A Review of Inspections Under Article 7 of the Antarctic Treaty and Article 14 of Its Protocol on Environmental Protection, 1959- 2001

Home , Arrival Heights, Cape Bird, Cape Hallett, Cape Royds, Dome C, East Base

º XXVI ATCM Information Paper IP-118-ASOC/UNEP/Rev.1 Agenda Item: ATCM 11 ASOC/UNEP Original: English

A REVIEW OF INSPECTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 7 OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY

AND ARTICLE 14 OF ITS PROTOCOL ON ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION, 1959-2001

Madrid, 9/20 de junio 2003

1 XXVI ATCM Information Paper 118/Rev.1 June 2003 Original: English Agenda Item 11

A REVIEW OF INSPECTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 7 OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY AND ARTICLE 14 OF ITS PROTOCOL ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 1959- 2001

Submitted to the XXVI ATCM by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition and the United Nations Environment Programme

A REVIEW OF INSPECTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 7 OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY AND ARTICLE 14 OF ITS PROTOCOL ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 1959- 2001

I. INTRODUCTION

Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty and Article 14 of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty enable Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties to conduct inspections in order to promote the objectives and ensure compliance with the provisions of the Antarctic Treaty and its Protocol.

Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty establishes the right of free access for observation and inspection by the Contracting Parties. Observers designed under Article VII (1) “shall have complete freedom of access”, including the conducting of aerial observations, “at any time to any or all areas of Antarctica.” The facilities that may be inspected include “all stations, installations and equipment within those areas, and all ships and aircraft at points of discharging or embarking cargoes or personnel in Antarctica.”

Article 14 of the Protocol establishes that Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties “shall arrange, individually or collectively, for inspections by observers to be made in accordance with Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty.” During inspections, observers should be given access to “all parts of stations, installations, equipment, ships and aircraft open to inspection under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty, and to all records” that are maintained at those facilities in accordance to Protocol requirements.

According to current practice, draft inspection reports are submitted to the inspected Parties for comments. They are subsequently made available to the Antarctic Treaty Parties and to the Committee for Environmental Protection, considered at the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting that follows the inspection, and thereafter made publicly available.

This report reviews past inspections with the view to inform the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties on the practice of inspections and assist them in planning future inspections. In agreement with the objectives of the Protocol, including its Article 14, the purpose of this report is to promote the protection of the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems.

The report focuses specifically on a number of aspects including: total number of official inspections and inspected sites or facilities; trends in official inspection frequency; geographical distribution of official inspections; Parties conducting inspections; official inspection frequency at each site or facility; official inspections of commercial tourism activities and non-governmental facilities; and, site or facility review visits carried by Non-Parties.

II. METHODOLOGY

A) List of inspections

A tentative list of past inspections carried out under the Antarctic Treaty and its Protocol between 1959 and 2001 was compiled by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC). The compiled list is 3 reproduced in Annex I. The list was based on:

! Inspection reports, some of which list earlier inspections to a site or facility; ! A list of inspections contained in Annex E to the Final Report of the XVIII ATCM; ! A list of inspections contained in Working Paper 34 submitted by Australia to the XXV ATCM. With technical support from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), a set of maps were created to visualize the geographical distribution of past inspections, as well as to represent some other aspects of inspections in a spatial context. These maps are at Appendix I.

B) List of sites and facilities

There is no official list of all sites and facilities in Antarctica. Such a list would help identify sites and facilities that have not yet been inspected.

The Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programmes (COMNAP) has posted on its web site a list of Antarctic stations. As of May 2003, the list contains 82 stations, of which 73 are located within the Antarctic Treaty Area (see Annex II). The COMNAP’s list, however, mentions primarily stations that are currently operational. As such, it does not include all the sites or facilities that had been inspected so far. Indeed, there are 32 inspected sites or facilities — excluding vessels — that are not on COMNAP’s list. In addition, there are National Antarctic Programmes for which the main stations are listed but not the additional facilities, such as substantial field camps.

The United Kingdom’s Antarctic Pilot and the SCAR’s Gazetter provide more comprehensive lists of Antarctic sites and facilities. The 1997 edition of the Antarctic Pilot lists 177 research stations and refuge huts inside the Antarctic Treaty Area, 27 aircraft landing places, 20 Specially Protected Areas, 35 Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and 72 Historic Sites and Monuments. However, it is likely that there are sites and facilities that are not reflected in those lists. In this regard, it is hoped that a more complete compilation of sites and facilities will be developed as Parties to the Protocol implement Art 8 (3) of Annex III of the Protocol, which requires that “Each such Party shall, as far as is practicable, also prepare an inventory of locations of past activities (such as traverses, fuel depots, field bases, crashed aircraft) before the information is lost…”.

For the purpose of this review, an ad hoc list of sites and facilities was produced that included in extenso the COMNAP’s list and derived additional information from the Antarctic Pilot. The ad hoc list is given at Annex III.

It is clear that the tentative list of inspections and the ad hoc list of sites and facilities prepared for the purpose of this report are not exhaustive. In addition, both lists may contain erroneous information. ASOC would very much welcomed comments from Parties that could help improve both lists towards a more comprehensive review of the practice of inspection in Antarctica.

