CELEX: 51993PC0218
Language: en
Date: 1993-05-19
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS FOR SHIP INSPECTION AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                             COM(93) 218 final
                                             Brussels, 19  May 1993
                             Proposal for a
                            COUNCIL DECISION
                ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS
                       FOR SHIP INSPECTION
                   AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS
                     (presented by the Commission)
fo>-,,:
 ---pagebreak---                                      A
               EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
  GENERAL INTRODUCTION
  1. In the Communication "A Common Policy on Safe Seas", approved
  on 24 February 1993, the Commission underlines that despite the efforts
  already made in order to reduce the risk of casualties at sea, both at
  national and international level, the risk in shipping activities is still very
  high1.
  2. The Communication also draws attention to the wide variation of
  accidents and deficiencies within the world fleets. These differences
  continue to exist in spite of the maze of international standards which
  regulate the shipping sector and which would be expected to lead to similar
  levels of safety performance in all fleets.
  3. The variations in safety performance are due to different factors. An
  important one is the unsatisfactory performance of a number of shipping
  operators and the flag authorities responsible for safety.
  4. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has also drawn the
  attention of the shipping world to the fact that many flag States are unable
  to secure and maintain a proper control of the safety and environment
  protection standards of vessels on their respective registers or operating
  under their flags.
  5. Investigations into the causes of accidents and deficiencies found on
  ships point to the ways chosen by States of implementing the
  internationally agreed standards on construction and maintenance of
  seagoing vessels. These standards are mostly fixed by international
  Conventions designed to ensure a satisfactory level of safety and pollution
  prevention. More precisely:
         the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS
          1974) lays down technical safety standards for cargo vessels over a
       Communication from the Commission "A Common Policy on Safe Seas", p.l
to 13.
 ---pagebreak---                                        I
       given tonnage and for passenger vessels, both on an international
       voyage
       the International Convention on Load Lines (LLC 1966) establishes
       safety standards relating to solidity and stability of ships and
       the International Convention on Maritime Pollution (M ARPOL 1973)
       lays down construction and operational rules designed to prevent
       pollution of the seas.
6. According to these Conventions, the national Administrations are
responsible for the testing of compliance with the international standards
and the issuing of the corresponding international Certificates to the vessels
on their Registers. These tasks require such a vast technical infrastructure
and expertise that it is difficult for most Member States to carry out their
responsibilities using the actual structure of the national Administrations.
7. Until two decades ago, these tasks were, however, already performed
by a limited number of highly specialized organisations, the classification
societies, with extensive experience in the shipping sector, employing
skilled technical staff and supported by powerful research and computer
centres. They had been assessing for quite some time already the
seaworthiness and quality of ships, within the framework of private
contracts with shipowners, in order to deliver a class, in a highly
professional manner, thanks to the adequacy of their back-up structures.
For this reason, the national Administrations decided, in conformity with
specific provisions in the Conventions, to delegate to these classification
societies inspections and surveys to various extents, i.e. control of
compliance with national and international safety rules and, in some cases,
the issuing of safety Certificates.
8. Furthermore, neither the SOLAS '74 Convention nor the Load Lines
Convention identify the standards to which all ships must conform, at the
building stage and during their entire life, to a degree detailed enough to
ensure that they are uniformly implemented in a non-divergent manner.
This is particularly true for elements such as the hull, machinery and
electrical and control installations. These fundamental ship components are
 ---pagebreak---                                                  3
controlled according to the rules of classification societies; the Load Lines
Convention even expressly provides that hull, machinery and electrical and
control installations "built and maintained in conformity with the
requirements of a classification society recognized by the Administration
may be considered to possess adequate strength"2. Therefore, most national
Administrations decided at the same time to delegate to the classification
societies the preparation and enforcement of safety rules concerning these
parts of the ships.
9. Since the adoption of these Conventions, however, the number of
classification societies has sharply increased to reach 40 to 50 nowadays.
This is the root of the problem. Quite a number of these companies, in
fact, cannot offer sufficient evidence as regards their experience, reliability
and professionalism and do not have the traditional characteristics to justify
their being delegated to act on behalf of the national Administrations: for
example, they have insufficient trained and experienced personnel and
infrastructure to prepare and carry out tests, to interpret rules and in some
cases to lay them down. There is also a lack of procedural criteria to be
followed by certain classification societies: for ships in service, survey
intervals and specifications of conditions under which a partially worn out
structure or worn machinery may be considered unsafe are not defined.
10. All these factors have led to a situation worldwide and in the EC
where the most important rules, i.e. those affecting hull, machinery and
electrical and control installations, have not been laid down internationally
but only internally by classification societies, and the conformity of ships
to rules is determined by bodies of different levels of quality and expertise
whose decisions on safety-related issues can hardly disregard other
considerations such as the need to retain a fleet under their class. These
divergences do not only have an adverse effect on safety, they can and do
create competitive disadvantages which encourage a more lax approach to
surveying and certification in those classification societies with an excellent
record of performance.
    2
      I n t e r n a t i o n a l Convention on Load L i n e s , 1966, Annex I Regulation 1,
 ---pagebreak---                                     H
JUSTIFICATION FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE
11.  a) What are the objectives of the envisaged action in relation to the
     obligations of the Community?
