OPINION OF THE COMMISSION on the amendments proposed by the European Parliament to the Council's Common Position on the proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES •ù •it -h -it Brussels, 06. 12. 1996 COM(96) 673 final 95/0226 (SYN) OPINION OF THE COMMISSION on the amendments proposed by the European Parliament to the Council's Common Position on the proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 189 c (d) of the EC Treaty) 1. BACKGROUND 1. 1. The objectives of the Commission's proposal are : • the further harmonization and improvement of the checks on motor vehicles; • the provision for the testing of speed limitation devices for lorries of over 12 tonnes and buses and coaches of over 10 tonnes, with as a consequence the extension of the current test regarding tachographs; • a clarified situation with regard to the vehicles of historical interest, taxis and ambulances; • • the provision for immediate removal from circulation of vehicles that do not meet minimum requirements regarding braking systems and emissions, and the redrafting of the oft-amended Directive 77/143/EEC into a single clear consolidated text. 1. 2. The Commission approved and sent the proposal to Council and Parliament on 8 September 1995'. 1. 3. The opinion of the Economic and Social Committee, which was delivered on 22 November 19952, was totally favourable. 1. 4. The opinion of the European Parliament at its first reading was delivered on 29 February 1996-1. The Parliament adopted seven amendments. Commission agreed on 3 amendments; their tenor, if not the wording, were taken into account by the Council in its Common Position. 1 2 3 OJ NoC 193, 4. 7. 1996,p. 5. OJ NoC 39, 12. 2. 19%. p. 24. OJ NoC 78, IX. 3. 1996, p. 27. 1. 5. The amended Commission proposal was forwarded on 18 April 19964. 1. 6. The common position (EC) No 38/96 was adopted by the Council on 18 June 1996s. The common position corresponds in the main to the Commission proposal, as amended. However, the Council made a number of changes to both the articles and the Annex II. In particular : 1. 6. 1. The option for the Member States of excluding from the scope of this Directive fire appliances and vehicles of historic interest which were manufactured before 1 January 1960; 1. 6. 2. The fixing of the date of implementation of the Directive to one year after its entry into force(instead of before 1. 1. 1996); 1. 6. 3. The addition of a new paragraph 3 in Article 11, replacing the fourth paragraph proposed by the Commission for to Annex II. This paragraph states that 'Member States must adopt the measures necessary to implement the system of tests laid down in this Directive and that the measures must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive'; introduction the 1. 6. 4. The new text of the second indent of point 7. 9. on tachographs in Annex II, with reading as follows : check, if in doubt, whether the nominal circumference or size of tyre matches the data given on the tachograph plate;'. 1. 7. Date of Commission response to the Common Position: on 2 July 19966. 1. 8. Date of announcement of receipt by the European Parliament: on 18 July 1996. 2. POSITION QF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - SECOND REAPING On 24 October 19967 the European Parliament amended the common position adopted by the Council on 18 June 1996 on the above-mentioned proposal. The three adopted amendments, one of which was already rejected by the Commission and the Council following the first reading of the European Parliament, are at annex. 4 5 6 7 OJ NoC 193, 4. 7. 1996, p. 31. OJ No C 248, 26. 8. 1996, p. 49. SEC(96) 1239 final - 95/0226(SYN). OJ NoC 347, 18. 11. 1996, p. 3. COMMISSION POSITION Under Article 189 C, sub-paragraph (d) of the EC Treaty, the Commission has re examined its proposal and decided not to accept any of the amendments of the European Parliament at its second reading, for the following reasons : • Amendment 1 : The first amendment, extending the possibility of carrying out more stringent and more frequent tests to all standards, and not just to braking systems as at present, is considered by the Commission to be contrary to the Community long term goal which is to harmonise testing standards - of course at levels which guarantee both a high level of safety and environmental protection. Moreover, such a provision would create a possibility for Member Sates to set standards at the roadworthiness tests which are higher than the standards for which the vehicles originally were approved. Finally, the application of different standards by Member States would jeopardize the objective of the Directive which is to harmonize as far as is practicable the rules on roadworthiness tests in order to ensure that road traffic within the Community operate under the most favourable conditions as regards safety, environmental protection and competitive conditions applying to carriers in the various Member States. • Amendment 2 : This second amendment, requiring the reduction to three years and one year in the intervals between tests on vehicles weighing less than 3. 