Page 92 - Collision Avoidance Rules Guide

A government may also recommend the use of traffic separation
schemes in international waters, without having submitted such
schemes to IMO for adoption. Rule 10 will not apply to such schemes
but it may be considered good seamanship to comply with the
recommendations relating to their use in accordance with Rule 2(a).
Off the coast of Japan several traffic separation schemes have been
recommended for use by the Japanese Captains’ Association since
1970, but have not been adopted by IMO. In 1973 a collision occurred
in a traffic lane of one of these schemes between the American
Aquarius and the Atlantic Hope. It was held in the United States
Court of Appeals that the traffic separation scheme had not attained
the status of a custom and that the action of the American Aquarius
in proceeding in the wrong direction in the traffic lane could not be
fairly characterised as a failure to conform with good seamanship.

Vessels using a trafic separation scheme
Paragraph (b) applies to vessels using a traffic separation scheme and
paragraph (h) applies to vessels not using a traffic separation scheme.
A vessel is using a scheme, in the context of Rule 10, when she is
navigating within the outer limits of the scheme and is not crossing
the lanes nor engaged in fishing within a separation zone. A vessel
using an inshore traffic zone is not using the scheme.
Any vessel using a traffic separation scheme, including a sailing ves-
sel, would normally be required to proceed in the appropriate traffic
lane in the general direction of traac flow. However, it is clearly nec-
essary to permit essential activities, such as hydrographic surveying, to
take place within the area covered by a traffic separation scheme.
Among the amendments to the Rules, adopted by the NO General
Assembly in 1981, are two additional paragraphs to Rule 10 which pro-
vide for this need. A vessel which is engaged in an operation for the
maintenance of safety of navigation, or in the laying, servicing or pick-
ing up of a submarine cable, within a traffic separation scheme is
exempted, by paragraphs (IC) and (l), from complying with Rule IO to the
extent necessary to cany out such work, if she is restricted in her ability
to manaxme. Such a vessel is, therefore, not prohibited from proceed-
ing against the general direction of flow within a traffic lane if this
becomes necessary to carry out the operation.
There is no exemption from complying with Rule 10 for a vessel
engaged in fishing. Although fishing is not prohibited within a traffic

73