     The Extraordinary Council on Environment and Transport, at its
     meeting of 25 January 1993, urged the Community and Member
     States to establish strict, convergent implementation for the whole
     Community of international rules, in particular on construction,
     certification and maintenance of vessels. The Communication, "A
     Common Policy on safe Seas", approved by the Commission on 24
     February 1993, announced the proposal for a Community Directive
     establishing measures to be followed by the Member States and
     national organisations concerned with the certification and the related
     surveillance of compliance by ships with the international
     Conventions on safety and pollution prevention at sea. This
     Directive is fully in line with the action announced in the
     Communication.
     b) Is the envisaged action solely the responsibility of the Community
     or a responsibility shared with the Member States?
     It is a responsibility shared with the Member States by virtue of
     Article 84, 2 of the Treaty.
     c) What is the Community dimension of the problem?
     All the Member States are concerned as flag States and eleven of
     them are also concerned as port States.
 ---pagebreak---                                   r
d) What is the most efficient solution taking into account the
resources of the Community and the Member States?
The most efficient solution is at Community level; a complete
explanation of the need for a Community measure is given in
paragraphs 12 to 15.
e) What is the concrete added value of the action envisaged by the
Community and what would be the cost of inaction?
The concrete added value of this Directive is the enforcement of
international standards in a non-divergent way at flag level and also
at port level, all over in the Community. Statistics show that each
year of inactivity involves a high price in terms of casualties and
loss of human lives.
f) What forms of actions are available to the Community?
This measure is meant to solve problems at Community level
because of the added value the Community can bring. One of the
elements necessary for attaining the objectives of the action is to
organise a Community-wide recognition of certain organisations.
This recognition can maintain an adequate safety and pollution
prevention level only if it lays down minimum standards for
recognition. Common criteria for hull, machinery and electrical and
control installations are also introduced by the proposed measure.
The definition of priority criteria for Port State Control will ensure
appropriate implementation to ensure that ships flying third State
flags are not treated more favourably than ships flying the flag of a
Member State.
 ---pagebreak---        g) Is uniform legislation necessary or does a Directive setting the
       general objectives and leaving the execution to the Member States
       suffice?
       This Directive establishes at Community level a common framework
       of quality requirements to be met by the organisations to which the
       Member States decide to delegate tasks, but it does so by leaving to
       each Member State the responsibility of deciding the implementation
       tools which best fit its internal system, the recognition its, the means
       of enforcement, and the implementation of the Directive.
12. The facts outlined in the general introduction show the necessity to
ensure that all the national Administrations and the organisations to which
they delegate the inspection, survey and certification tasks are fully
qualified for the job, which implies that their structure, methods, rules and
know-how guarantee a high quality of control of conformity with
international rules. Rules should also be established such as those fnr hull,
machinery and electrical and control installations, against which the
construction and maintenance of ships can actually be examined.
13. Action within the international organisations have not so far achieved
these objectives.
Quite a number of the States which are members of IMO are not in a
position to improve the performance of the organisations acting on their
behalf. Furthermore for several organisations to accept internationally
agreed high quality standards would imply raising their present
performance levels to a point where they will be less attractive than they
are now to irresponsible shipowners. If certain developing States were
obliged to delegate their tasks only to more severe classification societies,
they would need financial support to upgrade the quality of their
classification societies and their fleet. These circumstances make it
extremely difficult to introduce rules of a level of adequate severity
 ---pagebreak---                                          t
through IMO; this has been demonstrated during the first meeting of the
Flag State Implementation (FSI) Committee (see paragraph 17 below).
Furthermore, ongoing work on classification societies in IMO does not
deal with implementation and development of the rules affecting hull,
machinery and electrical and control installations, while this item is
considered an essential part of the Directive proposed by the Commission.
It is also quite obvious that an effective answer to the situation outlined
above cannot be given solely at national level. The present unacceptable
situation described above is, in fact, the. result of two decades during
which individual action by States has failed to secure the safety level
provided for by the international regulatory framework. Hence the need for
a Community solution which regulates the link between the national
Administrations and the classification societies, establishes qualitative
criteria for the organisations and aims to harmonise the development and
implementation of safety requirements as regards hull, machinery and
electrical and control installations. Finally, through Port State Control
action, it also ensures that ships flying third country flags are not treated
more favourably than ships operating under the flags of the Member
States.
14.      In accordance with the proportionality principle, the Directive
proposed by the Commission establishes at Community level a common
framework of quality requirements to be met by the organisations to which
the Member States decide to delegate tasks, in order to guarantee
equivalent safety performances of classification societies in the EC, but it
does so by leaving to each Member State the responsibility of deciding the
implementation tools which best fit its internal system, and to the delegated
competent organisations the duty to lay down, maintain and apply the
appropriate standards under the surveillance of the Member States in
cooperation with the Commission.
15. The need to introduce qualitative criteria for organisations acting on
behalf of Member States has already been stressed by the Council, which
 ---pagebreak---                                         i
  in its Regulation (EEC) N° 613/91 of 4 March 1991, on the transfer of
  ships from one register to another within the Community, provides that
   "Where the Certificates are issued by an organisation on behalf of a
  Member State, the latter must ensure that the qualifications, technical
  experience and staffing of the said organisation are such as will enable it,
  in applying the Conventions, to issue Certificates guaranteeing a high level
  of safety. The organisation must be in a position to develop and update
  rules and regulations having the quality of accepted technical standards,
  and must operate with qualified and experienced surveyors so as
  adequately to assess a ship's condition".3
   CONTENT OF THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE
   16. The scope of this Directive is to specify a set of criteria to be met by
  the classification societies and other private bodies, when acting on behalf
  of the national Administrations of the Member States; to ensure, through
  such criteria, that the organisations authorised to carry out surveillance and
   certification, or organisations upon which Member States intend to rely for
  those purposes, are professionally efficient, reliable and able to maintain
  proper control of compliance with safery and environmental protection
   standards of the vessels they classify.
