EUROPEAN COMMISSION
SECRETARIAT GENERAL
Registry
Brussels, 22 January 2016
OJ 2153, item 17
RCC(2016) 9
MEMORANDUM FOR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
Subject:
JOBS,GROWTH, INVESTMENT AND COMPETIVENESS / INTERNAL
MARKET, INDUSTRY, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SMEs
-
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems,
components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles
-
(COM(2016) 31
; SWD(2016) 9 ; SWD(2016) 10 ; SEC(2016) 64
)
-
Special meeting of Heads of Cabinet of 21 January 2016
-
Attendance list: see Annex.
Specific points for the attention of Heads of Cabinet for their weekly meeting on
Monday 25 January 2016:
–
support for the dossier subject to the distribution of an amended version
–
recommendation for adoption as "A item".
–
dossier reserved for the weekly meeting of Heads of Cabinet.
1
After examining the dossier, the Heads of Cabinet came to the following
conclusions for the purposes of their weekly meeting and the Commission meeting:
1.
Key points after discussion
After presentation of the dossier by the Heads of Cabinet of Vice-President
KATAINEN, Vice-President
ŠEFČOVIČ and Commissioner BIENKOWSKA and
input by the cabinets, note was taken of the points discussed at the meeting:
–
general support expressed in favour of the draft proposal for a Regulation;
–
general comment on the importance of communicating proactively the high
ambitions of the proposal to the public and key stakeholders;
–
comment on the need to give the final touch to the Impact Assessment
following the opinion of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board;
–
drafting suggestions regarding provisions relating to transparency which
should be clarified (notably with regard to inputs into the type approval
process or confidentiality);
–
drafting suggestions regarding provisions relating to market surveillance and
to periodical reviews by Member States specifically;
–
drafting suggestions relating to the peer review foreseen in the type approval
process and aimed at strengthening the Commission's supervisory role
allowing it to propose improvements as a result of peer reviews;
–
drafting suggestions to strengthen the provisions of article 77 §8 of the draft
proposal for a Regulation replacing "may" by "shall" in the text;
–
reply along the lines that strengthening the provisions of art 77 §8 would be
welcome but may prove difficult given the additional resources that would be
required – suggestion to adopt a risk based approach;
–
comment on the need to coordinate with Member States in the case a
procedure is launched to impose a penalty to a manufacturer;
–
general comment on the need to closely involve industry in all discussions
regarding type approval;
–
comment on the need to ensure that customers can continue to exert their
choice with regard to the entity which will diagnose their vehicle;
2
–
comment on the need to preserve the balance between car manufacturers and
other operators with regard to access to data;
–
comments and request for some clarifications regarding access to data which
goes far beyond car manufacturers and concerns a wide range of sectors and
stakeholders therefore requiring a broader approach.
2.
Reply from lead cabinet: key points
In response to the various comments, the Head of Cabinet of Commissioner
BIENKOWSKA indicated that:
–
on access to data, the draft proposal for a Regulation contains similar
provisions to those already applicable in the United States which involve that
manufacturers are required to provide access to their software's data;
–
industry and Member States are aware of the initiative and it is expected that
the thrust of the proposal should get broad support;
–
drafting proposals aimed at strengthening provisions on transparency are
welcome;
–
the additional burden involved by the new Commission's role in the type
approval process will be covered by a redeployment of internal resources and
we should seek to minimise staff implications;
–
streamlining the existing fora relating to car manufacturing is an avenue
which has been explored but it might sometimes prove difficult given the
variety of expertise involved, which often require dedicated fora.
3.
Conclusions of the Head of Cabinet to the President
The Head of Cabinet to the President thanked the lead cabinets and services for the
quality of the work and the Heads of Cabinet for their valuable contributions.
He noted the broad support in favour of the proposal, which would thus be
recommended for adoption by the College as an "A" point, subject to the circulation
of an amended version taking the suggestions made into account, including a last
screening of the text by the Legal Service.
3
He requested the Heads of Cabinet to send their comments and drafting suggestions
to the lead cabinet by 7 pm on the same day with the Cabinets of Vice-Presidents'
KATAINEN and ŠEFČOVIČ in copy. He indicated that a final version of the text
would be circulated the following day in the course of the afternoon in view of
Hebdo. He further underlined the importance of communicating well the purpose
and content of this initiative to the outside world and indicated communication
material would be provided by the Spokesperson Service for this purpose.
* *
*
Annex
Attendance list for the special meeting of Heads of Cabinet of
21 January 2016
Chair:
Mr THOLONIAT, Economic adviser in the President's Cabinet.
Present:
Ms NELEN, VANNINI, VELINOVA, Mr VERTMANN, LINDER,
FREIMANIS, RADZIEJEWSK, MAMER, Ms JAHNS, EICHHORN,
ARNOULD,
BARTOLINI,
Mr NEALE,
RIBOKAS,
ADAMIDIS,
Ms PASERMAN, MATTERA, WOOD, Mr SUTHERLAND, KUCK,
VON PETER, BERMIG, BRAUN, Ms REILLY, Mr DZIĘCIOŁOWSKI,
BENGTSSON, SCHRÖDER;
Ms REPPLINGER-HACH, SZYCHOWSKA, Mr BROERTJES, RENDERS
(« Internal Market,
Industry, Entrepreneurship and Smes » DG)
Ms CAUDET, PIETILA (« Communication »DG), Ms BECKER (Legal
Service), Ms LECOQ (Secretariat-General)
4