Print

[Omegafant]

[*quote*]
DUH Pressemitteilung
6.6.2016

Verkehrsministerium will in Brüssel Amnestie für manipulierte Diesel-Pkw durchsetzen

Deutsche Delegation informiert die europäischen Amtskollegen - Festgestellte Manipulationen bei zahlreichen europäischen Herstellern sollen mit dem Argument 'unklarer rechtlicher Vorgaben' nachträglich legitimiert werden - Klagemöglichkeiten von mehreren Millionen Autohaltern würden sich schlagartig verschlechtern

Berlin, 6.6.2016: Anlässlich des Treffens der EU-Verkehrsminister am morgigen 7. Juni 2016 bemüht sich Bundesverkehrsminister Dobrindt einmal mehr um das Wohl der Autokonzerne.

In einer "Information" der deutschen Delegation für das Ratstreffen der Verkehrsminister verweist diese auf das Ergebnis der deutschen "Untersuchungskommission Volkswagen", das am 22. April 2016 veröffentlicht wurde.

Darin kommt das Ministerium zu dem Schluss, dass nur VW illegale Abschalteinrichtungen im Sinne des Gesetzes nutze. Alle anderen Hersteller bewegen sich nach Auffassung des Bundesverkehrsministeriums im 'legalen Rahmen', selbst wenn wie bei Opel die Abgasreinigung zu mehr als 80 Prozent der Fahrten weitgehend abgeschaltet wird und es in der Folge zu stark erhöhten Dieselabgas-Emissionen des gesundheitsschädigenden Stickoxiden kommt.

Dazu erklärt Jürgen Resch, Bundesgeschäftsführer der Deutschen Umwelthilfe (DUH):

"Mit diesem Positionspapier versucht das Bundesverkehrsministerium die Verbrauchertäuschung der Automobilhersteller nachträglich zu legalisieren und die damit verbundene massive Gesundheitsgefährdung vieler Millionen Menschen als Kavaliersdelikt abzuhaken. Der Verkehrsminister ignoriert damit die rechtlich eindeutigen Vorgaben der EU Regulierungen 715/2007 und 692/2008, die nicht nur die umfassende Wirksamkeit der Abgasreinigung im normalen Betrieb und über die gesamte Lebenszeit der Fahrzeuge verlangen, sondern die ausdrücklich illegale Abschalteinrichtungen exakt so definieren, wie sie jetzt mehrfach bei unterschiedlichen Herstellern nachgewiesen wurden.
Die von Dobrindt vorgeschlagene Umdefinition der entscheidenden Formulierungen in der Zulassungsverordnung für Pkw bedeutet eine Verschlechterung der rechtlichen Situation. Die vorgeschlagenen Formulierungen sind eine Einladung zu neuen Täuschungsmanövern durch die Hersteller sind. So ist die legale Nutzung von Abschalteinrichtungen an die Verwendung der "besten verfügbaren Technologie" geknüpft, ohne den Bezugsrahmen zu definieren. Woran soll sich dies orientieren? Am besten in Bezug auf Kosten, Kraftstoffverbrauch oder Fahrleistung? Und verfügbar für wen, zu welchem Zeitpunkt und wie sollen im Einzelfall diese technischen Fragen geprüft und entschieden werden?
Der Minister nutzt das Papier darüber hinaus im Rahmen der Revision der Typzulassungsgesetzgebung, um die nationalen Zulassungsbehörden weiter zu stärken und hintertreibt so die Absicht einer europäischen transparenten Kontrolllösung, an deren Konzeption auch das Europäische Parlament zu berücksichtigen ist. Diese geplante Stärkung nationaler Zulassungsstellen ist besonders absurd, weil diese nachweislich in den vergangenen Jahren ihrer Aufsichtspflicht nicht nachgekommen sind und nicht nur "in Serie" Fahrzeuge mit Manipulationssoftware und hohem Schadstoffausstoß zugelassen haben sondern sich nun auch weigern, wirksam gegen dies entsprechenden Hersteller vorzugehen.
Die durch Diesel Pkw vorrangig verursachte hohe und gesetzeswidrige Belastung der Atemluft mit giftigen Stickoxiden in zahlreichen deutschen wie europäischen Städten ist so für die kommenden Jahre weiter vorprogrammiert. Der betrogene Fahrzeughalter, der in gutem Glauben ein "modernes und sauberes" Diesel-Fahrzeug erstanden hat, bleibt mit seinen berechtigten Ansprüchen im Regen stehen. Mit diesem Vorgehen umgeht der Minister darüber hinaus die Mitsprache des EU Parlaments."


Links:
Das Schreiben der deutschen Delegation für das Ratstreffen der Verkehrsminister finden Sie hier: [nein]

Kontakt:
Jürgen Resch | Bundesgeschäftsführer
0171 3649170 | resch[ätt]duh.de
DUH-Pressestelle:
Daniel Hufeisen | Ann-Kathrin Marggraf | Laura Holzäpfel | 030 2400867-20 | presse[ätt]duh.de
http://www.duh.de/
https://twitter.com/Umwelthilfe
http://www.facebook.de/Umwelthilfe

Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH), Fritz-Reichle-Ring 4, 78315 Radolfzell, Tel.: 07732-9995-0
[*/quote*]


http://www.duh.de/uploads/media/Implications_of_the_emissions_irregularities_Council_of_the_EU_9667_2016.pdf

[*quote*]
9667/16 PS/sc/il 1
DGE 2A EN
Council of the
European Union
Brussels, 3 June 2016
(OR. en)
9667/16
TRANS 204
ENV 371
CLIMA 58
COMPET 341
INFORMATION NOTE
From: General Secretariat of the Council
To: Council
Subject: Any other business
Implications of the emissions irregularities – the need for new road vehicle
legislation governing the type approval procedure
- Information from the German delegation

Delegations will find attached an information note from the German delegation on the abovementioned
subject for consideration under "Any other business" at the meeting of the Council
(Transport, Telecommunications and Energy) on 7 June 2016.
Please note that this item will be discussed jointly with the Policy Debate on "NOx emissions by
diesel cars".
9667/16 PS/sc/il 2
ANNEX DGE 2A EN

ANNEX
Information from the German delegation for the Transport Council on 7 June 2016

Agenda item:
Implications of the emissions irregularities – the need for new road vehicle legislation
governing the type approval procedure

A commission of inquiry was appointed in Germany at the Federal Ministry of Transport and
Digital Infrastructure immediately after the allegations against VW in the US had emerged. The
remit of the Commission of Inquiry was to investigate the manipulations – which VW had admitted
– on certain diesel vehicles manufactured by the VW Group. VW was ordered to remove the defeat
device used on these vehicles, because this device was designed as a prohibited test cycle
recognition system. In addition, the Commission of Inquiry was tasked with examining
commercially available diesel vehicle types produced by other manufacturers in Germany and
abroad to determine whether comparable test cycle recognition systems such as those in the case of
VW were being used. To this end, it conducted an extensive field test using over 50 vehicles.
The outcome of this test was that no other cycle recognition systems such as the one used by
Volkswagen were discovered. However, it became clear that for many vehicle types, real driving
emissions are significantly higher than on the dynamometer. One of the main reasons for this is that
the manufacturers adapt the effectiveness of their emissions control systems to driving and/or
environmental conditions in different ways. This is done primarily by means of the "temperature
window", outside which the manufacturers reduce the effectiveness of the emissions abatement.
Such adaptations are legally permissible if they are necessary in terms of protecting the engine.
Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 states that the use of defeat devices that reduce the effectiveness of
emission control systems is normally prohibited. In certain exceptional cases, however, this
prohibition does not apply. Such a case exists, for instance, "if the need for the device is justified in
terms of protecting the engine against damage or accident and for safe operation of the vehicle".
9667/16 PS/sc/il 3
ANNEX DGE 2A EN
In the case of some of the vehicle types investigated, the manufacturers concerned were able to
convince the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure's Commission of Inquiry that
the exhaust after treatment control system used by them appropriately reflects the need for engine
protection.
In the case of other manufacturers, however, the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital
Infrastructure's Commission of Inquiry had doubts as to whether the controls chosen, especially the
temperature window, could be fully and solely justified by the need for engine protection. The
Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure's Commission of Inquiry has called on all
the manufacturers concerned to take measures to limit the temperature window to the extent that is
actually necessary. With regard to the type approvals issued in Germany, this has been implemented
by the manufacturers making a voluntary commitment to improve the emissions strategies used for
their ongoing production and by recalling vehicles already on the road as part of a service action.
During the investigations, it emerged that European legislation governing acceptable and prohibited
forms of influencing exhaust after treatment is interpreted in different ways.
Against this background, Germany believes that the following measures are necessary:
1. The rule in the first and second sentences of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) 715/2007 should be
reworded as soon as possible to read as follows (amendments in bold and italics):
"(2) The use of defeat devices that reduce the effectiveness of emission control systems shall
be prohibited. The prohibition shall not apply where:
a) even if the best available technologies are included, no other technology is available to
protect the engine against damage or accident and for safe operation of the vehicle:"
9667/16 PS/sc/il 4
ANNEX DGE 2A EN
Reasons:
This would make it clearer that defeat devices are only acceptable if, using the best available
technology, they are necessary to protect the engine. Whether such other best available
technology is available, must be checked at the time the type approval is issued. Wording this
exception more precisely would increase legal certainty with regard to the application of the
prohibition of controls to reduce exhaust after treatment that are not necessary in terms of
engine protection and make it easier to legally enforce this prohibition, using incisive measures
if necessary. Germany believes that this re-wording should be done during the ongoing codecision
procedure on the adaptation of Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and No 595/2009.
2. Notwithstanding this, the European Commission should, at the same time, continue to analyse
the lessons learned in the US from regulations on the distinction between acceptable and
prohibited defeat devices and take them into account, in a suitable form, for updating the
European legal acts.
3. Regardless of these measures, the activities to adopt the supplementary rules governing real
driving emissions (RDE, 3rd and 4th Packages) must be brought to a speedy and comprehensive
conclusion.
4. Moreover, the European provisions must be further improved in terms of the conduct of followup
checks of vehicles on the road in order to establish a qualitative and quantitative framework
so that re-testing is carried out with a uniform degree of stringency in Europe and a potential
competitive situation between the type approval authorities is avoided. To this end, the
apparatus and extent of testing have to be enshrined in the individual provisions for uniform
application. This also involves developing and introducing suitable testing procedures with
laboratory tests and on-road tests using portable emissions measuring systems, in order to detect
prohibited defeat devices in the future and obtain proof of their use that is as evidential as
possible.
9667/16 PS/sc/il 5
ANNEX DGE 2A EN
5. The European Commission is invited to explore whether a rotation of the technical services
could be introduced and what period would be appropriate for this.
6. As an immediate action, type approval authorities are, before they issue a type approval, to
systematically demand that manufacturers provide a declaration as to whether they use engine
protection equipment, as is now a mandatory requirement in the RDE regulations. If this is the
case, the manufacturers are, on a case-by-case basis, to reveal its precise function, the specific
software it uses and the way it works as well as describing the reasons why they believe the
engine protection equipment is necessary. In addition, this procedure should also be used
retroactively for existing type approvals in all Member States. The type approval authorities
must check the information provided.
[*/quote*]