RINE S

Arctic Council MA

HI
Status on Implementation

A RC T I C

PPI G
of the AMSA 2009 Report

N
Recommendations SS
ESSMEN

T
APRIL 2015

ARCTIC COUNCIL
© Fednav Limited CANADIAN CHAIRMANSHIP
2013–2015
 RINE S
MA

HI
A RC T I C

PPI G
N
SS
ESSMEN

T
Arctic Council
Status on Implementation of the
AMSA 2009 Report Recommendations

APRIL 2015

© Mike Beedell/Students on Ice

Guide to Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACRONYM DEFINITION ACRONYM DEFINITION

AECO Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators IMO International Maritime Organization
AIA Aleut International Association IMSO International Maritime Satellite Organization
AIS Automatic Identification System IWC International Whaling Commission
AMAP Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program LRIT Long Range Identification and Tracking
(Arctic Council Working Group) MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention
AMATII Arctic Maritime and Aviation Transportation of Pollution from Ships
Infrastructure Initiative MEPC Marine Environment Protection Committee
AMSA Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment MPA marine protected area
AMTP Arctic Marine Tourism Project MSC Maritime Safety Committee
AmverNet Automated Mutual Assistance Vessel Rescue NGO non-governmental organization
Network
NOx nitrogen oxide
AOOGG Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines
NSR Northern Sea Route
AOR Arctic Ocean Review
PAME Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment
ARHC Arctic Regional Hydrographic Commission (Arctic Council Working Group)
BIMCO Baltic and International Maritime Council PM particulate matter
CAFF Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna RP3 Recommended Practices for Arctic Oil Spill
(Arctic Council Working Group) Prevention
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity SAO Senior Arctic Official
CMTS Committee on the Marine Transportation System SAR search and rescue
DNV Det Norske Veritas SARiNOR Search and Rescue in the High North
EBSA Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Area SBSTTA Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
EPPR Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Technological Advice
Response (Arctic Council Working Group) SDWG Sustainable Development Working Group
ERMA Environmental Response Management Application (Arctic Council Working Group)
GHG greenhouse gas SONS Spill of National Significance
GSIS Global Integrated Shipping Information System SOx sulfur oxide
HFO heavy fuel oil SRS ship reporting system
IALA International Association of Marine Aids to TFOPP Task Force on Oil Pollution Prevention
Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (Arctic Council Task Force)
ICC Inuit Circumpolar Council VOS Voluntary Observing Ship scheme
ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea WMO World Meteorological Organization
IHO International Hydrographic Organization WMU World Maritime University
IICWG International Ice Charting Working Group
 Table of Contents
RINE S
MA 2 Executive Summary

HI
A RC T I C

PPI G
4 Status of Progress on Recommendations

N
4 THEME I — Enhancing Arctic Marine Safety
4 I(A). Linking with International Organizations
5 I(B). IMO Measures for Arctic Shipping
SS
ESSMEN
A

T 6
6
I(C). Uniformity of Arctic Shipping Governance
I(D). Strengthening Passenger Ship Safety in Arctic Waters
7 I(E). Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) Instrument

8 THEME II — Protecting Arctic People and the Environment

8 II(A). Survey of Arctic Indigenous Marine Use
9 II(B). Engagement with Arctic Communities
10 II(C). Areas of Heightened Ecological and Cultural Significance
11 II(D). Specially Designated Arctic Marine Areas
12 II(E). Protection from Invasive Species
13 II(F). Oil Spill Prevention
14 II(G). Addressing Impacts on Marine Mammals
15 II(H). Reducing Air Emissions

16 THEME III — Building the Arctic Marine Infrastructure

16 III(A). Addressing the Infrastructure Deficit
17 III(B). Arctic Marine Traffic System
18 III(C). Circumpolar Environmental Response Capacity
19 III(D). Investing in Hydrographic, Meteorological and Oceanographic Data

© Fednav Limited
2 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

© Arctia Shipping

Executive Summary

T
he 2015 Progress Report on Implementation of the 2009 As with the two previous AMSA Progress Reports, the 2015
Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) Report Progress Report once again uses the original AMSA recommendations
Recommendations (the 2015 Progress Report) is the third as markers against which progress by the greater community of
biennial effort by the Arctic Council’s Working Group on Arctic stakeholders is measured. While primarily focused on joint
the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) to document efforts made by Arctic States acting through various international or
and track progress in implementing the 17 recommendations in the regional fora, the report also highlights examples of individual Arctic
AMSA Report approved by Arctic Council Ministers. State initiatives, as well as certain efforts by Permanent Participants,
Six years after its original publication, the AMSA Report continues industry associations and NGOs operating in the Arctic. Inasmuch as
to resonate as both a comprehensive and an authoritative analysis on the content captured within this report acknowledges success and
the subject of Arctic shipping. Under the leadership of Canada, Finland progress in several areas, the 2015 Progress Report should not been
and the United States, the AMSA Report focused on ships, their uses seen as exhaustive nor should it divert attention away from areas
of the Arctic Ocean, their potential impacts on humans and the Arctic where additional work remains to be done.
marine environment, and their marine infrastructure requirements.
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y 3

