INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION E IMO MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION COMMITTEE 58th session Agenda item 8 MEPC 58/8 31 July 2008 Original: ENGLISH IDENTIFICATION AND PROTECTION OF SPECIAL AREAS AND PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE SEA AREAS Executive summary: Antarctic Shipping Submitted by FOEI, Greenpeace International, IFAW and WWF 1 Strategic direction: 7 High-level action: 7.1.2, 7.2.2 Planned output: Action to be taken: Paragraph 19 Related documents: Introduction SUMMARY This document proposes a joint IMO/ATCM Working Group to consider and collaborate on solutions to shipping threats in the Antarctic Treaty New or amended mandatory and/or non-mandatory IMO instruments MEPC 57/INF.19; MEPC 57/21 and MSC/Circ.1056 MEPC/Circ.399 1 The Antarctic area south of 60 o S latitude is recognized as sensitive and vulnerable to the impacts of pollution and has been designated as a under Annexes I, II and V. At MEPC 57, FOEI presented MEPC 57/INF.19 on Antarctic vessel issues, in particular regarding concerns about the increased number and types of operating in the Antarctic area, the absence of agreed international ice-strengthening standards, and the number of recent incidents. Document MEPC 57/21 invited submission of proposals to future meetings of the Committee better to protect the Antarctic area. This document responds to the invitation and follows up on document MEPC 57/INF.19 by proposing a joint Working Group of appropriate national representatives from the IMO and the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) to be formed to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the potential impacts to the area from, the presence or absence of a measure to address those impacts, whether a measure exists and has not been ratified or effectively implemented, and whether further action is needed. 1 This document was prepared for the IMO s MEPC by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC), an umbrella NGO with expert observer status at Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings and meetings of the Commission for the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, in collaboration with ASOC members FOEI, Greenpeace, IFAW and WWF. For reasons of economy, this document is printed in a limited number. Delegates are kindly asked to bring their copies to meetings and not to request additional copies.
MEPC 58/8-2 - Background Antarctic marine environment 2 The sensitivity and vulnerability of the Antarctic area has been well established and in recognition of certain potential adverse impacts from shipping the IMO designated the Antarctic south of 60 o S as a under Annexes I, II and V. 3 The Antarctic area is unique in having no internationally agreed coastal state jurisdiction. The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) functions on the basis of shared responsibility for the. Operationally, enforcement of shipping regulations is primarily dependent on flag States. The forty-seven Antarctic Treaty Parties (ATPs) have joint responsibility for protection of the Antarctic marine and terrestrial environments; however, reaching consensus issues make the development and application of appropriate measures complex and slow. Antarctic shipping and potential concerns 4 In addition to the risks to human safety and of oil spills associated with shipping in remote and frequently hazardous waters, operational threats to the environment and wildlife of the Antarctic area include legal and illegal of oils, chemicals, treated and untreated sewage and grey water, garbage, and other substances; leaks from refuelling operations; introduction of alien species through ballast water and on ships hulls; damage caused by leaching from anti-fouling systems; air emissions; underwater noise; and ship strikes. 5 The range of vessel types operating in the region is increasing and a number of international shipping regulations are not comprehensive regarding the types of to which they apply. For example, the for ships operating in ice-covered waters, currently restricted to the, exclude fishing, pleasure yachts, wooden ships of primitive build, cargo ships of less than 500 gross tonnage, and naval. Further, the are non-mandatory and very general in nature. 6 The number and size of operating in the Antarctic Treaty has increased significantly in the past decade, placing greater pressure on the environment. There are no agreed international ice-classification standards for Antarctic. Some are not well equipped for the conditions; many have limited ability to deal with wastes generated on board. Increasingly, concern is being expressed about the potential for a major disaster in the wake of the sinking of the M/V Explorer, and about the impacts of operational activities such as sewage. 7 Annex 1 presents a preliminary and only partial assessment of existing shipping regulations in relation to the variety of which operate in the Antarctic Treaty. Annex 2 shows the current status of ratification of a range of IMO regulations of particular relevance to shipping in the Antarctic Treaty by Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties. 8 While ATPs have a responsibility to ensure the safety of all visitors to the region and the expertise to determine required levels of protection and management in the sensitive environment, action to improve shipping regulation in the area under the framework of the ATS will never be completely sufficient since many operating in the region are registered by non-parties. Further, there are numerous gaps in ATS instruments covering even flagged to Parties.
- 3 - MEPC 58/8 Action being taken 9 MEPC s fifty-seventh session agreed a new work item for the BLG Sub-Committee on the use and carriage of heavy grade fuel oil in the Antarctic area, which will be considered at BLG s twelfth session in 2009, with the aim of completing work by 2010. 10 Following the fifty-first session of the DE Sub-Committee, a Correspondence Group has been established to update and extend the for ships operating in ice-covered waters (MSC/Circ.1056 MEPC/Circ.399) to cover the Antarctic. The Correspondence Group will report to the fifty-second session of DE Sub-Committee in 2009. 11 In 2007, the thirtieth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) established an open-ended Intersessional Contact Group (ICG) charged with examining issues pertaining to passenger vessel operations in the Antarctic Treaty area. At the thirty-first ATCM (June 2008) the terms of reference were extended to focus the work on issues relating to preventing and mitigating the effects of maritime incidents from passenger and the ICG s work was continued for another year. 2 Improving protection and management of the Antarctic area 12 Given the special nature of the Southern Ocean and the increasing numbers of operating there, we submit that a number of actions are necessary to address the potential threats from international shipping in the region. As a general action, we suggest that a joint Working Group of national representatives with expertise in IMO and ATCM matters should be formed. This group should also include interested environmental and industry NGOs accredited to the IMO and/or the ATCM. The first task of this joint Working Group would be to conduct a comprehensive assessment of potential risks and impacts on the area from, identify the presence or absence of a measure to address those impacts, analysis of whether a measure exists and has not been ratified or effectively implemented, and whether further action is needed. Such a joint Working Group would bring together the necessary skills to identify potential threats to the Southern Ocean; identify gaps in the existing system of instruments; determine the appropriate framework for action; and collaborate in the development of new measures. Specific actions that might be considered along with a comprehensive review 3 13 With the increasing number of passenger ships and other shipping in the area, the amount of sewage and grey water being discharged into this environment is also increasing dramatically. Sewage and grey water, even when treated, contain pollutants and pathogens which can be harmful to marine ecosystems, and arguably have greater potential for adverse impacts in a pristine environment such as the Antarctic area. Consideration should be given to the following possible measures to address this threat:.1 banning all of treated or untreated sewage or grey water from operating south of 60 o S and certified to carry more than 10 people; and.2 creating sewage/grey water no discharge zones in the most sensitive and biologically rich areas, such as in the vicinity of the ice face of glaciers, and/or requiring advanced wastewater treatment systems on board all south of 60 o S. 2 3 ASOC participates actively in the ICG. These have yet to be developed as full proposals, but are simply indicative of possible new measures.
