Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2008)316 - Type-approval requirements for the general safety of motor vehicles - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2008)316 - Type-approval requirements for the general safety of motor vehicles. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2008)316  |
| date | 23-05-2008 |
- Grounds for and objectives of the proposal
The objective of the proposal is to lay down harmonised rules on the construction of motor vehicles with a view to ensuring the functioning of the internal market while at the same time providing for a high level of safety and environmental protection. The proposal aims at enhancing the safety of vehicles by requiring the mandatory fitting of some advanced safety features. The proposal also aims at enhancing the environmental performance of vehicles by reducing the amount of road noise and vehicle CO2 emissions from tyres. Finally, the proposal contributes to the competitiveness of the automotive industry by simplifying the existing vehicle safety type-approval legislation, improving transparency and easing administrative burden.
General context The technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to numerous safety and environmental elements have been harmonised at Community level in order to avoid requirements that differ from one Member State to another, and to ensure a high level of road safety and environmental protection throughout the Community. New technologies are now available which can dramatically improve vehicle safety (such as Electronic Stability Control Systems) or reduce CO2 emissions (such as low rolling-resistance tyres). Research has indicated that there would be significant benefits if such technologies were introduced as standard on new vehicles. Setting common mandatory requirements would also prevent the fragmentation of the internal market which could result from varying product standards emerging across Member States. The Commission in its Communication on “A Competitive Automotive Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century”[1] welcomed the recommendation from the CARS 21 report i to simplify the current whole vehicle type-approval regulatory framework. Following this recommendation, the proposal significantly simplifies the type-approval legislation by replacing 50 base Directives (and around 100 related amending Directives) in the field of motor vehicle safety and tyres with one Council and Parliament Regulation.
Existing provisions in the area of the proposal Council Directive 70/221/EEC, Council Directive 70/222/EEC, Council Directive 70/311/EEC, Council Directive 70/387/EEC, Council Directive 70/388/EEC, Council Directive 71/320/EEC, Council Directive 72/245/EEC, Council Directive 74/60/EEC, Council Directive 74/61/EEC, Council Directive 74/297/EEC, Council Directive 74/408/EEC, Council Directive 74/483/EEC, Council Directive 75/443/EEC, Council Directive 76/114/EEC, Council Directive 76/115/EEC, Council Directive 76/756/EEC, Council Directive 76/757/EEC, Council Directive 76/758/EEC, Council Directive 76/759/EEC, Council Directive 76/760/EEC, Council Directive 76/761/EEC, Council Directive 76/762/EEC, Council Directive 77/389/EEC, Council Directive 77/538/EEC, Council Directive 77/539/EEC, Council Directive 77/540/EEC, Council Directive 77/541/EEC, Council Directive 77/649/EEC, Council Directive 78/316/EEC, Council Directive 78/317/EEC, Council Directive 78/318/EEC, Council Directive 78/549/EEC, Council Directive 78/932/EEC, Council Directive 89/297/EEC, Council Directive 91/226/EEC, Council Directive 92/21/EEC, Council Directive 92/22/EEC, Council Directive 92/23/EEC, Council Directive 92/24/EEC, Council Directive 92/114/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directive 94/20/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 95/28/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 96/79/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 96/27/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 97/27/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 98/91/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 2000/40/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/56/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/85/EC, European Parliament and Council Directive 2003/97/EC. The proposal and its implementing measures will carry over the existing requirements laid down in the above acts. Compared to the existing acts, the proposal lays down new requirements on some advanced safety measures, namely Electronic Stability Control Systems, Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems, Advanced Emergency Braking Systems and Lane Departure Warning Systems. In addition, the proposal makes the requirements on rolling noise for tyres more stringent and introduces new requirements on tyres with respect to their wet grip and rolling resistance. Consistency with the other policies and objectives of the Union The proposal is consistent with the EC objective to make roads safer as outlined, in particular, in the White Paper on European Transport Policy i, which was adopted by the Commission in 2001 and provides an umbrella for the European Road Safety Action Programme. Furthermore, as far as the environmental aspects of the proposal are concerned, the proposal implements two of the measures identified in the strategy to reduce CO2 emissions form cars outlined in the Commission's Communication on the “Results of the review of the Community Strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light-commercial vehicles”[4]. Finally, the proposal is consistent with the EC strategy for the simplification of the regulatory environment as announced in the Commission's Communication on “Updating and simplifying the Community acquis”[5] which identifies the type-approval system for motor vehicles as a priority area for simplification of Community legislation.
