Sittings · Document

Draft report (COM(2023)0445 – C90306/2023 – 2023/0265(COD)) 2023-11-30

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

Committee on Transport and Tourism

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

AM_Com_LegReport

Amendment 51

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) By streamlining and clarifying the rules on weights and dimensions of road transport heavy-duty vehicles, it is necessary to address the energy and operational inefficiencies of cross-border transport operations, provide strong incentives to operators for the uptake of zero-emission technologies while facilitating the use of the existing energy-saving solutions, and further support intermodal freight transport operations. To minimise administrative burdens, prevent distortion of competition and reduce risks to road safety and damage of road infrastructure certain requirements as to the use of heavier and longer vehicles should be harmonised and enforcement of the rules in force should be strengthened.

(3) By streamlining and clarifying the rules on weights and dimensions of road transport heavy-duty vehicles, it is necessary to address the energy and operational inefficiencies of cross-border transport operations, provide strong incentives to operators for the uptake of zero-emission technologies while facilitating the use of the existing energy-saving solutions, and further support intermodal freight transport operations. To minimise administrative burdens, prevent distortion of competition, reduce risks to road safety and the damage of road infrastructure, and avoid reverse modal shift, certain requirements as to the use of heavier and longer vehicles should be harmonised and enforcement of the rules in force should be strengthened.

Or. en

Amendment 52

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) To achieve these objectives, the right balance between economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, protection of road infrastructure and road safety aspects should be struck.

(4) To achieve these objectives, the right balance between economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, protection of road infrastructure and road safety aspects should be struck. Furthermore, to ensure legislative coherence and legal certainty, this Directive should be aligned as closely as possible with the CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles Regulation and the Combined Transport Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 53

Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) To achieve these objectives, the right balance between economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, protection of road infrastructure and road safety aspects should be struck.

(4) To achieve these objectives, the right balance between economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, protection of road infrastructure and road safety aspects should be struck. In order to ensure legal certainty and consistency, this Directive should be aligned with the Regulation on CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles and the Combined Transport Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 54

Roman Haider

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) The provisions of Directive 96/53/EU complement Council Directive 92/106/EEC41 as regards promoting and supporting the growth of intermodal transport. The definition of intermodal transport operation should therefore be aligned with the terminology applied in Directive 92/106/EEC, in order to allow lorries, trailers and semi-trailers used in intermodal operations to benefit from the same extra weight allowances as in cases of road vehicles carrying containers or swap bodies and used in containerised intermodal transport. Such weight incentive should encourage road transport operators to engage also in non-containerised intermodal transport.

__________________

41 Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States (OJ L 368, 17.12.1992, p. 38).

Or. en

Justification

Cooperation and coordination between different modes of traffic is the only way to reach a more efficient way to transport increasing volumes of freight and to achieve an effective modal split, as rail-based multimodal transport chains are the most efficient and sustainable way to transport goods.

Amendment 55

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

__________________

41 Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States (OJ L 368, 17.12.1992, p. 38).

Or. en

Amendment 56

Massimiliano Salini

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

__________________

41 Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States (OJ L 368, 17.12.1992, p. 38).

Or. en

Amendment 57

Colm Markey

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7a) Member States should put in place simplified approval procedures for specialised one-off vehicles to allow them to be commercially viable.

Or. en

Amendment 58

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8) The transport of indivisible loads is an important market segment linked with the strategic areas of renewable energy, civil engineering and infrastructure, oil and gas, heavy industry and power generation sectors. Despite the recognised value of the existing European Best Practice Guidelines for Abnormal Transport, adopted by experts designated by the Member States, very little progress has been made towards the simplification and harmonisation of the rules and procedures to obtain permits for the transport of indivisible loads. Without prejudice to the right of Member States to establish the necessary conditions to ensure the safe transport of indivisible loads in their territories, Member States should cooperate to harmonise, to the extent possible, those requirements to avoid the multiplication of diverging conditions serving the same purpose. Member States should also ensure that national requirements are proportionate and non-discriminatory, refraining from imposing unjustified requirements such as fluency in the national language of the Member State concerned. To reduce administrative burden for operators and to ensure efficient, fair and safe operations, it is crucial to put in place a transparent, harmonised, user-friendly system for obtaining permits.

Or. pl

Amendment 59

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 60

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Nowadays a lot of Member States offer permits only in their own national language. Translation challenges are therefore part of everyday life for transport companies operating in this sector throughout the EU. This is an unnecessary bureaucratic burden.

Amendment 61

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 62

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8) The transport of indivisible loads is an important market segment linked with the strategic areas of renewable energy, civil engineering and infrastructure, oil and gas, heavy industry and power generation sectors. Despite the recognised value of the existing European Best Practice Guidelines for Abnormal Transport, adopted by experts designated by the Member States, very little progress has been made towards the simplification and harmonisation of the rules and procedures to obtain permits for the transport of indivisible loads. Without prejudice to the right of Member States to establish the necessary conditions to ensure the safe transport of indivisible loads in their territories, Member States should closely cooperate to harmonise, to the best extent possible, those requirements to avoid the multiplication of diverging conditions serving the same purpose. Member States should also ensure that national requirements are proportionate and non-discriminatory, refraining from imposing unjustified requirements such as fluency in the national language of the Member State concerned. To reduce administrative burden for operators and to ensure efficient, fair and safe operations, it is crucial to put in place a transparent, harmonised, user-friendly system for obtaining permits that is available by electronic communication means.

Or. en

Amendment 63

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8a) Abnormal road transport operators should be able to use a simplified authorization procedure to operate in abnormal road transport corridors. These corridors should effectively connect European industrial centres and central logistics hubs such as ports. The creation of such corridors would, among other things, promote the expansion of renewable energies, as the expansion of wind power plants in particular requires abnormal transportation. These corridors should follow the trans-European road network and be based on the road network, pavements, bridges and other specific road structures that are considered suitable for the transportation of abnormal transport. The information on the corridors should be publicly available to operators and other interested parties. Member States should provide up-to-date information on the accessibility of corridors for abnormal road transport, e.g. through traffic reports on ongoing road works, natural disasters and traffic density.

Or. en

Amendment 64

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) European Modular Systems (EMS) have been used and trialled at length and have proven to be an interesting solution to improve the economic and energy efficiency of transport operations, while ensuring road safety and protection of infrastructure, thanks to their confinement to adequate parts of the road networks. Given national specificities, different economic interests, transportation needs and diverse transport infrastructure capacities in Member States, they are best placed to assess and authorise the circulation of EMS on their territories. At the same time, to enlarge the positive socio-economic and environmental impacts of the use of EMS, it is crucial to remove unnecessary barriers to their use in cross-border operations between neighbouring Member States that allow such vehicle combinations on their territories, without limitation in the number of borders crossed as long as they comply with the maximum authorised weights and dimensions for EMS established by Member States within their respective territories. This is to ensure that EMS used in cross-border operations comply with the common lowest weight and dimension limit for EMS applicable in those Member States. In the interests of safety of operations, transparency and legal clarity, common conditions should be established for the circulation of EMS in national and international traffic, including providing clear information on the weights and dimensions limits for EMS and on parts of the road network compatible with specifications of such vehicles, and monitoring the impacts of the use of EMS on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal share.

(9) European Modular Systems (EMS), commonly referred to as 'gigaliners' or 'monster trucks', are trucks usually significantly longer and heavier than other standard heavy duty vehicles. Research shows there are safety risks associated with longer and heavier trucks, particularly in collisions where the likelihood of death or serious injury is much higher compared to shorter and lighter trucks, while there are also difficulties when it comes to visibility, parking and overtaking. There may also be under-explored negative behavioural effects of a shift to longer and heavier trucks because the heightened real and perceived risk discourages vulnerable road users such as cyclists from using infrastructure where such vehicles are present. Due to EMS often being much heavier and longer than standard trucks the impact assessment also identifies substantial costs linked to having to adapt and maintain roads, bridges, tunnels, parking and other associated maintenance costs. EMS also pose a threat to other more sustainable non-road forms of freight transportation such as rail and waterborne modes due to the greater payload potential and this in turn risks reverse modal shift. In the interests of safety of operations, transparency and legal clarity, common conditions should therefore be established for the circulation of EMS in national traffic. These should include provisions to avoid competition with other more sustainable modes of transport including rail and waterborne transport; safety measures such as improved driver training and alerts for dangerous weather conditions; cost coverage for road infrastructure; providing clear information on the weights and dimensions limits for EMS and on the parts of the road network compatible with the specifications of such vehicles; and monitoring the impacts of the use of EMS on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, and on the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal share. Additionally, requirements to limit their use to certain roads and to intermodal operations and, as of a certain date, that such vehicles be zero-emission, should also be imposed. Given the aforementioned risks associated with permitting heavier and longer vehicles, Member States should be required to submit a reasoned request to the Commission before authorising the circulation of such vehicles, and the Commission should evaluate whether the conditions have been met before granting authorisation for the circulation of EMS.

Or. en

Amendment 65

Roman Haider

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Given the fact that some of the terminals are not able to accommodate these vehicles, and due to the increasing importance of handling costs as road freight becomes more cost-efficient, combined transport will lose market share. In addition to their impact on modal shift huge trucks are a danger to the safety of all road users and an enormous cost driver. If 60-ton long trucks were permitted, additional costs of 4.8 billion euros would be incurred for bridge construction on the highway and expressway network in Austria alone, and another 600 million euros for restraint systems, tunnel safety and ancillary facilities. For 48-ton long trucks, the additional costs would be 160 million euro, and for 44-ton long trucks, 80 million euro.

Amendment 66

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

The EMS concept is introduced to the directive in this revision for the first time. In order to have a comprehensive understanding of the impact of these vehicles, there should be sufficient time for monitoring and data collection. Therefore, the Commission should consider zero emission objectives for the EMS vehicles five years after the adoption of this legislation.

Amendment 67

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) European Modular Systems (EMS) have been used and trialled at length and have proven to be an interesting solution to improve the economic and energy efficiency of transport operations, while ensuring road safety and protection of infrastructure, thanks to their confinement to adequate parts of the road networks. Given national specificities, different economic interests, transportation needs and diverse transport infrastructure capacities in Member States, they are best placed to assess and authorise the circulation of EMS and other high-capacity vehicles combinations on their territories. At the same time, to enlarge the positive socio-economic and environmental impacts of the use of EMS, it is crucial to remove unnecessary barriers to their use in cross-border operations between neighbouring Member States that allow such vehicle combinations as well as vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I on their territories, without limitation in the number of borders crossed as long as they comply with the maximum authorised weights and dimensions for EMS or other high-capacity vehicles combinations established by Member States within their respective territories. This is to ensure that EMS or other high-capacity vehicles combinations used in cross-border operations comply with the common lowest weight and dimension limit for EMS applicable in those Member States. In the interests of safety of operations, transparency and legal clarity, common conditions should be established for the circulation of EMS in national and international traffic, including providing clear information on the weights and dimensions limits for EMS and on parts of the road network compatible with specifications of such vehicles, and monitoring the impacts of the use of EMS on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal share.

Or. en

Amendment 68

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 69

Erik Bergkvist

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) European Modular Systems (EMS) have been used and trialled at length and have proven to be an interesting solution to improve the economic and energy efficiency of transport operations, while ensuring road safety and protection of infrastructure, thanks to their confinement to adequate parts of the road networks. Given national specificities, different economic interests, transportation needs and diverse transport infrastructure capacities in Member States, they are best placed to assess and authorise the circulation of EMS on their territories. At the same time, to enlarge the positive socio-economic and environmental impacts of the use of EMS and high-capacity vehicle combinations, it is crucial to remove unnecessary barriers to their use in cross-border operations between neighbouring Member States that allow such vehicle combinations as well as vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I on their territories, without limitation in the number of borders crossed as long as they comply with the maximum authorised weights and dimensions for EMS or high-capacity vehicle combinations established by Member States within their respective territories. This is to ensure that EMS or high-capacity vehicle combinations used in cross-border operations comply with the common lowest weight and dimension limit for EMS applicable in those Member States. In the interests of safety of operations, transparency and legal clarity, common conditions should be established for the circulation of EMS in national and international traffic, including providing clear information on the weights and dimensions limits for EMS and on parts of the road network compatible with specifications of such vehicles, and monitoring the impacts of the use of EMS on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal share.

Or. en

Justification

High-capacity vehicle combinations have been shown to greatly contribute to reducing fuel consumption, emissions, the number of trucks on roads and alleviate the driver shortage problem in the EU. It is essential to continue to allow this practice between consenting Member States as some do not have the possibility to carry out cross-border operations by any other way because of for example different rail requirements. Such operations have been taking place for decades without significantly affecting international competition in the transport sector.

Amendment 70

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) Member States should continue to be allowed to run trials on a temporary basis. Indeed, new technologies allowing for in-motion charging, such as solar panels, pantographs and electric roads, or the progressive introduction of EMS in Member States, may require exceeding the maximum weights and dimensions in a testing environment, including in cross-border sections of the road network. Therefore, Member States should continue to be allowed to conduct such trials and be able to test the compatibility of new technologies and concepts across borders. The temporary and innovative nature of trials needs to be clarified by setting up a maximum period of time to conduct them. At the same time, the number of trials of new technologies and innovative schemes should not be restricted to avoid hampering innovation. Member States should regularly monitor and assess the performance and impacts of testing the new technologies and new concepts on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts on the transport system, such as impacts on the modal share.

