Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions and on access to vehicle repair information, amending Directive 72/306/EEC and Directive …/…/EC [COM(2005) 683 final — 2005/0282 (COD)]
Date: 2006-09-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: air quality, approximation of laws, motor vehicle, pollution control measures, quality label, technical regulations

C 318/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emis-
sions and on access to vehicle repair information, amending Directive 72/306/EEC and Directive …/
…/EC

[COM(2005) 683 final — 2005/0282 (COD)]

(2006/C 318/11)

On 31 January 2006 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned 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 12 July 2006. The rapporteur was
Mr Ranocchiari.

At its 429th plenary session, held on 13 and 14 September 2006 (meeting of 13 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 180 votes to three, with 11 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

The EESC agrees that it was necessary to promote the
1.1
continued improvement of car emission levels by means of
legislation, gradually introducing increasingly ambitious objec-
tives. It therefore welcomes the Commission's proposal, which
marks a further step in this direction.

1.2
The EESC also endorses the Commission's decision to
opt for a regulation rather than a directive and its choice of
legislative procedure, which provides for a co-decision-based
regulation, supplemented by a comitology-procedure regulation
for the more technical aspects, drawn up with the assistance of
a regulatory committee.

The Committee must nevertheless point out

1.3
the
draft regulation in its current form poses considerable problems
for the industry and for the Member State government depart-
ments responsible for vehicle type approval and registration.

that

1.3.3
The EESC believes that the exemption enabling certain
M1 passenger vehicles (2) that perform specific functions or are
used for work (e.g. minibuses) to be approved in accordance
with the limits laid down for light commercial vehicles (N1)
therefore asks the Commission to
should be preserved.
provide a more precise and restricted definition for such vehicles
than that given in the current directive.

It

1.3.4
The EESC recommends that the proposed regulation
not contain rules that would be better covered by other regula-
tions or directives already in force.

1.3.5
Lastly, the EESC asks the Commission to revise those
points in the proposed text that could give rise to administrative
uncertainties, by making full use of the support of national
experts who deal with problems relating to the type approval
and registration of motor vehicles on a day to day basis.

In particular the EESC recommends changing the dates
1.3.1
of entry into force of the new rules contained in the proposed
regulation to 1 January 2010 (for the type approval of new
types of car) and 1 January 2011 (for new registrations) or,
alternatively, 36 months and 48 months after the publication of
the new regulations in the EU Official Journal. The EESC also
recommends maintaining a further period of one year for class
II and III N1 vehicles (1).

2. Reasons and legislative context

1.3.2
The EESC agrees with the limits proposed for vehicles
with diesel engines. It has doubts, however, as to the need to
further tighten the limits for vehicles with engines running on
petrol or gaseous fuels.

Until now, emissions from cars (M1 vehicles) and light
2.1
commercial vehicles (N1 vehicles) have been regulated by Direc-
tive 70/220/EEC and subsequent amendments. The most recent
updates, commonly referred to as Euro 4 (3), came into force on
1 January 2005 (new vehicle types) and 1 January 2006 (new
registrations) respectively.

(1) Category N vehicles are goods vehicles with at least four wheels. They
are divided into three classes: N1, N2 and N3, on the basis of maximum
weight: N1< 3 500kg; N2< 12 000kg; N3>12 000kg. The N1 class is
also subdivided into 3 subclasses: NI, NII and NIII, also on the basis of
weight.

(2) Category M covers passenger vehicles with at least four wheels. They
are divided into three classes (M1, M2, M3) based on the number of
seats and their maximum weight: M1< 9 seats; M2> 9 seats and
< 5 000kg; M2> 9 seats and < 5 000kg.

(3) OJ L 350 of 28.12.1998, Directive 1998/69/EC.

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/63

The present proposal provides for a tightening of the
2.2
rules on motor vehicle emissions, by adopting a regulation to
replace the current directive. The reason for this choice of legal
instrument is that the regulation and thus its objectives will be
directly applicable in the Member States without having to be
transposed into national law as would have been the case for a
directive. The existing directives are repealed.

