COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic
Date: 2023-07-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: common transport policy, international transport, large vehicle, national transport, road safety, road transport, sustainable mobility, technical standard, weight and size, weights and measures

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 11.7.2023  SWD(2023) 446 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic {COM(2023) 445 final} - {SEC(2023) 445 final} - {SWD(2023) 445 final} - {SWD(2023) 447 final}  
 
 
A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  

Directive  96/53/EC sets the maximum authorised  weights and  dimensions of commercial heavy-duty 
vehicles  (HDVs)  operating  within  the  EU.  By  establishing  these  common  standards,  the  Directive 
aimed to ensure that HDVs do not exceed limits that can compromise road safety, infrastructure and 
the  environment  and  that  road  transport  operators  can  compete  on  an  equal  footing  in  the  internal 
market.  The  subsequent  targeted  amendments  to  the  Directive  aimed  to  improve  the  energy  and 
operational  efficiency  of road transport  operations. This  was done by  introducing certain derogations 
from the maximum authorised weights and dimensions of vehicles and vehicle combinations, in order 
to  encourage  the  uptake  of  alternatively  fuelled  powertrains,  improve  vehicles’  aerodynamics  and 
ensure interoperability with other modes of transport. 
The  Directive  was  subject  to  an  ex post  evaluation  performed  ‘back-to-back’  with  the  impact 
assessment.  The  evaluation  found  that  the  Directive  was  only  partially  successful  in  achieving  its 
objectives.  While  it  facilitated  cross-border  transport  and  removed  some  technical  barriers,  national 
derogations  and  ambiguities  in  certain  provisions  created  diverging  national  rules  and  practices  and 
fragmented  the  internal  market,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  use  of  heavier  HDVs  and  European 
Modular  Systems  (EMS  -  longer  and/or  heavier  combinations  of  standard  vehicle  units).  The 
patchwork  of  national  rules  and  derogations,  together  with  bilateral  arrangements  between  some 
Member  States,  brought  legal  uncertainty  as  to  the  rules  applicable  to  cross-border  transport  and 
made  enforcement  ineffective  and  inconsistent.  The  Directive  had  a  very  limited  impact  on 
sustainability, as the incentives for the uptake of alternatively fuelled vehicles including zero-emission 
vehicles  (e.g.  extra  weight  to  accommodate  zero-emission  technologies)  and  aerodynamic  devices 
(e.g. extra length to accommodate rear flaps) appeared insufficient. The Directive also failed  partially 
to promote efficiently intermodal operations, mainly due to internal and external inconsistencies of the 
Directive, including inconsistency with the Combined Transport Directive. 

Without EU action, the inconsistent application and weak enforcement of the Directive would continue 
and the regulatory limitations on innovation and the mismatch with technological advancements would 
hamper the deployment of vehicles and operational schemes that are more efficient, sustainable and 
compatible  with other modes of transport. Given the  cross-border dimension  of the  economic, social 
and  environmental  impacts  of  commercial  road  transport  operations,  improving  the  Directive  to 
address the identified problems has clear EU relevance. 

What should be achieved? 

In line with the European Green Deal and the EU internal market goals, this initiative aims to improve 
the  energy  and  operational  efficiency  of  road  transport  operations  by  HDVs  and  ensure  the  free 
movement  of  goods  and  fair  competition  on  the  internal  road-transport  market.  This  should  be 
achieved by: (a)  removing  barriers to the uptake of  zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) and  energy-saving 
devices  and  incentivising  intermodal  transport;  (b)  harmonising  the  rules  on  maximum  weights  and 
dimensions  of  HDV  in  cross-border  operations;  and  (c)  improving  the  enforcement  of  the  rules.  The 
revised  Directive  will  provide  for  a  stable  and  more  suitable  regulatory  framework  that  takes  into 
account  the  specific  needs  of  different  types  of  transport  operations  while  ensuring  a  high  level  of 
safety, the protection of infrastructure and the need for a reduction of greenhouse gases and pollutant 
emissions from the transport system. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)?  

