Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive 70/156/EEC
Date: 2003-09-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: accident prevention, common transport policy, motor vehicle, pedestrian, road safety, transport accident, transport user

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 12.9.2003
COM(2003) 553 final

2003/0033 (COD)

Amended proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users
in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive 70/156/EEC

.

(presented by the Commission)

2003/0033 (COD)

Amended proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users
in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive 70/156/EEC

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.

HISTORY OF THE PROPOSAL

Commission’s adoption of the proposal

19 February 2003

Transmission of the Proposal to the Council and the European
Parliament – COM(2003) 67-C5-0054/2003-2003/0033(COD) -
in accordance with Article 95 of the Treaty:

20 February 2003

Opinion of the European Parliament - first reading:

3 July 2003

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee:

16 July 2003

In its session of 30 June-3 July 2003 the European Parliament approved  a report containing
11 amendments in first reading.

2.

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL

As  many  as  8.000  pedestrians  and  cyclists  are  killed  and  a  further  300.000  injured  in  the
Community  each  year  in  road  accidents.  Road  accident  statistics  indicate  that  a  significant
proportion of casualties involve pedestrians and cyclists who are injured as a result of contact
with a moving vehicle, notably with the frontal structures of passenger cars.

The  Commission  proposal  aims  at  mitigating  the  severity  of  injuries  to  pedestrians  in  the
event of a collision with a motor vehicle. According to the proposal, motor vehicles will have
to pass a number of tests. In a first phase, starting in 2005, new types of vehicles must comply
with two tests concerning protection against head injuries and leg injuries. In a second phase,
starting  in  2010,  four  tests  of  increased  severity,  based  on  the  recommendations  of  the
European  Enhanced  Vehicle  Committee  (“EEVC”),  will  be  required  for  new  types  of
vehicles,  two  tests  concerning  head  injuries  and  two  concerning  leg  injuries.  The  proposal
acknowledges  the  possibility  of  other  measures  being  introduced  in  the  future,  including
active safety measures, as alternatives to the EEVC tests. These alternative measures could be
introduced,  following  a  feasibility  assessment  to  be  carried  out  by  July  2004,  if  those
measures have at least equal protective effects to the EEVC tests.

The  amended  proposal  contains  11  amendments,  6  being  new  recitals  or  articles,  which
generally clarify the text or improve it.

2

3.

COMMISSION OPINION ON THE AMENDMENTS ADOPTED BY THE PARLIAMENT

3.1.

General view

The  amendments  approved  by  the  European  Parliament  are  in  line  with  the  Commission
proposal.  In  general  they  clarify  the  text  proposed  by  the  Commission  or  make  it  more
precise.  The  Commission  accepts  all  the  amendments,  however  it  considers  that  a  small
editorial alteration to the wording in Amendment 2 was required.

3.2.

Analysis of the amendments

Amendment 1 (Title)

Amendment  1  consists  of  a  modification  to  the  title  of  the  directive,  by  adding  the  words
“before  and”.  This  clarifies  that  the  directive  not  only  lays  down  passive  safety  measures
(that  is,  measures  addressing  pedestrian  protection  in  the  event  of  a  collision),  but  also
acknowledges the possible future inclusion of  active safety ones (that  is, measures  aimed at
avoiding the  collision altogether). This  is acceptable  as  the  Commission  already approved a
combination  of  active  and  passive  measures  for  ensuring  pedestrian  protection  when  the
Commission  presented  the  industry  commitment  on  pedestrian  protection  to  the  European
Parliament and to the Council.

Amendment 2--Recital 1 a (new)

With the introduction of this new recital, the Parliament wishes to stress that the proposal is
part  of  a  broader  package  of  both  active  and  passive  measures,  to  be  taken  urgently  to
improve protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users within the framework of the
Road Safety action programme. The Commission can accept this  amendment  as  it  is in line
with  the  Commission  proposal.  However,  the  amendment  refers  to  a  “forthcoming”  road
safety  action programme.  The  Commission considers it  to  be  appropriate to delete  from  the
wording  of  amendment  2  the  word  “forthcoming”  as  the  European  Road  Safety  Action
Programme has been presented in the meantime by the Commission in its Communication on
2 June 2003, (COM(2003) 311 final).

Amendment 3--Recital 3

The amendment concerning recital 3 aims at stressing that an effective approach to pedestrian
protection should be based on a combination of active and passive measures. The amendment
also underlines the broad acceptance of the EEVC tests. As mentioned above the Commission
can accept this amendment  as the Commission supports  the  idea  of  a  combination of active
and passive measures. Moreover, the amendment is in line with the Commission’s recognition
that EEVC recommendations are widely accepted in this area.

Amendment 4--Recital 3a (new)

With the introduction of this new recital, the Parliament wishes to provide for the possibility
of an extension of the scope of the Directive to vehicles up to 3,5 tonnes, while the original
proposal applies  to  vehicles  up  to  2,5  tonnes.  The  Commission  can  accept  this  amendment,
since it is reasonable to investigate if an extension of the scope of the Directive is justified.

3

Amendment 5--Recital 3(b) (new)

With  this  new  recital,  the  Parliament  wishes  to  stress  that  the  Community,  industry  and
Member  States  should  undertake  a  broader  package  of  measures,  of  which  the  Directive  is
one element, to ensure the safety of pedestrians and other road users. Those measures will be
related to both active or passive safety. The Commission can accept this amendment as it is in
line with the Commission proposal.

Amendments 6 and Amendment 8--Recital 4 and Article 5, paragraph 1

Through  the  amendments  concerning  recital  4  and  Article  5(1),  the  Parliament  wishes  to
clarify  that  the  feasibility  assessment  to  be  carried  out  by  the  Commission  should  cover
alternative  measures  to  the  EEVC  tests  which  have  at  least  equivalent  actual  effectiveness.
Those  amendments  clarify  that  alternative  measures  might  be  considered  as  either  passive
measures  or  a  combination  of  active  and  passive  measures.  Those  amendments  can  be
accepted by the Commission. A combination of active and passive measures is consistent with
the  industry  commitment  on  which  the  Commission  proposal  is  based.  The  Commission
considers that the amendment’s wording that alternative measures should be of equal actual
effectiveness  instead  of  “measures  which  are  at  least  equivalent”  to  the  EEVC  test  is
appropriate  as  it  requires  that  the  effectiveness  of  any  alternative  measures  should  be  fully
proven.  In  addition  the  amendment  concerning  Article  5(1)  stresses  that  the  feasibility
assessment  should  be  carried  out  by  independent  experts  and  should  be  based  on  practical
tests  and  independent  scientific  studies.  The  Commission  considers  that  this  amendment
clarifies the text with regard to the feasibility assessment.

Amendment 7---Recital 5a (new)

With the introduction of this new recital, the Parliament wishes to stress that the development
of active safety technologies should be encouraged. The Commission accepts this amendment
as it is in line with the Commission’s view expressed in the proposal that the development of
new technologies can be expected.

Amendments 9 and 10--Article 5 paragraph 1a (new) and Article 5 paragraph 1b (new)

Amendments  9  and  10  concern  the  procedure  to  be  followed  when  it  appears  necessary  to
amend  the  requirements  of  the  second  phase  of  the  Directive.  With  amendment  10  the
Parliament refers to the comitology procedure in the case when the adaptation is restricted to
the  introduction  of  alternative  passive  safety  measures.  By  contrast,  if,  as  a  result  of  the
feasibility  assessment,  a  combination  of  active  safety  and  passive  measure  are  introduced,
amendment 9 requires the Commission to follow the co-decision procedure. The Commission
accepts those amendments, as they clarify the procedure for amending the Directive.

4

Amendment 11--Article 5 paragraph 2

The  Parliament  wishes  to  introduce  an  obligation  on  the  Commission  to  report,  before
1 April 2006  and  every  two  years,  to  the  Council  and  the  Parliament  on  the  results  of  the
monitoring of development in the field of pedestrian protection. The Commission accepts this
amendment as it defines in clearer terms the obligation to report to the legislators.

4.3

Amended proposal

Having  regard  to  Article  250(2)  of  the  EC  Treaty,  the  Commission  amends  its  proposal  as
indicated above.

5