Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS FOR SHIP INSPECTION AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS
Date: 1993-05-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: international standard, prevention of pollution, roadworthiness tests, supervisory body, transport safety, vessel

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES 

COM(93) 218 final 

Brussels,  19  May  1993 

Proposal  for a 

COUNCIL DECISION 

ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS 

FOR SHIP INSPECTION 

AND SURVEY  ORGANISATIONS 

(presented  by  the Commission) 

fo>-,,: 

A 

EXPLANATORY  MEMORANDUM 

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 

1. 
In the Communication  "A Common  Policy  on Safe  Seas",  approved 
on 24 February  1993, the Commission underlines that despite the  efforts 
already  made  in  order  to  reduce  the  risk  of  casualties  at  sea,  both  at 
national and international level,  the risk in shipping  activities is still very 
high1. 

2.  The  Communication  also  draws  attention  to  the  wide  variation  of 
accidents  and  deficiencies  within  the  world  fleets.  These  differences 
continue  to  exist  in  spite  of  the  maze  of  international  standards  which 
regulate the shipping sector and which would be expected to lead to similar 
levels of safety  performance  in all fleets. 

3.  The variations in safety  performance  are due to different  factors.  An 
important one is the unsatisfactory  performance  of a number  of  shipping 
operators  and the flag  authorities  responsible for  safety. 

4.  The International  Maritime  Organization  (IMO)  has  also  drawn the 
attention of the shipping world to the fact that many flag  States are unable 
to  secure  and  maintain  a  proper  control  of  the  safety  and  environment 
protection  standards  of  vessels  on their  respective  registers  or  operating 
under  their  flags. 

Investigations  into the causes  of  accidents  and deficiencies  found  on 
5. 
ships  point  to  the  ways  chosen  by  States  of 
the 
internationally  agreed  standards  on  construction  and  maintenance  of 
seagoing  vessels.  These  standards  are  mostly  fixed  by  international 
Conventions designed to ensure a satisfactory  level of safety  and pollution 
prevention.  More precisely: 

implementing 

the International  Convention  for  the Safety  of Life  at Sea (SOLAS 
1974) lays down technical safety  standards for  cargo vessels over a 

Communication from the Commission "A Common Policy on Safe Seas", p.l 

to 13. 

I 

given  tonnage  and  for  passenger  vessels,  both  on  an  international 
voyage 
the International Convention  on Load Lines  (LLC  1966) establishes 
safety  standards  relating  to  solidity  and  stability  of  ships  and 
the International Convention on Maritime Pollution (M ARPOL 1973) 
lays  down  construction  and  operational  rules  designed  to  prevent 
pollution  of  the  seas. 

6.  According  to  these  Conventions,  the  national  Administrations  are 
responsible  for  the  testing  of  compliance  with  the  international  standards 
and the issuing of the corresponding international Certificates  to the vessels 
on their  Registers. These tasks require such a vast technical  infrastructure 
and expertise that it is difficult  for  most Member  States  to carry  out their 
responsibilities using  the actual structure of the national  Administrations. 

7.  Until two decades  ago, these tasks were,  however,  already  performed 
by  a limited  number  of highly  specialized  organisations,  the  classification 
societies,  with  extensive  experience  in  the  shipping  sector,  employing 
skilled  technical  staff  and  supported  by powerful  research  and  computer 
centres.  They  had  been  assessing  for  quite  some  time  already  the 
seaworthiness  and  quality  of  ships,  within  the  framework  of  private 
contracts  with  shipowners,  in  order  to  deliver  a  class,  in  a  highly 
professional  manner,  thanks  to  the  adequacy  of  their  back-up  structures. 
For  this  reason,  the national  Administrations  decided,  in  conformity  with 
specific  provisions  in  the  Conventions,  to delegate  to  these  classification 
societies  inspections  and  surveys  to  various  extents,  i.e.  control  of 
compliance with national and international safety  rules and, in some cases, 
the issuing  of  safety  Certificates. 

8.  Furthermore,  neither  the SOLAS  '74 Convention  nor  the Load  Lines 
Convention  identify  the standards  to which all  ships  must  conform,  at the 
building  stage  and  during  their  entire  life,  to  a degree  detailed  enough  to 
ensure  that  they  are  uniformly  implemented  in  a  non-divergent  manner. 
This  is  particularly  true  for  elements  such  as  the  hull,  machinery  and 
electrical and control installations. These fundamental  ship components are 

3 

controlled according to the rules of classification  societies; the Load Lines 
Convention even expressly provides that hull, machinery  and electrical and 
in  conformity  with  the 
control  installations  "built  and  maintained 
requirements  of  a  classification  society  recognized  by  the  Administration 
may be considered to possess adequate strength"2. Therefore,  most national 
Administrations  decided  at  the  same  time  to delegate  to  the  classification 
societies  the preparation  and enforcement  of safety  rules  concerning  these 
parts  of  the  ships. 

9.  Since  the  adoption  of  these  Conventions,  however,  the  number  of 
classification  societies  has  sharply  increased  to reach 40 to 50 nowadays. 
This  is  the  root  of  the  problem.  Quite  a  number  of  these  companies,  in 
fact,  cannot offer  sufficient  evidence as regards their experience,  reliability 
and professionalism  and do not have the traditional characteristics to justify 
their being  delegated  to act on behalf  of  the national  Administrations:  for 
example,  they  have  insufficient  trained  and  experienced  personnel  and 
infrastructure  to prepare and carry  out tests, to interpret rules and in some 
cases  to  lay  them  down.  There  is  also  a lack  of  procedural  criteria  to  be 
followed  by  certain  classification  societies:  for  ships  in  service,  survey 
intervals  and specifications  of conditions under which a partially worn out 
structure  or  worn  machinery  may  be  considered  unsafe  are  not  defined. 

10.  All  these  factors  have  led  to  a  situation  worldwide  and  in  the  EC 
where  the most  important  rules,  i.e.  those  affecting  hull,  machinery  and 
electrical  and control installations, have not been laid down  internationally 
but only internally by  classification  societies,  and  the conformity  of  ships 
to rules is determined by bodies of different  levels of quality  and expertise 
issues  can  hardly  disregard  other 
whose  decisions  on  safety-related 
considerations  such  as  the  need  to  retain  a fleet  under  their  class.  These 
divergences do not only have an adverse effect  on safety,  they can and do 
create competitive disadvantages  which encourage a more lax approach to 
surveying and certification  in those classification  societies with an excellent 
record  of  performance. 

2  I n t e r n a t i o n al  Convention  on  Load  L i n e s,  1966,  Annex  I  Regulation  1, 

H 

JUSTIFICATION  FOR A  COUNCIL  DIRECTIVE 

11. 

a) What  are the objectives  of  the envisaged  action in relation to the 
obligations  of  the  Community? 