(10) Member States should continue to be allowed to run trials on a temporary basis. Indeed, new technologies allowing for in-motion charging, such as solar panels, pantographs and electric roads, or the progressive introduction of EMS in Member States, may require exceeding the maximum weights and dimensions in a testing environment. Therefore, Member States should continue to be allowed to conduct such trials and be able to test the compatibility of new technologies and concepts. The temporary and innovative nature of trials needs to be clarified by setting up a maximum period of time to conduct them. Member States should regularly monitor and assess the performance and impacts of testing the new technologies and new concepts on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts on the transport system, such as impacts on the modal share.

Or. en

Amendment 71

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) Member States should continue to be allowed to run trials on a temporary basis. Indeed, new technologies allowing for in-motion charging, such as solar panels, pantographs and electric roads, or the progressive introduction of EMS in Member States, may require exceeding the maximum weights and dimensions in a testing environment, including in cross-border sections of the road network. Therefore, Member States should continue to be allowed to conduct such trials and be able to test the compatibility of new technologies and concepts across borders. The temporary and innovative nature of trials needs to be clarified by setting up a maximum period of time to conduct them with a possibility for one-time renewal justified by the Member State to the Commission. At the same time, the number of trials of new technologies and innovative schemes should not be restricted to avoid hampering innovation. Member States should regularly monitor and assess the performance and impacts of testing the new technologies and new concepts on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts on the transport system, such as impacts on the modal share.

Or. en

Justification

A strictly limited trial period might not always give sufficient time to determine the level of maturity of a vehicle or encourage companies to invest and innovate. Therefore, a trial period should be allowed to be renewed once with adequate justification.

Amendment 72

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) The transport of indivisible loads carried out by vehicles or vehicle combinations exceeding the maximum weights or dimensions and the use of EMS, given their needs for additional safety features and for suitable infrastructure, require that special attention is given to elements such as transparency of relevant information, legal certainty and harmonisation of the permit processes. It is therefore necessary for Member States to establish a single electronic information and communication system containing all the relevant information regarding the operational and administrative conditions for the transport of indivisible loads and for the use of EMS, in a clear and easily accessible manner. This national system should also enable the operators to obtain the information and submit electronically the application, in an EU standardised format, for special permits for the carriage of indivisible loads in the Member State concerned. These permits should be issued in an electronic format and it should be possible to carry out an abnormal transport using this electronic document. In addition, that national system should provide information on the national maximum authorised dimensions and weights of vehicles and vehicle combinations, information on possible restrictions, in particular on height, as well as on the minimum qualifications requirements for drivers. To ensure that operators and citizens can access all relevant information in one place, a dedicated European web portal connecting the national electronic and communication systems and providing, among others, a clear graphic overview of the roads on which EMS are allowed to circulate in the relevant Member States, should be established by the Commission, at the latest by [6 months after the date of transposition of this Directive].

Or. en

Amendment 73

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 74

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 75

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Some Member States require drivers to keep permits in the vehicles in paper format only. This creates unnecessary administrative and bureaucratic burdens. In order to create more simple and streamlined processes, drivers should be allowed to use electronic permit documents.

Amendment 76

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 77

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Some Member States require drivers to carry permits only in paper form in the vehicle. The same Member States also issue permits that sometimes contain more than 300 pages and must be carried in the truck and in all accompanying vehicles. This creates an excessive bureaucratic burden, wastes paper and in no way contributes to road safety.

Amendment 78

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) The artificial barriers to the cross-border transport of heavier lorries primarily used in long distance transport (such as vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles), should be removed in a harmonised way to take advantage in the short term of the operational, energy and environmental efficiency linked to the greater loading capacity granted by the Member States, including for intermodal transport. To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to phase out the use of such heavier lorries running on fossil fuels, as of 2035, when the market penetration of zero-emission HDVs is projected to increase significantly up to around 50% of new HDV registrations. After the phasing out, heavier lorries should continue to be allowed in national traffic while, in international traffic, they should comply with the maximum authorised weights set up in Annex I to Directive 96/53/EC, which limits the extra weight allowance to zero-emission vehicles and to vehicles involved in an intermodal transport operation.

(12) To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility and promote combined transport operations, it is necessary to phase out the use of heavier lorries running on fossil fuels. For this reason, in cross border traffic, zero emission vehicles should be better incentivised over the use of vehicles running on fossil fuels in the coming years.

Or. en

Amendment 79

Roman Haider

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to phase out the use of such heavier lorries running on fossil fuels, as of 2035, when the market penetration of zero-emission HDVs is projected to increase significantly up to around 50% of new HDV registrations. After the phasing out, heavier lorries should comply with the maximum authorised weights set up in Annex I to Directive 96/53/EC, which limits the extra weight allowance to zero-emission vehicles and to vehicles involved in an intermodal transport operation.

Or. en

Justification

The impact of heavier lorries on the modal shift and on road infrastructure and safety shall be minimized, therefore an exemption on national level is not argumentable.

Amendment 80

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) The artificial barriers to the cross-border transport of vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles should be removed in a harmonised way to take advantage in the short term of the operational, energy and environmental efficiency linked to the greater loading capacity granted by the Member States, including for intermodal transport. To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to further encourage the market penetration of more efficient zero-emission HDVs. Non-zero-emission vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles should continue to be allowed in international traffic, with the same extra weight allowance as zero-emission vehicles as long as the targets set in Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 allow the first registration of such vehicles or combinations.

Or. en

Amendment 81

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 82

Markus Ferber, Henna Virkkunen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) The artificial barriers to the cross-border transport of heavier lorries primarily used in long distance transport (such as vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles), should be removed in a harmonised way to take advantage in the short term of the operational, energy and environmental efficiency linked to the greater loading capacity granted by the Member States, including for intermodal transport. To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to further encourage the market penetration of more efficient zero-emission HDVs. Non-zero emission vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles should continue to be allowed in international traffic, with the same extra weight allowance as zero-emission vehicles as long as the targets set in Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 allow the first registration of such vehicles or combinations and the state of enabling conditions is satisfactory.

Or. en

Justification

Alignment with Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 on CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles, which sets targets until 2040 for the market uptake of new zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles.

Amendment 83

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) The artificial barriers to the cross-border transport of heavier lorries primarily used in long distance transport (such as vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles), should be removed in a harmonised way to take advantage in the short term of the operational, energy and environmental efficiency linked to the greater loading capacity granted by the Member States, including for intermodal transport. To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to phase out the use of such heavier lorries running on fossil fuels in line with the targets set in the CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles Regulation. Therefore, the phase-out should be as of 2040, if enabling conditions are met. After the phasing out, heavier lorries should continue to be allowed in national traffic while, in international traffic, they should comply with the maximum authorised weights set up in Annex I to Directive 96/53/EC, which limits the extra weight allowance to zero-emission vehicles and to vehicles involved in an intermodal transport operation.

Or. en

Justification

It is important to have incentives for operators to decarbonise road transport. However, for legal certainty and legislative coherence, the phase-out timeline should be aligned as closely as possible with the targets set out in the CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles regulation. Enabling conditions include, for example, the availability of infrastructure and zero-emission vehicles.

Amendment 84

Pablo Arias Echeverría, José Ramón Bauzá Díaz

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) The artificial barriers to the cross-border transport of heavier lorries primarily used in long distance transport (such as vehicle combinations with 5 and 6 axles), should be removed in a harmonised way to take advantage in the short term of the operational, energy and environmental efficiency linked to the greater loading capacity granted by the Member States, including for intermodal transport. To effectively drive the transition towards zero-emission mobility, it is necessary to evaluate as of 2032 whether the state of the technology developments in the markets allows to phase out the use of such heavier lorries running on fossil fuels. After the phasing out, heavier lorries should continue to be allowed in national traffic while, in international traffic, they should comply with the maximum authorised weights set up in Annex I to Directive 96/53/EC, which limits the extra weight allowance to zero-emission vehicles and to vehicles involved in an intermodal transport operation.

Or. en

Amendment 85

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) Vehicle carriers with open bodies have very limited potential to reduce their energy consumption via improved aerodynamics. Diverging national rules on the overhanging of loads on vehicle carriers cause distortions of competition and limit significantly their potential to improve operational efficiency and energy performance in international traffic. Therefore it is necessary to harmonise rules on the overhanging of loads of vehicle carriers with open bodies, so as to ensure that these objectives are properly met.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 86

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) Vehicle transporters, most of which have open bodies, have very limited potential to reduce their energy consumption via improved aerodynamics. Many different national rules on the use of overhanging loads on vehicle transporters cause distortions of competition and limit significantly their potential to improve operational efficiency and energy performance in international traffic. Therefore, it is necessary to harmonise rules on the use of overhanging loads of vehicle transporters, so as to ensure that these objectives are properly met.

Or. en

Amendment 87

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 88

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14a) New passenger vehicles are becoming ever-wider, spurred on by rising sales of larger Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs). EU law currently applies a single legal limit (255 cm) to govern the width of all types of new vehicles. This one-size-fits-all approach followed to date is enabling the average width of cars and pick-up trucks to rapidly increase towards the 255 cm width limit, with a number of large SUVs and pick-up truck models already measuring 200-215 cm in width. The larger size of vehicles poses particular problems from a road safety, environmental and road infrastructure perspective, because vulnerable road users are put at a greater safety risk, more materials are required for vehicle construction, tail pipe emissions and energy consumption increase and greater weight puts more stress on road infrastructure. The legal limit in width of vehicle categories M1 and N1 should therefore be lowered through an amendment to Regulation 2019/2144, while also providing sufficient lead-in time for manufacturers, particularly those of zero emission vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 89

Mario Furore

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) Heavy-duty vehicles with elongated cabs have started making their entrance on the market, paired with zero-emission propulsion systems. Using zero-emission propulsion systems requires, depending on the technology, extra space which should not be counted at the expense of the effective load of the vehicle, so that the zero-emission road transport sector is not penalised in economic terms. It should thus be clarified that the excess in the maximum lengths provided for the elongated cabs can be such that it provides space needed for accommodating zero-emission technology, such as batteries and hydrogen tanks, provided that the safety, efficiency and comfort features of aerodynamic cabs are not jeopardized.

Or. it

Amendment 90

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15a) In order to ensure that the capacity of intermodal transport to cooperate and compete with road transport is not hindered by a lack of compatibility between road transport and rail and inland waterways, the Commission should ensure that new vehicles and new vehicle combinations are technically and operationally compatible with the requirements of combined transport operations. To this end, the Commission should amend type approval legislation and address, among other things, the weight, shape, size, craneability, resistance to railway air forces, and retractability and foldability of protruding devices when it comes to new trailers.

Or. en

Amendment 91

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Similarly to the need for extra space, current standards are also not suitable to compensate for the extra weight of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, in particular in long distance transport. Additional weight and axle weight are necessary for zero-emission vehicle combinations, as well as to the most common passenger vehicles in use in the Union. Lighter technologies and better aerodynamics will render the use of zero-emission propulsion systems more efficient (for example, to allow for longer range travelled and longer battery life) by reducing their energy consumption. To provide additional incentives to the deployment of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, to promote technological development, as well as the equipment of vehicles with improved aerodynamics, extra weight allowances should therefore be disconnected from the weight of the zero-emission technology.

Or. en

Amendment 92

Roman Haider

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Similarly to the need for extra space, current standards are also not suitable to compensate for the extra weight of alternative drive of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, in particular in long distance transport. Additional weight and axle weight up to the weight of the alternative drive but not more than the values stated in Annex I, 2.2.2 are necessary for zero-emission vehicle combinations, as well as to the most common passenger vehicles in use in the Union. Lighter technologies and better aerodynamics will render the use of zero-emission propulsion systems more efficient (for example, to allow for longer range travelled and longer battery life) by reducing their energy consumption.

Or. en

Justification

Rail transport in general and single wagon transport in particular are characterized by a very low economic threshold, which in turn means that they are very sensitive to even small volume reductions. Across all corridors and at 44t/25.25m LHV, volume reductions of more than 30% are found in single wagon transport and of more than 13% in combined transport. The impact of the allowance of additional transport volume on road would have an irreversible impact on the modal shift. In order to reduce the already higher external costs of road transport as much as possible compared to more ecological rail transport and to minimize the effects of heavy-duty vehicles on the road infrastructure, the extra weight allowances should be linked to the weight of the respective alternative drive.

Amendment 93

Elsi Katainen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Similarly to the need for extra space, current standards are also not suitable to compensate for the extra weight of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, in particular in long distance transport. Additional weight is necessary for zero-emission vehicle combinations, as well as to the most common passenger vehicles in use in the Union. However, this should be done without increasing axle weights to avoid exponential increase in road wear. Lighter technologies and better aerodynamics will render the use of zero-emission propulsion systems more efficient (for example, to allow for longer range travelled and longer battery life) by reducing their energy consumption. To provide additional incentives to the deployment of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, to promote technological development, as well as the equipment of vehicles with improved aerodynamics, extra weight allowances should therefore be disconnected from the weight of the zero-emission technology.

