Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

BACKGROUND, PURPOSE AND CONTENT

General background

1. Since it began in 1993, [1] Community maritime safety policy has resulted in the adoption of fifteen or so regulations or directives designed to improve the safety of ships, and their crews and passengers, and to do more to prevent pollution of the seas.

[1] Communication from the Commission of 24 February 1993: A common policy on safe seas, COM(93) 66 final of 24.2.1993.

The Erika accident on 13 December 1999 showed that there is still a risk of accidents at sea along the European coastline, and also demonstrated how serious the consequences can be, particularly as regards coastal pollution. On 21 March 2000, three months after the accident, the Commission adopted a communication on the safety of the seaborne oil tanker trade, in which it set out a general strategy and made a number of proposals for specific measures to prevent the recurrence of accidents of this kind. The short-term measures proposed by the Commission in this communication were to be backed up by other measures to improve the protection of European waters against the risk of accidents and sea pollution in the longer term. It also set out medium-term measures on the safety of shipping, improving systems of liability and compensation for damage in the event of accidental pollution, and the establishment of a European maritime safety agency. These proposed measures were confirmed at the Biarritz European Council on 14 October 2000 on the basis of the Commission's report of 27 September 2000 on the Community's strategy for safety at sea. [2]

[2] COM (2000) 603 final of 27.9.2000.

2. In Europe, and particularly along the Atlantic coastline, there have been a number of disastrous accidents involving oil tankers (Torrey Canyon, Amoco Cadiz, Tanio, Braer and Aegean Sea). Apart from the direct causes of these accidents, which are many and varied, bad weather and sea conditions, difficult coastlines and the dense traffic in certain sea areas can also increase risk considerably. In addition, cases of accidental pollution, and regular operational pollution, are common (particularly along the Atlantic coast) causing particular damage to the environment and the local economy, because of the particular abundance along the European coast of vulnerable biotopes and sea-based resources (fishing and tourism). In this respect, virtually the whole of Europe's coastline can be classed as a sensitive area which should be protected. The economic consequences of an accident caused by a single oil tanker, even a small one, can be catastrophic, as was shown by the Erika accident, the damage caused by which involves compensation payments estimated at more than EUR 300 million.

3. At both international and Community level, there is now a whole body of technical rules on the construction, stability and equipment of ships, the qualifications of crews and living and working conditions on board. Without these rules, the number of accidents at sea would be much higher. However, even the best safety rules in the world will never be able to reduce the risk of accidents in European waters to zero, especially as these rules are applied much more thoroughly by some countries than by others. The statistics established by the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control of ships show that there are still many cases where inspections discover defects sufficiently serious to justify the detention of hundreds of ships a year. Thus, port State control is not sufficient on its own to solve the problem of open-registry ships. Moreover, port State control has one major shortcoming: inspections are carried out only when ships put into ports. Even though increasingly sophisticated methods of selection are being developed, like targeting coefficients, some ships still manage to slip through the net for a while at least. As a result, every day there are many ships plying the coasts of the Member States whose poor condition is an obvious threat to safety and the environment, while the threat remains undetected, or the riparian State is not even aware that the ship is passing through its waters.

Consequently, neither the safety rules which bind flag States, nor port State control are sufficient to protect a State against the risk of accident or pollution of its coastline. Accordingly, it is important for those Member States with a coastline to set up a system for monitoring and controlling maritime traffic along their coasts in order to protect their citizens, their economies and their environment against the disastrous effects of an accident at sea.

The international context

4. In recent years, there have been substantial changes, both legal and technological, regarding the monitoring and control of maritime traffic.

The United Nations Convention on the law of the sea of 10 December 1982 establishes the balance between the responsibilities of coastal States, flag States and port States, in a way which largely upholds the principle of the freedom of the seas, but gives coastal States many more legal powers than before. It is mainly in order to combat the risks of pollution that coastal States have been given wide powers regarding both their own territorial waters and their exclusive economic zone (if they have one).

5. Since then, there have been several changes to international law, particularly as a result of the various changes to the SOLAS Convention (International Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea). Chapter V of SOLAS, on safety of navigation, is currently being reworked. The new Chapter V will contain detailed provisions on, for example:

- ships' routing systems (new Regulation 10) designed to improve safety in sensitive areas where traffic is particularly heavy or difficult; systems may involve traffic separation schemes, no-go areas, deep water routes, etc;

- ship reporting systems (new Regulation 11) requiring ships transiting particular areas to notify the coastal authorities responsible and give them certain types of information;

- vessel traffic services (or VTS as they are usually called, see new Regulation 12), which provide ships travelling through sea areas where traffic density is high or where there are serious risks of accidents with shipping and weather information, and, where appropriate, with traffic assistance and routing services.

The regulations in the SOLAS Convention have been supplemented with resolutions on these various points describing in detail the principles of these services and systems and operational arrangements.

6. The last ten years or so have seen some important developments in the technologies relating to communications and the positioning and monitoring of ships, particularly with regard to satellite positioning, electronics and telematics. One of the most important innovations is certainly the appearance of automatic ship identification systems or transponders, which the IMO is expected to make compulsory on board ships of more than 300 tonnes beginning in 2002. One of the advantages of this technology, as used ship-to-land, is that it is a passive technology that does not require active intervention on board ships, which makes the master's job much easier. Moreover, computerisation has considerably simplified and optimised the monitoring of ships by coastal stations, particularly as a result of improved processing of radar images, and also makes it much faster to transmit information electronically.

Developments in the European Community

7. Because of the volume of traffic and the high risks to shipping in European waters, the Member States have, for some 20 years now, been introducing ships' routing systems on the main routes used by traffic to and from European ports. These systems, which have been approved by the IMO, have helped to limit the risk of collision or other accidents along Europe's coastlines.

The development of compulsory reporting systems is more recent. Before the SOLAS Convention was amended in 1994, systems were based on the voluntary participation of ships in transit. Now, the IMO has approved a number of voluntary or mandatory reporting systems, particularly along the Atlantic coast and in the English Channel, areas which are particularly vulnerable or environmentally sensitive. In addition, the practice of port reporting is also widespread: ships notify ports of their ETA (generally several days in advance, so as to reserve a berth) and confirm 24 or 48 hours before they arrive in port.

Ship movements in most European ports and their approaches are controlled by port VTS, thus helping to improve the efficiency of port management and safety in and around port areas. The development of coastal VTS is designed to improve the monitoring of transit traffic in certain areas where justified by traffic density.

It should be stressed that often the various functions described above are performed by the same land-based authority. So, for example, one VTS may be receiving reports from ships while monitoring traffic passing through a traffic separation scheme in its area of cover, and will also be responsible for related services such as search and rescue at sea.

8. A number of points should be made regarding the situation at Community level.

Firstly, the Community already has a legislative framework:

* Directive 93/75/EEC (known as the "Hazmat Directive") was adopted in September 1993 to allow the national authorities responsible for tackling the consequences of an accident at sea to have the information they require. Accordingly, the masters or operators of ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods are required to provide certain information to the competent authorities designated by the Member States. These authorities must then pass on this information as required for safety reasons.

* The proposal for the Eurorep Directive was adopted in December 1993. It follows on from Directive 93/75/EEC, which established a notification system for vessels bound for or leaving Community ports and carrying dangerous or polluting goods. Its main purpose is to extend the notification requirements in Directive 93/75/EEC to ships passing through Community coastal waters. Although the proposal was approved by the European Parliament, discussions in the Council ran into a number of obstacles; it has been before the Council since 1994 but a common position has not yet been adopted.

* The Council Decision of 25 February 1992 on radionavigation systems for Europe makes provision for the development of navigation aids in European waters by extending the terrestrial Loran-C navigation systems. This maritime component contributes to European policy on navigation for all modes of transport, and particularly to the development of the Galileo satellite navigation network.

* A Council Directive of 21 December 1978 is designed to ensure that ships wishing to use pilotage services in the North Sea and English Channel can call on adequately qualified deep-sea pilots.

* Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network has as one of its objectives the establishment of a management and information system for maritime traffic, so as to guarantee a high level of safety and efficiency of shipping and environmental protection in shipping zones belonging to Community Member States. This instrument makes it possible to provide Community funding for various maritime traffic management or information projects (particularly VTS). In addition, other Community funds can contribute to the development of maritime traffic management and information infrastructure or installations (ERDF, Cohesion Funds).

As one of a number of measures designed to facilitate the implementation of Community legislation, the Commission initiated a memorandum of understanding between Member States on the establishment of an electronic data interchange network between the authorities in the Member States for the implementation of Directive 93/75/EEC (five Member States are already party to the agreement and three others should be joining shortly). The project is being funded out of trans-European transport network resources. One Phare project (Early Warning System - EWS - for the Baltic Sea), which was concluded in 1999, should result in a similar scheme involving several of the Baltic Sea States.

Results of implementation of Directive 93/75/EEC

9. The Hazmat Directive, Directive 93/75/EEC, has been in force since 1995. The Commission now has a fairly comprehensive view of its application from several sources of information: scrutinising national transposing legislation, information obtained directly from Member States, contact with the industry, and the results of specially commissioned studies.

The main conclusions are:

* The system established by the Directive is not very clear to the rest of the world and is often not fully understood by masters and shipowners, particularly those from outside the European Union;

* The requirement that the operator of a ship coming from a port located outside the Community must give notification of departure is not correctly applied, in many cases notification being given after the ship's departure and in some cases being addressed simply to the port of destination according to the local rules of that port (e.g. 48 or 24 hours in advance); similarly, it is often the case that notification from a port of departure inside the Community is given late;

* There are sometimes problems in transmitting information on the cargo, notably because the means of communication are inappropriate, e.g. fax machines for the transmission of large quantities of information;

* Since the Directive lays down no procedures or standard format for the transmission and exchange of data, this can prevent the proper and efficient working of the whole system;

* There is no clear definition of competent authorities, and as a result responsibilities are not clearly established; the problem applies particularly to ports, which are not mentioned in the Directive;

* The list of competent authorities is not updated regularly and is not easily available;

* In most cases, information notified under the Directive is merely stored by the recipients for use in the event of an accident, but otherwise remains unused; thus the information collected is not put to any good use.

The purpose of a new Community initiative

10. For the reasons mentioned above, the Commission considers that the instruments put in place to cope with accidents or pollution caused by substandard shipping in European waters are still inadequate.

In fact, the main aim of Directive 93/75/EEC is to reduce the possible environmental consequences of an accident at sea. Existing instruments for monitoring and managing traffic are of limited geographical scope and concentrate on the main areas of traffic convergence without properly covering events which could occur outside radar or radio range. The only really effective way the Community has of preventing a substandard ship (flying the flag of a non-member country) from sailing in European waters seems to be port State control. However, by definition this is an unreliable instrument (since it only covers part of the traffic) and does not reduce the potential hazard of (as yet) uninspected ships plying the coasts of Europe.

Another limitation is that there is not enough contact between the parties which have information on maritime traffic. Frequently, VTS, coastguards, port authorities, etc. have very detailed information on traffic, but this information is not usable because it has not been pooled or circulated efficiently.

In its report to the Biarritz European Summit, the Commission outlined the main principles of its new proposals on safety of shipping in European waters:

- "introducing a wider obligation to declare before entry into European waters,

- improving the procedures regarding the transmission and use of data concerning dangerous cargoes, more particularly by making systematic use of electronic data interchange (EDI),

- requiring ships sailing in Community waters to carry on board automatic identification systems (or transponders) in accordance with the timescale laid down by the IMO in order to ease their identification and monitoring by the relevant coastal authorities,

- boosting the development of common databases and the networking of centres responsible for managing the information received under the Directive in order to provide a more complete picture of the traffic, especially transit traffic, in European waters,

- ensuring closer monitoring of the ships presenting a particularly serious threat to safety at sea and the environment,

- enhancing the powers of intervention of the Member States, as coastal States, if there is an accident hazard or threats of pollution off their coasts."

11. These aims are too broad to be covered by a simple amendment to Directive 93/75/EEC. Accordingly, the Commission proposes a new instrument which incorporates the objectives of Directive 93/75/EEC but also covers much broader objectives: preventing accidental and operational pollution at sea, management and monitoring of maritime traffic, closer surveillance of ships deemed to pose a risk, wider scope for intervention at sea where there are threats to the environment and shipping safety, and facilitating search and rescue operations at sea.

Adoption of measures to improve the monitoring and safety of shipping in European waters

12. The Commission proposes to provide a Community legal basis for a number of practices or requirements applied by Member States in order to improve their efficiency and, where appropriate, to allow further application of a system of appropriate sanctions by the Member States in cases of infringements. In particular, it will be made compulsory:

- to give prior notification before entering European ports;

- to report to the mandatory reporting systems set up by Member States and approved by the IMO;

- to use the vessel traffic services and ships' routing systems approved by the IMO.

These measures should ensure that, whether or not they carry dangerous or polluting goods, all ships covered by the Directive which enter European waters or use European ports will be identified, will observe the traffic rules in force and will provide the coastal authorities with information that will be important in the event of an emergency at sea.

13. The content of information is based on minimal harmonisation: only certain essential items of information are included (identification of ship, position, destination, etc.), on the grounds that certain information (type of ship, tonnage, etc.) can easily be obtained from other sources like the EQUASIS database on Quality Shipping. Moreover, these minimum items of information are those generally required by the mandatory reporting systems already in place, with the exception of the following information which is included in the proposal.

- The number of persons on board. Directive 93/75/EEC required notification of the number of crew members on board. However, this information proved to be inappropriate and inadequate because: (a) it took no account of any non-crew members on board, (b) it applied only to ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, and (c) being part of a cargo information management system it did not have any direct operational usefulness for the land-based authorities concerned (particularly the centres which coordinate sea search and rescue operations). In future, this information will be transmitted en route to the coastal stations which can make the best use of it.

- An address. This allows the operational authorities to contact those persons who have detailed knowledge of the cargo, which can be vital in the case of an accident involving ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, especially, for example, in the case of a ship in transit which is not heading for a Community port (in such cases no authority in any Member State has information on the cargo).

- Details of the type and quantity of bunker fuel. This is because the fuel carried in ship bunkers is a major potential source of pollution (some ships carry thousands of tonnes of fuel). If spilled, oil is particularly difficult to recover and can have serious toxic effects. Accordingly, it is important for coastal authorities to have this information so that they are in a better position to evaluate the possible consequences of an accident at sea.

14. The proposal is designed to improve efforts to prevent and understand the reasons for accidents at sea. In fact, in order to establish an effective policy for preventing accidents at sea, it is essential to have better knowledge of traffic flows and to be able to identify and monitor ships which constitute a safety or environmental hazard. This aim can be achieved more easily by introducing automatic identification systems, known as transponders, which make it possible to keep coastal shipping under continuous surveillance. Moreover, accurate analysis of the reasons for accidents at sea is essential in order to understand the factors which cause an accident and as a result to introduce further safety measures. In the past, enquiries have often been lengthy, complex and expensive. This situation should be greatly facilitated by the use of black boxes, based on those used in aircraft. These should also play a role in preventing accidents (particularly those due to human error) in that crews will know there is a black box on board and will be encouraged to exercise greater vigilance and a greater sense of responsibility when operating the ship. These various technological developments are currently being considered by the IMO, particularly in the context of changes to Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention, but the Commission takes the view that they should be introduced more rapidly and more extensively in the European Union, particularly for categories of ships not subject to international regulations.

First of all, the new SOLAS provisions on transponders must be made mandatory. In particular, they will be extended or applied more rapidly to ships not covered by the new SOLAS Regulation, i.e. basically ships of more than 300 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages. This is in line with the approach already adopted by the Commission in other areas of maritime safety: the need to require that ships engaged in cabotage inside the Community comply with rules which are at least as strict as those which apply to ships on international voyages in order to ensure a uniform level of safety in European waters.

Secondly, the proposal makes it compulsory for ships to be fitted with black boxes (voyage data recorders - VDR), similar to those used in aircraft. Though these are not strictly navigation equipment, being designed to help with enquiries after accidents, their inclusion in Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention, currently being reworked, proves their importance in terms of general shipping safety. Directive 1999/35 made black boxes compulsory on board ro-ro ferries and high-speed passenger craft providing scheduled services to and from a port in a Member State. Given their importance in analysing the causes of accidents and improving shipping safety, the Commission considers it essential to make the new Regulation 20 on black boxes in Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention compulsory, even at this early stage, for all passenger ships and all other categories of ships, whether or not engaged in international voyages.

Introduction of a notification system for ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods

15. The proposal includes the basic provisions of Directive 93/75/EEC, but changes them to take account of experience with the Directive, and in the light of legal and technological developments at international level.

One of the basic difficulties of Directive 93/75/EEC is that of managing what may be huge amounts of information on cargoes efficiently and cheaply. One significant way of improving the present situation should therefore be first to improve procedures for circulating this information.

To this end, the new provisions are designed to keep information on cargoes as close as possible to the source of that information (the concept of the "dormant" system), so that the information is used only in exceptional circumstances. The Commission proposes to make the procedure for notifying this information more flexible so that, depending on the Member State's preference, it could be notified either to a designated competent authority, as under the current Directive 93/75/EEC (i.e. for those Member States wishing to maintain the existing system), or to the port authority, which would be responsible for keeping the information available to the competent national authorities on a 24-hour basis in case it is needed. However, national authorities would only contact ports to obtain this information in the event of an accident. This procedure would allow those Member States which so wished to operate the system more efficiently and cheaply.