The  Extraordinary  Council  on Environment  and Transport,  at its 
meeting  of  25 January  1993, urged  the  Community  and  Member 
States  to  establish  strict,  convergent  implementation  for  the  whole 
Community  of  international  rules,  in particular  on  construction, 
certification  and  maintenance  of  vessels.  The  Communication,  "A 
Common  Policy  on safe  Seas",  approved by the Commission  on 24 
February  1993, announced  the proposal for  a Community  Directive 
establishing  measures  to  be  followed  by  the  Member  States  and 
national organisations concerned with the certification  and the related 
surveillance  of  compliance  by  ships  with 
international 
Conventions  on  safety  and  pollution  prevention  at  sea.  This 
Directive  is  fully 
in  the 
Communication. 

in  line  with  the  action  announced 

the 

b) Is the envisaged action solely the responsibility of the Community 
or  a responsibility  shared  with  the Member  States? 

It is  a responsibility  shared  with  the Member  States  by  virtue of 
Article  84,  2  of  the  Treaty. 

c) What  is  the  Community  dimension  of  the  problem? 

All  the  Member  States  are  concerned  as  flag  States  and  eleven  of 
them  are  also  concerned  as port  States. 

r 

d)  What  is  the  most  efficient  solution  taking  into  account  the 
resources  of the Community  and the Member  States? 

The  most  efficient  solution  is  at  Community  level;  a  complete 
explanation  of  the  need  for  a  Community  measure  is  given  in 
paragraphs  12 to 15. 

e) What is the concrete added value of the action envisaged by the 
Community  and what would be the cost of  inaction? 

The  concrete  added  value  of  this  Directive  is  the  enforcement  of 
international standards in a non-divergent way at flag level and also 
at port  level,  all over  in the Community.  Statistics  show that  each 
year  of  inactivity  involves  a high price  in  terms  of  casualties  and 
loss of human lives. 

f)  What forms  of  actions are available to the Community? 

This  measure  is  meant  to  solve  problems  at  Community  level 
because  of  the added  value  the Community  can bring.  One  of  the 
elements  necessary  for  attaining  the  objectives  of  the  action  is  to 
organise  a Community-wide recognition  of  certain organisations. 
This  recognition  can  maintain  an  adequate  safety  and  pollution 
prevention level only if  it lays down minimum  standards  for 
recognition. Common criteria for hull, machinery and electrical and 
control installations  are also introduced by the proposed  measure. 
The definition  of priority criteria for  Port State Control will ensure 
appropriate  implementation  to  ensure  that  ships  flying  third  State 
flags  are not treated more favourably  than ships flying  the flag  of a 
Member State. 

g)  Is  uniform  legislation  necessary  or  does  a Directive  setting  the 
general  objectives  and  leaving  the  execution  to  the  Member  States 
suffice? 

This Directive establishes at Community level a common  framework 
of  quality  requirements  to be met by  the organisations  to which the 
Member  States decide to delegate tasks, but it does so by leaving to 
each Member State the responsibility of deciding the implementation 
tools which best fit its internal system, the recognition its, the means 
of  enforcement,  and  the  implementation  of  the  Directive. 

12.  The  facts  outlined  in the general  introduction  show  the necessity  to 
ensure that all the national Administrations  and the organisations  to which 
they  delegate  the  inspection,  survey  and  certification  tasks  are  fully 
qualified  for the job, which implies that their structure, methods,  rules and 
know-how  guarantee  a  high  quality  of  control  of  conformity  with 
international  rules. Rules should also be established  such as those fnr hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations,  against  which  the 
construction  and  maintenance  of  ships  can  actually  be  examined. 

13.  Action within the international organisations have not so far  achieved 
these  objectives. 

Quite  a  number  of  the  States  which  are  members  of  IMO  are  not  in  a 
position  to  improve  the performance  of  the  organisations  acting  on  their 
behalf.  Furthermore  for  several  organisations  to  accept  internationally 
agreed  high  quality  standards  would 
their  present 
performance  levels  to  a point  where  they  will be  less  attractive  than they 
are  now  to  irresponsible  shipowners.  If  certain  developing  States  were 
obliged to delegate their tasks only to more severe classification  societies, 
they  would  need  financial  support  to  upgrade  the  quality  of  their 
classification  societies  and  their  fleet.  These  circumstances  make  it 
extremely  difficult  to  introduce  rules  of  a  level  of  adequate  severity 

imply  raising 

t 

through IMO; this has been demonstrated  during  the first  meeting of the 
Flag State Implementation  (FSI)  Committee (see paragraph  17 below). 

Furthermore,  ongoing  work  on  classification  societies  in  IMO  does not 
deal  with  implementation  and  development  of  the  rules  affecting  hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations,  while  this  item  is 
considered an essential part of the Directive proposed by the Commission. 

It  is  also  quite  obvious  that  an effective  answer  to  the  situation  outlined 
above cannot be given solely  at national  level.  The present  unacceptable 
situation  described  above  is,  in  fact,  the. result  of  two  decades  during 
which  individual  action  by  States  has  failed  to  secure  the  safety  level 
provided for by the international regulatory framework.  Hence the need for 
a  Community  solution  which  regulates  the  link  between  the  national 
Administrations  and  the  classification  societies,  establishes  qualitative 
criteria for  the organisations and aims to harmonise the development and 
implementation  of  safety  requirements  as  regards  hull,  machinery  and 
electrical  and  control  installations.  Finally,  through  Port  State  Control 
action,  it also ensures that ships flying  third country  flags  are not treated 
more  favourably  than  ships  operating  under  the  flags  of  the  Member 
States. 

In  accordance  with  the  proportionality  principle,  the  Directive 
14. 
proposed  by  the Commission  establishes  at Community  level  a common 
framework  of quality requirements to be met by the organisations to which 
the  Member  States  decide  to  delegate  tasks,  in  order  to  guarantee 
equivalent safety performances  of classification  societies in the EC, but it 
does so by leaving to each Member State the responsibility  of deciding the 
implementation tools which best fit its internal system, and to the delegated 
competent  organisations  the  duty  to  lay  down,  maintain  and  apply  the 
appropriate  standards  under  the  surveillance  of  the  Member  States  in 
cooperation  with the Commission. 

