Road safety: type-approval requirements of motor vehicles
The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection adopted the report drafted by Andreas SCHWAB (EPP-ED, DE), amending the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning type-approval requirements for the general safety of motor vehicles.
The main amendments – made in the framework of the codecision procedure – are as follows:
Scope:MEPs aim to clarify that this Regulation establishes requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles, their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units with regard to their safety. The type-approval requirements with regard to installation of
Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems refer to safety, fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions. It also establishes requirements for the type-approval of newly-manufactured tyres, with regard to their rolling resistance performance and rolling noise emissions.
Noise reduction objectives: MEPs support the CO2 emissions goals of the proposal and consider that these objectives should perhaps be more visibly tied to the Parliaments ongoing work on the Regulation setting performance standards for new passenger cars. They consider however that the market should be well prepared as a whole for clear and timely implementation of the new prerogatives without significant disruption to industry and supply chains. Amendments have been introduced to further harmonise the proposed implementation dates, and the corresponding marginal implementation delays.
Electronic stability control systems, advanced emergency braking systems and lane departure warning systems: MEPs consider that requirements for such systems should be established by the Commission in line with UNECE regulations for those vehicle categories in which their application is appropriate and for which it is demonstrated (through an impact assessment) that they will improve the overall level of safety. Sufficient lead time until implementation should be provided to allow for implementation measures to be completed and subsequently for development and in-vehicle application of these complex technologies. In setting detailed implementation deadlines for electronic stability control systems, a lead time of 12 months after completion of implementation measures should be allowed before the initial mandatory implementation deadline.
Type-approval of vehicles, components and separate technical units: the report underlines that systems such as electronic stability control systems, ISOFIX child seat anchorages, seat belt reminders and tyre pressure monitoring systems are currently in the market and have proven their efficiency towards improving road safety. MEPs consider that that they should be mandated as early as possible and therefore bring forward the dates provided for the Commission in this context.
Electronic stability control systems: until these systems are introduced, the Commission should take measures and run campaigns to provide information on their effectiveness and to promote their sale. In addition, the Commission should watch price developments to ascertain that the price of new cars is not being disproportionately increased as a result of equipping them to meet new safety standards.
Tyres: MEPs consider that the Commission should assess the feasibility of strengthening the requirements for wet grip for tyres, and if appropriate, propose an amendment to this Regulation. Member States should ensure effective market surveillance. The report underlines that the full potential of increasing safety, reducing CO2 emissions and lowering traffic noise can only be achieved in combination with a labelling scheme for tyres. The label should inform the consumer regarding safety (wet grip), CO2 emissions and noise.The regulation should envisage an exemption for retreaded tyres. The Commission should make a proper assessment of this business sector, involving all stakeholders, and evaluate if there is any need for an evolution of the actual regulatory regime.
Comitology: there are a number of provisions in the Commission proposal which give concern in terms of respect of Comitology rules. In particular, Article 5(3) of the initial proposal appears to delegate the definition of the scope of the Regulation to the Commission. This is however an essential aspect of the Regulation which is for the legislature to decide. Furthermore, MEPs consider that the criteria for setting out the "additional safety requirements" applicable to transport of dangerous goods are not specified and the same applies in other articles in so far as they refer to "further technical requirements" to be established by the Commission. These provisions are problematic in that the ambit of the powers conferred on the Commission is not clearly defined. Amendments are introduced to address these problems.
New safety features: MEPs consider that the Commission should continue to assess the technical and economic feasibility and market maturity of other advanced safety features, and carry out a review, with possible revision of this Regulation, if appropriate, by 1 December 2012, and every three years thereafter.
Transport noise: in addition to the ongoing Commission initiative which aims to define a road grading system, the Commission should, within 12 months of the entry into force of this Regulation, bring forward a proposal on the classification of EU roads according to noise generation that will complement noise mapping in motor vehicle transportation with a view to fixing appropriate priorities and road surface requirements and setting maximum road noise generation limits.