Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2018)275 - Amendment of Directive 96/53/EC as regards the time limit for the implementation of the special rules regarding maximum length in case of cabs delivering improved performance - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2018)275 - Amendment of Directive 96/53/EC as regards the time limit for the implementation of the special rules regarding maximum ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2018)275  |
| date | 17-05-2018 |
1. CONTEXTOFTHEPROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
Council Directive 96/53/EC of 25 July 1996 laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorized dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorized weights in international traffic1 was last revised by Directive (EU) 2015/719 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic2.
One of the aims of Directive (EU) 2015/719 was to improve the aerodynamics of motor vehicles falling within the scope of the Directive by allowing these to derogate from maximum lengths restrictions if certain conditions were respected. It was also the aim to adapt the legislation to technological developments and changing market needs and to facilitate intermodal transport.
The derogation from maximum length restrictions was granted for the rear of vehicles, for the mounting of aerodynamic devices3, and for the front of vehicles4 to allow for a more rounded and aerodynamic shape of cabs of trucks.
The present decision concerns the front of the vehicles, that is to say the cabs as contemplated in Article 9a of Directive 96/53/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2015/719. This provision establishes a number of conditions, among which compliance of the vehicle with the turning radius requirements set out in point 1.5 of Annex I.
In its Impact Assessment5 accompanying the proposal for an amendment of Directive 96/53/EC6, the Commission identified significant benefits of granting the length derogations now contemplated in amending Directive (EU) 2015/719. Besides important aerodynamic improvements from both the aerodynamic rear devices and elongated cabs, such cabs would also provide benefits in terms of better visibility for drivers, improved safety for other road users as well as safety and comfort for drivers.
Whereas the Impact Assessment of the Commission did not suggest the necessity of a moratorium of the entry into force of elongated cabs, the final compromise between the legislators, as adopted in Article 9a(3) of Directive (EU) 2015/719, did include a moratorium for a period of 3 years.
Given the current situation, and considering that CO2 emissions from road transport represent a quarter of all CO2 emissions in the EU and that emissions from road transport are projected to grow by 6% in the period 2015 -2030, the Commission considers that the benefits of elongated cabs should be harvested as quickly as possible. The importance of this matter is confirmed by the proposal on CO2 standards for heavy goods vehicles, as proposed by the Commission as part of Mobility Package III, which specifically emphasises the importance of aerodynamic cabs7. In fact, compliance with the future CO2 emission standards for heavy
SWD(2013) 108 final COM(2013) 195 final
goods vehicles will require the application of various technologies to improve the energy efficiency; among these the introduction of aerodynamic cabs is the most effective measure to reduce air drag..
However, the moratorium included in the current legislation deters manufacturers from improving aerodynamics of cabs as a way to achieve compliance with the upcoming CO2 standards for heavy goods vehicles. Moreover, the moratorium also goes against the innovation principle and the principles of better regulation as it hinders the development of new technologies and concepts.
Therefore, the Commission is proposing to shorten the time limit for the transposition of Article 9a(1) of Directive 95/53/EC. The proposed new text of Article 9a(3) would still leave sufficient time for Member States to take the necessary steps.
In this context, account has been taken of the time necessary for the adoption of the present Decision.
It should also be mentioned, first, that the change to the type approval framework contemplated in Article 9a(2) can be brought about by an amendment to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1230/20128, as emerges from a closer examination of the issue. The amendment to Regulation (EU) No 1230/2012, which is estimated to be completed by end-2018, will be carried out by an implementing measure under the General Safety Regulation9. The new time as set out in this proposal takes account of this fact and should ensure that the national measures transposing Article 9a(1) of Directive 96/53/EC become applicable at about the same time as the amendment to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1230/2012.
Second, it is not necessary to maintain the precise sequence of changes as currently contemplated in Article 9a(3) of Directive 96/53/EC. Circulation of the vehicles concerned on the roads requires, cumulatively, changes to the type approval framework and the change as set out in article 9a(1) of Directive 96/53/EC. Transposition of the latter change does not, in and of itself, require a prior amendment to the type approval framework. It is sufficient for the national rules to provide for type approval as a condition, as set out in Article 9a(1) of Directive 96/53/EC.
The change proposed is fully in line with the Impact Assessment10 already carried out by the Commission, which – as mentioned - did not contemplate a moratorium as adopted by the co-legislators. For the same reason, there would be no need to carry out an Impact Assessment for the present proposal.
• Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area
This proposal is in line with, and supports, the existing policies regarding CO2 standards for heavy goods vehicles, as proposed today. It is also in line with existing policies intended to reduce the accidents and fatalities in road transport.
This proposal only advances the date from which on more aerodynamic and/or safer cabins may be used as already provided for since Directive 2015/719, it does therefore not impact on intermodal transport and the general objective to promote alternatives to road transport.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1230/2012 of 12 December 2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to type-approval requirements for masses and dimensions of motor vehicles and their trailers and amending Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 353, 21.12.2012, p. 31. Regulation (EU) 661/2009
8
• Consistency with other Union policies
The proposal contributes directly to the first political priority of the Juncker Commission: Jobs, Growth and Investment by allowing truck manufacturers and equipment suppliers to innovate and produce new models of heavy goods vehicles. This proposal is also intended to contribute to the Energy Union and Climate priority, through a lowering of emissions from heavy goods vehicles.
2. LEGALBASIS, SUBSIDIARITYAND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
The legal basis for the proposed amendment is Article 91(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ('TFEU').
• Subsidiarity
The proposal is limited to adjusting the time limit set out in Article 9a(3) of Directive 96/53/EC. Such adjustment can only be brought about by the Union itself.
Moreover, distortions in the internal market can only be avoided by a single date of application of the new rules. .
• Proportionality
The policy proposal is proportionate to the problems that have been identified and it does not go beyond what is needed to solve them. Specifically, the measure is confined to adjusting the time limit for the transposition of Article 9a(1) of Directive 96/53/EC and, in addition, still leaves enough time for Member States to take the necessary steps.
• Choice of the instrument
Amendments to Directives should normally come in the same form, i.e. of amending Directives.
This particular case, however, only involves the change of a time limit imposed on Member States. That change, as such, is not liable to be transposed by Member States. Consequently, it should take the form of a Decision.
3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER
Contents
ANDIMPACTASSESSMENTS
Considering that no additional Impact Assessment is required for this proposal, reference is made to the Impact Assessment already carried out by the Commission: SWD (2013) 108
4. BUDGETARYIMPLICATIONS
The proposed change has no implications on the Union budget.
5. OTHERELEMENTS • Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal
The main elements of the proposal are the following:
Directive 96/53/EC
Article 9a
The current Article 9a(3) includes a 3 years moratorium for the introduction of aerodynamic cabs after the date of transposition or application of the necessary amendments as regards technical type-approval requirements.
It is proposed to adjust Article 9a(3) so as to suppress the 3 years moratorium and to come to a shorter, but proportionate time limit.