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"
Date: 2000-10-19
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: application of EU law, bulk product, competition, harbour installation, maritime safety, maritime transport

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/37

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

of bulk carriers to carry out their functions and to promote
the safety of bulk carriers.

1.1. More than 5 000 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 oper-
ations 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

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

1.4.
The ESC has been asked for its Opinion on a proposed
Directive submitted by the Commission to establish require-
ments 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.

Assessment

2.2.
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 pro-
cedures of cooperation and communication between bulk
carriers and the dry bulk cargo-handling terminals in European
ports and suggested that terminals should operate in conform-
ity 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.

C 14/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

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.

The proposal seeks to establish a legal framework in
2.5.
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 (1) sub-
scribed 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.

The ESC also stated in the above Opinion (1) that ‘it is
3.2.
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 (2) and FEPORT(3)) — 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 (4) 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 consider-
ations 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.

The master and the crew are responsible for the
3.3.2.
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

(1) OJ C 34, 2.2.1994, p. 47.
(2) ESPO: European Sea Ports Organization.
(3) FEPORT: Federation of European Private Port Operators.

(4) IACS: International Association of Classification Societies.

16.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 14/39

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.

The ESC notes that although the IMO BLU Code itself
3.5.
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 Com-
munity 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.

The ESC welcomes the long awaited proposal and
3.6.
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

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 (1),
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 Com-
mission 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 represen-

tatives

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 recog-
nised 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

The ESC notes that the definition of the ‘Terminal Representa-
tive’ may be construed as requiring the terminal to designate a

(1) ISM Code: International Safety Management Code.

C 14/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.1.2001

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 certifi-
cated 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,

Brussels, 19 October 2000.

to inspect cargo holds well before all loading and after all
unloading operations with a view to detecting damages and
defects.

5. Conclusions

The ESC believes that

the implementation of

the
5.1.
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.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS