/. Design Data (U.S. Coast Guard, 1963). (Conservative design because of remoteness 

 from shore.) 



(1) Operational Tenure. 75 years. 



(2) Maximum Design Storm Tide. 14.0 feet above MLW. 



(3) Design Wave. Maximum height 52 feet. 



(4) Depth at Structure. 54 feet below MLW. 



(5) Design Windspeed. 125 miles per hour. 



(6) Instrumentation. Structure originally provided with instrumentation for obtain- 

 ing meteorological and oceanographic data and also a device for oceanographic sampUng of 

 waves, water levels, salinity, and temperature (sampling device no longer operable). It is 

 reported that the tower is to be reinstrumented for obtaining sea temperature, current 

 direction and velocity, sand bottom movement, and wave measurements thus providing a 

 good source of environmental reference data. 



g. Structural Performance (Rouzie, 1967— 71). 



(1) Effectiveness of Structure. Excellent. Structure is performing satisfactorily. 

 Design conditions have not been experienced. The davits and Ufeboat have been removed. A 

 general purpose hoist for supphes and personnel has been added. 



(2) Integrity of Structure. Good. Primary components of the tower are in excellent 

 structural condition. Anticipated cleaning and painting has been performed. Glass of the 

 lantern tower (elevation 122 feet) was broken by a waterspout and repaired. Ultrasonic weld 

 inspection and general inspection of the structure above and below water (June 1970) 

 confirmed competency of the structure but revealed continued scouring around the tower 

 legs, averaging 3 feet in depth (Rouzie, 1967—71). Cathodic protection sacrificial anodes 

 were replaced in 1970. 



h. Effect of Structure on Environment. 



(1) Physical (Rouzie, 1967—71). The offshore distance of the tower precludes any 

 effect on the shoreUne. Local scouring of the sea bottom at the base of the structure is 

 monitored by measurements taken during periodic underwater inspections. Measurements in 

 1970 indicated a maximimi scour of 11 feet at the legs. A year later, with no remedial 

 action taken, this had decreased to a maximum of 5 feet. Graded riprap or concrete scour 

 protection, originally recommended but not installed, is being considered as a possible 

 solution to the problem. Structure psychologically beneficial to the small-craft operator. 



(2) Biota. No recorded data. Several underwater inspections have reported heavy 

 marine growth on the structure and that fish are attracted to the structure (Fig. 48). 

 Occupants report birds are also attracted. 



(3) Aesthetics. Light station is not visible from shore, thus the offshore view is not 

 aesthetically affected. No known objections from occupants of passing boats. 



88 



