WRITTEN QUESTION E-1781/99 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission. Maritime accident investigations.
C 225 E/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 1995 amending Directive 89/655/EEC (5) has yet to be transposed by one Member State. Accordingly, the Commission has instituted infringement proceedings under Article 226 (formerly Article 169) of the EC Treaty. The Commission has no knowledge of cases in which the national authorities might be failing to meet their obligations in terms of monitoring the application of the national legislation transposing these Directives. New machinery placed on the market and brought into service to produce shoes is covered by Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery (6), which sets objectives. Two draft European standards setting out the essential requirements are currently being drawn up: PrEN 12203 (Footwear, leather and imitation leather goods manufacturing machines ü shoe and leather presses ü safety requirements) and PrEN 12387 (Footwear, leather and imitation leather goods manufacturing machines ü modular shoe repair equipment ü safety requirements). Member States are required to ensure that all machinery placed on the market and brought into service meets the requirements of the abovementioned Directive. The Commission is unaware of any failures to meet this obligation. The bringing into compliance of machinery already in service is covered by Directive 89/655/EEC, as amended by Directive 95/63/EC. (1) COM(98) 574 final. (2) COM(1999) 441 final. (3) COM(97) 454 final. (4) OJ L 393, 30. 12. 1989. (5) OJ L 335, 30. 12. 1995. (6) OJ L 207, 23. 7. 1998. (2000/C 225 E/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1781/99 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (11 October 1999) Subject: Maritime accident investigations In the light of the recent collision in the Channel, and with a view to the improved safety of passengers at sea, will the Commission ensure that independent accident investigation arrangements are introduced for all maritime operations in the EU, similar to the arrangements for air accident investigation in the EU? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (10 November 1999) A first Commission initiative aimed at introducing independent accident investigation arrangements has resulted in the adoption of Council Directive 1999/35/EC of 29 April 1999 on a system of mandatory surveys for the safe operation of regular ro-ro ferry and high-speed passenger craft services (1). This Directive will provide any substantially interested Member State the legal right to participate, to co-operate in, or where provided under the Internation maritime organization (IMO) code for the investigation of marine casualties (2), to conduct any marine casualty or incident investigation involving a ro-ro ferry or high-speed passenger craft. The Commission acknowledged in the explanatory memorandum of its proposal for this Directive (3) that a justified and legitimate involvement of Member States in marine casualty investigations should not be limited to ro-ro ferries and high speed passenger craft only. The Commission considered the proposal as a first step towards a more general application of the IMO code for the investigation of marine casualties and announced that it would consider, in the light of the expertise gained with the application of this Directive, how and which further steps would be necessary at Community level to ensure an effective implementation of the IMO code in all maritime accidents and incidents occurring within waters falling under the Communityís concern. 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/21 This Commission intention has been confirmed in the Commission communication on áthe common transport policy ü sustainable mobility: perspectives for the futureí, which mentions a proposal on accident the main possible tasks for its action programme 2000-2004 (4). investigation and statistics as one of IMO Assembly Resolution A. 849(20) adopted on 27 November 1997. (1) OJ L 138, 1. 6. 1999. (2) (3) OJ C 108, 7. 4. 1998. (4) COM(98) 716 final. (2000/C 225 E/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1793/99 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission Subject: Ban on antifouling paints containing copper (11 October 1999) On 31 August 1999, the Netherlands Minister for Health, Welfare and Sport (for the Pesticides Authorisa- tion Board) issued a decree prohibiting, with effect from 1 September 1999, the use on (i. e. application to) pleasure craft in the Netherlands of antifouling paints that contain copper. However, vessels to which antifouling paints containing copper are applied in other countries are not banned in Dutch waters. Nor does the ban apply to antifouling treatments used in the Netherlands before 1 September 1999. Does the Commission agree that the Dutch provisions may be regarded as a barrier to trade such as is prohibited by Article 30 of the EC Treaty? Does the Netherlands government have the power to issue such a decree before the end of implementation period of, in this case, Directive 98/8/EC (1) (the Biocides Directive)? the What are the Netherlands governmentís obligations pursuant to Directive 98/8/EC and/or the general directive on the notification of technical measures (Directive 98/34/EC) (2) as regards the notification of this ban before it is implemented? Has the Netherlands fulfilled any such obligations? If so, how and to what extent? If not, what action does the Commission plan to take? (1) OJ L 123, 24. 4. 1998, p. 1. (2) OJ L 204, 21. 7. 1998, p. 37. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (17 December 1999) The Commission is unable to state its opinion on the national provisions until they have been notified to it. If the national provisions concerned are átechnical rulesí within the meaning of Directive 98/34/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down the procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, the Netherlands has not fulfilled its obligations since, as far as the Commission is aware, the provisions concerned have not been notified to it. If the provisions are indeed átechnical rulesí which have not been notified in accordance with the procedure laid down in the above Directive, the Commission, as guardian of the EC Treaty, will take all necessary steps. However, a more detailed examination of the measure is necessary to enable the Commission to adopt a position on it