NationStates Jolt Archive

The Civil Transportation Safety Act

WHEREAS certain civil water voyages, civil space flights and civil flights originate, pass through, pass above or terminate at different nations, and

FURTHERMORE citizens from third nations are often aboard these craft,

AWARE that these craft often cross into international waters, international airspace or beyond the stratosphere, and

RECOGNISING that the safety of those aboard and on land are the concern of the nations where the craft departs from, travels above, travels through, arrives at and passengers hold citizenship of, and

AWARE that safety is a shared responsibility of all parties.

THEREFORE, in the interests of promoting international travel, trade and, most of all, safety by air, space and water, the NationStates United Nations

RESOLVES that the safety of civil craft travelling through water, air and space between or above one or more nations is the responsibility of the United Nations Civil Transportation Authority (UNCTA).

1. The United Nations Civil Transportation Authority shall create and publicise safety standards regarding travel by civilian watercraft, civilian aircraft and civilian spacecraft between UN nations; this includes any non-governmental freight-carriers. These technical standards shall be created by experts under the direction of the UNCTA and may include such items as:

* type, number and position of lifeboats
* docking, refuelling and other port procedures
* number, length and position of runways or launch pads
* type, number and procedures for air traffic control and navigational aids
* baggage, on-board crew, on-ground crew and passenger screening procedures
* type and number of on-ground and in-flight fire fighting equipment
* number and arrangement seating and storage compartments
* flight crew training, staffing numbers and certification
* type and storage of fuel
* what constitutes a major modification or an emergency.

2. These standards shall be reviewed at least every two-and-a-half years, and may be reviewed earlier in response to transportation mishaps or technological advances.

3. At least every two years and after every major modification, the UNCTA will certify which ports, airports, spaceports, watercraft, aircraft and spacecraft are in compliance with its regulations. Each certified port or craft will receive it's own UNCTA-status, determining how well it is complying with UNCTA-standerds, on a scale from 1-10. The UNCTA will maintain a list of all applications and results for the certification of watercraft, aircraft, spacecraft, ports, airports and spaceports. The positive or negative results of these applications shall be made available to all nations and citizens.

4. Each certified and uncertified craft on an international trip must file a plan with every nation along its proposed route. Any nation along a route may deny certified or uncertified craft free passage through national waters/national air(space), or docking rights, or both, with exception during emergency landings or dockings. This denial may apply generally or on a case by case basis. Where an uncertified craft has been denied passage, landing or both, no retaliatory measures may be made against the denying nation. Certified craft may not be denied passage or landing once underway, except during a UNCTA emergency or when the craft has been denien entrance before the journey has started.

5. In an emergency, UNCTA certified craft may attempt to dock or land at any civilian or military port, airport or spaceport after following UNCTA procedures for notifying the proper authorities of such an emergency.

6. Following a succesfull or unsuccesfull emergency landing/docking at a port, the carrier most pay a reasonable, by UNCTA-determined, sum of money to the port.

7. A civil craft may not be intentionally damaged or destroyed by military means once it broadcasts its UNCTA emergency status. The owner of the craft of the nation in which it is based may levy a charge no greater than ten times the cost of the craft which was destroyed, plus indemnification for injury and loss of life against the violator of this provision.

8. The UNCTA will also compile and publicise a list of civilian freight and passenger transportation owners whose craft or facilities have often unsuccessfully sought certification. This list will exclude companies whose craft or facilities would fail the UNCTA certification process but have not applied for certification.

About four hundred characters, one committee and zero readings of #74, The Law of the Sea too long.

Thanks for pointing that out!

Only what does the phrase "b) Freedom to fly" have to do in resolution 74?

My point was the agency created by LotS would have jurisdiction over civil naval transportation.

Seriously, the character limit is, I think, 3000-3400; yours weighs in at about 3,700 without spaces. Also, resolutions that just create committees/bodies aren't looked on that favourable. I quite like the idea, though.

Thanks. Don't worry, I'll change it. :)

BTW, I sent you a TM.

Does this remind anyone of section 2 of Open Skies (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423311&highlight=Open+Skies)?

Does this remind anyone of section 2 of Open Skies (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423311&highlight=Open+Skies)?
You should give Open Skies another try. I liked that one.

We believe this is an excellent idea and a fine first draft. We look forward to seeing further drafts. We do have an idea for the author's consideration....

