## 3 Conformity Review According to Fairway Design Standard
### Conformity Review  
In Section 2, we analyzed the current status and design criteria of the target fairway. The widths of the Wando fairway, the fairway within the Yeosu area, the Masan fairway, and the Gadeok fairway were 1660, 2000, 1660, and 1680 m, respectively. According to the PIANC Guide, the width of the fairway requires 3.8-18.6 times the width of the largest vessel, and at least 1-2 times the length of the largest vessel, according to the port and fishing port design standards. As a result of the maritime traffic survey analyzed in this chapter, the largest vessel on the Wando fairway is 161 m long and 25 m wide, that on the Yeosu fairway is 400 m long and 59 m wide, that on the Masan fairway is 345 m long and 53 m wide, and that on the Gadeok fairway is 400 m long and 59 m wide. Therefore, we found that the required fairway width according to the PIANC Guide was 95-465 m based on the passing ships of the Wando fairway and 161-322 m according to the port and fishing port design standards, and the current fairway width satisfies the design standards. The required fairway width according to the PIANC Guide was 224-1097 m based on the vessels passing through the Yeosu fairway and 400-800 m according to the port and fishing port design standards. Furthermore, the required fairway width according to the PIANC Guide was 201-986 m based on the passing ships of the Masan fairway, and that according to the harbor and fishing port design standards was 345-690 m, which satisfies the design standards. The required fairway width according to the PIANC Guide was 224-1097 m based on the passing ships of the Gadeok fairway and 400-800 m, according to the port and fishing port design standards. According to the fairway design standards based on the largest vessel, such as the PIANC Guide or the port and fishing port design standards, the current fairway width is sufficient. In addition, excess fairways were found. The average hourly congestion of the Yeosu fairway was up to 25.5%, and the congestion level during the busiest time period was 101.9%, indicating that there was room the entire time. In addition, the average hourly congestion level of the Gadeok fairway was up to 36.9% and the congestion level during the busiest time period was 205.2%, significantly exceeding the traffic capacity of the fairway. Distributing traffic from the time when ships are concentrated to other time zones may be a \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Fairway**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **L\({}^{2}\)-Converted Traffic Volume** \\ **(Number of Vessel/h)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Speed** \\ **(Knots)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Traffic Congestion** \\ **(Average)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Traffic Congestion** \\ **(Peak-Time)** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Wando} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.86} & 10 & 1.4\% & 9.1\% \\  & & 12 & 1.2\% & 7.6\% \\  & & 15 & 0.9\% & 6.1\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Yeosu} & \multirow{3}{*}{18.8} & 10 & 25.5\% & 101.9\% \\  & & 12 & 21.2\% & 84.9\% \\  & & 15 & 17.0\% & 67.9\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Masan} & \multirow{3}{*}{4.0} & 10 & 6.5\% & 50.0\% \\  & & 12 & 5.4\% & 41.7\% \\  & & 15 & 4.4\% & 33.4\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Gadeok} & \multirow{3}{*}{22.9} & 10 & 36.9\% & 205.2\% \\  & & 12 & 30.7\% & 171.0\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 15 & 24.6\% & 136.8\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Average Hourly Congestion and Peak-Time Congestion. short-term measure; however, in the long run, fundamental solutions, such as widening the fairway, are required. As shown in the analysis of previous studies, fairways are installed in a sea area where collisions and grounding accidents are highly probable due to a high density of vessel traffic or low-depth areas, as in Resolution A. 572(14) adopted by the IMO [16; 17; 18].