Share this on
Vehicle type-approval, direct EU supervision on emission controls
Massimo Brunamonti
The European Union has plans for stricter type-approval measures. The goal is to curb the level of harmful emissions in motor vehicles. One of the latest news relates to the possibility of sanctioning non-complying manufacturers
On December 7 last year, Brussels defined a “European” supervisory procedure, to be implemented by the Commission, to curb the level of harmful emissions issuing from all circulating vehicles as well as new registrations. The EU executive has thus being empowered to sanction any manufacturer whose vehicles are found not complying with the emission limits set out in the new regulations. “We need a system that guarantees both quality and independence, better controls on currently circulating vehicles and a more thorough supervision at European level”, said Elzbieta Bienkowska, European Industry Commissioner.
In short the text states that, as of September 1, 2020, all vehicle type-approval procedures must be supervised by Brussels and that all non-compliant vehicles be subjected to mandatory recalls with possible sanctions in the region of 30 thousand Euro for non-complying manufacturers. In addition, type-approval procedures in each member state will undergo regular inspections following the strict parameters set out by the EU to ensure that the current regulatory framework is thoroughly applied throughout the Union. As far as vehicles already circulating on European roads, spot-checks will be performed on at least every 40 thousand vehicles, with emission tests on at least 20% of the vehicles.
What now remains to be establish is how to resolve a potential conflict of interests between type-approval bodies and vehicle manufacturers who, after all, are the ones paying for the service. The introduction of inspections on type-approval procedures and the resulting indirect relationship could solve the problem, but this and other aspects need to be clarified in the final draft of the procedure.
The need for such an initiative was made clear by a series of events that led to what we all know as the Dieselgate, yet this did not prevent a few countries from trying to weaken the effectiveness of these measures. In fact, according to a Reuters report, seven member states, with Italy among them, suggested a number of conditions that would ultimately undermine the authority of the Commission as a control body. Germany, for example, sought to oppose such inspections by the Commission claiming that “any type of control would result in additional red tape without real benefits”. And France even went as far as proposing inspections so sporadic that would render the whole program basically useless.
The proposed measures are now approaching the final stage between the Council and the Commission; the overriding question, as reported by a number of EU diplomatic circles, is: “are we really keen to have the Commission poking its nose in the affairs of each National type-approval authority? In the wake of the Dieselgate, saying no is proving increasingly difficult”.
In short the text states that, as of September 1, 2020, all vehicle type-approval procedures must be supervised by Brussels and that all non-compliant vehicles be subjected to mandatory recalls with possible sanctions in the region of 30 thousand Euro for non-complying manufacturers. In addition, type-approval procedures in each member state will undergo regular inspections following the strict parameters set out by the EU to ensure that the current regulatory framework is thoroughly applied throughout the Union. As far as vehicles already circulating on European roads, spot-checks will be performed on at least every 40 thousand vehicles, with emission tests on at least 20% of the vehicles.
What now remains to be establish is how to resolve a potential conflict of interests between type-approval bodies and vehicle manufacturers who, after all, are the ones paying for the service. The introduction of inspections on type-approval procedures and the resulting indirect relationship could solve the problem, but this and other aspects need to be clarified in the final draft of the procedure.
The need for such an initiative was made clear by a series of events that led to what we all know as the Dieselgate, yet this did not prevent a few countries from trying to weaken the effectiveness of these measures. In fact, according to a Reuters report, seven member states, with Italy among them, suggested a number of conditions that would ultimately undermine the authority of the Commission as a control body. Germany, for example, sought to oppose such inspections by the Commission claiming that “any type of control would result in additional red tape without real benefits”. And France even went as far as proposing inspections so sporadic that would render the whole program basically useless.
The proposed measures are now approaching the final stage between the Council and the Commission; the overriding question, as reported by a number of EU diplomatic circles, is: “are we really keen to have the Commission poking its nose in the affairs of each National type-approval authority? In the wake of the Dieselgate, saying no is proving increasingly difficult”.
On the same topic
#Great turmoil in Europe around new vehicle approval systems, connected vehicles and access to technical data#Vehicle approval, the EU’s efforts in ensuring free accessibility to OBD data
