5 Cableway installations
| (35927)
8436/14
+ ADDs 1-3
COM(14) 187
| Draft Regulation on cableway installations
|
| Legal base | Article 114 TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 27 March 2014
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 3 April 2014
|
| Department | Transport
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 28 April 2014
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| Discussion in Council | Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
5.1 The Cableways Directive, Directive 2000/9/EC, on cableway
installations designed to carry people, was adopted as part of
the EU's programme to eliminate technical barriers to trade. Its
primary purpose is to harmonise national laws regarding the design
and manufacture of cableways equipment to be used in installations
designed to carry passengers. The main types of cableway installations
covered by the Directive are funiculars, gondolas, detachable
chair lifts, fixed grip chair lifts, aerial tramways, funitels
(aerial lifts, generally used to transport skiers) and combined
installations made of several cableway types. The fundamental
requirement of the Directive is that the design, construction
and entry into service of cableway installations should be carried
out in such a manner as to ensure the safety of users, workers
and third parties.
The document
5.2 The Commission proposes that the Cableways Directive be replaced
by this draft Regulation. The Commission presents the proposal
in the context of its simplification objectives, in particular
aligning the legislation with the New Legislative Framework Decision,
Decision No. 768/2008/EC.[7]
5.3 The Commission intends the proposal to address
some difficulties that have been experienced in the implementation
of the Cableways Directive by Member States. It follows on from
Commission consultations in 2010 and 2012. Issues raised include:
· some
Member States have different views on whether certain types of
installations come under the scope of the Directive;
· there
are also differing views on whether certain equipment should be
considered as a subsystem, infrastructure or safety component;
and
· the
Directive does not currently specify which type of conformity
assessment procedure has to be applied to subsystems.
5.4 The proposal, therefore, is to modify the provisions
of the Cableways Directive through a mixture of non-legislative
and legislative measures. The Commission suggests this is the
preferred solution because it will address problems being encountered
by a number of Member States by providing clarification in the
scope, definition and consistency and flexibility of conformity
assessment procedures for subsystems and safety components. Furthermore
it suggests that these changes will not result in significant
costs for economic operators and notified bodies. It is also suggested
that the proposal will improve the functioning of the internal
market of subsystems and safety components by ensuring equal treatment
of all economic operators (notably importers and distributors)
as well as notified bodies.
5.5 The draft Regulation would provide:
· that
in the light of the development of new types of cableway installations,
those used for leisure purposes, in fairgrounds or amusement parks,
are excluded — that is, the scope does not cover cableway
installations that are intended for a dual function, namely of
transporting persons and for leisure activities;
· for
continued exclusion of certain cableway installations intended
for agricultural or industrial purposes;
· clarification
that those cableway installations intended for the service of
mountain shelters or huts that are not intended for the transport
of the public are excluded;
· updating
of the current exclusion of cable-operated ferries to all cable-operated
installations where the users or carriers are water-borne, such
as cable operated water ski installations; and
· for
introduction of a range of conformity assessment procedures for
subsystems based on the existing conformity assessment modules
for safety components, fully aligned to the New Legislative Framework
Decision.
5.6 The proposal is accompanied by the Commission's
impact assessment and an executive summary of the assessment.
The Government's view
5.7 The Minister of State, Department for Transport
(Baroness Kramer) first tells us that:
· there
are currently around 17,500 cableway installations in Europe and
these make up around 60% of the estimated 30,000 cableway installations
worldwide;
· within
Europe, the main markets for cableways are France, Austria, Italy,
Germany and Switzerland — together these markets account
for over 50% of all cableway installations in Europe;
· there
are two main industry groups involved in manufacturing cableways,
the Doppelmayr-Garaventa Group (based in Austria and Switzerland)
and a group comprising Leitner (Italy) and Poma (France);
· these
two groups dominate the European and global cableways industries,
accounting for 90% of the global industry;
· in addition,
there are over 30 other cableway manufacturers in Europe, most
of which are SMEs;
· the
number of UK manufacturers is very small — the Government
believes there is only one in existence;
· in the
UK there are ski lift operators who use but do not manufacture
cableway equipment for outdoor slopes, about five in Scotland,
and artificial ski slopes, about 120 in the UK — the Scottish
ski areas have about 75 installations;
· as far
as the Government is aware the vast majority of the cableways
in the UK are used for leisure purposes; and
· the
Secretary of State for Transport, with the role of authorising
new or modified cableways in the UK, currently receives on average
fewer than five per year — these are typically for new or
modified lifts at ski resorts in Scotland, but there are occasionally
larger systems that require authorisation, the most notable of
which is the Emirates Cable Car in London.
5.8 The Minister then says that:
· the
Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Department for Transport
provided a response to the EU study to support the Commission
in the process of reviewing (and potentially revising) the Cableways
Directive;
· the
UK response did not identify any issues relating to implementation
other than a need to clarify the distinction between the Cableways
Directive and Lifts Directive, Directive 95/16/EC;
· this
follows a small number of instances within the UK concerning inclined
lifts where there has been uncertainty around whether they fall
within the scope of the Lifts or Cableways Directives;
· this
issue has been addressed in the proposal and it is recommended
that clarification over the distinction between lifts and cableways
is made in the application guidance — this is the Government's
preferred option and is supported by the HSE;
· the
other issues which the proposal seeks to address have not been
identified as an issue within the UK context;
· the
Government, therefore, does not have any concerns about what is
being proposed by the Commission;
· the
proposals do not seem to impose a burden on the UK, however, further
analysis will be undertaken following further detailed scrutiny
and wider consultation with the sector — this is expected
to determine whether there are wider policy and financial implications
for the UK;
· when
the UK Cableways Installations Regulations were drafted, it was
decided that they would apply to modifications to cableway installations
which were in place before the Cableways Directive came into force
in 2004 (although this was left up to decision by Member States);
· a concern
for the HSE, the enforcing body, is that applying the requirements
to all cableways acts as deterrent for operators of existing 'historic'
systems to make essential improvements, because they would have
to go through a costly authorisation process before modifications
could be made; and
· the
Government is seeking clarification with the Commission with respect
to whether installations built and put into service from 2004
are included or not within the revised proposal.
5.9 The Minister adds that:
· the
Commission's impact assessment provides little in the way of monetised
costs and benefits — instead the benefits are described
as being improved health and safety and legal clarification;
· no significant
costs have been identified for the preferred options;
· the
Government considers that this assessment is reasonable, although
it would have liked to have seen more information on monetised
benefits/costs;
· the
Government is considering whether a UK impact assessment is required;
and
· given
that the proposals will improve the clarity of existing legislation,
the Government would agree that the financial implications are
likely to be minimal.
Conclusion
5.10 Whilst there is no apparent problem with
this proposal, we note the Government's planned wider consultation,
the possibility of a UK impact assessment and the need for clarification
of whether installations built and put into service from 2004
are included or not in the new measure. Before we consider the
proposal again we should like to hear in due course from the Government
on these three points. Meanwhile the document remains under scrutiny.
7 The New Legislative Framework Decision sets out a
common framework for EU product harmonisation legislation and
consists of the provisions which are commonly used in such legislation
(for example, definitions, obligations of economic operators,
notified bodies and safeguard mechanisms). Back
| 