5 tonnes which are used for the carriage of goods (category 5) and the extension of this category to vehicles used for the public transport of passengers (at present covered within category 6), is not sensible at a time when some Member States currently benefit from a derogation, accorded under Article 1 of Directive 91/328/EEC8, until 1. 1. 1998 for the public transport of passengers (part of category 6) from the present provisions. These Member States would find it too onerous to apply such a measure given the extra infrastructure that would be required. The third amendment, requiring the re-establishment of a ban on the use of vehicles which have not passed the braking system or exhaust gas tests (i. e. the fourth paragraph to the introductory note to Annex II of the draft Directive, which had been proposed by the Commission in its original proposal9) is now seen as being too rigid given that vehicles could fail the test with only minor defects. Such a measure could only be practical if a general agreement existed on the classification of deficiencies that, for instance, could justify an immediate ban, a short period to 8 OJ No L 178, 6. 9. 1991, p. 29. 9 OJ NoC 193,4. 7. 1996, p. 5. repair, a longer period to repair or just a warning. Fherefore, the substituted text (Article 11. 3 in the common position of the Council) indicating that 'Member States shall adopt the measures necessary to implement the system of tests laid down in this Directive and that the measures adopted must be effective proportionate and dissuassive', is more appropriate. Therefore the Commission endorsed the common position adopted by the CounciL Annex: 3 amendments of the Parliament. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 15 October 1996 A4-0295/2 AMENDMENT 2 t a b l ed by t he C o m m i t t ee on T r a n s p o rt a nd T o u r i sm RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING R a p p o r t e u r: Mr B e l l e rè ( A 4 - 0 2 9 5 / 9 6) ROADWORTHINESS TESTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES Common p o s i t i on of ( C 4 - 0 3 6 9 / 96 - 9 5 / 0 2 2 6 ( S Y N) t he C o u n c il Common p o s i t i on of t he C o u n c il Amendment. JT- (Amendment ^L) R e c i t al 19 ( 1 9) W h e r e as Member S t a t es may make ( 1 9) W h e r e as Member t he b r f l k i nq or i n c r e a se testing; t e st more s t r i n g e nt f r e q u e n cy Q£ t he i n t r o d u ce more or i n c r e a se thereof ; S t a t es s t r i n g e nt t he may ££s_ts_ f r e q u e n cy - Q- PE 2 5 2. 7 1 3 /2 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 15 October 1996 A4-0295/8 AMENDMENT 8 t a b l ed by t he C o m m i t t ee on T r a n s p o rt a nd T o u r i sm RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING R a p p o r t e u r: Mr B e l l e rè ( A 4 - 0 2 9 5 / 9 6) ROADWORTHINESS TESTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES Common p o s i t i on of ( C 4 - 0 3 6 9 / 96 - 9 5 / 0 2 2 6 ( S Y N) t he C o u n c il Common p o s i t i on of t he C o u n c il Amendment (Amendment gU Annex 1 ( 5) C a t e g o r i es of v e h i c le F r e q u e n cy t e s ts of C a t e g o r i es of v e h i c le F r e q u e n cy t e s ts of 5. Motor wahiclaa having at laaat tour wh««la. a c n t l lT uaad Cor tha road carriage of oooda and with a •aw J a» «a parwlaalhla a ut not a»o««i1inq 3 SOO ko. «•eluding agricultural t r a c t o r» and «achinsety four yaara aftar tha data on which tha vwhlcla was first uaad. and tharaaftar «vary two raar» S. Motor vahiclaa having at laaat four whaala. noraally uaad Cor tha road caxrlaga of <jood» or for tha public tranaport of paaaonocr» and with a mmMimin paralaalbla aaaa not axcaadlng 3 SOO kg. «xcluding agricultural tractor a and Machinery Thraa yaars attar ths data on which tha vahicla «u flrrt uaad. and tharaaftar «vary y»«r - 1" PE 2 5 2. 7 1 3 /8 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 15 October 1996 A4 -0295/9 AMENDMENT 9 tabled by the Conuiiittee on Transport and Tourism RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING Rapporteur: Mr Bellerè (A4-0295/96) ROADWORTHINESS TESTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES Common position of the Council (C4-0369/96 - 95/0226(SYN) Common position of the Council Amendment (Amendment 3) Annex II, introduction, 3rd paragraph a (new) The Member States must nonetheless ensiiie. that vehicles which do not requirements minimum meet relating to braking systems and exhaust gases are not used en the rûâsL. the PE 252. 713/9 ISSN 0254-1475 COM(96) 673 final DOCUMENTS EN 06 07 15 Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-684-EN-C ISBN 92-78-13452-X Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg