COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/18/EC establishing the fundamental principles governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector
Date: 2023-06-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: environmental protection, marine environment, maritime safety, maritime transport, transport accident

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.6.2023  SWD(2023) 146 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council  amending Directive 2009/18/EC establishing the fundamental principles governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector {COM(2023) 270 final} - {SEC(2023) 201 final} - {SWD(2023) 145 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet 

Impact assessment on a Proposal for a Revision of Directive 2009/18/EC establishing the fundamental principles 
governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector 

A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  
Directive 2009/18/EC sets out the EU regime on the investigation of accidents in the maritime  transport sector. 
The Directive incorporates the principles of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea as well as the 
relevant  International  Maritime  Organization  (IMO)  code  into  EU  law.  The  main  purpose  of  the  Directive  is  to 
improve maritime safety by harmonising technical investigations and lessons learnt after accidents at sea.  

The Directive was the subject of an ex-post evaluatuon and maritime fitness check (alongside other pieces of EU 
legislation) in 2018. A certain number of issues have been identified as being problematic.  (1) The Directive as 
currently formulated does not provide for the investigation of accidents involving fishing vessels of less than 15 
metres length. (2) Unclear definitions, vague wording as well as lack of precision in some provisions of the text 
create confusion (3)  developments in the relevant  international regulatory  environment  (4) some accidents are 
going unreported or are not being investigated because the  accident investigation bodies (AIBs) lack adequate 
resources and expertise  (5) new developments and/or technologies that may arise in the  greening of maritime 
transport or the use of autonomous ships will necessarily imply new challenges for AIBs. 

Absent EU action, EU AIBs will work in an uncoordinated and non-harmonised way.  

What should be achieved?  
This initiative seeks to ensure and improve on the high level of maritime safety and pollution protection across 
the Union.  

What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)?  
Shipping as an  international business operates in different EU and international waters and  is regulated at the 
global as well as regional and national instances, it has by nature a strong cross-border dimension.  

B. Solutions 

What  are  the  various  options  to  achieve  objectives?  Is  there  a  preferred  option  or  not?  If  not, 
why?  
Three policy options (PO) have been developed. The preferred PO is PO C. This option partially brings certain 
types  of  accidents  involving  smaller  fishing  vessels  (less  then  15  metres)  within  the  scope  of  the  Directive.  It 
allows  for  enhanced  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency  (EMSA)  operational  support  to  AIBs.  It  aligns  the 
Directive  with  the  most  up  to  date  IMO  provisions  and  also  requires  that  Accident  Invesigation  Bodies  have  a 
certified quality management system in place.         

What are different stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?  
The  preferred  policy  option  (PO  C)  is  supported  by  the  fishing  industry  as  accidents  involving  larger  fishing 
vesels  are  already  within  the  scope  of  the  Directive.  There  are  mixed  opinions  among  Accident  Invesigation 
Bodies as to whether the scope should be extended to smaller fishing vessels. PO C however does not envisage 
that  all  very  serious  marine  casualties  involving  smaller  fishing  vessels  have  to  be  investigated  but  rather  that 
AIBs should carry out a  preliminary assessment to determine if a safety investigation should be carried out. 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?                                       
Societal impacts are mainly assessed in terms of impacts of the policy options on maritime safety (in terms of 
lives saved and injuries avoided, working conditions and environmetal protectionover the period 2025-2050. PO 
C  is  projected  to  result  in  28  to  48  lives  saved  and  219  to  379  injuries  avoided.  This  is  mainly  due  to  the 
extension of the scope of the Directive to very serious accidents involving fishing vessels below 15 meters. The 
reduction of external costs is estimated at EUR 132.6 to 229.28 million and prevent 101 to 176 tonnes of bunker 
fuel  being  lost  at  sea.  In  addition,  indirect  impacts  for  vessels’  owners/operators,  the  cost  savings  are 
projected at EUR 5.68 to 9.41 million. It should be noted however that because the impacts of  the Directive on 
safety are indirect, through the safety recommendations and their follow-up, there is high uncertainty regarding 
the estimates.   

1 

 
 
What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?                                      
The most significant  additional costs will fall on  AIBs with an increased workload foreseen in PO C  due to the 
higher  number  of  investigations.  In  total,  costs  are  estimated  at  EUR  11.97  to  141.53  million.  In  addition,  the 
increased assistance from EMSA to AIBs is estimated at EUR 31.88 million.  Enforcement costs for the industry 
(vessel  onwers/operators)  are  estimated  at  EUR  0.29  to  0.7  million.  Costs  impacts  for  consumers  have  not 
proved possible to quantify but they are expected to be negligible. 

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?  
The  proposed  extension  of  the  Directive  to  very  serious  marine  casulaties  involving  fishing  vessels  below  15 
meters in PO C is ‘relevant’ for SMEs. Enforcement costs for the industry, mostly SMEs, are estimated at EUR 
0.29 to 0.7 million. At the same time, the benefit of the extension of the scope is estimated at EUR 5.68 to 9.41 
million due to the avoidance of 18-31 vessels being sunk.   

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  
The costs for AIBs are estimated at EUR 11.97 to 141.53 million.     

Will there be other significant impacts?  
As the same high safety  level  will  be  preserved  across the  Union, there  will  be  positive  impact on the  internal 
market and competitivenes  

Proportionality 
The policy option does not go beyond what is necessary to reach the overall policy objectives.  

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed?  
The policy will be reviewed allowing for an adequate period of time after the proposal’s adoption for measures 
to be effective and to have generated impacts. The Commission/EMSA will continue monitoring the database of 
accidents managed by EMSA to verify that investigations are being carried out in a timely and effective manner 
and that reports are uploaded. EMSA will continue to carry out visits to AIBs leading to horizontal analyses.  

2