  This Directive represents a first step to improve the compliance with
  international safety standards existing in the shipping sector and in view
  in particular of the low safety performance of some organisations
  concerned with the certification and related surveillance of compliance of
  ships with the Conventions. Moreover, loopholes and weaknesses in the
  international Conventions, Codes and Resolutions have often led to varying
      3
         Council Regulation     (EEC) N° 613/91 of 4 March 1991, article 3,
paragraph 3.
 ---pagebreak--- levels of application and enforcement thereof, and to consequent differing
safety and environmental performances. A further aim of this Directive,
therefore, is to establish the development and implementation of minimum
safety requirements with equivalent effect throughout the Community, in
order to eliminate substantial differences in the construction and
maintenance of vessels operating under the flags of the Member States,
and more precisely rules on hull, machinery and electrical and control
installations.
17. The IMO intends to develop non-mandatory guidelines for delegation
of authority to organisations, and minimum standards for organisations
acting on behalf of the Administration.
Therefore, the newly created sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation
was invited to prepare a relevant IMO Resolution. During its April 1993
meeting this sub-Committee finalised a draft Resolution.
It is the intention of the sub-Committee to report to the next Maritime
Safety Committee (MSC) and Marine Environment Protection Committee
(MEPC) on the outcome of its work, with the aim of inviting the
Assembly to adopt a Resolution.
The requirements, with regard to delegation of authority, set out in this
Directive are quite similar to those under preparation in the IMO. The
criteria set out in Annex I of the Directive contain the minimum
requirements identified at this stage by the Flag State Implementation sub-
Committee.
Should this Assembly Resolution be adopted in November 1993, the
Commission is prepared to take the IMO recommendations duly into
account in so far as the guidelines contain more detailed provisions with
regard to the relationship between the Admimstration and the
organisations, and if the minimim criteria for the organisations ensure at
least an equivalent level of safety.
 18. In order to achieve the above mentioned aims, the Directive sets two
objectives. The first objective of this Directive is to secure the direct and
tighter involvement of the national Administrations in the ship certification
 ---pagebreak--- and survey process. To this end the following provisions will be necessary:
a) A first provision to establish that where a Member State decides to
delegate fully or in part its statutory role in inspecting and certifying
compliance with Conventions such as SOLAS, Load Lines and MARPOL,
or to rely upon expertise from organisations outside its Administration to
carry out inspections and surveys related to those Certificates, it shall only
entrust these duties to organisations which meet a set of common minimum
criteria established in the Directive, guaranteeing their ability and
commitment to perform at a highly reliable and efficient level.
This provision applies to the inspection surveys and Certificates required
by the International Conventions listed in the Directive; for example, the
Directive does not affect certification of specific items of marine
equipment, nor does it relate to Certificates for ships which are not
covered by the International Conventions.
The list of criteria has been established having regard to the requirements
of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) and to
the criteria specified in EN 45004 (inspection bodies) and EN 29001
European standardisation (CEN). According to these criteria, organisations
authorised to act on behalf of Member States are required
       to maintain a documented quality system;
       to employ a number of professionally qualified technical staff,
       working exclusively for the organisation and sufficient to carry out
       research and to develop a full and adequate set of own rules and
       regulations at least on hull, machinery and electrical and control
       installations, and able to carry out all inspections and surveys
       required by the Conventions for the issue of Certificates;
       to maintain a worldwide coverage of inspection offices and a
       minimum size of classified fleet or tonnage;
       to demonstrate willingness to cooperate with port State control.
In deciding upon the recognition of the organisations, the Commission
                                      10
 ---pagebreak--- shall consult a Committee; such Committee will become operational as
soon as the Council has adopted the Directive.
b) A second provision to establish a working relationship between the
competent national Administrations and the organisations acting on their
behalf, to ensure quality and consistency of rules, surveys and
certifications. This relationship is based upon a formalized agreement
between the parties setting out the specific duties and functions assumed
by the orgamsations; the national Adrninistrations shall carry out a periodic
audit of this work as well as checking procedures involving random and
detailed inspections of ships, and shall provide the Commission with a
report of the results of this monitoring and with any information relating
to the performances of the organisations.
c) A third provision concerns the non-Community flag Administrations.
Since safety at sea is a worldwide problem, the responsible behaviour
required from Member States' Administrations when delegating tasks to
outside organisations must also be required from third States'
Administrations, whose ships intend to operate in Community waters. To
this end, the Directive establishes that Member States, acting as States of
the port, shall ensure that ships flying third States flags are not treated
more favourably than ships operating under the flag of a Member State.
They shall therefore consider as a primary criterion for selecting ships for
inspection the fact that the ship Certificates have been delivered by an
organisation which has not been recognised. Appropriate measures should
then be taken for ships which fail to meet the agreed international
standards.
