Annexes to COM(2023)272 - Amendment of Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2023)272 - Amendment of Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2023)272  |
| date | June 1, 2023 |
1.5.4. Compatibility with the Multiannual Financial Framework and possible synergies with other appropriate instruments
The proposed revision is a key deliverable of the Communication from the Commission on a Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy, which sets out the EU vision for the transport system of the future. The strategy announced that the Commission is planning to initiate a major review of existing legislation on flag State responsibilities, port State control and accident investigation in 2021 (under Flagship 10 - Enhancing transport safety and security).
The proposed revision will create synergies with other pieces of EU regulatory framework, notably the Directive 2009/16/EC on port State control and Directive 2009/18/EC on accident investigation.
The proposal is compatible with the current Multiannual Financial Framework, although it will require reprogramming within Heading 1 as regards the annual contribution to EMSA (budgetary offsetting by a compensatory reduction of programmed spending under CEF Transport (02 03 01)). The budget impact of the current proposal is already included in the budget for the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Maritime Safety Agency and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002.
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
1.5.5. Assessment of the different available financing options, including scope for redeployment
The budgetary impact of this initiative refers to the additional resources necessary for the increasing role of EMSA to facilitate the Flag State’s obligations (i.e. in relation to the e-certificates, develop and maintain a reporting module (THETIS) for use of electronic certificates across flag States and Recognised Organisations, as well as tools for validation and inspection, as well as a module for e-Flag inspection reports, in relation to reporting statistics, further develop a reporting tools/gateway to support the applications, and in relation to the capacity building, develop a common curricula for Flag State inspectors and provide training in new technologies, including but not limited to renewable and low carbon fuels, and automation) under the proposed Directive.
The additional need of human resources cannot be met by redeployment, while the additional budgetary needs will be met through offsetting by existing programmes managed by DG MOVE under the current multiannual financial framework.
The increase in appropriations for EMSA will be offset by a compensatory reduction of programmed spending under CEF Transport (02 03 01). The budget impact of the current proposal is already included in the budget for the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Maritime Safety Agency and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002.
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
1.6. Duration and financial impact of the proposal/initiative
limited duration
- Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
- Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY
unlimited duration
- Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY to YYYY [n.a.]
- followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Method(s) of budget implementation planned39
Direct management by the Commission through
- executive agencies
Shared management with the Member States
Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:
international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
bodies referred to in Articles 70 and 71;
public law bodies;
bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they are provided with adequate financial guarantees;
bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the implementation of a public-private partnership and that are provided with adequate financial guarantees;
bodies or persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
Comments
Management of the proposed Directive will be done overall by the Commission services assisted by the European Maritime Safety Agency as appropriate.
Member States will be required to transpose the provisions of the Directive by the respective deadline.
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The Commission will be overall accountable for implementing the proposed Directive.
EMSA, on behalf of the Commission, carries out visits to Member States to verify operations on the ground. The respective visits reports will identify any shortcomings and areas for improvement.
The Commission and/or EMSA will participate as observers in the International Maritime Organisation Audit, complementary to EMSA’s visits and inspections on behalf of the Commission. EMSA will also carry out a horizontal analysis, giving an indication of how the legislation is functioning and identifying gaps and what can be done to address them, and report to the Commission and Member States, probably discussing the findings in workshops.
The Commission will also establish the flag State expert group to promote the cooperation between the Member States and the Commission.
2.2. Management and control system(s)
2.2.1. Justification of the management mode(s), the funding implementation mechanism(s), the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed
The Commission will be overall accountable for implementing the proposed Directive. The Commission will be assisted by EMSA as appropriate in providing the IT services and developing the IT tools necessary for the reporting, monitoring and verification provisions of the proposed Directive, as well as organising trainings. Member States will be required to carry out the transposition of the Directive to their national legislation by the deadline mentioned in the Directive. Enforcement activities will be carried out as part of the existing controls, in particular during flag State Control and via the flag performance scheme.
2.2.2. Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up to mitigate them
While the Commission will be overall accountable for implementing the proposed Directive, the European Maritime Safety Agency will be responsible for the performance of its operation and for the implementation of its internal control framework. It will be required to develop IT tools and modules, as well as provide training to the Flag State Control officers, and the Member States will be required to carry out enforcement.
EMSA is best placed to carry out reporting and assessment of compliance tasks, as this will be technical work, requiring strong expertise in data management, as well as in-depth understanding of complex technical matters related to electronic certificates and training.
