COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER Ex ante evaluation Accompanying the proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on multi-annual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and to marine pollution caused by oil and gas installations
Date: 2013-04-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, marine pollution, maritime safety, offshore oil structure, oil pollution, pollution from ships, prevention of pollution

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 3.4.2013  
SWD(2013) 101 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 

Ex ante evaluation 

Accompanying the proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

on multi-annual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the 
field of response to pollution caused by ships and to marine pollution caused by oil and 
gas installations 

{COM(2013) 174 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Policy Background ....................................................................................................... 4 

Problem definition........................................................................................................ 7 

Objectives of the proposal............................................................................................ 8 

Options ......................................................................................................................... 8 

Description of options .................................................................................................. 9 

Risks and assumptions ............................................................................................... 10 

Expected impacts from the options considered.......................................................... 11 

Cost-efficiency ........................................................................................................... 21 

Cost-effectiveness ...................................................................................................... 22 

Monitoring and evaluation ......................................................................................... 22 

Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 23 

Annex I....................................................................................................................... 24 

Annex II ..................................................................................................................... 25 

Annex III .................................................................................................................... 28 

Table 1: Commitment Appropriations Existing Tasks............................................... 30 

Table 2: Commitment Appropriations New Core Tasks............................................ 32 

Table 3: Total Commitment Appropriations.............................................................. 32 

Table 4: Payment Appropriations Existing Tasks...................................................... 33 

Table 5: Payment Appropriations New Core Tasks................................................... 35 

Table 6: Total Payment Appropriations..................................................................... 35 

Annex IV.................................................................................................................... 36 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 

21. 

22. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 

Ex ante evaluation 

Accompanying the proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

on multi-annual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the 
field of response to pollution caused by ships and to marine pollution caused by oil and 
gas installations 

INTRODUCTION 

1. 
The  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency  ("the  Agency"),  established  in  20021,  was  assigned 
tasks in the field of pollution response in 20042. Bearing in mind the long-term nature of the 
Agency’s responsibility for pollution response, the efficient and thorough completion of the 
tasks  involved  requires  appropriate  financial  security  based  on  a  multi-annual  commitment. 
Therefore, in 2006 the EU legislator established multi-annual funding for the Agency's action 
in the field of response to pollution caused by ships for the period from 2007 to 20133. This 
ex-ante evaluation examines the case for renewing the mechanism for the period from 2014 to 
2020. The documents used for this evaluation are listed in Annex I. 

Current  EU  expenditure  in  the  area  of  pollution  response  caused  by  ships  is  channelled 
through  the  annual  budget  of  the  Agency.  Regulation  2038/2006/EC,  Article  4  states  that 
annual appropriations shall be determined by the budgetary authority within the limits of the 
financial  framework.  In  this  context,  the  necessary  funding  of  operational  assistance  to  the 
Member States pursuant to Article 3(c) is to be guaranteed. 

There  is  no  other  EU  body  carrying  out  similar  activities.  Some  activities  related  to  the 
pollution  response  activities  of  EMSA  are  undertaken  by  the  European  Monitoring  and 
Information  Centre  (MIC)  managed  by  the  Commission  services  active  in  the  field  of  civil 
protection and disaster response. However, the MIC does not have marine pollution response 
assets  at  its  disposal.  Its  role  is  to  facilitate  and  co-ordinate  provision  of  the  European 
assistance, including that from EMSA. Therefore, pollution response means managed by the 
Agency are made available to the affected country on the  basis of  requests received via the 
MIC. 

The  Agency  has  been  subject  to  a  number  of  evaluations,  audits  and  feedback  from 
stakeholders during the period 2007-2009 in relation to its pollution preparedness, detection 
and response activities. An overview is provided in Annex  II.  The various  evaluations  have 
demonstrated  the  positive  evolution  in  the  stakeholders’  perspective  of  EMSA’s  capacity  to 

1 

2 

3 

Regulation  (EC)  No  1406/2002  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  27  June  2002 
establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (OJ L 208 of 5.8.2002, p. 1). 
Regulation (EC) No 724/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 (OJ L 
129 of 31.4.2004, p. 1). 
Regulation (EC) No 2038/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on 
multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to 
pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) n° 1406/2002 (OJ L 394 of 30.12.2006, p. 1. 
See also corrigendum in OJ L 30 of 3.2.2007 p. 12, which rectifies the number of the Regulation). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
implement  complex  projects  that  bring  added  value  to  the  pollution  activities  of  Member 
States. In the preparation of the Multi-Annual Funding Mid-term Report on the actions of the 
Agency in the field of pollution preparedness and response to ship-sourced pollution, EMSA 
consulted its key stakeholders. The focus of this consultation was to obtain feedback on the 
way EMSA has implemented these tasks during the period 2007-2009, as well as to receive 
comments regarding the possible future evolution of EMSA’s work in this field beyond 2013. 
The  main  results  of  the  consultation  show  that,  according  to  the  views  of  stakeholders, 
EMSA's Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels has high technical and operational 
capabilities, that the CleanSeaNet Service as a European monitoring and surveillance service 
is considered as very efficient and provides added value, and that EMSA has established good 
relations with the Member States and the Regional Agreements. 

2. 

POLICY BACKGROUND 

In 2004, the Agency was given tasks in the field of pollution preparedness and response. The 
initial  framework  for  these  activities  was  described  in  the  Action  Plan  for  Oil  Pollution 
Preparedness  and  Response  (2004  Oil  Action  Plan).  With  the  adoption  of  Directive 
2005/35/EC on  ship-source  pollution,  mandating  the  Agency  to  provide technical assistance 
“such as tracing discharges by satellite monitoring and surveillance”, a new task of detecting 
and monitoring oil spills in European waters was added and incorporated into the Action Plan. 

Initially the Agency concentrated its pollution preparedness and response activities on tasks 
related to oil pollution. Nevertheless, from the beginning it was also recognised that further 
actions would be necessary to address pollution caused by hazardous and noxious substances 
(HNS). Following a workshop with experts from the Member States and the Commission in 
February 2006, the Agency developed the Action  Plan  for  HNS  Pollution  Preparedness and 
Response (2007 HNS Action Plan), which was adopted by EMSA’s Administrative Board in 
June 2007. Both action plans are updated through the annual EMSA Work Programme. 

Regulation  2038/2006/EC  has  reserved  a  financial  envelope  of  EUR  154  M  for  the 
implementation of these tasks for the duration of the 2007- 2013 Financial Perspectives. This 
allows the Agency to better plan its expenditure in particular for the multi-annual contracts for 
the pollution response vessels and for the provision of satellite services. The activities of the 
Agency in the field of pollution response are in three main categories, namely: 

• 

• 

• 

Operational  assistance  (Network  of  Standby  Oil  Spill  Response  Vessels, 
CleanSeaNet4 and MAR-ICE5); 

Cooperation  and  coordination  (relations  with  national  and  international  bodies 
including participation in operational exercises and training); 

Information  (promoting  best  practice  to  address  pollution  issues  including  the 
development of decision support tools and studies). 

The  Agency’s  Administrative  Board  established  the  “top-up”  philosophy  behind  developing 
operational pollution response activities at an EU level. The underlying principles of EMSA’s 
assistance to Member States are: 

4 
5 

CleanSeaNet is the European satellite oil spill monitoring and vessel detection service.  
MAR-ICE Network: Marine Intervention in Chemical Emergencies Network (MAR-ICE) is a network 
of  experts  created  by  EMSA  in  close  cooperation  with  CEFIC  (the  European  Chemical  Industry 
Council), and Cedre (the Centre of Documentation, Research and Experimentation on Accidental Water 
Pollution). 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

EMSA's  assistance  should  not  affect  the  prime  responsibility  of  affected  coastal 
States  for  operational  control  of  pollution  incidents,  nor  should  it  replace  existing 
capacities of coastal States; 

EMSA’s  operational  tasks  should  be  a  “logical  part”  of  the  pollution  response 
mechanism  of  coastal  States  requesting  support  and  should  “top-up”  the  efforts  of 
coastal States by primarily focussing on spills beyond the national response capacity 
of individual Member States; 

EMSA’s services should be channelled to requesting states through the existing EU 
mechanism in the field of civil protection (MIC); 

The  requesting  state  will  have  EMSA’s  assistance  at  its  disposal  and  under  its 
command  and  control.  Whilst  initially  national  authorities  have  to  bear  the 
operational  costs  incurred  by  the  vessel,  reimbursement  mechanisms  exist  through 
the  international  oil  spill  compensation  regime  (e.g.  CLC  926,  Fund  927,  2003 
Supplementary Fund Protocol8) with an upper limit in excess of EUR 800 M per oil 
tanker incident. There are other mechanisms which cover spills from non-tankers. 

EMSA’s operational role should be conducted in a cost efficient way; 

EMSA’s  activities  should  respect  and  build  upon  existing  cooperation  frameworks 
In  addition,  EMSA  should  strengthen  existing 
and 
arrangements and should create coherence in this field within the European Union. 

regional  agreements. 