Evidence of both the rate of change and corresponding inter­ subject to a range of factors (not least of which include prevailing
national interest in the Arctic Region is reflected in the diversity of weather and sea ice conditions) interest by shipping companies in its
efforts and initiatives noted within this report. In November 2014, potential utility remains. By point of comparison, the Northern Sea
the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Maritime Safety Route (NSR) Administration Office identified 31 complete transits
Committee approved the mandatory safety components of the Polar along the NSR during the 2014 navigation season — a marked decrease
Code, a significant achievement in an ongoing effort to address the when viewed against the record-breaking 2013 navigation season that
range of safety and environmental protection matters for ships saw 71 complete transits.
operating in the Polar Regions. Elsewhere in the IMO, progress is also Multiple reasons can account for this change, though the differ­
being made to prevent the transfer of invasive species through both ence in transit numbers along the NSR helps to underscore the risks
ballast water exchange and biofouling, to mitigate the impact of and unpredictability so regularly associated with shipping in much
underwater noise from ships on marine mammals, and to manage of the Arctic Region. Accordingly, looking beyond the parameters of
black carbon emissions. this Progress Report it is difficult to speculate on how shipping
The past two years have been witness to significant events and activity in the Arctic Region will evolve, as much of it influenced not
changes related to the volume, type and composition of Arctic just by potential accessibility resulting from changing environmental
shipping. During the 2013 summer navigation season the first ever conditions, but also by larger geopolitical and commodity market
eastward transit of a commercial bulk carrier along the Northwest considerations. The evolution of future Arctic Council initiatives and
Passage occurred, followed just one year later by a similar historic projects to further advance the AMSA recommendations is similarly
westward transit by another commercial bulk carrier. While the viability difficult to predict and will no doubt reflect in part these changing
of regular commercial transits through the Northwest Passage remains patterns of shipping.

© Pascale Otis/Students on Ice

 4 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I – E N H A N C I N G A R C T I C M A R I N E S A F E T Y

Status of Progress
on Recommendations
1

THEME I — Enhancing Arctic Marine Safety

I(A). Linking with International Organizations
“That the Arctic states decide to, on a case by case basis, identify areas of common interest and
develop unified positions and approaches with respect to international organizations such as: the
International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the International Maritime Satellite Organization
© Håkon Kjøllmoen

(IMSO) to advance the safety of Arctic marine shipping; and encourage meetings, as appropriate, of
member state national maritime safety organizations to coordinate, harmonize and enhance the
implementation of the Arctic maritime regulatory framework.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(A)

PAME, IALA, ICES At PAME’s invitation, representatives of the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and
Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) and the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) made
presentations at PAME meetings that focused on areas of common interest and opportunities for
collaboration and cooperation. IALA submitted a paper to PAME proposing specific areas for collaboration
and cooperation in fall 2014 that PAME has decided to further explore and pursue as appropriate.

PAME, ARHC PAME and the Arctic Regional Hydrographic Commission (ARHC) continued to focus on areas of
common interest, in particular on surveying and charting in the Arctic Region. At PAME’s invitation,
the ARHC submitted information on Arctic hydrography and nautical charting, made a presentation
on the subject at PAME’s September 2014 meeting, and is working to collect and analyze Arctic
information that relates to safe and efficient marine navigation.

PAME PAME is exploring how it might support the ARHC by facilitating the provision of hydrographic and
bathymetric data.

WMU, IMO, PAME With the IMO and the World Maritime University (WMU), PAME agreed to co-sponsor and support the
development of an international conference on “Safe and Sustainable Shipping in a Changing Arctic
Environment” (ShipArc 2015) scheduled for August 2015.

IMO, Arctic Council The IMO Secretary General gave a presentation on the Polar Code at the March 2014 Senior Arctic
Officials Meeting.

Continued on the next page

1. Neither this Report nor the information it contains constitutes an assessment by any PAME member government of the consistency with international law, including the Law of the Sea, of domestic laws,
regulations or other measures or resolutions identified or referenced herein.
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I – E N H A N C I N G A R C T I C M A R I N E S A F E T Y 5

I(A). Linking with International Organizations (continued from the previous page)

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(A)

Canada Canada is delivering meteorological and navigational warning services for the two MET/NAV areas of
the Arctic Ocean for which it accepted responsibility (MET/NAV areas XVII and XVIII) to promote safe
navigation in Arctic waters. Through this initiative Canada has put in place year-round standardized
and coordinated coverage of these areas and has coordinated with international partners who are
responsible for the three adjacent Arctic MET/NAV areas.
Finland Finland submitted an information paper (MSC 93/INF.12) to the IMO’s Marine Safety Committee to
inform the Committee of the outcome of the Workshop on Safe Ship Operations in the Arctic Ocean,
held at IMO Headquarters on 28 February 2014.

