natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Сървейъри, които не отговарят на горепосочените критерии, също могат да бъдат приети, ако към датата на приемане на настоящата директива са били в трудови правоотношения с компетентен орган за законоустановени прегледи или са извършвали инспекции към държавния пристанищен контрол
Surveyors not fulfilling the above criteria are also accepted if they were employed by a competent authority for statutory surveys or port state control inspections at the date of adoption of this Directive.
Сървейъри, които не отговарят на горепосочените критерии, също могат да бъдат приети, ако към датата на приемане на настоящата директива са били в трудови правоотношения с компетентен орган за законоустановени прегледи или са извършвали инспекции към държавния пристанищен контрол и съответната пристанищна държава се е присъединила към Парижкия меморандум за разбирателство относно държавния пристанищен контрол .
Surveyors not fulfilling the above criteria are also accepted if they were employed by a competent authority for statutory surveys or port State control inspections at the date of adoption of this Directive and the port State concerned has acceded to the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control .
It would be useful to mention the Paris Memorandum of Understanding because this would ensure in any event that surveyors satisfied requirements of a uniformly high standard.
It would be useful to mention the Paris Memorandum of Understanding because this would ensure in any event that surveyors satisfied requirements of a uniformly high standard.
Приложение III, параграф 1, точка 1
Annex III, paragraph 1, point 1
Когато компетентният орган на държава-членка (оттук нататък наричана държава на флага) е информиран, че кораб плаващ под неин флаг е задържан от пристанищна държава, той трябва да следи за предприемането на подходящи коригиращи мерки, за да се приведе незабавно корабът в съответствие с приложимите регламенти и международни конвенции.
When the competent authority of a Member State (hereinafter called the flag State) is informed that a ship flying its flag has been detained by a port State it should oversee the appropriate corrective measures to bring the ship into compliance with the applicable regulations and international conventions.
Тези мерки трябва да включват следното:
Such measures should include the following.
Когато компетентният орган на държава-членка (оттук нататък наричана държава на флага) е информиран, че кораб плаващ под неин флаг е задържан от друга пристанищна държава, той трябва да следи за предприемането на подходящи коригиращи мерки, за да се приведе незабавно корабът в съответствие с приложимите регламенти и международни конвенции.
When the competent authority of a Member State (hereinafter called the flag State) is informed that a ship flying its flag has been detained by another port State it should oversee the appropriate corrective measures to bring the ship into compliance with the applicable regulations and international conventions.
Изброените по-долу мерки се считат за подходящи; списъкът не изключва приемането на равностойни или допълнителни мерки, доколкото те са в съответствие с целите и средствата на действие, предоставени от настоящата директива.
The measures listed below are deemed to be appropriate; the list does not prevent the adoption of equivalent or additional measures, so long as they are consistent with the aims of, and the means of action afforded by, this Directive.
Detail added to the text to clarify and complete the sense of the provision.
Detail added to the text to clarify and complete the sense of the provision.
Приложение III, параграф 2, точка 3
Annex III, paragraph 2, point 3
За по-сериозни недостатъци, особено структурни и такива, за които има издадени свидетелства от призната организация (ПО) от името на държавата на флага, държавата на флага трябва да изиска извършването на инспекция от неин сървейър или да назначи конкретен сървейър от ПО, който да извърши инспекцията от нейно име.
For more serious deficiencies, particularly structural ones and others covered by certificates issued on the flag State’s behalf by a recognised organisation (RO), the flag State should require an inspection by one of its surveyors or appoint a surveyor from the RO to carry one out on its behalf.
Инспекцията трябва да се насочи най-напред към онези области, в които са отбелязани недостатъци от пристанищната държава.
Initially this inspection should focus on those areas where deficiencies have been recorded by the port State.
Ако държавата на флага или сървейър на ПО намери за необходимо, обхватът на прегледа може да бъде разширен и да се извърши пълен повторен преглед на областите, за които се отнасят съответните законоустановени свидетелства.