15.  The need to introduce qualitative criteria for  organisations acting on 
behalf  of Member  States has already been stressed by the Council, which 

i 

in its Regulation  (EEC)  N°  613/91 of 4 March  1991, on the transfer  of 
ships  from  one  register  to  another  within the  Community,  provides  that 
"Where  the  Certificates  are  issued  by  an  organisation  on  behalf  of  a 
Member  State,  the  latter  must  ensure  that  the  qualifications,  technical 
experience and staffing  of the said organisation are such as will enable it, 
in applying the Conventions, to issue Certificates  guaranteeing a high level 
of  safety.  The  organisation  must  be  in  a position  to develop  and update 
rules  and  regulations  having  the  quality  of  accepted  technical  standards, 
and  must  operate  with  qualified  and  experienced  surveyors  so  as 
adequately to assess a ship's  condition".3 

CONTENT OF THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 

16.  The scope of this Directive is to specify  a set of criteria to be met by 
the classification  societies and other private bodies, when acting on behalf 
of the national Administrations  of the Member States; to ensure, through 
such criteria, that the organisations authorised to carry out surveillance and 
certification,  or organisations upon which Member States intend to rely for 
those purposes,  are professionally  efficient,  reliable and able to maintain 
proper  control  of  compliance  with  safery  and  environmental  protection 
standards  of the vessels they  classify. 

This  Directive  represents  a  first  step  to  improve  the  compliance  with 
international  safety  standards  existing  in the shipping  sector  and in view 
in  particular  of  the  low  safety  performance  of  some  organisations 
concerned with the certification  and related surveillance of compliance of 
ships with  the  Conventions.  Moreover,  loopholes  and  weaknesses  in the 
international Conventions, Codes and Resolutions have often led to varying 

3  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  N°  613/91  of  4  March  1991,  article  3, 

paragraph 3. 

levels of application and enforcement  thereof,  and to consequent  differing 
safety  and environmental  performances.  A further  aim of  this Directive, 
therefore,  is to establish the development and implementation of minimum 
safety  requirements  with equivalent  effect  throughout  the Community,  in 
in  the  construction  and 
order  to  eliminate  substantial  differences 
maintenance  of  vessels  operating  under  the  flags  of  the Member  States, 
and  more  precisely  rules  on  hull,  machinery  and  electrical  and  control 
installations. 

17.  The IMO intends to develop non-mandatory guidelines for delegation 
of  authority  to  organisations,  and  minimum  standards  for  organisations 
acting on behalf  of the Administration. 
Therefore,  the newly created sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation 
was invited  to prepare a relevant IMO Resolution.  During its April 1993 
meeting this sub-Committee  finalised  a draft  Resolution. 
It  is  the  intention  of  the  sub-Committee  to  report  to  the  next  Maritime 
Safety  Committee (MSC) and Marine Environment Protection  Committee 
(MEPC)  on  the  outcome  of  its  work,  with  the  aim  of  inviting  the 
Assembly  to adopt a Resolution. 
The  requirements,  with regard  to delegation  of  authority,  set  out  in this 
Directive  are  quite  similar  to  those  under  preparation  in  the  IMO.  The 
criteria  set  out  in  Annex  I  of  the  Directive  contain  the  minimum 
requirements identified  at this stage by the Flag State Implementation sub-
Committee. 
Should  this  Assembly  Resolution  be  adopted  in  November  1993,  the 
Commission  is  prepared  to  take  the  IMO  recommendations  duly  into 
account  in so far  as the guidelines  contain more detailed  provisions  with 
regard 
the 
organisations,  and if the minimim  criteria  for  the organisations  ensure at 
least an equivalent level of  safety. 

the  relationship  between 

the  Admimstration  and 

to 

18.  In order to achieve the above mentioned aims, the Directive sets two 
objectives. The first  objective of this Directive is to secure the direct and 
tighter involvement of the national Administrations in the ship certification 

and survey process. To this end the following provisions will be necessary: 

a)  A first provision  to  establish  that  where  a  Member  State decides  to 
delegate  fully  or  in  part  its  statutory  role  in  inspecting  and  certifying 
compliance with Conventions such as SOLAS, Load Lines and MARPOL, 
or to rely upon expertise from  organisations outside its Administration to 
carry out inspections and surveys related to those Certificates,  it shall only 
entrust these duties to organisations which meet a set of common minimum 
criteria  established  in  the  Directive,  guaranteeing  their  ability  and 
commitment  to perform  at a highly  reliable and efficient  level. 

This provision applies to the inspection surveys  and Certificates  required 
by the International  Conventions  listed in the Directive;  for  example,  the 
Directive  does  not  affect  certification  of  specific  items  of  marine 
equipment,  nor  does  it  relate  to  Certificates  for  ships  which  are  not 
covered by the International  Conventions. 

The list of criteria has been established having regard to the requirements 
of the International  Association of  Classification  Societies  (IACS)  and to 
the  criteria  specified  in  EN  45004  (inspection  bodies)  and  EN  29001 
European standardisation (CEN). According to these criteria, organisations 
authorised  to act on behalf  of Member  States  are required 

to maintain a documented  quality system; 
to  employ  a  number  of  professionally  qualified  technical  staff, 
working exclusively for  the organisation and sufficient  to carry out 
research  and  to develop  a  full  and  adequate  set  of  own  rules  and 
regulations  at  least  on  hull,  machinery  and  electrical  and  control 
installations,  and  able  to  carry  out  all  inspections  and  surveys 
required by the Conventions  for  the issue of  Certificates; 
to  maintain  a  worldwide  coverage  of  inspection  offices  and  a 
minimum  size of classified  fleet  or tonnage; 
to demonstrate willingness  to cooperate with port State control. 

In  deciding  upon  the  recognition  of  the  organisations,  the  Commission 

10 

shall  consult  a  Committee;  such  Committee  will  become  operational  as 
soon as  the  Council has  adopted  the  Directive. 

b)  A  second  provision  to  establish  a  working  relationship  between  the 
competent  national  Administrations  and  the  organisations  acting  on  their 
behalf, 
to  ensure  quality  and  consistency  of  rules,  surveys  and 
certifications.  This  relationship  is  based  upon  a  formalized  agreement 
between  the parties  setting  out  the  specific  duties  and  functions  assumed 
by the orgamsations; the national Adrninistrations shall carry out a periodic 
audit  of  this  work  as  well  as  checking  procedures  involving  random  and 
detailed  inspections  of  ships,  and  shall  provide  the  Commission  with  a 
report  of  the  results  of  this  monitoring  and  with  any  information  relating 
to the performances  of  the  organisations. 