In  March  2010,  the  EMSA  Administrative  Board  endorsed  the  5-Year  Strategy9  for  the 
Agency. It stated that a review of the pollution preparedness, detection and response activities 
would be undertaken on the basis of a new risk assessment (updating the one of the 2004 Oil 
Action  Plan)  and  based  in  part  on  the  experience  gained  and  insights  acquired  over  the 
intervening years. The 5-Year Strategy indicated that, in order to be able to make an educated 
decision regarding the optimal size of the Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels, the 
following information needed to be available: 

The costs of the system; in particular those of increasing or decreasing the density of 

"a) 
EMSA contracted response vessels along the EU coastline; 

b) 
The  benefits  of  the  system;  in  particular  the  performance  that  can  be  expected  –  in 
terms of tonnes of pollutant substance recovered at sea – of the present network of contracted 
response vessels in case of a large accidental spill; 

The chance of occurrence and what are the consequences of a large accidental spill in 

c) 
the various sea basins that form the EU coastline." 

The pollution preparedness and response activities of the Agency are intended to cover large 
accidental spills. However, since the very beginning, EMSA has also been tasked to provide 
assistance in addressing illegal or deliberate discharges. 

6 

7 

8 
9 

The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 (1992 Civil Liability 
Convention). 
The International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil 
Pollution Damage, 1992 (1992 Fund Convention). 
The Protocol of 2003 to the 1992 Fund Convention (Supplementary Fund Protocol). 
The document is available at the EMSA website under: 
http://www.emsa.europa.eu/news-a-press-centre/external-news/item/145-emsa-5-year-strategy.html. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
By  setting  up  CleanSeaNet,  the  European  satellite  based  oil  spill  monitoring  and  vessel 
detection service, in 2007, the Agency met the requirements of Article 10(2)(a) of Directive 
2005/35/EC.  Accordingly,  the  5-Year  Strategy  includes  the  objective  that  EMSA  should 
further  support  the  strengthening  of  the  illegal  discharge  law  enforcement  chain.  To  that 
effect, the Agency could develop, in close collaboration with the enforcement community in 
the Member States and the Commission, new actions in the areas identified in Article 10 of 
the Directive, for example common practices and guidelines. 

With  regard  to  accidental  spills  of  Hazardous  and  Noxious  Substances,  the  Administrative 
Board,  following  the  adoption  of  the  2007  HNS  Action  Plan,  confirmed  in  the  5-Year 
Strategy  the  policy  line  that  EMSA  should  continue  to  focus  on  developing  a  deeper 
knowledge of “what to do and what not to do” in case of marine chemical incidents. EMSA 
shall thus serve as a knowledge-tool providing technical assistance to Member States in case 
of a chemical emergency. 

The issues raised by the 5-Year Strategy were addressed as part of the EMSA contribution to 
the Commission Mid-term Report to Parliament and Council and the associated study “EMSA 
Oil  Spill  Recovery  Vessel  Network  –  Study  on  the  Benefits  and  Limitations”10.  The  main 
conclusions  were  that  both  the  network  of  response  vessels  and  CleanSeaNet  had  been 
established in a cost efficient manner. In parallel, the services provided were of an appropriate 
operational capacity in line with the “topping-up” mandate of the Agency (see Annex III for 
more details).  
The Commission Mid-term report11 is considered as ex-post evaluation of the measure. In this 
report  the  Commission  concluded  that  no  changes  to  the  existing  Regulation  for  the  years 
2007-2013  were  necessary,  but  that  the  material  would  be  used  in  the  preparation  of  the 
proposal for the period 2014-2020. 

Key  EMSA  pollution  preparedness  and  response  services  and  associated  deliverables  using 
the existing multi-annual funding framework (2007-2013) are: 

• 

Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels: 

• 

• 

• 

16  contracts  are  currently  active  providing  coverage  for  all  the  regional  sea 
basins around the European Union. 

18  vessels,  with  an  average  recovered  oil  storage  capacity  of  approximately 
3500 m3 can be mobilised simultaneously and ready to sail within 24 hrs. 

The  EMSA  vessels  have  participated  in  36  international  (cross-border) 
operational  exercises  since  2007.  Participation  in  exercises  facilitates  the 
integration of EMSA services in the response mechanisms of Member States12. 

• 

CleanSeaNet: 

• 

• 

Over  12,000  satellite  images  have  been  delivered  since  the  service  was 
launched in April 2007, an average of over 2000 images per year.  
Over 1,000 million km2 has been monitored. 

10 

11 
12 

EMSA’s Contribution to the Mid-term Report 2007-2009 regarding Regulation No. 2038/2006/EC on 
the  Multi-annual  Funding  of  the  Agency’s  Marine  Pollution  Preparedness  and  Response  Activities 
(October 2010) 
COM(2011)286 
More details can be found in Annex III. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
• 

Around  200  illegal  discharges  per  year  are  confirmed  by  Member  States 
following  “on  the  spot”  surveillance.  Since  the  CleanSeaNet  service  became 
operational, there has been a downward trend in deliberate discharges in some 
European sea basins. 

• 

EMSA pollution response services have been utilised in a total of 25 incidents since 
2007  including  four  mobilisations  of  response  vessels  in  Europe  as  well  as  one 
equipment  assistance  package  to  the  USA  during  the  Deepwater  Horizon  incident. 
Emergency support to affected coastal states has included response vessels, satellite 
imagery, MAR-ICE activation, and onsite expertise. 

In  parallel,  the  Agency  has  undertaken  a  number  of  activities  to  develop  and  promote  best 
practice in the field of pollution preparedness and response across a range of issues. For the 
reference period, EMSA has: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Hosted  20  expert  meetings  and  workshops.  This  is  in  addition  to  regular 
CleanSeaNet  training  with  Member  State  duty  officers  and  meetings  with  Network 
vessel operators. 

Published seven inventories on different aspects of Member States’ preparedness and 
response policies and capacities. 

Managed  the  civil  servant  exchange  programme  “EMPOLLEX”,  which  has 
facilitated the exchange of 21 experts between Member States since its inception in 
June 2008. 

Developed  one  decision  response  tool  for  the  application  of  dispersants  during  an 
incident. 

Coordinated  specific  studies  when  needed  (e.g.  Study  on  discharge  facilities,  Safe 
Platform  study:  development  of  vessel  design  requirements  to  enter  and  operate  in 
dangerous atmospheres). 

In  October  2010,  the  Commission  proposed  a  modification  to  the  Agency's  Founding 
Regulation13, which inter alia foresaw two extensions for pollution response: (a) an extension 
to  cover  marine  pollution  caused  by  oil  and  gas  installations  and  (b)  inclusion  of  the  EU 
Neighbourhood Policy countries as potential beneficiaries. The proposal was accompanied by 
an  impact  assessment  presenting  the  case  for  the  proposed  extensions14.  The  European 
Parliament and the Council confirmed the two extensions. The new Regulation15 is thus based 
on  the  list  of  EMSA  tasks  as  per  2012,  it  is  important  to  highlight  that,  according  to  the 
amended Regulation, the pollution response activities are “core tasks” of the Agency. 

3. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

From  the  outset  of  implementing  EMSA’s  task  in  the  field  of  ship-sourced  pollution,  the 
Agency  was  confronted  with  limitations  of  budget  structure.  The  budgetary  principle  of 
“annuality” was difficult to reconcile with the need  to conclude multi-annual contracts with 

13 
14 
15 

COM(2010)611, dated 28.10.2010. 
SEC(2010)1264, dated 28.10.2010. 
Regulation  (EU)  No  100/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  January  2013 
amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (OJ L 39, 
9.2.2013, p. 30). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
industry (ship operators and satellite earth observation imagery providers). Such longer term 
contracts are needed in particular for standby oil spill response  vessel arrangements and  for 
organising CleanSeaNet services. 

The existing Multi-annual Funding (MAF) Regulation has proven to be a very useful tool to 
enable the Agency to implement activities in the field of pollution preparedness and response. 
In particular, the possibility to conclude multi-annual contracts has allowed, for example, the 
Agency to benefit from one-off investments in pre-fitting vessels for oil recovery services and 
to create economies of scale for satellite based services. The (cost efficient) sustainability of 
the operational services, which is a key factor in their added value, is only possible through 
the budgetary framework provided by the MAF Regulation. 

With the Agency providing sustainable services, Member States can be confident that support 
is available when an incident occurs. Member States can take such support into consideration 
when developing their national marine pollution response plans. 

EMSA's tasks are laid down in its Founding Regulation as amended in 2013. The question to 
be addressed here is thus not what the Agency should do in the area of pollution response; the 
question  under  consideration  is  whether  EMSA  again  needs  a  multi-annual  financial 
framework  to  better  plan  and  execute  its  pollution  response  tasks  during  the  period  2014-
2020.  Furthermore,  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  amount  which  should  be  earmarked  for 
these activities under the financial perspectives for 2014-2020, especially in light of the 2013 
decision by the EU legislator to extend EMSA's pollution response tasks. 

4. 

OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSAL 

The  general  policy  objective  is  to  ensure  effective  EU  assistance  for  response  to  pollution 
caused  by  ships  and  to  pollution  caused  by  oil  and  gas  installations  by  EMSA  providing 
sustainable pollution response services to affected States. 

The  specific  objective  of  the  proposal  is  to  ensure  financial  security  in  a  multi-annual 
perspective for the continuation of EMSA's pollution response services for the period 2014-
2020 taking also into account the new tasks for the Agency. 

The proposal, keeping in mind the EMSA Founding Regulation as amended in 2013, should 
also contribute to two other EU policy objectives: 

• 

• 

5. 

Strengthening the disaster response capacity of the European Union; 

Support to the European Neighbourhood Policy. 

OPTIONS  

The basic approach is to put in place a multi-annual funding framework. This will facilitate 
the planning of services and ensure their cost efficiency. The alternative option would be to 
rely entirely on the annual budgetary procedure. 

The  second  item  to  be  considered  is  the  amount  to  be  earmarked  taking  into  account  that 
EMSA's tasks have been extended. In theory, three options can be considered: 

(a) Spending less,  

(b) Spending approximately the same amount, or  

(c) Spending more. 

However,  spending  less  would  certainly  lead  to  a  situation  in  which  the  Agency  would  not 
have enough resources to fulfil its tasks. As this would be contrary to the Agency's Founding 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Regulation,  this  option  has  to  be  discarded.  For  the  two  other  options,  three  scenarios  are 
developed in the next part (Section 6). 

6. 

- 

DESCRIPTION OF OPTIONS 

Multi-annual financial framework or annual budgetary procedure 

If  multi-annual  funding  was  not  available  to  the  Agency,  EMSA  would  face  a  number  of 
challenges in the execution of its tasks. The main problem would be the inherent uncertainty 
involved  in  using  an  annual  budget  to  manage  individual  multi-annual  contracts.  These 
individual  contracts,  when  combined,  form  the  basis  of  the  main  operational  services  being 
provided  to  Member  States  and  the  Commission.  For  example  individual  response  vessel 
contracts,  currently  16  in  total,  have  been  concluded  for  the  geographical  areas  where 
additional spill response capacity is needed, based on risk. The areas are selected taking into 
consideration the whole operational coverage of the Network rather than individual contracts. 
Multi-annual  contracts  for  CleanSeaNet  deliver  cost  efficiency  gains  through  volume 
discounts  and  the  sustainable  service  provides  the  opportunity  for  (combined)  aerial 
surveillance  planning  by  Member  States  in  advance  of  satellite  imagery  acquisition. 
Budgetary  restrictions  would  most  likely  result  in  losses  of  financial  and  operational 
efficiency as contractors would find working with the Agency less attractive and/or adopt a 
short-term commercial view. In parallel, the sustainability of the pollution response services 
provided  through  the  Agency,  which  is  a  prerequisite  for  Member  States  to  include  EMSA 
services in their national response chains, would be deeply undermined. 

- 

Amount to be earmarked 

The  following  three  budget  options  have  been  developed.  Option  A  follows  the  logic  of 
spending approximately the same amount, while options B and C follow the logic of spending 
more: 

(1) 

Option A 

The  funding  envelope  as  proposed  effectively  allows  only  the  implementation  of  existing 
tasks  of  the  Agency.  The  funding  under  Option  A  would  be  distributed  as  follows:  existing 
tasks: EUR 154.480 M / new tasks: EUR 6.020 M; Total: EUR 160.500 M. 

Consequently, there would be limited additional activities in relation to the new tasks of the 
Agency.  There  would  be  no  dedicated  CleanSeaNet  monitoring  of  offshore  facilities  (oil 
platforms) for illegal discharges (only co-utilisation of images, where possible, as ordered for 
ship-pollution monitoring). In parallel, there would also be no additional ships for at-sea oil 
recovery  for  any  “Deepwater  Horizon”  scale  oil spills  than  the  new  vessel  for  the  Northern 
North Sea, which will be designed from the outset to fight pollution caused by ships and by 
offshore  installations,  nor  any  capacity  building  in  partner  countries  of  the  European 
Neighbourhood Policy. 

This  option  is  based  on  exploiting  the  operational  functionality  of  the  specialised  at-sea  oil 
recovery equipment for as long as possible. Such an approach will lead to equipment that is 
functional  but  potentially  sub-optimal  in  terms  of  performance  efficiency  as  it  ages  despite 
implementing  appropriate  levels  of  maintenance.  Innovation  and  higher  performing 
equipment cannot be incorporated due to a lack of funding for replacing equipment. 

There would be limited funding available (EUR 6.020 M) for new tasks with regard to placing 
of specialised equipment. 

(2) 

Option B 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
This option foresees a modest increase on the existing funding envelope in order to deliver a 
higher  level  of  sustainable  services  taking  better  into  account  the  new  core  tasks  of  the 
Agency. The funding would be distributed as follows: Existing tasks: EUR 154.480 M / New 
tasks: EUR 11.345 M, Total EUR 165.825 M. 

Accordingly and on top of the activities identified in Option A, there would be a prioritisation 
of  implementing  the  new  task  of  monitoring  of  offshore  facilities  (oil  platforms)  for  illegal 
discharges by CleanSeaNet with only a very basic level of training for users. The remainder 
would  be  available  for  specialised  equipment  on  board  at-sea  oil  recovery  vessels.  Any 
activities  in  relation  to  the  European  Neighbourhood  Policy  (ENP)  would  be  undertaken 
within the funding framework of other EU programmes. 

(3) 

Option C 

A more significant increase in available funding would allow, taking into account the existing 
and new core tasks of the Agency, a higher level of service deliverables. The funding would 
be distributed as follows: Existing tasks: EUR 154.480 M / New tasks: EUR 30.325 M, Total 
EUR 184.805 M. 

Accordingly and on top of the activities identified in Option B, there would be two additional 
EMSA  response  vessels.  Priority  areas  would  the  Adriatic,  where  significant  offshore 
facilities already exist, as well as taking into consideration regions where oil exploration and 
production  and  the  associated  transport  of  the  oil  as  cargo  is  evolving  rapidly  e.g.  south  of 
Portugal, the Canary Islands and the Arctic. The Commission will submit a mid-term report 
on  the  utilisation  of  the  new  multi-annual  financial  framework  in  2017.  It  will  analysis  the 
operational coverage of the EMSA response vessel network and will be an appropriate basis 
on  which  to  determine  the  way  forward  regarding  the  future  distribution  of  vessels  around 
European. Such factors as oil transportation by ships as well as new developments regarding 
oil exploitation activities will be taken into account. 

With  the  increased  funding,  it  would  also  be  possible  for  CleanSeaNet  to  provide  a  full 
service of monitoring of illegal discharges from offshore facilities across all European waters. 
This  would  include  extensive  training  of  Member  State  operators  in  order  that  they  may 
maximise their use of CleanSeaNet. This would reflect more precisely the nature of the new 
core task assigned to the Agency in this field. 

Any activities in relation to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) would be undertaken 
within the funding framework of other EU programmes. 

7. 

RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS 

If  a  multi-annual  funding  framework  is  not  established  for  the  period  2014-2020  then  a 
number  of  aspects  regarding  the  activities  of  the  Agency  in  this  field  can  be  expected  to 
evolve negatively. Such impacts and associated risks would include: 

• 

• 

Planning  for  extended  periods  would  be  possible  but  without  a  firm  funding  basis. 
Robust  planning  is  based  on  reliable  assumptions  regarding  key  criteria  including 
funding streams. 

Inherent  uncertainty  regarding  the  provision  of  services  to  Member  States.  This  in 
turn  would  cast  doubt  on  the  level  and  reliability  of  support  from  the  Agency  that 
Member  States  could  expect  during  an  incident.  Such  levels  of  doubt  could  affect 
their own national contingency planning. This might give rise to a situation whereby 
a Member State is of the opinion that resources which would have been provided by 
the Agency need to be established from their national budget directly. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Higher costs associated with ship operators, whose willingness to engage in activities 
outside their normal commercial field is crucial. They may be reluctant to engage in 
contracts for which, regardless of their own actual performance, renewal is in doubt. 

Short term contracts with oil monitoring and vessel detection service providers might 
jeopardise  their  willingness  to  invest  in  ground  stations  and  advanced  systems  to 
meet the CleanSeaNet requirements. 

Regarding routine monitoring of European water for illegal discharges, it should be 
emphasised that, for a number of European Member States, CleanSeaNet remains the 
only remote sensing tool available to detect and monitor oil spills at sea. A service 
disruption would result in large European sea areas not being monitored. 

Planning  and  funding  uncertainty  will  most  likely  result  in  less  assistance  being 
available to Member States. Less assistance available to countries affected by an oil 
spill  would  result  in  greater  exposure  of  their  coastline  to  socio-economic  and 
environmental  damage.  The  consequential  costs  will  be  increased  significantly  as 
generally one tonne of oil recovered at sea is the equivalent of preventing 10 tonnes 
oiling the shoreline. 

The European Union would be less prepared for marine accidents and disasters from 
shipping and/or offshore installations having a reduced emergency response capacity. 
This may result in increased socio-economic and environmental impacts of a major 
oil spill. 

Increased  political  consequences  of  a  major  oil  spill  when  the  European  tier  of 
response has been deliberately reduced. 

The  risks  associated  with  implementing  the  proposed  multi-annual  expenditure  programme 
and the manner of its execution, are limited. Implementation is based on procured contracts 
with  the  shipping  and  satellite  service  industries.  Conceptually  the  main  risk  is  a  lack  of 
market interest in providing these services. This has not been the case to date, although some 
procurement  offers  failed  to  be  concluded.  The  Agency  has  taken  deliberate  measures  to 
promote  both  the  actual  services  themselves  and  the  associated  public  procurement 
opportunities with potentially interested parties. This has resulted in a successful procurement 
programme. Importantly, those ship operators and satellite service providers who have entered 
into contract with the Agency have, in general, been ready to renew contracts. 