Lastly, the Commission provides for measures relating to
3.3
access to vehicle repair
information for operators working
outside the network of authorised dealers. It is proposed that
this information should be more accessible via web sites, in a
standardised format developed by an international
technical
committee (OASIS standard (4)).

The Commission proposes a two-pronged legislative

2.3
approach:

a) a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council,
defining general principles, will be approved by means of the
co-decision procedure (‘co-decision proposal’);

The Commission proposes that

3.4
take effect:

the regulation should

— as of 18 months and 36 months after publication in the EU
Official Journal for new models and for all newly registered
vehicles (class I passenger cars and light commercial vehi-
cles) respectively,

b) a regulation defining technical specifications will be adopted
by the Commission with the assistance of the Committee on
adaptation to technical progress (‘comitology proposal’).

— as of 30 months and 48 months for new models and for all
newly registered vehicles (class II and III light commercial
vehicles) respectively,

the
In addition, an economic impact assessment of
2.4
proposed regulation has been published, including estimates of
the costs of the measures to be taken to bring vehicles into
conformity with the reduced emission levels planned.

— this would mean the possible introduction of the proposed
new standards for passenger vehicles as of the first half of
2008.

3. Content of the proposal

The draft regulation, referred to in Community jargon as
3.1
‘Euro 5’, applies to cars and light commercial vehicles fuelled by
petrol, natural gas, LPG and diesel. It establishes limit values for
emissions of pollutants originally considered by the Commission
to be a priority, such as particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides
(NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC).

imposes the following
the proposal
3.2 More specifically,
restrictions on the tailpipe emissions of positive ignition (petrol
and gaseous fuels) and diesel vehicles:

— A 25 % reduction in NOx and HC is proposed for engines

fuelled by petrol and gaseous fuels.

4. General comments

4.1
The EESC welcomes the Commission's decision to opt
for a regulation rather than a directive. As a result, as it is not
necessary to transpose the regulation into national law, it will
become immediately and simultaneously applicable in all the
Member States.

4.2
The EESC endorses the new two-stream legislative proce-
dure, while stressing the need for the two regulations — one
the product of co-decision, the other of comitology — to be
published in the Official Journal simultaneously. The industry
needs both pieces of legislation in order to complete the engi-
neering of technical devices to meet the new standards.

The EESC welcomes the plan to introduce tighter limits

4.3
on diesel emissions.

— An 80 % reduction in particulate emissions is proposed for
engines fuelled by diesel, requiring the installation of diesel
particulate filters (DPF). A 20 % reduction in NOx emissions
is also planned.

4.4
The EESC recognises that technology to reduce the parti-
culate (PM) emissions of vehicles with diesel engines is now
available and that the proposed limit values will require its
generalised use.

— The Commission supplements its proposals on tailpipe emis-
sion limits with rules on the durability of emission testing
systems,
in-use compliance checks, on-board diagnostics
(OBD), evaporative emissions, idling speed emissions, crank-
smoke opacity, and fuel consumption
case emissions,
measurement.

The Committee does, however, have

4.5
considerable
concerns regarding the proposed regulation's economic impact
assessment:

(4) OASIS, Organisation for the Advancement of Structured Information

Standards.

C 318/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

— first,

in striking contrast to the working methods of the
CAFE programme (5) (Clean Air for Europe), none of the
results obtained by the models used for assessing the cost-
benefit ratios of the measures to be taken in the various
sectors causing air pollution have been made available in the
way suggested by CARS 21 (6);

— the draft regulation should either confirm 1 January 2010
as the date of entry into force of the new requirements for
the approval of new types of vehicle or impose a 36-month
period from the date the regulation is published, subject to
clarification of the limit values and testing protocols,

— the economic impact assessment refers only to the addi-
tional costs generated by the entry into force of the new
limits on car emissions and the corresponding reduction in
pollutants emitted in tonnes/year. It does not therefore allow
for any comparative assessment of
the cost-benefit of
measures that could be implemented in other sectors, using
the CAFE models;

— the industry has planned, in agreement with its suppliers, to
introduce the Euro 5 standards by 2010/2011, as was
clearly indicated in the Commission's communication on
fiscal incentives in January 2005 (9). Changes to the various
models and related production processes have already been
planned, the deadline for introducing Euro 5 is already very
tight and the timetable cannot
therefore be made any
tighter.

— the figures for the ‘Euro 5’ scenario proposed by the Regu-
lation, which were estimated by the group of independent
experts (7) chosen by DG Enterprise for that purpose, have
been cut by 33 % to take into account the economies of
scale arising from the increased volume of production,
without any explanation for the choice of percentage (8);

— more specifically, the group of independent experts' esti-
mates of the cost of measures to be taken on vehicles to
bring them into line with the various emission-reducing
scenarios already include a 30 % reduction in the price of
precious metals. Precious metals are one of the key elements
in post-processing systems for exhaust gases and their
market value has a major influence on the cost of such
systems. The above hypothesis is not justified by the fact
that over the last five years the price of platinum has risen
steadily.

The EESC also has concerns regarding the dates of imple-

4.6
mentation of the regulation:

— the 18-month period following the entry into force of the
new regulation is not sufficient, as it takes at least three
years to bring into production a known technology that has
not yet been applied to specific models,

(5) CAFE — Clean Air for Europe. This programme was launched by
Communication COM(2001)245. It is designed to develop an analy-
tical strategy for assessing directives on air quality, the effectiveness of
programmes running in the Member States, ongoing monitoring of air
quality and the dissemination of information to the public, the revision
and updating of emissions limits and the development of new moni-
toring and modelling systems.

(6) CARS 21 — Competitive Automotive Regulatory System for the 21st
Century. This is a group of experts made up of representatives of the
Commission, the European Parliament, the Member States, industry,
trade unions, NGOs and consumers. Its task is to make recommenda-
tions for improving the competitiveness of the European automobile
industry, while giving consideration to the relevant socio-environ-
mental aspects.

(7) At the meeting of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Group (December
2005), DG Enterprise handed out the document produced by the
group of independent experts, which set out the results of the analysis
carried out on the technology/cost ratio for vehicles falling within Euro
5.

(8) SEC(2005) 1745, Impact Assessment for the present draft regulation,
§6.2. Scenarios of the Regulatory Approach, Table 1 — Scenario G, p.
13.

Lastly,

in Article 5(4)

4.7
the Commission sets specific
requirements for type approval, without providing any further
guidelines or instructions. The EESC is concerned that
the
absence of such instructions makes it impossible to assess the
real
the proposal on vehicle engineering and the
environment.

impact of

5. Specific comments

5.1
In Annex 1, Table 1 of the draft regulation, Euro 5 limit
values are given for HC and NOx emissions from positive igni-
tion petrol-fuelled vehicles. There is a 25 % reduction, taking
HCs to 75mg/km and NOx to 60mg/km. However, there is no
justification for this reduction of the Euro 4 limit values in the
results obtained by the Auto Oil II programme on air quality,
and neither the CAFE analysis nor the Thematic Strategy on Air
Pollution document (10) envisages an NOx or HC level reduction
scenario for these vehicles.

As far as the CAFE results are concerned,

5.2
the EESC
concludes that in terms of benefits to air quality there is no
clear justification for the measures set out in the draft regulation
as regards:

— NOx limit values: the proposed reduction would place an
additional obstacle in the way of cutting fuel consumption
and thus CO2 emissions from petrol-fuelled cars, which is
the greatest challenge facing industry today. Meanwhile, the
environmental benefits would be completely negligible given
that, according to CAFE data, petrol-fuelled vehicles account
for only 4 % of total NOx emissions from vehicle trans-
port (11);

(9) SEC(2005) 43, Commission Staff Working Paper, Fiscal incentives for

motor vehicles in advance of Euro 5.

(10) COM(2005) 446 final.
(11) Information available on the IISA, International Institute for Applied

Systems Analysis, website.