If deemed necessary by the flag State or RO surveyor it may then be extended to a full re‑survey for those areas covered by the relevant statutory certificates.
За по-сериозни недостатъци, особено структурни и такива, за които има издадени свидетелства от държавата на флага или от призната организация (ПО), държавата на флага трябва да изиска извършването на специална допълнителна инспекция от неин сървейър или да назначи конкретен сървейър от ПО, който да извърши инспекцията от нейно име.
For more serious deficiencies, particularly structural ones and others covered by certificates issued by the flag State or by a recognised organisation (RO), the flag State should require a special supplementary inspection by one of its surveyors or appoint a surveyor from the RO to carry one out on its behalf.
Ако държавата на флага или сървейър на ПО намери за необходимо, обхватът на прегледа може да бъде разширен и да се извърши пълен повторен преглед на областите, за които има съответни законоустановени свидетелства.
If deemed necessary by the flag State or RO surveyor it may then be extended to a full re‑survey for those areas covered by the relevant statutory certificates.
Приложение III, параграф 3, точка 5
Annex III, paragraph 3, point 5
Във всички случаи държавата на флага трябва да прецени какви правни действия срещу компанията е подходящо да предприеме , включително налагане на глоби.
In all cases the flag State should consider what legal action, including fines, against the company may be appropriate .
Ако даден кораб постоянно не отговаря на изискванията на приложимите нормативни актове и международни конвенции, държавата на флага трябва да прецени какви допълнителни санкции могат да бъдат наложени, включително заличаване на регистрацията му.
In the case of a ship which persistently fails to comply with the requirements of the applicable regulations and international conventions the flag State should consider what additional sanctions may be necessary including the deletion of the ship from its registry.
Във всички случаи държавата на флага трябва да прецени какви правни действия могат да се предприемат срещу компанията , включително налагане на доста големи глоби, с цел да се спрат нарушенията на общностните стандарти и международните правила.
In all cases the flag State should consider what legal action might be taken against the company , including fines of sufficient severity to discourage infringement of Community standards and international rules .
Ако даден кораб постоянно не отговаря на изискванията на нормативните актове на Общността и международните конвенции, държавата на флага трябва да прецени какви допълнителни санкции могат да бъдат наложени, включително заличаване на регистрацията му.
In the case of a ship which persistently fails to comply with the requirements of Community regulations and the international conventions the flag State should consider what additional sanctions may be necessary , including the deletion of the ship from its registry.
Details added to the text to clarify and complete the sense of the provision.
Details added to the text to clarify and complete the sense of the provision.
Приложение III, параграф 3, точка 6
Annex III, paragraph 3, point 6
При завършване на всички коригиращи мерки за привеждане на кораба в съответствие с приложимите нормативни актове и международни конвенции, държавата на флага следва да изпрати доклад до ИМО в съответствие с изменената Международна конвенция за безопасност на човешкия живот на море (SOLAS 74), глава 1, правило 19, буква д и параграф 5, точка 2 на изменената резолюция А 787(19) на ИМО.
When all corrective measures to bring the ship into compliance with the applicable regulations and international conventions have been completed the flag State should send a report to IMO in accordance with SOLAS 74 as amended, Chapter I, Regulation 19(d) and paragraph 5.2 of IMO Resolution A. 787 (19) as amended.
При завършване на всички коригиращи мерки за привеждане на кораба в съответствие с международните конвенции и нормативни актове на Общността са завършени, държавата на флага трябва да изпрати доклад до ИМО и до Комисията , изготвен в съответствие с изменената Международна конвенция за безопасност на човешкия живот на море (SOLAS 74), глава 1, правило 19, буква д и параграф 5, точка 2 на изменената резолюция А 787(19) на ИМО по отношение на ИМО и съдържащ допълнителна информация относно съответните нормативни актове на Общността, както и по отношение на Комисията .
