Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council modifying Directive 94/25/EC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft"
Date: 2001-03-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: European standard, approximation of laws, free movement of goods, pleasure craft, safety standard, technical specification

29.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 155/1

II

(Preparatory Acts)

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council modifying Directive 94/25/EC on the approximation of the laws,
regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft’

(2001/C 155/01)

On 7 November 2000 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 14 March 2001. The rapporteur was
Mr Colombo.

At its 380th plenary session on 28 March 2001, the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion by 99 votes, with one against and one abstention.

1.

Background and objectives

The Commission proposal

1.1.
to modify Directive
94/25/EC, which became fully operational in June 1998 after
a four-year transition period, is justified by the need for the
design and construction of recreational craft to be subject to
harmonised standards for exhaust and noise emissions from
engines installed on such craft.

The proposal satisfies the guidelines proposed on
1.2.
environmental
issues and sustainable development by the
European Council in Cardiff in June 1998, which were adopted
by the Industry Council of November 1999 in its report
‘Integrating sustainable development and industry policy’.

The lack of

initiatives at Community level has
1.3.
prompted some Member States to independently take decisions
designed to incorporate a number of environmental provisions
into Directive 94/25/EC. In view of this situation, a rapid
process of harmonisation would seem imperative in order to
prevent individual national initiatives from hindering trade
and violating the principle of free movement of goods.

1.4.
Although pollution caused by recreational craft rep-
resents an almost negligible proportion of total emissions, it
has a significant impact on air quality in areas with high
concentrations of boats because the emissions produced
consist of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, which are
known precursors of ozone.

The second issue addressed by the proposal, namely
1.5.
noise, is one of the most reported forms of pollution. Many
people consider noise generated by traffic,
industrial and
recreational activities to be their main environmental problem.
The noise produced by personal water craft (PWC) is particu-
larly significant because of their undulating motion and the
so-called practice of wave-jumping, which exacerbates the
discomfort to the extent that it becomes difficult to endure.

Both factors considered also cause harm to flora and
1.6.
fauna when boats enter remote areas used by fish and wildlife
as nesting and reproduction habitat.

C 155/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

29.5.2001

1.7.
The extent of the problem addressed in the Directive is
significant for two reasons: firstly, in view of the large number
lakeshores and navigable rivers across the EU and in
of
neighbouring countries (e.g. Switzerland, Liechtenstein); and
secondly, the size of the pleasure craft park, which is very large
in relative terms (see Table 1) and is produced by an industry
that represents a considerable technological and occupational
asset for the European Union, accounting for 33 % of total
world output.

Table 1

Boat park in Europe 1998

Sailboats

Motorboats

Inflatables

821 506

3 628 000

170 000 (not already included with
motorboats)

Personal watercraft

10 700

Total:

4 630 206

Source: Estimates by ICOMIA (International Council of Marine Industries
Associations)

2. Commission proposal

2.1.
The purpose of the Commission proposal is to amend
Directive 94/25/EC, in view of the need to establish Com-
munity rules on exhaust and noise emissions for recreational
craft.

2.2.
The legal basis for the proposed Directive is Article 95
of the Treaty (internal market), the proposal being to guarantee
a harmonised approach in the EU to the essential requirements
that must be met in the manufacture of watercraft falling
within the Directive’s scope.

2.3.
The main aim of the changes is to apply harmonised
rules for exhaust and noise emissions for such watercraft,
introducing a number of requirements that can be verified
through conformity assessment procedures, with the ultimate
objective of protecting human health, ensuring citizens’ well-
being and promoting the smooth functioning of the internal
market by removing any obstacles to trade.

2.4.
Applying requirements that are noticeably different
from national rules could actually create barriers to trade
and fail to ensure uniform protection of citizens’ health at
Community level.

The following national regulations govern exhaust and

2.5.
noise emissions of watercraft:

— Bodensee shipping regulation (Stage 1) of 1/1/93

— Bodensee shipping regulation (Stage 2) of 1/1/96

— State of Brandenburg regulation

— Swedish regulation currently waived in anticipation of

Community legislation.

To these should be added further measures currently in
preparation in other EU countries that are temporarily on
hold.

These rules can only develop into a joint approach guarantee-
ing a uniform level of protection if they are backed by a
directive that harmonises requirements relating to exhaust and
noise emissions of watercraft.

2.6.
The Commission proposal is the fruit of a long period
of consultation of the parties concerned by the directive
— Member States, industry, consumers, the CEN (1) — which
submitted their comments and requests. The proposed
measures — which are important for the smooth functioning
of the internal market, and for the protection of human health
and citizens’ well-being and quality of life — thus reconcile
industrial policy with protection of the environment, and
come at an important stage of the ‘sustainable development’
policy pursued in recent Community legislation.