III. RESULTS

A) Total number of official inspections and inspected sites or facilities

The total number of official inspections1 conducted between 1959 and 2001 is 36, of which nine were carried out between 1992 and 2001, and four in the period 1998-20012 (see Table 1).

The total number of inspected sites or facilities3 between 1959 and 2001 is 265, of which 89 were inspected between 1992 and 2001, and 46 in the period 1998-20014.

B) Trends in official inspection frequency

The frequency of official inspections increased during the 1959-2001 period from 0.82 inspections per annum during the period 1959-1991, to 0.83 for 1992-1997, and to 1 for 1998-2001 (see Fig.1).

The frequency of inspected sites or facilities increased during the 1959-2001 period from 5.3 inspected sites or facilities per annum during the period 1959-1991, to 7.2 for 1992-1997, and 11.5 for 1998-2001 (see Fig.2).

A peak in both the number of official inspections and in the number of inspected sites or facilities was recorded in the years immediately following the adoption of the 1988 Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities.

1 An inspection by official inspectors from one or more Parties to one or a number of sites or facilities - such as research stations, Historic Sites and Monuments, ships - following formal procedures under the Antarctic Treaty and the Madrid Protocol. 2 1959-1991 refers to the period from the adoption of the Antarctic Treaty up to the adoption of the Madrid Protocol (October 1991). 1992-1997 refers to the period from the adoption of the Madrid Protocol (October 1991) up to its entry into force (January 1998). 1998-2001 refers to the period from the entry into force of the Madrid Protocol (January 1998) up to June 2001. 3 An official inspection to a single site or facility. 4 It should be noted that there are have been inspections (quoted in Australia Working Paper No.34 submitted at the XXV ATCM) to an additional 28 facilities, the name of which is not available. All these inspections took place before October 1991. 5

Fig. 1 – Official inspections, 1959-2001

Fig. 2 – Number of inspected sites / facilities, 1959-2001

6 Table 1 – Tentative list of official inspections, 1959-2001

Year Inspected by Number of Region5 Source6 facilities inspected 1963 New Zealand 3 AW Auburn (1982) 1964 Australia 4 AW ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 UK 1 RS ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA 10 AW ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1966 Argentina 1 AP ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1967 USA 9 AW USA (1967) 1971 USA 4 EA USA (1971) 1975 USA 4 AP USA (1975) 1977 Argentina 1 Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1977 USA 5 AW USA (1977) 1980 USA 6 AP USA (1980) 1983 USA 14 AW USA (1983) 1985 USA 6 AP USA (1985) 1986 Australia 2 OC, EA Australia (1986) 1987 Chile 10 AP ATCPs (1994) 1988 Russia 15 AW USSR (1988) 1989 France/Germany 8 AP ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 New Zealand 3 AP, SOI New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ 11 AP UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 USA 16 OC, RS USA (1989) 1989 Russia 15 Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1990 Brazil 4 Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1990 Chile 9 AP Chile (1990) 1990 China 7 AP China (1990) 1990 Norway 3 DML, WS Quoted in Norway (2001) 1991 Australia 1 EA ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Chile 4 AP ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1993 UK/Italy/South Korea 19 AP UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) 1994 Sweden 9 DML Sweden (1994) 1995 Argentina 3 AP, SOI Argentina (1995) 1995 USA 8 AW USA (1995) 1996 Norway 4 DML Norway (1996) 1999 Belgium/France 5 EA Belgium and France (2001) 1999 UK/Germany 23 AP UK and Germany (1999) 2001 Norway 6 DML Norway (2001) 2001 USA 12 AP USA (2001) TOTAL 265

5 AP=Antarctic Peninsula; AW=Antarctic wide; CA=Central Antarctica; EA=East Antarctica; EL/MBL = Ellsworth Land/Marie Byrd Land; OC=Oates Coast; QML=Queen Maud Land; RS=Ross Sea; SOI=South Orkney Islands; WS=Weddell Sea. 6 Primary sources are quoted whenever possible. 7

C) Geographical distribution of official inspections

In order to help appreciate the geographical distribution of official inspections, the Antarctic has been divided in nine regions, namely Antarctic Peninsula; Central Antarctica; East Antarctica; Ellsworth Land/Marie Byrd Land; Oates Coast; Queen Maud Land; Ross Sea; South Orkney Islands; and, Weddell Sea. Of the 36 inspections carried out between 1959 and 2001, 22 took place in a single distinct region of Antarctica, five in two regions, and eight to facilities located in more than two regions. The majority of the 22 inspections to a single region took place in the Antarctic Peninsula (15), followed by Queen Maud Land and East Antarctica (three each) and the Ross Sea (one).

The majority of the inspected sites or facilities were located in the Antarctic Peninsula (48.3 %), followed by East Antarctica (12.1 %), Queen Maud Land (9.1 %) and the Ross Sea (7.9 %) (see Table 2). This reflects the density of facilities in these areas that is a function of ease of access to these areas (which, in turn, might have influenced the choice of facilities selected for inspection).

