52001SC1948

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

2000/0325 (COD)

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic

1. BACKGROUND

Proposal submitted to the European Parliament and the Council: 8 December 2000 (document COM(2000)802 final - 2000/0325 (COD))

Economic and Social Committee Opinion: 30-31 May 2001

Committee of the Regions Opinion: 13 June 2001

Opinion of European Parliament at first reading: 14 June 2001

Amended proposal submitted: 12.10.2001 (COM(2001)592 final COD 2000/0325)

Common position adopted : 19 December 2001

2. PURPOSE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL

In addition to the first ERIKA package with proposals to enhance the safety on seaborne oil trade, the Commission has come up with the second ERIKA package including three legislative proposals with the aim to bring about a lasting improvement in the protection of human life at sea and of the marine environment in Europe.

The first proposal of the ERIKA-II package for legislation concerns the setting-up of a Community monitoring, control and information of maritime traffic, which would contribute both to enhance maritime safety, prevent pollution from ships and to facilitate search and rescue in the event of an accident.

The key elements of the proposal are:

- obligation for vessels to comply with routeing, reporting and traffic control schemes; obligation for Member States to equip accordingly shore-based installations;

- mandatory carriage requirements of certain equipment on board vessels : automatic identification systems (AIS) and voyage data recorders (VDRs or "black-boxes" for casualty investigation);

- uniformization of procedures for the transmission to competent national authorities of information concerning dangerous or polluting goods on board, making use of telematics;

- a better identification and follow-up of ships posing potentially a risk to safety or the environment;

- increased obligations for vessels to report incidents and pollution at sea and to cooperate with shore-based authorities;

- prohibition to leave port in case of exceptionally bad weather and serious threat of pollution;

- obligation for Member States to draw up plans for accommodating ships in distress in places of refuge along their coasts;

- obligation of cooperation for the future development of the Community maritime traffic network

3. COMMENTS ON THE COMMON POSITION

3.1. General observations on the common position

The Council, unanimously, has brought a large a number of amendments to the initial proposal of the Commission. Many of them however mainly aim at clarifying the text. The objectives of the initial Commission's proposal have largely been kept intact or even been strengthened. The Common position also takes largely into account the views of the European Parliament in first reading.

3.2. Action taken on Parliament's amendments

During its 14 June 2001 Plenary Session, the European Parliament approved, subject to a number of amendments, the Commission's proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive establishing a Community monitoring, control and information system for maritime traffic. The Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions supported the legislative initiative as well.

a) Parliament amendments incorporated into the amended proposal and the common position

The Commission in its amended proposal and the Council in its common position have accepted the following:

* The extension of the requirement on ships calling at a port or flying the flag of a Member state to participate in a vessel traffic service whose area of competence extends beyond the territorial waters of that State (article 8 [1]).

[1] The numbering is based on the text of the common position, which is different from the corresponding provisions in the initial Commission's proposal.

* The need for the equipment and shore-based installations handling the information required under the Directive to be capable of relaying such information with other stations in the various Member States (article 9).

* The need to complete the mandatory carriage requirement of black-boxes (voyage data recorders) with the principle of an obligation to make use of the data collected by such equipment in case of a casualty investigation and to publish it (article 10, paragraph 2).

* The need to carry out an in-depth evaluation of the implementation of the Directive (article 26), in order notably to evaluate the efficiency of the system put in place and propose any relevant improvements to the Directive.

b) Parliament amendments incorporated only in part into the amended proposal and the common position

* The provision concerning the prohibition to leave port in exceptionally adverse weather conditions (article 18) has only been partially taken into account. The Council, like the Parliament, has introduced a two-tier approach, i.e. a general recommendation in case of risk to safety and the environment, and, when the risk of accident or pollution is more important, the possibility to take any appropriate measure which may include a prohibition to leave port. However, certain elements of the Parliament's amendment have not been agreed by the Council, in particular the obligation to provide the necessary resources and infrastructures for assisting ships in distress and the possible prohibition of high-risk manoeuvres, such as the bunkering of ships.