When all corrective measures to bring the ship into compliance with the international conventions and the Community regulations have been completed the flag State should send to IMO and to the Commission a report, drawn up in accordance with SOLAS 74 as amended, Chapter I, Regulation 19(d) and paragraph 5.2 of IMO Resolution A. 787 (19) as amended , with regard to IMO, and containing additional information relating to Community related provisions, with regard to Commission.
Приложение III, параграф 4, точка 2
Annex III, paragraph 4, point 2
Прегледът трябва също да включва, но без да се ограничава до тях, съответните точки за разширена инспекция, посочени в [част В от Приложение V на Директива 95/21/ЕО на Съвета или част В от Приложение VIII на Директива .../.../ЕО (относно държавния пристанищен контрол)].
It should also include, but not be limited to, the relevant items for an expanded inspection specified in [ Part C of Annex V to Council Directive 95/21/EC or Part C of Annex VIII to Directive …/…/EC (on port State control)].
Когато е необходимо, сървейърите на държавата на трябва да включват в прегледа функционални тестове на спасителните лодки и салове и на съоръженията за тяхното спускане, основните и второстепенни машини, люковите закрития, електрическото захранване и трюмните системи.
Flag State surveyors should not refrain from including, where deemed necessary, functional tests of items such as survival craft and their launching arrangements, main and auxiliary machinery, hatch covers, main electrical power and bilge systems.
Прегледът трябва също да включва, но без да се ограничава до тях, съответните точки за разширена инспекция, посочени в [част В от Приложение V на Директива 95/21/ЕО на Съвета или Приложение VIII на Директива .../.../ЕО (относно държавния пристанищен контрол)].
It should also include, but not be limited to, the relevant items for an expanded inspection specified in [Annex V to Council Directive 95/21/EC or Part C of Annex VIII to Directive …/…/EC (on port State control)].
The EU has already adopted the rules laid down in the ‘Erika I’ and ‘Erika II’ packages with a view to improving maritime security and safety: among other things, surveys of ships in port have been intensified, single-hull vessels may no longer be used to transport oil, and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has been established.
The EU has already adopted the rules laid down in the ‘Erika I’ and ‘Erika II’ packages with a view to improving maritime security and safety: among other things, surveys of ships in port have been intensified, single-hull vessels may no longer be used to transport oil, and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has been established.
Parliament played its part in the debate by setting up a Temporary Committee on Improving Safety at Sea (known as the MARE Committee), which between November 2003 and April 2004 held a series of meetings and hearings with political leaders and technical operators (cf. report A5-0257/2004 ).
Parliament played its part in the debate by setting up a Temporary Committee on Improving Safety at Sea (known as the MARE Committee), which between November 2003 and April 2004 held a series of meetings and hearings with political leaders and technical operators (cf. report A5-0257/2004 ).
Parliament’s activity found further expression in the April 2004 resolution on improving safety at sea, which set out the conclusions of the MARE Committee and prefigured the proposals in the ‘Erika III’ package; the resolution called for the EU to assume responsibility for a comprehensive policy on maritime matters and safety, for the (preferably compulsory) international auditing system to be strengthened, for the performance of the maritime administrations to be improved, and for registration under Community flags to be encouraged (cf. resolution P5_TA(2004)0350 ).
Parliament’s activity found further expression in the April 2004 resolution on improving safety at sea, which set out the conclusions of the MARE Committee and prefigured the proposals in the ‘Erika III’ package; the resolution called for the EU to assume responsibility for a comprehensive policy on maritime matters and safety, for the (preferably compulsory) international auditing system to be strengthened, for the performance of the maritime administrations to be improved, and for registration under Community flags to be encouraged (cf. resolution P5_TA(2004)0350 ).
Summary of the proposal
Summary of the proposal
Draft directive on flag States
Draft directive on flag States
In November 2005 the Commission adopted a new set of legislative proposals (the ‘Erika III' package), including a draft directive on flag State requirements aimed at making Member States ensure that ships in their national registers conform to international standards.
In November 2005 the Commission adopted a new set of legislative proposals (the ‘Erika III' package), including a draft directive on flag State requirements aimed at making Member States ensure that ships in their national registers conform to international standards.
The Commission intends to (a) incorporate parts 1 and 2 of the ‘Flag State Code’ into Community law, that is to say, the measures for implementing the mandatory instruments adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO); (b) lay down the requisite minimum qualifications for surveyors (also covering basic and further training) and guidelines for inspections (when a national ship is detained in a foreign port); and (c) ensure that the maritime administrations of the Member States meet the quality criteria defined in the ISO 9001/2000 standard.
The Commission intends to (a) incorporate parts 1 and 2 of the ‘Flag State Code’ into Community law, that is to say, the measures for implementing the mandatory instruments adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO); (b) lay down the requisite minimum qualifications for surveyors (also covering basic and further training) and guidelines for inspections (when a national ship is detained in a foreign port); and (c) ensure that the maritime administrations of the Member States meet the quality criteria defined in the ISO 9001/2000 standard.
Legal context
Legal context
The obligation to comply with the rules laid down in the international maritime safety conventions is already provided for in Article 3 of Directive 94/57/EC (consolidated text), which requires Member States to implement IMO resolution A 847(20) on Guidelines to assist flag States.
The obligation to comply with the rules laid down in the international maritime safety conventions is already provided for in Article 3 of Directive 94/57/EC (consolidated text), which requires Member States to implement IMO resolution A 847(20) on Guidelines to assist flag States.
That resolution has been revoked and replaced by resolution A 973(24) entitled ‘Code for the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments’: the Commission intends to take over the provisions of the IMO code as reproduced in the text of Annex I and as they stood at the time when the proposal was drawn up (Community legislation cannot alter the system of rules established by the conventions).
That resolution has been revoked and replaced by resolution A 973(24) entitled ‘Code for the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments’: the Commission intends to take over the provisions of the IMO code as reproduced in the text of Annex I and as they stood at the time when the proposal was drawn up (Community legislation cannot alter the system of rules established by the conventions).
The Commission’s intentions
The Commission’s intentions
In the short term, the Commission wishes to remedy supposed weaknesses in the IMO rules, in other words the non-binding nature of IMO measures, and hence the fact that their non-enforcement is not punishable at international level, and the discretion accorded when interpreting exemptions from IMO rules: these shortcomings are apparently to be overcome by means of ‘comitology’ procedures.
In the short term, the Commission wishes to remedy supposed weaknesses in the IMO rules, in other words the non-binding nature of IMO measures, and hence the fact that their non-enforcement is not punishable at international level, and the discretion accorded when interpreting exemptions from IMO rules: these shortcomings are apparently to be overcome by means of ‘comitology’ procedures.
In the medium and long term, the Commission is seeking to turn the Member States’ fleets into a high-quality fleet and make their flags more attractive: the possibility for third countries, if they could guarantee that they had comparable quality systems, to conclude agreements with EU Member States would raise the overall degree of compliance with the conventions.
In the medium and long term, the Commission is seeking to turn the Member States’ fleets into a high-quality fleet and make their flags more attractive: the possibility for third countries, if they could guarantee that they had comparable quality systems, to conclude agreements with EU Member States would raise the overall degree of compliance with the conventions.
Position of the Member States
Position of the Member States
Some Member States believe that, as a matter of principle, the Community is not competent to act; many of them, in any case, deplore what they see as a violation of the subsidiarity principle (effectiveness of national systems) and the proportionality criterion (plethora of instruments laid down).
Some Member States believe that, as a matter of principle, the Community is not competent to act; many of them, in any case, deplore what they see as a violation of the subsidiarity principle (effectiveness of national systems) and the proportionality criterion (plethora of instruments laid down).