Contents
Consultation of interested parties
Consultation methods, main sectors targeted and general profile of respondents In developing the proposal the Commission has consulted stakeholders in a number of ways: There was a general internet consultation, covering all aspects of the proposal. With regard to the proposals on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems, a project was carried out to examine the potential costs and benefits arising from the equipment of vehicles of various classes with such systems. This project was carried out in co-operation with an industry stakeholder group. With regard to the requirements covering tyres, there have been a number of meetings with tyre manufacturers' organisations, research groups and environmental interest groups, with the aim of achieving a balanced and feasible set of requirements.
Summary of responses and how they have been taken into account During the internet consultation, a number of issues were raised by stakeholders. The impact assessment that accompanies this proposal provides a full account of the substantive issues raised and discusses how they have been taken into consideration.
An open consultation was conducted over the internet from 23/08/2007 to 18/10/2007. The Commission received 81 responses. The results are available on ec.europa.eu/enterprise/automotive
Scientific/expertise domains concerned The proposal required the assessment of different policy options as well as the associated economic, societal and environmental impacts.
Methodology used Studies on the feasibility of reducing tyre rolling noise and on the outline costs and benefits of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems were conducted specifically to support the development of the relevant aspects of this Regulation. In addition, use was made of existing studies on CO2 reduction (by TNO) and road casualty reduction (by COWI) in order to quantify the benefits likely to arise from the proposed measures. In the case of the study on tyre noise, the following work was carried out by the consultant: Review of relevant literature to identify social and environmental impacts of tyre/road noise. Gathering and evaluation of noise test data on existing tyres of various categories. Assessment of the feasibility of reducing tyre noise limits, including the potential impact on other tyre design parameters. Assessment of likely overall noise reductions arising from the proposed measures, using suitable computer modelling techniques. Liaison with various stakeholders. In the case of the study on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems, the following work was carried out by the consultant: Assessment of current accident scenarios likely to be avoided or mitigated using this technology. Assessment of current and future system capabilities. Assessment of economic cost per vehicle of installing such systems. Liaison with various stakeholders.
Main organisations/experts consulted The Tyre noise study was carried out by FEHRL (Federation of European Highway Research). The Advanced Emergency Braking System study was carried out by TRL (Transport research laboratory) Ltd.
The tyre noise limit values proposed in the Annex to this Regulation are based on recommendations by FEHRL. The TRL work supported the case for prioritisation of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems for heavy-duty vehicles. The impact assessment makes reference to other research studies which were also used to evaluate various policy options. In all cases, the preferred policy option has been selected on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis, as explained in the impact assessment accompanying the proposal. Means used to make the expert advice publicly available All completed and approved research reports are or will be available on the DG Enterprise and Industry web site.
Impact assessment For each of the main aspects of the proposal, different options were considered: 1. Simplification aspects a) Do nothing. This would mean that the existing 50 Directive would be maintained with additional amendments when necessary. The EC Directives would continue to operate in parallel with the existing UNECE Regulations with the technical requirements usually (but not always) being equivalent. This is currently the cause of much confusion for stakeholders who are not closely involved with the type-approval system, and leads to a situation of a regulatory system that is less than fully transparent. b) Do nothing as part of the current exercise, but review each Directive as and when it is due to be modified, and decide whether replacement is appropriate. This option would effectively contribute to the simplification of the regulatory environment. However, the simplification exercise would take place over a number of years. c) Replace all existing Directives through the proposed Regulation. This is the retained option since it would maximise the advantages of simplification at the benefit, in particular, of national authorities and industry. 2. Advanced safety technologies a) Do nothing and allow the market to take the initiative. Features such as Electronic Stability Control Systems are already appearing on an increasing number of cars in some markets. However, on vehicles such as heavy trucks and tourist coaches, where the benefit of Electronic Stability Control Systems may be even greater than for cars, there is often not the market incentive to fit Electronic Stability Control Systems voluntarily, since, unlike the case with cars, the purchasers are not normally the beneficiaries. Moreover, without harmonised standards, there is the risk that diverging standards are applied across the EU with a resulting fragmentation of the internal market. b) Establish technical standards for advanced safety technologies (where fitted) and allow manufacturers to fit them optionally. Though this would prevent emerging varying standards across the EU, as stated above, this option will not ensure that advanced safety features are fitted in all vehicles. c) Establish technical standards and mandatory fitting requirements. This option will ensure that the full potential of advanced safety features is exploited. Since there is a positive cost-benefit case for these systems, it appears that the mandatory option is justified. 