NoC73/22 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 15.3.93
Opinionon:
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonthemassesanddimensionsoftwo-andthree­
wheelmotorvehicles(*),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveontheidentificationofcontrols,telltalesand
indicatorsfortwo-orthree-wheelmotorvehicles(1),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonaudiblewarningdevicesfortwo-orthree-wheel
motorvehicles(!),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonstandsfortwo-wheelmotorvehicles(*),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonprotectivedevicesintendedtopreventthe
unauthorizeduseoftwo-orthree-wheelmotorvehicles(*),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonthemountingoftherearregistrationplateof
two-orthree-wheelmotorvehicles(*),
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonstatutorymarkingsfortwo-orthree-wheelmotor
vehicles(!),and
—theproposalforaCouncilDirectiveonpassengerhand-holdsontwo-wheelmotor
vehicles(*)
(93/C73/06)
On12October1992andon19October1992theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomic
andSocialCommittee,underArticle100aoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomic
Community,ontheabovementioned proposals.
TheSectionforIndustry,Commerce,CraftsandServices,whichwasresponsibleforpreparing
theCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon6January1993.TheRapporteur
wasMrBagliano.
Atits302ndPlenarySession(meetingof27January1993)theEconomicandSocialCommittee
unanimouslyadoptedthefollowingOpinion.
1.Generalcomments 1.3.1.However,toensurethattherulesareapplied
concurrentlyanduniformlyinallMemberStates,the
Committee recommends thateachDirectivein
implementation oftheframeworkDirectivespecify:
—adeadlinebywhichitmustbetransposedinto
nationallegislation(e.g.18monthsfromthedate
oftheDirectiveitself);1.1.TheCommitteewelcomesthepresentpackage
ofeightdraftDirectivesimplementingtheframework
Directive92/61/EECof30June1992relatingtothe
typeapprovaloftwo-orthree-wheelmotorvehicles.
1.2.Inparticular,theCommitteestressesthatthe
abidingconcernoftheserulesisthesafetyofpeople
andtransport,togetherwiththeneedtoharmonize
technicalstandardsandproceduresinordertoeliminate
barrierstotradebetweenMemberStates.Thisisvital
ifthereistobearealinternalmarket.—anotherdatefor'entryintoforce':forexample,at
leastsixmonthsafterthetranspositiondeadline.
Duringthesesixmonths,typeapprovalcouldobvi­
ouslybeinaccordanceeitherwithexistinglegis­
lationorwiththenewEECDirectives.
1.3.WhilenotingthattheCouncilhasoptedforthe
legalinstrumentofaDirective,theCommitteestill
thinksthataRegulationwouldhavebeenmoreappro­
priate,soastoavoiddiscrepanciesinimplementation
datesandmethods.1.3.2.Thiswillpreventdifferentimplementingdates
intheMemberStatesfromdistortingthemarketorat
leastcreatingconfusionabouttype-approval pro­
cedures.
(»)OJNoC293,9.11.1992,p.1,5,15,23,32,38,43and49.1.3.3.Theminimumperiodofsixmonthsmentioned
in1.3.1isneededinordertoallowvehicleandcom­

15.3.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC73/23
ponentmanufacturerstoadapttheirproductiontothe
newrulesandtodesignvehiclesandcomponentsthat
meetthenewspecifications .2.2.3.Turningtothe'maximummasseswhichmay
becarried'(Point3.2.3oftheAnnex),theCommittee
considersthatthe800kgmaximumforthree-wheel
mopeds(Point3.2.3.1)ismuchtoohigh.Inviewof
trafficproblemsandthereliabilityofthistypeof
vehicle,theCommitteethinksthata300kglimitwould
besafer. 1.4.Asregardstheprocedureforadaptingthe
Annexestotechnicalprogress,theCommitteenotes
thatArticle16oftheframeworkDirectiveapprovedby
theCouncilon30June1992referstoArticle13of
Directive70/156/EEC.3.DraftDirectiveontheidentificationofcontrols,
telltalesandindicatorsfortwo-orthree-wheel
motorvehicles
1.5.TheCommitteealsofavoursthedefinitionof
appropriaterules—aslaiddownintheframework
Directive—tomakeitmoredifficultto'soupup'both
mopedsandmotorcycles .3.1.Thisproposalconcernsidentificationofthe
vehicle'smaincontrols,telltalesandindicators,which
areimportantforbothactiveandpassivesafety.For
obvioussafetyreasons,identificationofthesefeatures
mustbestandardizedonalltypesofmotorvehicle,
includinglowspeedmodels.