The areas of aerospace and sea transportation safety are both complicated ones. We wonder if it wouldn't be better to limit the scope of the proposal to aerospace transportation. This would allow more intensive coverage of that limited subject matter within the proposal length limits. It would also eliminate the need to work around potential conflicts with NSUN Resolution #74.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

I think that specific combinations of nations should be able to draw up their own agreements about safety for any civil transportation that is going to remain within their collective territories, without passing through/across either international waters/space or the territories of any other nations, and that in cases of this type where such treaties have been agreed the proposed UN agency should have no jurisidiction.


(Most of St Edmund's territories are situated in an 'alternative' Earth where Humanity [or other sapient species] never evolved, which the St Edmundans have reached through a zone where two realities overlap, and the only other nations there are ones to which St Edmund has historically had strong ties of friendship so that suitable treaties already exist... )

I think that specific combinations of nations should be able to draw up their own agreements about safety for any civil transportation that is going to remain within their collective territories, without passing through/across either international waters/space or the territories of any other nations, and that in cases of this type where such treaties have been agreed the proposed UN agency should have no jurisidiction.

(Most of St Edmund's territories are situated in an 'alternative' Earth where Humanity [or other sapient species] never evolved, which the St Edmundans have reached through a zone where two realities overlap, and the only other nations there are ones to which St Edmund has historically had strong ties of friendship so that suitable treaties already exist... )

An interesting point and, given the very unusual situation of your nation and its neighbors, a valid concern. Any attempt to accommodate the situation in the proposal would have to be very carefully crafted so as not to violate the "Optionality" rule:

UN Proposals are not optional. Don't try to make one that is. Many 'Mild' Proposals will have phrases such as "RECOMMENDS" or "URGES", which is just fine. The opinionality ban refers to when language such as "Nations can ignore this Resolution if they want," which is right out.

It could probably be done, though. We think it would be best to table this particular issue until the author has time to consider the aerospace/sea suggestion we made earlier. Proposal length would likely be a factor here.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

lets consider the differing levels of technology here.

not every country has jet airliners or big ro/ro ferries.

some airlines may still be using prop driven flying boats or bi-planes for all we know and their idea of a ferry may well be a wooden hulled sailing ship.

this should be a government matter anyway. they know what safety standards they need and they would know better than an official of the UNCTA

The Civil Transportation Safety Act

WHEREAS certain civil water voyages, civil space flights and civil flights originate, pass through, pass above or terminate at different nations, and

FURTHERMORE citizens from third nations are often aboard these craft,

AWARE that these craft often cross into international waters, international airspace or beyond the stratosphere, and

RECOGNISING that the safety of those aboard and on land are the concern of the nations where the craft departs from, travels above, travels through, arrives at and passengers hold citizenship of, and

AWARE that safety is a shared responsibility of all parties.

THEREFORE, in the interests of promoting international travel, trade and, most of all, safety by air, space and water, the NationStates United Nations

RESOLVES that the safety of civil craft travelling through water, air and space between or above one or more nations is the responsibility of the United Nations Civil Transportation Authority (UNCTA).

1. The United Nations Civil Transportation Authority shall create and publicise safety standards regarding travel by civilian watercraft, civilian aircraft and civilian spacecraft between UN nations; this includes any non-governmental freight-carriers. These technical standards shall be created by experts under the direction of the UNCTA and may include such items as:

* type, number and position of lifeboats
* docking, refuelling and other port procedures
* number, length and position of runways or launch pads
* type, number and procedures for air traffic control and navigational aids
* baggage, on-board crew, on-ground crew and passenger screening procedures
* type and number of on-ground and in-flight fire fighting equipment
* number and arrangement seating and storage compartments
* flight crew training, staffing numbers and certification
* type and storage of fuel
* what constitutes a major modification or an emergency.

Agreed.

[/QUOTE]2. These standards shall be reviewed at least every two-and-a-half years, and may be reviewed earlier in response to transportation mishaps or technological advances.[/QUOTE]

What magnitude would an accident be qualified as in order to be subject to an early review?