During the existing MAF funding period, the Agency has managed to implement the policy 
objectives in accordance with the Key Performance Indicators identified in the annual Work 
Programmes (see Annex IV). Budget utilisation has been, and is projected to be for the whole 
seven year period, high. Utilisation of commitment appropriations is predicted to be 97.20 % 
whilst  the  equivalent  value  for  payment  appropriations  is  79.48%  due  to  the  phasing–in  of 
new scenarios and discount clauses for under performance. Based on the proposed planning 
for the period 2014-2020, a better budget utilisation of payment appropriations is expected. 

8. 

EXPECTED IMPACTS FROM THE OPTIONS CONSIDERED 

A number of pathways for impacts, both positive and negative, are considered. With respect 
to  the  identified  commitment  and  payment  appropriations,  the  analysis  focusses  on  the 
provision of the at-sea oil recovery service (Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels) 
and  the  European  satellite  oil  spill  monitoring  and  vessel  detection  service  (CleanSeaNet). 
These two services are expected to consume the vast majority of the appropriations envisaged 
under the multi-annual funding instrument. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
It  should  be  noted  that  there  are  two  main  contexts  with  regard  to  the  abovementioned 
services, namely accidental spills or deliberate discharges. The source of these releases of oil 
also  needs  to  be  considered  i.e.  from  a  ship  or  from  an  offshore  facility.  In  parallel,  the 
Agency’s objective and therefore the nature of EMSA activity in such scenarios must also be 
reflected. The combinations of these variables are shown in the table below. 

Mitigation  of  socio-economic  and  environmental  impacts  refers  to  limiting  the  negative 
effects  of  oil  contaminating  the  coastline  and  on  economic  resources  such  as  fisheries  and 
tourism. In addition, consideration has been given to the political impact of major incidents. 

The  “deterrent  effect”  refers  to  actions  taken  to  discourage  ships/platforms  from  breaking 
their legal obligations with respect to discharges  by  proactively monitoring their  day-to-day 
operations. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  Network  of  Standby  Oil  Spill  Response  Vessels  is  designed  to 
intervene in large spills, accidental in nature. CleanSeaNet can, and does, support accidental 
response operations but it is primarily designed to identify deliberate illegal discharges which 
tend to be smaller in scale but much more frequent and to have a deterring effect. 

Accordingly, the Agency services are “multi-purpose” with respect to the scenarios to which 
they  can  be  used.  The  table  below  illustrates  the  links  between  the  sources  of  oil  spills,  the 
aims of EMSA intervention and the Agency services involved.  

Source 

Context of 
Release 

Accidental 
spill 

Ship 

Objective of 
EMSA 
Activity 

Active 
intervention: 

Mitigation of 
socio-
economic and 
environmental 
impacts 

Deliberate 
discharge 

Deterrent 
effect 

Offshore 
facility 

Accidental 
spill 

Active 
intervention: 

Mitigation of 
socio-
economic and 
environmental 
impacts 

Nature of EMSA 
Activity 

EMSA Pollution Response Services 
involved16 

Response operations: 

At-sea oil recovery 
and/or oil slick 
surveillance  

Monitoring and 
detection: 

Oil slick surveillance, 
vessel identification, 
triggering/supporting 
follow-up actions by 
MS  

Response operations: 

At-sea oil recovery 
and/or oil slick 
surveillance 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(1) 

(2) 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Network of Standby Oil Spill 
Response Vessels 

CleanSeaNet 

Expertise:  Onsite 
remote support 

and/or 

CleanSeaNet 

Expertise: Remote support 

Network of Standby Oil Spill 
Response Vessels 

CleanSeaNet 

Expertise:  Onsite 
remote support 

and/or 

16 

Note that additional resources within the Agency will also be involved e.g. SafeSeaNet (SSN) and the 
Maritime Support Services (MSS) however these are outside the multi-annual financial framework. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Deliberate 
discharge 

Deterrent 
effect  

Monitoring and 
detection: 

Oil slick surveillance, 
triggering/supporting 
follow-up actions by 
MS 

(1) 

(2) 

CleanSeaNet 

Expertise: Remote support 

The tables below analyse different options for the main two EMSA services with respect to 
investment level by EMSA and MS and their operational impacts (benefits) as well as EU cost 
efficiency. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
EMSA At-sea oil recovery service: Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels 

Source of Spill: Ship or Offshore facility 

Scale of Spill: Large 

Investment 
Level 

(EUR) 

Socio-
economic  and 
Environmental 
Benefit 

(EUR) 

Overall 
Combined 
Beneficial 
Effect of 
EMSA and MS 
Operations / 
Resources 

European  Union 
Cost Efficiency 

(Cost to EU for 
EMSA Added 
Value Activities)

(EUR) 

Option 

1: 

EMSA 

“Do nothing” 

States 

Member 
individual 
to  provide  all 
responsibility 
response  capacity  needed  within 
limitations of national budgets. 

2: 

EMSA  in  contractual  relations 
with  ship-owners/operators  who 
have  already  invested  in  the 
vessels. 

Member  States  “topped  up”  by 
EMSA resources 

EU  Zero 

Zero 

MS  Very High 

Medium/Low 

EU  Medium 

Medium 

MS  Medium 

Medium 

3: 

EMSA 
operator. 

as 

Ship-owner/ship-

EU  Very high 

Medium 

Member  States  “topped  up”  by 
EMSA resources. 

MS  Medium 

Medium 

Low 
↓↓↓ 

(Insufficient 
capacity for 
major 
incidents) 

High 
↑↑↑ 

(Combined 
EMSA/MS 
response 
capacity) 

High 
↑↑↑ 

(Combined 
EMSA/MS 
response 
capacity) 

Neutral 
↔ 

High 
↑↑↑ 

Very low 
↓↓↓↓↓ 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EMSA Oil spill monitoring and vessel detection service: CleanSeaNet 

Source of Spill: Ship or Offshore facility 

Scale of Spill: Small to Large 

Investment 
Level 

(EUR) 

Socio-
economic  and 
Environmental 
Benefit 

(EUR) 

Overall 
Combined 
Beneficial 
Effect of 
EMSA and MS 
Operations / 
Resources 

European  Union 
Cost Efficiency 

(Cost to EU for 
EMSA Added 
Value Activities)

(EUR) 

EU  Zero 

Zero 

High  

(No cross 
fertilisation 
between MS - 
Duplication of 
service 
development 
and operation 
at MS level)  

High/Medium 

(The equivalent 
capacity of 
CleanSeaNet 
would not be 
available in 
every MS) 

Low 
↓↓↓ 

partial 

(Only 
capacity 
throughout 
Europe ) 

Neutral 
↔  
(At high costs for 
Member States) 

Option 

1: 

EMSA 

“Do nothing” 

Member States individual 
responsibility to provide the full 
detection and response chain 
within limitations of national 
budgets. 

MS 

2: 

EMSA is in contractual relations 
with satellite owners and 
operational service providers 
which have already invested in 
the relevant sectors. 

Member States response chain 
activities, including aerial 
surveillance, are complemented 
by EMSA CleanSeaNet service.  

3: 

EMSA is in contractual relations 
with satellite owners but 
undertakes itself the operational 
image analysis (instead of 
contracting service providers – 
like in option 2). 

Member States response chain, 
including aerial surveillance, is 
complemented by EMSA 
CleanSeaNet service. 

High 
↑↑↑ 

High 
↑↑↑ 

EU  Medium  

High 

MS 

Very Low 

(MS can focus 
on other 
elements of the 
response chain 
as EMSA 
provides 
detection 
services) 

Very High 
↑↑↑↑↑ 

Medium 

(More efficient 
use of aerial 
resources) 

(European  wide 
capacity- 
Combined 
EMSA/MS 
detection 
and 
response chain) 

EU  Very high 

High 

MS 

Zero 

(MS  can  focus 
other 
on 
elements of the 
response  chain 
as 
EMSA 
provides 
detection 
services) 

Medium 

(More efficient 
use of aerial 
resources) 

(European  wide 
capacity- 
Combined 
EMSA/MS 
and 
detection 
response chain) 

Low 
↓↓↓  
(Existing industry 
capacity/ 
investment not 
taken into 
account) 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Whilst the above tables provide a strategic overview of the impacts expected of the actions to 
be  funded  through  the  multi-annual  envelope,  the  tables  below  show  the  impacts  from  the 
perspective of projected deliverables. 

It  should  be  highlighted  that  the  type  and  scale  of  deliverables  shown,  whilst  based  on 
previous experience in this field, are considered as indicative for the period 2014-2020. This 
is partly due to the natural general uncertainty of predicting all actions so far into the future 
but also that a number of activities are directly linked to the active cooperation/collaboration 
of external parties. An example would be the organising of operational (at-sea) exercises by 
Member States and EMSA’s participation in such events. 

With respect to new tasks related to the offshore oil/gas exploration and production industry, 
foreseen  to  enter  to  enter  into  force  in  2012,  the  gap  analysis  (as  detailed  in  the 
aforementioned  Mid-term  report  of  2011)  of  the  existing  network  coverage  identified  the 
following areas as needing additional response capacity: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The Northern North Sea: The North Sea has the largest number of known oil fields 
and  offshore  installations.  Due  to  the  shallowness  of  this  area,  the  majority  of 
platforms are in shallow waters of less than 300 m depth. Deep sea oil installations 
can be found east and west of the Shetland Islands and west of Norway. 

The Adriatic Sea: There are a large number of offshore installations around Italy and 
these  facilities  are  located  in  the  Adriatic  Sea,  in  the  Ionian  Sea,  and  in  the  Sicily 
Channel. 