2.DraftDirectiveonmassesanddimensionsoftwo­
andthree-wheelmotorvehicles3.2.Specificcomments
—ThesymbolsshowninFigures13and14shouldbe
reservedasanoptionfordiesel-enginevehicles,to
beconsistentwiththeparallelDirectiveonvehicles.
—ThetelltalelightshowninFigure17shouldbe
green,againtobeconsistentwiththevehiclesDirec­
tive.2.1.Theproposalisdesignedtopreventthemarket­
ingofvehicleswhichareexcessivelylargeorheavyin
relationtotheirpowerunit,sincesuchvehiclescould
impedetheflowoftrafficandthusbeasourceof
danger.Theproposallaysdowndefinitionsandpro­
ceduresforcalculatingthemaindimensionsofthe
vehicle.
2.2.Specificcomments
4.DraftDirectiveonaudiblewarningdevicesfortwo­
orthree-wheelmotorvehicles2.2.1.Asregardsthe'maximumauthorizedkerb
mass'(Point3.2.1oftheAnnextotheproposal),the
CommitteeconsidersthatPoint3.2.1.2('three-wheel
motorvehicles')shouldmakeadistinctionbetween
three-wheelmopedsandtricycles(*).Aseparatelimit,
considerablylessthanthe1000kggenerallyproposed
forthree-wheelvehicles,shouldbesetforthree-wheel
mopeds(perhaps250-270kg).4.1.Thisproposalcouldimprovetrafficsafetyasits
aimistodrawattentiontothepresenceofavehicleor
totheneedtocarryoutamanoeuvreinadangerous
situation,withoutcausingunacceptablenoiselevels.
4.2.Totakeaccountofthedifferenttypesofvehicle,
thewaythewarningdeviceislikelytobeused,andthe
limitedtechnicalandpracticalcapacitiesofmopeds,
theproposallaysdownthreecategoriesofsoundlevel
forthedevice,dependingonthetypeofvehicleon
whichitistobefitted.2.2.2.InPoint3.2.2oftheAnnex,theCommittee
proposesthattwo-wheelmopedsbepermittedatowa­
blemassof80kg(asunderSwisslegislation)rather
thantheproposed50%ofthekerbmass(whichin
somecaseswouldonlybe50or60kg).Formotor
cyclesandthree-wheelvehicles,however,theCom­
mitteeagreeswiththecriterionof50%ofkerbmass.
4.3.Specificcomments
(')Tricycles:vehicleswiththreesymmetricallyarrangedwheels,
acylindercapacityofmorethan50cm3and/oramaximum
designspeedofmorethan45km/h[Article1(2)ofDirective
92/61/EEC,inOJNoL225,10.8.19921.4.3.1.Asthreecategoriesofaudiblewarningdevice
aretobepermitted,andeachtypecanonlybefitted
toonecategoryofvehicle,itmightbeworthdevising

NoC73/24 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 15.3.93
therequirementsofthepresentDirective,other
solutionsarepermissibleprovidedtheyrespectthe
aimsoftheDirectiveandareacceptabletothe
technicalauthoritiesresponsiblefortesting.'adifferentidentifyingmarktodistinguishclearlythe
threetypesofdevice.
4.3.2.TheCommitteeconsidersthataderogation
shouldbeprovidedformopedswithapowerofunder
0,5kW,whichshouldbeauthorizedtohaveonlya
hand-operated mechanicalbell.
7.DraftDirectiveonthemountingoftherearregis­
trationplateoftwo-orthree-wheelmotorvehicles
5.DraftDirectiveonstandsfortwo-wheelmotor
vehicles7.1.Theproposallaysdowntechnicalrequirements,
whichthemanufacturer ofthevehiclemustmeetatthe
designstage,relatingtothemountingfortheregis­
trationplateonvehicleswheresuchaplateismanda­
tory. 5.1.Theproposalsetsoutconstructionrequirements
forstandsontwo-wheelmotorvehiclesandspecifi­
cationsfortheiruse.Thesewillensurethestabilityof
thevehiclewhenitisstationaryonbothflatandsloping
surfaces.Therequirementsshouldensurethatthepar­
kedvehiclecannottipoverasaresultofexternal
pressure(suchasalightknockfromanothervehicleor
agustofwindcausedbypassingtraffic).7.2.Theproposedrequirementsfocusonthedimen­
sions,inclinationandheightoffthegroundofthe
platemounting,andtheanglesofvisibilityoftheplate
mountedthereon.
5.2.Specificcomments
5.2.1.Inparagraph3.1.1.3,itshouldbespecified
thatstandswhichretractautomaticallyoncontactwith
theroadsurfaceareauthorized .7.3.ThespecificationsproposedbytheCommission
coverthemountingoftheplatebutnottheplateitself.
