Is the Polar Code's 5-Day Survival Rule Holding Up in the Arctic? Insights from a USCG Report

As Arctic shipping routes open up due to climate change, the risks for mariners in these icy waters are escalating. The International Maritime Organization's (IMO) Polar Code, implemented in 2017, sets standards for ships operating in polar regions, including a minimum 5-day survival requirement for life-saving equipment. But is five days really enough? A 2023 report from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Research and Development Center dives into this question using advanced simulations, revealing that in some scenarios, it falls short. In this post, we'll break down the report's findings and connect them to the Polar Code's Personal Survival Kits (PSK) and Group Survival Kits (GSK)—essential gear designed to keep crews alive during emergencies. With new IMO amendments on the horizon in 2026, this is a timely look at how safety standards are evolving.

The USCG Report: Testing Survival Times in Harsh Arctic Conditions

The report, titled "Verify International Maritime Organization Polar Code Survival Time Requirement: Arctic Search & Rescue Simulation Model," focuses on the U.S. Arctic Area of Responsibility (AOR). It uses a Repast Simphony-based model to simulate six emergency scenarios, incorporating real historical data on vessel traffic (from AIS), weather (ERA5 dataset), ice extent (NSIDC), and response assets like USCG cutters, helicopters, and vessels of opportunity (VOOs).

The Polar Code defines the Maximum Expected Time of Rescue (METR) as at least 5 days, during which survival equipment must function in extreme cold. Ship operators conduct an Operational Assessment to determine METR, but the report highlights a lack of standardized methods, allowing some to default to the minimum—potentially endangering lives.

The simulations cover June to October, with victim counts from 8 to 320, in locations from the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas to the North Pole. Key assets include the icebreaker USCGC Healy, Maritime Security Cutters (WMSLs), HC-130 aircraft for supply drops, and rotary-wing helicopters like MH-60s.

thearcticinstitute.org

news.uscg.mil

dvidshub.net

These images capture the intensity of USCG Arctic search and rescue operations, showcasing assets like the Healy in action—critical for the scenarios modeled.

Key Findings: When 5 Days Isn't Enough

The model ran each scenario 30 times to account for variability, calculating confidence intervals for response times. Here's a summary of the results:

Scenario	Description	Victims	Location/Season	METR Exceeds 5 Days?	Key Insights
1	Cargo vessel abandon ship	8	Northeast of Barrow, AK / August (open water)	No	Helicopters enable quick rescues; air drops effective.
2	Research vessel beset in ice	25	Near North Pole / October (in ice)	Yes	Icebreaker-dependent; times often >5 days despite pararescue jumps.
3	Tanker abandon ship	10	Chukchi Sea / September (open water)	No	VOOs and helicopters suffice.
4	Cruise vessel abandon ship	300	Northwest Passage / September (open water)	No	Mass rescue handled by multi-agency air assets.
5	Icebreaker (analog to Healy) abandon ship	80	North of ice extent / August (on ice)	Yes	No backup icebreaker; helicopter refueling delays push times >5 days.
6	Airliner crash on ice	320	North of Barrow / June (on ice)	No	Full response manages recovery, though aircraft lack polar gear.

In remote, ice-bound areas or with large victim numbers beyond helicopter range, METR often exceeds 5 days. The report recommends updating the Polar Code to mandate consistent METR calculation methods for Polar Ship Certificates, ensuring adequate safety for all aboard.

Tying It Back: The Role of PSK and GSK in Polar Survival

The report's emphasis on METR directly links to the Polar Code's requirements for Personal Survival Kits (PSK) and Group Survival Kits (GSK). These kits are mandated for ships in low-temperature polar waters to support survival for the assessed METR, which must be at least 5 days.

• Personal Survival Kit (PSK): Designed for individual use, PSKs include thermal protective aids like immersion suits, gloves, hats, and personal rations (e.g., high-energy food bars, water packets) to prevent hypothermia and sustain life. They must be portable and functional in -30°C conditions, aligning with ISO standards for polar equipment.

• Group Survival Kit (GSK): For collective survival, GSKs (often for 6 persons) contain tents, sleeping bags, stoves, snow saws, medical kits, and signaling devices. Versions like "Lite" or "Advanced" are available, with contents like tarpaulins and booties to create shelters on ice.

If METR exceeds 5 days—as seen in scenarios 2 and 5—standard PSK/GSK provisions might not suffice, risking dehydration, frostbite, or starvation. The USCG simulations underscore that without accurate METR assessments, operators could under-provision these kits, echoing the report's call for standardization.

imo.org

These visuals illustrate typical Polar Code survival equipment, like liferafts and kits tested in icy conditions, highlighting their importance in real-world rescues.

Looking Ahead: IMO Updates and Implications

Since the report's release in December 2023, the IMO has adopted amendments via Resolution MSC.538(107) in June 2023, set to enter force on January 1, 2026. These expand the Polar Code to non-SOLAS vessels (e.g., fishing ships under 24m), add navigation safety measures, and refine voyage planning for polar hazards. While they don't directly alter the 5-day baseline, they address gaps like those in the USCG study, potentially requiring enhanced PSK/GSK for extended METRs.

Arctic traffic has surged 37% from 2013 to 2023, making robust standards crucial. For operators, this means reassessing routes and kits; for policymakers, it's a push toward global harmonization.

In conclusion, the USCG report is a wake-up call: the Polar Code's 5-day rule works in some cases but not all. By tying METR to properly equipped PSKs and GSKs and the Arctic 10+ Immersion suit / Survival suit, we can better protect those venturing into the Arctic's unforgiving expanse. As amendments roll out in 2026, expect safer seas ahead—but only if implementation keeps pace with the ice melt. What are your thoughts on Arctic safety? Share in the comments!