MEPC 58/8-4 - 14 A further concern is the lack of a comprehensive system of vessel traffic monitoring for Antarctic that includes relevant characteristics. Such a system is essential for establishing, applying and enforcing better standards for and for improving the ability of Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centres response to maritime safety (search and rescue) and environmental incidents in the Antarctic area. To ensure safety of navigation, ship routeing, monitoring and control measures need to be considered for areas where there is uncertainty about ice flows or hydrographic conditions, particularly the busiest areas frequented by commercial tourism during the Southern hemisphere summer. 15 For the Antarctic Treaty, or discrete areas within the area, a risk assessment and assessment against the PSSA guidelines should be undertaken, and some of the above measures developed as associative protective measures (APMs), if appropriate. Additional steps 16 The lack of full ratification of existing shipping instruments by ATPs and the Parties to Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) is a serious concern, and we call on all ATPs and CCAMLR Parties, as well as States which flag ships operating in the Antarctic Treaty, to quickly ratify existing instruments and ensure full implementation of such instruments and relevant guidance. 17 We urge flag and port States to increase their inspections and controls over operating in the Antarctic area in order to ensure strict compliance with the highest safety and environmental standards, and urge flag States to encourage to report their vessel positions on a regular basis to the relevant regional Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centres while operating within the Southern Ocean. 18 Finally, to support a way forward on this issue, the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC), which includes as members FoEI, Greenpeace, IFAW and WWF, is seeking co-sponsors for a Workshop to be held in 2009, to being the comprehensive assessment of the threats to the Antarctic area from the full range of operating in the area. The workshop will seek to address both risks and routine operations and begin identifying appropriate mitigation measures. Action requested of the Committee 19 The Committee is invited to consider the above information and take action, in particular:.1 agree to establish a joint IMO-ATCM Working Group to consider the full range of threats from shipping in the Antarctic area and identify and develop new measures as necessary; and.2 provide positive endorsement of ASOC s proposal to host a workshop in 2009. ***
MEPC 58/8 ANNEX 1 WORK IN PROGRESS PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF MEASURES REGULATING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF SHIPPING IN ANTARCTIC WATERS Ice strengthening Standards Construction standards Fuel oil Restrictions Collisions/ groundings Hydrocarbo n Chemical Sewage/grey water Garbage Air emissions (SO x /NO x ) CO 2 emissions Ballast water Anti-fouling systems Cargo >500GT BLG work item ban carriage and use V standards Annex V review CG Annex VI MEPC work prog deadline 2009 MEPC.163(56) AFS Convn. entry into force Sept 08 Tourism BLG work item ban carriage and use V standards Annex V review CG Annex VI MEPC work prog deadline 2009 MEPC.163(56) AFS Convn entry into force Sept 08 Fishing CCAMLR Research / Resupply Refuelling BLG work item ban carriage and use Annex VI MEPC work prog deadline 2009 MEPC.163(56) AFS Convn entry into force Sept 08 Whaling Others: Private yachts, Bioprospecting, Surveillance/ patrol, naval
MEPC 58/8 ANNEX 1 Page 2 Cargo >500GT Tourism Fishing Research / Resupply Refuelling Whaling Others: Private yachts, Bioprospecting, Surveillance/ patrol, naval Underwater noise to be developed to be developed to be developed Ship strikes Search and Rescue MSC.1/ Circ./1184 Vessel traffic monitoring Selfmonitoring CCAMLR some ***
MEPC 58/8 ANNEX 2 CURRENT STATUS OF RATIFICATION OF SELECTED IMO INSTRUMENTS BY ANTARCTIC TREATY CONSULTATIVE PARTIES (ATCPS) AT 3/07/08 ATCP SOLAS Convn 4 SFV Protocol 5 STCW-F 6 Convn 95 73/78 7 Annex OPRC 8 90 Bunkers 9 Convn 01 AFS 10 Convn 74 95 I/II IV V VI 01 Argentina Australia Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Chile China Ecuador Finland France Germany India Italy Japan Republic of Korea Netherlands New Zealand Norway Peru Poland Russian Federation South Africa Spain Sweden Ukraine United Kingdom United States Uruguay BMW 11 Convn 04 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974. The Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels (SFV) Protocol 1993. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F), 1995. International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 ( 73/78). oil, noxious liquid substances in bulk, V sewage, Annex V garbage, Annex VI air pollution. International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC), 1990. International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (Bunkers Convention), 2001. International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships (AFS), 2001. International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM), 2004.