Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (4) has been substantially amended several times. Since further amendments are to be made, it should be recast in the interests of clarity.
(2)
In view of the nature of the provisions of Directive 94/57/EC it seems appropriate that its provisions be recast in two different Community legal instruments, namely a Directive and a Regulation.
(3)
Ship inspection and survey organisations should be able to offer their services throughout the Community and compete with each other while providing equal levels of safety and of environmental protection. The necessary professional standards for their activities should therefore be uniformly established and applied across the Community.
(4)
This objective should be pursued through measures that adequately tie in with the work of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and, where appropriate, build on and complement it. Furthermore, the Member States and the Commission should promote the development by the IMO of an international code for recognised organisations.
(5)
Minimum criteria for recognition of organisations should be laid down with a view to enhancing the safety of, and preventing pollution from, ships. The minimum criteria laid down in Directive 94/57/EC should therefore be strengthened.
(6)
In order to grant initial recognition to the organisations wishing to be authorised to work on behalf of the Member States, compliance with the minimum criteria laid down in this Regulation could be assessed more effectively in a harmonised and centralised manner by the Commission together with the Member States requesting the recognition.
(7)
Recognition should be granted only on the basis of the quality and safety performance of the organisation. It should be ensured that the extent of that recognition be at all times in keeping with the actual capacity of the organisation concerned. Recognition should furthermore take into account the differences in legal status and corporate structure of recognised organisations while continuing to ensure uniform application of the minimum criteria laid down in this Regulation and the effectiveness of the Community controls. Regardless of the corporate structure, the organisation to be recognised should provide services worldwide and its legal entities should be subject to global joint and several liability.
(8)
The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (5).
(9)
In particular, the Commission should be empowered to amend this Regulation in order to incorporate subsequent amendments to the international conventions, protocols, codes and resolutions related thereto, to update the minimum criteria in Annex I and to adopt the criteria to measure the effectiveness of the rules and procedures as well as the performance of the recognised organisations as regards the safety of, and the prevention of pollution from, their classed ships. Since those measures are of general scope and are designed to amend non-essential elements of this Regulation, inter alia, by supplementing it with new non-essential elements, they must be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.
(10)
It is of the utmost importance that failure by a recognised organisation to fulfil its obligations can be addressed in a prompt, effective and proportionate manner. The primary objective should be to correct any deficiencies with a view to removing any potential threat to safety or the environment at an early stage. The Commission should therefore be given the necessary powers to require that the recognised organisation undertake the necessary preventive and remedial action, and to impose fines and periodic penalty payments as coercive measures. When exercising these powers, the Commission should do so in a manner that complies with fundamental rights and should ensure that the organisation can make its views known throughout the procedure.
(11)
In accordance with the Community-wide approach, the decision to withdraw the recognition of an organisation which fails to fulfil the obligations set out in this Regulation if the above measures prove ineffective or the organisation otherwise presents an unacceptable threat to safety or the environment, has to be taken at Community level, and therefore by the Commission, on the basis of a committee procedure.
(12)
The continuous a posteriori monitoring of the recognised organisations to assess their compliance with this Regulation can be carried out more effectively in a harmonised and centralised manner. Therefore, it is appropriate that the Commission, together with the Member State requesting the recognition, be entrusted with this task on behalf of the Community.
(13)
As part of the monitoring of the operations of recognised organisations, it is crucial that Commission inspectors have access to ships and ship files regardless of the ship’s flag in order to ascertain whether the recognised organisations are complying with the minimum criteria laid down in this Regulation in respect of all ships in their respective classes.
(14)
The ability of recognised organisations to identify rapidly and correct weaknesses in their rules, processes and internal controls is critical for the safety of the ships they inspect and certify. That ability should be enhanced by means of a quality assessment and certification entity, which should be independent of commercial or political interests, can propose common action for the sustained improvement of all recognised organisations and ensure fruitful cooperation with the Commission.
(15)
The rules and procedures of recognised organisations are a key factor for increasing safety and preventing accidents and pollution. The recognised organisations have initiated a process that should lead to harmonisation of their rules and procedures. That process should be encouraged and supported by Community legislation, as it should have a positive impact on maritime safety as well as on the competitiveness of the European shipbuilding industry.
(16)
The harmonisation of the rules of recognised organisations for the design, construction and periodic survey of merchant ships is an ongoing process. Therefore, the obligation to have a set of own rules or the demonstrated ability to have own rules should be seen in the context of the process of harmonisation and should not constitute an obstacle to the activities of recognised organisations or potential candidates for recognition.
(17)
Recognised organisations should be obliged to update their technical standards and enforce them consistently in order to harmonise safety rules and ensure uniform implementation of international rules within the Community. Where the technical standards of recognised organisations are identical or very similar, mutual recognition of certificates for materials, equipment and components should be considered in appropriate cases, taking the most demanding and rigorous standards as the reference.
(18)
While each recognised organisation, in principle, should be held responsible solely and exclusively in relation to the parts it certifies, the liability of recognised organisations and manufacturers will follow the agreed conditions or, as the case may be, the applicable law in each individual case.
(19)
Since transparency and exchange of information between interested parties, as well as public right of access to information, are fundamental tools for preventing accidents at sea, recognised organisations should provide all relevant statutory information concerning the conditions of the ships in their class to the port State control authorities and make it available to the general public.
(20)
In order to prevent ships from changing class to avoid carrying out necessary repairs, recognised organisations should exchange all relevant information among themselves concerning the conditions of ships changing class and involve the flag State when necessary.
(21)
The protection of intellectual property rights of maritime stakeholders including shipyards, equipment suppliers and shipowners, should not prevent normal business transactions and contractually agreed services between these parties.
(22)
The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) established by Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) should provide the necessary support to ensure the application of this Regulation.
(23)
Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the establishment of measures to be followed by organisations entrusted with the inspection, survey and certification of ships, operating in the Community, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
(24)
Measures to be followed by the Member States in their relationship with ship inspection and survey organisations are laid down in Directive 2009/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (7),
