7 Maritime inspection and survey organizations
| (27272)
5912/06
COM(05) 587
| Draft Directive on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organizations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations
|
| Legal base | Article 80(2) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 23 November 2005
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 09 February 2006
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | EM of 16 February 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
7.1 Technical safety standards for ships are developed partly
by the International Maritime Organization through international
conventions (statutory requirements) and partly by ship inspection
and survey organisations, known as classification societies, through
their technical rules and regulations (class rules). Classification
societies are private sector organisations to which flag states,
including the UK, delegate some ship inspection functions.
7.2 Classification societies play a crucial safety
role. Every ship must be built, maintained and certificated in
accordance with the technical rules of a classification society.
These detailed rules cover all aspects of a ship's structure,
its machinery and the equipment it is to carry or might need when
carrying out its duties. Each society makes its own rules and
follows its own inspection methods — thus there can be quality
differences between the different societies.
7.3 Classification societies can issue, in addition
to their own class certificates, certificates of conformity, on
behalf of some flag states, to confirm that a particular ship
complies with international conventions. This means a society
can issue a statutory certificate of conformity to a vessel it
is also certifying under its own rules.
7.4 Within the Community the system for recognition
of classification societies is governed by Directive 94/57/EC
as amended by three subsequent Directives.[17]
The document
7.5 The Commission makes this proposal because of
its concerns with the performance of the classification societies
and because there have been suggestions that problems with the
existing classification system contributed to the loss of the
oil tanker "Prestige" in 2002. The draft Directive is
intended to update the Community regime for classification societies.
It would:
- repeal the existing Directives
and consolidate and revise the bulk of the existing provisions;
- reform the criteria for recognition as a classification
society in the Community, moving away from the existing quantitative-based
method of recognition to a new system of recognition using qualitative
criteria, which would allow smaller societies to be recognised;
- allow the Commission, through the comitology[18]
body, the Committee on Safe Seas and the Prevention of Pollution
from Ships, to develop more flexible enforcement measures against
failing classification societies. These include the introduction
of a graduated penalty system, in addition to the existing power
of de-recognition;
- improve the transparency issue of certificates
of conformity on behalf of flag states and minimise the risk of
conflicts of interest; and
- require the classification societies themselves
to establish a new independent body, with the appropriate technical
and administrative resources, to assist the Commission in the
oversight of the operation of the class system in the Community.
7.6 This proposal is part of what the Commission
refers to as the "Third Maritime Safety Package". This
comprises seven discrete measures which are being taken forward
separately, rather than as a package, by the Council. The draft
Directive does not feature on the Austrian Presidency's agenda
(only two of the measures do). It is possible, but far from certain,
that the Finnish Presidency will begin consideration of the proposal.
The Government's view
7.7 The Minister of State, Department of Transport
(Dr Stephen Ladyman) says that although the present Directive
was last updated only three years ago the Government favours continued
improvement in the overall standard of those classification societies
which are recognised in the Community, whilst still remaining
within the internationally-agreed classification system.
7.8 The Minister says the Government:
- supports the principle of greater
transparency in the work of the classification societies, in particular
in relation to the statutory work which they undertake on behalf
of flag states;
- supports introduction of graduated penalties
for failing classification societies. The flexible approach suggested
by this Directive should enable corrective action on a failing
classification society to be taken more swiftly. But how much
the penalties for poor performance might be are subject to further
discussions, since the Commission has not provided a mechanism
for determining their level; and
- understands the Commission wish, following enlargement,
to be as inclusive as possible and to recognise classification
societies which are, currently, too small for that. But any new
process of recognition will need to be established on the basis
of robust quality criteria so as not to reduce the overall level
of standards or performance.
7.9 The Minister also says that the Government is
aware of and has some sympathy for the shipping industry's view
that the proposed new independent body to be set up by the classification
societies could add some further costs to the industry by creating
a further level of bureaucracy. The Government itself has some
concerns about how such a body can be truly transparent and independent
when it is to be established and paid for by the very people it
is supposed to be overseeing. Moreover, the European Maritime
Safety Agency already has powers to audit the performance of classification
societies and monitor the performance of those undertaking statutory
work on behalf of flag states.
7.10 The Minister tells us that the Government, as
Presidency, consulted the principal industry organizations on
this proposed measure. Although there was no widespread opposition,
the initial reaction was not particularly favourable. In addition
to the concern about the proposed new independent body to be set
up by the classification societies already mentioned, there is
a general feeling that the existing arrangements are satisfactory,
but with some recognition that a graduated scale of penalties
would have some merits. The Government will continue to consult
the UK shipping and classification-related interests as the proposal
develops.
7.11 Finally, the Minister says that a Regulatory
Impact Assessment is not considered necessary because at present
the impact on the UK is seen as minimal. But the Government will
submit a Regulatory Impact Assessment should negotiations change
this.
Conclusion
7.12 Clearly the work of classification societies
is important and anything sensible that would improve their performance
is to be welcomed. But we note the Government's cautious approach
to the draft Directive as it stands. We recognise that it is likely
to be some time before it becomes apparent how this proposal is
going to develop. But in due course we should like to hear from
the Government about developments in relation to the matters the
Minister has mentioned to us before we consider the document further.
7.13 Meanwhile we do not clear the document.
17 Directives 97/58/EC, 2001/105/EC and 2002/84/EC.
The societies currently recognised in the Community are the American
Bureau of Shipping, Bureau Veritas, the China Classification Society,
Det Norske \/eritas, Germanischer Lloyd, Hellenic Register of
Shipping for Greece (limited recognition), Korean Register of
Shipping, Lloyd's Register of Shipping (the principal UK society),
Nippon Kaiji Kyokai, Registro Italiano Navale, Registro Internacional
Naval SA (limited recognition) and the Russian Maritime Registry
of Shipping. Back
18
Comitology is the system of committees which oversees the exercise
by the Commission of legislative powers delegated to it by the
Council and the European Parliament. Comitology committees are
made up of representatives of the Member States and chaired by
the Commission. Back
|