Table 2 – Geographic distribution of official inspections

Region Facilities Number % Antarctic Peninsula 128 48.3 East Antarctica 32 12.1 Queen Maud Land 24 9.1 Ross Sea 21 7.9 Oates Coast 9 3.4 South Orkney Islands 7 2.6 Weddell Sea 5 1.9 Central Antarctica 4 1.5 Ellsworth Land /Marie Byrd Land 3 1.1 Vessels 10 3.8 Not available 22 8.3 265 100.0

D) Parties conducting inspections

Sixteen of the 27 Consultative Parties have conducted one or more inspections between 1959 and 2001, namely: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, China, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States of America, and the Russian Federation (see Table 3). However, eleven Consultative Parties have never conducted inspections during that period, namely: Bulgaria, Ecuador, Finland, India, Japan, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, South Africa, Spain and Uruguay.

8 Table 3 – Number of official inspections, number of sites or facilities inspected and the year of the most recent inspection.

Party conducting Number of Number of Year of last the inspections inspections facilities inspection inspected Argentina 3 5 1995 Australia 3 7 1991 Belgium 1 5 1999 Brazil 1 4 1999 Chile 3 23 1991 China 1 7 1990 France 2 13 1989 Germany 2 31 1999 Italy 1 19 1999 New Zealand 3 17 1989 Norway 3 13 2001 Russia 2 30 1989 South Korea 1 19 1999 Sweden 1 9 1994 United Kingdom 4 54 1999 USA 11 94 2001 36 (*) 265(*)

(*) Some inspections were undertaken jointly: Belgium and France (1999), United Kingdom and Germany (1999), United Kingdom, Italy and South Korea (1993), France and Germany (1989) and United Kingdom and New Zealand (1989).

E) Official inspection frequency at each site or facility

Of the 73 stations in the COMNAP’s list, that are located within the Antarctic Treaty Area, 51 (70%) have been inspected and 22 (30%) have never been inspected (see Table 4). Of the 51 stations in COMNAP’s list that have been inspected, 38 (75%) have been inspected after October 1991, and 26 (51%) after January 1998. The 13 stations that have not been inspected since October 1991 are listed in Table 5.

46 sites or facilities have been inspected two or more times since 1959 and 15 have been inspected five or more times since 1959 (see Table 6).

Official inspections have taken place to an additional 32 sites or facilities that are not in the COMNAP’s list. Of these, 21 sites or facilities (41%) have been inspected after October 1991, and 18 (28%) have been inspected after January 1998.

Table 4: Sites or facilities that have never been officially inspected (Based on the COMNAP’s list) 9

COMNAP Facility country Facility ID 6 Argentina Cámara 7 Chile Risopatron 10 Chile Ripamonti 22 Peru Machu Picchu 26 Argentina Primavera 28 Argentina Petrel 32 Argentina Sobral 38 South Africa E-Base 40 Norway Tor 45 Sweden Wasa 46 Japan Asuka 47 Japan Dome Fuji 48 Japan Mizuho 54 Russia Soyuz 56 Russia Progress 58 Australia Law Base 63 France Dome C 64 Italy Dome C 66 Australia Law Dome 76 Argentina Matienzo 77 Argentina Melchior 78 Chile Yelcho

Table 5: Sites or facilities that have not been the subject of an official inspection since October 1991 (Based on the COMNAP’s list). COMNAP Facility country Facility Most recent ID inspection 33 Chile González Videla 1964 3 Russia Vostok 1964 25 Russia Druzhnaya 4 1977 24 Argentina Belgrano II 1983 75 Russia Molodezhnaya 1983 79 Argentina Brown 1987 69 Argentina Marambio 1988 71 USA South Pole - Amundsen Scott 1988 62 USA McMurdo 1988 55 Chile Carvajal 1989 50 Italy Terra Nova 1989 60 New Zealand Scott 1989 70 Ecuador Maldonado 1991

Table 6: Frequently inspected sites or facilities

Year of Site or facility Name of site or facility Number of last country times inspection inspected 1964 USA Byrd 2 1983 Russia Molodezhnaya 2 1989 Russia Leningradskaya 2 1993 Argentina San Martín 2 1995 China Zhongshan 2 1999 United Kingdom Base B, Deception Island 2 1999 Spain Gabriel de Castilla 2 1999 Chile O’Higgins 2 1999 Australia Wilkes 2 2001 Chile Escudero 2 2001 Bulgaria St. Kliment Ochridski 2 2001 Ukraine Vernadsky 2 1987 Argentina Brown 3 1988 Argentina Marambio 3 1988 USA South Pole 3 1995 Argentina Orcadas 3 1999 Australia Casey 3 1999 Australia Davis 3 2001 Germany Forster 3 2001 India Maitri 3 2001 South Africa SANAE IV 3 1988 USA McMurdo 4 1993 Argentina Decepción 4 1994 United Kingdom Halley 4 1994 South Africa SANAE III 4 1995 United Kingdom Signy 4 1995 Japan Syowa 4 1999 Argentina Esperanza 4 1999 USA Palmer 4 2001 Russia Novolazarevskaya 4 2001 Spain Juan Carlos I 4 1989 New Zealand Scott 5 1995 Russia Mirny 5 1999 Australia Mawson 5

11 1999 United Kingdom Rothera 5 2001 Argentina Jubany 5 1993 United Kingdom Faraday (later Vernadsky) 6 1996 Germany Neumayer 6 1995 France Dumont d’Urville 7 2001 Brazil Ferraz 7 2001 Chile Frei/Marsh 8 2001 China Great Wall 8 2001 South Korea King Sejong 8 2001 Poland Arctowski 9 2001 Uruguay Artigas 9 2001 Russia Bellingshausen 10 Ten vessels were inspected in the 1959-2001 period, of which six were inspected after October 1991, and three after January 1998. All Parties, but Sweden, have had at least one of their sites or facilities inspected.7 The Parties that had most sites or facilities inspected include Argentina, Russia, United Kingdom, USA and Chile (Table 7).

Table 7 – Frequency of inspections to Parties

Party inspected Number of Number of Year of last inspections to facilities Inspection that Party inspected Argentina 19 29 2001 Russia 21 27 2001 United Kingdom 17 27 1999 USA 12 18 1999 Chile 12 17 2001 Australia 7 15 1999 Germany 11 15 2001 China 11 11 2001 Poland 11 11 2001 Uruguay 9 10 2001 Brazil 8 9 2001 South Africa 7 9 2001 New Zealand 6 8 1989 South Korea 8 8 2001 Spain 6 8 2001 France 7 7 1995 India 5 5 2001 Japan 5 5 1995 Bulgaria 2 2 2001 Ecuador 2 2 1991 Ukraine (*) 2 2 2001 Bahamas(**) 1 1 1999

7 Australia was invited to send a representative to the 2001-02 Swedish expedition. A report was produced by Australia that included an evaluation of the implementation of the Protocol at Sweden’s Wasa Station.

12 Denmark 1 1 1967 Finland 1 1 1994 Italy 1 1 1989 Liberia(**) 1 1 1993 Netherlands 1 1 1991 Norway 1 1 2001 Not applicable 2 10 1999 Not available 1 3 1989 (*) Non-Consultative Party (**) Not a Party to the Antarctic Treaty

F) Official inspections to commercial tourism activities and to non-governmental facilities

The inspection of commercial tourism activities has been limited to the inspection of tourist vessels. Of the 10 vessels inspected since 1959, five were tourist vessels, and all have been inspected since October 1991. The number of tourist vessels currently operating in Antarctica on regular basis is in excess of 20, with a capacity varying between 6 and 1,200 passengers.

Industry sources list at least 114 sites in the Antarctic Peninsula where tourist landings occur, and a further 83 sites elsewhere in Antarctica.8 The frequency of landing varies greatly, with some sites being visited very often and others rarely, and with much higher numbers of tourists visiting the Antarctic Peninsula. In the past few years the five most visited sites in the Antarctic Peninsula received between 1,500-7,000 visitors during the tourism season. The most visited sites elsewhere in Antarctica received some hundreds visitors during the tourism season (IAATO 2003). Some tourist landing sites could be the subject of an official inspection.

There is a land-based commercial tourist facility located in the Patriot Hills, which provides support to commercial or private expeditions to the interior of Antarctica. That facility has never been inspected.

Non-governmental facilities that have never been inspected include a hut maintained by Czech nationals at Rip Point, Nelson Island, and a hut maintained by Australian nationals in Commonwealth Bay (which may have already been removed).

A site, formerly the base camp of the “Footsteps of Scott Expedition” (1984-1986) and later Greenpeace’s World Park Base (1988-1991) at Cape Evans, Ross Island, was never inspected formally, although it was visited by Consultative Parties’ officials at several occasions. The base structures and all other materials were removed by Greenpeace in the 1991-1992 austral summer. In November 1992 officials associated with the (then) New Zealand Antarctic Programme visited the site and produced a summary report (Sheppard and Deeley 1992).

G) Site or facility review visits carried out by Non-Parties

The international environmental organization Greenpeace carried out unofficial review visits to a total of 162 sites or facilities since 1988, two of which were to its former base site. These visits focused on the environmental performance of Antarctic operations and took place in the Antarctic Peninsula, Oates Coast and the Ross Sea (Greenpeace 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997). They generally provided information comparable to that of official inspections under Article 14 of the Protocol. Over fifteen sites visited by Greenpeace, including refuges, huts and decommissioned stations, have not been the subject of official inspections.

8 A minority of these sites also host facilities of National Programme Operators. 14

IV. COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROTOCOL

The inspections that took place since the entry into force of the Protocol reported general compliance with the objectives and provisions of the Protocol at all sites inspected. However, some inspection reports noted some elements of implementation falling short of the requirements of the Protocol, including some instances of non-compliance with the requirements of Annex III. The inspection reports recommended improvements in several areas, including: fuel transfer and storage; energy efficiency and use of alternative energy; management of former sites (abandoned stations); waste management; and, sewage treatment.

ASOC and UNEP intend to review the compliance with the Protocol based on inspection reports and submit this information to a future meeting of the Committee for Environmental Protection.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The inspection system is essential to the implementation of the Antarctic Treaty and its Protocol on Environmental Protection. Inspections provide critical information on the level of compliance with the Treaty and the Protocol’s provisions and help identify issues that need further attention from the Parties. They are also learning experiences for both the inspected Parties and for the Parties conducting the inspection.

The XVIII ATCM Final Report notes “Parties should provide corrections and additions so that more complete lists could be published in the reports of future ATCMs.” The review of past inspections conducted by ASOC and UNEP aimed at complementing existing compilations and assisting Parties in planning future inspections.