Member States are best placed, also under international law obliagtions, to carry out the enforcement of the proposed Directive, notably by continuing enforcing Flag State control in a harmonized way.
DG MOVE apply the necessary controls in line with the supervision strategy adopted in 2017 on the DG's relations with decentralised agencies and JUs. Under the strategy, DG MOVE monitors performance indicators for the implementation of the budget, the audit recommendations and administrative matters. A report is provided by the Agency on a bi-annual basis. The controls performed on the supervision of the Agency as well as on the related financial and budgetary management are in accordance with DG MOVE’s Control Strategy, updated in 2022.
The additional resources put at the disposal of EMSA will be covered by EMSA’s internal control and risk management system that is aligned with the relevant international standards and includes specific controls to prevent conflict of interests and ensure the protection of whistle-blowers.
2.2.3. Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio of "control costs ÷ value of the related funds managed"), and assessment of the expected levels of risk of error (at payment & at closure)
Under the proposed revision, additional financing will be provided both to EMSA, which will be developing IT tools and modules, as well as providing training to the Flag State Control officers, and to the Commission.
EMSA has full responsibility for the implementation of their budget, while DG MOVE is responsible for the regular payment of the contributions established by the Budgetary Authority. The expected level of risk of error at payment and at closure is similar to that attached to the budget subsidies provided to the Agency.
The additional tasks resulting from the proposed Directive are not expected to generate specific additional controls. Therefore, the cost of control for DG MOVE (measured against the value of funds managed) is expected to remain stable.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures, e.g. from the Anti-Fraud Strategy.
The proposed revision contains several provisions specifically targetted at preventing fraud and irregularities. Member States will have to have a Quality Management System (QMS) to certify their organisation, policies, processes, resources and documentation are appropriate to fulfil their responsibilities. This will have to be certified and subsequently subject to periodic audit. Member States will have to share with Commission and/or EMSA the results of the audits carried out by the International Maritime Organisation and accredited body such that the national flag State authorities can retain their QMS certification.
EMSA applies the anti-fraud principles of decentralised EU Agencies, in line with the Commission approach. In March 2021, the Agency adopted an updated Anti-Fraud Strategy, based on the methodology and guidance for anti-fraud strategy presented by OLAF as well as on the Anti-Fraud Strategy of DG MOVE. It provides a framework addressing the issues of prevention, detection and conditions for investigations of fraud at Agency level. EMSA continuously adapts and improves its policies and actions to promote the highest level of integrity of EMSA staff, support effective prevention and detection of fraud risk and establish the appropriate procedures to report and handle potential fraud cases and their outcome. Furthermore, EMSA adopted in 2015 its Conflict of Interest policy for the Management Board.
EMSA cooperates with the Commission services on matters relating to preventing fraud and irregularity. The Commission will ensure that this cooperation will continue and will be strengthened.
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected
- Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | Budget line | Type of expenditure | Contribution | |||
| Number | Diff./Non-diff.40 | from EFTA countries41 | from candidate countries and potential candidates42 | From other third countries | other assigned revenue | |
| 1 | 02 10 02 | Non-diff. | YES | NO | NO | NO |
- New budget lines requested
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | Budget line | Type of expenditure | Contribution | |||
| Number | Diff./non-diff. | from EFTA countries | from candidate countries and potential candidates | from other third countries | other assigned revenue | |
| [XX.YY.YY.YY] | YES/NO | YES/NO | YES/NO | YES/NO |
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | 1 | Single Market, Innovation and Digital |
| European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) | Year 2025 | Year 2026 | Year 2027 | Year 2028-2034 | TOTAL | ||
| Title 1: | Commitments | (1) | 0.171 | 0.342 | 0.342 | 2.394 | 3.249 |
| Payments | (2) | 0.171 | 0.342 | 0.342 | 2.394 | 3.249 | |
| Title 2: | Commitments | (1a) | |||||
| Payments | (2a) | ||||||
| Title 3: | Commitments | (3a) | 0.368 | 1.041 | 1.266 | 4.412 | 7.087 |
| Payments | (3b) | 0.368 | 1.041 | 1.266 | 4.412 | 7.087 | |
| TOTAL appropriations for EMSA | Commitments | =1+1a +3a | 0.539 | 1.383 | 1.608 | 6.806 | 10.336 |
| Payments | =2+2a +3b | 0.539 | 1.383 | 1.608 | 6.806 | 10.336 |
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | 7 | ‘Administrative expenditure’ |
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year N | Year N+1 | Year N+2 | Year N+3 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | |||||
| DG: <…….> | ||||||||||
| Human Resources | ||||||||||
| Other administrative expenditure | ||||||||||
| TOTAL DG <…….> | Appropriations |
| TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 7 of the multiannual financial framework | (Total commitments = Total payments) |
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year 2025 | Year 2026 | Year 2027 | Year 2028-2034 | TOTAL | |||
| TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 7 of the multiannual financial framework | Commitments | 0.539 | 1.383 | 1.608 | 6.806 | 10.336 | |
| Payments | 0.539 | 1.383 | 1.608 | 6.806 | 10.336 |
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
3.2.2. Estimated impact on EMSA’s appropriations
- The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
- The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:
Amounts in EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Indicate objectives and outputs | Year N | Year N+1 | Year N+2 | Year N+3 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | ||||||||||||
| OUTPUTS | ||||||||||||||||||
| Type43 | Average cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | No | Cost | Total No | Total cost | |
| SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 144… | ||||||||||||||||||
| - Output | ||||||||||||||||||
| - Output | ||||||||||||||||||
| - Output | ||||||||||||||||||
| Subtotal for specific objective No 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 ... | ||||||||||||||||||
| - Output | ||||||||||||||||||
| Subtotal for specific objective No 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| TOTAL COST |
Where applicable, amounts reflect the sum of the Union contribution to the agency and other revenue of the agency (fees and charges).
3.2.3. Estimated impact on EMSA’s human resources
3.2.3.1. Summary
- The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an administrative nature
- The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places) Where applicable, amounts reflect the sum of the Union contribution to the agency and other revenue of the agency (fees and charges).
| Year 2025 | Year 2026 | Year 2027 | Year 2028-2034 | TOTAL |
| Temporary agents (AD Grades) | 0.171 | 0.342 | 0.342 | 2.394 | 3.249 |
| Temporary agents (AST grades) | |||||
| Contract staff | |||||
| Seconded National Experts |
| TOTAL | 0.171 | 0.342 | 0.342 | 2.394 | 3.249 |
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
Staff requirements (FTE):
| Year 2025 | Year 2026 | Year 2027 | Year 2028-2034 | TOTAL |
| Temporary agents (AD Grades) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Temporary agents (AST grades) | |||||
| Contract staff | |||||
| Seconded National Experts |
| TOTAL | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
EMSA will start preparing the recruitment as soon as the proposal is adopted. The costs are estimated based on the assumption that the 2 FTEs are recruited as of 1st July 2025. So only 50% of the HR costs are needed for the first year.
3.2.3.2. Estimated requirements of human resources for the parent DG
- The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
- The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:
Estimate to be expressed in full amounts (or at most to one decimal place)
| Year N | Year N+1 | Year N+2 | Year N+3 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | ||||
| - Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) | ||||||||
| 20 01 02 01 and 20 01 02 02 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) | ||||||||
| 20 01 02 03 (Delegations) | ||||||||
| 01 01 01 01 (Indirect research) | ||||||||
| 10 01 05 01 (Direct research) | ||||||||
| External staff (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)45 | ||||||||
| 20 02 01 (AC, END, INT from the ‘global envelope’) | ||||||||
| 20 02 03 (AC, AL, END, INT and JPD in the Delegations) | ||||||||
| Budget line(s) (specify) 46 | - at Headquarters47 | |||||||
| - in Delegations | ||||||||
| 01 01 01 02 (AC, END, INT – Indirect research) | ||||||||
| 10 01 05 02 (AC, END, INT – Direct research) | ||||||||
| Other budget lines (specify) | ||||||||
| TOTAL |
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
Description of tasks to be carried out:
| Officials and temporary staff | |
| External staff |
Description of the calculation of cost for FTE units should be included in the Annex V, section 3.
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
- The proposal/initiative is compatible the current multiannual financial framework.
- The proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the multiannual financial framework.
The tasks allocated to EMSA will require reprogramming of the budget line for the annual contribution to the Agency (02 10 02) under the current multiannual financial framework. The increase in appropriations for EMSA will be offset by a compensatory reduction of programmed spending under CEF Transport (02 03 01) under the current multiannual financial framework. The budget impact beyond the current MFF is an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
- The proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument or revision of the multiannual financial framework48.
Explain what is required, specifying the headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
- The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties.
