Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 417/2002 on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design requirements for single-hull oil tankers and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2978/94 COM(2006) 111 final — 2006/0046 (COD)
Date: 2006-09-14
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: International Maritime Organisation, international convention, international standard, maritime transport, oil pollution, prevention of pollution, tanker, technical regulations

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/229

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 417/2002 on the accelerated
phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design requirements for single-hull oil tankers and repealing
Council Regulation (EC) No 2978/94

COM(2006) 111 final — 2006/0046 (COD)

(2006/C 318/37)

On 25 April 2006, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European 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 4 September 2006. The rapporteur
was Mr Simons.

At its 429th plenary session, held on 13 and 14 September 2006 (meeting of 13 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 187 votes to four with eight abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The EESC agrees that EU Member States must adhere to
their political agreements. Providing support, by means of the
present proposal for a Regulation, to those EU Member States
which fulfil this requirement and demonstrating to a world-wide
audience that the EU is serious about also complying in practice
with the commitments entered into in connection with the IMO
are measures which are very much more important than any —
purely speculative and very limited — negative consequences,
which may or may not arise.

2. Introduction

Regulation (EC) No 417/2002, as amended by Regu-
2.1
lation (EC) No 1726/2003, introduced measures prohibiting the
carriage of heavy grade oil in single-hull oil tankers leaving or
bound for ports in the European Union in order to reduce the
risk of accidental oil pollution in European waters.

2.2
A similar ban, based on the measures adopted by the EU,
has been imposed on a worldwide basis by the International
Maritime Organisation (IMO) through the new regulation 13G
and 13H of Annex I to the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution by Ships 73/78 (MARPOL). However,
under paragraphs 7 of 13G and 5, 6 and 7 of 13H of the said
MARPOL regulation administrations may under certain condi-
tions exempt tankers from the ban. This was the compromise
which had to be accepted as the price for the adoption of a
worldwide provision. Directly afterwards, the Italian presidency
of the EU, speaking on behalf of all EU Member States and the
European Commission, declared, following the elaboration of
the then customary and mutually binding prior coordination
agreement, that they would all not invoke the exemption provi-
sions. Following the entry into force of the IMO regulation on 5
April 2005, one Member State notified the IMO, as early as
18 April 2005, of its intention to invoke the exemption provi-
sion which is the subject of the Commission proposal under

review. In the following months, many Member States notified
the IMO, in accordance with the coordination agreement, that
they would not invoke the exemption provisions. Four Member
States have yet to make an official announcement to this effect
but they have announced in COREPER, and therefore to the
European Commission and the other Member States, that they
will shortly be following the example of the other 19 Member
States.

2.3
The European Commission recalls political agreements
prior and soon after the adoption of the IMO ban and the state-
ment in IMO in December 2003 by the Italian Presidency of the
EU expressing a commitment of the then 15, now 25, Member
States to refrain from making use of the MARPOL Convention
exemptions.

2.4
The European Commission proposes an amendment to
Regulation (EC) No 417/2002 to translate the political commit-
ment into law that would extend the scope of the Regulation by
prohibiting the carriage of heavy grades of oil in all single-hull
tankers flying the flag of a Member State irrespective of the
jurisdiction governing the ports, offshore terminals or the mari-
time area in which they operate.

3. General comments

The EESC recalls that with its opinion on Erika II (1) it
3.1
supported the banning of single-hull tankers for the carriage of
the most polluting heavy grades of oil.

3.2
It is a matter of principle, that the Member States should
adhere to their political commitments made at international
level and should ensure the coherence of the Community policy.
is preceded by a short explanatory
However,
memorandum focusing only on the political commitments and
in particular on the EU statement at the time of adoption of the
new regulation 13H of MARPOL.

the proposal

(1) OJ C 221, 7.8.2001, p. 54.

C 318/230

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

any economic and social concerns which may play a role in the
case of the one Member State which opted to invoke the exemp-
tion. It is still not possible to obtain precise data in respect of
the ships which may be involved by consulting the register of
shipping of the state concerned, with the result that any such
information continues to be nothing more than speculation,
which is unworthy of the EESC. Even if, as an overall figure, 23
ships and between 300 and 400 national seamen may be
is not the first option;
involved, the danger of ‘flagging-out’
shrewd entrepreneurs/ship-owners will
seek other oil
products to transport and the market for these products is
equally buoyant.

just

The field of application of the present proposal is based
3.5
tankers of more than 5000t.
on existing regulations
However, it should be reconsidered whether a special regulation
for tankers with less than 5000t should be foreseen.

for

4. Specific comments

4.1
Finally, the EESC believes that there is a need to clarify,
or define, what is meant by the ‘heavy grade oil products’ in
the proposed new paragraph 3a to Article 1 (English version).

4.2
Articles 4(4) and (5) of the (amended) Regulation (EC)
No 417/2002 make reference to Article 4(3) of this Regulation.
Under the proposal for a Regulation under review, the Commis-
sion proposes that a paragraph 3a) be inserted in Article 4,
which would render the abovementioned references no longer
applicable;
the
proposal for a Regulation.

this is in no way one of

the objectives of

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

routing

systems under

3.3 With its opinion on Erika II the EESC recommended that
the EU should propose to the IMO the designation under the
MARPOL Convention of highly sensitive environmental areas as
‘areas to be avoided’ by tankers carrying heavy fuel oil and the
establishment of mandatory
the
SOLAS (2) Convention. Subsequently, IMO responded to propo-
sals by interested states and established a number of Particularly
Sensitive Sea Areas (Western European Waters, Baltic Sea,
Canary Islands, Galapagos Archipelago) and extended the Great
Barrier Reef Area to include the Torres Strait (Australia-Papua
New Guinea). These areas, as well as the areas of the Sabana-
Camagüey Archipelago (Cuba), the Malpelo Island (Colombia),
the sea around the Florida Keys (USA) and the Paracas National
Reserve
established between 1997 and 2003 are
protected by associated measures such as areas to be avoided by
tankers and other ships, routing measures, reporting systems
and pilotage. The establishment of these or such areas should be
seen as a reflection of policies of coastal states to minimize the
risk of pollution from single hull oil tankers.

(Peru)

tankers (VLCC and ULCC,

According to the statistics, presented in April 2003 (3) to
3.4
IMO by the Member States and the European Commission, in
November 2002 there were in operation approximately 660
single hull oil tankers of category 2 (20.000dwt and over) out
tankers of
of which 160 super
200.000dwt and over) mostly engaged in the transport of crude
oil from the Persian Gulf area to USA and Japan. Oil tankers
may be taken out of service for many different reasons or may
be laid up at any specific time. By the end of 2006 the
maximum number of these super tankers in operation will be
less than 50, decreasing every year according to the phasing-out
schedule ending in 2010. These figures reveal nothing about

Brussels, 13 September 2006.

(2) SOLAS: Safety of Life at Sea Convention.
(3) IMO document MEPC 49/16/1.