The requirements of Directive 2000/14/EC are in force. Details of five notified bodies appointed by the DTI to provide assessments for construction equipment that has to meet noise limits (AVT, BSI, MIRA, Lloyds Register QA and SRL) can be found on the DTI web site: www.dti.gov.uk/strd/neenb.htm. Only six Member States have transposed the Directive. Where it has not been transposed the Commission has stated that the Directive still applies. There is concern that the German Regulations will require lower noise limits and higher uncertainties than the Directive and the CEA is closely monitoring progress. We also continue to pursue concerns about sales to and from EU countries that have no Regulations as yet.

The Commission’s guide to the Directive can be studied on its web site. Net-installed engine power is not properly defined and the CEA is seeking the DTI’s assurance that CEA members will not be disadvantaged by a stringent interpretation in the UK. The DTI did not agree with the guide’s section on uncertainties and will re-issue its own guide, together with a guide on the technical documentation required. A proposal to amend the Directive is expected from the Commission in mid-2002. Changes to future noise limits may be considered, but the CEA will oppose this until the Directive is firmly established. The DTI is also of the opinion that the Directive needs to be operating satisfactorily before changes are considered.

Industry’s long campaign to harmonise road regulations in Europe is succeeding at last. The consultant working for the Commission has recommended that benefits would accrue if harmonisation is introduced. Industry needs to remain active now to keep the issue ongoing and the CEA is looking for CECE to take the initiative.

Although there is wide acceptance of the need for harmonisation of engine emission requirements between Europe and the USA, the questions of test methods, timescales, fuel quality, trap technology, as well as the actual emission levels, are at issue. The Commission is seeking a proposal for a Stage III of emission levels to amend Directive 97/68/EC by the end of 2002. This will be the prime topic for discussion at an additional CEA technical meeting at the end of April, during which the CEA will develop its position, starting from the basic CECE objectives:

• EU Stage III not to be more than one year after EPA Tier 3 (EU NOx to be equal to Tier 3 NOx)
• EU Stage III PM level should not require traps
• Off-road emissions to be in line with fuel regulations
• Flexibility arrangements for stock-clearing to be acceptable
• After treatment only to be required for some limited operations
• EU and EPA phase IV to be harmonised

Council discussions on the proposed revision of Directive 98/37/EC have greatly accelerated under the current Spanish Presidency. A redraft of the proposal is expected shortly. The CEA has recently met with the DTI and agreed the key issues as: the definition of partly completed machinery; the large number of EP proposed amendments; maintaining self-certification; resisting Commission powers to make subsequent changes; maintaining paragraph numbers (otherwise documentation and Standards have to be changed). The target is to reach Common Position during May and the CEA will agree a formal Position paper at this time.

The CEA has been successful in ensuring that there will be a consistent approach by European manufacturers in measuring noise at operator positions of earthmoving machinery. CECE has adopted the principle that ISO 6396 will be the standard test method to meet the requirements of the Machinery Directive.

ISO 5006, Parts 1 and 2, on visibility test methods is being revised and a working draft has been circulated to Standards organisations. A difficulty for the ISO WG is that the HSE does not accept that the standard should refer to job-site organisation to improve visibility. The CEA is producing a summary paper to highlight the need for the revised standards to be acceptable to all parties and the BSI will be urged to exert pressure on the ISO. Failure to achieve this will likely result in the HSE specifying additional requirements in the UK.

The drastic reduction to the whole-body vibration (WBV) exposure limit value proposed by the European Parliament (EP) is less likely to be accepted following a trilogue meeting between the Commission, Council and Parliament at the beginning of February. The HSE says the Common Position value of 1.15 m/s2 (this value still sets severe requirements for industry) is now more likely. The price to be paid is that the EP may insist that the transition period for existing equipment is reduced from six years (Common Position) to four and that new equipment would not be eligible for the transition period if bought after 2005 (Common Position is 2008).

If these predictions become reality, the hard work by the CEA and its members in discussions with the HSE, by lobbying MEPs and encouraging all sectors of industry to become involved will have been worthwhile (for example the WBV exposure limit value was originally 0.63 m/s2 before the CEA became involved). However, now fresh challenges will follow as the CEA works on behalf of its members to ensure that the theory in the Directive can be applied practically and uniformly across Europe with the minimum hardship to manufacturers.

A CEA initiative to set up a test programme to obtain WBV data on earthmoving machines will be held over until more information on the required test methods is available. In the meantime the pooling of existing test results could act as a database for assessing exposure and this possibility will be pursued by the CEA.

The CEA has also been actively involved with the HSE on this other Physical Agents Directive, the Common Position of which has also been challenged by the EP. Its draft report proposed to apply the exposure limit value of 87 dB(A) without taking ear protection into account, which would close down much of manufacturing industry in Europe. The latest information is that the EP has moved towards the Common Position including maintaining the action exposure value of 85 dB(A). However, nothing can be assumed and the CEA continues to support the HSE in pressing for the Common Position.

NON-COMPLIANT IMPORTS

The complaint made by CECE against the UK government for failing to have an adequate enforcement system has been dropped by the European Commission but it is still pursuing the complaint against the Netherlands. The UK and Netherlands governments have received funding to conduct a surveillance exercise to test examples of non-compliant earthmoving machinery imports and legitimate machines. The UK will test six hydraulic excavators (three "grey" and three manufacturer CE-marked) for compliance with the EMC Directive and the old and new Noise Directives. The Netherlands will test similar machines against compliance with the Machinery Directive. The CEA will seek a full report on the results of this exercise.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL MATTERS CONTACT:

Bill Osborne - CEA Technical Officer - bill@admin.co.uk

OR

Tim Faithfull - CEA Director of Member Services - tim@admin.co.uk