 19.     The second objective of this Directive is to ensure that all
 "Convention" ships flying the flag of a Member State comply with
precisely defined requirements designed to achieve equivalent results on
safety and reliability of hull, machinery and electrical and control
installations. These requirements apply both to the certification of new
constructions and to surveys during the life of the ship. Preparation of
sufficiently detailed standards for new constructions would mean, however,
                                      11
 ---pagebreak--- practically re-writing the extremely large and complex set of rules and
procedures of the classification societies, in fact several hundred volumes
of rules, and keeping them continuously updated. This would be unrealistic
and unnecessary since the major classification societies which are members
of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) have
developed, maintained and upgraded in the course of the years all
necessary standards for these ships' main components. Although they may
differ in cases, it is generally accepted that their effects on the safety of
ships are substantially equivalent. Thus, the Directive states that hull,
machinery and electrical and control installations are to be built and
maintained in conformity with the requirements of one of the classification
societies which meet the set of common criteria described above. In order
to maintain equivalence of safety standards in accordance with the
provisions of the Directive, approved organisations shall consult with each
other periodically.
20. The Commission considers that an immediate consequence of this
Directive, apart from the improvement and harmonisation of safety and
environmental rules within the Community will be to release the approved
organisations from the present economic pressure put on them by unsound
competitors. The Commission shares the views expressed by the shipping
sector that such an economic pressure prevents classification societies from
maintaining the necessary full independence of judgement when carrying
out their statutory duties on behalf of the national Administrations. The
adoption of this Directive will restore full confidence in the effectiveness
and reliability of the inspections and surveys of the approved organisations
and in their continuous commitment to maintain and update rules on hull,
machinery and electrical and control installations.
21. An additional positive effect of this Directive will be the suppression
of special or exclusive rights granted by Member States to one or more
organisations on the basis of criteria other than quality and safety criteria.
The application of the principle of freedom to provide services within the
Community to organisations which meet the common set of minimum
criteria will allow only qualified organisations to compete freely, while
                                      12
 ---pagebreak--- guaranteeing shipowners and Governments a high quality service as
regards the safety aspects. The Directive achieves these objectives by
stating that Member States which delegate to or rely upon organisations
outside their Administration will have to accept that such tasks are carried
out by any one of the recognised organisations.
                                    13
 ---pagebreak--- SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Article!
This article defines the purpose of the Directive: to specify a set of criteria
to be met by the classification societies and other private bodies, when
acting on behalf of the national Administrations of the Member States; to
ensure, through such criteria, that the organisations authorised to carry out
surveillance and certification, or organisations upon which Member States
intend to rely for those purposes, are professionally efficient, reliable and
able to maintain proper control of compliance with safety and
environmental protection standards of the vessels they classify.
This Directive represents a first step to improve the compliance with
international safety standards existing in the shipping sector and in view
in particular of the low safety performances of some organisations
concerned with the certification and related surveillance of compliance of
ships with the Conventions.
Moreover, loopholes and weaknesses in the international Conventions,
Codes and Resolutions have often led to varying levels of application and
enforcement thereof, and to consequent differing safety and environmental
performances. A farther aim of this Directive, therefore, is to establish the
development and implementation of minimum safety requirements with
equivalent effect throughout the Community, in order to eliminate
substantial differences in the construction and maintenance of vessels
operating under the flags of the Member States, and more precisely rules
on hull, machinery and electrical and control installations of ships.
                                      14
 ---pagebreak--- Article 2
This article contains definitions of the key words of the Directive.
Article 3
Paragraph 1. This article reaffirms the principle that States are primarily
responsible for the implementation of the provisions of international
Conventions to which they have acceded. Each Member State must, in so
far as possible, ensure that their Administrations effecting inspections of
the ships and issuing the related Certificates, do have enough experience,
capability and reliability to carry out such tasks.
Paragraph 2. Most of the relevant international Conventions, however,
allow Member States to delegate fully or in part surveys and inspections
of the ships (including those for the assessment of the general structural
strength of the hull, the reliability and safety of machinery and electrical
and control installations) and the issuing of Certificates to private
organisations or experts.
This article states that the organisations or experts entrusted to carry out
these duties on behalf of a Member State, or on the expertise of which a
Member State relies, shall only be the recognised organisations, being
bodies which offer evidence of their experience, technical ability and
ethical reliability. Exceptions to this provision are the Cargo Ship Safety
Radiotelegraphy Certificate and the Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelephony
Certificate, whose issuing may be delegated to other bodies for practical
reasons.
Paragraph 3. The certification of specific items of marine equipment is not
covered by this article; it will be regulated by another EC Directive.
                                       15
 ---pagebreak--- Article 4
Paragraph 1. This article states that Member States may recognise as
organisations acting on their behalf only those bodies which fulfil the
criteria set out in Annex I of this Directive. The organisations which want
to be recognised for the purpose of article 3 have to submit adequate
information to the Member States in order to prove their compliance with
such criteria.
Paragraph 2. Notification of the recognised organisations shall be given by
each Member State to the Commission and to the other Member States.
Article 5
Paragraph 1. In accordance with the principles of free circulation of
services and the elimination of special and exclusive rights within the
common market, laid down in articles 60 and 90 of the Treaty, this article
states that Member States delegating safety duties as mentioned in Article
3, cannot refuse any of the recognised organisations which are located in
the Community to act on their behalf. Where a Member State decides to
delegate or rely upon an organisation for those tasks, it has to accept all
the recognised organisations which are located, within the meaning of
article 58 of the Treaty, in the European Community and which offer to
provide their services for the accomplishment of such tasks.
Paragraph 2. If the recognised organisation is located in a third State, a
reciprocal recognition between the Member State and the third State may
be requested to authorise the said organisation to act on behalf of the
Member State.