Or. en

Justification

Extra weight allowance for zero-emission vehicles will incentivise their use and is also needed to address the heavier technologies used. However, increasing axle weights increases road wear exponentially. To avoid this, these trucks should opt to add more axles or adopt other technical solutions and thus keep axle weights lower, which will decrease road wear and damage to infrastructure.

Amendment 94

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Similarly to the need for extra space, current standards are also not suitable to compensate for the extra weight of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, in particular in long distance transport. Additional weight and axle weight are necessary for vehicle combinations including a zero-emission motor vehicle, as well as to the most common passenger vehicles in use in the Union. Lighter technologies and better aerodynamics will render the use of zero-emission propulsion systems more efficient (for example, to allow for longer range travelled and longer battery life) by reducing their energy consumption. To provide additional incentives to the deployment of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles, to promote technological development, as well as the equipment of vehicles with improved aerodynamics, extra weight allowances should therefore be disconnected from the weight of the zero-emission technology.

Or. en

Amendment 95

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16a) Battery electric, fuel-cell and other hydrogen-powered vehicles have a strong potential to decarbonise certain segments of the heavy duty transport sector and their development should be encouraged, while taking into account the fact that no technology goes without an environmental impact. Where electrification is not possible or less efficient and hydrogen fuelled vehicles are not appropriate or cost competitive, the principle of technological neutrality allows for ensuring a level playing field with other technologies that are more mature.

Or. en

Amendment 96

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) Effective, efficient, and consistent enforcement of the rules is of utmost importance to ensure undistorted competition between operators and eliminate risks to road safety and to road infrastructure posed by vehicles unlawfully exceeding the applicable weights or dimensions. To better target roadside controls at overloaded vehicles, and if they choose to use automatic systems on the road infrastructure, Member States should ensure as a minimum the deployment of such systems in the trans-European road transport network. Moreover, for reliability and consistency of the enforcement across the Union, the mandatory minimum level of controls to be performed by Member States should be established in proportion to the level of traffic on their territories by the vehicles within scope of this Directive, including an appropriate number of controls during night hours.

Or. en

Amendment 97

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Abnormal transports exceed standard weight limits. If the automatic systems do not directly recognise the abnormal transport permits, abnormal transport operators can be unfairly fined. Especially for foreign operators, rectifying this kind of a fine is difficult and time-consuming. This creates unfair practices in the single market between Member States and therefore systems in place should recognise abnormal transport permits.

Amendment 98

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 99

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Without direct recognition of abnormal transport permits by the automatic systems, abnormal transport operators will be wrongly fined for exceeding the normal weight limits. If it is a foreign operator, the correction of the fine is difficult and time-consuming. This is a competitive disadvantage for foreign operators.

Amendment 100

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) Effective, efficient, and consistent enforcement of the rules is of utmost importance to ensure undistorted competition between operators and eliminate risks to road safety and to road infrastructure posed by vehicles unlawfully exceeding the applicable weights or dimensions. To better target roadside controls at overloaded vehicles, and if they choose to use automatic systems on the road infrastructure, Member States should ensure as a minimum the deployment of such systems in the trans-European road transport network. Moreover, for reliability and consistency of the enforcement across the Union, the mandatory minimum level of controls to be performed by Member States should be established in proportion to the level of traffic on their territories by the vehicles within scope of this Directive, including controls during night hours. Furthermore, a requirement should be placed on vehicles and vehicle combinations to carry onboard weighing equipment that is connected to tachographs onboard, in order to aid enforcement.

Or. en

Amendment 101

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Without a direct recognition of abnormal transport permits by the automatic systems, abnormal transport operators will be fined as they will exceed the standard weight limits.

Amendment 102

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 103

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17a) The framework conditions for truck drivers in the exercise of their profession need to be urgently improved. The lack of truck parking spaces in the EU adds to the deterioration of the working conditions of truck drivers and fuels the shortage of drivers. To counteract the consequences of this, the European Commission should develop vehicle concepts that make drivers more independent of comfort equipment from parking spaces and provide for the installation of sanitary facilities in the vehicles, reflected in the dimensions of vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 104

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 105

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers.

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers and by creating the necessary framework conditions for the road and rail infrastructure to transport these units.

Or. en

Amendment 106

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers.

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, in particular in combination with rail transport, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers.

Or. en

Amendment 107

Roman Haider

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by allowing extra height to road vehicles to transport high-cube containers.

(19) To promote the growth of multimodal transportation system, containerised transport should be further facilitated by creating the necessary framework conditions for the road and rail infrastructure to transport these units.

Or. en

Justification

Facilitation of high cube containers to foster combined transport is necessary, but their use requires the adaption of railway and road infrastructure for instance the full roll-out of the loading gauge P400.

Amendment 108

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19a) Given the efforts deployed to facilitate combined transport under the modal shift objectives, the maximum height of road vehicles should not be modified, in particular due to the application of the P400 standard to the railway infrastructure.

Or. en

Amendment 109

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21) To enable a swift response of the road transport sector to any crisis, such as natural disasters, pandemics, military conflicts or infrastructure failures, there is a need to introduce an emergency clause to Directive 96/53/EC, which enables temporarily the circulation of heavy-duty vehicles exceeding the maximum permitted weights and/or dimensions, in order to ensure a continued supply of necessary goods and services. Such exceptional clause should be applied only where the public interest requires it, and provided that road safety is not thereby jeopardised.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 110

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(22a) European Modular System vehicles are still relatively novel in the EU, even though they are already in use in some Member States. In order to utilise the insights gained from monitoring and data collection, as well as to share experiences and exchange knowledge on EMS vehicles between different Member States, an EMS Best Practices Forum should be set up, which should meet at least once a year.

Or. en

Justification

EMS vehicles are in use in some Member States but not in others. As the circulation and data collection on EMS vehicles increases, it would be beneficial to create opportunities for Member States to share experiences, knowledge and best practices when it comes to EMS vehicles in the form of an EMS Best Practices Forum.

Amendment 111

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish a common standard application form and harmonise the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements for vehicles or vehicle combinations which exceed the maximum weights and/or dimensions and are intended to carry indivisible loads, to establish a standard reporting format for Member States to comply with their reporting obligations, and to establish temporary exceptions from the application of the weights and dimensions limits used in international traffic between Member States affected by a crisis. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 .

(23) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish a common standard application form and harmonise the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements for vehicles or vehicle combinations which exceed the maximum weights and/or dimensions and are intended to carry indivisible loads, and to establish a standard reporting format for Member States to comply with their reporting obligations. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 .

__________________

45 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

Or. en

Amendment 112

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish an EU common standard application form and harmonise the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements for vehicles or vehicle combinations which exceed the maximum weights and/or dimensions and are intended to carry indivisible loads, to establish a standard reporting format for Member States to comply with their reporting obligations, and to establish temporary exceptions from the application of the weights and dimensions limits used in international traffic between Member States affected by a crisis. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 .

__________________

Or. en

Amendment 113

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – second indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘trailer’ shall mean a vehicle as defined in Article 3(17) of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

— ‘trailer’ shall mean any non-self propelled vehicle, which is designed and constructed to be towed by a power driven vehicle and includes semi-trailers. However, the trailer may be propelled to support the motion without applying propelling forces when not coupled to a towing vehicle.;

Or. en

Justification

It must be ensured that transport operators interested in investing in zero-emission or more energy-efficient motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers can do so unhindered by legal flows. EU type approval legislation still does not facilitate the type-approval of trailers and semi-trailers with an auxiliary propulsion system. This is a very serious barrier to their market uptake and use.

Amendment 114

Carlo Fidanza

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point aa (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – new indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

the following definition is inserted:

– ‘e-trailer technology’ means a technology designed to support auxiliary trailer equipment, in particular a transport refrigeration unit, that may include an e-axle with regenerative braking and a battery pack system for storage of electricity generated by the e-axle or received from an auxiliary source.

Or. en

Amendment 115

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – third indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘semi-trailer’ shall mean a vehicle as defined in Article 3(33) of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

— ‘semi-trailer’ shall mean a towable vehicle, in which the axle(s) is (are) positioned behind the centre of gravity of the vehicle (when uniformly loaded), and which is equipped with a connecting device permitting horizontal and vertical forces to be transmitted to a towing vehicle. One or more of the axles may be driven to support the towing vehicle, and a contribution to the propelling forces of the vehicle combination is permitted at all speeds. To ensure the stability of the vehicle combination, the propelling forces of the semi-trailer shall not exceed those of the towing vehicle at speeds above 15 km/h.;

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 116

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – fifth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘European Modular System’ shall mean a motor vehicle or vehicle combination coupled to one or more trailers or semitrailers where the total combination exceeds the maximum authorised length and may exceed the maximum authorised weights laid down in Annex I and where the individual motor vehicle, trailer(s) and semitrailer(s) do not exceed the weights or dimensions laid down in Annex I,;

Or. en

Amendment 117

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – fifth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 118

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – new indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) the following definition is inserted after the definition of ‘conditioned vehicle’:

‘— ‘Non-containerised transport’ shall mean transportation of goods or cargo loaded, transported, and unloaded individually, in bulk, or using other specialized methods, without the use of standard shipping containers’;

Or. en

Amendment 119

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c b (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – new indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(cb) the following definition is inserted after the definition of ‘conditioned vehicle’:

‘— ‘Open body vehicle' shall mean a vehicle that has an open cargo area or bed without a fully enclosed or covered cargo compartment.'

Or. en

Amendment 120

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c c (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – new indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(cc) the following definition is inserted after the definition of ‘conditioned vehicle’:

‘— ‘Overhanging of loads' shall mean a situation where a part of a load on a vehicle extends beyond the legal or authorised limits of the vehicle, including its length, width, or height.'

Or. en

Amendment 121

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – thirteenth indent

Present text

Amendment

(da) in the thirteenth indent, the definition of ‘alternative fuels’ is replaced by the following:

— ‘alternative fuels’ shall mean fuels or power sources which serve, at least partly, as a substitute for fossil oil sources in the energy supply to transport and which have the potential to contribute to its decarbonisation and enhance the environmental performance of the transport sector, consisting of:

— ‘alternative fuels’ shall mean fuels or power sources which serve as a substitute for fossil oil sources in the energy supply to transport and which have the potential to contribute to its decarbonisation and enhance the environmental performance of the transport sector, consisting of:

(a) electricity consumed in all types of electric vehicles;

(b) hydrogen;

(b) renewable hydrogen;

(c) natural gas, including biomethane, in gaseous form (Compressed Natural Gas — CNG) and liquefied form (Liquefied Natural Gas — LNG);

(d) Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG);

(e) mechanical energy from on-board storage/on-board sources, including waste heat,

Or. en

Directive 96/53 EC

Amendment 122

Peter Lundgren

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – thirteenth indent

Present text

Amendment

(da) in the thirteenth indent, the definition of ‘alternative fuels’ is replaced by the following:

(a) electricity consumed in all types of electric vehicles;

(b) hydrogen;

(c) natural gas, including biomethane, in gaseous form (Compressed Natural Gas — CNG) and liquefied form (Liquefied Natural Gas — LNG);

(d) Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG);

(e) mechanical energy from on-board storage/on-board sources, including waste heat,

(f) carbon-neutral fuels

Or. en

Directive 96/53 EC

Justification

“Carbon-neutral fuels” should be included in the definition of “alternative fuels” as they could be an important energy source to contribute to the decarbonisation of the commercial road passenger and goods transport fleet.

Amendment 123

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – fourteenth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly or in part by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

Or. en

Justification

The amendment reverts the definition of alternatively fuelled vehicle back to the text currently in force, noting that this directive applies to all vehicles in operation.

Amendment 124

Marco Campomenosi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e

Directive 95/53/EC

Article 2 – fourteenth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly or in part by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

Or. en

Amendment 125

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – fourteenth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

— ‘alternatively fuelled vehicle’ shall mean a motor vehicle powered wholly or in part by an alternative fuel and which has been approved under the framework of Regulation (EU) 2018/858,;

Or. en

Amendment 126

Marco Campomenosi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – indent

Present text

Amendment

(ea) the definition of ‘zero-emission vehicle’ is amended by the following:

‘

‘zero-emission vehicle’ shall mean a zero-emission heavy-duty vehicle as defined in point (11) of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1),

-- ‘zero-emission vehicle’ shall mean a zero-emission heavy-duty motor vehicle as defined in point (11) of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1),

’

Or. en

Directive 96/53 /EC

Amendment 127

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point f

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – fifteenth indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

'intermodal transport operation' shall mean:

'intermodal transport operation' shall mean the combined transport operations defined in Article 1 of Council Directive 92/106/EEC1b

(a) the combined transport operations defined in Article 1 of Council Directive 92/106/EEC

(b) transport operations engaged in the transport of one or more containers or swap bodies, up to a total maximum length of 45 feet, using waterborne transport, provided that the length of the initial or the final road leg does not exceed 150 km in the territory of the Union. The distance of 150 km referred to above may be exceeded in order to reach the nearest suitable transport terminal for the envisaged service in the case of:

(i) vehicles complying with point 2.2.2(a) or (b) of Annex I; or

(ii) vehicles complying with point 2.2.2(c) or (d) of Annex I, in cases where such distances are permitted in the relevant Member State.

