To consultees Dear Sir/Madam THE MERCHANT SHIPPING (AMENDMENTS TO REPORTING REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS 2005 1.The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) announces proposals to introduce Regulations to disapply the reporting requirements contained in Regulation 12 of the Merchant Shipping (Vessel Traffic Monitoring and Reporting Requirements) Regulations 2004 (the “2004 Regulations”) to fishing vessels, traditional ships, recreational craft having a length of less than 45 metres and bunker fuel of less than 5,000 tonnes for use on board ships. These were outside the scope of Directive 2002/59/EC (Establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system), (the “Directive”) which was implemented by the 2004 Regulations. 2.It is proposed to include the same group that are removed from application in the 2004 Regulations – namely fishing vessels, traditional ships, recreational craft having a length of less than 45 metres and reports involving bunker fuel of less than 5,000 tonnes for use on board ships (of any size and type) – in alternative reporting requirements contained in the Merchant Shipping (Reporting Requirements for Ships Carrying Dangerous or Polluting Goods Regulations 1995 (the “1995 Regulations”). 3.The 1995 Regulations are distinct from those required by the Directive. It is necessary to maintain a reporting requirement so that the United Kingdom continues to comply with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (the MARPOL Convention) and including the provisions of Protocol I to that Convention. The proposed Regulations amend the 1995 Regulations and the 2004 Regulations. 4.Owners of small craft and their representatives are requested to note that:
5.The new regulations are deregulatory and it is anticipated that the introduction of the Regulations will not significantly increase costs on businesses that comply with current regulations. However, when commenting on the substance of the draft regulations attached to this letter, it would be particularly helpful if you could identify and quantify any additional direct or indirect costs which you think would be likely to arise. 6.It is intended that the Regulations will come into force in May 2005. 7.The Regulations are without prejudice to application of the reporting requirements under the Merchant Shipping (Accident Reporting and Investigation) Regulations 1999 (SI No. 2567), currently under process of revision. Further details can be found in Marine Guidance Note MGN.115 (M+F). You are invited to comment on the draft regulations. Any comments you have should be sent to Victoria Brown, Bay 2/29, Spring Place no later than 15 March 2005. The draft Regulations will also be available on the MCA website during this period at www.mcga.gov.uk. We may also be contacted to assist with any queries on telephone 023 8032 9315 or fax 023 8032 9204; or by writing to The Maritime and Coastguard Agency, Bay 2/29, Spring Place, 105 Commercial Road, Southampton SO15 1EG By Fax: 023 8032 9204 By E-mail: navigationsafety@mcga.gov.uk Yours faithfully Joe Collins Enclosures: The Merchant Shipping (Amendments to reporting requirements) Regulations 2005 Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment THE MERCHANT SHIPPING (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS TO REPORTING REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS 2005 LIST OF CONSULTEES Industry and Shipping Interests ABP Shipping British Marine Equipment Association British Marine Equipment Council British Marine Industries Federation British Ports Association British Standards Institution Broadgate Limited BTR Electronic Services C A Clase (UK) Limited Chamber of Shipping Chart Co Gilden Research Limited Honourable Company of Master Mariners ICS Electronics Limited International Sailing Federation John Lilley and Gillie Limited Kelvin Hughes Marconi Mobile Limited Marine Electronics Marketing Marineworks Limited McLennan Marine Limited McMurdo Marine MCP Plc Munro Engineering Limited National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations National Union of Marine, Aviation and Shipping Transport Officers National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers The Nautical institute Navitron Systems Limited Northern Ireland Fishermen’s Federation Polaris Electronics UK Limited QinetiQ Royal Institute of Navigation Royal National Lifeboat Institution Royal Yachting Association SARTECH Scottish Fishermen’s Fedreration Sea Safety Group S G Brown (division of TSS (UK) Limited) Ships Electronic Services Limited South Tyneside College Strategic Marine Services Limited Thomas Walker and Sons Limited Transas Marine (UK) Limited UK Harbour Masters Association UK Major Ports Group UK Pilots Association Warsash Maritime Centre Classification Societies ABS Europe Limited Bureau Veritas Det Norske Veritas Germanischer Lloyd Lloyds Register of Shipping Registro Italiano Navale Red Ensign Group Bermuda Registry of Shipping Cayman Islands Shipping Registry Gibraltar Registry of Shipping Isle of Man Registry of Shipping Government Departments, Agencies and Statutory Advisors Cabinet Office, Regulatory Impact Unit Commissioners of Irish Lights Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Department for Transport Defence, Science and Technology Laboritory Foreign and Commonwealth Office Health and Safety Executive Home Office, Sentencing and Offences Unit Marine Accident Investigation Branch Met Office MOD, Commander-in-Chief Fleet MOD, DSTRAT Support MOD CINCFLEET National Assembly for Wales Northern Ireland Office Northern Lighthouse Board Ofcom Scottish Executive Small Business Service Trinity House Lighthouse Service UK Hydrographic Office HM Customs & Excise PARTIAL REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Merchant Shipping (Amendments to Reporting Requirements) Regulations 2005 Implementation of Reporting Requirements contained in Directive 2002/59/EC (Establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system) and the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973. 1. INTRODUCTION i) Issue and objective Issue: To introduce Regulations to disapply the reporting requirements contained in Regulation 12 of the Merchant Shipping (Vessel Traffic Monitoring and Reporting Requirements) Regulations 2004 (the “2004 Regulations”) to fishing vessels, traditional ships, recreational craft having a length of less than 45 metres and bunker fuel of less than 5000 tonnes for use on board ships. These were outside the scope of Directive 2002/59/EC (Establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system), (the “Directive”) which was implemented by the 2004 Regulations. Alternative reporting requirements distinct from those required by the Directive will be contained in the Merchant Shipping (Reporting Requirements for Ships Carrying Dangerous or Polluting Goods Regulations 1995 (the “1995 Regulations”), as amended. It is necessary to maintain a reporting requirement so that the United Kingdom continues to comply with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (the MARPOL Convention) and including the provisions of Protocol I to that Convention. These latest Regulations amend the 1995 Regulations and the 2004 Regulations. Objective: The main objectives are to:
The objectives are de-regulatory to smaller craft in particular, in that the legislation will remove some of the reporting requirements. ii) Purpose and intended effect of measure The primary purpose of the legislation is to ensure appropriate and timely reporting of incidents, accidents and marine pollution.The reporting requirement is separate from any offence that may be committed due to poor practice, accident or neglect of duty. The 2004 Regulations have been interpreted by owners of smaller recreational craft as requiring them to report all accidents and incidents, whether or not the safety of a ship is or could be affected. They are concerned that relatively safe routine occurrences experienced by sailing dinghies, such as capsizes and collisions with craft of similar size, have to be reported. The extent of their concern is such that the Royal Yachting Association (RYA) is making a legal challenge to this aspect of the 2004 Regulations. The effect of the legislation is to remove some reporting requirements in the case of vessels of less than 15 metres in length. The reporting requirements will ensure that Her Majesty’s Coastguard is informed without delay and to the fullest extent possible with the purpose of ensuring the correct and prompt response of authorities to incidents, accidents or potentially dangerous situations at sea, including search and rescue operations, and contributing to better prevention and detection of pollution by ships. The MCA values and depends upon reports from mariners of dangers; accidents and incidents where this is appropriate both for the sake of their own safety should they require assistance and since they may be the only observers on the scene, for the sake of preserving the coastal environment, the waters of the United Kingdom and beyond. The MCA strongly recommends that persons in charge of smaller craft should report serious incidents to HM Coastguard, irrespective of any legal requirement to do so, to enable the deployment of search and rescue and anti-pollution resources if necessary. Nevertheless, there are statutory responsibilities to provide reports that are based upon international law. iii) Risk assessment The safety of shipping in European waters is of crucial importance: it is estimated that 90% of the European Union’s trade with third party countries is seaborne. In 2001 there were 154,155 Ship arrivals in the UK. The risk of accidents due to the concentration of traffic in the main European seaways is particularly high in areas where the traffic converges, such as the Dover Strait. Environmental consequences from an accident at sea, which can also occur outside areas of high traffic density (as in the Erika case), can be disastrous for the economy and the environment of all coastal EU Member States. The United Kingdom must therefore maintain the means to monitor more effectively the traffic off its coasts and to take more effective action in the event of critical situations arising at sea. The long-term vision is the ability to better detect potential risk situations, better react in case of threat to maritime safety and the environment and improve emergency response in case of incidents or pollution at sea. 2. OPTIONS Option 1: do nothing This is not a viable option given the concerns which have been expressed by stakeholders about the 2004 Regulations. Option 2: to agree the amendments as proposed The amendments alter the circumstances in which incidents and accidents should be reported and will be more acceptable to owners of smaller craft. Requirements and procedures that implement the Directive will be unaffected. Option 3: to make amendments to take non-Directive ships and bunker fuel out of reporting regulations This is not a viable option. The United Kingdom would be in breach of international responsibility to implement MARPOL including Protocol I. This action would encourage ships to neglect reporting of incidents, accidents and pollution at sea and consequently reduce United Kingdom capacity to respond promptly in those circumstances. 3. BENEFITS Option 1: Minimal impact or benefit for enhancing safety and efficiency of maritime traffic or improving the response of authorities to incidents, accidents or potentially dangerous situations at sea around or along the coast of the United Kingdom that are the primary aims. Owners of fishing vessels, traditional ships, recreational craft having a length of less than 45 metres and owners of ships using bunker fuel of less than 5000 tonnes are likely to continue to object to what is perceived as “gold plating” Directive requirements. Option 2: Will have minimal impact upon safety and operational efficiency, but will allow the UK to comply with its international obligations. Option 3: Would have a negative effect upon safety and pollution prevention. The United Kingdom would suffer loss of reputation and HM Coastguard’s ability to respond to cases of incident, accident and pollution would be impaired. 4. COSTS i) Compliance costs Infrequent, minimal administrative costs are anticipated for either of the options identified. There are few, if any, direct costs to industry or to Government. Options other than option 2 may result in loss of efficiency and public confidence that is not possible to quantify. ii) Other costs Minimal additional costs for administration imposed upon shipping and the MCA. iii) Costs for a typical business No additional costs are anticipated. 5. IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESS No additional costs are anticipated. 6. COMPETITION ASSESSMENT Issues will not arise in respect of competition with other European Member States as the Directive and MARPOL are required to be implemented equally by all EEA Member States. 7. ENFORCEMENT AND SANCTIONS The penalty for any contravention of the 1995 Regulations is a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum and on conviction on indictment by imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine, or both. Once in place, compliance with the legislation will be monitored and enforced by the MCA. 8. MONITORING AND REVIEW The date for review of these Regulations is set under the terms for monitoring implementation and evaluation under the Directive and under further review of Chapter V of the SOLAS Convention. Contact Point: Paul Wilkins Maritime and Coastguard Agency Navigation Safety Branch Spring Place Bay 2/29 105 Commercial Road Southampton Tel:023 8032 9100 GTN 1513 100 Fax:023 8032 9204 GTN 1513 204 Link below to draft Statutory Instrument. (download 65.6 KB) |