2.7.
In order to take due account of technological and
design developments in the marine engines and watercraft
industry, the Commission is also proposing to set up a
regulatory committee which will be empowered to make any
necessary change to technical aspects and to the exhaust
emission limits. However, any other amendments to the
Directive which alter the objective of the proposal must pass
through the formal procedure provided for.

One particular feature of this Directive is the confor-
2.8.
mity assessment procedure. It should be borne in mind that
the recreational boat industry is composed very largely of
SMEs geared to producing small series of different models,
though with similar technical features. To reduce the cost of
the conformity assessment procedure, while ensuring that the
requirements imposed are met, the idea of a ‘reference boat’
system has been introduced.

(1) European Committee for standardisation.

29.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 155/3

2.9.
A list of reference boats will be drawn up that have
been inspected under ISO standard 14509 and found to
comply with the stipulated requirements. The list will form the
basis for a comparison, conducted on the basis of
the
maximum permitted deviation, with other boats produced.
This will allow the industry to use an alternative conformity
assessment procedure to Module Aa (1).

2.10.
At a purely technical level, the Directive sets limits on
exhaust emissions from engines according to nominal power
for 2-stroke and 4-stroke spark ignition engines and com-
pression ignition engines. In the case of noise emissions, the

Directive sets limits on the basis of nominal power, type of
engine and its installation.

2.11.
ance with the following standards:

The test methods are rigorously enforced in accord-

— ISO 8178 for exhaust emissions (2)

— ISO 14509 for noise emissions (3).

2.12.
The requirements for exhaust gas emissions are
clearly stated in terms of values relative to the type of
propulsion, as in the following table:

(2) Standard for measuring gas emissions from internal combustion

engines.

(3) Standard for measuring noise emissions from internal combustion

(1) Internal production control plus tests (Annex VI of the Directive).

engines.

Table 2

Type

Carbon monoxide
CO=A+B/Pn
N
g/kWh

Hydrocarbons
HC=A+B/Pn
N
g/kWh

A

B

n

A

B

n

Nitrogen
oxides
NOx
g/kWh

Particulates

Two-stroke spark ignition

150,0

600,0

1,0

30,0

100,0

0,75

10,0

Not applicable

Four-stroke spark igni-
tion

150,0

600,0

1,0

Compression ignition

5,0

0

0

6,0

1,5

50,0

0,75

2,0

0,5

15,0

9,8

Not applicable

1,0

Where A, B and n are constants in accordance with the table, PN is the rated engine power in kW and the exhaust emissions are
measured in accordance with the harmonised standard.

2.13.
also fixed in relation to engine power.

Levels of noise emissions for recreational craft are

Table 3

Engine power in kW

Maximum sound pressure level =
LpASmax

of-life issues at
the centre of all Community legislative
initiatives, as a basic precondition for achieving high quality of
life. Moreover, the ESC particularly appreciates the Com-
mission’s efforts to involve all the parties concerned at an early
stage, with the aim of gathering and incorporating observations
and reaching the best possible consensus. The ESC therefore
naturally endorses the broad objectives of the proposal, though
it intends to make several comments of a general nature,
particularly regarding the need to protect the business of SMEs
in the internal market and outside the EU.

PN < 10

10<PN < 40

PN>40

67

72

75

PN = rated engine power in kW at rated speed.
LpAS max = maximum sound pressure level in dB.

3. General comments

3.1.
The Commission proposal goes in the direction the
ESC had always hoped for, placing environmental and quality-

3.2.
It is necessary to standardise test procedures as far as
possible and to base them on uniform methods, especially in
the case of noise emissions. This means wherever possible
basing tests on checks generally carried out on the manufac-
turer’s premises. Clearly in the case of the engine/boat configu-
ration it is easier to achieve this objective by carrying out the
relevant engine checks as far as possible on the manufacturer’s
premises rather than on a fully equipped boat on the water. In
the case of stern-drive engines (with traditional types of

C 155/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

29.5.2001

exhaust) it can be assumed that the noise emission characte-
ristics of the finished boat are guaranteed if the engine has
successfully completed the conformity assessment procedure
and has been installed on board in accordance with the
manufacturer’s instructions (see ‘Specific comments’ for details
of proposed change).

The Committee stresses the importance of keeping
3.8.
abreast of
technological advances obtained by scientific
research in the broader field of engine design and manufacture,
keeping close contact with larger-scale production activities
(cf. the car industry), as the engines used on boats are often
only transferred to the sector at a later stage.

3.3.
The Directive requires that if a boat that is already on
the market before its entry into effect replaces or substantially
the new noise emission
modifies the propulsion engine,
requirements are applicable not just to the new engine, but
also to the existing boat.