For intermodal transport operations, the nearest suitable transport terminal providing a service may be located in a Member State other than the Member State in which the shipment was loaded or unloaded,

__________________

1b Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States

Or. en

Amendment 128

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point ga (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 2 – new indent

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ga) the following definition is inserted after the definition of ‘eFTI Platform’:

'external costs' shall mean the costs as defined in Council Directive 92/106/EEC.

Or. en

Amendment 129

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a – introductory part

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) in paragraph 1, the following point (c) is added:

(a) in paragraph 2, the following point (c) is added:

‘(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I providing they do not significantly affect international competition in the road transport sector as defined by Article 4.4.’

Or. en

Amendment 130

Erik Bergkvist

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I.;

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I with the exception of cross-border operations with vehicle combinations not complying with the characteristics set out in Annex I, providing there is mutual consent among the cross-border Member States concerned and providing that these operations do not significantly affect international competition in the road transport sector as defined by Article 4.4;

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 131

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraphs 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I.;

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I with the exception of cross-border operations with vehicle combinations not complying with the characteristics set out in Annex I, providing there is mutual consent among the Member States concerned and providing that these operations do not significantly affect international competition in the road transport sector as defined by Article 4.4.;

Or. en

Amendment 132

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I.;

(c) of vehicles or vehicle combinations for the international transport of goods or passengers which are not in conformity with the characteristics set out in Annex I; these should not significantly affect international competition in the road transport sector as defined by Article 4.4;

Or. en

Amendment 133

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to further harmonise the permit issuing deadlines. Member States shall also cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall also cooperate to further harmonise the appearance, markings and signs of escort vehicles and pilot cars. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States are encouraged to provide transparent information on the basic network accessible for indivisible load transports, where this exists.

Or. en

Justification

The proposal can include more elements to facilitate the preparation of national and cross-border indivisible load transports, including for permit applications, roadside checks, available road network and escort vehicles. This could create further facilitation in the granting of permits and the establishment of appropriate routing for national and cross-border indivisible load transports.

Amendment 134

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – second subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that the procedure for obtaining permits or similar arrangements for the transport of indivisible loads is smooth, efficient and non-discriminatory, by minimising administrative burdens and avoiding unnecessary delays.

Member States shall ensure that the procedure for obtaining permits or similar arrangements for the transport of indivisible loads is smooth, efficient and non-discriminatory, by providing an EU common standard application form and by minimising administrative burdens and avoiding unnecessary delays.

Or. en

Amendment 135

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to further harmonise the permit issuing deadlines. Member States shall act jointly to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, favour the use of pictograms over text and further harmonise the appearance, markings and signs of escort vehicles and pilot cars. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the drivers of indivisible loads transports. Member States are encouraged to provide transparent information on the basic network accessible for indivisible load transports, where this exists.

Or. en

Amendment 136

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to issue the permits or similar arrangements in an electronic format as well as to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall also cooperate to harmonise rules on the prescribed use, markings and signs for escort vehicles. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Or. en

Amendment 137

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Or. pl

Amendment 138

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text and to align the rules for escorting abnormal transports. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport and drivers of indivisible loads.

Or. en

Amendment 139

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text and to align the rules for escorting abnormal transports . Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Or. en

Amendment 140

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 3 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall guarantee that the conditions under which the permits or similar arrangements related to the transport of indivisible loads are issued are proportionate and non-discriminatory. In particular, Member States shall cooperate to avoid the multiplicity of vehicle markings and signalling, and to favour the use of pictograms over text. Member States shall not impose language requirements related to the transport of indivisible loads.

Or. en

Justification

Aligning the rules for escort vehicles of abnormal transports would make it easier for the operators to execute cross-border transports.

Amendment 141

Erik Bergkvist

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.4 to 1.8, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Member States may allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national or international transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with weights and dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 to 1.8, 2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Justification

International transport operations should be added to the text so cross border operations are also included. It should also be possible to deviate either in terms of length, width, height and/or weight as it has been shown to greatly contribute to reducing fuel consumption and emissions. If we do not have this addition, at the border trucks will have to be unloaded, uploaded to smaller vehicles, and then once again unloaded and uploaded to bigger vehicles after the crossing. This is not good internal market practice and neither does it benefits the environment.

Amendment 142

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national or international transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with weights or dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 to 1.8, 2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Justification

Cross-border operations with vehicles or combinations deviating from Annex 1 have been taking place between consenting Member States for several decades without significantly affecting international competition in the transport sector as defined by this directive. Specialised vehicles or combinations are used for these operations due to the operational environment. The proposal should include these operations and create legal clarity for these well-functioning, energy efficient existing practices already accepted by consenting Member States.

Amendment 143

Markus Ferber, Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa, Jörgen Warborn

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national or international transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with weights or dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 to 1.8, 2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Justification

Cross-border operations using specialized vehicles or combinations deviating from the characteristics of Annex 1 have taken place between consenting Member States for several decades without significantly affecting international competition in the transport sector, as defined by this Directive. These energy-efficient operations should be included in this proposal to create legal certainty for this practice that is already accepted by consenting Member States.

Amendment 144

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national or international transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with weights and dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 to 1.8, 2, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Amendment 145

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow vehicles or vehicle combinations used for transport which carry out certain national or international transport operations that do not significantly affect international competition in the transport sector to circulate in their territory with weights or dimensions deviating from those laid down in points 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 to 1.8, 2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Justification

If neighbouring Member States allow nationally vehicles or combinations to operate with certain dimensions deviating to those laid down in Annex 1, these vehicles or combinations should be al-lowed to cross the border between these member states. If Member States have been allowing nationally bigger vehicles and combinations already for decades and consistently improving the logistical efficiency and environmental impacts of transport, they should be allowed to do so also in the future.

Amendment 146

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the Member State which permits transport operations to be carried out in its territory by vehicles or vehicle combinations with dimensions deviating from those laid down in Annex I also permits the circulation of European Modular Systems pursuant to paragraph 4a, so as to achieve at least the loading length authorised in that Member State, and so that every operator may benefit from equal conditions of competition.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 147

Markus Ferber, Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa, Jörgen Warborn

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the Member State which permits transport operations to be carried out in its territory by vehicles or vehicle combinations with weights or dimensions deviating from those laid down in Annex I also permits the circulation of European Modular Systems pursuant to paragraph 4a, so as to achieve at least the loading length authorised in that Member State, and so that every operator may benefit from equal conditions of competition.

Or. en

Amendment 148

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 149

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow the circulation in their territories in national and international traffic of European Modular Systems subject to all of the following conditions:

Member States may only allow the circulation in their territories in national traffic of European Modular Systems, or trials pursuant to paragraph 5, subject to all of the following conditions:

Or. en

Amendment 150

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point ba (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ba) the Member States shall conduct an analysis of the investment that may be required to adapt the infrastructure to allow for the safe circulation of EMS, and make this analysis public;

Or. en

Amendment 151

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) the Member States shall ensure the connectivity of the part of the network where European Modular Systems can circulate in their territories with the road network of neighbouring Member States that also allow the circulation of European Modular Systems, in order to enable cross-border traffic;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 152

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) the Member States shall set a monitoring system and assess the impact of European Modular Systems on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal split.

(d) the Member States shall set up a continuous monitoring system that shall assess the impact of European Modular Systems on road safety, on road infrastructure, on modal cooperation, on traffic volumes, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal split; this monitoring shall also take into consideration the impact of the aforementioned aspects on neighbouring Member States; the assessments shall be regular and publicly available;

Or. en

Amendment 153

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) the Member States shall set a monitoring system and assess the impact of European Modular Systems on road safety, on the road infrastructure, on the need for additional driver training, on modal cooperation, as well as the environmental impacts of European Modular Systems on the transport system, including the impacts on modal split.

Or. en

Amendment 154

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point da (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(da) the Member States shall ensure that the use of European Modular Systems is strictly limited to: roads with separate carriageways for the two directions of traffic, separated from each other by a dividing strip not intended for traffic or, exceptionally, separated by other means; roads outside residential areas; roads outside urban areas; and roads outside rural conurbations;

Or. en

Amendment 155

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point db (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(db) the Member States shall ensure that any decision regarding the roads that European Modular Systems may circulate on is subject to, and informed by, a public consultation;

Or. en

Amendment 156

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point dc (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(dc) the Member States shall ensure that the use of European Modular Systems will not lead to an increase in road transport’s share of the modal split within those Member States, have a detrimental impact on rail freight or waterborne transport, or lead to a notable increase in the external costs generated by road transport;

Or. en

Amendment 157

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point dd (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(dd) the Member State shall ensure there is no competition with rail freight or waterborne freight for routes used by European Modular Systems and shall demonstrate that the introduction of European Modular Systems is required because of an absence of non-road transport alternatives that generate comparatively less external costs;

Or. en

Amendment 158

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point de (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(de) the Member States shall ensure that measures are taken to avoid negative impacts on road safety brought about as a result of the circulation of European Modular Systems;

Or. en

Amendment 159

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point df (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(df) the Member States shall ensure that European Modular Systems may circulate only when part of an intermodal transport operation;

Or. en

Amendment 160

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point dg (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(dg) the Member States shall ensure that where road infrastructure requires maintenance, expansion, alteration or any other redesign to allow for the circulation of European Modular Systems, that the costs involved are covered partially or entirely by the operators of the European Modular Systems benefiting from such works.

Or. en

Amendment 161

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point dh (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(dh) the Member States shall ensure that by 1 January 2030 all European Modular Systems shall be operated by zero-emission vehicles;

Or. en

Amendment 162

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – point di (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(di) the Member States shall ensure that, when their national meteorological institutes or other relevant bodies issue a dangerous traffic weather warning, European Modular Systems are automatically informed of such announcements and their use on roads is halted, where necessary, until such time as the warning has been withdrawn;

Or. en

Amendment 163

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – Paragraph 4a – point dj (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(dj) the Member States shall ensure that drivers of European Modular Systems have a minimum age of 24, possess a minimum of 5 years' experience operating vehicles of Category C and CE, maintain a clean driving record without suspensions for the past 3 years, and hold a specific certificate for operating EMS.

Or. en

Amendment 164

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Whenever a Member State allows, pursuant to this paragraph, the circulation of European Modular Systems in national traffic, it may not reject or prohibit the circulation in its territory of European Modular Systems in international traffic, provided that such systems do not exceed the maximum weights and dimensions set for European Modular Systems in national traffic.

Or. en

Amendment 165

Erik Bergkvist

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Whenever a Member State allows, pursuant to this paragraph, the circulation of European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I in national traffic, it may not reject or prohibit the circulation in its territory of European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I in international traffic between consenting Member States, provided that such systems do not exceed the maximum weights and dimensions set for European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I in national traffic.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 166

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Before allowing the circulation of European Modular Systems in their own territory, Member States shall issue a reasoned request to the Commission where they shall set out how they have met all of the conditions as set out in points (a) to (dj) of this paragraph. The Commission shall assess the request and only authorise the circulation of European Modular Systems within the Member State if the conditions have been met. The Commission shall make public its assessments and the justifications for any decision it makes under this subparagraph.

Or. en

Amendment 167

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Whenever a Member State allows, pursuant to this paragraph, the circulation of European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I in national traffic, it may not reject or prohibit the circulation in its territory of European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I in international traffic, provided that such systems do not exceed the maximum weights and dimensions set for European Modular Systems or vehicle combinations deviating from Annex I allowed in national traffic.

Or. en

Amendment 168

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Member States allowing the circulation of European modular systems in international traffic should be encouraged to cooperate to mutually recognize the qualifications of EMS drivers from other Member States in order to avoid that the refusal of training and testing in a host Member State becomes an obstacle to international use.

Amendment 169

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – sixth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 170

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a (new) – seventh subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall inform the Commission in case they allow the circulation in their territories of European Modular Systems.

Member States shall inform the Commission in case they allow the circulation in their territories of European Modular Systems. Three years after the entry into force, the Commission shall present a report on the cross-border circulation of the European Modular System combinations in the EU and shall, if appropriate, make a legislative proposal duly accompanied by an impact assessment to widen the scope of its use.

Or. en

Amendment 171

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a (new) – seventh subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall inform the Commission in case they allow the circulation in their territories of European Modular Systems.

The circulation of European Modular Systems in international traffic between two neighbouring Member States shall only be permitted where at the time of entry into force of this Directive, there is already widespread, regular, non-trial based, cross border traffic of European Modular Systems between the two Member States, subject to the conditions outlined in paragraph 4a.