I(B). IMO Measures for Arctic Shipping

“That the Arctic states, in recognition of the unique environmental and navigational conditions in the Arctic, decide to cooperatively support
efforts at the International Maritime Organization to strengthen, harmonize and regularly update international standards for vessels operating in
the Arctic. These efforts include:

• Support the updating and the mandatory application of relevant parts of the Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-covered Waters
(Arctic Guidelines); and,
• Drawing from IMO instruments, in particular the Arctic Guidelines, augment global IMO ship safety and pollution prevention conventions
with specific mandatory requirements or other provisions for ship construction, design, equipment, crewing, training and operations, aimed
at safety and protection.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(B)

PAME PAME continued to monitor IMO’s development of a mandatory code for ships operating in polar
waters (Polar Code) and through its Records of Decision encouraged member governments to intensify
their collaboration with respect to the finalization of the Polar Code. PAME also continued to support
and encourage Arctic States to meet in advance of IMO committee and sub-committee meetings of
relevance to the Polar Code.
PAME (Norway, Russian PAME completed Phase II of a multi-year project to identify risks associated with vessel use and carriage
Federation and USA as co-leads) of heavy fuel oil (HFO) in the Arctic, possible effects on the environment of an HFO spill, and options for
minimizing those risks. Based on the final HFO Phase II Report, PAME considered recommendations put
forward in a consultant’s report for its member governments to consider pursuing at IMO.
PAME (Norway, Finland, At PAME´s invitation, a representative of the IMO Secretariat attended a PAME workshop in Reykjavik in
Russian Federation and USA June 2013 to give a talk and provide guidance on how IMO measures (MARPOL Special Areas and
as co-leads), IMO Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas) could be used to protect the marine environment in the Arctic high seas.
Norway, Russian Federation In 2012, Norway and Russia submitted a joint proposal to IMO for a new mandatory ship reporting
system for the Barents Region (Barents SRS). The Barents SRS was adopted by IMO’s Maritime Safety
Committee at its 91st Session and entered into force in June 2013.
6 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I – E N H A N C I N G A R C T I C M A R I N E S A F E T Y

I(C). Uniformity of Arctic Shipping Governance

“That the Arctic states should explore the possible harmonization of Arctic marine shipping regulatory regimes within their own jurisdiction
and uniform Arctic safety and environmental protection regulatory regimes, consistent with UNCLOS, that could provide a basis for protection
measures in regions of the central Arctic Ocean beyond coastal state jurisdiction for consideration by the IMO.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(C)

PAME PAME initiated the development of follow-up actions for the marine operation and shipping recom-
mendations contained in the AOR Final Report approved at the 2013 Arctic Ministerial Meeting.
PAME (USA, Russia, Canada, PAME member governments developed a draft format and outline for the development of a regional
Finland, Kingdom of Denmark reception facilities plan relevant to the Arctic based on applicable IMO guidelines for consideration by
and Norway) Arctic States.
Arctic Council The Arctic Council Task Force on Oil Pollution Prevention (TFOPP) developed a Framework Plan for
adoption at the 2015 Ministerial Meeting with the objective of strengthening cooperation, including
the exchange of information, among the participants and their competent national authorities.
Arctic States An informal executive level meeting took place in September 2014 to further discuss the concept of
formally establishing an Arctic Coast Guard Forum. A follow-up meeting at the working level, co-led by
Canada and the United States, is scheduled for spring 2015.
Arctic Economic Council The Arctic Economic Council met for the first time in September 2014 and focused, inter alia, on business
activities and economic development related to maritime transportation in the Arctic Region.

I(D). Strengthening Passenger Ship Safety in Arctic Waters

“That the Arctic states should support the application of the IMO’s Enhanced Contingency Planning Guidance for Passenger Ships Operating in
Areas Remote from SAR Facilities, given the extreme challenges associated with rescue operations in the remote and cold Arctic region; and strongly
encourage cruise ship operators to develop, implement and share their own best practices for operating in such conditions, including consideration
of measures such as timing voyages so that other ships are within rescue distance in case of emergency.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(D)

PAME (Canada and USA PAME’s Arctic Marine Tourism Project (AMTP) developed voluntary, non-binding best practice guide-
as co-leads) lines for Arctic marine tourism to advance sustainable economic development and environmental
conservation. The draft best practice guidelines, submitted for adoption by Arctic Ministers in 2015,
were the product of two international workshops and input from a diverse cross-section of Arctic
stakeholders including other Arctic Council Working Groups, industry, indigenous and Arctic commu-
nities, local and regional governments, and academia.
Canada, Norway, United States, Member governments submitted information papers to PAME’s February 2014 meeting on their domestic
Kingdom of Denmark rules and policies pertaining to Arctic cruise tourism as background and context for the AMTP.
Canada A Transport Canada commissioned report entitled “Strategies for Managing Arctic Pleasure Craft Tourism:
A Scoping Study” was released in August 2013.
AECO The Secretary General of the Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO) made a presentation
to PAME on how its members address voyage planning (including possible contingencies) and coordinate
with each other and with shore-based administrations.
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I – E N H A N C I N G A R C T I C M A R I N E S A F E T Y 7

I(E). Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) Instrument

“That the Arctic states decide to support developing and implementing a comprehensive,
multi-national Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) instrument, including aeronautical and maritime SAR,
among the eight Arctic nations and, if appropriate, with other interested parties in recognition of the
© AECO/Polar Quest

remoteness and limited resources in the region.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation I(E)

EPPR Based on updates from the Kingdom of Denmark, EPPR has discussed the lessons learned from the
two search and rescue (SAR) exercises hosted by the Kingdom of Denmark in addition to SAR exercises
hosted by the Russian Federation.

EPPR EPPR followed up on a March 2013 request from the executive SAO meeting in Yellowknife on
coordination and practical implementation of the SAR Agreement and the Agreement on Marine Oil
Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic.

