Amended 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 (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty)
Date: 2001-10-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, approximation of laws, pleasure craft, technical regulations

26.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51 E/339

Amended 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 (1)

(2002/C 51 E/19)

COM(2001) 636 final (cid:151) 2000/0262(COD)

(Submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty on 31 October 2001)

1. Background

Transmission of the Proposal to the Council and the European
Parliament
in
the Treaty
accordance with Article 251(2)
12 October 2000

639 (cid:151) 2000/0262(COD))
and 95 of

(COM(2000)

come closer and that the 55 (cid:176)C flash point division is no longer
valid.

Amendments 14 and 29 constitute editorial improvements.

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 28-29 March
2001

Amendments 37 and 41 concern the distinction of stern drive
engines in two categories. They are accepted as a logical conse-
quence of amendment 8 which is accepted in principle.

Opinion of the European Parliament (cid:151) first reading 5 July
2001

2. Objective of the Commission proposal

The proposal introduces harmonised provisions on exhaust and
noise emissions limit values from engines on recreational craft.
It also includes a number of modifications on the construction
aspects of recreational craft covered by this Directive (e.g. the
inclusion of jet-skis in the scope of the original Directive).

Amendment 44 deletes the reference to the CE marking on
personal watercraft engines. This amendment
is accepted
because personal watercraft engines form an integral part of
this product and, consequently, the CE marking needs only to
be affixed on the personal watercraft.

3.2. Amendments accepted in part or principle by the Commission
(No 43 (first part), 3, 5, 7, 8, 10 (second part), 12, 13, 45
(first part), 21, 23, 35 and 36)

The Commission can accept the first part of Amendment 43 as
improved rewording.

3. Commission opinion on the amendments adopted by

the Parliament

3.1. Amendments accepted by the Commission (No 1, 6, 14, 18,

44, 22, 28, 29, 37, 39, 41)

Amendments 1, 6 and 39 are accepted as useful clarifications.

The Commission can accept the second part of Amendment 10
concerning the exemption of craft built for own use from the
noise requirements of the proposed Directive. This exemption
should be reflected with a new, second indent under Article
1(2)(c) as follows: (cid:145)craft built for own use, provided that they
are not subsequently placed on the Community market during
a period of five years.(cid:146)

Amendment 22 excludes extreme weather conditions, such as
hurricanes, from the weather conditions foreseen under Boat
Design Category A. It is accepted as a logical clarification.

The Commission can accept the first part of amendment 45
naming the products bearing the CE marking, as it provides a
useful clarification.

Amendment 18 provides for the simplification of noise testing
procedures. This amendment introduces an alternative method
to demonstrate compliance with the noise provisions, in order
to alleviate the compliance cost
small boat builders
producing low speed craft.

for

The Commission can accept in principle Amendment 3 subject
to the following rewording of the last sentence of new recital
11a, as follows: (cid:145)The introduction of EU wide measures may be
considered during the review of this Directive, if appropriate.(cid:146)

Amendment 28 provides for a logical adaptation of the original
Directive to technical development. It is true that flash points
of petrol and diesel fuels in recreational craft fuel tanks have

(1) OJ C 62 E, 27.2.2001, p. 139.

The Commission can accept in principle Amendment 5 subject
to the clarification that propulsion engines subject to major
engine modifications
the
should fall under
proposed Directive with regard to exhaust emissions when
first placed on the market and/or put into service after the
date of entry into force of the present Directive.

the scope of

C 51 E/340

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

26.2.2002

The Commission can also accept in principle Amendment 7
concerning noise emissions subject to the clarification that the
proposed Directive applies to products first placed on the
market and/or put into service after the date of entry into
force of the present Directive.

As regards Amendments 5 and 7, the above mentioned clari-
fication could be specified in a separate paragraph d) under
Article 1(1), as follows:

(cid:145)for products falling under Article 1(1)(a)(ii), 1(b) and 1(c) the
provisions of the present Directive shall only apply from the
first placing on the market and/or putting into service after the
date of entry into force of the present Directive.(cid:146)

engines

stern drive

The Commission can accept in principle Amendment 8, which
in two
introduces a distinction of
categories, i.e. those with integral exhaust and those without
integral exhaust. This distinction does not alter the intended
purpose of the proposed Directive. Therefore, this amendment
is accepted subject
to the following rewording of Article
(cid:145)outboard engines and stern drive engines with
1(1)(c)(iv):
integral exhausts
installation on recreational
craft(cid:146). For the sake of consistency and clarity a modification
should also be made, accordingly,
to
(cid:145)recreational
distinguish the two types of engines as follows:
craft with stern drive engines without
integral exhaust or
inboard propulsion engine installations(cid:146).

to Article 1(1)(c)(i)

intended for

in principle Amendment 12
The Commission can accept
subject to the rewording suggested on Amendment 10 above.

in principle Amendment 13,
The Commission can accept
the
which introduces a distinction between replacement of
engine, major modification of an engine and major conversion
of a craft, and deletes the word (cid:145)either(cid:146) and the phrase (cid:145)or the
replacement of the propulsion engine by a different type or
size of engine(cid:146) from Article 1(3)(e).

The Commission can accept
in principle Amendment 21
(linked to Amendment 46 below) as regards the possibility of
a further step of emissions limit values. A satisfactory formula
might be reached if the possibility to further reduce emissions
limit values is explored in the report foreseen under Article 2
of the Commission’s proposal.

