Id like to try in one post to address all the issues concerning the ICC and certification of competence in Europe. Id like to challenge those here that persistently mis quote pseudo official websites and documents as well
I am quite happy to debate these points without descending into personal attacks about " dave from CF etc"
I should say that I have recently resigned from my involvement in policy making in this area ( not directly referring to ICC) but since such discussion are private to the organisation , in would not be appropriate for me to comment about the internal workings etc.
So from that respect I am just Dave from CF !.
The ICC was actually formatted to address the issue of INLAND certificate of competency on Europes extensive commercial canal
and river infrastructure, it was not initially intended to have any basis for charter
or costal sailing.
the committee called
ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE
INLAND TRANSPORT COMMITTEE Working Party on Inland Water Transport ( note Inland)
was set up to address a standardised competency cert for places like the rhine and Danube.
It that regard , most countries that require competency on Inland waters DEMAND an ICC , or will recognise specific national INLAND competency certs.
The UNECE ( a post WW2 UN body) of which by the way the US is a member, produced first Resolution 14 and then resolution 40. Without plouging through this is detail , som ekey points are salient
(1) A signatory to the Res 40, merely obliges ( as a recommendation) that that the signatory nation accepts an ICC as "A" form of competency certification. It does not mandate recognition nor force a signatory country to introduce any competency certification at all.
(2) A signatory country " can" mandate an agency to test and issue ICCs , it doesn't actually have to
(3) A ICC is a competency cert that merely says that the holder is " regarded " as competent on his " own" boat. ( i.e. national flag) It is NOT a competency cert for charter
or third party boat use ( my italics and quotes). It use in charter competency is outside the scope
of Res 40 and hence why there is so much obfuscation and confusion.
(4) Countries can only issue ICCs to their own nationals, the EXCEPTION is that both the ISA ( Irish sailing association) and the RYA ( Royal Yachting Association) were recently granted approvals to issue ICCs to other nationals of countries that did not officially issue ICCs,
This is the basis upon which IYT issue ICCS to USA
and Canadian yachtmens. Why the ASA then went on to develop their own, when the US could have easily signed Res 40, which is more a problem of the US and its relationship with the UN then anything nautical.
IYT which initially derived a lot of its legimacy from the ISA , and later the RYA/MCA hence have used that derogation to so issue ICCs
Note , there isn't ONE ICC. There are several variants for power
and sail. For Inland use the CEVNI rules exam must be sat and the extension so applied to the ticket.
(5) Resolution 40 also allows signatory countries to use equivalent national certs as the basis for awarding the ICC, as long as the national cert meets the basic conditions as laid out in Res 40. This is the basis for the RYA / ISA and others issuing the cert in the back of Day Skipper,powerboat and advanced power
tickets etc .
(6) Now the obfuscation
To my knowledge ( and yes thats it) Only two counties in Europe, DEMAND specific NAMED qualifications in order to charter or sail certain pleasure craft in their territorial waters . That is Croatia and Montenegro. They accept a wide variety of such certifications as has been detailed elsewhere on CF. This includes ASA certs etc. It worth pointing out that these countries do not accept commercial tickets for such purposes , but anecdotally I have heard they are accepted.
Enforcement of these rules can be haphazard and subject to local confusion too.
( I am unclear in respect of Albania)
Several other countries , most notably Portugal
have a requirement that a " license
" is required to operate a leisure boat, often depending on sea area operation, engine
power etc. Countries like Portugal also operate under the basis of comity, in that they will not render illegal , things that are legal
in friendly countries. ( these rules have limits of course)
Hence countries like Portugal and Greece
will recognise other countries official national " licenses " , the problem of course comes from those pesky nautical countries that have no such " official license
". This is a grey area, on the basis of comity, such countries DO not and HAVE not made an issue for yachts from such flag countries , even if from time to time certain port officials have adopted a " officious " approach. Noone to my knowledge has been prosecuted on that basis.
Again I will re-state, to my detailed knowledge , the in regards the ICC, no country specifically requires it to charter or operate in it s waters in exclusion to any other competency cert. This is an area that sailing schools and the IYT for example have caused great confusion and obfuscation.
The ICC is a useful addition for sailors in the Med
and Europe ( and South Africa/ Australia) to demonstrate that they have achieved "some" level of competence. It is not an EXCLUSIVE requirement. Any competence certificate is better then none.
Certain countries have specific rules regarding charter , especially domestic charter , Greece , for example requires competency certification, but accepts a wide variety and the charter company can actually self certify in conjunction with the local police etc. Rules vary but again in no case is the ICC a unique requirement.
By and large the Med has a very relaxed approach to boating , entry and exit formalities and often rules are not applied even when they have the force of law and local officials have significant lee-way ( official or not ) in what happens. Long may it remain.
PS In that regard the EBA document is quite correct , but entirely taken out of context in the post that referenced it. ( it is demanded for inland only )
The ICC would have made a very useful standardised document, but unfortunately , in its implementation , countries have screwed with the whole concept
, now leaving the cert in a kind of no-mans land