Or. en

Amendment 172

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – new subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Three years after the entry into force, the Commission shall present a report on the cross-border circulation of the European Modular System combinations in the EU and shall, if appropriate, make a legislative proposal duly accompanied by an impact assessment to widen the scope of its use.’;

Or. en

Amendment 173

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – new subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 174

Pablo Arias Echeverría, José Ramón Bauzá Díaz

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 4a – new subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

From 1 January 2040, where Member States allow the circulation in their territories of vehicles or vehicle combinations of European Modular Systems (EMS) engaged in international traffic, they shall evaluate whether the state of the technology developments in the markets allows phasing out the use of such EMS running on fossil fuels.

Or. en

Amendment 175

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow for a limited period of time trials of vehicles or vehicle combinations incorporating new technologies or new concepts which cannot comply with requirements of this Directive. Such vehicles or vehicle combinations shall be allowed to carry out certain national or international transport operations for the trial period. In particular, trials with European Modular Systems shall be allowed for five years and renewable once. In case a Member State renews a European Modular Systems trial, it shall provide adequate justification to the Commission. The number of trials shall not be limited. Member States shall inform the Commission thereof.

Or. en

Justification

A trial period is limited to five years which may not be sufficient to determine the level of maturity of a vehicle concept in all circumstances. A prolongation of the period should be possible. However, it should be subject to a proper justification provided to the relevant national competent authorities.

Amendment 176

Massimiliano Salini

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 4 – paragraph 5 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow for a limited period of time trials of vehicles or vehicle combinations incorporating new technologies or new concepts which cannot comply with requirements of this Directive. Such vehicles or vehicle combinations shall be allowed to carry out certain national or international transport operations for the trial period only after demonstrating that the targeted transport activities cannot be conducted by rail or any other form of transport that offers similar or superior safety and environmental benefits. It must be proven that this does not have a significant impact on intermodal competition in the transportation industry as a whole. In particular, trials with European Modular Systems shall be allowed for a maximum of five years. The number of trials shall not be limited. Member States shall inform the Commission thereof.

Or. en

Amendment 177

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow for a limited period of time trials of vehicles or vehicle combinations incorporating new technologies or new concepts which cannot comply with requirements of this Directive. Such vehicles or vehicle combinations shall be allowed to carry out certain national or international transport operations for the trial period. In particular, trials with European Modular Systems shall be allowed for a maximum of five years and can be renewed once for another five years. If a Member State decides to renew a trial, it shall provide sufficient justification to the Commission. The number of trials shall not be limited. Member States shall inform the Commission thereof.

Or. en

Justification

A trial period limited to five years might not be sufficient to determine the level of maturity of a vehicle concept. Furthermore, for many small and medium-sized companies, trials represent a significant investment and a limitation of a 5-year trial period might negatively affect their willingness to invest and innovate for example more energy efficient vehicles. Therefore, a trial should be allowed to be renewed once with adequate justification.

Amendment 178

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5– first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow for a limited period of time trials of vehicles or vehicle combinations incorporating new technologies or new concepts which cannot comply with requirements of this Directive. Such vehicles or vehicle combinations shall be allowed to carry out certain national transport operations for the trial period only after ensuring the conditions as laid down in paragraph 4a to this Article have been met. In particular, trials with European Modular Systems shall be allowed for a maximum of three years. Member States shall request authorisation from the Commission pursuant to paragraph 4a.

Or. en

Amendment 179

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5– first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may allow for trials of vehicles or vehicle combinations incorporating new technologies or new concepts which cannot comply with requirements of this Directive. Such vehicles or vehicle combinations shall be allowed to carry out certain national or international transport operations for the trial period. In particular, trials with European Modular Systems shall be allowed. The number of trials shall not be limited. Member States shall inform the Commission thereof.

Or. en

Justification

A time limitation will set fewer incentives for companies to invest in innovative and more energy efficient EMS. In particular for SMEs it is difficult to understand why they should make a significant investment in an EMS if its life expectancy is more than 5 years but its use may be limited.

Amendment 180

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5– first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 181

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5– first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 182

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point e

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10h to supplement this Directive by determining the minimum sets of data and the performance indicators to be provided by the monitoring systems set up by the Member States as referred to in paragraphs 4a, point (d), and 5 of this Article.;

5a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10h to supplement this Directive by determining the minimum sets of data and the performance indicators, linked to the points (a) to (dj) of this Article, to be provided by the monitoring systems set up by the Member States as referred to in paragraphs 4a, point (d), and 5 of this Article.;

Or. en

Amendment 183

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point ee (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4 – paragraph 5b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The following paragraph 5b is inserted:

By 30 June 2025, the Commission shall ensure that all requirements and technologies for heavy duty vehicles under Regulation (EU) 2019/21441a are made applicable to, and, where necessary, altered for, European Modular Systems, in order to take account of the potential increased road safety risk posed by such vehicles;

__________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 on type-approval requirements for motor vehicles and their trailers, and systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, as regards their general safety and the protection of vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users, amending Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulations (EC) No 78/2009, (EC) No 79/2009 and (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 631/2009, (EU) No 406/2010, (EU) No 672/2010, (EU) No 1003/2010, (EU) No 1005/2010, (EU) No 1008/2010, (EU) No 1009/2010, (EU) No 19/2011, (EU) No 109/2011, (EU) No 458/2011, (EU) No 65/2012, (EU) No 130/2012, (EU) No 347/2012, (EU) No 351/2012, (EU) No 1230/2012 and (EU) 2015/166 (Text with EEA relevance)

Or. en

Amendment 184

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part

Directive 96/53/EC

Articles 4a and 4b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) the following Articles 4a and 4b are inserted:

(4) the following Articles 4a, 4b and 4c are inserted:

Or. en

Amendment 185

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part

Directive 96/53/EC

Articles 4a and 4b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) the following Articles 4a and 4b are inserted:

(4) the following Article 4a is inserted:

Or. en

Justification

Allowing combustion vehicles to go from 40 tonnes to 44 tonnes will reduce the incentive for market actors to move from combustion to electric vehicles and allowing bilateral agreements between the Members States to apply weights and dimensions above those set out in this Directive in cross-border traffic renders the directive obsolete.

Amendment 186

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Articles 4a – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a single national access point for the applicants to obtain the information on the requirements for applying for special permits or similar arrangements as laid down in Article 4(3) and to the necessary information to plan their routes in a clear, accessible, and transparent manner;

Or. en

Amendment 187

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a single national access point to obtain the information on the requirements for applying for special permits or similar arrangements as laid down in Article 4(3) and to the necessary information to plan their routes in a clear, accessible, and transparent manner. It is necessary to be included information on height restrictions;

Or. en

Amendment 188

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a single national access point to obtain the information on the requirements for applying for special permits or similar arrangements as laid down in Article 4(3) and to the necessary information to plan their routes in a clear, accessible, and transparent manner. Information on height restrictions shall be included;

Or. en

Amendment 189

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard vehicle registration and permit application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits, including in digital form, or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3) as well as harmonising the rules for escorting abnormal transports. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Justification

At the moment, all Member States require the same information during the application process for abnormal permits. However, they do so in a different format and in their own national language. This creates pointless bureaucratic burden. Streamlining the application procedures between Member States does not require any change in the responsibilities of road operators or the methods for issuing permits.

Amendment 190

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard application form for vehicle registration and authorisation, harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits, including in digital form, or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3), and harmonising the rules on escorting non-standard transport operations. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).’;

Or. pl

Amendment 191

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard vehicle registration and permit application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Amendment 192

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard vehicle registration and permit application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Justification

Currently, Member States require the same information during the application procedure but in a different format and in their own national language. Streamlining application procedures with a common standard for all Member States will reduce the administrative burden of abnormal transport operators and also result in financial savings.

Amendment 193

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard vehicle registration and permit application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Amendment 194

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts establishing an EU common standard application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Amendment 195

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing a common standard application form and harmonising the rules and procedures for the issuing of national permits or similar arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Article 4(3). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Amendment 196

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4b

deleted

1. Whenever a Member State, pursuant to Article 4(2), point (a), allows the circulation within its territory of vehicle combinations with a maximum weight exceeding the limits set out in points 2.2.1 or 2.2.2 of Annex I, it may not reject or prohibit the use in its territory in international traffic of those vehicle combinations complying with the weight values set for the national transport of goods, provided that such vehicle combinations do not have a maximum authorised weight exceeding 44 tonnes.

deleted

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the 44 tonnes-weight limit set out in paragraph 1 may be exceeded in case the Member State allows higher weight values to those vehicle combinations when involved in an intermodal transport operation.

deleted

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Allowing combustion vehicles to go from 40 tonnes to 44 tonnes will reduce the incentive for market actors to move from combustion to ZE vehicles and allowing bilateral agreements between the Members States to apply weights and dimensions above those set out in this Directive in cross-border traffic renders the directive obsolete.

Amendment 197

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Whenever a Member State, pursuant to Article 4(2), point (a), allows the circulation within its territory of vehicle combinations with a maximum weight exceeding the limits set out in points 2.2.1 or 2.2.2 of Annex I, it may decide to permit the use in its territory in international traffic of vehicle combinations complying with the weight values set for the national transport of goods, provided that such vehicle combinations do not have a maximum authorised weight exceeding 44 tonnes, that routes used by such vehicles do not compete with rail or waterborne transport modes, and provided at least one of the following conditions is met:

(a) the vehicle combination is zero emission;

(b) the vehicle combination is used for intermodal transport operations;

Point (b) of this paragraph shall apply until 31 December 2030.

Or. en

Amendment 198

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

In order to stimulate uptake of ZEV vehicles, intermodality and to increase decarbonisation efforts, while also allowing for additional payload, 44 tonnes shall be granted to three-axled motor vehicles with three axles semi-trailers and additional 2 tons for ZEVs, alternatively fuelled or involved in intermodal transport. The over-all increase to 44 tonnes shall ensure fewer trips to reduce the ghg emissions

Amendment 199

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Any Member State can set their own weights and dimensions but must allow the circulation within its territory of vehicle combinations with a maximum weight of 60 tonnes on the TEN-T-network and may not reject or prohibit the use in its territory in international traffic of those vehicle combinations complying with the weight values set for the national transport of goods, provided that such vehicle combinations do not have a maximum authorised weight exceeding 60 tonnes.

Or. en

Amendment 200

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 201

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the 60 tonnes-weight limit set out in paragraph 1 may be exceeded in case the Member State allows higher weight values to those vehicle combinations when involved in an intermodal transport operation.

Or. en

Amendment 202

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the 46 tonnes-weight limit set out in paragraph 1 may be exceeded in case the Member State allows higher weight values to those vehicle combinations when involved in an intermodal transport operation.

Or. en

Amendment 203

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 204

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 205

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2039, if the enabling conditions on the market allow for it.’;

Or. en

Amendment 206

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Ondřej Kovařík

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2039, if enabling conditions are met.’;

Or. en

Justification

It is important to have incentives for operators to decarbonise road transport. However, for legal certainty and legislative coherence, the phase-out timeline should be aligned as closely as possible with the targets set in the CO2 standards for heavy-duty vehicles regulation. Enabling conditions include, for example, the availability of infrastructure and zero-emission vehicles.

Amendment 207

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, the application of this Article shall be evaluated in 2040.’

Or. en

Amendment 208

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4b – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall apply until 31 December 2034.’;

3. In view of the expected increase in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles, this Article shall be evaluated in 2035.’;

Or. en

Amendment 209

Jan-Christoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 4c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4c

The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing abnormal road transports corridors as well as a simplified permit application procedure for use of these corridors. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 10i(2).

Or. en

Amendment 210

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point aa (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 4

Present text

Amendment

(aa) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

4. Vehicles carrying proof of compliance may be subject:

4. Vehicles carrying proof of compliance shall be subject:

- as regards common standards on weights, to random checks,

- as regards common standards on dimensions, only to checks where there is a suspicion of non-compliance with this Directive.

Or. en

Directive 96/53/ EC

Amendment 211

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

‘

7. For a transport operation to qualify as an intermodal transport operations for the purpose of this directive, the shipper or, if different from the shipper, the undertaking which organises the intermodal transport operation, shall ensure that the documents referred to under Articles 3 and 7 of Directive 92/106/ECC, as appropriate, are recorded and made available on an eFTI platform in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2020/1056. Such information shall be accessible to competent authorities, on the same eFTI platform where the transport information was recorded, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2020/1056.

’

Or. en

Justification

This provision should be dealt as part of the revision of the Combined Transport Directive

Amendment 212

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) the following Article 8c is inserted:

deleted

‘

Article 8c

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

The overhang or load support of vehicle transporters may not protrude in relation to the load. The load may protrude in front of the towing vehicle up to a maximum of 0,5 meters, provided that the first axle of the transported vehicle rests on the trailer structure. The load may protrude from behind up to a maximum of 1,5 meters, provided that the last axle of the transported vehicle rests on the trailer structure.;

’

Or. en

Justification

This provision increases competition between road freight and rail. It makes sense for trucks to be used for road car transporters for short distances but not for them to incentivised through greater length for cross border travel. In addition, and as stated in the Impact Assessment, when overloads go above the design limit the safety risks substantially increase.