required 

c)  A third  provision  concerns  the  non-Community  flag  Administrations. 
Since  safety  at  sea  is  a  worldwide  problem,  the  responsible  behaviour 
required  from  Member  States'  Administrations  when  delegating  tasks  to 
outside  organisations  must  also  be 
third  States' 
Administrations,  whose  ships  intend  to operate  in Community  waters.  To 
this  end,  the Directive  establishes  that  Member  States,  acting  as States  of 
the  port,  shall  ensure  that  ships  flying  third  States  flags  are  not  treated 
more  favourably  than  ships  operating  under  the  flag  of  a Member  State. 
They shall therefore  consider  as a primary  criterion for  selecting ships  for 
inspection  the  fact  that  the  ship  Certificates  have  been  delivered  by  an 
organisation which has not been recognised.  Appropriate  measures  should 
then  be  taken  for  ships  which  fail  to  meet  the  agreed  international 
standards. 

from 

19. 
The  second  objective  of  this  Directive  is  to  ensure  that  all 
"Convention"  ships  flying  the  flag  of  a  Member  State  comply  with 
precisely  defined  requirements  designed  to  achieve  equivalent  results  on 
safety  and  reliability  of  hull,  machinery  and  electrical  and  control 
installations.  These  requirements  apply  both  to  the  certification  of  new 
constructions  and  to  surveys  during  the  life  of  the  ship.  Preparation  of 
sufficiently  detailed standards for new constructions would mean, however, 

11 

practically  re-writing  the  extremely  large  and  complex  set  of  rules  and 
procedures  of the classification  societies,  in fact  several  hundred  volumes 
of rules, and keeping them continuously updated. This would be unrealistic 
and unnecessary since the major  classification  societies which are members 
of  the  International  Association  of  Classification  Societies  (IACS)  have 
developed,  maintained  and  upgraded  in  the  course  of  the  years  all 
necessary standards for  these ships'  main components.  Although they may 
differ  in  cases,  it  is  generally  accepted  that  their  effects  on  the  safety  of 
ships  are  substantially  equivalent.  Thus,  the  Directive  states  that  hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations  are  to  be  built  and 
maintained  in conformity  with the requirements  of one of the  classification 
societies which meet the set of  common criteria described  above.  In order 
to  maintain  equivalence  of  safety  standards  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions of the Directive,  approved organisations shall consult with each 
other  periodically. 

20.  The  Commission  considers  that  an  immediate  consequence  of  this 
Directive,  apart  from  the  improvement  and  harmonisation  of  safety  and 
environmental  rules within the Community  will be to release the approved 
organisations from  the present economic pressure put on them by unsound 
competitors.  The Commission  shares  the views expressed  by the shipping 
sector that such an economic pressure prevents classification  societies from 
maintaining  the necessary  full  independence  of judgement  when  carrying 
out  their  statutory  duties  on  behalf  of  the  national  Administrations.  The 
adoption  of this Directive  will restore  full  confidence  in  the  effectiveness 
and reliability of the inspections and surveys of the approved  organisations 
and  in their  continuous  commitment  to maintain  and update  rules  on hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations. 

21.  An additional positive effect  of this Directive will be the  suppression 
of  special  or  exclusive  rights  granted  by  Member  States  to  one  or  more 
organisations  on the basis of criteria  other  than quality  and safety  criteria. 
The  application of the principle of  freedom  to provide services  within  the 
Community  to  organisations  which  meet  the  common  set  of  minimum 
criteria  will  allow  only  qualified  organisations  to  compete  freely,  while 

12 

guaranteeing  shipowners  and  Governments  a  high  quality  service  as 
regards  the  safety  aspects.  The  Directive  achieves  these  objectives  by 
stating  that  Member  States  which delegate to or  rely  upon  organisations 
outside their Administration will have to accept that such tasks are carried 
out by any one of the recognised organisations. 

13 

SPECIAL  CONSIDERATIONS 

Article! 

This article defines  the purpose of the Directive: to specify  a set of criteria 
to  be  met  by  the  classification  societies  and  other  private  bodies,  when 
acting  on behalf  of  the national  Administrations  of  the Member  States;  to 
ensure, through such criteria,  that the organisations authorised to carry  out 
surveillance and certification,  or  organisations upon which Member  States 
intend to rely for  those purposes,  are professionally  efficient,  reliable and 
able 
to  maintain  proper  control  of  compliance  with  safety  and 
environmental  protection  standards  of  the vessels  they  classify. 

This  Directive  represents  a  first  step  to  improve  the  compliance  with 
international  safety  standards  existing  in  the  shipping  sector  and  in  view 
in  particular  of  the  low  safety  performances  of  some  organisations 
concerned  with  the certification  and  related  surveillance  of compliance  of 
ships  with  the  Conventions. 

Moreover,  loopholes  and  weaknesses  in  the  international  Conventions, 
Codes  and Resolutions  have often  led to varying levels  of  application  and 
enforcement  thereof,  and to consequent differing  safety  and environmental 
performances.  A farther  aim of this Directive, therefore,  is to establish the 
development  and  implementation  of  minimum  safety  requirements  with 
equivalent  effect 
in  order  to  eliminate 
substantial  differences  in  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  vessels 
operating under  the flags  of  the Member  States,  and  more precisely  rules 
on hull,  machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations  of  ships. 

throughout  the  Community, 

14 

Article 2 

This article contains definitions  of the key words of the Directive. 

Article 3 

Paragraph  1. This article reaffirms  the principle that States are primarily 
responsible  for  the  implementation  of  the  provisions  of  international 
Conventions to which they have acceded. Each Member State must,  in so 
far  as possible,  ensure that their Administrations  effecting  inspections of 
the ships and issuing the related Certificates,  do have enough experience, 
capability  and reliability  to carry out such tasks. 

Paragraph  2.  Most  of  the  relevant  international  Conventions,  however, 
allow  Member  States to delegate fully  or  in part  surveys  and inspections 
of the  ships  (including  those  for  the assessment  of  the general  structural 
strength of the hull,  the reliability  and safety  of machinery  and  electrical 
and  control  installations)  and  the  issuing  of  Certificates  to  private 
organisations  or experts. 

This  article states that the organisations  or  experts  entrusted  to carry out 
these duties on behalf  of  a Member State,  or on the expertise of which a 
Member  State  relies,  shall  only  be  the  recognised  organisations,  being 
bodies  which  offer  evidence  of  their  experience,  technical  ability  and 
ethical reliability.  Exceptions  to this provision are the Cargo Ship  Safety 
Radiotelegraphy  Certificate  and  the  Cargo  Ship  Safety  Radiotelephony 
Certificate,  whose issuing  may be delegated  to other bodies for  practical 
reasons. 

Paragraph 3. The certification  of specific items of marine equipment is not 
covered by this article;  it will be regulated by another  EC Directive. 

15 

Article 4 

Paragraph  1.  This  article  states  that  Member  States  may  recognise  as 
organisations  acting  on  their  behalf  only  those  bodies  which  fulfil  the 
criteria set out in Annex I of this Directive. The organisations which want 
to  be  recognised  for  the  purpose  of  article  3  have  to  submit  adequate 
information  to the Member States in order to prove their compliance with 
such criteria. 

