10. 9. 81 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 230/1 
II 
(Preparatory  Acts) 
ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
Opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the limitation  of noise  emitted  by hydraulic 
and rope-operated  excavators  and by dozers  and loaders 
The text referred  to the Committee  has been  published  in Official  Journal  of the European 
Communities  No C 356 of 3 December  1980,  page  3. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 10 December  1980  the Council  referred  the abovementioned  proposal  to the Economic  and 
Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  100  of the Treaty  establishing  the European 
Economic  Community. 
B. OPINION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 189th 
plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 1,2  and  3 July 1981. 
The full text of the opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the Treaty  establishing  the European 
Economic  Community,  and  in particular  Article  100 
thereof, 
Having  regard  to the request  made  by the Council  of the 
European  Communities  on 10 December  1980  for an 
opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the 
limitation  of  noise  emitted  by  hydraulic  and 
rope-operated  excavators  and by dozers  and loaders, 
Having  regard  to the decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 
9 December  1980,  instructing  the Section  for Industry, 
Commerce,  Crafts  and Services  to draw  up an opinion 
and a report  on the matter, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section  for 
Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and Services  at its meeting 
on 2 and 3 June  1981  (sitting  of 3 June  1981), 
Having  regard  to the report  submitted  by the Rapporteur, 
Mr Marvier, Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 189th  plenary 
session,  held  on 1,2  and  3 July 1981  (sitting  of 1 July 
1981), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
by 50 votes  to 34 with  six abstentions: 
The Committee  approves  the Commission's  proposal  that 
Council  Directive  79/113/EEC  be supplemented  with  a 
Directive  on the determination  of the noise  levels  of 
earth-moving  machines.  At the same  time,  however,  it 
would  ask  the Commission  to take  account  of the 
following  comments. 
1.1. The  Directive  concerns  sectors  of industry  which 
are important  for both  manufacturers  and  users  of 
construction  machines.  The differences  between  Member 
States  as regards  measuring  specifications  and standards 
for the protection  of workers  impede  the free  marketing 
of products  and  the  provision  of services  in these 
sectors. 
1.2. The  Committee  would  question  the estimates  of 
the costs  for implementing  the various  stages.  The figures 
No C 230/2 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 10. 9. 81 
given  seem  to be extremely  optimistic  given  the levels  of 
inflation  over  the past  few  years. 
1.3. The  Committee  notes  that  the Directive  does  not 
make  provision  for checks  on, the measurement  of, or 
restrictions  on the overall  level  of noise  emitted  by the 
machines  in question  when  in operation.  There  is 
therefore  a need  to ascertain  the values  of the various 
parameters  for assessing  their  exposure  to noise  if we are 
going  to be able  to protect  the health  of operators  of 
construction  machines  and  persons  present  in the 
proximity  of these  machines. 
2. Specific  comments 
Article  3 
2.1. On  close  examination  the  permissible  sound 
power  levels  proposed  by the Commission  are seen  to be 
strict.  This  criticism  applies  to the levels  for both  stages. 
In order  to obtain  EEC  type-verification  certificates 
manufacturers  will  have  to carry  out expensive  sound 
insulation  work.  The  materials  available  for 
soundproofing  are not sufficiently  durable.  The  use of 
these  materials  not  only  makes  maintenance  more 
difficult  but it also  considerably  restricts  the cooling  of the 
motor  and the gears,  thereby  reducing  the working  life of 
the machines.  In temperate  climates  this  problem  may 
cause  users  of the machines  to remove  the soundproofing 
panels  and  fittings.  During  the  summer  months  such 
machines  will  only  be able  to be used  in part  in the 
southern  countries  of the Community  (Italy  and  Greece 
and, at a later  stage,  Spain  and  Portugal). 
2.2. It  would  be wrong  to consider  that  a short-term 
method  used  principally  with  a view  to EEC 
type-verification  was  indicative  of the current  level  of 
technical  knowledge  in that  field.  New  developments  will 
be necessary  in order  to enable  machines  to comply  with the permissible  sound  power  levels  set out in the draft 
Directive  under  consideration. 
2.3. Industry  would  need  a period  of at least  five  years 
in order  to achie\  e these  new  developments.  In the present 
case it must  be acknowledged  that  there  is more  space 
available  for  fitting  soundproofing  to hydraulic  and 
rope-operated  exca\  ators  than  to other  machines.  In the 
case of dozers  and  loaders  the  tracks  or wheels  are 
situated  very  close  to the base  of the machine.  Very  little 
space  is therefore  available  for  the  soundproofing 
material. 
2.4. The  provisions  of point  5 are inexplicable.  They 
in fact  stipulate  that  a machine  for which  a certificate  of 
conformity  has  been  issued,  on the  basis  of an EEC 
type-verification  certificate,  can be neither  sold  nor used 
four years  after  the Directive  comes  into  force,  even  if the 
machine  complies  with  the  sound  pressure  levels  laid 
down  initially. 
2.5. For  the reasons  set out  above  the Committee 
considers  that  European  manufacturers  will  not be in a 
position  to comply  with  the permissible  sound  power 
levels  set out in Commission  Doc.  COM(80)  468  fin.  In 
view  of this prospect  and in the light  of technical  progress 
which  can  be expected  in the  coming  years,  the 
Committee  proposes  that  the permissible  sound  power 
levels  should  be modified  to read  as follows: 
Power  of motor 
up to 150  kW 
from  150  to 250  kW 
from  250  to 375  kW 
above  375  kW First  stage 
110 dB (A) 
113 dB (A) 
115 dB (A) 
118 dB (A) Second  stage 
106 dB (A) 
109 dB (A) 
112 dB (A) 
115 dB (A) 
First  stage:  two  years  after  the Directive's  entry  into 
force. 
Second  stage:  six years  after  the first  stage. 
Done  at Brussels,  1 July  1981. 
The Chairman 
of the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Tomas  ROSEINGRAVE 
10. 9. 81 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 230/3 
ANNEX 
to the opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Rejected  amendments 
The following  amendments,  tabled  in accordance  with  the Rules  of Procedure,  were  rejected  in the course 
of the discussions: 
Page  2: 
Delete  2.5. 
Voting: 
For: 39, against:  41, abstentions:  9. 
Page  2, point  2.5: 
'The industry  in question  is already  under  fierce  competition  from  outside  the Community  and this is 
likely  to further  increase  if permissible  levels  in the European  Community  do not correspond  to those 
prevailing  in the rest of the world.  In other  words,  European  industry  would  have  to produce  several 
versions  of the same  machine,  depending  on the particular  markets  aimed  at, and  this  would  entail 
substantially  higher  costs  and a consequent  loss of competitiveness.  In view  of this prospect  and in the 
light of the technical  progress  which  can be expected  in the coming  years,  the Committee  proposes  that 
the permissible  sound  power  levels  be modified  to read  as follows.  (It should  be noted  that  below  these 
Second  stage 
109 dB (A) 
112 dB (A) 
115 dB (A) 
118 dB (A) levels  the machines  might  not function  properly): 
Power  of motor  First  stage 
upt to 150  kW 112  dB (A) 
from  150  to 250  kW 115  dB (A) 
from  250  to 375  kW 117  dB (A) 
above  375  kW 120  dB (A) 
Reasons: 
The Assembly  is basically  being  asked  to consider  the Study  Group's  conclusions  set out in the draft 
opinion.  These  conclusions  are now  being  re-submitted.  The  whole  problem  cannot  be solved  by ignoring 
the need  for competitiveness  since  employment  levels  can only  be protected  if the industry  remains 
competitive. 
The Section  puts  forward  and explicates  in its opinion  a large  number  of justifiable  technical  reservations. 
This amendment  merely  draws  the logical  conclusions  and puts  forward  proposals.  A purely  arithmetical 
compromise  between  maximum  limit  values  (which  is what  the Section  attempted)  is self-contradictory  and 
would  not achieve  any practical  results. 
Voting: 
For: 19, against:  52, abstentions:  13. 
Page  2, add  a new  point  (point  2.6)  reading  as follows: 
'The Committee  proposes  that the permissible  sound  pressure  level  at the operator's  position  be fixed  at 
90 dB (A) from  the entry  into  force  of the Directive,  thus  bringing  it into  line  with  almost  all 
international  and  national  regulations  currently  in force.' 
No C 230/4 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 10. 9. 81 
Reasons: 
It is hard  to understand  why  the Commission  should  propose  a figure  of 89 dB (A) rather  than  the figure  of 
90 dB (A) fixed  by the most  advanced  national  laws. 
Recent  legislation  published  in the USA's  'Federal  Register'  on 16 January  1981  lays  down  a level  of 
90 dB (A) for an eight-hour  period. 
Voting: 
For: 27, against:  46, abstentions:  12.