The Commission can accept
in principle Amendment 23
subject to the following rewording of Annex I, section 2.1 as
follows:

(cid:151) The title should read as follows: (cid:145)Craft identification(cid:146)

compliance with the noise provisions. The Commission,
however, would like to analyse further the proposed limit
values.

For the same reason, the Commission can accept in principle
Amendment 36 defining the formulas foreseen in amendment
35.

3.3. Amendments not accepted by the Commission (No 2, 4, 9, 10
(first part), 11, 15, 16, 17, 20, 24, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 40,
42, 43 (second part), 45 (second part), 46 and 48)

Amendment 2 implies an obligation for consistency with other
emission measures, which is contrary to the Commission’s
right of initiative. It is, therefore, not acceptable.

Amendments 4 and 16 require the deletion of the provisions
relating to comitology and are, therefore, contrary to the prin-
ciples governing the Commission’s executive powers. The
Commission sticks to its position to establish a Regulatory
Committee under Council Decision 1999/468/EC, which will
be required to advise the Commission on measures relating to
the modification of technical provisions. These amendments
are, therefore, not acceptable, also taking into consideration
the Commission’s comments under Amendment 21 on the
possibility to explore further steps of emissions limit values.

Amendment 9 introduces an exclusion of steam powered craft
from Directive 94/25/EC. This is an entirely new issue not
supported by sufficient evidence. This amendment cannot,
therefore, be accepted.

Amendment 10 (first part) introduces the exemption of engines
on craft built for own use from the relevant exhaust emission
requirements. As the responsibility for compliance testing, in
lies with engine manu-
the case of
facturers and not with the boat builder,
the
amendment is not acceptable.

the exhaust emissions,

this part of

Amendment 11 introduces a more generic definition of classic
engines and is contrary to the intention of the Commission’s
proposal to exempt only vintage engines of a unique design
fitted to a historical craft. The Commission considers that the
characteristics of the replica engines would be null and void, if
these engines are fitted on new craft, and that a more general
exemption risks creating market distortions. This amendment
is, therefore, not acceptable.

(cid:151) The chapeau should be changed as follows: (cid:145)Each craft shall
be marked with an identification number including the
following information(cid:146).

The Commission can accept
which introduces

in principle Amendment 35,
an alternative method to demonstrate

Amendment 15 calls for the application of more stringent
limits in specific inland waters at national level. The objective
of Commission’s proposal was not to regulate the use of boats
and engines in specific waters at national level. This falls under
the competence of Member States according to the principle of
subsidiarity. This amendment cannot, therefore, be accepted.

26.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51 E/341

Amendment 17 requires self-certification or limited third-party
intervention for the assessment of compliance of personal
watercraft with
the
construction
Commission’s proposal. The Commission has initially rejected
this amendment.

requirements

the

of

Amendment 20 requires that the Commission will submit a
proposal for a new Directive two years after the entry into
the proposed Directive, on how and when to
force of
testing. This
implement a system of
amendment
is not acceptable as contrary to the right of
initiative of the Commission.

compliance

in-use

Amendment 24 is rejected by the Commission,
avoid a too restrictive wording.

in order to

Amendment 40 introduces a new interpretation of Directive
94/25/EC, which is not fully justifiable.
It is, therefore, not
acceptable.

Amendment 42 introduces an additional provision, which is
incorrect. The manufacturer of stern drive engines with integral
exhaust must, just like the outboard engine manufacturer, affix
CE marking and not issue a declaration of conformity. This
amendment is, consequently, not accepted.

Amendment 43 (second part) allows for more stringent limits
It is rejected as
for specific inland waters at national
contrary to the intention of the Commission’s proposal,
i.e.
to establish harmonised provisions across the EU.

level.

Amendment 30 requires more stringent exhaust emissions
is
limits for ecologically sensitive waters. This amendment
to
the Commission’s proposal
contrary to the intention of
establish harmonised positions across
the EU and avoid
market fragmentation. It is, therefore, not acceptable.

Amendment 45 (second part) relating to the declaration of
incorporation is superfluous and,
therefore, not acceptable.
Such a provision already exists under Article 1, point 2,
concerning Article 4, paragraph 3a and Article 1, point 13,
Annex XV.3.

Amendment 31 refers to another EC Directive than the one
specified in the Commission’s proposal for reference fuels used
for diesel engines. As both petrol and diesel fuels are covered
by the same Directive,
i.e. 98/69/EC, as foreseen in the
Commission’s proposal, this amendment is not fully justifiable
and, therefore, cannot be accepted.

Amendments 33 and 34, are relevant to the (acceptable by the
Commission) distinction of
in two
categories. They are, however, rejected as this distinction is
not necessary in this particular provision of
the proposed
Directive (Annex A, point 6, annex I.C) as all stern drive
engines are subject to the noise emissions requirements.

stern drive

engines

Amendment 46 introduces changes to the definition of boat
design category D. There is little evidence that these particular
technical modifications would improve the implementation of
Directive 94/25/EC. This amendment
is, consequently, not
accepted.

Amendment 48 removes the allowance of 3 dB for twin
engines and multiple engine units. It is rejected because the
limits foreseen are thought to be technologically achievable for
single engine boats and it is impossible for dual and multiple
engines to be limited in the same level of noise.

Amendment 38 requires that
ignition protected equipment
refers only to petrol engines. This amendment is not acceptable
because ignition risks can be recognised in all
installations,
both petrol and diesel.

4. Amended proposal

Having regard to Article 250, paragraph 2, of the EC Treaty,
the Commission modifies its proposal as indicated above.