including 

The  evaluation  of  the  Weights  and  Dimensions  Directive  confirms  the  added  value  of  EU  action  in 
establishing  common  standards  for  HDVs  travelling  on  EU  roads.  However,  shortcomings  in  the 
Directive, 
loopholes  and  outdated  standards,  hamper  broad  deployment  of 
decarbonisation  technologies  and  improvements  in  operational  efficiency  in  cross-border  transport. 
Lack of coordinated EU action would lead to further market fragmentation, competitive distortions, and 
discriminatory control practices. All this would weaken incentives to deploy zero-emission vehicles and 
energy-efficient technologies. Initiatives at the national, local, and sectoral levels will not be  sufficient 

legal 

2 

 
to  address  EU-wide  problems  and  their  underlying  drivers  or  to  meaningfully  contribute  to  achieving 
decarbonisation targets. The revision of the Directive will maintain the Member States’ prerogative to 
develop solutions tailored to specific infrastructure and local circumstances. 

B. Solutions 

What  are  the  various  options  to  achieve  the  objectives?  Is  there  a  preferred  option  or 
not? If not, why?  
Three policy options (PO-A, PO-B, PO-C) have been designed to address the problems and problem 
impact  assessment.  All  policy  options  contain 
drivers 
decarbonisation,  harmonisation  and  enforcement  measures  to  help  achieve  the  objectives  of  the 
initiative, although with a different level of effectiveness and efficiency. 

the  evaluation  and 

identified  during 

PO-A  includes  seven  policy  measures  that  are  common  to  all  policy  options.  PO-A  harmonises  the 
conditions for cross-border operations by heavier and/or longer vehicles (44-tonne vehicles and EMS) 
between  Member  States  that  allow  such  vehicles  in  their  territories  in  accordance  with  national 
derogations. By increasing weight and length limits to accommodate zero-emission (ZE) technologies, 
it ensures that ZE HDVs do not lose payload compared with conventional  internal combustion engine 
HDVs, which will incentivise the uptake of zero-emission technologies. It also facilitates the carriage of 
high-cube containers for intermodal transport. Finally, it strengthens enforcement somewhat by setting 
a  minimum  number  of  checks  per million  vehicle-kilometres  and  provides  minimum  requirements  for 
Member States willing to implement intelligent access policies, so as to ensure the harmonisation and 
interoperability of these schemes across the EU. 

PO-B  goes  further  in  supporting  the  transition  to  zero-emission  HDV  fleets  through  economic 
incentives,  such  as  enabling  additional  loading  capacity  for  HDVs  with  zero-emission  powertrains  or 
HDVs  involved  in  intermodal  (non-containerised)  operations.  This  policy  option  introduces  the  target 
date beyond which heavier HDVs (44 tonnes), allowed by PO-A to be used in cross-border transport, 
must  be  zero-emission,  but  can  circulate  all  throughout  the  EU.  PO-B  harmonises  the  authorisation 
requirements  and  administrative  procedures  for  cross-border  transport  by  certain  longer/heavier 
vehicles (e.g. for carriage of indivisible loads) and introduces mandatory weight control equipment (i.e. 
Weigh-in-Motion system (WIM)) to be installed in road infrastructure for more efficient enforcement. 

PO-C  aims  at  the  highest  level  of  harmonisation,  decarbonisation  and  enforcement  but  comes  with 
stronger EU regulatory action than the other two options. It extends the operational domain for EMS to 
the  whole  EU  territory,  which  must  be  zero-emission  and/or  involved  in  intermodal  operations, 
imposing  at  the  same  time  higher  vehicle  safety  standards  and  stricter  driver’s  qualifications 
requirements.  This  policy  option  entails  the  highest  infrastructure  maintenance  costs  for  Member 
States’ authorities and imposes additional compliance costs on operators using modular systems. 

Based  on  the  comparison  of  the  policy  options  in  terms  of  effectiveness,  efficiency,  coherence, 
subsidiarity  and  proportionality,  PO-B  is  the  preferred  option.  It  provides  for  the  right  balance 
between achieving the desired objectives effectively while ensuring that the measures proposed under 
this policy option do not go further than what is necessary to resolve the problem efficiently. 

