25.9 6 552.0 HSN8 267 343 19.2 8 450.0 613.0 JLSSGMR6 248 318 15.4 6 521.5 JLSSGMR8 248 318 15.4 8 771.0 JSSMR8 248 267 12.9 8 636.0 JVSSM12 248 267 12.9 12 919.0 K26S s 260 480 25.5 6 376.6 731.9 K28B s 280 480 29.6 6 358.3 797.6

### A-19 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW KA6 s 230 360 15.0 6 410.0 270.0 KGRMR265 250 380 18.6 6 235.0 KL21B 185 260 7.0 6 235.0 KMBV12 250 300 14.7 12 750.0 3703.0 KMVB12 250 300 14.7 12 2207.0 KNLH625 258 430 22.6 6 395.0 814.0 KNLH6275 275 450 26.7 6 390.0 956.0 KR2285U / KR228SU 295 420 28.7 6 250.5 KRGB6 250 300 14.7 6 787.5 1011.5 KRGB9 250 300 14.7 9 850.0 2435.6 KRM6 250 300 14.7 6 750.0 990.0 KRM8 250 300 14.7 8 775.0 1494.0 KRM9 250 300 14.7 9 841.7 1817.3 KRMB6 250 300 14.7 6 841.4 1026.6 KRMB8 250 307.5 15.1 8 840.0 1617.4 KRMB9 250 300 14.7 9 818.8 2007.2 KSHC6275 275 400 23.8 6 588.0 KV6M536 270 360 20.6 6 265.0 KVGB12 250 300 14.7 12 850.0 2221.3 KVGB16 250 300 14.7 16 825.0 2977.7 KVGB18 250 300 14.7 18 3358.0 KVM12 250 300 14.7 12 765.0 1646.4 KVM16 250 300 14.7 16 750.0 1840.0 KVMB12 250 300 14.7 12 778.4 1992.2 KVMB16 250 300 14.7 16 800.0 2469.7 KVMB18 250 300 14.7 18 3010.3 KVMB8 250 300 14.7 8 825.0 1460.0 L20710-G7B 230 279 11.6 20 900.0 1839.0 L230 s 230 350 14.5 6.5 600.0 382.5 L5792DS s 216 216 7.9 12 1057.5 998.2 L6670DS s 232 216 9.1 12 839.0 LA230.8SS 230 350 14.5 8 577.0 LDM5 250 300 14.7 5 515.0 LDM6 250 300 14.7 6 750.0 670.8 LDM8 250 300 14.7 8 992.4 LDM9 250 300 14.7 9 780.0 1054.8 LDMB6 250 300 14.7 6 825.0 766.3 LDMB8 250 300 14.7 8 213.0 1088.4 LDMB9 250 300 14.7 9 780.0 1170.8 LDMC6 250 300 14.7 6 787.5 627.0 LDMC8 250 300 14.7 8 750.0 809.0 LDMCB6 250 300 14.7 6 825.0 625.0 LH26G 260 440 23.4 6 LH28G s 280 460 28.3 6 1177.0 LSMC5 250 300 14.7 5 478.0 LSMC6 250 300 14.7 6 574.0 LSMC8 250 300 14.7 8 750.0 769.8

### A-20 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW LSMC9 250 300 14.7 9 1986.0 LSMCB9 250 300 14.7 9 825.0 993.0 LZ6 260 400 21.2 6 331.0 M200 s 200 260 8.2 6 861.8 524.7 M220 s 220 300 11.4 6 789.4 752.9 M24UT 240 420 19.0 6 588.0 M400 180 200 5.1 12 1625.0 686.4 M401 s 180 200 5.1 12 1561.1 709.5 M412 180 200 5.1 12 1500.0 627.0 M416 180 200 5.1 12 810.0 M419AM3 180 200 5.1 12 1600.0 791.3 M421 180 200 5.1 12 990.0 M423 290 420 27.7 8 375.0 552.0 M44I 250 420 20.6 4 228.4 M45I 250 420 20.6 5 334.5 M46 s 253 422.2 21.3 7 320.0 372.5 M47 s 241 405 19.0 7 325.0 392.8 M470 180 200 5.1 12 990.0 M50 180 200 5.1 12 735.5 M6D20B s 200 240 7.5 6 750.0 368.7 M6D26B s 260 320 17.0 6 720.0 551.8 MA301FA 230 300 12.5 8 750.0 605.3 MA423 290 420 27.7 8 555.5 MA424AK 290 420 27.7 8 425.0 736.0 MA6SS 270 400 22.9 6 390.0 456.0 MAS278 270 500 28.6 8 427.0 MAU423 s 290 420 27.7 8 370.0 444.4 MB518C 185 250 6.7 20 1720.0 2207.0 MB839 190 230 6.5 16 1398.0 MD1081 185 200 5.4 20 2530.0 MD330 185 200 5.4 6 1500.0 436.7 MD36 215 360 13.1 3 74.0 MD655 s 185 200 5.4 9 1450.0 662.5 MDS623S 230 380 15.8 6 221.0 MF24 s 234 390.8 17.2 6 411.4 445.3 MF26 s 260 500 26.5 6 349.1 613.5 MF28 s 280 450 27.7 6 364.3 687.6 MH22 s 220 390 14.8 6 416.7 MH23 s 230 390 16.2 6 433.3 479.4 MK6 s 300 420 29.7 6 370.0 400.0 ML624GA s 240 400 18.1 6 257.0 ML624GHS s 240 400 18.1 6 405.0 370.8 ML624GS s 240 400 18.1 6 398.8 386.7 ML626GS s 260 480 25.5 6 340.0 551.7 ML627GS s 270 480 27.5 6 340.0 652.0 MNL28M 280 480 29.6 6 328.0 676.8 MS24 180 240 6.1 6 162.0

### A-21 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW MS245G s 245 470 22.2 6 791.0 MS25GSC s 250 470 23.1 6 320.0 563.1 MS25GTSC s 250 470 23.1 6 420.0 698.7 MS26GSC s 260 470 24.9 6 346.7 565.5 MS26GTSC2 260 470 24.9 6 956.0 MS27SC 270 420 24.0 6 625.0 MS28FSC 280 420 25.9 6 400.0 956.0 MS28GFSC 280 420 25.9 6 790.5 MS28SC 280 420 25.9 6 400.0 736.0 MS423 290 420 27.7 6 412.0 MS726 260 400 21.2 6 184.0 MSU36 s 215 360 13.1 6 174.0 MSU423 s 290 420 27.7 6 341.7 304.9 MSU424 s 290 420 27.7 6 345.0 MU323CG s 230 380 15.8 5 294.5 MU323CGS1 230 380 15.8 3 147.0 MU323DGSC 230 380 15.8 3 420.0 267.3 MU36 215 360 13.1 6 147.0 MU623 s 230 380 15.8 6 420.0 353.0 MU625HS 260 420 22.3 6 368.0 MU626HS 270 420 24.0 6 496.5 MU627 s 270 420 24.0 6 496.5 MV36 215 360 13.1 4 103.0 MV421 280 420 25.9 4 110.0 MV423 290 420 27.7 4 226.7 Q265/3 265 410 22.6 3 110.0 R321 210 330 11.4 3 R4A7 229 305 12.6 7 390.0 R4AUUN5 229 305 12.6 5 750.0 355.0 R6DV136 240 360 16.3 6 205.3 R6Z133U 225 330 13.1 6 600.0 308.0 R8DV136 240 360 16.3 8 350.0 238.3 R8V22/30ATL 220 300 11.4 8 791.0 R8Z133 225 330 13.1 8 500.0 368.0 RA6M428 220 280 10.6 6 176.3 RA6M528 220 280 10.6 6 186.3 RA8M428 220 280 10.6 8 228.0 RA8M528 220 280 10.6 8 287.0 RBA12M528 220 280 10.6 12 1066.5 RBA6M428 220 280 10.6 6 268.5 RBA6M528 220 280 10.6 6 807.0 362.2 RBA8M528 220 280 10.6 8 810.0 507.2 RBV6M536 270 360 20.6 6 353.2 RBV6M628 240 280 12.7 6 1235.0 RDV136 240 360 16.3 6 221.0 RH230 s 215 300 10.9 5 475.0 126.0 RH235 250 350 17.2 4 110.0

### A-22 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW RH330 s 215 300 10.9 6 600.0 182.4 RH335SU 250 350 17.2 6 500.0 216.0 RH435SU 250 350 17.2 6 239.0 RH526A 180 260 6.6 8 173.0 RHO215 210 300 10.4 5 280.0 RHO216K 210 300 10.4 6 204.5 RHO218K 210 300 10.4 8 485.0 RHS435 s 250 350 17.2 7 294.5 RHS526 s 180 260 6.6 7 900.0 196.5 RSBA12M528 220 280 10.6 12 829.7 1058.3 RSBA16M528 220 280 10.6 16 1588.5 RSBA6M528 220 280 10.6 6 900.0 551.0 RSBA8M528 220 280 10.6 8 784.3 701.9 RSP5 250 360 17.7 5 331.0 RSP6 250 360 17.7 6 425.0 397.0 RTG 8 250 360 17.7 8 445.0 373.7 RTG7 250 360 17.7 7 386.0 RTG8 250 500 24.5 8 364.0 RV6M 270 360 20.6 6 147.0 RV6M436 240 360 16.3 6 177.0 RV6M536 270 360 20.6 6 506.3 233.7 RV8M536 270 360 20.6 8 500.0 625.0 RZI6 210 330 11.4 6 430.0 221.0 S12UMTK 240 260 11.8 12 2354.0 S185 s 185 230 6.2 6 848.8 402.4 S23G 230 400 16.6 6 404.3 385.9 S25G 250 450 22.1 6 426.8 S26G 260 470 24.9 6 379.5 603.1 S27G 270 480 27.5 6 380.0 855.3 S623 s 230 400 16.6 6 410.0 277.5 S6EDSS 240 400 18.1 6 441.0 S6MBHS 220 400 15.2 6 331.0 S6MBTHS 220 400 15.2 6 380.0 343.3 S6MUH28 280 340 20.9 6 1177.0 S6NDTE 270 400 22.9 6 294.0 S6UCT s 260 400 21.2 6 324.0 S6UDT s 260 400 21.2 6 397.5 544.0 S6UFGSS 260 400 21.2 6 427.0 S6UFTSS 260 400 21.2 6 410.0 625.0 S6UMPTK 240 260 11.8 6 900.0 978.5 S6UMTK 240 260 11.8 6 2000.0 978.1 S6YDTSS 280 420 25.9 6 644.0 S6YFSS 280 440 27.1 6 956.0 S8UMTK 240 260 11.8 8 1839.0 SA4M428 220 280 10.6 4 SA6M428 220 280 10.6 6 158.0 SBA12M528 220 280 10.6 12 867.0 1050.8

### A-23 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW SBA4M428 220 280 10.6 4 SBA6M528 220 280 10.6 6 830.5 381.0 SBA6M628 240 280 12.7 6 763.7 670.3 SBA8M528 220 280 10.6 8.21621622 812.8 640.7 SBV12M628 240 280 12.7 12 800.0 1976.8 SBV16M628 240 280 12.7 16 950.0 3097.1 SBV6M536 270 360 20.6 6 600.0 542.5 SBV6M628 240 280 12.7 6 864.7 935.2 SBV8M536 270 360 20.6 8 500.0 736.8 SBV8M628 240 280 12.7 8 841.3 1230.4 SBV9M628 240 280 12.7 9 867.2 1376.0 SF112V s 250 300 14.7 12 750.0 1584.1 SF116V s 250 300 14.7 16 800.0 2259.5 SF13RSF 250 300 14.7 3 357.0 SF14RS 250 300 14.7 4 331.0 SF15RSC 250 300 14.7 5 508.0 SF16RS s 250 300 14.7 6 750.0 725.9 SF18VS s 250 300 14.7 8 766.7 943.0 SIIB 280 420 25.9 6 239.0 SOD629 s 290 420 27.7 6 420.0 736.0 SODCHS6S25 250 410 20.1 6 420.0 552.0 SODHS6S24 240 390 17.6 6 379.7 SODHS6S25 250 410 20.1 6 552.0 SODHS6S26 260 410 21.8 6 420.0 588.0 SODHS6X26 260 410 21.8 6 600.3 SODHS6X29 290 440 29.1 6 717.5 SR4Z127 160 270 5.4 4 110.0 SR8 260 330 17.5 8 552.0 SV3M345 280 450 27.7 3 110.0 SV6M536 270 360 20.6 6 500.0 279.0 T12RS18/22 180 220 5.6 12 1200.0 496.5 T220 s 222 289.2 11.2 6 801.0 698.0 T220AL s 220 280 10.6 6 686.7 T240 s 240 310 14.0 6 766.7 701.6 T260 s 260 330 17.5 6 703.3 978.9 T26S s 260 440 23.4 6 447.0 602.3 T5B26YC 260 400 21.2 5 199.0 T6EKA 270 400 22.9 6 257.0 TARHS335AU 250 350 17.2 8 530.0 TB12RS18/22 180 220 5.6 12 1250.0 699.0 TB16RS18/22 180 220 5.6 16 1300.0 949.0 TBD4406 s 230 270 11.2 6 831.6 625.8 TBD4408 s 230 270 11.2 8 798.7 799.7 TBD441V12 s 230 270 11.2 12 810.0 1121.5 TBD441V16 s 230 270 11.2 16 1465.2 TBD4446 230 320 13.3 6 750.0 809.3 TBD4448 230 320 13.3 8 750.0 1157.5

### A-24 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW TBRH526SU 180 260 6.6 6 220.0 TBRS18/22V12 180 220 5.6 12 721.0 TD4406 230 270 11.2 6 463.3 TD4408 230 270 11.2 8 603.5 TD441V12 230 270 11.2 12 1067.0 TD441V16 230 270 11.2 16 1103.0 TEB296 290 400 26.4 6 1132.5 TEBF296 290 400 26.4 6 1103.0 TLADM4 216 349 12.8 4 150.0 TLSDMR6 216 330 12.1 6 269.0 TMAB276 270 500 28.6 6 607.0 TMAB278 270 500 28.6 8 691.0 TMABS278 270 500 28.6 8 380.0 752.0 TMAS276 270 500 28.6 6 375.0 307.0 TMBAS276 270 500 28.6 6 291.0 TRH435 s 250 350 17.2 7 437.5 395.9 TRHS435 s 250 350 17.2 7 504.4 TRHS518V16 180 220 5.6 16 1500.0 471.0 TRHS526A 180 260 6.6 8 206.0 UHS27 270 420 24.0 6 390.0 736.0 V12A/12 185 210 5.6 12 993.0 V12TR240CO 241 305 13.9 12 225.0 1888.3 V16A/12 185 210 5.6 16 1353.0 V16A/9 185 210 5.6 16 1236.0 V16TR240CO 241 305 13.9 16 1000.0 3118.0 V18A/10 185 210 5.6 18 1566.5 V18B/12 210 210 7.3 18 1200.0 2111.0 V6A/12 185 210 5.6 6 662.0 V6A/9 185 210 5.6 6 423.0 V6B 210 210 7.3 12 1663.0 1957.0 V6V22/30 s 220 300 11.4 12 780.0 868.2 V8A s 185 210 5.6 8 588.0 V8V22/30ATL 220 300 11.4 16 850.0 1350.7 V8V30/42AL 300 420 29.7 16 2700.0 VC8M 203 273 8.8 8 150.0 W4VSLM 175 220 5.3 4 666.5 156.0 W6LSR 180 220 5.6 6 221.0 W6V175/22A 175 220 5.3 6 122.5 W6V22/30A 220 300 11.4 6 515.0 W6VBSLM 175 220 5.3 6 670.0 284.7 W8V175/22 s 175 220 5.3 8 950.0 188.9 W8V30/38 300 380 26.9 8 1102.5 W8VBSLM 175 220 5.3 8 1182.9 382.6 W8VCSLM 175 220 5.3 8 386.0 386.0 WX28 s 280 390 24.0 7 548.8 1593.7 YYYY 240 400 18.1 8 1.0 618.0 Z27 s 270 420 24.0 6 390.0 588.0

### A-25 Engine Model Bore Stroke Displace Cylinders RPM kW Z280EN 260 280 14.9 6 720.0 1209.0 Z3 300 360 25.4 3 375.0 154.0 Z35 235 300 13.0 6 405.0 Z4 300 360 25.4 4 206.0 Z4EM 260 400 21.2 4 Z6235SH 235 300 13.0 6 429.0 Z626SH 260 330 17.5 6 496.5 Z627ASH 270 400 22.9 6 441.4 Z66 260 330 17.5 6 496.5 Z68 260 330 17.5 8 736.0 Z6L28ASH 280 430 26.5 6 588.0 Z6UK27 270 420 24.0 6 74.0 Z6VSH 280 450 27.7 6 637.3 Z76 270 400 22.9 6 441.3

## Appendix B. Summary of Monte Carlo Input and Output dataDee p W a t e r V essel

Fo r ecas t: Dee p W a t e r H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 1,191,707,853 to 4,440,497,391 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 1,169,729,099 to 4,465,240,444 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 6,989,695

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 2,666,159,213 Med i an 2,596,210,614 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 698,969,510 V a r i an ce 5 E+ 17 S k e w ne ss 0.30 K u r to s is 2.36 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.26 Range M i n i m um 1,169,729,099 Range Ma x i m um 4,465,240,444 Range W i dth 3,295,511,345 Mean S td. E rr or 6,989,695.10

T a r g e t F o re ca s t: D

e e p W a t e r H P

- HR

D e e p W a t e r HP 1

. 00

D e e p W a t e r LF

- . 01

D e e p W a t e r T r a n s i t D a ys
- . 01

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r e d b y R a n k C o rr e l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h art

D eep W a t er HP

D eep W a t er LF

D eep W a t er Tr an s i t D a ys

B -1Dee p W a t e r V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: Dee p W a t e r HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 1,860 L i k e li e st 3,603 Ma x i m um 7,200

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 1,860 to 7,200

A ss umpt i on: Dee p W a t e r U nd e r w a y Da ys

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 219 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

A ss umpt i on: Dee p W a t e r LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 80% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M e a n = 4 , 2 21

1 , 8 60 3 , 195 4 , 5 30 5 , 8 65 7 , 2 00 D e e p W a t e r HP

M e an = 2 19

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

2 17 2 18 2 19 2 20 2 21

D e e p W a t e r T r a n s i t D a ys

M ean = 8 0%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 120%

- 2 0% 80% 1 80% 2 80% D ee p W a t e r LF D ee p W a t e r U nd e r w a y D a ys

B -2T o w bo a ts

Fo r ecas t: T o w bo a t H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 3,243,495,839 to 15,743,368,200 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 3,213,901,615 to 25,888,889,076 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 30,200,146

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 7,920,359,723 Med i an 7,390,600,445 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 3,020,014,562 V a r i an ce 9 E+ 18 S k e w ne ss 0.95 K u r to s is 3.99 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.38 Range M i n i m um 3,213,901,615 Range Ma x i m um 25,888,889,076 Range W i dth 22,674,987,462 Mean S td. E rr or 30,200,145.62

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : T

o w bo a t s H P

- HR

T o w boa t s HP 1

. 00

T o w boa t s LF

. 01

T o w boa t s T r an s i t D a ys

. 01

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

T o w boa ts HP

T o w boa ts LF

T o w boa ts Tr an s i t D a ys

B -3T o w bo a t A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: T o w bo a t HP

W e i bu ll d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

Lo c at i on 900 S c a le 1,477 S hape 1.596695

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 900 to + In f i n i ty

A ss umpt i on: T o w bo a t U nd e r w a y Da ys

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 219 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

A ss umpt i on: T o w bo a t LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 44% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

M ean = 4 4%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 156%

- 5 6% 44% 1 44% 2 44% To w b o a

t s LF M ea n = 219

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

2 17 2 18 219 220 221 T o w bo a

t s T r a n s i t D ays M e an = 2 , 225

900 2 , 033 3 , 167 4 , 300 5 , 4 33 T o w b o a

t s HP

T o w bo a t U nd e r w a y D a ys

T o w bo a t LF T o w bo a t HP

B -4F e rr y V essels

Fo r ecas t: F e rr y H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 537,632,473 to 2,658,247,438 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 462,593,200 to 3,055,815,023 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 4,432,935

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 1,464,293,131 Med i an 1,438,633,302 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 443,293,456 V a r i an ce 2 E+ 17 S k e w ne ss 0.31 K u r to s is 2.71 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.30 Range M i n i m um 462,593,200 Range Ma x i m um 3,055,815,023 Range W i dth 2,593,221,823 Mean S td. E rr or 4,432,934.56

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : F e rr i e s H P

- HR

F er r i e s HP

. 94

F er r i e s T r a n s i t D a ys

. 30

F er r i e s LF

. 00

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

F err y HP

F err y Tr an s i t D a ys
F err y LF

B -5F e rr y V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: F e rr y HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 865 L i k e li e st 2,412 Ma x i m um 4,400

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 865 to 4,400

A ss umpt i on: F e rr y U nd e r w a y Da ys

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 152 L i k e li e st 174 Ma x i m um 243

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 152 to 243

A ss umpt i on: F e rr y LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 68% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

M ean = 6 8%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 132%

- 3 2% 68% 1 68% 2 68% F e rr i es LF M e an = 1 90

152 175 198 220 2 43

F e r r i e s T r a n s i t D a ys M e a n = 2 , 559

865 1 , 749 2 , 633 3 , 516 4 , 4 00 F e rr i es HP

F e rr y U nd e r w a y D a ys

F e rr y LF F e rr y HP

B -6C omm e r ical F is h i ng V essels

Fo r ecas t: C omm e r ical F is h i ng H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 1,733,197,125 to 6,376,550,424 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 1,658,213,722 to 10,825,122,187 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 11,426,276

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 3,412,840,776 Med i an 3,183,342,782 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 1,142,627,610 V a r i an ce 1 E+ 18 S k e w ne ss 1.05 K u r to s is 4.29 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.33 Range M i n i m um 1,658,213,722 Range Ma x i m um 10,825,122,187 Range W i dth 9,166,908,466 Mean S td. E rr or 11,426,276.10

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : C o mm e r i c a l F i s h i n g H P

- HR

C o mm e r c i a l F i s h i ng HP 1

. 00

C o mm e r c i a l F i s h i ng T r an s i t D a ys

. 08

C o mm e r c i a l F i s h i ng LF

. 01

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

C o mm er c i a l F i s h i ng HP

C o mm er c i a l F i s h i ng Tr an s i t D a ys
C o mm er i c a l F i s h i ng LF

B -7C omm e r cial F is h i ng A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: C omm e r cial F is h i ng HP

W e i bu ll d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

Lo c at i on 1,000 S c a le 1,054 S hape 1.478789

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 1,000 to + In f i n i ty

A ss umpt i on: C omm e r cial F is h i ng U nd e r w a y Da ys

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 250 L i k e li e st 271 Ma x i m um 292

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 250 to 292

A ss umpt i on: C omm e r cial F is h i ng LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 70% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M ean = 271

250 261 271 282 2 92

C o mm e r

c i a l F i s h i n g T r

a n s i t D ays

M e a n = 70%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 13 0%

- 30% 7 0% 17 0% 2 7 0%

C o mm e r

c i a l F i s h i n g LF

C o mm e r c i a l F i s h i ng U nd e r w a y D a ys

M e a n = 1 , 953

1 , 000 1 , 884 2 , 768 3 , 651 4 , 5 35

C o mm e r c i a l F i s h i ng HP

B -8G r ea t L akes V essels

Fo r ecas t: G r ea t L akes H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 376,459,662 to 2,238,549,592 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 332,637,421 to 2,273,199,755 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 4,051,230

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 1,393,243,855 Med i an 1,433,115,004 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 405,123,010 V a r i an ce 2 E+ 17 S k e w ne ss
- 0.27 K u r to s is 2.38 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.29 Range M i n i m um 332,637,421 Range Ma x i m um 2,273,199,755 Range W i dth 1,940,562,333 Mean S td. E rr or 4,051,230.10

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : G r e a t L a k e s H P -HR

G r ea t La k e HP 1

. 00

G r ea t La k e LF

- . 02

G r ea t La k e T r an s i t da ys
- . 02

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

G rea t La k e s HP

G rea t La k e s LF

G rea t La k e s Tr an s i t D a ys

B -9G r ea t L akes V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: G r ea t L akes HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 518 L i k e li e st 2,505 Ma x i m um 3,600

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 518 to 3,600

A ss umpt i on: G r ea t L akes U nd e r w a y d a ys

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 136 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

A ss umpt i on: G r ea t L akes LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 84% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M e an = 2 , 208

518 1 , 289 2 , 059 2 , 830 3 , 6 00 G r ea t L ake HP

M ea n = 136

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

1 34 1 35 136 137 138

G r e a t L a k e T r a n s i t d a

ys

M e a n = 84%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 11 6%

- 16% 8 4% 18 4% 2 8 4% G r e a t L ak e LF G r ea t L akes U nd e r w ay D ays

G r ea t L akes LF G r ea t L akes HP

B

- 10C o as t Gu a r d V essels

Fo r ecas t: C o as t Gu a r d H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 403,019,387 to 2,730,806,185 Hp

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 357,200,211 to 3,319,883,788 Hp

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 4,955,407

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 1,441,432,575 Med i an 1,387,144,416 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 495,540,718 V a r i an ce 2 E+ 17 S k e w ne ss 0.53 K u r to s is 3.01 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.34 Range M i n i m um 357,200,211 Range Ma x i m um 3,319,883,788 Range W i dth 2,962,683,577 Mean S td. E rr or 4,955,407.18

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : C o a s t G u a r d H P

- HR

C oa st G u a r d T r a n s i t D a ys

. 79

C oa st G ur ad HP

. 59

C oa st G u a r d LF

. 00

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

C oa st G uard Tr an s i t D a ys
C oa st G uard HP

C oa st G uard LF

B

- 11C o as t Gu a r d V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: C o as t Gu a r d HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 1,250 L i k e li e st 2,289 Ma x i m um 3,650

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 1,250 to 3,650

A ss umpt i on: C o as t Gu a r d U nd e r w a y Da ys

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 29 L i k e li e st 88 Ma x i m um 157

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 29 to 157

A ss umpt i on: C o as t Gu a r d LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 80% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M ea n = 2 , 3 96

1 , 250 1 , 850 2 , 450 3 , 050 3 , 6 50 C o a s t G u r a d HP

M ea n = 91

29 61 93 1 25 1 57

C o a s t G u a r d T r a n s i t D a ys

M ean = 8 0%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 120%

- 2 0% 80% 1 80% 2 80% C o as t G u a r d LF C o as t G u a rd U nd e r w ay D ays

B

- 12Off s ho r e V essels

Fo r ecas t: Off s ho r e H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 7,660,583,858 to 60,579,374,850 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 6,009,238,235 to 61,335,988,555 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 119,330,949

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 27,810,331,286 Med i an 26,052,108,450 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 11,933,094,915 V a r i an ce 1 E+ 20 S k e w ne ss 0.49 K u r to s is 2.43 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.43 Range M i n i m um 6,009,238,235 Range Ma x i m um 61,335,988,555 Range W i dth 55,326,750,320 Mean S td. E rr or 119,330,949.15

T a r g e t Fo r e ca s t : O f

f s ho r e H P -HR

O f f s h o r e HP 1

. 00

O f f s h o r s e T r a n s i t D a ys

. 04

O f f s h o r e LF

. 00

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R a n k C o r re l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

Offs hore HP

Offs hore Tr an s i t D a ys
Offs hore LF

B

- 13Off s ho r e V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: Off s ho r e HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 740 L i k e li e st 2,016 Ma x i m um 7,502

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 740 to 7,502

A ss umpt i on: Off s ho r se U nd e r w a y Da ys

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 280 L i k e li e st 299 Ma x i m um 317

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 280 to 317

A ss umpt i on: Off s ho r e LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 85% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M e an = 2 99

280 289 2 99 3 08 3 17

O ff s h o r s e T r a n s i t D a ys

M e a n = 85%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 11 5%

- 15% 8 5% 18 5% 2 8 5% O ff s ho r e LF O ff s hor e U nd e r w ay D ays M e a n = 3 , 4 19

740 2 , 431 4 , 121 5 , 812 7 , 5 02 O ff s ho r e HP

B

- 14Resea r c h V essels

Fo r ecas t: Resea r c h H P

- HR

S u mm a r y: D i s p l a y

Range i s f r o m 222,501,388 to 1,215,121,143 H P

- HR E nt i r e Range i s f r o m 204,627,058 to 1,231,848,504 H P

- HR A f te r 10,000 T r i a l s , the S td. E rr o r o f the Mean i s 2,170,568

S tat i s t i cs: V a l ue

T r i a ls 10000 Mean 654,876,718 Med i an 632,414,746 Mode

--- S tanda r d De vi at i on 217,056,751 V a r i an ce 5 E+ 16 S k e w ne ss 0.31 K u r to s is 2.38 Coe ff . o f V a r i ab ili ty 0.33 Range M i n i m um 204,627,058 Range Ma x i m um 1,231,848,504 Range W i dth 1,027,221,446 Mean S td. E rr or 2,170,567.51 T ar g e t F o r e cas t: R

es e a r c h H P

- HR

R e s ea r c h HP 1

. 00

R e s ea r c h LF

. 01

R e s ea r c h T r an s i t D a ys

. 01

-1

- 0 .5 0 0 .5 1
M ea s u r ed b y R an k C o rr e l a t i on S e n s i t i v i t

y C h a rt

R e s ear c h HP

R e s ear c h LF

R e s ear c h Tr an s i t D a ys

B

- 15Resea r c h V essel A ss umpt i ons

A ss umpt i on: Resea r c h HP

T r i angu l a r d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs:

M i n i m um 600 L i k e li e st 1,622 Ma x i m um 3,750

S e l e c ted r ange i s f r o m 600 to 3,750

A ss umpt i on: Resea r c h U nd e r w a y Da ys

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 220 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000

A ss umpt i on: Resea r c h LF

Cu s to m d i s t r i but i on w i th pa r a m ete rs: Re l at iv e P r ob.

Si ng l e po i nt 85% 1.000000 T ota l Re l at iv e P r obab ili ty 1.000000 M ean = 1 , 9 91

600 1 , 388 2 , 175 2 , 963 3 , 7 50 Rese a r c h HP

M ea n = 220

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

2 18 2 19 220 221 222 R e s ea r c h T r a n s i t D a ys

M e a n = 85%

. 0 00 . 2 50 . 5 00 . 7 50 1

. 0 00

- 11 5%

- 15% 8 5% 18 5% 2 8 5% R es e a r c h LF R esea r c h U nd e r w ay D ays

B

- 16

## Appendix C. Category 2 In-Port / At-Sea Splits

### C-1 In-Port and At Sea Summary (weighted by Activity, HP-HR) Straight Straight Weighted Weighted Average Average Activity Fraction Fraction Category 2 In-Port At-Sea (HP-HR) In-Port At-Sea Towboats 17% 83% 1,387,249,658 0.87% 4.22% Fishing 5% 95% 3,341,826,590 0.61% 11.65% Offshore 4% 96% 16,406,300,754 2.59% 57.63% Ferries 65% 35% 1,267,998,585 3.02% 1.63% Deepwater 1% 99% 1,387,249,658 0.05% 5.04% Research 1% 99% 534,376,948 0.02% 1.94% Great Lakes 1% 99% 1,588,928,635 0.06% 5.77% Government 59% 41% 1,332,989,402 2.86% 2.03% Total -- -- 27,246,920,230 10.09% 89.91% Average 19% 81% -- -- --

### C-2 1. Towboats, Tugs, and Tractors
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Assist Vessel 19 1.8% 95.0% 5.0% Line Haul Tug – Inland 713 67.5% 15.0% 85.0% Line Haul Tug – Oceanic 314 29.7% 15.0% 85.0% Dredge Support 11 1.0% 85.0% 15.0% Total 1057 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Assist Vessel 1.7% 0.1% Line Haul Tug - Inland 10.1% 57.3% Line Haul Tug - Oceanic 4.5% 25.3% Dredge Support 0.9% 0.2% Total 17.2% 82.8%
2. Commercial Fishing
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Commercial Fishing 333 100.0% 5.0% 95.0% Total 333 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Commercial Fishing 5.0% 95.0% Total 5.0% 95.0%

3. Offshore
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Crewboat/supply/crane 462 76.6% 5.0% 95.0% Survey 24 4.0% 2.0% 98.0% Pipelayer 14 2.3% 2.0% 98.0% Anchor 21 3.5% 2.0% 98.0% Liftboat 82 13.6% 2.0% 98.0% Total 603 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Crewboat/supply/crane 3.8% 72.8% Survey 0.1% 3.9% Pipelayer 0.0% 2.3% Anchor 0.1% 3.4% Liftboat 0.3% 13.3% Total 4.3% 95.7%

### C-3 4. Ferries
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Passenger Ferry 99 100.0% 65.0% 35.0% Total 99 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Passenger Ferry 65.0% 35.0% Total 65.0% 35.0%
5. Deepwater
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea US Flagged 45 100.0% 1.0% 99.0% Total 45 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea US Flagged 1.0% 99.0% Total 1.0% 99.0%

6. Research
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Univesity 31 100.0% 1.0% 99.0% Total 31 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Univesity 1.0% 99.0% Total 1.0% 99.0%

### C-4 7. Great Lakes and others
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Auto 0 0.0% 1.0% 99.0% Bulk 18 16.1% 1.0% 99.0% Container 2 1.8% 1.0% 99.0% Cruise 5 4.5% 1.0% 99.0% General Cargo 35 31.3% 1.0% 99.0% RORO 2 1.8% 1.0% 99.0% Special Carrier 43 38.4% 1.0% 99.0% Tanker 7 6.3% 1.0% 99.0% Total 112 1.0
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Auto 0.0% 0.0% Bulk 0.2% 15.9% Container 0.0% 1.8% Cruise 0.0% 4.4% General Cargo 0.3% 30.9% RORO 0.0% 1.8% Special Carrier 0.4% 38.0% Tanker 0.1% 6.2% Total 1.00% 99.00%

8. Government
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea USCG - Cruiser/Ice Breaker 37 23.6% 4.0% 96.0% USCG - Patrol 106 67.5% 80.0% 20.0% USCG - Buoy Tender 14 8.9% 40.0% 60.0% Total 157 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea USCG - Cruiser/Ice Breaker 0.9% 22.6% USCG - Patrol 54.0% 13.5% USCG - Buoy Tender 3.6% 5.4% Total 58.5% 41.5%

## Appendix D. Category 1 In-Port / At-Sea Splits

### D-1 1. Towboats, Tugs, and Tractors
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Line Haul Tug - Inland 2504 79.1% 15.0% 85.0% Line Haul Tug - Oceanic 660 20.9% 15.0% 85.0% Total 3164 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Line Haul Tug - Inland 11.9% 67.3% Line Haul Tug - Oceanic 3.1% 17.7% Total 15.0% 85.0%
2. Commercial Fishing
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Commercial Fishing 29346 100.0% 3.0% 97.0% Total 29346 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Commercial Fishing 3.0% 97.0% Total 3.0% 97.0%

3. Offshore
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Crewboat/supply/crane 405 76.6% 5.0% 95.0% Survey 21 4.0% 2.0% 98.0% Pipelayer 12 2.3% 2.0% 98.0% Anchor 18 3.5% 2.0% 98.0% Liftboat 72 13.6% 2.0% 98.0% Total 529 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Crewboat/supply/crane 3.8% 72.8% Survey 0.1% 3.9% Pipelayer 0.0% 2.3% Anchor 0.1% 3.4% Liftboat 0.3% 13.3% Total 4.3% 95.7%

4. Ferries
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Ferries 508 100.0% 80.0% 20.0% Total 508 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Ferries 80.0% 20.0% Total 80.0% 20.0%

### D-2 5. Deepwater
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea US Flagged 23 100.0% 15.0% 85.0% Total 23 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea US Flagged 15.0% 85.0% Total 15.0% 85.0%

6. Research
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Univesity 107 100.0% 1.0% 99.0% Total 107 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Univesity 1.0% 99.0% Total 1.0% 99.0%

7. Great Lakes and others
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Auto 0 0.0% 15.0% 85.0% Bulk 6 4.3% 15.0% 85.0% Container 1 0.7% 15.0% 85.0% Cruise 14 10.0% 15.0% 85.0% General Cargo 36 25.7% 15.0% 85.0% RORO 6 4.3% 15.0% 85.0% Special Carrier 68 48.6% 15.0% 85.0% Tanker 9 6.4% 15.0% 85.0% Total 140 1.0
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Auto 0.0% 0.0% Bulk 0.6% 3.6% Container 0.1% 0.6% Cruise 1.5% 8.5% General Cargo 3.9% 21.9% RORO 0.6% 3.6% Special Carrier 7.3% 41.3% Tanker 1.0% 5.5% Total 15.00% 85.00%

### D-3 8. Government
Subgroup Population Population Fraction In-Port At-Sea Pilot Boat 0.0% USCG - Patrol 291 100.0% 95.0% 5.0% USCG - Buoy Tender 0.0% USCG - Harbor Tugs 0.0% Total 291 100.0%
Subgroup In-Port At-Sea Pilot Boat USCG - Patrol 95.0% 5.0% USCG - Buoy Tender USCG - Harbor Tugs Total 95.0% 5.0%