EPPR EPPR finalized the pilot project “Automated Mutual Assistance Vessel Rescue Network” (AmverNet). The
project has its own regional ship reporting system and utilizes Automatic Identification System (AIS) and
Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) data for search and rescue. While each nation has its own
process for managing maritime emergencies in the Arctic, Amver data is available in an emergency and
is an additional tool that can be used when managing search and rescue cases in the Arctic.

Kingdom of Denmark Greenland hosted SAR exercises in 2013 in the Greenland Sea. The exercises consisted of both an open
sea search operation and an in-fjord cruise ship rescue and evacuation operation, building on lessons
learned from the previous year’s SAR exercise.

Norway Norway updated the EPPR I -2013 meeting about the SARiNOR (Search and Rescue in the High North)
project. The project was launched in 2013 and is still ongoing. The idea behind the project is, among
other things, to clarify challenges related to SAR in northern areas/Arctic and identify the needs for
SAR capabilities, make existing resources more effective, develop new concepts for SAR, and identify
possible R&D projects related to SAR.

IICWG International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG) meetings in 2013 and 2014 (Reykjavik and Punta Arenas)
focused attention on emergency response (SAR and environmental response), the corresponding role
played by the world’s ice services, and how best these ice services can be engaged with emergency service
providers.
 8 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T

THEME II — Protecting Arctic People and the Environment

II(A). Survey of Arctic Indigenous Marine Use
“That the Arctic states should consider conducting surveys on Arctic marine use by indigenous
communities where gaps are identified to collect information for establishing up-to-date baseline
© Fednav Limited

data to assess the impacts from Arctic shipping activities.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(A)

SDWG (ICC-Canada, Canada, US, Phase II of the SDWGs “A Circumpolar-Wide Inuit Response to the AMSA” (a deliverable for the 2015
and the Kingdom of Denmark) Arctic Council Ministerial) broadened the consultative process with Inuit communities in carrying out
an expanded survey to assess their current use of the sea and how it compares with records from early
land and marine use studies. The expanded surveys have been extended to cover Greenland, Russia
(Chukotka), the United States (Alaska), as well as broader surveys with Canadian Inuit.

AIA The Aleut International Association (AIA) made a presentation to PAME’s September 2013 meeting on the
“Arctic Marine Subsistence Use Mapping: Tools for Communities” project and subsequently submitted a
paper for PAME’s consideration during PAME’s February 2014 meeting with the same title which was
published in the fall of 2013.

USA The USA’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management funded several research studies, including:

• The Study of Sharing Networks to Assess the Vulnerabilities of Local Communities to Oil and
Gas Development Impacts in Arctic Alaska, 2007–2013
• Social Indicators in Coastal Alaska: Arctic Communities, 2011–2012
• Continuation of Impact Assessment for Cross Island Whaling Activities — Beaufort Sea, 2008–2013
• Subsistence Use and Knowledge of Salmon in Barrow and Nuiqsut, 2009–2013
• Aggregate Effects Research & Environmental Mitigation Monitoring of Oil Operations in the
Vicinity of Nuiqsut, 2009–2013
• Traditional Knowledge Implementation: Accessing Arctic Community Panels of Subject Matter
Experts FY 2015
• Subsistence Mapping of Wainwright, Point Lay, Point Hope, and Atqasuk. FY 2015

© Lee Narraway/Students on Ice

 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T 9

II(B). Engagement with Arctic Communities

“That the Arctic states decide to determine if effective communication mechanisms exist to ensure
© Sesselja Bjarnadóttir

engagement of their Arctic coastal communities and, where there are none, to develop their own
mechanisms to engage and coordinate with the shipping industry, relevant economic activities and
Arctic communities (in particular during the planning phase of a new marine activity) to increase
benefits and help reduce the impacts from shipping.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(B)

PAME, AIA, USA A project proposal entitled “Meaningful Engagement of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in
Marine Activities” was approved during PAME’s February 2015 meeting. The project will prepare a narra-
tive report with a compilation of information on existing mechanisms, processes, recommendations, and
guidelines for engagement of indigenous peoples and local communities in marine activities that have
been developed by the Arctic Council, States, international bodies, communities, industry and other
stakeholders and is expected to include legal mandates, declarations, guidelines, recommendations, best
practices and lessons learned in the Arctic. The project is scheduled to be finalized in 2016.

EPPR In 2014, EPPR approved a project proposal on “Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response in
small communities.” A scoping workshop is planned for spring 2015 and the output from the workshop
will be used to elaborate the details of the project.

Canada Canada submitted a paper to PAME’s February 2014 meeting on industry engagement with Arctic
communities in which the experiences of Fednav Ltd. and Petro-Nav were highlighted.

Canada The Canadian Ice Service is engaged in a three year pilot project examining the requirements for
enhanced community based ice information for the purposes of reducing the incidence of SAR cases
as well as assisting community members with their decision making regarding their work, life and
cultural events on and around the fast ice surrounding their community.
10 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T

II(C). Areas of Heightened Ecological and Cultural Significance

“That the Arctic states should identify areas of heightened ecological and cultural significance in light of changing climate conditions and
increasing multiple marine use and, where appropriate, should encourage implementation of measures to protect these areas from the impacts
of Arctic marine shipping, in coordination with all stakeholders and consistent with international law.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(C)

PAME PAME received and acknowledged the valuable contributions of the information contained in the report
prepared by AMAP, CAFF, and SDWG titled “Identification of Arctic marine areas of heightened ecological and
cultural significance: Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) IIc.” The report is available on AMAP’s website.

