L 365/158 Official Journal of the European Union 19.12.2014 COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION of 17 December 2014 on the recognition of Japan pursuant to Directive 2008/106/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the systems for training and certification of seafarers (notified under document C(2014) 9590) (Text with EEA relevance) (2014/935/EU) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Having regard to Directive 2008/106/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the minimum level of training of seafarers (!), and in particular Article 19(3) thereof, Whereas: (1)  According to Directive 2008/106/EC Member States may decide to endorse seafarers’ appropriate certificates issued by third countries, provided that the third country concerned is recognised by the Commission. Those third countries have to meet all the requirements of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW Convention), as amended. (2) By letter of 13 May 2005, the Republic of Cyprus requested the recognition of Japan. Following this request, the Commission contacted the Japanese authorities with a view to carrying out an assessment of their training and certification system in order to verify whether Japan meets all the requirements of the STCW Convention and whether the appropriate measures have been taken to prevent fraud involving certificates. It was explained that the assessment would be based on the results of a fact finding inspection to be carried out by the experts of the European Maritime Safety Agency. After lengthy discussions on the legal framework of the European Union, the Japanese authorities accepted an inspection mission by letter of 8 March 2011. The Commission then proceeded with the assessment of the training and certification system in Japan which was based on the results of an inspec- tion carried out by experts of the European Maritime Safety Agency in February 2012 and on the response of 10 January 2014 of the Japanese authorities to a request of 25 October 2012 for a voluntary corrective action plan. (3)  The assessment did not reveal serious concerns though it identified some areas in need of attention. In particular, the quality standards system of the maritime administration and of the Maritime Education and Training Institu- tions did not cover some processes. Also, the syllabi and the practical training established by the national stand- ards did not ensure the achievement of some prescribed standards of competence for the ‘Life Saving’ and ‘Fire Fighting’ courses. (4)  The Japanese legislation allowed candidates for certification to complete the seagoing service on board ships below the tonnage or propulsion power limits corresponding to the certificate to be issued or on board fishing vessels or Coast Guard ships. In order to ensure that this type of seagoing service was relevant to the certificate applied for and that all relevant competences were achieved during the seagoing service, the administration applied certain criteria for the candidates that had completed 12 months of seagoing service as part of an approved training programme. However, based on the analysis of the documentation provided by the Japanese authorities, it appeared that the administration did not ensure that this type of seagoing service was relevant to the certificate applied for and that all relevant competences were achieved during this seagoing service for the candidates who had completed 36 months of seagoing service. Also, it appeared that the administration did not ensure that this type of seagoing service was relevant to the certificate applied for and that all relevant compe- tences were achieved during this seagoing service for the revalidation and upgrade of certificates for all candi- dates. (5)  Lastly, the administration required candidates who have approved seagoing service of 12 months as part of an approved training programme to complete approved education in order to apply for certification at operational level. However, it appeared that the administration did not require candidates who have completed 36 months of seagoing service to also complete approved education in order to apply for certification at operational level. () OJL323,3.12.2008, p. 33.