Based on the review, it appears that future inspections could usefully focus on:

! Stations that have never been inspected or not been inspected since the adoption of the Protocol; ! Stations of Parties that have never or seldom had inspections to their facilities; ! Inland stations; ! Decommissioned, abandoned or infrequently used sites or facilities; ! Stations that have been inspected and have shown repeatedly that some aspects of their operations are falling short of the Protocol’s requirements; ! Other sites or facilities that are not stations (such as field huts, fuel depots, drilling sites); ! Ships, including vessels engaged in tourism and other non-governmental activities; and, ! Sites where tourism operations frequently take place.

-----

REFERENCES9

Argentina (1995): Informe de inspecciones en conformidad con el Artículo VIII del Tratado Antártico realizadas por la República Argentina, diciembre de 1994 – marzo de 1995. XIX ATCM/IP50. ATCPs (1994): Inspections by year, nationality and location, carried out under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty "Annex E (i) - Inspection" in the XVIII ATCM Final Report. (pages 249-254). Auburn, F.,M. (1982): Antarctic Law and Politics. Hurst, London. Australia (1986): Report of the 1985/86 Australian Observer Team in Antarctica under Article VII of the AntarcticTreaty - Visit to the French Station of Dumont d'Urville, 3 January 1986. Department of Foreign Affairs, Canberra. 17pp Australia (2002): Inspections Conducted under Art. VII of the Antarctic Treaty. ATCM XXV WP034 Belgium and France (2001): Report of a joint inspection in East Antarctica conducted in 1999 by Belgium and France under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty. XXIII ATVM/IP9 . Chile (1990): Informe de los Observadores de la República de Chile a la Antártica, Período 1989 - 1990. 26pp. China (1990): Report of the Chinese Inspection Team on King George Island, Antarctica under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty. COMNAP (Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs): www.comnap.aq. Last accessed: May 2003. Gateway Antarctica (http://www.anta.canterbury.ac.nz. Last accessed: May 2003. Greenpeace (1988): 1987/88 Antarctic Expedition Report. Lewes, United Kingdom: Stichting Greenpeace Council. Greenpeace (1989): 1988/89 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. Greenpeace (1990): 1989/90 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . Greenpeace (1991): 1990/91 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . Greenpeace (1992): 1991/92 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . Greenpeace (1994): 1992/93 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . Greenpeace (1995): 1994/95 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . Greenpeace (1997): 1996/97 Antarctic Expedition Report. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International . IAATO (International Association of Antarctic Tour Operators) (2002b): Compiled by National Science Foundation from data provided by U.S. tour companies in response to [Antarctic] Treaty reporting requirements. (available from http://www.iaato.org. Last accessed: May 2003). May J (1989): The Greenpeace book of Antarctica. A new view of the seventh continent. London: Dorling Kindersley. New Zealand (1989): Inspection Report by New Zealand Observers. 16 pp. Norway (1996): ATCM XXI IP 37. Norway (2001): Antarctic Treaty. Report of the Norwegian Antarctic inspection under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty and Article 14 of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Oslo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs. ATCM XXIV WP25. SCAR (Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research) website: www.scar.org Sheppard, D.S., and Deely, J.M. (1992): Report on environmental impacts at the former site of World Park Base, Cape Evans, Antarctica. Lower Hutt, New Zealand: Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences. Communication to Greenpeace New Zeland, December 1992. Sweden (1994): Antarctic Treaty - Report of an Inspection under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty by Observers from Sweden, January 1994'.Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Stockholm [74+vi]. ATCM XVIII/IP37. Hydrographer of the Navy (1997): The Antarctic Pilot. Fifth Edition. Taunton, UK.

9 Some of these references are from copies of documents available to ASOC that do not have information concerning where they were presented. 16 United Kingdom/Germany (1999a): Report of a joint inspection under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty. XXIII ATVM/WP23. United Kingdom/Italy/South Korea (1993): Antarctic Treaty: Report of a Joint Inspection Under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty by United Kingdom, Italian and Korean Observers, January- February 1993. ATCM XVIII/IP7. United Kingdom/New Zealand (1989): Antarctic Treaty: Report of a Joint Inspection Under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty by New Zealand and United Kingdom Observers January 1989. USA (1967): Report of United States Observers on Inspection of Antarctic Stations - 1966-67 Austral Summer Season. Department of State. USA (1971): Report of the 1971 Antarctic Inspection. United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the Department of State. 96pp. USA (1975): Report of the 1975 United States Antarctic Inspection. United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. 7pp. USA (1977): Report of the United States Antarctic Inspection January - February 1977. United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. 7pp. USA (1980): Report of the 1980 United States Antarctic Inspection. 18pp. USA (1983): Report of the United States Observer Team in Antarctica. USA (1985): United States Antarctic observer Team Report. USA (1989): Report of the United States Antarctic Inspection February 3-28,1989. United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. USA (1989): Report of the United States Antarctic Inspection; February 3.28, 1989: Team Report of the Inspection Conducted in Accordance with Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty Under the Auspices of the United States Department of State and the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, October 1989. USA (1995): Report of the United States Antarctic Inspection Team, February 9-March 11, 1995: Team Report of the Inspection Conducted in Accordance with Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty Under the Auspices of the United States Department of State and The United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. XX ATCM/INF 129, May 1996, Agenda Item 10. USA (2001): The inspection conducted in accordance with Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty and Article XIV of the Protocol under the auspices of the United States Department of State. XXIV ATCM/IP 17. USSR (1988): Report on the Inspection of the Antarctic Stations by a Group of Soviet Observers, November 1988.

17 ANNEX I

TENTATIVE LIST OF OFFICIAL INSPECTIONS

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected 1963 New Zealand USA Byrd Auburn (1982) 1963 New Zealand USA McMurdo Auburn (1982) 1963 New Zealand USA South Pole Auburn (1982) 1964 Australia New Zealand Scott ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 Australia USA Byrd ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 Australia USA McMurdo ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 Australia USA South Pole ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 UK USA McMurdo ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Argentina Decepción ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Argentina Esperanza ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Chile Aguirre Cerda ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Chile González Videla ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA France Dumont d’Urville ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA New Zealand Scott ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Russia Mirny ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Russia Vostok ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA Ukraine Faraday (later Vernadsky) ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1964 USA United Kingdom Base B, Deception Island ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1966 Argentina USA Palmer ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1967 USA Argentina Orcadas USA (1967) 1967 USA Australia Mawson USA (1967) 1967 USA Australia Wilkes USA (1967) 1967 USA Denmark MS Dan USA (1967) 1967 USA France Dumont d’Urville USA (1967) 1967 USA Japan Syowa USA (1967) 1967 USA Russia Molodezhnaya USA (1967) 1967 USA South Africa SANAE USA (1967) 1967 USA United Kingdom Signy USA (1967) 1971 USA Australia Casey USA (1971) 1971 USA Australia Mawson USA (1971) 1971 USA France Dumont d’Urville USA (1971) 1971 USA Russia Mirny USA (1971) 1975 USA Argentina Brown USA (1975) 1975 USA Chile Frei/Marsh USA (1975) 1975 USA Russia Bellingshausen USA (1975) 1975 USA Ukraine Faraday (later Vernadsky) USA (1975) 1977 Argentina USA Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1977 USA Argentina Marambio USA (1977) 1977 USA Chile Frei/Marsh USA (1977)

18 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected 1977 USA New Zealand Scott USA (1977) 1977 USA Russia Bellingshausen USA (1977) 1977 USA Russia Druzhnaya IV USA (1977) 1980 USA Argentina Brown USA (1980) 1980 USA Argentina Esperanza USA (1980) 1980 USA Chile O’Higgins USA (1980) 1980 USA Poland Arctowski USA (1980) 1980 USA Russia Bellingshausen USA (1980) 1980 USA United Kingdom Rothera USA (1980) 1983 USA Argentina Belgrano II USA (1983) 1983 USA Argentina Marambio USA (1983) 1983 USA Australia Casey USA (1983) 1983 USA Australia Davis USA (1983) 1983 USA Australia Mawson USA (1983) 1983 USA France Dumont d’Urville USA (1983) 1983 USA Germany Neumayer USA (1983) 1983 USA Japan Syowa USA (1983) 1983 USA Russia Leningradskaya USA (1983) 1983 USA Russia Mirny USA (1983) 1983 USA Russia Molodezhnaya USA (1983) 1983 USA Russia Novolazarevskaya USA (1983) 1983 USA South Africa SANAE III USA (1983) 1983 USA United Kingdom Halley USA (1983) 1985 USA Argentina Jubany USA (1985) 1985 USA Chile Frei/Marsh USA (1985) 1985 USA China Great Wall USA (1985) 1985 USA Poland Arctowski USA (1985) 1985 USA Russia Bellingshausen USA (1985) 1985 USA Ukraine Faraday (later Vernadsky) USA (1985) 1986 Australia France Dumont D‘Urville Australia (1986) 1986 Australia Russia Mirny Australia (1986); Australia (2002) 1987 Chile Argentina Decepción ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Argentina Brown ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Brazil Ferraz ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Brazil MV Prof. Besnard ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile China Great Wall ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Poland Arctowski ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Spain MV Alcocero ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile UK Faraday (later Vernadsky) ATCPs (1994)

19 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected 1987 Chile Uruguay Artigas ATCPs (1994) 1987 Chile Russia Bellingshausen ATCPs (1994) 1988 Russia Argentina Marambio USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Australia Mawson USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Chile Frei/Marsh USSR (1988) 1988 Russia China Great Wall USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Germany Forster USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Germany Neumayer USSR (1988) 1988 Russia India Dakshin Gangotri USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Japan Syowa USSR (1988) 1988 Russia New Zealand Scott USSR (1988) 1988 Russia South Africa SANAE III USSR (1988) 1988 Russia South Korea King Sejong USSR (1988) 1988 Russia United Kingdom Halley USSR (1988) 1988 Russia USA McMurdo USSR (1988) 1988 Russia USA South Pole USSR (1988) 1988 Russia Uruguay Artigas USSR (1988) 1989 France/Germany Argentina Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Not available – assumed to be 1989 France/Germany Brazil ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Ferraz 1989 France/Germany Chile Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Not available – assumed to be 1989 France/Germany South Korea ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) King Sejong 1989 France/Germany Spain Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 France/Germany United Kingdom Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Not available – assumed to be 1989 France/Germany Uruguay ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Artigas 1989 France/Germany USA Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 New Zealand United Kingdom Faraday New Zealand (1989) 1989 New Zealand United Kingdom Rothera New Zealand (1989) 1989 New Zealand United Kingdom Signy New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Argentina Orcadas UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Argentina San Martín UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Brazil Ferraz UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Chile Carvajal UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Chile Frei/Marsh UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ China Great Wall UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Poland Arctowski UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ Russia Bellingshausen UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ South Korea King Sejong UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 UK/NZ USA Palmer UK and New Zealand (1989)

20 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected 1989 UK/NZ Uruguay Artigas UK and New Zealand (1989) 1989 USA France Dumont d’Urville USA (1989) 1989 USA Germany Gondwana USA (1989) 1989 USA Italy Terra Nova USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Arrival Heights SSSI USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Beaufort Island USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Cape Crozier SSSI USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Cape Royds SSSI USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Coughley Beach SPA USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable New College Valley SSSI USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Observation Hill HS&M USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Scott's Hut HS&M USA (1989) 1989 USA Not applicable Shackleton's Hut HS&M USA (1989) 1989 USA New Zealand Cape Bird USA (1989) 1989 USA New Zealand Scott USA (1989) 1989 USA Russia Leningradskaya USA (1989) 1989 USA USA/NZ Cape Hallett SPA USA (1989) 1989 Russia Argentina Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Australia Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Brazil Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia China Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Germany Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Germany Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia India Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Japan Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia USA Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia New Zealand Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Not available Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Not available Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Not available Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia Poland Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1989 Russia UK Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1990 Brazil Argentina Not available ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Not available – assumed to be 1990 Brazil China ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Great Wall Not available – assumed to be 1990 Brazil South Korea ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) King Sejong Not available – assumed to be 1990 Brazil Uruguay ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) Artigas 1990 Chile Argentina Decepción Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Argentina Jubany Chile (1990)

21 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected 1990 Chile Brazil Ferraz Chile (1990) 1990 Chile China Great Wall Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Ecuador MS Orion Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Poland Arctowski Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Spain Juan Carlos I Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Uruguay Artigas Chile (1990) 1990 Chile Russia Bellingshausen Chile (1990) 1990 China Argentina Jubany China (1990) 1990 China Brazil Ferraz China (1990) 1990 China Chile Frei/Marsh China (1990) 1990 China Poland Arctowski China (1990) 1990 China South Korea King Sejong China (1990) 1990 China Uruguay Artigas China (1990) 1990 China Russia Bellingshausen China (1990) 1990 Norway Germany Neumayer Quoted in Norway (2001) 1990 Norway South Africa SANAE III Quoted in Norway (2001) 1990 Norway United Kingdom Halley ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Australia China Zhongshan ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Chile Ecuador Maldonado ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Chile Netherlands Deception Hut ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Chile Poland Deception Hut ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) 1991 Chile USA Seal Island Hut ATCPs (1994); Australia (2002) UK/Italy/South 1993 Argentina Decepción UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Argentina Esperanza UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Argentina San Martín UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Brazil Ferraz UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Chile Prat UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Germany MS Europa UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Liberia MS Explorer UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Poland Arctowski UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Russia MS Akademik Vavilov UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 South Korea King Sejong UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Spain Gabriel de Castilla UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 Spain Juan Carlos I UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea 22 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected UK/Italy/South 1993 Ukraine Faraday (later Vernadsky) UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 United Kingdom Base B, Deception Island UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 United Kingdom Base E, Stonington Island UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 United Kingdom Fossil Bluff UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 United Kingdom Rothera UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 USA East Base UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea UK/Italy/South 1993 USA Palmer UK, Italy and South Korea (1993) Korea 1994 Sweden Finland Aboa Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden Germany Forster Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden Germany Neumayer Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden India Maitri Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden Russia Novolazarevskaya Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden South Africa SANAE III Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden South Africa SANAE IV Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden South Africa Sarai Marais Sweden (1994) 1994 Sweden United Kingdom Halley Sweden (1994) 1995 Argentina South Korea King Sejong Argentina (1995) 1995 Argentina United Kingdom Rothera Argentina (1995) 1995 Argentina United Kingdom Signy Argentina (1995) 1995 USA Argentina Orcadas USA (1995) 1995 USA Australia Davis USA (1995) 1995 USA China Zhongshan USA (1995) 1995 USA France Dumont d’Urville USA (1995) 1995 USA Germany Neumayer USA (1995) 1995 USA Japan Syowa USA (1995) 1995 USA Russia Mirny USA (1995) 1995 USA United Kingdom Signy Australia (2002) 1996 Norway Germany Neumayer Norway (1996) 1996 Norway India Maitri Norway (1996) 1996 Norway Russia Novolazarevskaya Norway (1996) 1996 Norway South Africa SANAE IV Norway (1996) 1999 Belgium/France Australia Casey Belgium and France (2001) 1999 Belgium/France Australia Davis Belgium and France (2001) 1999 Belgium/France Australia Mawson Belgium and France (2001) 1999 Belgium/France Australia RSV Aurora Australis Belgium and France (2001) 1999 Belgium/France Australia Wilkes Belgium and France (2001) 1999 UK/Germany Argentina Esperanza UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Argentina Jubany UK and Germany (1999) 23 ANNEX I