CBD in collaboration In March 2014, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat held a workshop in Helsinki, Finland
with Finland and CAFF in collaboration with the Arctic Council CAFF working group that considered Ecologically or Biologically
Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) in the Arctic Region. The final workshop report concluded with a recom-
mendation to submit 11 EBSA candidates to the 18th meeting of the CBD’s Subsidiary Body on Scientific,
Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA). Two of these are located in the areas beyond national jurisdic-
tion (the ‘marginal ice zone and the seasonal ice-cover over the deep Arctic Ocean’ and the ‘multi-year ice of
the Central Arctic Ocean’) and nine in the territorial waters of the Russian Federation.

SDWG (ICC-Canada, Phase I of ICC-Canada’s “A Circumpolar-Wide Inuit Response to AMSA” project (a deliverable for the 2015
Canada, US, and the Arctic Council Ministerial) brought together a variety of stakeholders including representatives of Inuit
Kingdom of Denmark) communities from across the Arctic to a March 2013 workshop. At this workshop AMSA findings and recom-
mendations were communicated to Inuit participants and valuable engagement and guidance information
was documented on how best to respond to the AMSA recommendations from a community perspective.

© Lee Narraway/
Students on ice
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T 11

II(D). Specially Designated Arctic Marine Areas

“That the Arctic states should, taking into account the special characteristics of the Arctic marine
environment, explore the need for internationally designated areas for the purpose of environmental
© AECO/Hurtigruten

protection in regions of the Arctic Ocean.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(D)

PAME Based on the final AMSA II(D) report commissioned by PAME from Det Norske Veritas (DNV) on options
for international protection for the high seas of the Central Arctic Ocean, PAME member governments
decided to take a number of interim steps before pursuing any actions relevant to IMO. These included
developing a paper that explored ideas for making mariners aware of the ecological significance of
and hazards to navigation posed by the globally unique drifting multi-year ice pack, such as NAVAREA
warnings. At PAME’s February 2015 meeting an invitation was made to AMAP and CAFF to denote
areas within the high seas of the Central Arctic ocean that are particularly vulnerable to international
shipping activities, taking into account the AMSA II(c) Report and the CBD’s identification of two EBSAs
within the area. PAME also continues to seek information on ship traffic within the high seas of the
Central Arctic Ocean, and welcomed Norway’s offer to provide satellite AIS data for this area from
1 January 2015.

PAME (Norway, Finland, At PAME’s request, DNV submitted a report on specially designated Arctic high seas marine areas to
Russian Federation and USA PAME’s February 2014 meeting. The report explores the need for protection of the high seas area and
as co-leads) aided by DNV describes the traffic volume and vulnerability of the area. The report also reviews potentially available
IMO measures suited to protect the vulnerable areas. Based on the report, PAME decided to explore
whether, and if so how, international protection for the high seas areas of the Central Arctic Ocean
might be pursued by Arctic States at IMO.

PAME The role of the pan-Arctic MPA network, composed of individual Arctic State MPA networks, is to
protect and restore marine biodiversity, ecosystem function and special natural features, and
preserve cultural heritage resources. This non-binding Framework sets out a common vision for
international cooperation in MPA network establishment and management based on international
best practices and previous Arctic Council initiatives. It aims to support the efforts of Arctic States to
develop their MPA networks and chart a course for future collaborative planning, management and
actions for the conservation and protection of the Arctic marine environment. Following additional
intercessional revisions to the Framework, the MPA Network Expert Group held a one-day workshop
in Whitehorse, Canada in tandem with PAME’s September 2014 meeting. The workshop was attended
by five Arctic States and focused primarily on describing the characteristics of the Pan-Arctic
MPA Framework, including approaches particularly relevant in the Arctic, and short-term and
longer-term recommended actions.

Oceana Oceana presented a paper to PAME’s February 2013 meeting on mapping ecologically important sea
areas in the Arctic. PAME adopted a record of decision inviting Oceana to submit its final paper to PAME
when published.
 12 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T

II(E). Protection from Invasive Species

“That the Arctic states should consider ratification of the IMO International Convention for the
© Drummond Fraser

Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments, as soon as practical. Arctic states
should also assess the risk of introducing invasive species through ballast water and other means so
that adequate prevention measures can be implemented in waters under their jurisdiction.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(E)

Arctic States As of 12 February 2015, 44 States representing 32.86 % of the world tonnage have ratified the
International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments. Canada,
Sweden, Norway, the Russian Federation, and the Kingdom of Denmark are parties to the Convention.
Although it has not ratified the Convention, the USA has implemented domestic regulations for waters
subject to its national jurisdiction that are consistent with the standards set forth therein.

