From oil spills to sinking cruise ships: Managing emergencies in sub-zero temperatures

In May, Benjamin Strong was appointed chair of an Arctic Council working group called Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR). Strong agreed to talk to us about the EPPR’s role in Arctic affairs and how the organization has evolved since it was set up in the early 1990s.

First of all, could you tell us how and why EPPR was created?

How best to explain this nebulous, wonky, policy group that addresses emergency management in the Arctic? Let’s start at the beginning. In 1989, officials from the eight Arctic countries (as they were at the time*) met in Rovaniemi, Finland, to discuss how to work together to protect the Arctic environment. That led to the creation of several working groups, including EPPR.

Over the next several years, the Arctic diplomats met and negotiated a framework for protecting the Arctic. The emphasis was on threats to the region – such as radiological contamination and oil spills – and protecting the Arctic ecosystem and its inhabitants. The strategy recognized several groups with specific focuses, including emergencies.

The structure was formalized in 1991, so the EPPR actually predates the Arctic Council by five years.

Presumably Arctic emergency response covers much more than oil spills and radioactivity?

Absolutely. The decision to broaden the EPPR’s remit was prompted by the 2007 sinking of the cruise ship “Explorer” near Antarctica, and its subsequent rescue by a passing vessel. That got me thinking about how to increase search and rescue capability in the Arctic.

The United States Coast Guard has a program that uses commercial ships to rescue people where traditional search and rescue resources are unavailable. What better way to address limited search and rescue in the Arctic than using vessels of opportunity that are already there?

How did you go about this?

In 2010 I attended my first EPPR meeting to highlight the need for a robust search and rescue in the Arctic. I shared the Coast Guard’s global search and rescue system, and then did what any good salesperson would do: I refused to give up.

Five years later, EPPR established a search and rescue expert group, in response to the 2011 Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue Agreement. This was expanded to include expert groups in marine environmental response (MER) and radiological response (RAD).

How would you describe the EPPR’s current role?

The short answer is that we’re emergency-management experts who focus on the policy of emergency management in the Arctic.

For example, if there is an oil spill or other disaster in the Arctic which overwhelms the responding nations capability to respond, that country can request assistance. EPPR holds routine communications exercises to make sure those requests get to the right people, and the correct help arrives.

EPPR members look at new technologies, equipment, and emergency response procedures for the Arctic. Is there a better device for search and rescue? Let’s test it. Is there a better way to recover oil in the ice? OK, let’s see if it works. Can we respond to a radiological incident? EPPR has contributed to exercises about that. Can nations respond to wildfires? EPPR has helped share best practices in this area.

What else has your organization done to become effective?

EPPR is taking a less incident-specific look at emergencies in the Arctic. In the words of former United States Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen, “I’m agnostic to the causes. All I know is there is water where there once was ice.”

We recognize that the Arctic is rapidly changing and is more than a maritime domain. We’re learning about permafrost melting and its impact on critical infrastructure; the impact of extreme weather on coastal Arctic communities; the impact public health emergencies have in the Arctic; and, finally, the impact that wildfires are having on the Arctic.

Finally, how has the focus of your work at EPPR changed since you took the chairship?

I have learned quickly that the focus of EPPR needs to broaden. The earthquake off Russia and subsequent tsunami warning was a wakeup call that a real “All Hazards” approach is urgently needed when preparing for, and managing emergencies in the Arctic.

*  Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Soviet Union, Sweden, and the U.S.