OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the proposal for a Council Directive concerning the setting-up of a European vessel reporting system in the maritime zones of Community Member States
Date: 1994-06-01
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: exchange of information, maritime law, maritime shipping, navigational code, transport safety













EUR-Lex - 51994AC0747 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51994AC0747

OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the proposal for a Council Directive concerning the setting-up of a European vessel reporting system in the maritime zones of Community Member States  


Official Journal C 295 , 22/10/1994 P. 0028 





Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive concerning the setting-up of a European vessel reporting system in the maritime zones of Community Member States (1) (94/C 295/06)On 18 January 1994 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 84(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.The Section for Transport and Communications, which was responsible for preparing the Committee`s work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 11 May 1994. The Rapporteur was Mr Colombo.At its 316th Plenary Session (meeting of 1 June 1994) the Economic and Social Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion.1. Introduction 1.1. The Committee welcomes the proposal, which represents a further step forward in the drive to maximize maritime safety.1.2. The leading Convention on maritime safety is the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) as amended by the 1978 Protocol. This Convention specifies minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of ships compatible with their safety.The 1988 GMDSS Amendments to this Convention introduced the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System based on geostationary and polar orbiting satellites which can provide automatic indication of vessel position in emergencies.1.3. The extremely serious environmental damage and strong public feeling generated by recent disasters have obliged the Community to address the relation between the maintenance and development of maritime transport on the one hand and strict environmental protection on the other.1.4. The risk of shipping disasters remains high, as the Commission noted in its Communication of 24 February 1993 on a common policy for safe seas. The Committee Opinion on this Communication fully endorsed the objectives of safeguarding the marine environment and the safety of shipping (OJ No C 34, 2. 2. 1994, p. 47, Rapporteur: Mrs Bredima-Savopoulou).1.5. Working on these basic premises, the proposal supplements Article 13(2) of Directive 93/75/EEC (2) and meets the urgent calls for action made in the Council Resolution of 8 June 1993 (3).2.  Aims of the Directive 2.1. The purpose of the Directive is to set up a vessel reporting system to be known as Eurorep. The system is to inform coastal States, on a real-time basis, of the identity, position, route, cargo, and cargo distribution of vessels, with particular reference to those carrying dangerous or polluting goods.2.2. The proposal supplements Directive 93/75/EEC, on which the Committee issued an Opinion in 1989 (4), extending the obligation to provide such information not only to vessels bound for or leaving Community ports but also to those operating within 150 miles of Community coasts, even if they are not intending to call at a Community port.2.3. Full information on the route and nature of the cargo is a prerequisite for rapid and effective rescue operations in the event of an accident and - particularly when the goods transported are dangerous or polluting - for effective measures to tackle marine pollution.2.4. Such measures reinforce the preventative approach which provides the basic and undoubtedly the least costly way of safeguarding the environment, bearing in mind the huge human and economic costs and the sometimes irreparable damage caused to the ecological system when a vessel with dangerous or polluting cargo has an accident at sea.2.5. As well as maximizing the safety of shipping and the protection of the marine environment, the use of advanced technologies will also be of major assistance to port authorities in regulating sea traffic in congested areas and in coordinating any rescue operations.3.  Powers of the Community and the role of the Member States 3.1. The setting-up and organization of the proposed Eurorep reporting system must inevitably be done at Community level, even though all the Member States will play their part.3.2. The best way to establish preventative instruments and remedial measures is by using the technical, scientific and technological resources of the Community as a whole.3.3. While the Community will play a coordinating role, the Member States will also have an important task in the establishment of the identification and monitoring system.3.4. The Member States will be responsible for the monitoring and implementation of the Directive, and for introducing penalties into their national law for breaches of its provisions. Under international law, in particularly serious cases where the reporting obligation is breached in areas under Member States` jurisdiction, this could mean criminal proceedings.4.  General comments 4.1. The proposal is a welcome further step in Community legislation as it embraces vessels not intending to call at a Community port.4.2. The planned switch from a voluntary system to a mandatory one should further enhance safety at sea.4.3. It should be stressed that the present proposal, particularly with regard to vessels in transit, has been made possible by favourable developments in international law. The Eurorep system should only become mandatory after the amendments to the SOLAS Convention are approved.4.4. The IMO has drafted an amendment to Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention, recognizing the principle of mandatory reporting and the contribution of such systems to the safety of life at sea, the safety and efficiency of navigation and the protection of the environment.4.5. Since all vessels carrying dangerous or polluting goods are to be covered by Eurorep, the Directive will have to be compatible with the amendments to Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention which are due to be approved in May by the IMO`s Maritime Safety Committee; hence the guidelines for the establishment of a mandatory reporting system cannot be implemented until a later date.4.6. In maritime transport as in other transport sectors, it is important to retain competitiveness. The implementation of Eurorep must therefore provide as efficient a system as possible at minimum cost to Member States and the fleet.4.7. The Committee recommends that the Community undertake to cover the costs of acquiring and/or modernizing the equipment necessitated by Eurorep. The Committee asks that these costs be included in the financing scheduled for the trans-European networks referred to in the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment.4.8. The Committee also considers it important that, under the terms of Article 8, the Commission draw up effective technical measures for implementing Eurorep, taking account inter alia of the provisions of Directive 93/75/EEC, since it is extremely important that practical procedures for collating/processing vessel and cargo particulars should be developed.The system must not involve needless costs, and must avoid over-complicated procedures that would place an excessive burden on the sector; it should not oblige operators and captains to repeat the same message several times.4.9. Furthermore, to ensure the full cooperation of all the parties concerned - a vital factor for maximizing the safety of shipping and the protection of the marine environment - the Committee asks the Commission to see that the information which vessels will be obliged to transmit is used on a real-time basis and in a practical and appropriate manner.Done at Brussels, 1 June 1994.The Chairmanof the Economic and Social CommitteeSusanne TIEMANN(1) OJ No C 22, 26. 1. 1994, p. 7.(2) OJ No L 247, 5. 10. 1993, p. 19.(3) OJ No C 271, 7. 10. 1993, p. 1.(4) OJ No C 329, 30. 12. 1989, p. 20.