USA The USA is undertaking the following steps with respect to the Implementation Plan for its National
Strategy for the Arctic Region (issued January 2014). Objective: Develop, implement, and maintain an
international invasive species prevention and management plan. Next steps in this process include:

• Identify and assess invasive species pathways, risks, and ecosystem and economic impacts to
the Arctic Region by the end of 2015;
• Establish baseline conditions, prepare an early detection and rapid response plan to reduce
the threat of invasive species, and gather information regarding effective management
options by the end of 2015;
• Develop a comprehensive invasive species prevention, control, and management plan in
accordance with existing requirements by the end of 2017;
• Initiate implementation of invasive species prevention and management plans through
extensive consultation with stakeholders by the end of 2019;
• Explore becoming party to the International Convention for the Control and Management
of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (2004) in consideration of existing domestic regulations
and standards by the end of 2014.

IMO At the 65th meeting of IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee (13 –17 May 2013), Member
States approved the Guidance for evaluating the 2011 Guidelines for the Control and Management of
Ships’ Biofouling to minimize the transfer of invasive aquatic species (Resolution MEPC.207(62)). In
June 2013 Member States were invited to bring the circular to the attention of all parties concerned.

IMO’s Strategic Plan for the Organization (2012 to 2017) contains 13 key strategic directions. Thematic
priorities established by various IMO committees for the 2014-2015 biennium include “Strengthening
national and regional capacity and fostering regional cooperation for the ratification and effective
implementation… of the BWM Convention and of the ships’ biofouling guidelines”.
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T 13

II(F). Oil Spill Prevention

“That the Arctic states decide to enhance the mutual cooperation in the field of oil spill prevention
and, in collaboration with industry, support research and technology transfer to prevent release of oil
into Arctic waters, since prevention of oil spills is the highest priority in the Arctic for environmental
© Fednav Limited

protection.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(F)

PAME PAME monitored and supported efforts of the Arctic Council Task Force on Arctic Marine Oil Pollution
Prevention (TFOPP) regarding shipping related aspects.

PAME PAME completed the report AOOGG: Systems Safety Management and Safety Culture which deals with
preventing offshore oil and gas disaters and contains managment systems recommendations for the
full scope of operations including vessels operated by or for the industry.

EPPR EPPR presented in the RP3 Summary Report recommendations and opportunities for future cooperation.

© Håkon Kjøllmoen
14 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T

II(G). Addressing Impacts on Marine Mammals

“That the Arctic states decide to engage with relevant international organizations to further assess the effects on marine mammals due to ship noise,
disturbance and strikes in Arctic waters; and consider, where needed, to work with the IMO in developing and implementing mitigation strategies.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(G)

USA The USA submitted a paper and made a presentation at PAME’s September 2013 meeting on CetSound
and CetMap which are web-accessible tools for comparing the location of underwater sound fields to
the known distributions of whales to help in evaluating the impacts of human-induced noise on
cetacean species. As follow-up, PAME member governments submitted to the USA points of contact for
the exchange of information related to cetacean density and distribution information and the impact of
underwater noise on marine animals.

IMO In 2014, the IMO adopted voluntary Guidelines for the Reduction of Underwater Noise from Commercial
Shipping to Address Adverse Impacts on Marine Life. The guidelines recognize that shipping noise can
have short-term and long-term impacts on marine life; call for measurement of shipping noise according
to objective ISO standards; identify computational models for determining effective quieting measures;
provide guidance for designing quieter ships and for reducing noise from existing ships, especially from
propeller cavitation; and advise owners and operators on how to minimize noise through ship operations
and maintenance, such as by polishing ship propellers to remove fouling and surface roughness.

IWC In March, 2014, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) held a “Workshop on Impacts of Increased
Marine Activities on Cetaceans in the Arctic”. This workshop focused on the increasing shipping and oil
and gas activities. The workshop recommendations were endorsed by the Commission at its September
2014 meeting. Priority recommendations outlined in the workshop report include:

• Having a standing IWC agenda item on the Arctic;

• Increased co-operation with the Arctic Council by the Secretariat, starting in May 2015;
• Increased co-operation with the IMO with respect to mitigation measures for threats to cetaceans
and increased awareness of the issue of ship strikes and this importance of the IWC global ship
strikes database;
• Increased co-operation with stakeholders; and
• Requesting the Scientific Committee to undertake a number of actions related to Arctic research.

Building upon the CetSound work mentioned above, the USA and European States held a workshop in
April 2014 in Leiden, the Netherlands entitled “Predicting sound fields — Global soundscape modeling to
inform management of cetaceans and anthropogenic noise.” This workshop was sponsored in part by the
IWC. Workshop participants discussed regional and ocean-basin scale underwater sound field mapping
techniques to provide support for decision makers seeking to characterize, monitor, and manage the
potential impacts of chronic or cumulative anthropogenic noise on marine animals. The workshop
produced a meeting report that includes recommendations directed to sponsoring international
organizations and/or their science advisory groups to support the development and implementation of
soundscape modeling and mapping tools needed to make informed management decisions. The report
(SC/65b/Rep03) was presented to the 2014 meeting of the IWC’s Scientific Committee.
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I – P R OT E C T I N G A R C T I C P E O P L E A N D T H E E N V I R O N M E N T 15

II(H). Reducing Air Emissions

“That the Arctic states decide to support the development of improved practices and innovative
© AECO/Tall Ship Company

technologies for ships in port and at sea to help reduce current and future emissions of greenhouse
gases (GHGs), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Oxides (SOx) and Particulate Matter (PM), taking into
account the relevant IMO regulations.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation II(H)

PAME PAME monitored and supported efforts by the Arctic Council Task Force on Black Carbon and Methane
and encouraged continued research at IMO on black carbon emissions, with respect to a technical
definition of black carbon and appropriate methods and control measures. PAME also initiated the
development of a bibliography of publications on ship air emissions (including black carbon) in the Arctic.