Bearing in mind the need for a centralised database
3.9.
the Committee hopes that
regarding the ‘reference boat’,
measures in support of a specific programme will be envisaged
in the 2002-2006 multiannual framework programme on
RTD.

3.4.
Apart from being complicated to apply for boats that
have already been built, this requirement would have two
counterproductive effects:

— in the case of boats already on the market with old
engines that do not comply with the new exhaust
emission requirements, standards would have to be
applied retroactively, which is difficult to do for the
whole boat, and so the owner would decide not to replace
the engine but to keep it on board even in poor condition;

— such a constraint would cause serious losses for a large
number of parts suppliers — engine manufacturers
and on-board installation workshops — whose business
normally consists in equipping boats with new engines.

3.5.
Such a procedure is justified when the new engine is
if the power
more powerful than the old one. However,
remains the same, users might choose to keep on board
engines in poor condition and with high polluting potential,
jeopardising their own safety and the environment. This would
also hit a large part of the small-business sector, of which no
less than 40 % of turnover comes from fitting new engines
(see ‘Specific comments’ for details of proposed change).

3.6.
Assuming that the Directive introduces compulsory
application of well-defined standards and bearing in mind that
the watercraft industry consists largely of SMEs for which the
cost of external certification procedures (conducted by ‘notified
bodies’) is prohibitively high, the possibility of self-assessment
conformity procedures (Modules Aa and A, as applicable)
should be provided for (see ‘Specific comments’ for details of
proposed change).

3.7.
Such a proposal would not make the requirements less
technically effective or influence whether they are met, but it
would help to make their application by SMEs simpler and less
expensive.

4.

The Community legislative process and its links with
world policy in the sector

4.1.
The Committee agrees that it is important for the EU
to rapidly acquire specific legislation on the gas and noise
emissions from recreational craft, laying down harmonised
conformity criteria and obligations for all Member States
which will facilitate the smooth operation of the single market
and help to protect public health and wellbeing.

Community legislation can provide a precise reference
4.2.
point not only for the applicant countries but above all for the
other leading producers (USA, Japan, Australia) which still do
not have specific regulations on gas and noise emissions from
recreational craft.

Here the Committee would stress the importance of
4.3.
coordinated action by the Commission and the sector’s
representative organisations to ensure, in international bodies,
that the future Community legislation is applied worldwide,
preventing any possible obstacles to free competition.

In these international bodies, the Committee thinks
4.4.
that the first task is to affirm the basic principle that the
increased costs which these standards will mean for the sector
will be largely offset by the environmental and health benefits
and by the guarantee of a level playing field for the free
movement of goods. They may also encourage research
schemes for increasingly ‘eco-compatible’ engines.

29.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 155/5

5.

Specific comments

5.1.
As noted in the general comments above (see
point 3.2), in the case of traditional stern-drive engines (i.e.
with the exhaust built into the stern drive), noise emission
characteristics should be guaranteed if the engine has success-
fully completed the conformity assessment procedure and has
been installed on board in accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions.

The Committee therefore proposes that the Directive

5.2.
be amended as follows:

— Article 1(1)(c)(iv), Annex 1C(1.1), Annex 1C2 (first and
second paragraphs), Annex VIB (second paragraph): After
the words ‘outboard engines’ add ‘and stern-drive engines
with built-in exhaust’;

— Annex XV3: after ‘propulsion engines’ add ‘and stern-
drive engines with built-in exhaust, where the standard
craft method is used’.

To overcome the problems raised in the general
5.3.
comments (see point 3 above) regarding the fitting of new
engines, a clear distinction should be made between replace-
ment of the engine and major modifications to the craft.
Whilst it is logical to demand a further verification when a
major modification is made, replacement of the engine should
not require further conformity assessment procedures for
noise emissions.

Brussels, 28 March 2001.

5.4.
The Committee therefore proposes that in the second
indent of Article 1(3)(e), the words ‘or the replacement of the
propulsion engine by a different type or size of engine’ be
deleted.

5.5.
As most manufacturers in this sector are SMEs for
whom the cost of the notified-body certification procedures is
excessive, the Committee proposes the use of simpler confor-
mity assessment modules.

5.6.

The Committee therefore proposes that:

— Article 8(3)(a): for exhaust emissions, Module Aa could
also be used when the harmonised standard is applied, by
adding the following:
‘when the harmonised standard
referred to in section 2 of Annex IB is applied: internal
production control plus tests (Module Aa) as provided in
Annex VI’.

— Annex VIII

(Module C), new paragraph 4: The new
paragraph on the verification of exhaust emission require-
ments should be deleted. Module C spot checks are not
required under other directives nor under Directive
97/68/EC.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS