Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing requirements and harmonised procedures for the safe loading and unloading of bulk carriers"

(2001/C 14/08)

On 23 June 2000 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 80 (2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 28 September 2000. The rapporteur was Dr Bredima-Savopoulou.

At its 376th plenary session of 19 October 2000 the Committee adopted unanimously the following opinion.

1. Introduction

1.1. More than 5000 bulk carriers operating worldwide transport 30 % of the world ocean cargo (dry bulk cargoes) under tough market conditions and intense operational demands. Bulk carriers must be handled with care in ports as well as at sea. Accidental stress or damage caused during the loading or unloading could lead to catastrophic structural failures with unacceptable loss of lives.

1.2. In recent years there has been increasing concern over the number of bulk carriers that have been lost at sea and the associated loss of life. According to recent statistics in the period 1990-1998, 131 bulk carriers were lost with 731 lives(1). Research has indicated that over-stressing due to incorrect loading, high loading rates under an uncontrolled process and physical damage to cargo hold structures during discharging have contributed to hull structural failures leading to ship losses. The impact of dry bulk cargo-handling operations is in most cases invisible but becomes potentially damaging once the vessel encounters the dynamic forces of wave action on passage.

1.3. The safety of bulk carriers is one of the most important issues that is being addressed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and, as a result, a number of safety measures, covering both structural and operational aspects of such ships, have been introduced recently by IMO. The Code of Practice for the Safe Loading and Unloading of Bulk Carriers (BLU Code) is one such measure. The purpose of the Code is to assist persons responsible for the safe loading and unloading of bulk carriers to carry out their functions and to promote the safety of bulk carriers.

1.4. The ESC has been asked for its Opinion on a proposed Directive submitted by the Commission to establish requirements and harmonised procedures for the safe loading and unloading of bulk carriers.

2. The Commission's proposal

2.1. In its Communication on a Common Policy on Safe Seas (1993) the Commission highlighted the problem of vanishing bulk carriers and called for priority action to enhance the safety of this vulnerable type of ship.

2.2. Assessment into the causes of bulk carrier losses undertaken by Intercargo indicates that sudden disappearances of ships, for which the cause could not be established at all, raised the question whether faulty cargo-handling operations could have been at the origin of some of the problems. Furthermore, the results of a special study of the European Commission indicated clearly the need to improve the procedures of cooperation and communication between bulk carriers and the dry bulk cargo-handling terminals in European ports and suggested that terminals should operate in conformity with a quality assurance policy.

2.3. The Commission is of the view that particular attention has to be paid to those operational safety aspects affecting the safety of bulk carriers which are related to ship/port interface. On the other hand, cargo-handling being intrinsically related to the safety of ships, if not applied uniformly among ports, can lead to distortions of competition.

2.4. The purpose of the proposed Directive is to provide a better protection of the safety of bulk carriers calling at terminals in the EU for the loading or unloading of solid bulk cargoes. The proposal sets out requirements in relation to the suitability of bulk carriers and terminals, the responsibilities of masters and terminal representatives, procedures between bulk carriers and terminals and the role of the competent authorities.

2.5. The proposal seeks to establish a legal framework in the EU for applying in a harmonised way the relevant provisions of the Code of Practice for the Safe Loading and Unloading of Bulk Carriers (BLU Code), which was adopted by IM0 in December 1997 [Resolution A.862(20)]. The proposed mandatory provisions are based on the elaboration of basic sections of the BLU Code as it was not deemed necessary to incorporate in the proposal all the provisions of the BLU Code.

3. General comments

3.1. The ESC in its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission on a Common Policy on Safe Seas(2) subscribed to the view that "the maritime transport policy of the Community must secure competitive transport services and ensure that such services take place at a minimal level of risk for crews, passengers, cargo and vessels, for the marine environment and coastal activities". The proposal is consistent with this approach and effectively expands the scope of the Action Programme of the Common Policy on Safe Seas to an important area of operational safety where limited compliance and harmonisation exist so far.