Year Inspected By Nationality of Name of site or facility Source facility inspected Swedish Hut HS&M, Snow Hill 1999 UK/Germany Argentina UK and Germany (1999) Is. 1999 UK/Germany Bahamas MV Marco Polo UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Bulgaria St. Kliment Ochridski UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Chile Escudero UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Chile Frei/Marsh UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Chile O’Higgins UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany China Great Wall UK and Germany (1999) O'Higgins - German Antarctic 1999 UK/Germany Germany UK and Germany (1999) Receiving Station 1999 UK/Germany N/A Whalers Bay, Deception Island UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Poland Arctowski UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Russia Bellingshausen UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Russia MV Ioffe UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Spain Gabriel de Castilla UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Spain Juan Carlos I UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Ukraine Vernadsky UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany United Kingdom Base A, Port Lockroy UK and Germany (1999) Base F, Wordie House, 1999 UK/Germany United Kingdom UK and Germany (1999) Argentine Islands. 1999 UK/Germany United Kingdom Rothera UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany USA Palmer UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Uruguay Artigas UK and Germany (1999) 1999 UK/Germany Uruguay Elichiribehety UK and Germany (1999) 2001 Norway Germany Forster Norway (2001) 2001 Norway Germany EPICA Drill Site Norway (2001) 2001 Norway India Maitri Norway (2001) 2001 Norway Norway Troll Norway (2001) 2001 Norway Russia Novolazarevskaya Norway (2001) 2001 Norway South Africa SANAE IV Norway (2001) 2001 USA Argentina Jubany USA (2001) 2001 USA Brazil Ferraz USA (2001) 2001 USA Bulgaria St. Kliment Ochridski USA (2001) 2001 USA Chile Escudero USA (2001) 2001 USA Chile Frei/Marsh USA (2001) 2001 USA China Great Wall USA (2001) 2001 USA Poland Arctowski USA (2001) 2001 USA Russia Bellingshausen USA (2001) 2001 USA South Korea King Sejong USA (2001) 2001 USA Spain Juan Carlos I USA (2001) 2001 USA Ukraine Vernadsky USA (2001) 2001 USA Uruguay Artigas USA (2001)

24 ANNEX II

COMNAP’S LIST OF STATIONS WITHIN THE ANTARCTIC TREATY AREA

COMNAP Station Station Year of Most Total # ID Country Recent Inspection of Inspections 1 Ukraine Vernadsky 2001 2 2 United States Palmer 1999 4 3 Argentina Brown 1987 3 4 Chile Escudero 2001 2 5 Argentina Decepción 1993 4 6 Argentina Cámara -- -- 7 Chile Risopatron -- -- 8 Chile Prat 1993 1 9 Spain Juan Carlos I 2001 4 10 Chile Ripamonti -- -- 11 Chile O’Higgins 1999 2 12 China Great Wall 2001 8 13 Russia Bellingshausen 2001 10 14 Chile Frei/Marsh 2001 8 15 Uruguay Artigas 2001 9 16 South Korea King Sejong 2001 8 17 Argentina Jubany 2001 5 Dallmann 18 Germany 2001 3 Laboratory 19 Poland Arctowski 2001 9 20 Brazil Ferraz 2001 7 21 Bulgaria Ochridski 2001 2 22 Peru Machu Picchu -- -- 23 Argentina Esperanza 1999 4 24 Chile González Videla 1964 1 25 Argentina Marambio 1988 3 26 Argentina Primavera -- -- 27 United Kingdom Signy 1995 4 28 Argentina Petrel -- -- 29 Argentina Orcadas 1995 3 32 Argentina Sobral -- -- 33 Argentina Belgrano II 1983 1 34 United Kingdom Halley 1994 4 35 Finland Aboa 1994 1 36 South Africa SANAE IV 2001 3 37 Germany Neumayer 1996 6 38 South Africa E-Base -- -- 39 Norway Troll 2001 1 40 Norway Tor -- -- 41 India Maitri 2001 3 44 Russia Novolazarevskaya 2001 4 45 Sweden Wasa -- --

25 ANNEX II

COMNAP Station Station Year of Most Total # ID Country Recent Inspection of Inspections 46 Japan Asuka -- -- 47 Japan Dome Fuji -- -- 48 Japan Mizuho -- -- 49 Japan Syowa 1995 4 50 Russia Molodezhnaya 1983 2 53 Australia Mawson 1999 5 54 Russia Soyuz -- -- 55 Russia Druzhnaya 4 1977 1 56 Russia Progress -- -- 57 China Zhongshan 1995 2 58 Australia Law Base -- -- 59 Australia Davis 1999 3 60 United States South Pole 1988 3 61 Russia Mirny 1995 5 62 Russia Vostok 1964 1 63 France Dome C -- -- 64 Italy Dome C -- -- 65 Australia Casey 1999 3 66 Australia Law Dome -- -- 67 France Dumont d’Urville 1995 7 69 Italy Terra Nova 1989 1 70 United States McMurdo 1988 4 71 New Zealand Scott 1989 5 73 Argentina San Martín 1993 2 74 United Kingdom Rothera 1999 5 75 Chile Carvajal 1989 1 76 Argentina Matienzo -- -- 77 Argentina Melchior -- -- 78 Chile Yelcho -- -- 79 Ecuador Maldonado 1991 1 80 Spain Gabriel de Castilla 1999 2 81 Germany Epica Drilling Site 2001 1