TheCommitteesuggeststhatthoughtbegiventothe
profileoftheinstalledplate,andthatthecasebe
consideredforrecommending orrequiringappropri­
atelyroundededges,sincesharpedgescouldcause
injuriesnotonlytothevehicleuser.
5.2.2.Forsafetyreasons,thefollowingsentence
shouldbeinsertedinthefirstindentofparagraph4.2
aftertheword'clip':'Eachspringshouldallowthe
standtoreturntotheretractedpositionevenifthe
otherspringisbroken'. 8.DraftDirectiveonstatutorymarkingsfortwo-or
three-wheelmotorvehicles
6.DraftDirectiveonprotectiondevicestoprevent
theunauthorized useoftwo-orthree-wheelmotor
vehicles8.1.Thesemarkings,whichmustbeindelible,areto
bepermanentlyaffixedtoanaccessiblebutprotected
partofthevehicle,sothatintheeventofaroadside
checkitiseasytoascertainwhetheragivenvehicle
belongstoatype-approved productionrunandthus
meetsbothsafetyandenvironmental protection
requirements .6.1.Theproposedrequirementsareintendedtopre­
vent(whenthevehicleisinmotionanditsengine
running)anyaccidentallockingofthedeviceorany
deterioration inthesteeringgearortransmissionon
whichthedeviceacts,asthiscouldimpairvehicle
safety. 8.2.Therequirementsareinlinewithotherinter­
nationalrulesandshouldensurestandardized vehicle
identification worldwide .
6.2.Specificcomments
6.2.1.TheCommitteeproposesthatthefollowing
beaddedtochapter3tocaterforlowspeedmopeds:
'Ifforconstruction-related reasonsthesteeringhead
ofthemopedmakesitimpossibletocomplywith8.3.Theotherindicationswhichmustbeincluded
ontheplatearethenameofthemanufacturer ,thetype­
approvalmark,themakeandreferenceofthesilencer,
andtheauthorizedsoundlevelforthetypeofvehicle.
Thislastdetailshouldmakeiteasy,eveninaroadside
check(andregardlessofthetechnicalrequirements

15.3.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC-73/25
whichwillbelaiddowninaseparateDirective),to
detectanytamperingwiththeoriginalexhaustsystem.
9.DraftDirectiveonpassengerhand-holdsontwo­
wheelmotorvehicles
9.1.Forobvioussafetyreasons,thisdevice(astrap
and/orahand-grip)mustgiveafirmanchoragesothat
thepassengercanremainseatedonthevehicledespite
anyjoltscausedbytheroadsurface,driving
manoeuvres,ortrafficconditions.9.2.Specificcomments
9.2.1.Withreferencetothemechanicaltestsonthe
resistanceofthehand-holds,therequirementforthe
hand-holdsnottosnapwhenthespecifiedvertical
tractionforceisappliedcouldsuffice.
9.2.2.However,sincepermanentdeformationwill
alwaysoccurinnon-elasticmaterials(suchasleather
orsyntheticstraps),paragraph1.1shouldspecify'with­
out...sufferingpermanentdeformationofmorethan
15-20%oftheinitiallength'.
DoneatBrussels,27January1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)onfeedingstuffsintendedfor
particularnutritionalpurposes(!)
(93/C73/07
On28August1992theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle198oftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforAgricultureandFisheries,whichwasresponsibleforpreparingtheCom­
mittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon7January1993.TheRapporteurwas
MrPricolo.
Atits302ndPlenarySession(meetingof27January1993),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeunanimouslyadoptedthefollowingOpinion.
1.Introduction
1.1.TheproposalcomesinresponsetotheCouncil's
invitationtotheCommission ,on22January1990,to
presentspecificproposalstoregulatetheproduction,
marketingandinspectionofcompoundfeedingstuffs
forparticularnutritionalpurposes,commonlyknown
asdieteticfeedingstuffs .
1.2.Suchproductsaregainingagrowingshareof
themarket,andarenotyetregulatedatEClevel.Specificrulesarethereforenecessaryinorderto
reassureusersastotheirspecialpropertiesandquality.
1.3.Themainprovisionsoftheproposalconcern
theinformationtobeincludedonthelabel,thetypeof
packaging,thelistofintendeduses,andanyother
informationwhichhelpstoclarifythedieteticfeatures
oftheproduct,sothatitcannotbeconfusedeitherwith
ordinaryfeedingstuffs (simpleorcompound),whichare
alreadyregulatedbyDirective79/373/EEC,orwith
'medicinal'feedingstuffs (i.e.onesusedforstrictly
therapeuticpurposes).
1.4.Theproposaliscompletelynewintermsof
bothlegalbasis(RegulationratherthanDirective)and
content. (»)OJNoC231,9.9.1992,p.6.