In the Arctic region, oil and gas are currently produced in the shallow waters of the 
Barents Sea and the Norwegian Sea. The Barents Sea is one of the widest shelf areas 
in the world, and has a mean depth of 230 m. Both Russia and Norway are exploiting 
the area which, from an ecological point of view, is considered to be very sensitive to 
oil and gas development. 

The  Canary  Islands:  Based  on  current  information,  it  is  expected  that  during  the 
2014-2020  period  there  will  be  exploration  and  production  activities  around  the 
Canary Islands as well as south of Portugal. There is currently no coverage (48 hours 
sailing) of the response vessel Network for this area. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  any  additional  capacity  will  also  become  available  to  support 
response to oil spills from ships. This is particularly relevant for the Northern North Sea area 
as mentioned above. The overall effect is to reinforce the disaster response resources of the 
European Union. 

With  respect  to  CleanSeaNet,  the  assumptions  are  that  full  monitoring  of  offshore  oil 
production facilities every three days would require between 2,400 – 3,200 images/year. 50% 
of this amount can be covered through the “double usage” of images acquired in relation to 
the  existing  task  of  monitoring  and  detecting  illegal  oil  discharges  from  ships.  The  overall 
impact  of  monitoring  offshore  facilities  would  be  an  increase  of  approximately  1,200 
images/year. It is worth highlighting that CleanSeaNet has European wide coverage including 
the  ecologically  sensitive  Barents  Sea  where  substantial  oil  and  gas  exploration  is  already 
underway. 

Regarding Agency support to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), which includes 16 
countries from Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and the South shore of the Mediterranean, the 
overall  objective  is  to  provide  technical  assistance,  including  the  organisation  of  relevant 
training activities. Capacity building through knowledge transfer requires a start-up phase of 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
training  for  all  appropriate  personnel  across  a  range  of  pollution  response  and  associated 
contingency planning issues. This could be expected to involve Member State experts as well 
as EMSA staff. Such training should be continued thereafter on the basis of maintaining the 
level of knowledge transferred. In addition, there could be familiarisation activities regarding 
available  EMSA  services  and  how  they  could  be  utilised  if/when  required.  Such  activities 
should include at-sea operational exercises involving EMSA vessels and technical induction 
for  CleanSeaNet  operators.  Whilst,  under  the  amended  EMSA  Regulation,  the  Agency  has 
been  tasked  with  activities  in  relation  to  the  European  Neighbourhood  Policy,  no 
appropriations  are  available  under  this  multi-annual  funding  envelope.  Accordingly,  the 
implementation  of  such  activities  will  depend  on  the  existing  funding  mechanisms  for 
European Neighbourhood Policy purposes.  

The tables below show the various deliverables (Network of Response Vessels, CleanSeaNet 
etc.) per type of task (existing or new) under the three different funding options. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
Option A: Covering Existing Tasks: Indicative Deliverables 

Existing Tasks 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020  Total 

Vessels available for 

simultaneous 

mobilisation within 

24 hours 

Operational (At-sea) 

Exercises with MS 

Notification (Alert) 

Exercises with MS  

EMSA / Contractor 

Network of 
Standby 
Response 
Vessels 

19 

19 

19 

19 

19 

19 

19 

19 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

84 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

12 

84 

Drills (Verification of 

80 

80 

80 

80 

80 

80 

80 

540 

Contracted Services) 

Improvement projects  1 

3 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

13 

Images ordered and 

analysed per year 

Support to Joint MS 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

2000 

14000 

2 

0 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

2 

0 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

2 

1 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

2 

5 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

2 

0  

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

2 

0 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

14 

11 

24 hrs. 

per 

day 

24 hrs. 

per 

day 

Aerial Surveillance 

2 

Operations 

CleanSeaNet 

New contracts and 

improvement projects 

5 

24 

hrs. 

per 

day 

24 

hrs. 

Datacentre 

Availability 

MAR-ICE (HNS) 

Incident Response 

Information: Service 

per 

Availability 

day 

User group meetings 

and workshops for 

HNS 

Operational 

Support 

Cooperation, 

Coordination 

and 

Information 

CTG-MPPR, Vessel 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

4 

34 

Network & 

CleanSeaNet 

User training sessions 

for CleanSeaNet, 

CTG-MPPR & HNS 

Services 

4 

4 

3 

5 

4 

4 

3 

27 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
Support tools, studies 

and reports 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

14 

Option A: New Core Tasks - Minimum Implementation: 

Indicative Deliverables 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020  Total 

Specialised 

Improvement projects 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

8 

for platform response  

To support implementation of Existing and New core activities  

0 

New Tasks 

Network of 

Standby 

Response 

Vessels 

Contract 

Agents 

Option B, as shown in the table below, involves a modest increase of approximately EUR 11 
M  in  the  proposed  funding  envelope  for  the  new  core  tasks.  Accordingly,  there  are  no 
additional activities for existing tasks in comparison to Option A.  

Option B: New Core Tasks - Marginal Compliance: 

Indicative Deliverables in addition to Option A 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020  Total 

Specialised 
Improvement projects 
for platform response 

Images ordered and 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

2 

New Tasks 

Standby 
Response 
Vessels for 
Offshore 
Spills 

CleanSeaNet 

analysed per year for 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

1000 

7000 

for Offshore 

platform spills 

Monitoring 

New contracts and 

improvement projects 

CSN User Group 

1 

1 

0 

0 

1 

1 

0 

4 

Cooperation, 

Coordination 

and 

Information 

Contract 

Agents 

EN 

Meetings for platform 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

7 

user community 

CSN User training 

sessions and 
workshops for platform 

user community 

2 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

4 

To support implementation of Existing and New core activities  

3 

19 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Option  C,  as  shown  in  the  table  below,  involves  a  more  significant  increase  of  EUR  30  M 
which would allow a more comprehensive implementation of new core tasks than in Option 
A. Again, there are no additional activities for existing tasks in comparison to Option A.  

Option C: New Core Tasks Compliant Implementation: 

Indicative Deliverables in Addition to Option A 

New Tasks 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020  Total 

Vessels available 

for simultaneous 

mobilisation within 

24 hours 

Operational (At-

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

2 

Standby 
Response 
Vessels for 
Offshore Spills 

sea) Exercises with 

0 

MS 

Notification (Alert) 

Exercises with MS  

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

8 

8 

EMSA / Contractor 

Drills (Verification 

of Contracted 

Services) 

Improvement 

projects 

Images ordered and 

CleanSeaNet 

analysed per year 

for Offshore 

New contracts and 

0 

0 

4 

4 

8 

8 

8 

32 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

2 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

10500 

Monitoring 

improvement 

2 

1 

1 

0 

2 

1  

0 

7 

projects 

CSN User Group 

Meetings for 

platform user 

Cooperation, 

community 

Coordination 

and Information 

CSN User training 

sessions and 
workshops for 

platform user 

community 

2 

2 

1 

1 

2 

1 

1 

10 

3 

3 

2 

2 

3 

2 

2 

17 

Contract Agents  To support implementation of Existing and New core activities  

5 

In the light of the available budget within the next multi-annual financial framework, Option 
A was retained.  

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
Option A is further detailed in the annexed tables (Section 16). With regard to the network of 
response  vessels,  the  envisaged  planning  for  the  period  2014-2020  in  table  1  maintains 
coverage  of  the  current  geographical  areas  with  one  vessel  in  the  Northern  North  Sea 
available for pollutions caused by ships and by offshore installations. The milestones indicate 
either renewal of contracts for an additional 4 year period or (for those contracts which have 
expired) contracting replacement response capacity. It is expected that the requested number 
of images ordered and delivered by the CleanSeaNet service will increase. The integration of 
CleanSeaNet with other maritime applications will strengthen the effectiveness of the illegal 
discharge response chain. 

Table 2 shows the limited implementation of the Agency's extended mandate, the additional 
specialised equipment for responding to spills from offshore facilities (e.g. oil platforms). Due 
to funding constraints, the proposal will not cover dedicated satellite monitoring of offshore 
facilities  nor  support  for  the  Commission’s  activities  for  European  Neighbourhood  Policy 
countries. 

Table 3 provides the overall amount in commitment appropriations.  

Tables 4 to 6 show the expected payment appropriations needed.  

9. 

COST-EFFICIENCY 

It is proposed to carry out the existing tasks, which by the end of the 2007-2013 Perspective 
will be mature, for an amount of EUR 154.480 M for Commitment Appropriations and EUR 
152.584 M for Payment Appropriations. This represents a marginal increase (EUR 0.480 M) 
when compared to the previous envelope. It must be highlighted that under the new funding 
mechanism,  there  will  be  more  deliverables  over  the  7-year  period,  when  compared  to  the 
existing envelope. A “like for like” comparison would result in a reduced budget of around 7 
% in Commitment Appropriations and a similar value in Payment Appropriations. 

The main cost-efficiency mechanisms that are applicable for the new funding envelope are: 

(a)  Utilising  the  experience  and  expertise  gained  from  the  operational/technical/contractual/ 
financial  infrastructure  within  the  Agency  that  has  been  built  up  over  a  number  of  years  to 
manage  the  pollution  response  services.  By  way  of  an  example,  EMSA  has  developed 
contracts  for  at-sea  oil  recovery  services.  Based  on  the  experience  acquired  during  their 
implementation,  new  procurement  cycles  now  only  require  refinement  as  opposed  to 
wholesale development from a “blank page” situation. The existence of in-house knowledge 
and established management tools streamlines the time and resources required to provide the 
services at the appropriate quality level. 