The proposal for a directive should also harmonise methods of transmitting information. Currently, operators may use any means at all to give notification. Cargo information is often transmitted by fax, particularly to smaller ports, which obliges the authorities concerned to store large volumes of paper documents on their premises.

Many of Europe's major ports, realising the economic disadvantages of these outdated procedures, have tackled the problem by requiring ships to notify data electronically, specifically by EDI. The Commission is proposing that all cargo data now be transmitted electronically (i.e. by computer and not by fax), thus ending the current practice of using paper, which undermines the efficiency of the system. It also proposes that, when EDI formats are used for electronic data transmission, use be made only of the appropriate EDIFACT formats listed in the annex to the directive, in order to avoid having divergent standards throughout the Community.

Moreover, the system of exemption laid down in Directive 93/75/EEC for scheduled services of a certain duration should be made more flexible. The requirement concerning the journey duration is not needed if the company concerned has put in place a system guaranteeing the rapid transmission of data on dangerous cargoes to the competent authority when necessary.

16. Finally, it should be pointed out that Article 8 of Directive 93/75/EEC on the obligations of pilots has not been included in the new directive because:

- in the light of experience of the application of the Directive, very few masters complete the check list for the pilot, partly because it is unreasonable to expect the master himself to list the defects of his own ship; moreover, stricter port State controls introduced by Directive 95/21/EC make this check list redundant;

- paragraph 2 of Article 8 is redundant because it is included in Article 13 of Directive 95/21/EC.

Action and monitoring in respect of dangerous ships

17. Directive 93/75/EEC contains provisions on the reporting by ships of accidents or incidents at sea and the subsequent measures to be taken by Member States. However, because of the definition of "ship" given in the Directive, these measures apply only to ships bound for or leaving a Community port and carrying dangerous or polluting goods.

The first objective of the Commission's proposal therefore is to extend these provisions to all ships, whether or not they are carrying dangerous or polluting goods and whether or not they call at a Community port.

The proposal defines the circumstances under which the master of a ship will be required to report an incident to the coastal authorities. These are the situations described in IMO Resolution A.851(20) on ship reporting, and the reporting of pollution or the discharge of packaged goods (by other ships) observed at sea. These reports will enable the coastal authorities rapidly to launch operations to combat pollution or to recover floating packages, which in practice are unfortunately frequently not discovered until they reach the shore.

18. In addition to the measures available to a Member State under international law to take action to reduce hazards to its shoreline or to related interests, other examples of possible measures are listed in an annex to the Directive (which is not a restrictive list):

- give official notice to the master of the ship to put an end to the threat to the environment or maritime safety,

- send an evaluation team aboard the ship to assess the degree of risk, help the master to remedy the situation and keep the competent coastal station informed thereof,

- instruct the master to put in at a port of refuge on the coast in the event of imminent peril, or

- cause the ship to be piloted or towed.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as well as the 1969 Brussels Convention relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties and its 1973 Protocol on Pollution by Substances other than Oil enable Member States whose coastlines or interests are threatened to take such measures in their territorial waters, their exclusive economic zone and in respect of incidents arising on the high seas.

19. Whatever the cause of an accident at sea (human error or technical failure), experience shows that bad weather and rough seas in a particular area seriously increase the risks. Maritime ports are therefore natural places of refuge. Accordingly, the proposal aims to make it easier to seek a port of refuge in the event of trouble at sea, and also to prevent the risk of accident by prohibiting ships from leaving ports of call in the Community if particularly bad weather and sea conditions increase the risk of an accident.

Most of the pollution disasters off Europe's coasts have occurred during severe storms at sea. The Commission considers that where weather and sea conditions are particularly bad (wind speed of more than 48 knots, i.e. force 10 on the Beaufort scale), the need to protect the environment against serious pollution hazards is a justifiable reason for not leaving the decision as to whether to leave port solely in the hands of the master of the ship. Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods should not be allowed to put to sea until weather and sea conditions improve to the point where they can leave port safely.

The decision to require a ship to seek a port of refuge is always difficult. It requires a realistic assessment of the risks involved, either in refusing port access in order to keep the danger of pollution or explosion away from the coast or in requiring a ship in a precarious condition to head for a port in order to keep the ship and its crew safe and to avoid sea pollution. Indeed, a port may be putting itself at considerable risk by accepting a ship in distress, endangering local inhabitants and the environment, especially as the areas concerned, particularly estuaries, are often areas which are environmentally very vulnerable. However, the present situation leaves transport operators in considerable doubt, and this should be rectified. Moreover, there is obviously a Community dimension to the problem, since ships refused access to one port may have an accident and pollute the coastline of a neighbouring State.

So there has to be a legal framework to accommodate ships in distress. The decision whether or not to accept a ship in distress must be taken on an ad hoc basis. However it must also be based on objective criteria, such as the capacity of the port, and must take account of special constraints and hazards connected with the configuration of the port area and the environmental sensitivity of the area. Accordingly, Member States should draw up plans for accommodating ships in distress, listing all the relevant information and providing those responsible for port operations with reliable information on which to base their decisions.

High-risk ships

20. Some ships can pose a particular hazard for the States along whose coastlines they travel, either because they are known to be in poor condition following an inspection under the port State control system, or because they are presumed to be in a bad condition, or because of dubious behaviour, or because of infringement of international or European law.

At present, international law severely limits the potential for interference by Member States with ships which are potentially hazardous (e.g. ships prohibited under Directive 95/21/EC or ships which have infringed a reporting obligation), but which nevertheless do not necessarily constitute a serious and immediate accident or coastal pollution hazard. International law does not authorise extreme measures such as the rerouting of the potentially hazardous ships referred to in the Directive, except in the event of an incident or accident at sea.

Despite the limitations of international law, it is nevertheless possible to take preventive measures with regard to these ships. They should be subject to closer surveillance in European waters, which implies better exchange of information between Member States along the shipping route. Closer monitoring would, for example, make it possible to detect more swiftly manoeuvres which were risky or which threatened the safety of shipping and to take the precautionary measures required, and to inform ports of call or the authorities of other Member States of the arrival of these ships. With this information, the Member States concerned could, before accepting high-risk ships into their ports, ask for additional information in order to check that international conventions were being complied with by the ship (copy of safety certificates), or, if necessary, to carry out on-board inspections under Directive 95/21/EC.

Improving implementation of the Directive

21. The shortcomings already mentioned regarding the implementation of Directive 93/75/EEC are because there are no proper means of enforcement. The only sanction mentioned in the Directive is refusal of access as referred to in Article 5 for failure to provide notification after leaving the port of departure outside the Community. This sanction is not applied by the Member States, despite many instances of infringement of this Article, probably partly because of the severity of the penalty compared with the nature of the infringement. What is needed, then, is a system of financial penalties which would allow the ship to have access to the port and to conduct its commercial operations there, but at the same time would strongly deter the operator or master from committing the same offence again.

Furthermore, it is essential that Member States should, through random operational tests or simulation exercises, check that information systems put in place for the requirements of the Directive operate satisfactorily. This is particularly true for that part of the system which concerns the processing of information on dangerous cargoes. This information is supposed to be used only in exceptional circumstances in the event of an accident and it is obviously essential that data transmission procedures and tools function perfectly when this happens.

Finally, the Commission's proposal includes provisions designed to ensure that the international safety management (ISM) code has been correctly applied when there is an incident or accident at sea. In fact, the ISM code is critical for preventing accidents and pollution at sea, provided that it is seen by companies - and applied - as something more than a simple bureaucratic exercise designed merely to give formal recognition to an international requirement. Indeed, it is when an accident at sea occurs that it is possible to check whether the ISM code was anything other than a bureaucratic exercise for the company operating the ship, since the ISM code includes the obligation to establish procedures which can cope with emergency situations. One essential aspect is that, when an emergency occurs, it is possible at all times to maintain proper contact between the ship and the company, on the one hand, and between the company and operational authorities, on the other, in particular so that operational decisions can be taken under the best possible conditions both by the master and by the land-based authorities. The proposal for a directive includes this obligation for communication between the parties concerned and provides for follow up measures where it is established that the company's management system did not operate during an accident at sea. These follow up measures consist first of all of informing the State (or States) which issued the ISM certificate so that they can take the necessary steps. Moreover, in the case of a ship which was certified by a Member State, and if the fault is considered particularly serious, the Member State which issued the certificate must suspend certification until a thorough check has been made of the company's safety management system.

