Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an interim transit system applicable to heavy goods vehicles travelling through Austria for the year 2004 amending the proposal of the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty
Date: 2003-08-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Austria, Union transit, carriage of goods, commercial vehicle, tradeable emission permit

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 27.8.2003
COM(2003) 531 final

2001/0310 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's common position regarding the
proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

establishing an interim transit system applicable to heavy goods vehicles travelling
through Austria for the year 2004

AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION
pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

2001/0310 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's common position regarding the
proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

establishing an interim transit system applicable to heavy goods vehicles travelling
through Austria for the year 2004

1.

INTRODUCTION

Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty states that the Commission shall
deliver  an  opinion  on  the  amendments  proposed  by  the  European  Parliament  at  its  second
reading.  The  Commission's  position  on  the  amendments  adopted  by  Parliament  is  set  out
below.

2.

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

BACKGROUND

On 21 December 2001, the Commission forwarded to the Council and the European
Parliament its proposal for a Regulation (COM(2001) 807 final - 2001/0310(COD)).

The  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  delivered  an  opinion  on  the
Commission's proposal on 30 May 2002.

On  12  February  2003,  the  European  Parliament,  at  its  first  reading,  delivered  its
opinion containing 16 amendments to the Commission proposal.

The Council adopted its common position on 28 March 2003.

On 3 July 2003, at its second reading, the European Parliament adopted a resolution
containing 17 amendments to the common position.

2

3.

PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSAL

On 20 December 2001, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament  and  of  the  Council1  establishing  an  ecopoints  system  applicable  to  heavy  goods
vehicles  travelling  through  Austria  for  the  year  2004.  The  purpose  of  this  proposal  is  to
extend  the  ecopoints  system  as  an  interim  solution  pending  the  adoption  of  the  framework
proposal on  infrastructure  charging.  If  the  framework  proposal  on  infrastructure  charging  is
not adopted, the ecopoints system will be maintained for an additional year and, if necessary,
extended for two years at the most (1 + 1 + 1).

The Commission's proposal includes several significant points:

(cid:1)  the  108%  clause  (restriction  of  the  number  of  transit  journeys  to  an  annual  limit  not

exceeding 108% of the number of transit journeys in 1991) is abolished;

(cid:1)  the Regulation applies to the entire territory of Austria;

(cid:1)  the  number  of  ecopoints  is  maintained  at  a  fixed  level,  namely  that  of  2003,  for  the

15 Member States (no reduction).

4.

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION ON THE AMENDMENTS ADOPTED BY THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT

The  European  Parliament  adopted,  at  its  second  reading,  17  amendments  to  the  Council's
common position.

The  Commission  can  accept  four  amendments  in  full,  two  amendments  in  part,  subject  to
possible changes in the wording and one amendment in principle, subject to redrafting.

However  it  has  to  reject  10  amendments  whilst  maintaining  a  certain  flexibility  for  five  of
them, which could be negotiable at a later stage of the procedure.

4.1.

Amendments accepted by the Commission (four amendments in full, two in part
and one in principle).

4.1.1.

Amendments that can be accepted in full.

The Commission considers that amendments 1 (title), 10 (introduction to Article 3(2)) and 12
(Article 3(2)(d)) are acceptable because they are proposals for amendments to terminology.

Amendment  3  (recital  3b)  is  also  acceptable  because  it  provides  for  the  scope  of  the
Regulation to be extended to the candidate countries, which was considered to be premature
at  the  time  of  the  European  Parliament's  first  reading,  but  which  must  now  be  considered
because the Accession Treaties were signed on 16 April 2003 and the date of accession has
been fixed for 1 May 2004. The conditions for extending the scope of the Regulation to these
countries will, nevertheless, still have to be determined.

1

COM(2001) 807 of 20 December 2001.

3

                                                
4.1.2.

Amendments that can be accepted in part.

Amendment  15  (Article  3(3a))  can  be  accepted  in  part.  It  provides  that  the  comitology
procedure will be used to:

–  "fix the number of points to be allocated to the Member States;

–  adopt detailed measures concerning the procedures relating to the system, the distribution

of points and technical issues concerning the application of the system;

–  increase proportionally for each new Member State and for each year the quotas ... taking

account of the accession of central and eastern European countries."

The  first  and  last  subparagraphs  are  not  acceptable.  Fixing  the  number  of  points  to  be
allocated to (current and future) Member States is an integral part of the negotiations on the
type of system to be set up for heavy goods vehicles transiting through Austria. It is therefore
up to the Council and the Parliament to decide on how to allocate the points by country and
by year, possibly based on a quantitative analysis by the Commission.

The second subparagraph is acceptable without amendments to the text.

Amendment 16 (Article 4(1a)) can be accepted in part, namely only the first sentence, which
reiterates  the  Commission's  obligations  which  derive  from  the  Treaty  or  which  are
recommended in the White Paper on European transport policy. However, the reference to the
committee  referred  to  in  Article  5  should  be  deleted  as  a  management  committee  does  not
take decisions.

The  other  parts  of  Amendment  16  are  not  acceptable.  The  Commission  cannot  endorse  the
"Alpine  Convention  and  other  binding  instruments"  being  cited  in  the  same  way  as  the  EC
Treaty. The Commission cannot accept the final paragraph of the text either, which refers to
traffic flow regulation, as this does not fall under Community competence but under that of
the Member States, which are required to keep the Commission informed.

4.1.3.

Amendments that can be accepted in principle.

Amendment  5  (recital  3d)  can  be  accepted  in  principle.  The  reference  to  the  Alpine
Convention in a "recital" is acceptable provided that the quote included in the amendment is
complete.  The  text  quoted  relates  to  the  need  to  reduce  the  volume  and  dangers  of  Alpine
traffic and continues as follows: "by switching more traffic, in particular freight traffic, to the
railways in particular by providing appropriate infrastructure and incentives complying with
market principles, without discrimination on grounds of nationality".

4

4.2.

Amendments rejected by the Commission (10 amendments).

Amendment 2 (recital 3a) relating to the protection of the local population and noise pollution
must  be  rejected  for  two  reasons:  firstly  because,  if  lorries  choose  another  route,  it  will  be
other  populations  which  will  be  adversely  affected.  This  measure  therefore  has  a
discriminatory  effect.  The  second  reason  is  that  noise  pollution  has  no  relevance  to  the
ecopoint system.

Amendment  4  (recital  3c)  refers  to  the  UNO  declaring  2002  as  the  International  Year  of
Mountains. This reference is no longer relevant.

Amendment  6  (recital  4a)  refers  to  the  obligations  deriving  from  the  Treaty  on  European
Union  and  from  the  Alpine  Convention.  The  Commission  cannot  endorse  the  Alpine
Convention and other binding instruments being cited in the same way as the EU Treaty.

Amendment 11 (Article 3(2)(b)) abolishes exemptions to bans on the transit of certain types
of  EURO-0  lorries.  The  Commission  must  stick  to  its  position  regarding  these  exemptions,
which were obtained when the common position was negotiated. It therefore has to reject this
amendment.

Amendment 17 (Article 4(3a)) must be rejected because the Commission cannot support the
introduction  of  systematic  controls.  According  to  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  3912/92,
roadside checks can only be performed at random. Moreover, Directive 2000/30/EC provides
for polluting emissions to be measured and for roadworthiness tests to be appropriate to the
reality of situations.

Amendments 7, 8, 9, 13 and 14 must be rejected because, at this stage of the procedure, the
Commission is  obliged  to  stick  to  its  position  on the  Council's  common  position.  However,
these  five  amendments  will  probably  be  key  issues  during  subsequent  negotiations  on  the
future  system  as  they  deal  with  territorial  coverage,  the  application  of  weightings  in  the
distribution of the Community reserve and the definition of ecopoint quotas.

Amendments 7 (Article 1(c)), 8 (Article 1(e)), 9 (Article 1 (fa)) and part of 14 (Article 3(3))
limit  the  application  of  the  system  to  the  Austrian  Alps  and  in  particular  to  the  three  main
Alpine  passes  of  Brenner,  the  Tauern  and  the  Pyhrn.  This  is  a  radical  departure  from  the
existing system, which covers all Austrian territory, and will require technical adaptations that
will be very difficult to put in place from 2004. However, checks undertaken by experts have
shown that it is technically possible to remove ecopoint counting stations from one site  and
install  them  on  another  site.  This  change  would  be  expensive  for  Austria,  but  would  be
possible.

Amendment  13  (Article  3(2)(g))  retains  the  idea  of  reallocating  points  of  the  Community
reserve  weighted  in  accordance  with  the  actual  use  of  the  points  allocated  to  the  Member
States. On the other hand it abolishes the preferential treatment  given, in  the  reallocation of
the Community reserve, to the specific needs of carriers transiting through Austria using the
Hörbranz corridor.2 The European Parliament refuses to accept this preferential treatment as
the Hörbranz corridor is not a route for crossing the Alps. It does not therefore come within
the system which it is advocating.

2

The Hörbranz corridor  is  a  17  kilometre  half-road/half-tunnel  section  linking  Lindau  (Germany)  with
St Margrethen (Switzerland).

5

                                                
Amendment  14  (Article  3(3))  sets  a  quota  for  lorries  based  on  the  2002  ecopoint  quota
(10 533 187  for  the  15  Member  States).  The  Commission's  proposal  and  the  Council's
common  position  however  set  the  number  of  ecopoints  on  the  basis  of  the  2003  quota
(9 107 451),  because  it  is  in  this  year  that  the  objective  of  a  60%  reduction  in  pollution,
provided  for  by  the  ecopoint  system,  should  be  achieved.  The  overall  limit  on  total  NOx
emissions was in fact calculated for the year 1991 and was to be reduced on a linear basis by
60% by the end of 2003.

The exclusion of EURO 3 lorries from the system as from 2004, as proposed by the European
Parliament,  is  not  acceptable  because,  according  to  Austrian  statistical  forecasts,  EURO  3
lorries will represent 77% of total transit journeys in 2004 (in 2001 they represented 24.5%).
Even  if  there  are  doubts  about  the  reliability  of  the  Austrian  statistics,  these  forecasts
represent a realistic trend.

Finally, the system as proposed by the European Parliament in this amendment removes the
ecopoint  system's  raison  d'être,  since,  from  2005  onwards,  only  EURO  2  lorries  will  be
subject to ecopoints, with the same number of ecopoints to be allocated to the Member States
as in 2002 (namely 10 533 187).

5.

CONCLUSION

The Commission points out that the European Parliament's position differs significantly from
the text of the Council's common position and that, consequently, it will be necessary to make
major efforts to reach a final agreement. In the context of the tasks incumbent upon it in the
co-decision  procedure  under  the  Treaty,  the  Commission  will  continue  to  work  towards  an
overall  agreement  which  complies  with  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  free  movement  of
goods  in  the  single  market  in  conformity  with  the  objective  of  promoting  sustainable
development in the European Union.

Pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty the Commission hereby  amends its proposal as
set out above.

6