What are different stakeholders’ views? Who supports which option?  
The  stakeholders  broadly  supported  the  measures  common  to  all  policy  options,  which  include 
increasing  maximum  weights  and  dimensions  of  HDVs  to  compensate  a  weight  and  size  of  zero-
emission  technologies  and  authorising  cross-border  transport  by  heavier/longer  vehicles  between 
neighbouring  Member  States 
industry 
representatives  considered  those  measures  as  well  as  the  harmonisation  of  vehicle  carrier  loaded 
length, and establishing a minimum level of checks of HDVs’ weight as the most important measures 
for  decarbonisation,  harmonisation,  and  enforcement.  However,  a  few  Member  States  and 
rail/intermodal transport stakeholders showed some resistance to allowing cross-border long-distance 
operations by heavier/longer HDVs (supported greatly by PO-C) due to concerns regarding the impact 
on  road  infrastructure  and  possible  modal  backshift  from  rail  to  road.  The  stakeholders  particularly 
welcomed  additional  greening  incentives  contained  in  PO-B,  such  as  allowing  a  maximum  extra 

the  same  standards.  The  authorities  and 

that  allow 

3 

 
weight of 4 tonnes irrespective of the weight of ZE technology and considering trailers and semitrailers 
as  intermodal 
transport  units.  Harmonisation  and  simplification  of  administrative  procedures 
concerning  the  permits for abnormal  transport  operations  (in  PO-B)  were  also  strongly  supported  by 
stakeholders.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)?  

PO-B is expected to bring adjustment cost savings (related to the maintenance of road infrastructure) 
for  national  public  authorities,  estimated  at  EUR 3  billion  expressed  as  present  value  over  2025-
2050  relative  to  the  baseline.  The  costs  savings  are  driven  by  the  decrease  in  the  number  of  trips 
relative  to  the  baseline  (due  to  the  increase  in  payload),  the  shift  from  road-only  to  intermodal 
transport  and  the  reduction  in  the  frequency  and  severity  of  overloading  practices.  In  addition,  the 
administrative cost savings for national public authorities are estimated at EUR 22.8 billion. They are 
driven by the implementation of the one-stop-shop systems at national level and thus cost savings in 
processing permit requests, and  the reduction  in the  number of manual/roadside checks enabled  by 
the WIM systems. Total cost savings for national public authorities are estimated at EUR 25.8 billion, 
expressed as present value over 2025-2050, relative to the baseline. 

Road transport operators would benefit from adjustment costs savings estimated at EUR 42.8 billion 
expressed as present value over 2025-2050 relative to the baseline. They are linked to the reduction 
in  the  operation  costs  and  the  reduced  time  required  for  cooperating  with  the  public  authorities  for 
manual/roadside  weight  checks.  The  reduction  in  operation  costs  is  driven  by  the  increase  in  the 
average  payload  and  the  reduction  in  the  number  of  trips  (due  to  the  extra  length  and  weight  to 
accommodate ZE technologies, the harmonisation of the maximum permitted weight of 5- and 6-axle 
HDV  in  cross-border  transport,  allowing  cross-border  transport  of  44  tonnes  and  EMS  between 
‘allowing’ Member States and harmonisation of the loaded length of vehicle carriers), and by the shift 
from road-only to intermodal operations (due to the alignment of the definition of intermodal transport 
with  the  Combined  Transport  Directive).  In  addition,  road  transport  operators  benefit  from  the 
elimination of permits for the use of higher trucks to accommodate high-cube containers in intermodal 
transport (EUR 3.2  billion,  expressed as present  value over 2025-2050 relative  to the baseline), and 
from  the  reduction  in  the  time  needed  to  prepare  and  submit  requests  for  the  issuance  of  special 
permits  for  the  transport  of  indivisible  loads  (EUR 1.2  billion  expressed  as  present  value  over  2025-
2050  relative  to  the  baseline)  enabled  by  the  application  of  the  one-stop-shop  principles  at  national 
level  and  the  digitalisation  of  documents.  Total  costs  savings  for  road  transport  operators  are 
estimated at EUR 47.3 billion expressed as present value over 2025-2050 relative to the baseline. 