Paragraph 2. Notification of the recognised organisations shall be given by 
each Member  State to the Commission  and to the other  Member States. 

Article 5 

Paragraph  1.  In  accordance  with  the  principles  of  free  circulation  of 
services  and  the  elimination  of  special  and  exclusive  rights  within  the 
common market,  laid down in articles 60 and 90 of the Treaty, this article 
states that Member States delegating safety duties as mentioned in Article 
3,  cannot refuse  any of the recognised  organisations which are located in 
the Community  to act on their behalf.  Where a Member  State decides to 
delegate  or rely upon an organisation  for  those tasks,  it has to accept all 
the  recognised  organisations  which  are  located,  within  the  meaning  of 
article 58 of the Treaty,  in the European  Community  and which offer  to 
provide their  services for  the accomplishment  of  such tasks. 

Paragraph 2.  If  the recognised organisation  is located  in a third  State,  a 
reciprocal recognition between the Member State and the third State may 
be  requested  to  authorise  the  said  organisation  to  act  on  behalf  of  the 
Member State. 

16 

Article  6 

Paragraph  1.  Since  the Directive  intends  to  secure  a  tighter  involvement 
of the national Administrations in the ship certification  and survey process, 
this  article  describes  the  working  relationship  which  must  be  established 
between  the  responsible  administration  of  each  Member  State  and  the 
organisations  carrying  out its  statutory  duties. 

Paragraph  2.  Transparency  of  this  relationship  is  assured  by  formalised 
written  agreements  setting  out  the  duties  and  functions  assumed  by  the 
organisations  acting  on  behalf  of  a  Member  State.  This  agreement  will 
guarantee  the  possibility  for  that  Member  State  to  undertake  periodical 
audits  and  carry  out  inspections  of  ships  for  which  these  duties  and 
functions  have  been  delegated.  The  organisations  shall  also  provide  the 
Member  States with  information  about  their  classed  fleet. 

Paragraph  3.  Moreover,  in  order  to  allow  the  circulation  of  relevant 
information  concerning  the  performances  of  the  classification  societies 
within  the  Community  ,  this  article  sets  up  a  procedure  to  inform  the 
Commission  and  subsequently  all  the  Member  States  about  the  working 
relationship  which  each  national  Administration  establishes  with  external 
organisations. 

Article  7 

This article establishes an advisory  Committee made up of  representatives 
of the Member  States, preferably  maritime  safety  experts,  and chaired by 
a representative of the Commission.  The experts meet as required to assist 
the  Commission  in  amending  Annex  I,  in  withdrawing  recognition  of 
organisations  which no longer  fulfil  the criteria  set out in Annex I,  and  in 
the case of  a suspension procedure for  reasons  of serious danger to  safety 
or  environment  in accordance  with  article  9. 

17 

Article 8 

This article provides that Annex I may be amended by the Commission in 
order  to  adapt  it  to  possible  evolutions  of  the  relevant  international 
Conventions  and  to update the common  set  of  criteria.  The  Commission 
may  also  decide  to  withdraw  the  recognition  of  the  recognised 
organisations  which no longer  fulfil  the criteria  of  Annex I. 

In both  cases,  the Commission  will do so in  accordance  with  a  specific 
procedure  laid down in article 12. 

Article 9 

This article describes the procedure for suspending the authorisation given 
to  an  organisation  to  carry  out  statutory  duties:  when  a  Member  State 
considers  that  the  performance  of  a  classification  society  acting  on  its 
behalf  is  no  longer  reliable  in  terms  of  safety  and  environmental 
protection,  it  may  suspend  such authorisation,  and  must then inform  the 
Commission  and the other Member  States. The Commission  shall decide 
whether to withdraw the suspension or to withdraw the recognition of the 
organisations  in accordance with article  12 within three months. 
This article has been designed  as a safeguard  clause. 

Article 10 

Paragraph  1.  With  regard  to  the principle  of  direct  involvement  of  the 
national Administrations in the survey and certification process, this article 
establishes mandatory verification  of the effectiveness  of the tasks carried 
out  by  the  authorised  organisations  and  of  their  compliance  with  the 

18 

criteria set out in Annex I.  Member States must fulfil  the obligations under 
1  and  2  by  monitoring  those  items  themselves,  but  in  the  case  of 
organisations  located  in  another  State,  it  is  sufficient  for  them  to  review 
the  monitoring  by  another  Member  State's  Administration. 

Paragraph  2,  Each  Member  State is requested  to  monitor  the work  of  the 
delegated  organisations  every  year. 

Paragraph  3.  They  must  forward  to  the  Commission  and  to  the  other 
Member  States  both  the  results  of  this  control  and  any  information  about 
the performance  of  the  organisation. 

Article  11 

Paragraph  1.  This  paragraph  is  designed  to  ensure  that  ships  calling  at 
Community  ports  and  carrying  Certificates  issued  by  organisations  which 
have not been recognised  in this Directive as meeting  the required  quality, 
are inspected  as a priority  since one may  reasonably  doubt the  conformity 
of  the  ship  with  its  Certificates.  Member  States,  when  acting  as  Port 
Authorities,  are  required  to  inspect  with  high  priority  those  ships  whose 
safety  and  class  Certificates  have  not  been  issued  by  a  recognised 
organisation. 

the  internationally  agreed  standards  and 

Member  States  are  required  to  take  appropriate  measures  when  ships  do 
not  meet 
the 
Commission  and the Secretariat  of the Memorandum  of Understanding  on 
Port  State  Control  of  all  the  discrepancies  discovered  acting  as  Port 
Authorities. 

to  inform 

Paragraph 2. A performance  record of the organisations working on behalf 
of  flag  States will be held,  updated  every year  and distributed  to the other 
Member  States  and  the  Commission. 

19 

Article 12 

This  article  describes  the  procedure  which  must  be  applied  when  the 
Commission  is required  to take a decision on matters covered by articles 
8  and  9.  It  is  the  type procedure  I of  article  2  of  the  Council  Decision 
87/373/EEC  of 13 July 19874 laying down the procedures for the exercise 
of implementing  powers  conferred  to the Commission. 

Article 13 

This article requires the Member States to ensure that the ships flying their 
flag  comply  with  the  requirements  for  construction  and  maintenance, 
including  periodic  surveys,  of hull,  machinery  and electrical  and control 
installations  set  out  by  one  of  the  classification  societies  among  the 
recognised organisations. Furthermore, classification societies are required 
to consult  each  other  in  order  to maintain  equivalence  of  their  technical 
standards. 