Amendment 213

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – introductory part

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using extendable rear load supports.

The load may protrude in front of the vehicle transporter, excepting articulated vehicles, up to a maximum of 0.5 meters provided that the axles of the transported vehicle rest on the body structure. At the rear the load may protrude to a maximum of 1.5 meters provided that the forward axle(s) of the transported vehicle(s) rest on the trailer structure. The extendable rear load supports may not protrude further than the overhanging load.’;

Or. en

Amendment 214

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters with may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports, such as extendable rear load supports.

Or. en

Amendment 215

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using extendable rear load supports.

Or. en

Justification

There is no definition regarding which load supporters are "authorised" and which are not. Thus a clarification is necessary.

Amendment 216

Marco Campomenosi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 21 meters, using authorised load supports.

Or. it

Amendment 217

Massimiliano Salini

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 21 meters, using authorised load supports.

Or. en

Amendment 218

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using extendable rear load supports.

Or. en

Amendment 219

Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Vehicle transporters with open bodies may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports.

Vehicle transporters may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I while loaded, up to a total of 20,75 meters, using authorised load supports

Or. en

Amendment 220

Rovana Plumb

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The load may protrude in front of vehicle transporter, excepting articulated vehicles, up to a maximum of 0,5 meters, provided that the axles of the transported vehicle rests on the body structure. At the rear the load may protrude to a maximum of 1,5 meters, provided that the forward axle(s) of the transported vehicle(s) rest on the trailer structure. The extendable rear load supports may not protrude further than the overhanging load;

Or. en

Amendment 221

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 95/53/EC

Article 8c – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The load may protrude in front of the vehicle transporter, with the exception of articulated vehicles, up to a maximum of 0,5 meters, provided that the axles of the transported vehicle rest on the trailer structure. The load may protrude from behind up to a maximum of 1,5 meters, provided that the forward axle of the transported vehicle rests on the trailer structure.;

Or. en

Justification

Clarification as there is no recognised definition of 'open' and 'closed' vehicle transporters and to leave room for partial or future designs entering the market, while also reflecting the sector's operational reality of vehicle transporters.

Amendment 222

Massimiliano Salini

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 8c – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The overhang or load support of vehicle transporters may not protrude in relation to the load. The load may protrude in front of the towing vehicle up to a maximum of 0,5 meters, provided that the first axle of the transported vehicle rests on the structure of the motor vehicle. The load may protrude from behind up to a maximum of 1,5 meters, provided that the last axle of the transported vehicle rests on the trailer structure.;

Or. en

Amendment 223

Marco Campomenosi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 8c – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The overhang or load support of vehicle transporters may not protrude in relation to the load. The load may protrude in front of the towing vehicle up to a maximum of 0,5 meters, provided that the first axle of the transported vehicle rests on the motor vehicle structure. The load may protrude from behind up to a maximum of 1,5 meters, provided that the last axle of the transported vehicle rests on the trailer structure.’;

Or. it

Amendment 224

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 9a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Vehicles or vehicle combinations which comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/858 may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I to this Directive provided that their cabs deliver improved aerodynamic performance, energy efficiency and safety performance. Any excess of the maximum lengths allowed under this Article may also be used to install zero-emission technology. Vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with such cabs shall comply with point 1.5 of Annex I to this Directive and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the load capacity of those vehicles.

1. Vehicles or vehicle combinations which comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/858 may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I to this Directive provided that their cabs deliver improved aerodynamic performance, energy efficiency, safety performance and improved driver comfort. Any excess of the maximum lengths allowed under this Article may also be used to install zero-emission technology. Vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with such cabs shall comply with point 1.5 of Annex I to this Directive and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the load capacity of those vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 225

Mario Furore

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 9a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where cabs are equipped with toilets, those toilets cannot be removed to allow the installation of zero-emission technology.

Or. it

Amendment 226

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 9a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Vehicles or vehicle combinations which comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/858 may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I to this Directive provided that their cabs deliver improved aerodynamic performance, energy efficiency, improved driver comfort and safety performance. Any excess of the maximum lengths allowed under this Article may also be used to install zero-emission technology. Vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with such cabs shall comply with point 1.5 of Annex I to this Directive and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the load capacity of those vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 227

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 96/53 EC

Article 9a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Vehicles or vehicle combinations which comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/858 may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I to this Directive provided that their cabs deliver improved aerodynamic performance, energy efficiency, safety performance and improved driver comfort. Any excess of the maximum lengths allowed under this Article may also be used to install zero-emission technology. Vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with such cabs shall comply with point 1.5 of Annex I to this Directive and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the load capacity of those vehicles.

Or. en

Justification

The road freight sector is experiencing a chronic driver shortage, improved safety and overall comfort are crucial to aid as an alleviating factor.

Amendment 228

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 9a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Vehicles or vehicle combinations which comply with Regulation (EU) 2018/858 may exceed the maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I to this Directive provided that their cabs deliver improved aerodynamic performance, energy efficiency, safety performance and driver comfort. Any excess of the maximum lengths allowed under this Article may also be used to install zero-emission technology. Vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with such cabs shall comply with point 1.5 of Annex I to this Directive and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the load capacity of those vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 229

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 9b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8a) the following Article 9b is inserted:

Within one year of the entry into force of this Directive, the European Commission shall amend relevant type approval legislation including Regulation (EU) 2018/8586a to ensure that new vehicles or vehicle combinations are technically and operationally compatible with intermodal transshipment requirements, including but not limited to requirements of weight, shape, size, craneability, resistance to railway air forces, and the retractability and foldability of protruding devices.

__________________

6a Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC

Or. en

Justification

Today most road units are not compatible with their transport on rail or inland navigation and in order to avoid hampering an important market segment (particularly in light of changes introduced in Annex I ), it is crucial to ensure that any new road unit put on the market is compatible with intermodal transport operations by design.

Amendment 230

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – paragraph 1 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The maximum authorised weights and axle weights of alternatively fuelled or zero-emission vehicles shall be those set out in points 2.2., 2.3, 2.4, 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of Annex I.

Alternatively fuelled vehicles shall also comply with the maximum authorised axle weight limits set out in point 3 of Annex I.

Or. en

Amendment 231

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – paragraph 1 – first subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The maximum authorised weights and axle weights of alternatively fuelled or zero-emission vehicles shall be those set out in points 2.2., 2.3, 2.4, 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of Annex I.

The maximum authorised weights and axle weights of alternatively fuelled or zero-emission vehicles shall be those set out in points 2.2., 2.3, 2.4 and 3.4.2 of Annex I.

Or. en

Justification

Synchronisation with changes to the Annex

Amendment 232

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – second subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The additional weight required by alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles shall be defined on the basis of the documentation provided by the manufacturer when the vehicle in question is approved. That additional weight shall be indicated in the official proof required in accordance with Article 6.

The additional weight required by alternatively fuelled vehicles shall be defined on the basis of the documentation provided by the manufacturer when the vehicle in question is approved. That additional weight shall be indicated in the official proof required in accordance with Article 6.

Or. en

Amendment 233

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10h to supplement this Directive by updating the list of alternative fuels referred to in Article 2 that require additional weight. It is of particular importance that the Commission follow its usual practice and carry out consultations with experts, including Member States’ experts, before adopting those delegated acts.’.

The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 10h to supplement this Directive by updating the list of alternative fuels referred to in Article 2 that require additional weight, provided such additions are for a vehicle to comply with point 11 of Article 3 in Regulation (EU) 2019/12421a. It is of particular importance that the Commission follow its usual practice and carry out consultations with experts, including Member States’ experts, before adopting those delegated acts.’.

__________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 setting CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles and amending Regulations (EC) No 595/2009 and (EU) 2018/956 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Directive 96/53/EC

Or. en

Amendment 234

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I for zero-emission vehicles or vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles may be exceeded by the additional length necessary to accommodate the zero-emission technology, with a maximum of 90 cm, to allow the addition of such devices. Such zero-emission vehicles or vehicle combinations shall comply with points 1.5 and 1.5a of Annex I to this Directive, and any exceeding of the maximum lengths shall not result in an increase in the loading length of those vehicles or vehicle combinations, in order to ensure the compatibility of trailers and semi-trailers with the requirements for intermodal transport operations.

deleted

The additional length required by zero-emission vehicles shall be defined on the basis of the documentation provided by the manufacturer when the vehicle in question is approved. That additional length shall be indicated in the official proof required in accordance with Article 6.’.

Or. en

Amendment 235

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – paragraph 2a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. The Commission shall revise EU type approval legislation in order to take account of the requirements set out in points 3.4.2, 3.4.3 and 3.4.4 of Annex I.

Or. en

Amendment 236

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive96/53/EC

Article 10c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The maximum lengths laid down in point 1.1 of Annex I, subject where applicable to Article 9a(1) and 10b(2), and the maximum distance laid down in point 1.6 of Annex I, may be exceeded by 15 cm for vehicles or vehicle combinations engaged in the transport of 45-foot containers or 45-foot swap bodies, empty or loaded, provided that the road transport of the container or swap body in question is part of an intermodal transport operation. 45-Foot or longer containers and swap bodies which are part of an intermodal transport operation may also be carried by articulated vehicle combination with a semi-trailer with a length of up to 15 metres providing the conditions in Article 4 (1) and (2) are complied with’;

Or. en

Amendment 237

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 238

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – new subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Certified automatic systems shall be linked to the single national entry point for special permits or similar arrangement set out in Article 4a in order to be able to recognise vehicles or vehicle combinations which exceed the maximum authorised weights and are in possession of a special permit.

Or. en

Amendment 239

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – second subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If a Member State chooses to set up automatic systems on the road infrastructure, it shall ensure as a minimum the deployment of such systems in the trans-European road transport network set out in Regulation (EU) 1315/2013*. Automatic systems shall be able to, if technically possible, identify vehicles or combinations with a special permit and link the conditions laid down in the permit with the maximum authorised weights and dimensions.

Or. en

Justification

Automatic identification systems must be able to identify vehicles or combinations which exceed the maximum authorised weights and dimensions but have a derogation based on a special permit. Vehicles with a special permit should not receive an unjustified penalty due to information provided by an automatic identification system.

Amendment 240

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – second subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If a Member State chooses to set up automatic systems on the road infrastructure, it shall ensure as a minimum the deployment of such systems in the trans-European road transport network set out in Regulation (EU) 1315/2013*. Automatic systems shall be able to identify vehicles or combinations with a special permit and link the conditions laid down in the permit with the maximum authorised weights and dimensions.

Or. en

Amendment 241

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A Member State shall not require on-board weighing equipment to be installed on vehicles or vehicle combinations which are registered in another Member State.

Within 4 years of the entry into force of this Directive, all vehicles and all vehicle combinations shall be fitted with onboard weighing equipment that is connected to onboard tachographs.

Or. en

Amendment 242

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – third subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A Member State shall not require on-board weighing equipment to be installed on vehicles or vehicle combinations which are registered in another Member State.

Within 5 years of the entry into force of this Directive, all vehicles and all vehicle combinations shall be fitted with onboard weighting equipment.

Or. en

Justification

Rather than relying solely on weighing systems sporadically installed on road infrastructures (which can be easily circumvented via alternative routes which are likely to become congested), better enforcement of road legislation will be achieved by continuous weight monitoring onboard systems based on weight sensors connected to the already existing tachographs.

Amendment 243

Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Without prejudice to Union and national law, where automatic systems are used to establish infringements of this Directive and to impose penalties, such automatic systems shall be certified. These systems must also be linked to the electronic non-standard transport licensing system so that they can identify authorised vehicles carrying indivisible loads. Where automatic systems are used only for identification purposes, they need not be certified.

Or. pl

Amendment 244

Markus Ferber, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 1 – fourth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Without prejudice to Union and national law, where automatic systems are used to establish infringements of this Directive and to impose penalties, such automatic systems shall be certified. These systems shall also have to be linked to an electronic licensing system for abnormal transports in order to recognise permitted vehicles carrying indivisible loads. Where automatic systems are used only for identification purposes, they need not be certified.

Or. en

Amendment 245

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10d – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Each Member State shall carry out each calendar year at least six checks per one million vehicle-kilometres travelled by vehicles or vehicle combinations used for the transport of goods and falling within the scope of this Directive in its territory on the weights of those vehicles or vehicle combinations, irrespective of the country of registration of such vehicles or of the country where such vehicles were put into circulation. The compliance checks shall include an appropriate number of checks performed at night time.’;

Each Member State shall carry out each calendar year at least 20 checks per one million vehicle-kilometres travelled by vehicles or vehicle combinations used for the transport of goods and falling within the scope of this Directive in its territory on the weights of those vehicles or vehicle combinations, irrespective of the country of registration of such vehicles or of the country where such vehicles were put into circulation. The compliance checks shall include at least 5 checks per one million vehicle-kilometres travelled at night time.’;

Or. en

Amendment 246

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10da – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. When a Member State implements IAP pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall ensure that their IAP schemes comply with Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council*. In particular, Member States shall ensure that data related to the IAP scheme and falling within the scope of Directive 2010/40/EU, including weight, length, width or height restrictions, are available in digital machine-readable format and made accessible via the National Access Points established under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/670**.

Or. en

Amendment 247

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10da – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

IAP must be able to identify vehicles or combinations which exceed the maximum authorised weights and dimensions but have a derogation based on a special permit. Vehicles with a special permit should not receive an unjustified penalty due to information provided by an automatic identification system.

Amendment 248

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10 da – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) define the criteria for granting access to heavy-duty vehicles, including but not limited to vehicle weight, length, technical specifications, and compliance with specific safety standards;

(a) define the criteria for granting access to heavy-duty vehicles, including but not limited to vehicle weight, length, height technical specifications, and compliance with specific safety standards;

Or. en

Amendment 249

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10e – paragraph 1a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14a) In Article 10e, the following new paragraph is added:

Member States shall ensure that revenues generated from these penalties are used to develop and support intermodal transport operations, reduce the external costs generated by road transport operations and improve cross-border transport operations for rail and waterborne transport modes.

Or. en

Amendment 250

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10b – point 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) in Article 10f(1), point (a) is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘

(a) the shipper to give to the haulier to whom it entrusts the transport of a container or swap body a statement indicating the weight and the height of the container or swap body transported; and;

’

Or. en

Amendment 251

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10g – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Commission shall analyse the information received pursuant to paragraph 1, and on the basis of the information received, present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of this Directive, no later than 13 months after receiving the information from all Member States. Such report shall include information on relevant developments in the fields in question.

2. The Commission shall analyse the information received pursuant to paragraph 1, and on the basis of the information received, present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of this Directive, no later than 12 months after receiving the information from all Member States. Such report shall include information on relevant developments in the fields in question.

Or. en

Amendment 252

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 a (new)

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10 ga (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16a) The following Article 10 ga is inserted:

Article 10 ga

EMS Best Practices Forum

1. An EMS Best Practices Forum shall be set up in order to support dialogue and share experiences and best practices on EMS vehicles in the Union among Member States’ experts and members of the Road Transport Committee.

2. Member States shall delegate as experts to the EMS Best Practices Forum the experts participating in the Road Transport Committee referred to in Article 10i.

3. Stakeholders, representatives of vehicle manufacturers, representatives of transport operators and social partners may be invited to the EMS Best Practices Forum.

4. The EMS Best Practices Forum shall adopt its rules of procedure.

5. The EMS Best Practices Forum shall meet at least once a year.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 253

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 10j

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) Article 10j is deleted;

(19) Article 10j is replaced by the following:

By [4 years after the date of entry into force], and every 4 years thereafter, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the application of this Directive. The report shall contain a detailed assessment of the effects of this Directive on road safety, road infrastructure, the competitiveness of the sector, connectivity, and modal shift. The report should specifically assess the effects of European Modular Systems used in national transport to better understand the consequences of allowing their operation. As part of this report, the Commission shall also assess the extent to which the implementation of this Directive has met its objectives and its interaction with other relevant Union legal acts. On the basis of that report, the Commission shall, if appropriate, make a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 254

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new)

Directive 96/53/CE

Article 10ja (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19a) the following Article 10 ja is inserted:

Article 10 ja

Review

The Commission shall by 2027 at the latest , review the effectiveness and impact of this Directive , the feasibility of the dates set out in Article 4b and its compatibility with other relevant Union legislation and submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council with the result of the review. The report shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a proposal for amending this Directive based on findings of the review and an impact assessment.

The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the state of the enabling conditions for the market adoption of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles in the Union. In this report, the Commission shall assess in particular, but not limited to, the following elements:

(a) the amount of registrations of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles in Member States,

(b) the deployment of charging and refuelling infrastructure suitable for heavy-duty vehicles in Member States,

(d) the level of the average price of allowances under the new the emissions trading system covering road transport

(e) other measures that support the uptake of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 255

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20

Directive 96/53/EC

Article 10k – fourth subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For the purposes of this Article, a crisis means an exceptional, unexpected and sudden, natural or man-made event of extraordinary nature and scale that takes place inside or outside of the Union, with significant direct or indirect impacts on the area of road transport or the economy or welfare of the Union citizens, where the normal functioning of society is significantly disrupted, and where the public interest requires urgent action to be taken.;

For the purposes of this Article, a crisis means an exceptional, unexpected and sudden, natural or man-made event of extraordinary nature and scale that takes place inside or outside of the Union, with significant direct or indirect impacts on the area of road transport or the economy, safety or welfare of the Union citizens, where the normal functioning of society is significantly disrupted, and where the public interest requires urgent action to be taken.;

Or. en

Amendment 256

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article2a

Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2018/858

Article 3 (17) of Regulation (EU) 2018/858, is replaced by the following:

(17) ‘trailer’ means any non-self propelled vehicle, which is designed and constructed to be towed by a power driven vehicle and includes semi-trailers. However, the trailer may be propelled to support the motion without applying propelling forces when not coupled to a towing vehicle.;

Article 3 (33) of Regulation (EU) 2018/858, is replaced by the following:

(33) ‘semi-trailer’ A towable vehicle, in which the axle(s) is (are) positioned behind the centre of gravity of the vehicle (when uniformly loaded), and which is equipped with a connecting device permitting horizontal and vertical forces to be transmitted to a towing vehicle. One or more of the axles may be driven to support the towing vehicle, and a contribution to the propelling forces of the vehicle combination is permitted at all speeds. To ensure the stability of the vehicle combination, the propelling forces of the semi-trailer shall not exceed those of the towing vehicle at speeds above 15 km/h.;

Or. en

Justification

It must be ensured that transport operators interested in investing in zero-emission or more energy-efficient motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers can do so unhindered by legal flows. EU type approval legislation still does not facilitate the type-approval of trailers and semi-trailers with an auxiliary propulsion system, a very serious barrier to their market uptake and use.

Amendment 257

Ciarán Cuffe

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 2a

Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2019/2144

In Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2144, the following paragraph 4a is inserted:

4a. The vehicles of categories M1 and N1 shall have the following maximum authorised width:

1. M1: 1,921 m save for M1 vehicles with at least 10 cubic metres of internal space, for which the width limit shall be 2,07 m

2. N1: 1,921m save for N1 vehicles with at least 7 cubic metres of internal space, for which the width limit shall be 2,07m

3. N1: 2,60m for vehicles fitted with a bodywork with insulated walls of at least 45mm thick, having bodywork code 04 or 05, as referred to in Appendix 2 to Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2018/858

The requirements mentioned in points 1 and 2 of the first subparagraph shall be applicable from 1 January 2028 for the vehicles that emit tailpipe emissions, and from 1 January 2032 for zero-emission vehicles.

Or. en

Amendment 258

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by [date-of-adoption+2 years] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by [date-of-adoption+1 years] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Or. en

Justification

Given the timing, the revised provisions on weights and dimensions should become applicable as soon as possible. The national transposition should therefore be accelerated as much as possible.

Amendment 259

Elsi Katainen, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

This is an essential legislation for the road transport sector and therefore it is important that it becomes applicable as soon as possible. The national transposition should therefore not exceed 1 year after the adoption.

Amendment 260

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by [date-of-adoption+1 year] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Or. en

Amendment 261

Isabel García Muñoz, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, Thomas Rudner

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 262

Colm Markey

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3a

Not later than 31 December 2024, the Commission shall review the maximum width in EU law for light duty vehicles and, if appropriate, bring forward legislative proposals that apply to new registrations from an appropriate date or dates.

Or. en

Justification

In light of the expanding width of light duty passenger vehicles (i.e. cars, crossovers, SUVs and pick-up trucks), to deliver legislative clarity that their maximum width will be reviewed within a definite timeframe.

Amendment 263

Marianne Vind, Vera Tax, Kathleen Van Brempt

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3a

The Commission shall review the maximum width in EU law for light duty vehicles and bring forward legislative proposals that apply to new registrations from an appropriate date or dates no later than 31 December 2024.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 264

Clare Daly, Leila Chaibi

Proposal for a directive

Article 3a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3a

Not later than 31 December 2024, the Commission shall review the maximum width in EU law for light duty vehicles and bring forward legislative proposals that apply to new registrations from an appropriate date or dates.

Or. en

Amendment 265

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 1.1

Text proposed by the Commission

1. Maximum authorised dimensions for the vehicles referred to in Article 1(1), point (a)

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus

18,75 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

Amendment

1. Maximum authorised dimensions for the vehicles referred to in Article 1(1), point (a)

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

18,00 m

— road train

18,75 m

—three axled articulated bus

18,75 m

—four axled articulated bus

21,00 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

Or. en

Amendment 266

Elsi Katainen, JanChristoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 1.1 and point 2.5 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus

18,75 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

Amendment

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus with three axles

18,75 m

— articulated bus with four axles

21,00 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

2.5 Four-axle articulated buses

32 tonnes

In the case of alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weight of 32 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.5 is increased by the additional weight required for the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 32 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.5 is increased by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Justification

The amendment adds a separate category for four-axle articulated buses in order to make this legislation more future-proof. These buses are being increasingly used but have not yet been considered as a separate category.

Amendment 267

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 1.1

Text proposed by the Commission

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus

18,75 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

Amendment

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— articulated vehicle for the carriage of 45-foot containers or swap bodies involved in intermodal transport

18,00 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus with three axles

18,75 m

— articulated bus with four axles

21,00 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

Or. en

Amendment 268

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 1.3

Text proposed by the Commission

1.3 Maximum height

— any vehicle

4,00 m

— vehicles or vehicle combinations carrying in intermodal transport one or more containers with a standard external height of 9’ 6’’ (high-cube containers)

4,30 m

Amendment

1.3 Maximum height

— any vehicle

4,00 m

— vehicles or vehicle combinations carrying in intermodal transport one or more containers with a standard external height of 9’ 6’’ (high-cube containers)

4,00 m

Or. en

Amendment 269

Elsi Katainen, JanChristoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 1.1 and point 1.6

Text proposed by the Commission

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

16,50 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus

18,75 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

1.6 Maximum distance between the axis of the fifth-wheel king pin and the rear of a semi-trailer.

12,00 m

Amendment

1.1 Maximum length

— motor vehicle other than a bus

12,00 m

— trailer

12,00 m

— articulated vehicle

18,00 m

— road train

18,75 m

— articulated bus

18,75 m

— bus with two axles

13,50 m

— bus with more than two axles

15,00 m

— bus + trailer

18,75 m

1.6 Maximum distance between the axis of the fifth-wheel king pin and the rear of a semi-trailer.

13,50 m

Or. en

Justification

By extending the maximum length by only 1.5 metres, both the 45'- as well as the 48'-container can be transported. This strengthens intermodality. Further, the 48' container enables circa 30% more transport volume at almost the same cost compared to the 40'-container. This greater efficiency saves CO2 and has a positive effect on the shortage of drivers, as fewer drivers are needed to transport the same volume of goods. This extension only increases the transportable volume, but does not change the permissible total weight. Thus, there is no additional burden on the road infrastructure.

Amendment 270

Ciarán Cuffe

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2 Vehicle combinations

2.2.1

Road trains with five or six axles

(a) two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

(b) three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

2.2.3

Road trains with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle trailer

36 tonnes

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In case the maximum authorised weight (MAW) of the motor vehicle (18 tonnes) and the MAW of the tandem axle of the semi-trailer (20 tonnes) are respected and the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II the maximum authorised weight provided for in point 2.2.4.2 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2 shall be increased by the additional weight of the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.2 Vehicle combinations

2.2.1

Road trains with five or six axles

(a) two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

(b) three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

2.2.3

Road trains with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle trailer

36 tonnes

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission motor vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes. This weight allowance for zero-emission vehicle combinations shall be applicable for both national and international traffic.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission motor vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes. This weight allowance for zero-emission vehicle combinations shall be applicable for both national and international traffic.

Or. en

Amendment 271

Elsi Katainen, JanChristoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.1 and point 2.2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.1

Road trains with five or six axles

(a) two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

(b) three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Amendment

2.2.1

Road trains with five or six axles

(a) two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle trailer

40 tonnes

(b) three-axle motor vehicle with two -axle trailer

40 tonnes

(ba) three-axle motor vehicle with three-axle trailer

44 tonnes

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(ba)

three-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

44 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

On the one hand, the increase in the total weight by 4 tonnes enhances the efficiency of freight transport. This greater efficiency saves CO2 and has a positive effect on the shortage of drivers, as fewer drivers are needed to transport the same volume of goods. On the other hand, this increases wear and tear on the road. The proposal is a balanced compromise. By only allowing 3+3-axles vehicles to transport the extra weight, the additional load is spread over one more axle, which mitigates the disadvantage while retaining the advantages of more efficient freight transport.