PO-B  is  expected  to  bring  external  cost  savings  for  CO2  emissions  (estimated  at  EUR 3.5  billion 
expressed  as  present  value  over  2025-2050  relative  to  the  baseline),  for  air  pollutant  emissions 
(EUR 2.1  billion)  and  noise  emissions  (EUR 0.7  billion).  They  are  enabled  by  the  greater  use  of  ZE 
HDVs, the shift to intermodal transport and the decrease in the number of trips (due to the increased 
payload).  PO-B  is  also  expected  to  result  in  a  reduction  of  the  external  costs  of  fatalities  of  roughly 
EUR 0.9 billion, enabled by the shift to intermodal transport and the decrease in the number of trips. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)?  

PO-B  is  expected  to  lead  to  adjustment  costs for  national  public  authorities  estimated  at  EUR 4.3 
billion  expressed  as  present  value  over  2025-2050  relative  to  the  baseline.  They  cover  the 
maintenance  of  road  infrastructure  due  to  the  extra  weight  allowance  for  ZEV,  the  updating  of  the 
inventory  of  bridges  and  tunnels,  the  implementation  of  the  one-stop-shop  principle  at  national  level 
and  the  deployment  of  Weigh-in-Motion  systems  every  300  km  in  the  TEN-T  network.  In  addition, 
national  public  authorities  will  be  faced  with  administrative  costs  of  EUR 16.4  million  for  the 
maintenance and management of the one-stop-shop systems at national level. Total costs for national 
public authorities are estimated at EUR 4.4 billion expressed as present value over 2025-2050 relative 
to the baseline. Overall, considering the costs and costs savings, PO-B results in net costs savings 
for national public authorities of EUR 21.5 billion. 

4 

 
For  road  transport  operators,  PO-B  is  expected  to  lead  to  adjustment  costs  estimated  at  EUR 2.1 
billion  due  to  the  reduction  in  overloading  practices.  Operators  that  were  previously  operating 
overloaded trucks will now have to comply  with the weight limits and more vehicle-kilometres will be 
required  to  transport  the  same  quantity  of  goods.  This  will  affect  transport  operators  which  were 
operating under infraction. PO-B results in net cost savings for road transport operators estimated 
at EUR 45.1 billion, expressed as present value over 2025-2050 relative to the baseline.  

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness? 

The  preferred  policy  option  is  expected  to  have  a  positive  impact  on  the  competitiveness  of  SMEs, 
which constitute the great majority of the commercial road transport sector (99% of the road transport 
operators  are  SMEs).  In  particular,  SMEs  engaged  in  cross-border  as  well  as  intermodal  operations 
will  benefit  from  measures  helping  to  improve  operational  and  energy  efficiency  and  facilitating  the 
transition to zero-emission operations. Net cost savings for road transport operators are estimated 
at EUR 45.1 billion, expressed as present value over 2025-2050 relative to the baseline.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  
Total costs for national public authorities are estimated at EUR 4.3 billion expressed as present value 
over 2025-2050 relative to the baseline. The major cost element of the preferred policy option (around 
96% of the total costs) for Member States administrations is represented by adjustment costs linked to 
the  maintenance  of  infrastructure.  However,  considering  both  costs  and  cost  savings,  PO-B  is 
expected to result in net costs savings for national public authorities of EUR 21.5 billion.  

Will there be other significant impacts?  
The  initiative  may  also  help  alleviate  the  acute  problem  of  the  shortage  of  professional  drivers,  in 
particular in long-haul operations. The operations by heavier/longer vehicles enabling  the carriage of 
the  same  amount  of  cargo  with  fewer  vehicle-trips,  more  efficient  roadside  checks  and  faster 
administrative  procedures  for  abnormal  transport  will  help  optimise  the  use  of  the  working  time  of 
drivers and the usage of vehicles. In addition, the uptake of zero-emission vehicles equipped with the 
latest safety standards and improved comfort of cabins may help improve the image of the profession 
and attract young people and women to work in the sector. 

Proportionality 

The  preferred  policy  option  is  assessed  to  be  the  most  proportionate  option  to  what  is  necessary  to 
reach the overall policy objectives. 

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed?  
No review is planned at this stage. 

5