WRITTEN QUESTION E-0460/03 by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission. Compliance with emission standards for heavy goods vehicles (Directive 1999/96/EC).
Date: 2003-02-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European standard, application of EU law, combustion gases, commercial vehicle, environmental standard, technical regulations, testing

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/189

No 1774/2002 of the Parliament and of the Council of 31 October 2002 laying down health rules
concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption, including the prohibition on intra-
species recycling, are correctly implemented before a relaxation of the feed ban is proposed.

The Commission is considering maintaining the current feed ban after 30 June 2003, since some of the
control problems leading to the ban have not yet been solved. Rather than simply extending the current
provisions it may be considered to introduce them into Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the Parliament
and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of
certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (1), and to end the transitional character of the feed ban.
In this way, the legal situation would become clearer.

The current main route to dispose of animal by-products is incineration or landfill. Regulation (EC)
No 1774/2002, which becomes applicable on 1 May 2003, introduces alternatives for disposal or recovery
of animal by-products such as bio-gas production and use as fertiliser.

The estimated Union production of animal by-products is 16,1 million tonnes of which 14,3 million tons
are derived from animals fit for human consumption (category 3). Member States estimate the total costs
for disposal between EUR 100 and EUR 300 per ton of animal by-product. 14,3 million tons of category 3
by-products correspond with about 3 million tons of meat-and bone meal.

(1) OJ L 147, 31.5.2001.

(2003/C 192 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0456/03

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Delays in the ‘Information Society’ operational programme in Greece

Apparently, the ‘Information Society’ programme (cid:1) an operational programme in the third CSF which is
crucial for the development of the Greek economy (cid:1) is experiencing serious delays, prompting the
undertakings which might have taken advantage of it to protest.

The Commission:

1. Could it give the amounts for commitments and uptake of appropriations for this programme?

2. What are the reasons for the serious delays?

3. What action has the Commission taken or does it intend to take to accelerate implementation of the

programme?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2003)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answer to question E-3331/02.

(2003/C 192 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0460/03

by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

(19 February 2003)

Subject: Compliance with emission standards for heavy goods vehicles (Directive 1999/96/EC)

Directive 1999/96/EC (1) lays down EURO III (from 1 October 2000), EURO IV (from 1 January 2005) and
EURO V (from 1 October 2008) standards for exhaust emissions from heavy goods vehicles. An increasing

C 192 E/190

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

number of reports are now appearing in the press of modern engines that can be electronically controlled
in such a way that they only comply with exhaust emission limits during the test procedure. In other
circumstances, however, emissions increase dramatically, so that these modern engines produce an even
higher level of pollutants than their forerunners.

Is the Commission aware of this problem?

How does the Commission view this in legal terms? Is this not a case of cycle-beating and therefore legally
improper?

What steps does the Commission intend to take?

(1) OJ L 44, 16.2.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2003)

The issue of cycle beating is well known to the Commission and section 6.1.1. of Annex I to Directive
1999/96/E (1) specifically forbids the use of defeat devices (according to the definition in the Directive).

In 2000, the Commission became aware that two heavy-duty engines with a Euro III type-approval, which
are only required to be tested on the European Steady-State Cycle (ESC) were showing higher than
expected emissions when tested on the European Transient Cycle (ETC). The engines were suspected of
using electronic manipulation to improve performance or fuel consumption. In order to avoid a situation
similar to that which occurred in the United States only relatively recently, steps were taken by the
Commission to introduce Directive 2001/27/EC (2) to strengthen the requirements against the use of defeat
devices.

These new requirements require manufacturers to disclose, at the time of type-approval to the type-
approval authority or technical services, all their electronic strategies and justify why certain manipulations
may be used for valid reasons such as engine protection and cold starting but within closely defined
operating conditions. The commercial confidentiality of such information has to be respected by the type-
approval authority and technical services. In order to verify whether any of these strategies should be
considered a defeat device, the type-approval authority or technical service may require an additional
‘oxides of nitrogen (NOX) screening’ test using the ETC. This would be an additional test for Euro III
engines. Euro IV and Euro V engines have in any case to be tested on both the ESC and ETC.

As an alternative to disclosing all this information, the manufacturer may present the results of a NOX
screening test together with a statement that the engine does not employ any defeat device or irrational
control strategy according to the definitions in Directive 2001/27/EC.

Member States have been applying the measures contained in Directive 2001/27/EC since 1 October 2001
and compliance is mandatory for all new registrations from 1 October 2003. This Directive also requires
all Euro III engines that were type-approved before Directive 2001/27/EC came in to force to be re-
approved against the new measures. This may be done through an extension of the type-approval.

The Commission believes that this package of measures will provide a strong disincentive against the use
of defeat devices, the ultimate penalty for non-compliance being, of course, withdrawal of the type-
approval.

The Commission is also working in the United Nations Economic Committee for Europe (UN-ECE) to
develop a Global Technical Regulation detailing measures to protect against the use of defeat devices on
new heavy-duty vehicles.

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/191

Moreover, the Commission is preparing proposals to supplement the Euro IV emission standards with new
technical tests (as required in Directive 1999/96/EC) and several projects are looking at the differences
between actual in-use emissions and the type-approval limits. As part of the supplement to the Euro IV
emission standards, a test for in-use conformity of a heavy-duty vehicle emission control system is being
assessed and it is most likely that a procedure will be developed allowing authorities to fit a heavy-duty
vehicle with a data recording device to measure emissions while a vehicle is actually used on the road.
When used in combination with the type-approval test, this additional on-road test will provide a strong
control of emissions under all possible operating conditions.

However, heavy-duty engines may still be tampered with through the purchase of so-called ‘performance
chips’ or engine calibration programmes. A forthcoming amendment to Directive 88/77/EEC is being
prepared, that should offer improvements against tampering, especially with engine management systems
for new vehicles.

(1) Directive 1999/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 1999 on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate
pollutants from compression ignition engines for use in vehicles, and the emission of gaseous pollutants from
positive ignition engines fuelled with natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas for use in vehicles and amending
Council Directive 88/77/EEC (cid:1) OJ L 44, 16.2.2000.

(2) Commission Directive 2001/27/EC of 10 April 2001 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 88/77/EEC
on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures to be taken against the emission of
gaseous and particulate pollutants from compression ignition engines for use in vehicles, and the emission of
gaseous pollutants from positive ignition engines fuelled with natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas for use in
vehicles (cid:1) OJ L 107, 18.4.2001.

(2003/C 192 E/230)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0463/03

by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Fisheries agreement between Spain and Morocco

(19 February 2003)

In 2002 Parliament granted a total of EUR 197 million to be used for structural modernisation of the
Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets and to reduce the number of vessels. The reason was that no fisheries
agreement was concluded between the Union and Morocco.

Only about a month ago reports emerged (for instance as published in the Financial Times on 13 January
2003) that Spanish fishermen had been given permission to fish in Moroccan waters.

That being the case, does the Commission still intend to use appropriations for structural adjustment of
the fishing fleet, and, if so, how can such action be justified in the present circumstances?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 2003)

The authorisation from Morocco to give access to a limited number of Spanish vessels to fish in Moroccan
waters, was granted for a three month period starting 14 December 2002.

This was a solidarity gesture from Morocco following the Prestige disaster in order to help out Spain and
in particular the Galician region and fleet, during a period of exceptional hardship and is, as mentioned,
both very limited in time and for a limited number of vessels. In this sense, the present circumstances are
of an exceptional nature.

Thus, the structural adjustment of the fishing fleet continues as scheduled and remains a priority of the
fisheries policy. The appropriations for the structural adjustment of the fishing fleet remain fully justified.