- The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year N | Year N+1 | Year N+2 | Year N+3 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | Total | |||
| Specify the co-financing body | ||||||||
| TOTAL appropriations co-financed |
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
- The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
- The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
on own resources
on other revenue
please indicate, if the revenue is assigned to expenditure lines ◻
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Budget revenue line: | Appropriations available for the current financial year | Impact of the proposal/initiative49 | ||||||
| Year N | Year N+1 | Year N+2 | Year N+3 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | ||||
| Article …………. |
For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
1OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 132–135
2UNCLOS was signed in 1982. The European Union ratified in 1984. https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/UNCLOS-TOC.htm
3While the jurisdiction and enforcement on board is that of the nation flag, the development of the rules and regulations are done at international level by the International Maritime Organization (www.imo.org). IMO is a United Nations specialised agency; all EU Member States are IMO members. The European Union is not a member but the Commission holds observer status as an Intergovernmental Organisation (IGO) among many other such.
4International rules include for example the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS 74), International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78), Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW), the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966, the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREG 72) etc. Rules related to working and living conditions on-board ships are promulgated by another UN agency, the International Labour Organisation (ILO).
5When ‘safety’ is referred to, this generally includes safety, security and pollution prevention.
6Have all relevant certificates issued by the flag State for the type of ships, before it starts operating.
7The ‘flag State’ of a vessel is the jurisdiction under whose laws the vessel is registered, it is the nationality of the vessel. UNCLOS stipulates that a ship can fly only one flag of a State and is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that flag State which is responsible for its conduct and its compliance with safety and environmental protection requirements.
8OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 114
9As required by the Harmonised System for Survey and Certification (HSSC, IMO Resolution A.1140(31), 2019)
10It is only with such statutory safety certificates that the ship can get insurance; without insurance the ship can normally not sail.
11Regulation (EC) No 391/2009 and Directive 2009/15/EC
12OJ C 466, 7.12.2022, p. 24–24
13However, the IMO has no enforcement powers.
14Directive 2013/54/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 concerning certain flag State responsibilities for compliance with and enforcement of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (OJ L 329, 10.12.2013, p. 1–4)
15Established by Directive 2002/59/EC
16Directive (EU) 2017/2110 of 15 November 2017 on a system of inspections for the safe operation of ro-ro passenger ships and high-speed passenger craft in regular service and amending Directive 2009/16/EC and repealing Council Directive 1999/35/EC (OJ L 315, 30.11.2017)
17OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 57
18OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 114
19Regulation (EC) No 391/2009 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations (OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p.11) and Directive 2009/15/EC on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (OJ L131, 28.5.2009, p.47)
20Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system (OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 10)
21OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1
22Directive (EU) 2017/2110 on a system of inspections for the safe operation of ro-ro passenger ships and high-speed passenger craft in regular service (OJ L 315, 30.11.2017, p. 61)
23The matter is formally and legally Union exclusive competence as recognised by Council Decision 2013/268/EU, setting out the Union position that had to be followed by Member States in IMO at the time (in 2013) of agreeing the III-Code and IMO audit.
24SWD (2018) 232 final
25SWD (2018) 228 final
26EMSA carries out such visits under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency as part of its core tasks; therefore, no additional costs are expected to arise.
27OJ C , , p. .
28OJ C , , p. .
29Directive 2009/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 establishing the fundamental principles governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector and amending Council Directive 1999/35/EC and Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 114)
30Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC (OJ L 208 5.8.2002, p. 10).
31Regulation (EC) 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (OJ L 208 5.8.2002, p. 1).
32OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
33Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
34Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on port State control (OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 57).
35Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC (OJ L 208 5.8.2002, p. 10).
36Regulation (EC) 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (OJ L 208 5.8.2002, p. 1).
37Regulation (EU) xx/xx of the European Parliament and of the Council … [EMSA Regulation]
38As referred to in Article 58(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
39Details of budget implementation methods and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on the BUDGpedia site: https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/corp/budget/financial-rules/budget-implementation/Pages/implementation-methods.aspx
40Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
41EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
42Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans.
43Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
44As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
45AC = Contract Staff; AL = Local Staff; END = Seconded National Expert; INT = agency staff; JPD = Junior Professionals in Delegations.
46Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational appropriations (former ‘BA’ lines).
47Mainly for the EU Cohesion Policy Funds, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF).
48See Articles 12 and 13 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027.
49As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 20 % for collection costs.
EN EN