Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2003)586 - Use of frontal protection systems on motor vehicles - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
dossier | COM(2003)586 - Use of frontal protection systems on motor vehicles. |
---|---|
source | COM(2003)586 ![]() |
date | 10-10-2003 |
Systems providing additional frontal protection of motor vehicles ("frontal protection systems") have been increasingly used in recent years. Some of these systems constitute a risk to the safety of pedestrians and other road users in the case of a collision with a motor vehicle. This proposal aims to provide added protection to pedestrians and other vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle fitted with a frontal protection system. The proposal lays down requirements that must be complied with by frontal protection systems either as originally fitted to a vehicle or put on the market as separate technical units. As the construction of motor vehicles is covered by framework Directive 70/156/EEC establishing the EC type-approval system for vehicles, components and separate technical units, the proposed requirements will also be part of that system.
2. Legal Basis
This proposal lays down harmonised technical requirements for the type approval of motor vehicles with regard to any frontal protection systems that might be fitted as original equipment to a vehicle as well as for type approval of frontal protection systems distributed as separate technical units, within the meaning of Directive 70/156/EEC. Harmonised rules are necessary to avoid the adoption of different requirements among Member States and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market. This proposal is based on Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.
3. Contents
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 and notably the frontal structures of passenger cars. Most accidents take place in urban areas where serious or fatal injuries can be sustained at relatively low speeds, particularly in the case of children.
Although there is a clear case for the implementation of measures to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic and, where this is not feasible, to reduce the speed of traffic, there is nevertheless scope to mitigate the severity of injuries to pedestrians by improving the frontal structures of vehicles. Obviously, above certain speeds the scope to reduce such injuries is limited but, at speeds below approximately 40 km/h, the possibility exists to reduce significantly the levels of injury sustained by pedestrians involved in frontal impacts with passenger cars and light vans, particularly those which are fitted with frontal protection systems.
The Commission has successfully concluded negotiations with the European, Japanese and Korean automobile industries, concerning a commitment by the industry to carry out measures to increase pedestrian protection. This commitment would constitute a decisive and progressive contribution to the achievement of the Community's priorities on EU road safety and includes a commitment not to install so called 'rigid bull bars' as frontal protection systems on new vehicles from 2002. In its Communication of 11 July 2001 i the Commission stated that the commitment by the European Cars Manufacturers Association (ACEA) corresponded to the mandate given by the Commission in the Communication of 21 December 2000 i. Corresponding commitments to the commitment undertaken by ACEA have been made by JAMA and KAMA on behalf of the Japanese and Korean manufacturers.
However, before taking a decision on whether to accept the Commitment, the Commission decided to consult the European Parliament and the Council about the content of the Commitment and the Commission's assessment, and give them the opportunity to express their views. The Council, in its Communication of 26 November 2001 i, stated the view that the use of rigid bull bars should be banned for all M1 and N1 type vehicles and that the Commission should propose a means to do so. The Parliament, in its report of June 2002 i, invited the Commission to propose legislation banning rigid bull bars supplied as after market equipment.
Consequently, this proposal lays down requirements to be complied with by frontal protection systems either as originally fitted to a vehicle or put on the market as separate technical units. In parallel, the Commission has presented a proposal for a Directive relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle. The proposal for a Directive on pedestrian protection i, which has been adopted by the Commission on 19 February 2003, is currently being examined in co-decision.
Clearly the maximum benefit from making vehicles pedestrian friendly would occur if all types of vehicle comply with these requirements but it is recognised that their application to heavier vehicles (trucks and buses) would be of limited value and may not be technically appropriate. For this reason the scope of this Directive has been limited to vehicles of categories M1 and N1 up to 3.5 tonnes: since these vehicle categories represent the vast majority of vehicles currently in use, the proposed measures will have the widest practicable effect in reducing pedestrian injuries.
The prescribed requirements for frontal protection systems are laid down in the form of tests, which are described in Section 4 of Annex I to this proposal. It is proposed that as of 1 July 2005, Member States could no longer grant EC type-approval for a type of vehicle on grounds relating to the fitting of frontal protection systems, or for a type of frontal protection system as separate technical unit, if the requirements of the Annexes of this Directive are not fulfilled. As of 1 January 2006 all new vehicles which are fitted with frontal protection systems and all new frontal protection systems put on the market will have to comply with the proposed requirements.
The proposed requirements will be tested according to detailed technical prescriptions which will be set out by the Commission in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 70/156/EEC. With this approach, the Directive will not have to be encumbered with elaborated technical details.