Further development of the Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

22. The ultimate aim of the Community information and monitoring system for maritime traffic is not to increase the number of various reporting requirements but rather to try to simplify and standardise procedures further, while giving the greatest added value to the information collected.

This proposal is only a preliminary stage in the establishment of the system. It will be necessary gradually to complete the geographical cover of the shipping management network and put in place exchanges of information between the various authorities and operators concerned. The Commission and the Member States will have to cooperate closely to identify and implement objectives.

23. The Commission has identified the main objectives for this second phase:

To give added value to the information collected on shipping movements by means of appropriate computer links between coastal stations (mainly VTS) and the port authorities in Member States. Indeed, various bodies or authorities have information which could be exchanged to the mutual benefit of all concerned. To give one example, an essential item of information required by port managers is a precise ETA: the more accurate this information is, the better the ship's port of call can be organised and the more efficiently the various port services can be planned (pilotage, boatage, maintenance or repair services, administrative services, etc.). At present, the information given is often vague (if it is given at all), despite the fact that the local authorities need to be informed in advance. A computer link between the port of destination and a traffic monitoring service along the ship's route would allow the port to keep updating the ETA and to organise the ship's call with maximum efficiency (in return, the traffic monitoring centre would have more accurate information on which to base predictions of ships passing through its area since it will know the exact time the ship leaves port). In some cases, these links already exist on a local level but they should be made universal in order to improve traffic safety and port management. Similarly, within the context of the trans-European transport network, it is important to develop computer links between the coastal authorities in order to transmit the information notified by ships to the stations located along the shipping routes used by these ships. If they meet the eligibility criteria, these projects could benefit from funding from the resources available for trans-European transport networks.

To complete the geographical cover of the European chain of mandatory reporting systems. Currently the main shipping routes used by ships heading for Europe, or in transit, are covered by ship reporting systems and VTS in the Channel-Atlantic area. However, some areas are still not properly covered: the Mediterranean (in particular eastern access to the Mediterranean), and northern access to the North Sea and the Baltic for ships from riparian States which are not members of the EU. It is important therefore for the Commission and the Member States concerned to take swift action to deal with this matter and to begin preparing measures to cover ships in transit through these areas, so that the IMO can be informed as soon as possible.

To put in place a permanent framework for extending the information system introduced by this directive and facilitating the management of information on maritime traffic. The proposal for a Regulation 2000/../EC on the establishment of a European Maritime Safety Agency includes specifically among the duties to be performed by the Agency the accomplishment of tasks related to the monitoring of shipping and maritime traffic, pursuant to Community legislation, in order to facilitate cooperation between the Member States and the Commission in this area. In order to meet this objective, the Agency could have the support of one or more European maritime information management centres. The project to establish a centralised system of information on maritime traffic in Jobourg in France, covering the Atlantic from Gibraltar to the entrance to the North Sea, and the precedent of EQUASIS, show that the concept of systems which combine various items of information and make them accessible to all the users concerned have a number of advantages (particularly economies of scale) over a decentralised system based on the regular exchange of information between the authorities concerned. These centres, which could operate within the context of centres already in place (VTS, MRCC, etc.) in the major sea areas of Europe (Mediterranean, Channel-Atlantic-North Sea, Baltic) would have the role of compiling certain information of common interest (updated list of competent authorities, list of ships constituting a special hazard, etc.) in a public database and making it available. A framework for cooperation would have to be established between the Member States in order to define exactly what the centre's tasks and responsibilities might be.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Article 1

This article specifies that the proposal establishes a Community monitoring and information system for maritime traffic with view to enhancing maritime safety, improving the efficiency of maritime traffic and preventing accidental and operational pollution by ships.

Article 2

This article specifies the scope of the proposal. All ships above a threshold of 300 gross tonnage are covered, whether or not they carry dangerous goods. A number of exclusions are provided for, these being for warships and ships providing a non-commercial public service, (as defined in Regulation 1 of Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention, currently undergoing revision), recreational craft (irrespective of their characteristics and whether or not used for commercial purposes) and fishing vessels. However, the largest fishing vessels, measuring more than 45m in length, are likely to pose a hazard to shipping, and so their inclusion within the scope of the proposal is justified. Ships' stores and equipment for use on board ships are excluded (as under Directive 93/75/EEC). However, bunker fuels must be notified under the Directive.

Article 3

This article sets out the definitions applicable for the purposes of the Directive.

Article 4

This article requires all ships covered by the Directive to give advance notification before entering port. The present arrival notification practices are therefore made mandatory throughout the European Union, which should help make them more effective.

Article 5

This article lays down the principle that ships entering the area of competence of an authority operating a reporting system must send that authority the minimum information required for them to be effectively monitored, as set out in Annex I-1. The article takes account of the present state of international law, in particular the SOLAS Convention, which provides that only IMO-approved reporting systems may be made mandatory for ships which are purely in transit (i.e. which are neither bound for nor sailing from Community ports).

Article 6

This article is intended to increase traffic safety by requiring ships to comply with the existing IMO-approved instruments for the routing of shipping, which cover sensitive areas, areas with a high traffic density and areas which are dangerous for shipping, and to use vessel traffic services (VTS). Ships must comply with any instructions they may be given by the authorities responsible for the systems on grounds of safety. Member States must ensure that these authorities have the human and technical resources to carry out their tasks, and in particular that they comply with the IMO guidelines on the subject.

Article 7

This article specifies that any ship leaving or bound for Community ports must be equipped with transponders (or automatic identification systems) to enable them to be identified and monitored along the European coasts. This requirement takes over, anticipates and extends the requirements on the carrying of equipment introduced by the revised Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention (new Regulation 19-2) by including ships on domestic voyages which are not covered by SOLAS Regulation 19 (between 300 and 500 gross tonnage) or which are covered only from 1 July 2008. In order to enable ships fitted with automatic identification systems to be monitored in their waters, the Member States must provide their coastal stations with equipment to receive and process the data from the transponders.

Article 8

To facilitate enquiries into the causes of disasters at sea, the fitting of voyage data recorders ("black boxes") on board ships will make it possible to recover essential data about the movements and operation of the main installations on board. Article 8 supplements the requirements already laid down by Directive 1999/35/EC on regular ro-ro ferry and high-speed passenger craft services by adding the categories of passenger ships referred to in the new Regulation 20 in Chapter V of SOLAS, as well as other categories which are not covered by SOLAS (existing cargo ships, ships on domestic voyages). As far as the timetable is concerned, new ships built after 1 July 2002 will be subject to this requirement immediately, and existing passenger ships will have to be adapted by 1 January 2004 at the latest. As regards other ships (cargo ships), for which the proposed revision of the SOLAS Convention at the time of drafting this text provides for black boxes to be carried only by new ships, the Commission also proposes requiring existing ships to be adapted as from 2007 or 2008, depending on the ship's tonnage.

Article 9

This article, which is similar to a provision in Directive 93/75/EEC, details the obligations on the shipper so as to be able to guarantee that accurate information about the cargo is sent to the ship's master or operator, and that the information does indeed correspond to the dangerous or polluting goods which have been loaded.

Article 10

This article concerns the notification of information about the ship and its cargo to the competent authorities in the Community port of departure, or the Community port of destination in the case of ships arriving from ports outside the Community. It includes the requirements set out in Article 5 of Directive 93/75/EEC, but makes several amendments aimed at providing greater flexibility and further harmonisation:

- notification must no longer be given by the operator alone, but may also be given directly by the agent or by the ship's master in order to take account of the variety of situations encountered in practice;

- for ships arriving from ports located outside the Community, notification to the competent authorities of the port of destination in the Community is no longer regarded as a prior condition for access to the port. However, failure to provide notification is subject to a system of financial penalties (in Article 22);

- ships which do not know their destination at the time of leaving a Community port are authorised to notify the information requested as soon as they learn exactly where they are bound for;

- in order to limit the information in circulation, in particular as regards the cargo, the Member States may authorise the port authorities to receive and to retain the information transmitted by the ship, provided the procedures laid down allow immediate and continuous access to the data by the competent authority;

- the mode of transmission must be by computer-to-computer link and, if EDI formats are used, they must comply with the EDIFACT standards listed in an Annex to the Directive;

- lastly, it is specified that ships which are purely in transit and which do not call at Community ports must nevertheless communicate information about the cargo they are carrying via the ship reporting systems set up along the European coasts.

Article 11

This article concerns exchanges of data between the Member States to enable information about the ship and its cargo to be transmitted and used for safety purposes. Member States must cooperate to ensure that their national information systems are interconnected and interoperable so that the information required can be exchanged electronically at any time. The Memorandum of Understanding which has been concluded between several Member States for the purpose of implementing the Hazmat Directive provides a framework of cooperation for achieving that objective.