(b)  Re-using  the  specialised  oil  recovery  equipment  from  one  (expiring)  contract  in  another 
(replacement) contract. 

This  approach  is  already  being  implemented  in  line  with  the  maturation  of  the  Network  of 
response  vessels  and  is  expected  to  continue  through  the  period  2014-2020.  Avoiding  the 
purchase of new equipment for every new contract will result in significant cost efficiencies. 
For  the  years  2014-2020,  this  approach  will  be  implemented,  whereby  the  operational 
functionality of the specialised at-sea oil recovery equipment will be exploited for as long as 
possible.  Such  an  approach  will  lead  to  equipment  that  is  functional  but  potentially  sub-
optimal in terms of performance efficiency as it ages despite implementing appropriate levels 
of maintenance. Innovation and higher performing equipment cannot be incorporated due to a 
lack of funding for replacing equipment. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
10. 

COST-EFFECTIVENESS 

The  funding  framework  which  would  be  established  under  the  proposed  Regulation  is  for 
operational activities. Staff and administrative costs will continue to be borne by Titles 1 and 
2  of  the  EMSA  budget.  In  order  to  achieve  cost  effectiveness,  a  number  of  practical 
advantages result from the approach EMSA has taken to implement its tasks:  

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

The  overall  approach  of  the  Agency  consists  in  contracting-in  the  services  from 
relevant  industries  as  opposed  to  owning  the  response  resources  (ships/satellites) 
directly.  Owning  the  resources  directly  would  entail  a  huge  increase  in  budget  and 
staffing requirements in order to make the necessary initial investment costs as well 
as the annual costs of the day-to-day management. The cost implications of owning 
such resources are prohibitive and disproportionate to the Agency’s tasks. 

The  service  contracts  are  awarded  following  public  procurement  procedures. 
Contractors  are  selected  based  on  the  “most  economically  advantageous”  offer 
within the framework of the tender specifications. 

Volume discounts have been achieved through the combination of the opportunity of 
having significant contracts with the Agency, the commercial competitiveness of the 
interested  tenderers  and  the  actual  design  of  the  procurement  procedures.  For 
example,  the  cost  of  setting  up  and  running  the  CleanSeaNet  service  at  European 
level  is  estimated  at  being  20  %  less  compared  to  the  accumulated  costs  of  similar 
national  systems.  This  represents  a  significant  economy  of  scale.  This  is 
supplemented by the fact that one CleanSeaNet image can often cover the sea areas 
of two neighbouring countries, avoiding duplication of image purchasing. 

Service contracts are designed so that “under performance” by the contractor results 
in  reduced  payments  and/or  savings  for  the  Agency.  For  example,  late  delivery  by 
the contractor of requested satellite imagery results in a cost per image saving to the 
Agency.  Similarly,  if  a  Network  vessel  is,  for  whatever  reason,  “unavailable”  to 
provide  at-sea  oil  recovery  services  e.g.  it  has  sailed  out  of  a  pre-defined 
geographical  area,  this  results  in  a  reduction  of  payments  by  the  Agency  to  the 
contractor concerned. 

Integration  of  EMSA  vessels  in  national/regional  pollution  response  chain  through 
participation in regular exercises. This increases operational effectiveness and in turn 
overall cost efficiency. 

11. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The  following  indicators  to  measure  the  effectiveness  of  the  execution  of  the  funds  are 
envisaged: 

• 

• 

• 

Activities will be evaluated against the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) identified 
in EMSA’s Annual Work Programme of the relevant year (see Annex IV for details). 

The Agency’s Annual Report will include information on the utilisation of the funds 
for  pollution  activities,  in  particular  on  financial  aspects  i.e.  commitment  and 
payment appropriations. 

In order to define the requirements for operational assistance, such as additional anti-
pollution  vessels,  to  be  provided  by  the  Agency  to  the  Member  States,  the  Agency 
list  of  pollution  response  mechanisms 
will  publish  on  a  regular  basis  a 
(procedures/plans)  and  response  capabilities  (expertise/resources)  in  the  various 
regions of the European Union. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

Mid-term  Report:  The  Commission  will  publish,  on  the  basis  of  information 
provided by the Agency, a report on the implementation of this Regulation in 2017 
covering the period 2014 to 2016.  

More generally, the Agency is subject to audits by the European Court of Auditors 
and the Internal Audit Service of the Commission and to the discharge procedure by 
the Budgetary Authority. 

12. 

CONCLUSION 

The  approach  of  a  multi-annual  financial  framework  with  regard  to  the  implementation  of 
EMSA’s operational tasks in the field of pollution response creates significant cost efficiency 
by utilising industry expertise, e.g. tasking satellites to monitor marine oil spills. It also allows 
the  Agency  to  take  advantage  of  any  technological  developments  and  their  operational 
application in this field. The European tier of assistance made available through the Agency is 
complementary to the resources that coastal States have at their disposal. It can be considered 
as a “reserve for disasters” and is at an appropriate scale bearing in mind the responsibilities 
of  Member  States  to  protect  their  coastlines.  These  services  have  been  operational  for  a 
number  of  years.  The  implementation  procedures  and  administrative  infrastructure  already 
exist.  

Alternative approaches, e.g. annual funding rather than a multi-annual framework or spending 
less, are not appropriate as these options would leave the EU more vulnerable to pollution and 
the associated socio-economic, environmental and political consequences. While the Agency 
is  technically  capable  to  implement  more  activities  in  support  of  European  policy  goals, 
Options  B  and  C  ("spending  more")  are  not  considered  appropriate  within  the  current 
budgetary context. 

Integration of the Agency's services in the pollution response mechanisms of Member States 
is achieved through regular participation of the network vessels in operational exercises and 
the incorporation of satellite monitoring into national response chains. In parallel and as has 
been the case to date, EMSA itself undertakes regular operational and contractual reviews of 
the  services  in  order  to  identify  refinements  to  the  system  and/or  feasible  improvements 
taking  into  account  latest  technological  developments.  Such  activities  are  intended  to 
maximise  the  positive  socio-economic  and  environmental  impacts  of  the  services  when 
responding to pollution.  

In conclusion, the  envisaged commitment appropriations for the period 2014-2020 are EUR 
154.480  M  for  existing  tasks  and  EUR  6.020  M  for  new  core  tasks,  leading  to  a  total  of 
EUR 160.500 M. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
13. 

ANNEX I 

This ex-ante evaluation is based on the following documents:  

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

The  Commission  Mid-term  Report  to  Parliament  and  Council  on  the  Multi-annual 
Funding of EMSA’s Pollution Response Activities (COM(2011)286); 

EMSA’s Contribution to the Mid-term Report 2007-2009 regarding Regulation No. 
2038/2006/EC  on  the  Multi-annual  Funding  of  the  Agency’s  Marine  Pollution 
Preparedness and Response Activities (2010). 

The EMSA Action Plan on Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response (2004); 

The EMSA Action Plan on HNS Pollution Preparedness and Response (2007); 

EMSA Annual Work Programmes (2007-2012); 

EMSA 5 Year Strategy (March 2010); 

EMSA Annual Activity Reports (2004-2011); 

Annual EMSA Reports on the Multi-annual Funding of EMSA’s Pollution Response 
Activities (2007-2011); 

CleanSeaNet First Generation Report: 16 April 2007 - 31 January 2011 (2011); 

Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels and Equipment: Handbook 2012. 

All EMSA documents are available at www.emsa.europa.eu. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
14. 

ANNEX II 

Results of stakeholder consultation and lessons learned 

The  Agency  has  been  subject  to  a  number  of  evaluations,  audits  and  feedback  from 
stakeholders during the period 2007-2009 in relation to its pollution preparedness, detection 
and response activities. Those of particular relevance include: 

• 

• 

• 

A  dedicated  Audit  by  the  Internal  Audit  Service  (IAS)  of  the  Commission  in  2009 
regarding the Network of Standby Oil Spill Response vessels; 

The evaluation of the Agency of April 2008 as required by its Founding Regulation, 
undertaken by an external consultant (COWI A/S);  

A  stakeholder  consultation  in  March  2010  in  preparation  of  the  Multi-Annual 
Funding Mid-Term Report. 

The  2008  evaluation  of  the  Agency,  combined  with  the  2010  stakeholder  consultation, 
demonstrate  the  positive  evolution  in  stakeholders’  perspective  of  EMSA’s  capacity  to 
implement  complex  projects  that  bring  added  value  to  the  pollution  activities  of  Member 
States. 

The  overall  objective  of  the  2008  evaluation  was  to  assess  the  relevance  of  the  EMSA 
Regulation and the effectiveness and efficiency of the Agency in fulfilling its objectives and 
tasks. The findings of the final report are:  

• 

• 

• 

Member  States  had  different  opinions  regarding  the  relevancy  of  the  pollution 
response task. 

Most indicated that the Agency had adopted the correct operational, contractual and 
financial approach to setting up pollution response services. 

The  pollution  response  services  were  rated  by  the  Member  States  as  some  of  the 
activities in which the Agency had been most effective. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  Mid-term  Report  on  the  actions  of  the  Agency  in  the  field  of 
pollution  preparedness  and  response  to  ship-source  pollution,  EMSA  consulted  key 
stakeholders on the implementation of its tasks. The focus of this consultation was to obtain 
feedback  on  the  way  EMSA  has  implemented  these  tasks  during  the  period  2007-2009,  as 
well as to receive comments regarding the possible future evolution of EMSA’s work in this 
field beyond 2013. 