[/QUOTE]3. At least every two years and after every major modification, the UNCTA will certify which ports, airports, spaceports, watercraft, aircraft and spacecraft are in compliance with its regulations. Each certified port or craft will receive it's own UNCTA-status, determining how well it is complying with UNCTA-standerds, on a scale from 1-10. The UNCTA will maintain a list of all applications and results for the certification of watercraft, aircraft, spacecraft, ports, airports and spaceports. The positive or negative results of these applications shall be made available to all nations and citizens.[/QUOTE]

If the UNCTA discovers that a nation is following all the minimum required standards and measures needed to comply with the act, yet shows no other committment to the integrity and safeness of their vessels (i.e. failing to adopt new or better safety devices), what sanctions shall be considered?

If one country has a different threshold for what can be permitted to enter or dock at any port and a vessel falls beneath that threshold, would they be legally able to block the entry or docking of that vessel on health and safety grounds?

[/QUOTE]4. Each certified and uncertified craft on an international trip must file a plan with every nation along its proposed route. Any nation along a route may deny certified or uncertified craft free passage through national waters/national air(space), or docking rights, or both, with exception during emergency landings or dockings. This denial may apply generally or on a case by case basis. Where an uncertified craft has been denied passage, landing or both, no retaliatory measures may be made against the denying nation. Certified craft may not be denied passage or landing once underway, except during a UNCTA emergency or when the craft has been denien entrance before the journey has started.[/QUOTE]

Could this not be subject to abuse for petty reasons and politics by nations who are undergoing a period of tension, vis-a-vis each other? Equally, what rights would the passengers have with regards to re-imbursement?

[/QUOTE]5. In an emergency, UNCTA certified craft may attempt to dock or land at any civilian or military port, airport or spaceport after following UNCTA procedures for notifying the proper authorities of such an emergency.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

[/QUOTE]6. Following a succesfull or unsuccesfull emergency landing/docking at a port, the carrier most pay a reasonable, by UNCTA-determined, sum of money to the port.[/QUOTE]

I am concerned that this may reduce travel, as the bureaucracy will cause many transport companies to feel that costs negate any commercial value to a particular route and thus may downgrade or cancel traffic along it.

[/QUOTE]7. A civil craft may not be intentionally damaged or destroyed by military means once it broadcasts its UNCTA emergency status. The owner of the craft of the nation in which it is based may levy a charge no greater than ten times the cost of the craft which was destroyed, plus indemnification for injury and loss of life against the violator of this provision.[/QUOTE]

We agree with this measure, but would like to add:

This applies to all craft engaged in civillian transport, rendering it illegal to destroy such craft unless they pose a direct threat to national security/national safety/are engaged in the transport of illegal goods. Two warning flares must be fired first, then a shot across the bows, then any measures may be taken.

[/QUOTE]8. The UNCTA will also compile and publicise a list of civilian freight and passenger transportation owners whose craft or facilities have often unsuccessfully sought certification. This list will exclude companies whose craft or facilities would fail the UNCTA certification process but have not applied for certification.[/QUOTE]

I would suggest that this list only be given for those that have not essayed,having been rejected, to improve their safety standards in the relevant areas.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

You should give Open Skies another try. I liked that one.

I've been considering it. I'll wait a bit, I think. I'm also thinking of cooking up a sought "Right to form Free Trade Area's" proposal, so it's kind of on the back burner!

Our particular situation may be a bit unusual, but there seem to be plenty of regions for which it's assumed the member nations are geographically close and some of those do occupy specific non-Earthly worlds (the Moon, various versions of Mars, Middle-Earth, etc) too.
It seems to me that if the members of any such regions - quite possibly including those which aren't UN members, as well as those which are - can & do reach local agreements about safety for vessels that are engaged only in intra-regional (rather than inter-regional) journeys then no UN intervention should be necessary... or desirable.
After all, it seems quite possible that some such groups of nations would have smaller total populations than some of the larger individual nations elsewhere, and yet there's no call for the proposed UN agency to regulate safety for vessels that are only used for purely "internal" journeys within single nations regardless of how large those nations might be...

2. These standards shall be reviewed at least every two-and-a-half years, and may be reviewed earlier in response to transportation mishaps or technological advances.

My government's experience with tight deadlines is they are often relaxed, and given that this clause wisely permitts the organization to review safety protocols on a more timely basis, we'd recommend that the mandated review period be lengthed to "five years".

p.s. if you write is as "5 years" instead of "two-and-a-half years" it will cut down on length, and to many diplomats will be easier to read, even though correct grammar would be to spell out any number less than or equal to ten. ;)