Article 12

This article lays down the conditions under which Member States may allow exemptions from the normal notification procedures for scheduled services operating within the Community. The system of exemptions laid down by Directive 93/75/EEC has been made more flexible as the requirements concerning the length of the voyage have been deleted; however, the system set up by the company must guarantee that the information requested can be transmitted immediately, and Member States must check that the system operates satisfactorily.

Article 13

This article is intended to enable the Member States to take certain measures where ships which pose a potential hazard to shipping are in transit off their coasts. The article first of all defines which ships may be regarded as posing a risk and provides for an exchange of information between the Member States located along the route to be followed by the ship. The Member State concerned can then consider taking any action it sees fit, though this must be consistent with international law.

Article 14

This article extends the scope of similar provisions already existing in Directive 93/75/EEC to cover other categories of ship (which do not carry dangerous goods or are in transit). Furthermore, it sets out in detail the measures which a Member State can take to prevent incidents or accidents occurring at sea and the action which can be taken if they do occur. Masters are therefore required to notify any problem relating to the safety of the ship and the safety of shipping or concerning the preventing of pollution, and will also be obliged to notify the coastal authorities of any slicks of pollutant materials or goods containers drifting at sea which would pose a hazard to the environment or to other ships.

Article 15

This article states that, when the weather is so bad as to pose a serious threat to their coasts, or the coasts of their neighbours within the Union, the Member States must take the necessary steps to prohibit ships from leaving port.

Article 16

This article requires Member States to take all necessary measures permitted under international law to tackle the risk of accident or pollution at sea off their coasts, and obliges the parties concerned (operator, cargo owner, master) to cooperate fully in order to minimise the consequences of the accident. Furthermore, as soon as such an incident or accident occurs, the master must contact the company, which must place itself at the disposal of the competent authorities.

Article 17

This article stipulates that the Member States must draw up emergency plans to simplify decision-making with regard to the provision of a port of refuge for ships in distress, and to make these plans available to interested parties. The Commission must also be kept informed about the action taken by the Member States with regard to drawing up such plans.

Article 18

Article 18 extends to all ships the provisions in Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 93/75/EEC (concerning the broadcasting of warnings to shipping and providing information to other Member States concerned); initially, these provisions applied only to ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods and bound for or leaving Community ports.

Article 19

This article states that the Member States must designate the competent authorities, port authorities and coastal stations responsible for the application of this Directive and must inform the shipping industry and the Commission in an appropriate manner.

Article 20

This article deals with the creation of a framework for cooperation between the Commission and the Member States for the future development of the Community monitoring and information system for maritime traffic. It therefore provides for the development of computer links between coastal stations and the port authorities, and between coastal stations themselves, in order to optimise the management of information on the movement of ships in Community waters. It also recapitulates the need to extend the cover provided by the system, which is still not comprehensive, so that any ship entering Community waters can be identified and monitored as fully as possible. To this end, it will be necessary for the Member States to cooperate on the submission of appropriate proposals to IMO. Lastly, efforts should be made to improve the management of information about shipping, which is one of the tasks of the European Maritime Safety Agency, in order to provide easier access to information of common interest for States in the area concerned and to develop the necessary instruments for better traffic management in the area concerned.

Article 21

This article recalls that the principle of the confidentiality of commercial transactions must be observed when collecting and using the information notified under the Directive and that the information must be used for purposes of maritime safety and protection of the environment.

Article 22

This article sets out the measures required for satisfactory implementation of the Directive. Member States are thus required to carry out regular checks on the operation of the information systems set up for the purposes of the Directive and to provide in their national laws for financial penalties to act as a deterrent against infringement of the Directive's requirements regarding notification or the carrying of equipment. Particular emphasis is also placed on checking, where an incident at sea occurs, that the company's safety management system was in compliance with the requirements of the ISM Code. If any major instance of non-compliance is found, the ISM certificate should be withdrawn immediately.

Articles 23 and 24

These articles concern the establishment of a regulatory committee for the purposes of the Directive and define its scope.

Article 25

No comment.

Article 26

This article specifies that Directive 93/75/EEC, some of whose provisions are included in the present Directive, is to be repealed twenty-four months after the adoption of the Directive.

ANNEXES

Annex I

The first part of Annex I gives details of the operational information which must be transmitted to the competent coastal station. In accordance with IMO Resolution A.851(20), the information concerns the identification of the ship, its movements, the cargo and the number of people on board. The harmonisation is minimal since the Member States have the right to demand other information for the purposes of safety or the protection of the environment. However, the aim is also to minimise the amount of information which the master is required to give as the operational centres are able to obtain a host of information by consulting the EQUASIS database.

The second part of Annex I sets out the information which, in accordance with the new SOLAS Regulation 19, may be transmitted by automatic identification systems.

Lastly, it is recalled that any changes to the information notified, in particular any change to the ship's planned voyage, must be notified to the coastal authority.

Annex II

Annex II sets out the timetable according to which ships must carry automatic identification systems (AIS) and voyage data recorders (VDR) on the basis of the provisions of Chapter V of SOLAS, which is being revised and extended to cover other categories of ships and voyages which are not covered by the corresponding SOLAS Regulations.

Annex III

Annex III lists the information to be notified by the operator, agent or master of a ship bound for a Community port. This list corresponds to Annex I to Directive 93/75/EEC, except as regards certain items of information which have been deleted:

- Since the essential aim is the management of information about cargo, information such as the nationality of the ship and the length and draught is no longer necessary; such information can in any case be obtained from EQUASIS.

- Similarly, information relating to shipping (intended route) is already demanded for all ships under Title I. This information is of no use in the context of a cargo information management system and is not included in the formats for EDIFACT messages which are used for notifications to port.

- Indication of the number of crew members has been deleted for similar reasons, but also because there is no reason to require this information only in the case of ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods. This requirement is nevertheless included in the notification requirements set out in Title I of the Directive concerning the number of people on board.

- The information to be notified with regard to ships' times of arrival and departure has been made clearer. Directive 93/75/EEC was creating confusion: the estimated time of departure, required by point 6 in Annex I to Directive 93/75/EEC, was on some occasions being understood as either the time of departure from the Community port of departure or the time of departure from a port of departure outside the Community. The information required by the competent authority is the time of departure from a Community port or, for ships bound for a port in the Community but coming from a port outside the Community, the estimated times of arrival and departure in order to enable the intended length of stay to be determined.

Annex IV

Annex IV contains a list of the EDIFACT electronic messages which must be used for the transmission of information where the transmission is based on EDI protocols.

Annex V

Annex V sets out a (non-restrictive) list of measures available to Member States depending on their assessment of the local situation and in accordance with international law, to prevent or reduce the risks or consequences of an incident at sea. As with Directive 93/75/EEC, these are measures to restrict the movements of a ship or require it to adopt a specific itinerary, but also to oblige the master to take steps to put an end to the risks, to instruct him to put in at a port of refuge or agree to have his ship piloted or towed, or even to have an evaluation team placed on the ship if the facilities on board are from all evidence insufficient to remedy the situation.

2000/0325 (COD)

Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 80(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, [3]

[3] OJ C , , p. .

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee, [4]

[4] OJ C , , p. .

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, [5]

[5] OJ C , , p. .

Acting in accordance with the procedure indicated in Article 251 of the Treaty, [6]

[6] OJ C , , p. .

Whereas:

(1) In its communication of 24 February 1993 on a common policy on safe seas, the Commission indicated that one objective at Community level was the introduction of a mandatory information system to give Member States rapid access to all important information relating to the movements of ships carrying dangerous or polluting materials and to the precise nature of their cargo.

(2) Directive 93/75/EEC [7]4) of 13 September 1993 introduced a system whereby the competent authorities receive information regarding ships bound for or leaving a Community port and carrying dangerous or polluting goods, and regarding incidents at sea. Article 13 of the Directive requires the Commission to produce new proposals for the introduction of a fuller reporting system for the Community, possibly covering ships transiting along the coasts of Member States.

[7] 4) OJ L 247, 05.10.1993, p.19.

(3) The Council Resolution of 8 June 1993 [8]5) on a common policy on safe seas agreed that the main objectives of Community action included the adoption of a fuller information system.

[8] 5) OJ C 271, 07.10.1993, p.1.

(4) Setting up a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic will help to prevent accidents and pollution at sea and to minimise their impact on the environment, the economy and the health of local communities. The efficiency of maritime traffic, and in particular of the management of ships' calls into ports, also depends on ships giving sufficient advance notice of their arrival.

(5) Several mandatory ship reporting systems have been set up along Europe's coasts, in accordance with the relevant rules adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). It ought to be ensured that transiting ships comply with the reporting requirements in force under these systems. Reporting by these ships must at least include certain information advising the coastal authorities of the number of persons aboard, the cargo, and bunker fuels which might pose a serious risk of pollution in excess of a certain volume.

(6) Vessel traffic services and ships' routing systems have also been introduced and are playing an important part in the prevention of accidents and pollution in certain shipping areas which are congested or hazardous for shipping. It is necessary that ships use the services offered by vessel traffic services and that they follow the rules applicable to ships' routing systems approved by the IMO.

(7) Key technological progress has been made in the area of on-board equipment allowing automatic identification of ships (AIS systems) for enhanced ship monitoring, as well as voyage data recording (VDR systems or "black boxes") to facilitate investigations following accidents. Given its importance in the formulation of a policy to prevent shipping accidents, such equipment ought to be made compulsory on board ships making national or international voyages which call at Community ports.

(8) Accurate knowledge of dangerous or polluting goods being carried on board ships is essential to the preparation and effectiveness of operations to tackle pollution or the risk of pollution at sea. Ships leaving or bound for Member States must notify this information to the competent authorities or port authorities of those Member States. Ships not calling at a port located in the Community must provide the reporting systems operated by the coastal authorities of the Member States with information on the quantity and type of dangerous goods they are carrying.

(9) To streamline and accelerate the transmission and utilisation of what may be huge amounts of information on cargo, such information ought to be sent electronically to the competent authority or port authority concerned. Where EDI protocols are used, only those formats mentioned in the Directive should be employed so as to avoid an undesirable proliferation of incompatible standards. For the same reasons, exchanges of information between the competent authorities of the Member States should take place electronically.

(10) Where the companies concerned have, to the satisfaction of the Member States, introduced internal procedures to ensure that information required by the Directive is sent to the competent authority without delay, it must be possible to exempt scheduled services between the ports of one or more Member States from the reporting requirement for each voyage.

(11) Where a Member State considers that exceptionally poor weather and sea conditions are creating a serious threat for the environment, it stops all ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods from leaving port until the situation returns to normal. Within the framework of its power of discretion, the Member State must consider such conditions to have been reached if a force of 10 or more on the Beaufort scale, and corresponding sea conditions, have been noted in the area concerned.

(12) Because of their behaviour or condition, some ships pose potential risks to the safety of shipping and the environment. Member States should pay particular attention to the monitoring of such ships, take the appropriate measures, consistent with international law, to prevent any worsening of the risk they pose, and send any relevant information they possess on these ships to the other Member States concerned.

(13) Member States need to guard against the threats to maritime safety, local communities and the environment created by certain situations at sea and by the presence of polluting slicks or packages floating at sea. To this end, masters of ships must report such occurrences to the coastal authorities, supplying all appropriate information.

(14) In the event of an incident or accident at sea, full and complete cooperation by the parties involved in the carriage contributes significantly to the effectiveness of operations by the competent authorities.

(15) Non-availability of a port of refuge may have serious consequences in the event of an accident at sea. Member States ought therefore to draw up plans whereby ships in distress may, if the situation so requires, be given refuge in their ports in the best conditions possible.

(16) The effectiveness of the Directive depends greatly on the Member States enforcing its implementation strictly. To this end, Member States must carry out appropriate checks to ensure that the communication links established to meet the requirements of the Directive are operating satisfactorily. Deterrent penalties must also be introduced to ensure that the parties concerned comply with the reporting and equipment carrying requirements laid down by the Directive.

(17) A framework for cooperation between the Member States and the Commission needs to be established to enhance the implementation of the monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic, with proper communication links being established between the authorities and ports of the Member States. Moreover, the coverage of the ship identification and monitoring system needs to be supplemented in those shipping areas of the Community where it is insufficient. In addition, information management centres ought to be set up in the Community's maritime regions so as to facilitate the exchange or sharing of useful data in relation to traffic monitoring and the implementation of the Directive. The creation of the European Maritime Safety Agency by Regulation ../../EC will help achieve these objectives.

(18) With a view to the effective application of this Directive, the Commission needs to be assisted by a committee composed of representatives of the Member States. Since the measures needed to implement this Directive are measures of general scope within the meaning of Article 2 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, [9] they ought to be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure laid down in Article 5 of that Decision.

[9] OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

(19) Certain provisions of this Directive may be amended by that procedure so as to take account of changes to international instruments and of experience gained in implementing this Directive.

(20) The provisions of Directive 93/75/EEC are significantly reinforced, extended and amended by the current Directive. Accordingly, Directive 93/75/EEC ought to be repealed.

(21) Given the principle of subsidiarity, a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council is the appropriate legal instrument as it establishes a framework for the compulsory and uniform application by the Member States of the requirements and procedures laid down in this Directive, while leaving each of them free to choose the detailed implementing rules best suited to their national system,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

Purpose

The purpose of this Directive is to establish in the Community a monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic with a view to enhancing the safety and efficiency of such traffic and preventing pollution by ships.

Article 2

Scope

This Directive applies to ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards, except for:

a) warships, naval auxiliaries and other ships owned or operated by a Member State and used for non-commercial public service;

b) fishing vessels with a length of less than 45 metres and recreational craft;

c) ships' stores and equipment for use on board ships.

Article 3

Definitions

For the purpose of this Directive:

a) "operators" means the owners or managers of a ship;

b) "agent" means any person mandated or authorised to supply information on behalf of the operator of the ship;

c) "shipper" means any person by whom or in whose name or on whose behalf a contract of carriage of goods has been concluded with a carrier;

d) "company" means a company within the meaning of Regulation 1(2) of Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention;

e) "ship" means any sea-going vessel or craft;

f) "dangerous goods" means:

- goods classified in the IMDG Code,

- dangerous liquid substances listed in Chapter 17 of the IBC Code,

- liquefied gases listed in Chapter 19 of the IGC Code,

- solids referred to in Appendix B of the BC Code.

Also included are goods for the carriage of which appropriate preconditions have been laid down in accordance with paragraph 1.1.3 of the IBC Code or paragraph 1.1.6 of the IGC Code;

g) "polluting goods" means:

- oils as defined in Annex 1 to the Marpol Convention,

- noxious liquid substances as defined in Annex 2 to the Marpol Convention,

- harmful substances as defined in Annex 3 to the Marpol Convention;

h) "haulage unit" means a vehicle for the road haulage of goods, a wagon for the carriage of goods by rail, a container, a road tank-vehicle, a rail tanker or a movable tank;

i) "relevant international instruments" means the following instruments, in the version in force at the time of adoption of this Directive:

- "Marpol" means the International Convention for the prevention of pollution from ships, 1973 and its 1978 Protocol;

- "SOLAS" means the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, together with the protocols and amendments thereto;

- the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969;

- the International Convention relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties, 1969 and its 1973 Protocol relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Pollution by Substances other than Oil;

- "ISM Code" means the International Safety Management Code;

- "IMDG Code" means the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code;

- "IBC Code" means the IMO International Code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying dangerous chemicals in bulk;

- "IGC Code" means the IMO International Code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk;

- "BC Code" means the IMO Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes;

- "INF Code" means the IMO Code for the Safe Carriage of Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Flasks on board Ships;

- "IMO Resolution A.851(20)" means International Maritime Organisation Resolution 851(20) entitled "General principles for ship reporting systems and ship reporting requirements, including guidelines for reporting incidents involving dangerous goods, harmful substances and/or marine pollutants;

j) "address" means the name and the communication links whereby contact may, where necessary, be made with the operator, agent, port authority, competent authority or any other authorised person or body in possession of detailed information regarding the ship's cargo;

k) "competent authorities" means the authorities and organisations authorised by Member States to receive and pass on information reported pursuant to this Directive;

l) "port authorities" means the competent port authorities authorised by Member States to receive and pass on information reported pursuant to this Directive;

m) "coastal station" means any of the following, designated by Member States pursuant to this Directive: a vessel traffic service, a shore-based installation responsible for a mandatory reporting system approved by the IMO, or a body responsible for coordinating search and rescue operations or operations to tackle pollution at sea.

TITLE I - Ship reporting and monitoring in European waters

Article 4 Notification prior to entry into Community ports

Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that any ship bound for a port located in the Community announces its arrival to the port authority:

a) at least forty-eight hours before its arrival, if the port of call is known, or

b) as soon as the port of call is known, if this information is available less than forty-eight hours before its arrival, or

c) at the latest, at the time the ship leaves the previous port, if the journey time is less than forty-eight hours.

Article 5 Participation in mandatory reporting systems

1. Ships entering the area of competence of a coastal station operating a mandatory reporting system approved by the International Maritime Organisation must participate in the system in accordance with the applicable rules and procedures.