It should be noted that the feedback reflects different approaches and considerations. As such, 
the  feedback  covers  a  broad  range  of  aspects,  some  of  which  are  not  necessarily  within  the 
mandate  of  the  Agency  or  within  the  present  policy  approach  adopted  by  the  EMSA 
Administrative Board. Per activity, the following points were made: 

The Network of Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels: 

• 

• 

The technical and operational capabilities of the EMSA contracted vessels are very 
good,  especially  in  addressing  Heavy  Fuel  Oil  (HFO)  and  Very  Heavy  Fuel  Oil 
(VHFO) pollution; 

A Member States’ expert group for consultation on technical and operational issues 
of the Standby Oil Spill Response Vessels Network could be established by EMSA 
(similar to the CleanSeaNet User Group); 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

• 

• 

The  need  has  been  identified  for  a  new  risk  assessment  at  EU  level,  covering  the 
existing  pollution  prevention,  preparedness  and  response  capacities  of  the  Member 
States and also addressing new risk factors (e.g. large cargo ships with considerable 
quantities of fuel on board) in addition to tanker traffic; 

It  was  recognised  that  the  lack  of  a  minimum  standard  for  national  response 
mechanisms represents a challenge for EMSA with regard to its “topping up” task of 
Member  State  response  capacity.  Nonetheless,  many  Member  States  consider  that 
there  should  not  be  any  “European  Standard/Approach”  for  national  response 
capacities; 

Some  Member  States  would  like  the  Agency  to  provide  emergency  ship-to-ship 
transfer services (lightering from casualty or from recovery tanks of other response 
vessels in the area) possibly using the EMSA contracted Standby Oil Spill Response 
Vessels; 

Some  Member  States,  particularly  Baltic  countries,  further  developed  the  range  of 
potential services to include emergency towing and fire fighting. It should be noted 
that these types of activities are beyond the current mandate of the Agency and that 
such activities run counter the principle that the protection of national shorelines is a 
national responsibility. 

CleanSeaNet Service: 

• 

• 

The  pan-European  monitoring  and  surveillance  operational  capability  and  role  of 
EMSA is considered as very efficient and providing added value;  

Most  Member  States  emphasised  the  complementary  use  of  aerial  surveillance  and 
satellite monitoring regarding illegal discharges, which is strongly advocated by the 
Agency. 

Hazardous and Noxious Substances (HNS) and the MAR-ICE Network: 

• 

• 

• 

EMSA  should  strengthen  its  HNS-related  activities.  There  is  a  growing  concern 
about chemical spills and this type of service/information is very important; 

The  MAR-ICE  Network  and  EMSA’s  other  work  in  the  field  of  HNS/chemical 
pollution could be further developed and could also cover HNS operational response 
capability in the future; 

In the future the EMSA vessels could also have HNS response capability. 

Cooperation, coordination and information: 

• 

• 

17 

EMSA  has  established  good  relations  with  the  Member  States  and  the  Regional 
Agreements; 

The role of the Consultative Technical Group for Marine Pollution Preparedness and 
Response (CTG-MPPR)17 in the field of accidental or deliberate pollution is regarded 
positively.  A  good  example  of  work  on  issues  of  common  interest  is  the  Claims 
Management  Guidelines  document,  which  was  developed  for  the  benefit  of  all 
Member States. Work on this topic should continue; 

The CTG MPPR is the only European level forum for pollution issues. It is composed of Member State 
experts with EMSA providing the secretariat and budget for related activities.  

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
                                                 
• 

• 

• 

EMSA  could  work  more  closely  with  the  pollution  preparedness  and  response 
scientific  and  technical  community  and  stakeholders  and  should  have  a  role  in 
MPPR-related R&D coordination, evaluation and/or funding; 

Bilateral  meetings  with  industry  associations  are  appreciated  and  could  be  further 
developed; 

EMSA could further develop its role in training activities. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
15. 

ANNEX III 

Further details on EMSA's anti-pollution activities 

The current response vessel contracts have a four-year duration, renewable once, and involve 
the  initial  modification  (pre-fitting)  of  a  ship  for  spill  response.  Maximising  the  benefits  of 
this  one-off  investment  is  linked  to  utilising  the  pre-fitting  over  as  many  years  as  possible, 
hence multi-annual  contracts are  needed.  This  also applies to  maintaining vessel crew skills 
(deploying the specialised response equipment and manoeuvring the ship appropriately) built-
up  through  regular  practice  and  participation  in  international  exercises  during  the  initial 
contract. In parallel, managing the coverage of the Network across Europe takes a degree of 
planning, the sustainability of which is possible due to the advantages of having a multi-annul 
funding framework.  

Similarly,  with  regard  to  CleanSeaNet,  aside  from  the  fact  that  Member  States  need  a 
sustainable operational service, economies of scale secured though this Europe wide service 
are  made  possible  by  having  multi-annual  contracts  with  service  providers  and  satellite 
owners. 

It should be noted that the EMSA services have been established through contractual relations 
with  industries  which  have  already  invested  in  the  relevant  sectors  i.e.  shipping  and  remote 
sensing.  This  has  been,  in  the  case  of  CleanSeaNet,  complemented  by  cooperation  with  the 
European Space Agency. This has allowed the cost efficient utilisation of EU funds. By way 
of  an  example,  the  Network  of  response  vessels  is  based  on  adapting  ships  for  pollution 
response, ensuring their availability when required, but avoiding costs related to building or 
buying  dedicated  vessels.  Such  costs  would  increase  the  required  budget  by  an  order  of 
magnitude or even more. 

Regarding the operational effectiveness of the EMSA Network of Standby Response Vessels, 
the following points were noted from the study on the benefits and limitations: 

• 

• 

• 

EMSA vessels are placed under the operational command of the requesting Member 
State.  The  efficiency  and  the  amount  of  oil  recovered  will  largely  depend  on  the 
decisions of the Member State personnel responsible for coordinating the response. 

In general, the type, size and location of the EMSA vessels are suitable to deal with 
major oil spills where at-sea oil recovery is possible. Lessons learnt from past spills 
have  been  considered  when  designing  the  Network.  The  estimated  operational 
performance in the spill scenarios confirms the suitability of the design concept. 

The  availability  of  discharging  facilities  for  oil  recovered  at  sea  is  out  of  EMSA’s 
control  and  could  be  a  bottleneck.  It  seems  that  the  availability  of  discharging 
facilities  is  a  common  problem  around  Europe.  EMSA  has  already  partially 
addressed  this  issue  by  including  a  “Lightering  Clause”  in  the  vessel  contracts.  It 
indicates that the Contractor, if requested by the affected Member State, would try to 
find  a  suitable  lightering  vessel.  Appropriate  arrangements  to  have  sufficient 
receiving  tankers/barges  with  appropriate  capacity  to  discharge  the  recovered  oil 
should  be  in  place  before  any  incident.  Consideration  could  be  given  to  the 
establishment of an arrangement to guarantee the availability of discharging facilities 
in  sufficient  number  and  capacity.  This  would  mitigate  one  of  the  potential 
bottlenecks  that  may  appear  during  a  large-scale  incident.  A  new  study  has  been 
launched by the Agency addressing this issue. 

• 

In general, the average individual capacity per vessel that could be mobilised is quite 
similar  across  the  regions.  The  EMSA  Network  has  an  average  individual  vessel 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

storage  capacity  considerably  higher  than  typical  response  vessels  in  Europe.  This 
allows EMSA vessels to spend more time recovering oil at sea. 

In addition to the social and environmental benefits, the EMSA Network would also 
be  economically  valuable  for  the  Member  States  in  the  event  of  a  major  spill.  The 
estimations  made  for  the  scenarios  analysed  show  values  of  at  least  EUR  100  M 
benefit to the Member State affected by the spill, reaching more than EUR 500 M in 
one of the cases. 

The  amount  of  EU  funds  that  have  been  invested  to  date  in  setting  up  and 
maintaining the service and the expected potential benefits to affected Member States 
corresponds  favourably  with  the  “insurance  coverage”  analogy  identified  at  the 
beginning of the study. The analogy is that the investment in the at-sea oil recovery 
service  (“the  premium”)  provides  appropriate  operational  support  (“insurance 
coverage”)  to  coastal  States  in  mitigating  (reducing  the  amount  of  oil  hitting  the 
coastline) the socio-economic and environmental damage of major incidents. It can 
be considered a form of risk management.  

Considering  the  environmental,  social  and  economic  benefits  identified  for  most  of  the 
scenarios  analysed,  it  has  been  concluded  that  the  Network  of  standby  oil  spill  recovery 
vessels is a powerful tool in the hands of the Member States providing them with enhanced 
capacity  to  combat  large  oil  spills.  In  all  the  geographical  areas  analysed,  EMSA  would  be 
able  to  mobilise,  upon  request,  a  higher  capacity  than  available  at  national  level.  This 
European  tier of  response  resources  serves as  a valuable reserve  for disasters both from the 
environmental and economic point of view. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
16. 

TABLE 1: COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS EXISTING TASKS 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

of 

Network 
Standby 
Response 
Vessels 

Baltic Sea 

(2 contracts) 

North Sea 

(2 contracts) 

Channel 

(2 contracts) 

Atlantic 

(4 contracts) 

Mediterranean 
Sea 

(7 contracts) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

New tender 

3,100,000 

0 

0 

0 

New 
Tender 

New tender 

4,200,000 

Renewal 

2,600,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

0 

2,800,000 

7,000,000 

New tender 

4,500,000 

0 

7,100,000 

0 

0 

New tender 

4,000,000 

0 

0 

New tender 

4,000,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,800,000 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,800,000 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,800,000 

0 

0 

6,800,000 

2,800,000 

2,400,000 

6,800,000 

2,700,000 

2,700,000 

5,900,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

New tender 

4,500,000 

7,200,000 

0 

2,700,000 

New 
Tender 

0 

4,500,000 

6,900,000 

Renewal 

0 

2,800,000 

Renewal 

2,400,000 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

0 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

Renewal 

0 

2,400,000 

0 

4,500,000 

0 

0 

0 

2,700,000 

0 

0 

7,200,000 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

Renewal 

2,600,000 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

Renewal 

0 

2,700,000 

New 
Tender 

0 

0 

New 
Tender 

4,500,000 

7,100,000 

0 

0 

2,700,000 

2,700,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,400,000 

0 

0 

4,375,000 

0 

0 

6,775,000 

New 
Tender 

Black Sea 

3,100,000 

(2 contracts) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,700,000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Renewal 

2,800,000 

0 

0 

0 

5,900,000 

2,700,000 

Readiness & 
Contract 
Management 

Improvements 
equipment 

Operational 
Fund for 
Exercises 

CleanSeaNet 

Operational 
Services 

Datacentre 
Maintenance, 
Enhancements, 
User Training 
and Support 

Cooperation, 
Coordination 
& Information 

Annual 
Subtotal 

1,500,000 

4,150,000 

1,000,000 

2,700,000 

3,000,000 

2,500,000 

2,900,000 

17,750,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,100,000 

1,100,000 

1,200,000 

1,200,000 

7,600,000 

3,000,000 

3,200,000 

3,200,000 

3,400,000 

3,400,000 

3,600,000 

3,600,000 

23,400,000 

New 
Tender 

New 
Tender 

605,000 

650,000 

700,000 

1,150,000 

650,000 

750,000 

800,000 

5,305,000 

450,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

650,000 

700,000 

700,000 

 4,350,000 

17,255,000 

20,000,000 

21,000,000 

22,200,000 

24,075,000 

24,450,000 

25,500,000 

154,480,000 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17. 

TABLE 2: COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS NEW CORE TASKS 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

Specialised 
Equipment for 
Platform Spills 

2,420,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

6,020,000 

18. 

TABLE 3: TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

Annual Subtotal  

19,675,000  

20,600,000   21,600,000 

22,800,000 

24,675,000 

25,050,000   26,100,000   160,500,000 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
19. 

TABLE 4: PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS EXISTING TASKS: 2014-2020 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

Network  of 
Standby 
Response 
Vessels 

Baltic Sea 

(2 contracts) 

North Sea 

(2 contracts) 

Channel 

(2 contracts) 

Atlantic 

(4 contracts) 

Mediterranea
n Sea 

(7 contracts) 

New tender 

Renewal 

630,000 

630,000 

2,270,000 

650,000 

650,000 

650,000 

675,000 

6,155,000 

Renewal 

New tender 

600,000 

600,000 

625,000 

650,000 

650,000 

2,210,000 

815,000 

6,150,000 

New tender 

Renewal 

436,372 

2,110,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

700,000 

5,696,372 

420,000 

650,000 

650,000 

650,000 

675,000 

700,000 

700,000 

4,445,000 

Renewal 

Renewal 

678,115 

680,000 

680,000 

625,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

4,463,115 

New tender 

Renewal 

0 

1,900,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

700,000 

5,050,000 

Renewal 

1,104,684 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

637,500 

675,000 

675,000 

4,892,184 

Renewal 

591,630 

591,659 

591,659 

633,329 

675,000 

675,000 

675,000 

4,433,276 

New tender 

Renewal 

920,000 

580,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

700,000 

4,650,000 

598,603 

598,603 

598,603 

636,801 

675,000 

675,000 

675,000 

4,457,609 

Renewal 

New tender 

Renewal 

510,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

675,000 

675,000 

675,000 

4,335,000 

Renewal 

New 
Tender 

520,000 

520,000 

560,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

2,210,000 

5,610,000 

New 
Tender 

Renewal 

2,050,000 

650,000 

650,000 

650,000 

952,500 

675,000 

675,000 

6,302,500 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

Renewal 

New 
Tender 

541,660 

541,660 

595,830 

650,000 

650,000 

650,000 

2,375,000 

6,004,150 

Renewal 

550,000 

550,000 

550,000 

612,500 

675,000 

675,000 

675,000 

4,287,500 

690,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

637,500 

675,000 

675,000 

4,477,500 

Renewal 

Renewal 

New 
Tender 

710,000 

660,000 

600,000 

600,000 

2,140,000 

772,500 

675,000 

6,157,500 

New 
Tender 

Renewal 

910,000 

570,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

700,000 

4,630,000 

Renewal 

447,500 

447,500 

3,147,500 

337,500 

675,000 

675,000 

675,000 

6,405,000 

752,500 

1,500,000 

1,500,000 

1,850,000 

2,900,000 

2,800,000 

2,025,000 

13,327,500 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,100,000 

1,100,000 

1,200,000 

1,200,000 

7,600,000 

3,000,000 

3,200,000 

3,200,000 

3,400,000 

3,400,000 

3,600,000 

3,600,000 

23,400,000 

605,000 

650,000 

700,000 

1,150,000 

650,000 

750,000 

800,000 

5,305,000 

450,000 

600,000 

600,000 

650,000 

650,000 

700,000 

700,000 

4,350,000 

18,716,063 

21,029,421 

22,718,591 

19,645,131 

22,667,500 

23,232,500 

24,575,000 

152,584,206 

Black Sea 

(2 contracts) 

Readiness & 
Contract 
Management 

Improvement
s equipment 

Operational 
Fund for 
Exercises 

CleanSeaNet 

Operational 
Services 

DC 
Maintenance, 
Enhancement
s, User 
Training And 
Support 

Cooperation, 
Coordination 
& 
Information 

Annual 
Subtotal 

TOTAL 2014-2020 Existing Tasks 

152,584,206 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
20. 

TABLE 5: PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS NEW CORE TASKS 

Payment Appropriations: New Core Tasks 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

Specialised 
Equipment 
Platform Spills 

for 

1,210,000 

1,210,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

5,420,000 

21. 

TABLE 6: TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

Payment Appropriations: Existing and New Core Tasks 

TOTAL 2014-2020: 

158,004,206 

IMPORTANT NOTE: 

The Payment and Commitment Appropriations for this period do not match because: 

(a) 

(b) 

The Payment Appropriations shown include carry-overs of Commitments made before 2014. 

The contracts have a four-year duration.  

Therefore any commitment made after 2016 implies payments after 2020. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
22. 

ANNEX IV 

Key  performance  indicators  (KPIs)  for  pollution  response  as  extracted  from  EMSA  Work 
Programmes and Annual Reports for the years 2010 and 2011: 

2010 

2011 

KPI 

Achieved 

Status 

KPI 

Achieved 

Status 

No. of contracts 

13 

14 

▲ 

14 

16 

▲ 

Standby 
vessel 
Network 

Geographical 
coverage 

All 
regional 
sea 
basins of 
Member 
States 

All 
regional 
sea 
basins of 
Member 
States 

Network of standby 
oil spill recovery 
vessels 

Pre-fitting of 
newly 
contracted 
vessels 

No. of newly 
contracted vessels 
pre-fitted 

2 

No. of drills per year 

50 

All 
regional 
sea 
basins of 
Member 
States 

All 
regional 
sea 
basins of 
Member 
States 

1 

57 

8 

12 

24 

1 

64 

13 

13 

24 

● 

● 

▲ 

▲ 

▲ 

● 

● 

▲ 

▲ 

▲ 

▲ 

● 

3 

59 

14 

19 

24 

10 

15 

24 

2,000 

2,366 

▲ 

2000 

2481 

▲ 

100 

100 

● 

100 

100 

● 

N/A 

97.5 

94.4 

▼ 

>75 

100 

▲ 

>75 

100 

<25 

3 

0 

3 

N/A 

N/A 

▲ 

<25 

▲ 

2 

3 

1 

0 

2 

3 

1 

● 

● 

● 

● 

● 

Number of 
drills and 
exercises 

Response to 
requests for 
mobilisation 

Satellite 
images 

Response to 
assistance 
requests re. 
accidental 
spills 

No. of operational 
exercises per year 

No. of notification 
exercises per year 

Mobilisation time in 
hours 

No. of images 
ordered and 
analysed per year 

Percentage response 
rate to requests for 
assistance 

CSN-DC 
performance 

Percentage per year 
availability of CSN 

Response to 
requests for 
assistance to 
MAR-ICE 

Percentage of 
responses within 2 
hours 

Percentage of 
responses within 4 
hrs. 

Supporting 
tools/reports 

No. of tools / reports 
produced 

CTG MPPR 
co-ordination 

No. of CTG MPPR 
meetings and 
workshops 

Inventories 
and decision 
support tools 

No. of inventories / 
tools developed 

CleanSeaNet and 
illegal discharges 

HNS Operational 
support 

Co-operation and 
co-ordination and 
dissemination of 
information on 
pollution 
preparedness and 
response 

EN 

36 

   EN