This  approach  appears  sensible  as  these  standards  exist  and  ate  so 
numerous and complex that rewriting them would be very time-consuming 
and indeed also unnecessary,  since the major  classification  societies have 
developed  and  upgraded  in  the  course  of  the  years  all  necessary  safety 
standards for  these ships'  main components. 

* OJ N° L 197/33, 17. 7. 87. Council Decision 87/373/EEC of 13 July 1987 
laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred 
on the Commission. 

20 

Article 14 

This  article upholds  the measures  with which each Member  State has to 
comply in order to enforce  the Directive. 

Article 15 

No comments. 

21 

PROPOSAL  FOR  A 
COUNCIL  DIRECTIVE  ON  COMMON  RULES  AND  STANDARDS 
FOR  SHIP  INSPECTION  AND  SURVEY  ORGANISATIONS 

THE  COUNCIL  OF THE  EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing 
Community  and in particular  Article  84 (2)  thereof, 

the  European  Economic 

Having  regard  to the proposal  from  the  Commission, 

Having  regard  to  the opinion  of  the European  Parliament, 

Having  regard  to the  opinion  of  the Economic  and  Social  Committee, 

Whereas  safety  and  pollution  prevention  at  sea  may  be  effectively 
enhanced  through  the  elimination  of  substandard  operators  and  vessels 
from Community waters, while strictly applying international Conventions, 
Codes  and  Resolutions; 

Whereas the  ontrol of compliance  of ships with the uniform  international 
standards  fur  safety  and  prevention  of  pollution  of  the  seas  is  the 
responsibility  of  flag  and port  States; 

Whereas  Member  States  are  responsible  for  the  issuing  of  international 
Certificates  for  safety  and  pollution  provided  under  Conventions  such  as 
SOLAS  74,  Load  Lines  66  and  MARPOL  73/78,  and  for 
the 
implementation  of  the provisions  thereof; 

22 

Whereas  in  compliance  with  such  Conventions,  all  Member  States  may 
delegate to or rely to a various extent upon technical organisations for  the 
certification of such compliance, and may delegate the issue of the relevant 
safety  Certificates; 

Whereas worldwide a large number of the existing classification  societies 
do  not  ensure  either  adequate  implementation  of  the  rules  or  reliability 
when acting on behalf of the national Administrations,  as they do not have 
adequate  structures  and experience to be  relied upon and  to enable them 
to carry  out their duties in a highly professional  manner; 

Whereas the action at Community level is more efficient  in this field than 
the combined  actions of the Member States; 

Whereas the appropriate way to act is through a Council Directive laying 
down  minimum  criteria  for  recognition  of  organisations,  while  leaving 
recognition itself, the means of enforcement  and the implementation of the 
Directive to the Member States; 

Whereas  the  Council urged  the  introduction  of  standards  at  Community 
level  to enforce  the implementation  of the international  rules  in order  to 
eliminate substandard  vessels and operators from  Community  waters; 

Whereas EN 45004 and EN 29001 standards combined with International 
Association  of  Classification  Societies  (IACS)  standards  constitute  an 
adequate guarantee of performance  quality of organisations; 

Whereas  organisations  wishing  to be  recognised  for  the purpose  of  this 
Directive  shall  submit  to  the  Member  States  complete  information  and 

23 

evidence  of their compliance  with the minimum  criteria,  and  the Member 
States  shall notify  to the Commission  and to  the other  Member  States  the 
organisations  they have  recognised; 

Whereas the establishment of the common market involves free  circulation 
of  services  so that  organisations  meeting  a set  of  common  criteria  which 
guarantee  their  professionalism  and  reliability  cannot  be  prevented  from 
supplying  their  services  within  the  Community; 

Whereas  a  tighter  involvement  of  the  national  Administrations  in  ship 
surveys  and  issue  of  the  related  Certificates  is  necessary  to  ensure  full 
compliance  with  the  international  safety  rules  even  if  the  Member  States 
rely  upon  organisations  outside  their  Administration  for  carrying  out 
statutory  duties; 

Whereas  it is  necessary  to  establish  an  advisory  committee  composed  of 
the representatives  of the Member  States in order to assist the Commission 
in its  effort  to ensure effective  application  of  the existing  maritime  safety 
and  environmental  standards; 

Whereas  the  Commission  shall  act  according  to  the  same  procedure  laid 
down in article  12 in order to take due account of progress in international 
fora  and  to update  the  minimum  criteria; 

Whereas  on  the  basis  of  the  information  provided  in  accordance  with 
article  10 by the Member States about the performance  of the organisations 
working  on their behalf,  the Commission  will decide whether  to withdraw 
the  recognition  of  recognised  organisations  which no  longer  fulfil  the  set 
of  common  minimum  criteria,  acting in accordance with the procedure  of 
article  12; 

24 

Whereas  Member  States  must  nevertheless  be  left  the  possibility  of 
suspending  their  authorization  to  an  organisation  for  reasons  of  serious 
danger  to safety  or  environment; 

Whereas  the  Commission  shall  rapidly  decide  upon  confirmation  or 
overruling  of  such  a national  measure  in  accordance  with the procedure 
referred  to above; 

Whereas each Member State should periodically assess the performance of 
the organisations working on its behalf,  and provide the Commission and 
all  the  other  Member  States  with  precise  information  related  to  such 
performance; 

Whereas Member States, as port authorities, are required to enhance safety 
and  prevention  of  pollution  in  the  Community  waters  through  the 
elimination  of  substandard vessels irrespective  of the flag  of the ships; 

Whereas  the  adequate procedure  according  to which  the  Committee will 
act is Procedure  I of article 2 of Council Decision 87/373/EEC; 

Whereas  the  Commission's  decision  on  withdrawal  of  recognition  of 
organisations  which no longer  fulfil  the criteria  of  Annex I will take the 
utmost  account  of  the opinion  delivered  by  the  Committee  and  will pay 
particular  attention  to  the  safety  and  pollution  prevention  performance 
records  of the organisations; 

Whereas classification  societies have to update and enforce  their technical 
standards  in  order  to  harmonize  safety  rules  and  ensure  uniform 
implementation  of international rules within the Community; 

25 

Whereas at present  there are no uniform  international  standards to which 
all ships must conform  at the building stage and during their entire life,  as 
regards hull,  machinery  and electrical and control installations; 

Whereas  such  standards  may  be  fixed  according  to  the  rules  of 
classification  societies; 

HAS ADOPTED THIS  DIRECTIVE: 

26 

PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS 
FOR SHIP INSPECTION AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS 

Article l 

The purpose of this Directive  is to establish measures to be 
followed by the Member States and organisations concerned with 
the inspection, survey and certification of ships for compliance 
with the  international Conventions. This process includes the 
development and implementation of safety requirements for hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installations  of  ships 
falling under the scope of the international Conventions. 