3.2. The ESC also stated in the above Opinion(3) that "it is shipowners, ship operators, seamen, underwriters, charterers, flag States, classification societies and port States who must all pull together ... in finding the formula for cleaner and safer seas". In the same vein, the Maritime Industry Charter signed in the Mare Forum Conference (Amsterdam, 22 June 1999) by 24 maritime industry organizations - including the two ports organizations (ESPO(4) and FEPORT(5)) - expressly states that "each link in the maritime responsibility chain, be it at sea or on shore, should make safety considerations an integral part of its activities".

3.3. There are about 100 commercial ports/terminals in the EU where dry bulk carriers load or unload. Port and terminal operators, and, as important, the charterers who may well own terminals, need to be persuaded of the hazardous nature of their cargo handling practices. For too long ports and terminals have been employing cargo handling practices that are driven by the need to load or discharge cargo at the maximum rate permitted by their own machinery. In the loading ports there is a constant pressure upon ship to accept cargo faster and faster. In the unloading ports the use of very heavy grabs or pneumatic hammers to shake down cargo and the use of large earth-moving equipment with their steel blades is a normal feature of many unloading berths. In this regard research of IACS(6) shows that improper handling of heavy, high density cargo during loading and unloading may cause excessive stress and physical damage to holds and bulkheads, as well as damage to coatings protecting cargo holds from corrosion. Over time, this may reduce or threaten structural safety margins when the ship is in bad weather.

3.3.1. Many bulk carriers pressed by commercial considerations not to deviate or reduce speed in order to reach port on schedule, have been lost or sustained structural damage in areas of adverse weather conditions.

3.3.2. The master and the crew are responsible for the maintenance of the condition of their ship during its normal operation. However, in many cases, the need to ensure the safety of the ship for their own safety as well, may be subordinate to economic pressures, as evidenced by the operation of substandard ships. Furthermore, the demanding workload and the various tasks imposed upon masters and their crews when in ports, lead to fatigue and thereby affect the safe operation of ships.

3.3.3. The ESC believes that such economic pressures upon ships and crews should not be allowed to erode the relevant safety margins.

3.4. Ship officers have an obligation to try and prevent damage to their ship. However, in most cases it is difficult to establish that physical damage has been done until unloading is complete and harder to prevent it being done in the first place. Proving that the terminal is the guilty party is also quite difficult with the ship rushed off berth after unloading is completed. For the purpose of early identification of potential problems, IMO Resolution A.866 (20) has provided guidance to ship's crews and terminal personnel with respect to the principal areas on bulk carriers that are likely to be susceptible to damage or corrosion. The guidance recommends that the terminal operators and members of the ship's crew themselves regularly inspect the cargo holds, hatch covers and ballast tanks with a view to detecting damage and defects. It also stresses that from a safety point of view, it is desirable that inspections of cargo holds by the ship's crew or terminal operators are conducted well before all loading and after all unloading operations, although practical limitations will have to be taken into account.

3.5. The ESC notes that although the IMO BLU Code itself is not a legally binding instrument, certain parts of the Code have been incorporated in SOLAS regulation V1/7, which entered into force on 1 July 1998 and, therefore became mandatory from that date. The above regulation specifically addresses the interaction between the ship and the bulk cargo loading and unloading terminals. Rendering the main provisions of IMO Resolutions mandatory through Community legislation and introducing relevant complementary measures, such as the implementation by terminals of a quality management system, is considered the most appropriate and effective way to achieve the aim of enhancing bulk carrier safety.

3.6. The ESC welcomes the long awaited proposal and endorses its main objective to implement in the EU, in a harmonised way, the main principles and the provisions of the IMO Resolutions concerning the safety of ships carrying solid bulk cargoes and the safe loading and unloading of such ships and, in particular, the five main principles referred to in the operative part of the IMO Resolution A.862 (20). The ESC also believes that the proposal should incorporate relevant parts of the IMO Resolution A.866 (20). The proposed legal instrument of the Directive will provide a wider degree of flexibility to Member States in application of the subsidiarity principle.

4. Specific Comments

4.1. Article 2 - Scope

The ESC concurs with the Commission's opinion that since the BLU Code does not introduce any size limit for terminals or bulk carriers for its scope of application, a two tier safety regime whereby certain classes of bulk carriers or terminals are excluded from the scope of application of the proposed Directive based upon size criteria only, should be avoided.

4.2. Article 3 - Definitions

The ESC notes that the definition of the "Terminal Representative" may be construed as requiring the terminal to designate a representative for each individual ship. Though in practice this would be possible, the terminal representative, being the counterpart of the "designated person" under the ISM Code(7), should be fixed and the person so designated should have the overall responsibility for the compliance of the terminal with its obligations under Annex VI.

4.3. Article 5 - Requirements in relation to the suitability of terminals

Article 5 introduces an indispensable part of the package which ensures balanced commitments of ships and terminals for safe operations. The requirement that terminals develop, implement and maintain a quality management system, in accordance with the ISO 9001: 2000 standards should be seen as the counterpart of the obligation of ships and companies to operate under the ISM Code. It is estimated that only 20 % of terminals have a quality management system. Moreover, some West European terminals are in poor condition compared to terminals in LDC countries. The ESC commends the Commission for its vision and aim of ensuring that similar levels of commitment to applying internationally agreed safety and quality management principles will be available to both bulk carriers and terminals.

4.4. Article 6 - Responsibilities of masters and terminal representatives

The BLU Code and the proposed Directive define quite clearly the distinct and separate responsibilities of the master and those of the terminal representative. The overall responsibility of the master should be construed as recognition of his primary role on matters related to the safety of his ship and his prevailing opinion in cases of divergent views stemming from ship/terminal interface issues, and not as assigning responsibility even for practices, actions or omissions of the terminal.

4.5. Article 9 - Repair of damages during loading and unloading

The BLU Code stipulates that in case of damage to the ship during loading and unloading the action to be taken, whether to carry out immediate repair or defer it, should be to the satisfaction of the administration or an organization recognised by it and the appropriate authority of the port State. It also provides that where immediate repair is considered necessary, it should be carried out to the satisfaction of the master before the ship leaves port. Under the proposed Directive the decision will be taken by the port State control authority, which may rely upon the recommendation of a recognised organization (apparently different from the organization recognised by the administration). It may be appropriate to clarify that the option to use a different organization should be limited only in cases of ships certificated by organizations not recognised by the EU.

4.6. Article 10 - Verification and reporting

The ESC is of the view that the scope of verification should be expanded to include verification and monitoring that terminals have developed, implemented and maintained the required quality management system as per article 5 (4).

4.7. Annexes IV and VI - Duties of the master and the terminal representative prior to and during loading or unloading operations

The duties of the Master and the Terminal Representative should also include the requirement, when and where feasible, to inspect cargo holds well before all loading and after all unloading operations with a view to detecting damages and defects.

5. Conclusions

5.1. The ESC believes that the implementation of the proposed Directive will enhance the safety of bulk carriers in EU ports and could give a strong signal for the commitment of Member States to support measures decided at international level. It would also reduce the risk of distortion of competition between terminals.

5.2. The ESC endorses the proposed objectives that address the legitimate concerns of the shipping industry. Bulk carrier safety has been adequately regulated and mechanisms are in place to implement and enforce existing international and EU legislation. The complementary action to be introduced through the Directive will strike a proper balance between the interests of ships and terminals. The balance should be maintained if improvements in safety are to be achieved.

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) Intercargo: Bulk Carrier Casualty Report, 1998.

(2) OJ C 34, 2.2.1994, p. 47.

(3) OJ C 34, 2.2.1994, p. 47.

(4) ESPO: European Sea Ports Organization.

(5) FEPORT: Federation of European Private Port Operators.

(6) IACS: International Association of Classification Societies.

(7) ISM Code: International Safety Management Code.