3. Requirements on tyres Concerning tyres, the proposal introduces new requirements on the following aspects: Rolling Noise limit values, Rolling Resistance limit values, Wet Grip and Tyre Pressure Monitoring System. For each of the above issues, the following options were generally considered: a) do nothing; b) voluntary/market solution; c) mandatory solution with lower technical difficulty; d) mandatory solution with higher technical difficulty. Option d) was selected for all of the issues. In the case of Rolling Resistance, Wet Grip and Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems, research and product development are already at a quite advanced stage so that implementing the more stringent technical requirement in a relatively short timetable is considered to be feasible. Concerning Tyre Pressure Monitoring System, in particular, setting a higher standard would maximise the safety benefits, and ensure the maximum likelihood of reaching the CO2 reduction targets. Concerning Rolling Noise, option d) has also been retained because this is the only one that would ensure the fulfilment of the environmental objectives of the proposal. However, since the requirements on noise are more challenging than the other requirements, a longer implementation period has been foreseen. The Commission carried out an impact assessment listed in the Work Programme, whose report is accessible on ec.europa.eu/enterprise/automotive As far as further industry studies could not be concluded before the finalisation of the proposal, the Commission is ready to thoroughly assess the results of such additional studies during the legislative process and, if need be, to suggest or support adaptations necessary to avoid any negative impact on safety of tyres. 3. LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL Summary of the proposed action The proposal significantly simplifies the motor vehicle type-approval system with respect to the requirements on safety and tyres by repealing 50 Directives. The proposal introduces new mandatory requirements on advanced safety features. In particular, the proposal requires mandatory fitting of: Electronic Stability Control Systems on all vehicles; Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems on passenger cars; Advanced Emergency Braking Systems and Lane Departure Warning Systems on heavy-duty vehicles. The proposal also foresees that, in case of voluntary fitting of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems and Lane Departure Warning Systems on other categories of vehicles, these systems shall fulfil the requirements laid down in the proposal. The proposal sets more stringent noise emission limit values for tyres than those set out in existing legislation and introduces new requirements on wet grip and rolling resistance. Legal basis The legal basis of the proposal is Article 95 of the Treaty. Subsidiarity principle The subsidiarity principle applies insofar as the proposal does not fall under the exclusive competence of the Community. The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States for the following reasons. The technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to numerous safety and environmental elements have been harmonised at Community level and action by Member States alone would undermine the whole vehicle type-approval system. European Union action is necessary because of the need to avoid the emergence of barriers to the single market. Community action will better achieve the objectives of the proposal because it will avoid fragmentation of the internal market which would otherwise arise and will enhance the safety and environmental performance of vehicles. The proposal therefore complies with the subsidiarity principle. Proportionality principle The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reasons. As showed in the impact assessment, the proposal complies with the proportionality principle because it does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objectives of ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market while at the same time providing for a high level of public safety and environmental protection. The simplification of the regulatory environment will significantly contribute to the reduction of administrative costs for national authorities and industry. Choice of instruments Proposed instruments: regulation. Other means would not be adequate for the following reasons. The use of a Regulation is considered to be appropriate in providing the required assurance for compliance whilst not requiring the transposition into Member States legislation. The proposal uses the “split-level approach” that has originally been introduced at the request of the European Parliament and used in other pieces of legislation. This approach foresees that the proposal and adoption of legislation will be made according to two different, but parallel, routes: first, the fundamental provisions will be laid down by the European Parliament and the Council in a Regulation based on Article 95 of the EC Treaty through the co-decision procedure (the co-decision proposal); secondly, the technical specifications implementing the fundamental provisions will be laid down in Regulations adopted by the Commission in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC (the comitology proposals). 4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATION The proposal has no implication for the Community budget. 5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Simulation, pilot phase and transitory period There are general transitory periods in the proposal in order to allow sufficient lead times for vehicle and tyre manufacturers. Simplification The proposal provides for simplification of legislation. 50 Directives on the type-approval of vehicles will be repealed. The proposal provides for simplification of administrative procedures for public authorities. The proposal is included in the Commission's rolling programme for up-date and simplification of the acquis communautaire and its Legislative Work Programme under the reference 2008/ENTR/004. Repeal of existing legislation The adoption of the proposal will lead to the repeal of existing legislation. European Economic Area The proposed act concerns an EEA matter and should therefore extend to the European Economic Area.