Article 2 

For the purpose of this Directive including its annex, 

"ship" means a ship falling within the scope of the international 
Conventions; 

"inspections  and  surveys"  means  inspections  and  surveys made 
mandatory by the international Conventions; 

"international  Conventions"  means  the  197 4  International 
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, the 1966 International 
Convention on Load Lines and the 1973/78 International Convention 
for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, together with the 
Protocols and amendments thereto, and related Codes of mandatory 
status in all Member States; 

"organisation" means classification societies and other private 
bodies authorised by governments to carry out safety assessment 
work on their behalf; 

^ 

"recognised  organisation" means an organisation  recognised  in 
conformity with article 4; 

"Certificate" means a certificate issued by or on behalf of a 
Member State in accordance with the international  Conventions 
except the exemption certificates; 

"class certificate" means a representation by a classification 
society  as  to  the  structural  and  mechanical  fitness  for  a 
particular  use  or  service  in  accordance  with  its  rules  and 
standards ; 

"location" refers to the place of the registered office, central 
administration or principal place of business of an organisation. 

Article 3 

1. In assuming their responsibilities and obligations under the 
international Conventions, Member States shall ensure that their 
competent administrations can assure an appropriate enforcement 
of the provisions of the international Conventions, in particular 
with regard to the inspection and survey of ships and the issue 
of certificates and exemption certificates. 

2. Where for the purpose of paragraph 1 a Member State decides 
with respect to ships flying its flag 
i) to delegate fully or in part 

- inspections and surveys including those for the 
assessment of compliance with article 13 on the 
general structural strength of the hull, the 

reliability and safety of machinery and electrical 

and control installations, or 

- the issue or renewal of Certificates, 
or 

ii)  to rely upon expertise outside its Administration to 
carry  out  inspections  and  surveys  related  to 
Certificates, 

it shall entrust these duties only to recognised organisations. 

2.« 

However for the Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelegraphy Certificate and 
the Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelephony Certificate, these duties 
may be entrusted to other bodies with sufficient expertise in 
radio-communication. 

3. This article does not concern the certification of specific 
items of marine equipment. 

Article 4 

1. Member  States may  only  recognise  such  organisations which 
fulfil the criteria set out in Annex I. The organisations shall 
submit to the Member States complete information concerning, and 
evidence of, compliance with these criteria from whom recognition 
has  been  requested.  The  Member  States  will  notify  the 
organisations in an appropriate manner of their recognition. 

2. Each Member State shall notify to the Commission and the other 
Member States those organisations it has recognised. 

Article 5 

1. In applying Article 3, paragraph 2, Member States shall not 
refuse  to  delegate  to  or  rely  upon  any  of  the  recognised 
organisations located in the Community. 

2. In order for a Member State to accept that an organisation 
located in a third State is to carry out the duties mentioned in 
Article 3 or part of them  it may request that the said third 
State  grant  a  reciprocal  recognition  for  those  recognised 
organisations which are located in the Community. 

Article 6 

1. Member States which decide to act as described in Article 3, 
paragraph 2 shall set out a working relationship between their 

•13 

responsible administration and the organisations authorised to 
act on their behalf. 

2. The working relationship shall be regulated by a formalised 
written and non-discriminatory agreement setting out the specific 
duties and functions assumed by the organisations and at least 
including provisions for a periodical audit by the administration 
into the duties the organisations are authorise^ to undertake on 
its  behalf  and  the  possibility  for  random  and  detailed 
inspections  of  ships  and  provisions  for  reporting  essential 
information  about  their  classed  fleet,  changes  of  class  or 
disclassing of vessels. 

3. Each Member State shall provide the Commission with precise 
information on the working relationship established in accordance 
w4-th this Article. The Commission shall subsequently inform the 
other Member States. 

Article 7 

A Committee of an advisory nature composed of the representatives 
of the Member States and chaired by the representative of the 
Commission is hereby instituted to assist the Commission. This 
Committee shall be called by the Commission at least once a year 
and whenever required in the case of suspension of authorisation 
of an organisation Jay a Member  State under the provisions of 
Article 9. 
The Committee shall draw up its rules of procedure. 

Article  S 

The Commission, in accordance with the procedure  laid down in 
Article 12, may 

a) amend Annex I in order to 

(i)  take  into  account  amendments  to  the  international 
Conventions  and  new  international  Conventions, 

iO 

Conventions  and  new  international  Conventions, 

Protocols and Codes; 

(ii) update the criteria of Annex I; 

b) withdraw the recognition of recognised organisations referred 

to in article 4 which no longer  fulfil the criteria  set out  in 

Annex I. 

Article 9 

Notwithstanding the criteria specified in Annex I, where a Member 

State considers that a recognised  organisation can no longer be 

authorised  to  carry  out  on  its  behalf  the  tasks  specified  in 

Article 3 for reasons of serious danger to safety or environment, 

it may suspend such authorisation. 

In the above circumstances the following procedure shall apply: 

(a)  the Member  State  shall  inform  the Commission  and  the 

other  Member  States  of  its  decision  without  delay, 

giving substantiated  reasons therefor; 

(b)  the Commission shall decide whether to withdraw the 

suspension  of  authorisation  or  to  withdraw  the 

recognition  of  the  organisation.  It  shall  do  so  in 

accordance  with  Article  12  within  a  period  not 

exceeding three months. 

Article 10 

1.  Each  Member  State  must  satisfy  itself  that  the  functions 
delegated  to  recognised  organisations  under  Article  3  are 
effectively carried out and that the criteria specified in Annex 
I  are  fulfilled.  It  may  do  so  by  directly  monitoring  the 
recognised organisations or, in the case of organisations located 
in  another  Member  State,  by  reviewing  the  corresponding 
monitoring of such organisations by the administration of another 
Member State. 

31 

2. Each Member State shall carry out this task each year and 
shall provide the other Member States and the Commission with a 
report of the results of this monitoring at the latest by the 1st 
of March of each year following the year for which compliance has 
been assessed. 

3. Member States shall forward to the Commission and the other 
Member States any information relevant to the assessment of the 
performance of organisations. 

Article 11 

1. In exercising their inspection rights and obligations as port 
States, 
(a) Member States shall ensure that ships flying a third State 
flag are not treated more favourably than ships entitled to fly 
the flag of a Member State. To this end the fact that the ship 
Certificates including the class Certificate have been delivered 
by an organisation which is not a recognised organisation shall 
be  taken  as  a  primary  criterion  for  selecting  ships  for 
inspection. 

b) Member States shall take appropriate measures when ships do 
not meet the internationally agreed standards and report to the 
Commission and the Secreteriat of the Memorandum of Understanding 
on  Port  State  Control  the  discovery  of  any  issue  of  valid 
Certificates by organisations acting on behalf of a flag State 
to a ship which does not fulfil the relevant requirements of the 
international Conventions, or any failure of a ship carrying a 
valid class Certificate and relating to items covered by that 
certificate. 