Canada Canada made a presentation to PAME’s September 2014 meeting on current work to determine air
pollution impacts from shipping in the Canadian Arctic. Preliminary results were shown and Canada
will provide an update PAME on final results once available.

Norway Norway submitted regular updates to PAME on IMO’s work with respect to black carbon.

© Martin Lipman/Students on Ice

 16 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I I – B U I L D I N G T H E A R C T I C M A R I N E I N F R A S T R U C T U R E

THEME III — Building the Arctic Marine Infrastructure

III(A). Addressing the Infrastructure Deficit
“That the Arctic states should recognize that improvements in Arctic marine infrastructure are needed
to enhance safety and environmental protection in support of sustainable development. Examples of
© Sue Novotny/WWF

infrastructure where critical improvements are needed include: ice navigation training; navigational
charts; communications systems; port services, including reception facilities for ship-generated waste;
accurate and timely ice information (ice centers); places of refuge; and icebreakers to assist in response.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation III(A)

PAME PAME invited member governments to identify and submit information to help fill gaps and suggest
additional categories of information that may warrant inclusion in the Arctic Maritime and Aviation
Transportation Infrastructure Initiative (AMATII) database.

PAME, ARHC See entry under Recommendation I(A).

USA, Canada, Iceland, These five Arctic States submitted an information paper (NCSR 1/27/3, 25 April 2014) to the 1st session of
Norway, Sweden the IMO’s Sub-Committee on Navigation, Communications and Search and Rescue providing information
on the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Voluntary Observing Ship (VOS) Scheme in the Arctic
and encouraging increased participation in the VOS Scheme by all flag States.

USA USA submitted a paper to PAME’s September 2013 meeting on IMO’s Global Integrated Shipping
Information System (GISIS) database and the AMATII database, requesting the PAME Secretariat to bring
it to the attention of SDWG for appropriate action.

USA Under the U.S. National Strategy for the Arctic Region Implementation Plan, the U.S. Committee on the
Marine Transportation System (CMTS) was tasked with “Prepar[ing] for Increased Activity in the Marine
Domain.” CMTS efforts consist of three phases: 1) Complete a 10-year projection of maritime activity
in the Arctic Region by the end of 2014; 2) Deliver a 10-year prioritization framework to coordinate the
phased development of Federal infrastructure identified through a government validated needs
assessment by the end of 2015; 3) Develop recommendations for pursuing Federal public-private
partnerships in support of the needs assessment and identified prioritized activities by the end of 2015.
Phase I was completed in January 2015 and the report is available online.

© Clive Tesar/WWF
 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 20 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I I – B U I L D I N G T H E A R C T I C M A R I N E I N F R A S T R U C T U R E 17

III(B). Arctic Marine Traffic System

© Captain Patrick R.M. Toomey

“That the Arctic states should support continued development of a comprehensive Arctic marine traffic
awareness system to improve monitoring and tracking of marine activity, to enhance data sharing in near
real-time, and to augment vessel management service in order to reduce the risk of incidents, facilitate
response and provide awareness of potential user conflict. The Arctic states should encourage shipping
companies to cooperate in the improvement and development of national monitoring systems.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation III(B)

Canada, Norway Canada and Norway submitted papers to PAME’s February 2014 meeting on the effectiveness of their
routing and reporting measures in the Arctic Region.

Norway, Russian Federation Canada and Norway submitted information on their present and planned satellite (AIS, radar and optical)
and shore-based AIS capabilities to PAME’s February 2014 meeting.

Norway The first Norwegian AIS-satellite was launched in 2010 and the second (AISSat-2) was launched in
July 2014. The assumed lifetime of the first satellite was two to three years. After operating for four
years it is still going strong, and the expected lifetime is now up to six years. The satellites provide the
Norwegian Coastal Administration with valuable information on shipping traffic in polar areas and
also provide information to the Norwegian Coast Guard and the Joint Rescue Coordination Centres.

USA USA submitted a detailed information paper to PAME’s September 2013 meeting identifying and
graphically depicting all IMO-approved routing and reporting systems in the Arctic Region.

USA In July 2013, the U.S. Committee on the Marine Transportation System submitted a report to the President
entitled U.S. Arctic Marine Transportation System: Overview and Priorities for Action calling for near- and
long-term action to improve the U.S. Arctic marine transportation system to address anticipated increases
in vessel traffic in the U.S. Arctic.

BIMCO The Baltic and International Maritime Council (BIMCO) made a presentation to PAME’s February 2013
meeting on BIMCO’s shipping interests and activities as they relate to the Arctic and the AMSA Report.