                                      16
 ---pagebreak--- Article 6
Paragraph 1. Since the Directive intends to secure a tighter involvement
of the national Administrations in the ship certification and survey process,
this article describes the working relationship which must be established
between the responsible administration of each Member State and the
organisations carrying out its statutory duties.
Paragraph 2. Transparency of this relationship is assured by formalised
written agreements setting out the duties and functions assumed by the
organisations acting on behalf of a Member State. This agreement will
guarantee the possibility for that Member State to undertake periodical
audits and carry out inspections of ships for which these duties and
functions have been delegated. The organisations shall also provide the
Member States with information about their classed fleet.
Paragraph 3. Moreover, in order to allow the circulation of relevant
information concerning the performances of the classification societies
within the Community , this article sets up a procedure to inform the
Commission and subsequently all the Member States about the working
relationship which each national Administration establishes with external
organisations.
Article 7
This article establishes an advisory Committee made up of representatives
of the Member States, preferably maritime safety experts, and chaired by
 a representative of the Commission. The experts meet as required to assist
the Commission in amending Annex I, in withdrawing recognition of
organisations which no longer fulfil the criteria set out in Annex I, and in
the case of a suspension procedure for reasons of serious danger to safety
 or environment in accordance with article 9.
                                      17
 ---pagebreak--- Article 8
This article provides that Annex I may be amended by the Commission in
order to adapt it to possible evolutions of the relevant international
Conventions and to update the common set of criteria. The Commission
may also decide to withdraw the recognition of the recognised
organisations which no longer fulfil the criteria of Annex I.
In both cases, the Commission will do so in accordance with a specific
procedure laid down in article 12.
Article 9
This article describes the procedure for suspending the authorisation given
to an organisation to carry out statutory duties: when a Member State
considers that the performance of a classification society acting on its
behalf is no longer reliable in terms of safety and environmental
protection, it may suspend such authorisation, and must then inform the
Commission and the other Member States. The Commission shall decide
whether to withdraw the suspension or to withdraw the recognition of the
organisations in accordance with article 12 within three months.
This article has been designed as a safeguard clause.
Article 10
Paragraph 1. With regard to the principle of direct involvement of the
national Administrations in the survey and certification process, this article
establishes mandatory verification of the effectiveness of the tasks carried
out by the authorised organisations and of their compliance with the
                                     18
 ---pagebreak--- criteria set out in Annex I. Member States must fulfil the obligations under
1 and 2 by monitoring those items themselves, but in the case of
organisations located in another State, it is sufficient for them to review
the monitoring by another Member State's Administration.
Paragraph 2, Each Member State is requested to monitor the work of the
delegated organisations every year.
Paragraph 3. They must forward to the Commission and to the other
Member States both the results of this control and any information about
the performance of the organisation.
Article 11
Paragraph 1. This paragraph is designed to ensure that ships calling at
Community ports and carrying Certificates issued by organisations which
have not been recognised in this Directive as meeting the required quality,
are inspected as a priority since one may reasonably doubt the conformity
of the ship with its Certificates. Member States, when acting as Port
Authorities, are required to inspect with high priority those ships whose
safety and class Certificates have not been issued by a recognised
organisation.
Member States are required to take appropriate measures when ships do
not meet the internationally agreed standards and to inform the
Commission and the Secretariat of the Memorandum of Understanding on
Port State Control of all the discrepancies discovered acting as Port
Authorities.
Paragraph 2. A performance record of the organisations working on behalf
of flag States will be held, updated every year and distributed to the other
Member States and the Commission.
                                     19
 ---pagebreak---   Article 12
  This article describes the procedure which must be applied when the
  Commission is required to take a decision on matters covered by articles
  8 and 9. It is the type procedure I of article 2 of the Council Decision
  87/373/EEC of 13 July 19874 laying down the procedures for the exercise
  of implementing powers conferred to the Commission.
  Article 13
  This article requires the Member States to ensure that the ships flying their
  flag comply with the requirements for construction and maintenance,
  including periodic surveys, of hull, machinery and electrical and control
  installations set out by one of the classification societies among the
  recognised organisations. Furthermore, classification societies are required
  to consult each other in order to maintain equivalence of their technical
  standards.
  This approach appears sensible as these standards exist and ate so
  numerous and complex that rewriting them would be very time-consuming
  and indeed also unnecessary, since the major classification societies have
  developed and upgraded in the course of the years all necessary safety
  standards for these ships' main components.
     * OJ N° L 197/33, 17. 7. 87. Council Decision 87/373/EEC of 13 July 1987
laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred
on the Commission.
                                      20
 ---pagebreak--- Article 14
This article upholds the measures with which each Member State has to
comply in order to enforce the Directive.
Article 15
No comments.
                                  21
 ---pagebreak---                           PROPOSAL FOR A
 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS
     FOR SHIP INSPECTION AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic
Community and in particular Article 84 (2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee,
Whereas safety and pollution prevention at sea may be effectively
enhanced through the elimination of substandard operators and vessels
from Community waters, while strictly applying international Conventions,
Codes and Resolutions;
Whereas the ontrol of compliance of ships with the uniform international
standards fur safety and prevention of pollution of the seas is the
responsibility of flag and port States;
Whereas Member States are responsible for the issuing of international
Certificates for safety and pollution provided under Conventions such as
SOLAS 74, Load Lines 66 and MARPOL 73/78, and for the
implementation of the provisions thereof;
                                     22
 ---pagebreak--- Whereas in compliance with such Conventions, all Member States may
delegate to or rely to a various extent upon technical organisations for the
certification of such compliance, and may delegate the issue of the relevant
safety Certificates;
Whereas worldwide a large number of the existing classification societies
do not ensure either adequate implementation of the rules or reliability
when acting on behalf of the national Administrations, as they do not have
adequate structures and experience to be relied upon and to enable them
to carry out their duties in a highly professional manner;
Whereas the action at Community level is more efficient in this field than
the combined actions of the Member States;
Whereas the appropriate way to act is through a Council Directive laying
down minimum criteria for recognition of organisations, while leaving
recognition itself, the means of enforcement and the implementation of the
Directive to the Member States;
Whereas the Council urged the introduction of standards at Community
level to enforce the implementation of the international rules in order to
eliminate substandard vessels and operators from Community waters;
Whereas EN 45004 and EN 29001 standards combined with International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS) standards constitute an
adequate guarantee of performance quality of organisations;
Whereas organisations wishing to be recognised for the purpose of this
Directive shall submit to the Member States complete information and
                                     23
 ---pagebreak--- evidence of their compliance with the minimum criteria, and the Member
States shall notify to the Commission and to the other Member States the
organisations they have recognised;
Whereas the establishment of the common market involves free circulation
of services so that organisations meeting a set of common criteria which
guarantee their professionalism and reliability cannot be prevented from
supplying their services within the Community;
Whereas a tighter involvement of the national Administrations in ship
surveys and issue of the related Certificates is necessary to ensure full
compliance with the international safety rules even if the Member States
rely upon organisations outside their Administration for carrying out
statutory duties;
Whereas it is necessary to establish an advisory committee composed of
the representatives of the Member States in order to assist the Commission
in its effort to ensure effective application of the existing maritime safety
and environmental standards;
Whereas the Commission shall act according to the same procedure laid
down in article 12 in order to take due account of progress in international
fora and to update the minimum criteria;
Whereas on the basis of the information provided in accordance with
article 10 by the Member States about the performance of the organisations
working on their behalf, the Commission will decide whether to withdraw
the recognition of recognised organisations which no longer fulfil the set
of common minimum criteria, acting in accordance with the procedure of
article 12;
                                      24
 ---pagebreak--- Whereas Member States must nevertheless be left the possibility of
suspending their authorization to an organisation for reasons of serious
danger to safety or environment;
Whereas the Commission shall rapidly decide upon confirmation or
overruling of such a national measure in accordance with the procedure
referred to above;
Whereas each Member State should periodically assess the performance of
the organisations working on its behalf, and provide the Commission and
all the other Member States with precise information related to such
performance;
Whereas Member States, as port authorities, are required to enhance safety
and prevention of pollution in the Community waters through the
elimination of substandard vessels irrespective of the flag of the ships;
Whereas the adequate procedure according to which the Committee will
act is Procedure I of article 2 of Council Decision 87/373/EEC;
Whereas the Commission's decision on withdrawal of recognition of
organisations which no longer fulfil the criteria of Annex I will take the
utmost account of the opinion delivered by the Committee and will pay
particular attention to the safety and pollution prevention performance
records of the organisations;
Whereas classification societies have to update and enforce their technical
standards in order to harmonize safety rules and ensure uniform
implementation of international rules within the Community;
                                    25
 ---pagebreak--- Whereas at present there are no uniform international standards to which
all ships must conform at the building stage and during their entire life, as
regards hull, machinery and electrical and control installations;
Whereas such standards may be fixed according to the rules of
classification societies;
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
                                     26
 ---pagebreak--- PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ON COMMON RULES AND STANDARDS
FOR SHIP INSPECTION AND SURVEY ORGANISATIONS
                     Article l
The purpose of this Directive is to establish measures to be
followed by the Member States and organisations concerned with
the inspection, survey and certification of ships for compliance
with the international Conventions. This process includes the
development and implementation of safety requirements for hull,
machinery and electrical and control installations of ships
falling under the scope of the international Conventions.
                     Article 2
For the purpose of this Directive including its annex,
"ship" means a ship falling within the scope of the international
Conventions;
"inspections and surveys" means inspections and surveys made
mandatory by the international Conventions;
"international Conventions" means the 197 4 International
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, the 1966 International
Convention on Load Lines and the 1973/78 International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, together with the
Protocols and amendments thereto, and related Codes of mandatory
status in all Member States;
"organisation" means classification societies and other private
bodies authorised by governments to carry out safety assessment
work on their behalf;
                               ^
 ---pagebreak--- "recognised organisation" means an organisation recognised in
conformity with article 4;
"Certificate" means a certificate issued by or on behalf of a
Member State in accordance with the international Conventions
except the exemption certificates;
"class certificate" means a representation by a classification
society as to the structural and mechanical fitness for a
particular use or service in accordance with its rules and
standards ;
"location" refers to the place of the registered office, central
administration or principal place of business of an organisation.
                     Article 3
1. In assuming their responsibilities and obligations under the
international Conventions, Member States shall ensure that their
competent administrations can assure an appropriate enforcement
of the provisions of the international Conventions, in particular
with regard to the inspection and survey of ships and the issue
of certificates and exemption certificates.
2. Where for the purpose of paragraph 1 a Member State decides
with respect to ships flying its flag
     i) to delegate fully or in part
           - inspections and surveys including those for the
             assessment of compliance with article 13 on the
              general structural strength of the hull, the
             reliability and safety of machinery and electrical
              and control installations, or
           - the issue or renewal of Certificates,
           or
     ii) to rely upon expertise outside its Administration to
           carry out inspections and surveys related to
           Certificates,
it shall entrust these duties only to recognised organisations.
                               2.«
 ---pagebreak--- However for the Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelegraphy Certificate and
the Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelephony Certificate, these duties
may be entrusted to other bodies with sufficient expertise in
radio-communication.
3. This article does not concern the certification of specific
items of marine equipment.
                     Article 4
1. Member States may only recognise such organisations which
fulfil the criteria set out in Annex I. The organisations shall
submit to the Member States complete information concerning, and
evidence of, compliance with these criteria from whom recognition
has been requested. The Member States will notify the
organisations in an appropriate manner of their recognition.
2. Each Member State shall notify to the Commission and the other
Member States those organisations it has recognised.
                     Article 5
 1. In applying Article 3, paragraph 2, Member States shall not
refuse to delegate to or rely upon any of the recognised
organisations located in the Community.
 2. In order for a Member State to accept that an organisation
 located in a third State is to carry out the duties mentioned in
Article 3 or part of them it may request that the said third
State grant a reciprocal recognition for those recognised
organisations which are located in the Community.
                     Article 6
 1. Member States which decide to act as described in Article 3,
paragraph 2 shall set out a working relationship between their
                                •13
 ---pagebreak--- responsible administration and the organisations authorised to
act on their behalf.
2. The working relationship shall be regulated by a formalised
written and non-discriminatory agreement setting out the specific
duties and functions assumed by the organisations and at least
including provisions for a periodical audit by the administration
into the duties the organisations are authorise^ to undertake on
its behalf and the possibility for random and detailed
inspections of ships and provisions for reporting essential
information about their classed fleet, changes of class or
disclassing of vessels.
3. Each Member State shall provide the Commission with precise
information on the working relationship established in accordance
w4-th this Article. The Commission shall subsequently inform the
other Member States.
                     Article 7
A Committee of an advisory nature composed of the representatives
of the Member States and chaired by the representative of the
Commission is hereby instituted to assist the Commission. This
Committee shall be called by the Commission at least once a year
and whenever required in the case of suspension of authorisation
of an organisation Jay a Member State under the provisions of
Article 9.
The Committee shall draw up its rules of procedure.
                     Article S
The Commission, in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 12, may
a) amend Annex I in order to
      (i) take into account amendments to the international
           Conventions and new international Conventions,
                                 iO
 ---pagebreak---            Conventions   and   new  international    Conventions,
           Protocols and Codes;
      (ii) update the criteria of Annex I;
b) withdraw the recognition of recognised organisations referred
to in article 4 which no longer fulfil the criteria set out in
Annex I.
                     Article 9
Notwithstanding the criteria specified in Annex I, where a Member
State considers that a recognised organisation can no longer be
authorised to carry out on its behalf the tasks specified in
Article 3 for reasons of serious danger to safety or environment,
it may suspend such authorisation.
In the above circumstances the following procedure shall apply:
      (a)  the Member State shall inform the Commission and the
           other Member States of its decision without delay,
           giving substantiated reasons therefor;
      (b)  the Commission shall decide whether to withdraw the
           suspension of authorisation or to withdraw the
           recognition of the organisation. It shall do so in
           accordance with Article 12 within a period not
           exceeding three months.
                     Article 10
1. Each Member State must satisfy itself that the functions
delegated to recognised organisations under Article 3 are
effectively carried out and that the criteria specified in Annex
I are fulfilled. It may do so by directly monitoring the
recognised organisations or, in the case of organisations located
in another Member State, by reviewing the corresponding
monitoring of such organisations by the administration of another
Member State.
                                 31
 ---pagebreak--- 2. Each Member State shall carry out this task each year and
shall provide the other Member States and the Commission with a
report of the results of this monitoring at the latest by the 1st
of March of each year following the year for which compliance has
been assessed.
3. Member States shall forward to the Commission and the other
Member States any information relevant to the assessment of the
performance of organisations.
                     Article 11
1. In exercising their inspection rights and obligations as port
States,
 (a) Member States shall ensure that ships flying a third State
flag are not treated more favourably than ships entitled to fly
the flag of a Member State. To this end the fact that the ship
Certificates including the class Certificate have been delivered
by an organisation which is not a recognised organisation shall
be taken as a primary criterion for selecting ships for
inspection.
b) Member States shall take appropriate measures when ships do
not meet the internationally agreed standards and report to the
Commission and the Secreteriat of the Memorandum of Understanding
on Port State Control the discovery of any issue of valid
Certificates by organisations acting on behalf of a flag State
to a ship which does not fulfil the relevant requirements of the
international Conventions, or any failure of a ship carrying a
valid class Certificate and relating to items covered by that
certificate.
2. Each Member State shall establish a performance record of the
organisations acting on behalf of flag States. This performance
record shall be updated yearly and distributed to the other
Member States and the Commission.
                                3X,
 ---pagebreak---                     Article 12
1. The following procedure shall apply for matters covered by
Articles 8 and 9:
     (a)  the representative of the Commission shall submit to
          the Committee referred to in Article 7 a draft of the
          measures to be taken;
     (b)  the Committee shall deliver its opinion within a time
          limit which the chairman may lay down according to the
          urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a votei.
