USCG Maritime Commons attended the 6th Symposium on the Impacts of an Ice-Diminishing Arctic on Naval and Maritime Operations. Capt. John Mauger, Polar Code expert, provided background and updates on IMO’s Polar Code.
Highlights
Polar Code boundary
The U.S. has a definition for the Arctic in 15 USC 4111 of the U.S. law. However, the Polar Code boundary follows its own specific definition, which is closely related to the maximum historical extent of ice coverage. The Polar Code boundary is the 60 degree latitude parallel across the Bering Sea to where it intersects with the western slope of Alaska and then continues northward. Everything above this boundary ‘line’ is considered within the applicability of the Code. Everything below, which includes the whole Aleutian Chain, is outside the applicability for the Polar Code. Locations like Prince William Sound and Cook Inlet are also outside of the applicability for the Polar Code. Ships that sail into Anchorage or Valdez may encounter ice, harsh weather and other risk factors but they are not subject to the Polar Code. The Antarctic boundary is at 60 degrees south latitude.
Standards for ice strengthening
People who have been working in the Arctic understand that it is an incredibly diverse region; as such it’s impossible to develop a one-size-fits-all solution for ship design and construction. With this in mind, the Polar Code was developed as a goal-based code; the standards for ice strengthening and safe design differ depending on the risks associated with the activities.
With respect to ice-strengthening, ships are divided into three broad categories in terms of what types of requirements, categories A, B and C. They are categorized in terms of what ice strengthening requirements would be placed on each ship. For example, category C ships are non-ice strengthened. Category C ships are normal SOLAS ships, but under the Polar Code these ships are limited to operating in minimal ice conditions, commensurate with their design. Category B and A ships are ice-strengthened and are designed to operate in more severe ice-conditions.
However, these design limitations necessitate additional planning and operating guidance for the crew. Part of the work that continues is to develop further risk-based guidance to ship masters to allow them to assess the condition in those geographic areas and plan accordingly.
Polar Operations Manual
One of the key elements of the Polar Code is the requirement for a Polar Operations Manual. The purpose of this manual is to outline: the design standards that the ship was built to, the operational assumptions that go into those design standards, and the operational limitations that will be put on the certificate. The Polar Water Operations Manual also gives operating guidance to the Master, crew and pilots on board the vessel.
Life saving and safety equipment
Given the risks associated with operation in the polar regions, the Code also includes measures to protect vital safety equipment and ensure increased ability to respond to emergencies. These include a number of detailed technical requirements for the design, testing and installation of equipment to protect against low temperatures, ice accretions and other factors associated with extreme temperatures. Further, the standards for lifesaving specify additional requirements to ensure escape routes are free of ice, navigable and ensure that there is additional equipment on board to allow sufficient time to evacuate and provide sufficient time for rescue resources to respond.
Navigation and Communication challenges in polar waters
Charting is limited in polar waters. The Polar Code requires additional navigation equipment so the ships can ensure that they know where the ice is and that they have additional sensors to be able to see underwater either for ice or for uncharted mounts. Additionally, as the ships travel into higher latitudes, there are additional technical requirements for communications equipment to ensure operability.
Environmental provisions
It’s important to remember that the requirements in the Polar Code are in addition to the existing MARPOL requirements. MARPOL already has special area requirements for operators in the Antarctic; the Polar Code didn’t do away with those. Rather, in some cases it built on top of the existing special area requirements; in other cases it left them unchanged. MARPOL is divided into six different annexes covering different pollution discharge streams. The work in the Polar Code expanded on Annexes I, II, IV and V.
The Polar Code includes limitations on operational discharges, such zero discharge of oil and oily mixtures, and noxious liquid substances. With regard to the discharge of sewage and garbage, for the limited cases where discharge is currently allowed, added restrictions were put in place to increase the discharge distance from ice. The environmental requirements also include additional design and construction restrictions such as added tank protection and increased resistance to damage to reduce the chance for spilling oil or noxious liquid substances
Implementation of the IMO Polar Code
Because the Polar Code is built on top of the existing IMO Conventions, the Coast Guard will be able to leverage existing compliance and enforcement capabilities to implement the Polar Code.
Casualties in the Arctic
The Coast Guard has requirements for vessels to report casualties. Depending on the severity of the casualty, the Coast Guard will take various actions ranging from data collection to on-scene investigation and enforcement.
From 2011 to 2013, there were 25 vessel casualties reported to the Coast Guard for operations north of 60 degrees latitude. If we look at the type of vessels, with the exception of one, all of the incidents occurred in June to November timeframe. This is when U.S. vessels operate in this area. If we look at the type of vessels that are impacted, they are predominantly uninspected commercial fishing vessels and uninspected towing vessels. If we look at the types of casualties, they are mechanical, equipment and material failures; only one of the casualties was the result of impact with ice. The type of casualties we are seeing and the type of vessels involved in those casualties aren’t covered by the safety provisions of the Polar Code.
However, USCG is addressing these casualties through additional requirements for some uninspected commercial fishing vessels and through the towing vessel regulations. USCG has a large regulatory effort underway to inspect and certificate towing vessels; when these regulations are finalized they will likely apply irrespective of where the vessel operates and should reduce the types of casualties that have been reported from these vessels in the Arctic.
Source: USCG Blog
In the outbreak, I was open with you propecia before and after has changed my life. It has become much more fun, and now I have to run. Just as it is improbable to sit.