2. Each Member State shall establish a performance record of the 
organisations acting on behalf of flag States. This performance 
record  shall  be  updated  yearly  and  distributed  to  the  other 
Member States and the Commission. 

3X, 

Article  12 

1. The  following  procedure  shall  apply  for  matters  covered  by 

Articles 8 and 9: 

(a)  the representative  of the Commission  shall submit to 
the Committee referred to in Article 7 a draft of the 
measures to be taken; 

(b)  the Committee shall deliver its opinion within a time 

limit which the chairman may lay down according to the 

urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a votei. 

(c)  the  opinion  shall  be  recorded  in  the  minutes;  in 
addition each Member State shall have the right to have 
its position recorded  in the minutes; 

(d)  the Commission shall take the utmost account of the 

opinion delivered by the committee. It shall inform the 
committee of the manner in which its opinion has been 
taken into account. 

2.  In preparing  drafts  for  a  decision  relating  to the  matters 
referred  to  in  article  8  (b) , the  Commission  shall  take  into 
account the reports and information mentioned in articles 10 and 
11.  In preparing  such draft measures, the Commission  shall pay 
particular  attention  to  the  safety  and  pollution  prevention 
performance  records  of  the  organisations.  Draft  decisions 
relating to such matters may also be submitted to the Committee 
by the Member States. 

Article 13 

1. Each Member  State  shall  ensure that  a  ship  flying  its  flag 
shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the hull, 
machinery  and  electrical  and  control  installation  requirements 
of a recognised  organisation. 

33 

2. The recognised organisations shall consult with each other 
periodically  with  a view  to maintaining  equivalence  of their 
technical standards and the implementation thereof. They shall 
provide  the  Commission  with  periodic  reports  on  fundamental 
progress in standards. 

Article 14 

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and 
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive 
on 1 November 1994. 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. 

2.  The  Member  States  shall  immediately  communicate  to  the 
Commission all provisions of domestic law which they adopt in the 
field governed by this Directive. The Commission shall inform the 
other Member States thereof. 

Article 15 

This Directive is addressed to the Member States 

j# 

ANNEX  I 

MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR ORGANISATIONS REFERRED TO  IN ARTICLE 3 

GENERAL 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

The  recognised  organisation  must  be  able  to  document 
extensive  experience  in  assessing  the  design  and 
construction of merchant ships. 

The  organisation  should  have  in  its  class  a  fleet  of  at 
least 1000 ocean-going vessels  (over 100 GRT) totalling no 
less than 5 million GRT. 

The organisation must employ a technical staff commensurate 
with  the  number  of  vessels  classed.  As  a  minimum,  100 
exclusive surveyors would be needed to meet the requirements 
in paragraph  1.2. 

The  organisation  should  have  comprehensive  rules  and 
regulations for the design, construction and periodic survey 
of merchant  ships, published  and continually  upgraded  and 
improved through research and development programmes. 

The  organisation  should  have  its  Register  of  Vessels 
published on an annual basis. 

SPECIFIC 

1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

The organisation  is established with: 
(a)  a  significant  technical,  managerial,  support  and 

research staff; 

(b)  world-wide coverage by exclusive field staff. 
The organisation  is governed by a Code of Ethics. 
The organisation  is managed and administered  in such a way 
as to ensure the confidentiality of information required by 
the Administration. 
The organisation is prepared to provide relevant information 
to the administration. 

The organisation's management has defined and documented its 
policy and objectives for, and committment to, quality and 
has ensured that this policy is understood, implemented and 
maintained  at all levels in the organisation. 

3* 

The organisation  has developed,  implemented  and  maintains 
an effective  internal quality  system  based  on  appropriate 
parts of  internationally  recognised  quality  standards  and 
in compliance with EN 45004  (inspection bodies) and with EN 
29001,  as  interpreted  by  the  IACS  Quality  System 
Certification Scheme Requirements, and which,  inter alia, 
ensures that: 
(a)  the  organisation's  Rules  and  Regulations  are 

established  and maintained  in a systematic manner; 

(b)  the organisations  Rules  and Regulations  are  complied 

with ; 

(c)  the requirements  of the  statutory  work  for which the 

organisation  is authorised  are satisfied; 

(d)  the responsibilities, authorities and interrelation of 
personnel  whose  work  affects  the  quality  of  the 
organisation's services are defined and documented; 

(e)  all work is carried out under controlled conditions; 
(f)  a  supervisory  system  is  in place  which  monitors  the 
actions and work carried out by surveyors and technical 
and  administrative  staff  employed  directly  by  the 
organisation; 

(g)  a system for qualification of surveyors and continuous 

updating of their knowledge  is implemented; 

(h)  records  are maintained,  demonstrating  achievement  of 

the required standards in the items covered by the 
services performed, as well as the effective operation 
of the quality system; and 

(i)  a  comprehensive  system  of  planned  and  documented 
internal audits of the quality  related  activities  in 
all locations. 

The organisation must demonstrate  ability 
(a)  to develop and keep updated a full and adequate set of 
own rules and regulations on hull, machinery and 
electrical and control equipment having the quality of 
internationally recognised technical standards on the 
basis  of  which  SOLAS  Convention  and  Passenger  Ship 
Safety  Certificates  (as  regards  adequacy  of  ship 
structure  and  essential  shipboard  machinery  systems) 
and Load Line Certificates (as regards adequacy of ship 

u 

strength) can be issued, 

(b)  to carry out all inspections and surveys required by 

the international Conventions for the issue of 
Certificates. 

8 

The organisation is subject to certification of its quality 
system by an indépendant body of auditors recognised by the 
Administration of the State in which it is located. 
9.  The  organisation  should  allow  participation  in  the 
development  of  its  rules  and/or  regulations  by 
representatives of the Administration and other parties 

concerned. 
10.  The organisation must demonstrate willingness to co-operate 
with  port  State  control  when  a  ship  of  its  class  is 
concerned  and  in  particular  in  order  to  facilitate  the 
rectification  of  reported  deficiencies  or  other 
discrepancies. 

11.  The organisation must provide all relevant information to 
the Administration  about changes of class or disclassing 
vessels. 

37 

i* 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(93) 218 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

04 07 

Catalogue number : CB-CO-93-245-EN-C 

ISBN 92-77-55854-7 

Office for Officiai Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Luxembourg