     (c)  the opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; in
          addition each Member State shall have the right to have
          its position recorded in the minutes;
     (d)  the Commission shall take the utmost account of the
          opinion delivered by the committee. It shall inform the
          committee of the manner in which its opinion has been
          taken into account.
2. In preparing drafts for a decision relating to the matters
referred to in article 8 (b) , the Commission shall take into
account the reports and information mentioned in articles 10 and
11. In preparing such draft measures, the Commission shall pay
particular attention to the safety and pollution prevention
performance records of the organisations. Draft decisions
relating to such matters may also be submitted to the Committee
by the Member States.
                    Article 13
1. Each Member State shall ensure that a ship flying its flag
shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the hull,
machinery and electrical and control installation requirements
of a recognised organisation.
                                33
 ---pagebreak--- 2. The recognised organisations shall consult with each other
periodically with a view to maintaining equivalence of their
technical standards and the implementation thereof. They shall
provide the Commission with periodic reports on fundamental
progress in standards.
                     Article 14
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive
on 1 November 1994. They shall forthwith inform the Commission
thereof.
When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a
reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such
reference on the occasion of their official publication. The
methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by Member
States.
2. The Member States shall immediately communicate to the
Commission all provisions of domestic law which they adopt in the
field governed by this Directive. The Commission shall inform the
other Member States thereof.
                     Article 15
This Directive is addressed to the Member States
                                j #
 ---pagebreak---                ANNEX I
MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR ORGANISATIONS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 3
GENERAL
1    The recognised organisation must be able to document
     extensive   experience   in   assessing   the   design   and
     construction of merchant ships.
2    The organisation should have in its class a fleet of at
     least 1000 ocean-going vessels (over 100 GRT) totalling no
     less than 5 million GRT.
3    The organisation must employ a technical staff commensurate
     with the number of vessels classed. As a minimum, 100
     exclusive surveyors would be needed to meet the requirements
     in paragraph 1.2.
4    The organisation should have comprehensive rules and
     regulations for the design, construction and periodic survey
     of merchant ships, published and continually upgraded and
     improved through research and development programmes.
5    The organisation should have its Register of Vessels
     published on an annual basis.
SPECIFIC
1    The organisation is established with:
      (a) a significant technical, managerial, support and
          research staff;
      (b) world-wide coverage by exclusive field staff.
2    The organisation is governed by a Code of Ethics.
3    The organisation is managed and administered in such a way
     as to ensure the confidentiality of information required by
     the Administration.
4    The organisation is prepared to provide relevant information
     to the administration.
5    The organisation's management has defined and documented its
     policy and objectives for, and committment to, quality and
     has ensured that this policy is understood, implemented and
     maintained at all levels in the organisation.
                                3*
 ---pagebreak--- The organisation has developed, implemented and maintains
an effective internal quality system based on appropriate
parts of internationally recognised quality standards and
in compliance with EN 45004 (inspection bodies) and with EN
29001, as interpreted      by the IACS Quality        System
Certification Scheme Requirements, and which, inter alia,
ensures that:
(a) the     organisation's  Rules    and   Regulations   are
     established and maintained in a systematic manner;
(b) the organisations Rules and Regulations are complied
     with ;
(c) the requirements of the statutory work for which the
     organisation is authorised are satisfied;
(d) the responsibilities, authorities and interrelation of
     personnel whose work affects the quality of the
     organisation's services are defined and documented;
(e) all work is carried out under controlled conditions;
 (f) a supervisory system is in place which monitors the
     actions and work carried out by surveyors and technical
     and administrative staff employed directly by the
     organisation;
 (g) a system for qualification of surveyors and continuous
     updating of their knowledge is implemented;
 (h) records are maintained, demonstrating achievement of
     the required standards in the items covered by the
     services performed, as well as the effective operation
     of the quality system; and
 (i) a comprehensive system of planned and documented
     internal audits of the quality related activities in
     all locations.
The organisation must demonstrate ability
(a) to develop and keep updated a full and adequate set of
     own rules and regulations on hull, machinery and
     electrical and control equipment having the quality of
     internationally recognised technical standards on the
     basis of which SOLAS Convention and Passenger Ship
     Safety Certificates (as regards adequacy of ship
     structure and essential shipboard machinery systems)
     and Load Line Certificates (as regards adequacy of ship
                           u
 ---pagebreak---            strength) can be issued,
     (b) to carry out all inspections and surveys required by
          the international Conventions for the issue of
          Certificates.
8    The organisation is subject to certification of its quality
     system by an indépendant body of auditors recognised by the
     Administration of the State in which it is located.
9.   The organisation should allow participation in the
     development    of    its   rules  and/or   regulations   by
     representatives of the Administration and other parties
concerned.
10. The organisation must demonstrate willingness to co-operate
     with port State control when a ship of its class is
     concerned and in particular in order to facilitate the
     rectification     of   reported  deficiencies    or   other
     discrepancies.
11. The organisation must provide all relevant information to
     the Administration about changes of class or disclassing
     vessels.
                              37
 ---pagebreak---                                              i*
                                                                     ISSN 0254-1475
                                                              COM(93) 218 final
                                                      DOCUMENTS
EN                                                                         04 07
                                 Catalogue number : CB-CO-93-245-EN-C
                                                             ISBN 92-77-55854-7
Office for Officiai Publications of the European Communities
L-2985 Luxembourg