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/65

— HC limit values: the new limit proposed would prove an
insurmountable obstacle to vehicles that run on natural gas,
which offer considerable environmental benefits. 90 % of
these vehicles' HC emissions consist of methane, a gas that
is well-known for being stable and non-pollutive and is also
void of aromatic hydrocarbons; the CO2 emissions of these
vehicles are 20-25 % lower than those of petrol fuelled vehi-
cles. If the 25 % reduction in HC fuels introduced by the
regulation were to be confirmed,
it would no longer be
possible to produce and market natural gas-run vehicles,
which would have a negative impact on CO2 emissions. This
would also run counter to the substitution objectives set by
the Commission in its
communication on alternative
fuels (12).

5.3
The Commission proposal does away with the exemption
enabling M1 passenger vehicles with a weight of over 2.5
tonnes (but under 3.5 tonnes) to be type approved in line with
the limits for light commercial vehicles (N1).

5.3.1
The EESC believes that a distinction should be drawn
between heavy vehicles designed to perform specific tasks and
those often bought as a fashion statement and for mounting
kerbstones in big cities. Examples of the former include:

— vehicles designed to carry seven or more passengers: these
vehicles perform a local transport function (e.g. minibuses,
shuttles, campervans and vehicles designed for
specific
purposes, such as ambulances). The ability to seat a large
number of passengers and the greater load-carrying capacity
imply the design of a heavier, taller and wider vehicle with a
specific gear box and thus slightly higher emissions;

— off-road vehicles, with a maximum weight of over 2.5
tonnes:
these vehicles are essential work tools for rural
communities, as well as for the emergency services and
public utility organisations, and have many other important
functions, including military purposes. For this reason, their
specific needs are taken into consideration by various legisla-
tive systems and they should continue to benefit
from
special treatment;

— production volumes in these two market segments are extre-
mely small and their emissions account
for a negligible
share of total motor-vehicle emissions. Their impact on air
quality is therefore negligible providing the rules for light
commercial vehicles are applied.

5.3.2
The EESC does not agree with the Commission that the
conditions no longer apply to justify M1 category vehicles
weighing over 2.5 tonnes being type approved within the limits
intended for light commercial vehicles. The Committee does
however accept the need to define more clearly which vehicles
can benefit from the exemption.

5.3.3
The indiscriminate removal of the exemption for all
heavy M1 vehicles would lead to a switch to petrol engines,

(12) COM(2001) 547 final, whose objective for replacing traditional fuels

with natural gas was set at 5 % by 2015 and 10 % by 2020.

with a corresponding increase in fuel consumption and thus
CO2 emissions.

The EESC agrees with the Commission that access to
5.4
vehicle repair information and effective competition in the
market for vehicle repair and information services are necessary
to facilitate the free movement of vehicles in the internal
market. This has been confirmed in Regulation 1400/2002/EC
on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of
vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle
sector as well as in Directives 98/69/EC and 2002/80/EC and
elsewhere.

5.4.1
Nevertheless, the EESC would point out that it is neces-
sary to provide unrestricted and standardised access to vehicle
repair information, since, in practice, vehicle manufacturers tend
to spread this information across different media and documen-
tation structures. It causes considerable barriers to independent
multi-brand aftermarket operators, especially small enterprises
that predominate on the independent repair market in the EU.
to
Therefore,
include in the regulation a requirement that vehicle repair infor-
mation also be available through websites in a standardised
format.

the EESC supports the Commission proposal

6. Comments and specific recommendations

6.1
The draft regulation makes a number of references to
future Directive XXX/XX/EC. As this directive will modify the
Framework Directive on type approval, it would be preferable to
indicate clearly that the reference is to the ‘Framework Directive
on type approval 70/156/EEC, as modified by Directive XXXX/
XX/CE’.

6.2
The 13th recital introduces the requirements for a stan-
dardised method of measuring fuel consumption and for custo-
mers and users to have access to objective and precise informa-
tion. However, these are already binding requirements under
Directive 1999/94/EC and it is therefore quite unnecessary to
mention them again.

6.3
The EESC would point out that the text of Article 2(1),
Article 4(1) and Article 5 of the draft regulation is unclear.
More specifically:

6.3.1
Article 2(1) lists the motor vehicles concerned by the
regulation. Article 4(1) and Article 5 then appear to require that
all vehicle models covered by the regulation (i.e. those listed in
Article 2) comply with the following long list of requirements:
tailpipe emissions; low ambient temperature emissions; evapora-
tive emissions; on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems; durability
and anti-pollution devices; emissions at idling speed; crankcase
emissions; CO2 emissions and fuel consumption; smoke opacity.

C 318/66

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

The above would however

involve an unjustified
6.3.2
increase in the number of tests to be conducted at the type
approval stage. For instance, measuring emissions at
idling
speed or evaporative emissions for a diesel vehicle is totally
unnecessary. It would be less ambiguous and more appropriate
to use the table proposed in Directive 70/220/EEC (13), Annex I,
Figure 1.5.2.

6.4
The EESC would point out lastly that the scope of the
regulation is not clear in the case of category M vehicles
(passenger vehicles) with positive ignition engines, with the
exception of those running on NG and LPG. Articles 4 and 5 of
the regulation seem to extend the entire set of requirements to
M2 and M3 category vehicles, whereas, in the past, M vehicles
weighing more than 3.5 tonnes (which are extremely rare in
Europe) had only to comply with requirements on idling speed
and crankcase emissions.

6.5
Article 4(3) underlines the manufacturer's obligation to
provide the buyer with technical information on vehicle emis-
sions and consumption. As this obligation is already laid down
in Directive 1999/94/EC, as modified by Directive 2003/77/EC,
this paragraph is redundant.

6.6
Article 10 deals with the type approval of non-original
replacement components. It bans the sale and installation of
replacement catalytic converters unless they are of a type that
has been approved within the meaning of the regulation. It is
not clear whether the Commission intends to limit the use of
such converters to vehicles registered before 1992 (and thus to
pre-OBD vehicles), ruling them out for more recent vehicles.
Furthermore, the need for type approval should be extended to
any other non-original
emission control
systems, such as particulate filters.

components of

Article 11(2) authorises Member States to introduce
6.7
incentives for the installation of retrofit systems (14)
financial
that bring the tailpipe emissions of in-use vehicles into line with
the limits set by the regulation. The Commission does not
however state which procedures should be used to demonstrate
that these systems conform with requirements, nor does it state
whether such procedures are already available.

Brussels, 13 September 2006.

Article 17 gives a list of Directives (15)

that will be
6.8
repealed 18 months after the date of entry into force of the
regulation. This gives rise to the following comments:

— if the Commission intended to include all the Directives that
amend Directive 70/220/EEC on vehicle emissions and
Directive 80/1268/EEC on fuel consumption,
is
incomplete (e.g. Directive 70/220/EEC has undergone 18
those are mentioned). A
modifications, but only six of
simpler approach might be to use the following wording:
‘Directive 70/220/EEC, as most recently modified by Direc-
tive 2003/76/EC, and Directive 80/1268/EEC, as most
recently modified by Directive 2004/3/EC, are repealed with
effect from …’.

the list

6.8.1
The proposed repeal of the above-mentioned directives
on vehicle emissions and fuel consumption 18 months after the
entry into force of the regulation raises some serious problems.

6.8.2
This date would in fact coincide with the date for the
entry into force of type approval standards, albeit only for new
M1 vehicles introduced by the manufacturer. M1 models already
type approved before that date may still be registered for a
type approval being
further 18 months, without a further
required. Similar conditions apply for class II and III N1 vehicles:
new models have a further 12 months to be type approved,
whereas those that have already been type approved and have
still to be registered are granted a further 30 months.

6.8.3
The problem lies in understanding how the certificate
of conformity required at registration can be issued if it necessa-
rily refers to a repealed directive.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(13) This table identifies the tests to be carried out by vehicle type.
(14) The term retrofit means the installation of a mechanism on a vehicle

that is already in use in order to further restrict emissions.

(15) Directive 70/220/EEC, Directive 80/1268/EEC, Directive 89/458/EEC,
Directive 91/441/EEC, Directive 93/59/EEC, Directive 94/12/EC,
Directive 96/69/EC and Directive 2004/3/EC.