* The Council has agreed on the extension of the concept of port of refuge to cover also other sheltered areas (article 20). However, the Council has rejected the idea of giving to ports a right for compensation linked to the accommodation of ships in distress, as well as the obligation of insurance for ships calling to places of refuge.

The Commission has incorporated in its amended proposal the amendments of the European Parliament referred to in (a) and (b), taking into account the text agreed by the Council in its common orientation of 28 June 2001.

3.3. New provisions introduced by the Council and the Commission's position on them

The following are the main amendments introduced by the Council in its common position, to which the Commission can agree. The changes introduced by the Council, and in particular the introduction of new articles, has led to a change in the numbering of the provisions of the Directive:

* The title and purpose (article 1) have been improved. In particular the ambiguous word "control" has been replaced in article 1 with a more detailed definition of the objectives of the Directive.

* The scope (article 2) has been slightly changed: traditional ships (i.e. historical ships and their replicas) are excluded from the application of the Directive, but recreational ships will only be excluded if they are less than 45 metres long.

* The notification prior to entry into Community ports (article 4) shall take place 24 hours in advance, instead of 48 hours in advance as in the Commission's proposal, to take into account the current practices in the various ports within the Community.

* The provisions concerning the use of ships' reporting systems, ships' routeing systems and vessel traffic services (article 5, 7 and 8) have been included into separate articles, for reasons of clarity. The wording has also been adjusted to the wording of the corresponding provisions in the SOLAS Convention of the IMO.

* Article 6 concerning the use of automatic identification systems has been strengthened to include an obligation to maintain the AIS in operation at all times.

* As regards the fitting of voyage data recorders (VDRs) on vessels calling at EU ports (article 10), the Council has amended the timetable laid down in Annex II: the retrofitting of VDRs on board existing cargo vessels (i.e. built before 1 July 2002) will be made mandatory on such vessels not later than the date fixed by the IMO, or, in the absence of a decision in IMO, not later than 1 January 2007 or 2008, depending on the tonnage of the vessel. The Commission can agree with this change, which aims at conciliating the principle of mandatory carriage requirement for all ships, as included in its initial proposal, with the need to avoid the risk to prejudice the adoption of such requirement in the IMO.

* The Council has introduced a new article 11 on casualty investigation, which requires Member States to comply with the relevant IMO provisions and to cooperate in the investigation.

* The arrangements, procedures and messages for the electronic transmission of data concerning dangerous or polluting goods (article 13 and annex III) will be the subject of a close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission, on the basis of an "Interface Control Document" to be developed by the Commission, describing the formats and procedures to be used. In addition, the reporting and information exchange obligations resulting from other directives, in particular Directive 2000/59/EC on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues, will be incorporated into such information system.

* The wording of paragraph 3 of article 16, concerning the follow-up actions to be taken after a ships has been identified as posing a risk to shipping, has been clarified by the Council.

* The scope of the obligation to report incidents and accidents at sea (article 17) has been extended to cover, where appropriate, the search and rescue area under the responsibility of a Member State.

* In article 25, he Council has replaced the detailed provisions on penalties laid down in the original proposal of the Commission with the standard clause concerning the obligation to lay down a system of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. Although the Commission believes that its initial proposal had the merit of giving a clear indication of the possible violations of the Directive, the Council's text can nevertheless be accepted since it does not weaken the legal obligation for Member States to sanction any infringement to the Directive.

3.4. Problems relating to committee procedures

The Council has slightly changed the provisions on the regulatory committee in the Commission's proposal, specifying in particular that an amendment by the committee must not lead to an extension of the Directive's scope. The Commission can accept this amendment, which is a standard clause in several Directives on maritime safety.

4. Conclusion

The Commission considers that the text of the common position, adopted unanimously by the Council, is acceptable as it respects the key principles of the original proposal. It introduces a degree of flexibility, within reason, which is balanced by a tightening up of certain provisions in the light of the amendments adopted by Parliament at first reading.