Taksha University Prof. Guy George Thomas (Taksha University) made a presentation on “Collaboration in Space for Inter-
national Global Maritime Awareness: Stepping Stones to Arctic Surveillance” at PAME’s September
2013 meeting.
 18 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 2 0 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I I – B U I L D I N G T H E A R C T I C M A R I N E I N F R A S T R U C T U R E

III(C). Circumpolar Environmental Response Capacity

“That the Arctic states decide to continue to develop circumpolar environmental pollution response
© Peter Ewins/WWF-Canada

capabilities that are critical to protecting the unique Arctic ecosystem. This can be accomplished, for
example, through circumpolar cooperation and agreement(s), as well as regional bilateral capacity
agreements.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation III(C)

EPPR EPPR has been tasked to follow up and update the Operational Guidelines attached to the Agreement
on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response. At every EPPR meeting the working group will
undertake an annual update of the Operational Guidelines in order to maintain administrative
accuracy. This update will be a standing item on every EPPR I agenda. The procedures for updating
were approved by the SAO’s at their 2013 fall meeting.

EPPR EPPR has finalized Phase I of the Arctic Region Oil Spill Response Resource and Logistics Guide (Arctic
ERMA) project. Arctic ERMA is a mapping tool to aid emergency response. The final report on Phase I and
Phase II will be a deliverable to the Ministerial meeting.

EPPR has, based on a request from the IMO, been involved in the development of the IMO in-situ
burning guidelines and the chapter about Polar response.

EPPR The report “Arctic Environmental Hazards and National Programs” was finalized in 2014. The purpose
of this document is to provide broad information on activities in the Arctic that pose a risk to the
Arctic environment.

EPPR EPPR was asked by IMO to develop a Guide on Oil Spill response in ice and snow conditions. A final draft
of the Guide was submitted to IMO in January 2014. An Arctic version of the Guide will be a delivery from
EPPR to the 2015 Ministerial meeting.

EPPR EPPR approved at the EPPR II 2014 meeting the “Circumpolar Oil Spill Response Gap Analysis” project. The
background for a gap analysis is the need for a better overview of oil spill response limitations and
effectiveness under Arctic conditions in order to develop optimized prevention and response strategies in
the Arctic Region. The project might be a first phase for a full circumpolar Environmental Risk Assessment.

EPPR EPPR approved at the EPPR II 2014 meeting the “Development of a Database of Arctic Response Assets”
project. This will be a searchable oil spill response database with detailed information on Arctic specific
equipment, vessels, dispersant stockpiles and application platforms, in situ burn boom, well contain-
ment and cap and flow devices, and other resources owned by or regionally available to all member
states of the Arctic Council.

Norway, Russian Federation The Joint Plan attached to the agreement on Oil Spill response in the Barents Sea was re-signed in
December 2014. The two countries have conducted combined SAR and Oil spill response exercises
annually. In addition, Norway and Russia have concluded exercises on shoreline response, as well as
other exercises to improve the oil spill preparedness and response in the Barents Sea.

Continued on the next page

 S TAT U S O N I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F T H E A M S A 20 0 9 R E P O R T R E CO M M E N D AT I O N S | T H E M E I I I – B U I L D I N G T H E A R C T I C M A R I N E I N F R A S T R U C T U R E 19

III(C). Circumpolar Environmental Response Capacity (continued from the previous page)

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation III(C)

USA, Canada Canada and the USA continued their cooperation to implement the Canada-U.S. Joint Contingency
Plan for oil spills in the Beaufort Sea, an ongoing program of joint exercises.

USA, Russian Federation The Russian Federation and the USA continued their coordination, under the Russia-US Joint Contingency
Plan, to enhance oil pollution preparedness and response in light of increasing vessel traffic and resource
extraction, including conducting either a joint response seminar or exercise by the end of 2015.

Canada in cooperation The Canadian Coast Guard hosted the first international exercise under the new Agreement on
with EPPR Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic during May and June 2014.
The virtual exercise tested components of the Agreement’s Operational Guidelines including practice
with respect to: notifying each other of an oil spill; requesting assistance; and, discussing the movement
and removal of resources across borders.

Norway An Environmental Risk Assessment and an Emergency Response Analysis was conducted for Svalbard
and Jan Mayen. The results from these analyses will be used to improve the preparedness for oil spill
response in the area.

USA For the U.S. National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan, the Alaska Regional Response Team developed
an Arctic Logistics Concept of Operations (CONOP) Overview of Project. The purpose of the project
was to develop a concept of logistics for a Spill of National Significance (SONS) in the Arctic that considers
the limited capabilities of the region, the challenges of time and distance, industry needs and Tribal
considerations that supports the National Incident Commander and Federal On-scene Coordinator in
ensuring a coordinated and effective response. This logistics framework should identify federal govern-
ment requirements, sources of supply, interagency resource ordering processes, deployment and
demobilization strategies.

III(D). Investing in Hydrographic, Meteorological and Oceanographic Data

© Martin Lipman/Students on Ice

“That the Arctic states should significantly improve, where appropriate, the level of and access to
data and information in support of safe navigation and voyage planning in Arctic waters. This would
entail increased efforts for: hydrographic surveys to bring Arctic navigation charts up to a level acceptable
to support current and future safe navigation; and systems to support real-time acquisition, analysis
and transfer of meteorological, oceanographic, sea ice and iceberg information.”

Lead State and Partners Status of Recommendation III(D)

PAME, ARHC, IHO See entry under Recommendation I(A).
 RINE S
MA

HI
A RC T I C

PPI G
N
SS
ESSMEN
A

© Fednav Limited