Amendment 272

Massimiliano Salini

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Amendment

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 273

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Amendment

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(ba)

three-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

46 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two -axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

(da)

three-axle motor vehicle with three -axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

46 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 274

Marco Campomenosi

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Amendment

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 275

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.2

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

42 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two- or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations

44 tonnes

Amendment

2.2.2

Articulated vehicles with five or six axles

(a)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(b)

three-axle motor vehicle with two-axle semi-trailer

40 tonnes

(ba)

three-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

44 tonnes

(c)

two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations or zero-emission or alternatively fuelled two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

44 tonnes

(d)

three-axle motor vehicle with two or three-axle semi-trailer involved in intermodal transport operations or zero-emission or alternatively fuelled two-axle motor vehicle with three-axle semi-trailer

46 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 276

JanChristoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.4

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1b, 2.2.2b and 2.2.2d shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Justification

On the one hand, increasing the total weight by 4 tonnes for zero-emission vehicles is necessary to compensate for their additional weight and incentivise their use. On the other hand, this increases wear and tear on the road. The proposal is a balanced compromise. By only allowing 3+3-axles vehicles to transport the extra weight, the additional load is spread over one more axle, which mitigates the disadvantage while retaining the advantages of more efficient freight transport.

Amendment 277

JanChristoph Oetjen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.4

Text proposed by the Commission

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.2.4

Articulated vehicles with four axles consisting of a two-axle motor vehicle and a two-axle semi-trailer, if the distance between the axles of the semi-trailer:

2.2.4.1

is 1,3 m or greater but not more than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

2.2.4.2

is greater than 1,8 m

36 tonnes

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles and/or trailers with zero-emission technology the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles vehicles and/or trailers with zero-emission technology the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Justification

During the transition to fully zero-emission road freight transport and in the absence of a fully established AFIR programme, it must be possible for the two-tonne weight exemption limit to be granted also to trailers with zero-emission technology towed by ICE trucks.

Amendment 278

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.4 –last three rows

Text proposed by the Commission

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 279

Carlo Fidanza

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.2.4 –last three rows

Text proposed by the Commission

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 4 tonnes.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 shall be increased by 2 tonnes for the zero-emission vehicle and 2 tons for a trailer including e-trailer technology.

In the case of vehicle combinations including zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weights provided for in in Sub-section 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 1 tonne for the zero-emission vehicle and 1 tonne for a trailer including e-trailer technology.

In the case of vehicle combinations including vehicles other than alternatively fueled vehicles or zero-emission vehicles provided for in Sub-section 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 shall be increased by 2 tons for a trailer including e-trailer technology.

Or. en

Justification

The proposed amendments aim at dedicating a specific additional weight to accommodate the installation of zero-emissions refrigeration units and the necessary technologies (e-axle and battery pack) whilst also making sure that there is a fair split of the extra weight allowance between the vehicle and the trailer. The new exception proposed looks at allowing the possibility to deploy zero-emissions refrigeration units also on ICE vehicles as a bridging measure until all HDVs are ZEV. This would enable the elimination of roughly 6 million tons of CO2 emitted annually by all refrigeration units circulating on EU roads..

Amendment 280

Ciarán Cuffe

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.

Text proposed by the Commission

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

Three-axle motor vehicles where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes.

26 tonnes

2.3.5

Four-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes

32 tonnes

2.3.6

Five-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes.

40 tonnes

In the case of alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in points 2.3.1, 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 of Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by the additional weight of the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

32 tonnes

2.3.6

32 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission motor vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes. This weight allowance for zero-emission vehicle combinations shall be applicable for both national and international traffic.

Or. en

Amendment 281

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.

Text proposed by the Commission

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

32 tonnes

2.3.6

40 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

Three-axle motor vehicles with driving axles according to 3.5.3.2 to 3.5.3.4.

26 tonnes

2.3.5

Four-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles with driving axles according to 3.5.3.2 to 3.5.3.4.

32 tonnes

2.3.6

Five-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles with driving axles according to 3.5.3.2 to 3.5.3.4.

40 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Amendment 282

Paolo Borchia

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.

Text proposed by the Commission

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

32 tonnes

2.3.6

40 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.3 Motor vehicles

2.3.1

Two-axle motor vehicles other than buses:

18 tonnes

2.3.2

two-axle buses:

19,5 tonnes

2.3.3

Three-axle motor vehicles:

25 tonnes

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

32 tonnes

2.3.6

Five-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent

40 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Amendment 283

Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.- last row

Text proposed by the Commission

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes. Point 2.3.2 shall be increased by 0,5 tonnes.

Or. en

Justification

The Commission proposal would allow for a 21,5t bus with only two axles. Such a limit would cause a number of issues with road infrastucture, especially in the cities, Three-axle vehichles are already available on the market, they safeguard the road infrastructure better and they also allow for a higher numbrer of passenger because of a greater maximum length.

Amendment 284

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.4, point 2.3.5, point 2.3.6

Text proposed by the Commission

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

32 tonnes

2.3.6

40 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

2.3.4

26 tonnes

2.3.5

Four-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles and at least with one driving axle fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes

32 tonnes

2.3.6

Five-axle motor vehicles with two steering axles and at least with one driving axle fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognized as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes.

40 tonnes

In the case of alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in points 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 of Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by the additional weight of the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of zero-emission motor vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in points 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 to 2.3.6 shall be increased by 4 tonnes, for vehicles provided for in point 2.3.2. by 2 tonnes.

Or. en

Amendment 285

Dominique Riquet

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.3.6 – last two rows

Text proposed by the Commission

In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weights provided for in Sub-section 2.3 shall be increased by 2 tonnes.

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 286

Ciarán Cuffe

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.4

Text proposed by the Commission

2.4 Three-axle articulated buses

28 tonnes

In the case of alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weight of 28 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.4 is increased by the additional weight required for the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 28 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.4 is increased by 2 tonnes

Amendment

2.4 Three-axle articulated buses

28 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission motor vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 28 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.4 is increased by 2 tonnes. This weight allowance for zero-emission vehicle combinations shall be applicable for both national and international traffic.

Or. en

Amendment 287

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.4

Text proposed by the Commission

2.4 Three-axle articulated buses

28 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 28 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.4 is increased by 2 tonnes

Amendment

2.4 Articulated buses

2.4.1

Three axle articulated buses

28 tonnes

2.4.2

Four axle articulated buses

32 tonnes

In the case of alternatively fuelled vehicles other than zero-emission vehicles, the maximum authorised weight provided for in Sub-section 2.4 is increased by the additional weight required for the alternative fuel technology with a maximum of 1 tonne.

In the case of zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 28 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.4.1 is increased by 3 tonnes and the maximum authorised weight provided for in Sub-section 2.4.2 is increased by 4 tonnes.

Or. en

Amendment 288

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 2.5 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.5

Four-axle articulated buses

32 tonnes

In the case of zero-emission vehicles the maximum authorised weight of 32 tonnes provided for in Sub-section 2.5 is increased by 4 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 289

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.1, point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.1 Single axles

Single non-driving axle

10 tonnes

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.1 Single axles

Single non-driving axle

10 tonnes

Single non-driving axle with twin tyres for buses

11,5 tonnes

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5

12,5 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 290

Andor Deli

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

11.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

11.5 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

The proposed increase of driving axle in 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 would cause excessive road wear (approximately +40%) and does not incentivise manufacturers to produce lighter vehicles.

Amendment 291

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

12,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.3 and 2.4

12.5 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 292

Kateřina Konečná

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

Text proposed increase of driving axle in 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 would cause excessive road wear (approximately +40%) and does not incentivise manufacturers to produce lighter vehicles.

Amendment 293

Ciarán Cuffe

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in

points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, except those vehicles described

below.

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles newly-registered between the entry into force of this Directive and 1 January 2029, provided the conditions in point 3.4.4 are met.

From 1 January 2029, the conditions laid down in point 3.4.4 shall apply to all newly-registered vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, irrespective of their powertrain

11,5 tonnes

12 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

Driving axle of zero-emission two-axle buses newly-registered between the entry into force of this Directive and 1 January 2035, provided the conditions in point 3.4.4 are met

From 1 January 2029, the conditions laid down in point 3.4.4 shall apply to all newly-registered two-axle buses, irrespective of their powertrain.

11.5 tonnes

12 tonnes

3.4.4

Zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles which are newly-registered between entry into force and 1 January 2029, and which have a 12 tonne driving axle, shall:

1. Deploy wide-base high-efficiency single tyres on the steering axle with an EU tyre rating minima of A for rollingresistance and B for wet grip;

2. Deploy a dual tyre configuration on the driving axle using tyres with an EU tyre rating minima of A for rolling resistance and B for wet grip;

3. Set the alert level of the Tyre Pressure Monitoring System to inform the driver of a loss of pressure at 0.6 Bar;

4. Deploy an acceleration limiter that ensures acceleration from rest does not exceed 1.2m/s².

From 1 January 2029 all new heavy-duty vehicles registered shall deploy the technologies described in points 1 to 4 of this sub-section.

Or. en

Amendment 294

Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

11,5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

11,5 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

Adding the axle load would cause significant negative effects on road wear and bridges. For example, there are a lot of weak road structures and small bridges in the cities that cannot handle the added 12,5 axle load. This would limit the usage of these busses. Almost every buss line will go through the cities at some point during their trip as they pick up passengers. There are lots of three axles zero emissions busses already in traffic, and 11,5 axle mass has not been an issue when promoting green transition.

Amendment 295

Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

11,5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

11,5 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

Raising the driving axle mass for zero emission combination from 11,5 tonnes to 12,5 tonnes would cause weight limit issues for city bridges and consequently limit the usage of buses. The road load would increase significantly with this proposal. The current axle mass limit of 11,5 tonnes has not been an issue when developing electric busses for the green transition. There are lot of different options such as two axle, three axle and articulated electric busses already available on the market.

Amendment 296

Isabel García Muñoz

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.4

Text proposed by the Commission

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Amendment

3.4 Driving axle

3.4.1

Driving axle of the vehicles referred to in points 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 other than zero-emission vehicles

11,5 tonnes

3.4.2

Driving axle of zero-emission vehicles referred to in points 2.2.1 and 2.2.2

12.5 tonnes

3.4.3

Zero-emission two-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

3.4.4

Zero-emission three-axle buses

12.5 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 297

Isabel García Muñoz

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.5.3

Text proposed by the Commission

3.5.3

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

18 tonnes

19 tonnes

Amendment

3.5.3

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

18 tonnes

Where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being equivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II, or where each driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and where the maximum weight for each axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes. In the case of zero-emission vehicles, the maximum sum of the axle weights per tandem axle shall be increased by 1 tonne.

19 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 298

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.5.3

Text proposed by the Commission

3.5.3

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

18 tonnes

19 tonnes

Amendment

3.5.3

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

3.5.3.1

In general

18 tonnes

3.5.3.2

19 tonnes

3.5.3.3

In case of a zero-emissions vehicle referred to in points 2.3 and 2.4 where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres and air suspension or suspension recognised as being quivalent within the Union as defined in Annex II

20 tonnes

3.5.3.4

In case of a zero-emission vehicle referred to in points 2.3 and 2.4 where each driving axles is fitted with twin tyres and where the maximum weight for each axle does not exceed 10 tonnes

20 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 299

Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.6 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.6 Tri-axles of motor vehicles

The sum of the axle weights per tri-axle must not exceed, if the distance (d) between the axles is:

3.6.1

less than 1,3 m (d < 1,3)

21 tonnes

3.6.2

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

24 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

It is important to add weights for tri-axles of motor vehicles to the Annex I, so that there will be common weights in the EU.

Amendment 300

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.6 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.6 Tri-axles of motor vehicles

The sum of the axle weights per tri-axle must not exceed, if the distance (d) between the axles is:

3.6.1

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

24 tonnes

3.6.2

In the case of zero-emissions vehicles, if at least two axles are fitted with twin tires.

1,3 m or greater but less than 1.8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

26 tonnes

Or. en

Amendment 301

Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 3.6 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.6 Tri-axles of motor vehicles

The sum of the axle weights per tri-axle must not exceed, if the distance (d) between the axles is:

3.6.1

less than 1,3 m (d < 1,3)

21 tonnes

3.6.2

1,3 m or greater but less than 1,8 m (1,3 ≤ d < 1,8)

27 tonnes

Or. en

Justification

Weights for tri-axles of motor vehicles should be added to Annex I in order to have common weights in the EU.

Amendment 302

Elsi Katainen

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 4.3

Text proposed by the Commission

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Amendment

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle or five-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Or. en

Justification

To safeguard the road safety and infrastructure, it is important to control the bridge loads. The five-axle trucks carry the heaviest goods and have 40 tonnes gross weight. Therefore, the maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase is actually even more important for five-axle than four-axle trucks and should be added to the Directive. Too short wheelbase would cause issues with, for example, bridge infrastructure.

Amendment 303

Peter Lundgren

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 4.3

Text proposed by the Commission

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Amendment

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle or five-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Or. en

Amendment 304

Henna Virkkunen, Petri Sarvamaa

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – table – point 4.3

Text proposed by the Commission

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Amendment

4.3 Maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle or five-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in metres between the axles of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle

Or. en

Justification

The maximum authorised weight depending on the wheelbase is even more important for five-axle than four-axle trucks, as five-axle trucks carry the heaviest goods and have 40 tonnes gross weight. This should be codified into the Directive