2. Ship reports shall include at least the information referred to in Annex I-1, without prejudice to additional information required by a Member State in accordance with IMO Resolution A.851(20).

Article 6 Ship routing in areas of high traffic density or which are dangerous for shipping

1. Ships entering the area of competence of a vessel traffic service, or ships' routing system approved by the IMO, placed under the responsibility of a Member State, must, in accordance with the applicable rules and procedures, use the services provided, where such exist, and comply with the measures applicable in the area and with any instructions they receive. Only in maritime areas located within the territorial waters of the Member State concerned may participation in a vessel traffic service be made compulsory for ships flying the flag of a third country.

2. Member States shall ensure that the vessel traffic services and ships' routing systems placed under their responsibility dispose of sufficient properly qualified staff and appropriate means of communication and ship monitoring and that they are operated in accordance with the relevant IMO guidelines.

Article 7 Automatic identification systems

1. Any ship calling at a Community port must, in accordance with the timetable set out in Annex II-1, be fitted with an automatic identification system which meets the performance standards drawn up by the IMO and is capable of transmitting the information referred to in Annex I-2.

2. Member States shall see that they furnish themselves, on a timescale compatible with the timetable set out in Annex II-1, with appropriate equipment and shore-based installations for receiving and utilising the information referred to in paragraph 1.

Article 8 Voyage data recorders (black boxes)

Ships calling at a port located in the Community must be fitted with a voyage data recorder (black box) in accordance with the detailed rules laid down in Annex II-2. Any exemptions granted to ro-ro ferries or high-speed passenger craft under Article 4(1)(d) of Council Directive 1999/35/EC [10] shall terminate on the date on which this Directive enters into force.

[10] OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 1.

The voyage data recorder must be able to store, in a secure and retrievable form, and make available to the Member State involved in an enquiry following a maritime accident, relevant information concerning the position, movement, physical status, and command and control of the ship concerned.

Title II - Notification of dangerous or polluting goods on board ships (Hazmat)

Article 9 Obligations on the shipper

No dangerous or polluting goods may be offered for carriage or taken on board any ship in a port of a Member State unless a declaration has been delivered to the master or operator containing the correct technical names of the dangerous or polluting goods, the United Nations (UN) numbers where they exist, the hazard classes and the quantities of such goods and, if they are being carried in haulage units other than tanks, the identification numbers thereof.

It shall be the duty of the shipper to deliver to the master or operator the declaration required by this Directive and to ensure that the shipment offered for carriage is indeed the one declared in compliance with the first paragraph.

Article 10

Notification by ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods

1. The operator, agent or master of a ship carrying dangerous or polluting goods and leaving a port in a Member State shall, at the latest at the moment of departure, notify the information indicated in Annex III to the competent authority designated by that Member State.

2 The operator, agent or master of a ship carrying dangerous or polluting goods coming from a port located outside the Community and bound for a port located in the Community or an anchorage located in a Member State's territorial waters shall, at the latest upon departure from the loading port or as soon as the port of destination is known, if this information is unavailable at the moment of departure, notify the information indicated in Annex III to the competent authority of the Member State in which the first port of destination or anchorage is located.

3. Member States may put in place a procedure authorising the operator, agent or master of a ship referred to in the above paragraphs to notify the information listed in Annex III to the port authority of the port of departure or destination in the Community, as appropriate.

The procedure put in place must ensure that the competent authority has access to the information indicated in Annex III at all times should it be needed. To this end, the competent port authority shall retain the information listed in Annex III long enough for it to be usable in the event of an accident or incident at sea. The port authority shall take the necessary measures to provide this information electronically and without delay to the competent authority, 24 hours a day upon request.

4. The operator, agent, or master of the ship must communicate the cargo information indicated in point 5 of Annex III to the port authority or the competent authority electronically. Where EDI messages are used to transmit data, the EDIFACT message formats indicated in Annex IV must be used.

5. Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods in transit through the territorial waters or exclusive economic zones of Member States and neither leaving nor bound for a Community port shall notify coastal stations operating a mandatory reporting system as referred to in Article 5(1) of the quantity and IMO class of dangerous goods they are carrying.

Article 11 Computerised exchange of data between Member States

Member States shall cooperate to ensure the interconnection and interoperability of the national systems used to manage the information indicated in Annex III.

Communication systems set up in application of the above paragraph must display the following features:

- data exchange must be electronic and enable messages notified in accordance with Article 10 to be received and processed;

- the system must allow information to be transmitted 24 hours a day;

- each Member State must be able, upon request, to send information on the ship and the dangerous or polluting cargo on board without delay to the competent authority of another Member State.

Article 12 Exemptions

1. Member States may exempt national scheduled services performed between ports located on their territory from the requirement laid down in Article 10 where the following conditions are met:

- the company operating the scheduled services referred to above keeps and updates a list of the ships concerned and sends it to the competent authority concerned,

- for each journey performed, the information listed in Annex III is kept available for the competent authority upon request. The company must establish an internal system to ensure that, upon request 24 hours a day and without delay, the said information can be sent to the competent authority electronically, in accordance with Article 10(2).

2. Member States shall periodically check that the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are being met. Where at least one of these conditions is no longer being met, Member States shall immediately withdraw enjoyment of the exemption from the company concerned.

3. Member States shall communicate to the Commission a list of companies and ships granted exemption under this Article, as well as any updating of that list.

4. Where two or more Member States are concerned in an international scheduled service operated by a single company, they may collaborate in granting an exemption to the company concerned in accordance with the requirements laid down by this Article.

TITLE III - Monitoring of hazardous ships and intervention in the event of incidents and accidents at sea

Article 13 Ships posing a potential hazard to shipping

1. Ships meeting the criteria set out below shall be considered to be ships posing a potential hazard to shipping or a threat to the environment within the meaning of this Directive:

- ships which have been involved in accidents or incidents at sea as referred to in Article 14;

- ships which have failed to comply with the reporting requirements imposed by this Directive;

- ships which have failed to comply with the applicable rules in ships' routing systems and vessel traffic services placed under the responsibility of a Member State;

- ships in respect of which there is proof or strong presumptive evidence of deliberate discharges of oil or other infringements of the Marpol Convention in waters under the jurisdiction of a Member State;

- ships which have been refused access to Community ports or which have been the subject of a report or notification by a Member State in accordance with Annex I-1 to Directive 95/21/EC.

2. Coastal stations holding relevant information on the ships referred to in paragraph 1 shall communicate it to the coastal stations concerned in the other Member States located along the planned route of the ship.

3. Without prejudice to Article 15, Member States shall, in compliance with international law, take the appropriate measures regarding the ships referred to in paragraph 1 which they have identified or which have been reported to them by other Member States, with a view to preventing or reducing the risk to safety or the environment at sea. They shall carry out any checks or action they deem appropriate, in conditions compatible with Directive 95/21/EC, with a view to establishing any infringements of the provisions of this Directive or of the relevant rules of international conventions in force. Where appropriate, they shall inform the Member State which sent them the information pursuant to paragraph 2 of the results of the action they take.

Article 14 Reporting of incidents and accidents at sea

1. With a view to preventing or mitigating any significant threat to maritime safety, the safety of individuals or the environment, the master of any ship sailing in the territorial sea or exclusive economic zone of a Member State or the high seas off the coast of a Member State must immediately report to the coastal station responsible for that geographical area:

- any incident or accident affecting the safety of the ship, such as collision, running aground, damage, malfunction or breakdown, flooding or shifting of cargo, any defects in the hull or structural failure,

- any incident or accident which compromises shipping safety, such as failures likely to affect the ship's manoeuvrability or seaworthiness, or any defects affecting the propulsion system or steering gear, the power generation equipment, navigation equipment or communications equipment,

- any situation liable to lead to pollution of the waters or shore of a Member State, such as the discharge or threat of discharge of polluting products into the sea, as well as any slicks of polluting materials and containers or packages seen drifting at sea.

2. The report message sent in application of paragraph 1 must include at least the ship's identity, its position, the port of departure, the port of destination, the address from which information may be obtained on the cargo where appropriate, the number of persons aboard, details of the incident and any relevant information referred to in IMO Resolution A.851(20).

Article 15 Measures in the event of exceptionally bad weather

Where a Member State considers, in the event of exceptionally bad weather and sea conditions, that there is a serious threat of pollution of its shipping areas or coastal zones, or of the shipping areas or coastal zones of other Member States, it must, using any appropriate administrative measures, prohibit ships liable to create such a threat from leaving ports located in the area or zone in question.

The ban on departure shall be lifted once it has been established that the ship may leave the port without posing a serious threat within the meaning of paragraph 1.

Article 16 Measures relating to incidents or accidents at sea

1. In the event of incidents or accidents at sea as referred to in Article 14, Member States shall take all appropriate measures, consistent with international law, to ensure the safety of shipping and of persons and to protect the marine environment.

Annex V sets out a non-exhaustive list of measures available to Member States in application of this Article.

2. The operator, the master of the ship and, where appropriate, the owner of the cargo must cooperate fully with the competent national authorities, at the latter's request, with a view to minimising the consequences of an incident or accident at sea.

3. The master of a ship to which the provisions of the ISM Code are applicable shall inform the company of any accident or incident which occurs at sea. As soon as it has been informed of such a situation, the company must contact the competent coastal station and place itself at its disposal as necessary.

Article 17 Ports of refuge

Member States shall make the necessary arrangements to ensure that ports are available on their territory which are capable of accommodating ships in distress. To this end, having consulted the parties concerned, they shall draw up plans specifying, for each port concerned, the features of the area, the installations available, the operational and environmental constraints and the procedures linked to their possible use to accommodate ships in distress.

Plans for accommodating ships in distress shall be made available upon demand. Member States shall inform the Commission of the measures taken in application of the preceding paragraph.

Article 18 Informing the parties concerned

1. The competent coastal authority of the Member State concerned shall, as necessary, broadcast within the relevant areas any incident notified under Article 14(1) and information with regard to any ship which poses a threat to other shipping.

2 Competent authorities holding information notified in accordance with Articles 10 and 14 shall make adequate arrangements to provide such information at any time upon request for safety reasons by the competent authority of another Member State.

3. Any Member State whose competent authorities have been informed, pursuant to this Directive or in some other way, of facts which involve or increase the risk for another Member State of a hazard being posed to certain shipping areas and coastal zones, shall take whatever measures are appropriate to inform any interested State thereof as soon as possible and consult it regarding the action being envisaged. Where appropriate, Member States shall cooperate with a view to pooling the arrangements for joint action.

Each Member State shall make the necessary arrangements to use fully the reports which ships are required to transmit to them pursuant to Article 14.

TITLE IV - Accompanying measures

Article 19 Designation and publication of a list of competent bodies

1. Each Member State shall designate the competent authorities, port authorities and coastal stations to which the notifications required by this Directive must be made.

2. Each Member State shall ensure that the shipping industry is properly informed and regularly updated, notably via nautical publications, regarding the authorities and stations designated pursuant to paragraph 1, including where appropriate the geographical area for which they are competent, and the procedures laid down for notifying the information required by the Directive.

3. Member States shall send the Commission a list of the bodies they designate pursuant to paragraph 1, as well as any updatings thereof.

Article 20 Cooperation between the Member States and the Commission

1. The Member States and the Commission shall cooperate on attaining the following objectives:

a) making optimum use of the information notified pursuant to this Directive, notably by developing appropriate telematic links between coastal stations and port authorities with a view to exchanging data relating to ships' movements, their estimated times of arrival in ports and their cargo;

b) developing and enhancing the effectiveness of telematic links between the coastal stations of the Member States with a view to obtaining a clearer picture of traffic, improving the monitoring of ships in transit along European coasts, and harmonising and, as far as possible, streamlining the reports required from ships en route;

c) extending the cover of the European monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic with a view to enhanced identification and monitoring of ships sailing in European waters. To this end, the Member States and the Commission shall work together to put in place mandatory reporting systems, mandatory vessel traffic services and, where necessary, appropriate ships' routing systems, with a view to submitting them to the IMO for approval.

2. The European Maritime Safety Agency created by Regulation ../../EC shall help attain the following objectives:

- facilitating cooperation between the Member States and the Commission to attain the objectives set out in paragraph 1;

- promoting cooperation between riparian States in the shipping areas concerned in the fields covered by this Directive;

- seeing that the shipping industry is better informed of the requirements and procedures stipulated by this Directive;

- collecting and making available to the interested parties the list of competent bodies designated pursuant to Article 19, the relevant data regarding companies granted an exemption under Article 12 and ships posing a potential hazard to shipping referred to in Article 13 and any appropriate information for implementing this Directive;

- developing and operating any information system necessary for attaining the objectives referred to in the indents above;

- with a view inter alia to ensuring optimum traffic conditions in areas of high traffic density or which are hazardous for shipping, establishing regional centres to manage the information gathered and utilised pursuant to this Directive.

Article 21 Confidentiality of information

Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the confidentiality of information sent to them pursuant to this Directive, and must use such information only for the purposes of maritime safety and preventing pollution by ships.

Article 22 Monitoring the implementation of the Directive and penalties

1. Member States shall, by means of regular checks and unannounced checks, check the functioning of the telematic systems set up to meet the requirements of the Directive, and in particular their capacity to meet the requirements of receiving or sending without delay, 24 hours a day, information notified pursuant to Articles 10 and 12.

2. Member States shall provide in their national law for financial penalties to be imposed on operators, agents, shippers, owners of cargo and masters of ships in the event of infringements of the provisions of this Directive.

The financial penalties referred to in the subparagraph above must be set at a level high enough to deter the person from committing or persisting in an infringement.

3. Without prejudice to the other measures needed to apply the Directive, the financial penalty arrangements introduced by Member States must apply inter alia to the following infringements of the Directive:

- failure to make prior announcement of entry into port as required by Article 4;

- failure to report to a mandatory reporting system as required by Article 5;

- violation of the applicable rules in a ships' routing system or failure to comply with instructions given by a vessel traffic service designated by a Member State as required by Article 6;

- absence or malfunction of the shipborne automatic identification system or of the voyage data recorder referred to in Articles 7 and 8 respectively;

- failure to declare or incorrect declaration by the shipper under Article 9;

- violation of the notification requirements laid down in Articles 10 and 12;

- failure to report an incident, accident or situation at sea as required by Article 14;

- departure from a port in violation of Article 15;

- failure to cooperate with the national authorities to minimise the consequences of an accident at sea in accordance with Article 16.

4. Member States shall, without delay, inform the flag State and any other State concerned of measures taken in respect of ships not flying their flag pursuant to Articles 13 and 16 and to paragraph 2 of this Article.

5. Where a Member State finds, on the occasion of an accident or incident at sea referred to in Article 16, that the company has not been able to establish and maintain a link with the ship or with the operational authorities concerned, it shall so inform the State which issued the ISM certification, or on whose behalf it was issued.

Where the seriousness of the failure shows the existence of a major incidence of non-compliance in the functioning of the company's safety management system, the Member State which issued the certificate of compliance or safety management certificate to the ship shall immediately withdraw the ISM certification from the company concerned.

Final provisions

Article 23 Amendment procedure

The procedure laid down in Article 24 may be implemented in order:

- for the purposes of this Directive, to apply subsequent amendments which have entered into force in respect of the relevant international instruments referred to in Article 2(i),

- to amend the requirements and procedures laid down in the annexes in the light of experience gained with this Directive.

Article 24 Regulatory committee

1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee composed of representatives of the Member States and chaired by a representative of the Commission.

2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, the regulatory procedure laid down in Article 5 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, in compliance with Article 8 thereof.

3. The period provided for in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC is set at three months.

Article 25

Member States shall adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 July 2002 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by Member States.

Article 26

Council Directive 93/75/EEC is hereby repealed twenty-four months after the adoption of this Directive.

Article 27

This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Article 28

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

ANNEX I

Information notified by the ships referred to in Title I

1. Information referred to in Article 5

- A - Ship identification (name, call sign, IMO identification number or MMSI number)

- C or D: Position

- G - Port of departure

- I - Port of destination and estimated time of arrival

- P - Cargo and, if dangerous goods present on board, quantity and IMO class

- W - Total number of persons on board

- X - Various information:

- Address for the communication of cargo information,

- Characteristics and estimated volume of bunker fuel, for ships carrying more than 5 000 tonnes of bunker fuel.

2. Information referred to in Article 7

- Ship identification (name, call sign, IMO identification number or MMSI number)

- Ship type

- Position, course, speed and navigational status

- Port of departure, port of destination and estimated time of arrival

- Presence on board of dangerous goods: yes/no

- If yes, address for the communication of cargo information

3. In the event of a change to the information notified pursuant to this Annex, the master of the ship must forthwith inform the coastal authority concerned thereof.

ANNEX II

Prescriptions applicable to on-board equipment

I - Automatic identification systems (AIS)

1. Ships built on or after 1 July 2002

Passenger ships, irrespective of size, and all ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards built on or after 1 July 2002 which call at a port located in the Community are subject to the carrying requirement laid down in Article 7.

2. Ships built prior to 1 July 2002

Ships built prior to 1 July 2002 which call at a port located in the Community are subject to the carrying requirement laid down in Article 7 according to the following timetable:

- passenger ships