As regards the specifics, many Member States are predicting that compliance with the standards underlying flag State requirements will generate additional costs, whether direct (qualified surveyors, implementation of administrative systems, qualified auditing personnel) or indirect (delegation of survey-related and certification responsibilities to classification societies), posing a risk that Community practices might ‘overlap’ with international obligations.
As regards the specifics, many Member States are predicting that compliance with the standards underlying flag State requirements will generate additional costs, whether direct (qualified surveyors, implementation of administrative systems, qualified auditing personnel) or indirect (delegation of survey-related and certification responsibilities to classification societies), posing a risk that Community practices might ‘overlap’ with international obligations.
Opinion of the rapporteur
Opinion of the rapporteur
Subjects for discussion
Subjects for discussion
The failure of some Member States to comply with the international instruments creates problems (a) of an economic nature, given that the discrepancies between greater oversight of ships flying the flag and a lack of rigour at the time of registration make themselves felt in terms of the costs incidental to ships and the expenditure incurred by administrations; (b) in the social sphere, since failure to comply with international obligations has a bearing on the employment of cheaper, less skilled crews, leading to social dumping that does skilled personnel out of jobs; and (c) as regards environmental protection, since the use of ships not conforming to the international conventions, manned by crews without the necessary qualifications, increases the risk of marine incidents, losses of human lives, and damage to the ecosystem.
The failure of some Member States to comply with the international instruments creates problems (a) of an economic nature, given that the discrepancies between greater oversight of ships flying the flag and a lack of rigour at the time of registration make themselves felt in terms of the costs incidental to ships and the expenditure incurred by administrations; (b) in the social sphere, since failure to comply with international obligations has a bearing on the employment of cheaper, less skilled crews, leading to social dumping that does skilled personnel out of jobs; and (c) as regards environmental protection, since the use of ships not conforming to the international conventions, manned by crews without the necessary qualifications, increases the risk of marine incidents, losses of human lives, and damage to the ecosystem.
Competence problems
Competence problems
The putative limit to EU legislative competence seems legally unsound and politically unwise.
The putative limit to EU legislative competence seems legally unsound and politically unwise.
On the one hand, as far as shipping is concerned, the EC Treaty itself not only assigns abstract competence, but also enables a preserve to be established through the exercise of legislative power (Article 80(2) TEC).
On the one hand, as far as shipping is concerned, the EC Treaty itself not only assigns abstract competence, but also enables a preserve to be established through the exercise of legislative power (Article 80(2) TEC).
Secondly, in the era of ‘global transport’, it makes little sense to treat the seas as a national matter, thus preventing the European legislature from coordinating efforts to develop and improve maritime safety.
Secondly, in the era of ‘global transport’, it makes little sense to treat the seas as a national matter, thus preventing the European legislature from coordinating efforts to develop and improve maritime safety.
Furthermore, as has been mentioned above, the EU has already legislated, explicitly invoking international rules.
Furthermore, as has been mentioned above, the EU has already legislated, explicitly invoking international rules.
As regards the subsidiarity principle and the proportionality criterion (Article 5 TEC, second and third paragraphs), it can no doubt be said that (a) given the repeated incidents in Community waters ( Erika , Prestige , Braer , Herald of Free Enterprise , Torrey Canyon ), protection at national level cannot be considered adequate or effective; (b) bearing in mind that infringements of the IMO conventions are not punishable, a real improvement in enforcement could be achieved by ‘Communitarising’ the international standards.
As regards the subsidiarity principle and the proportionality criterion (Article 5 TEC, second and third paragraphs), it can no doubt be said that (a) given the repeated incidents in Community waters ( Erika , Prestige , Braer , Herald of Free Enterprise , Torrey Canyon ), protection at national level cannot be considered adequate or effective; (b) bearing in mind that infringements of the IMO conventions are not punishable, a real improvement in enforcement could be achieved by ‘Communitarising’ the international standards.