Tag Archive: Review Type-Approval

  1. European Commission: Machinery Directive unsuitable for vehicles

    Comments Off on European Commission: Machinery Directive unsuitable for vehicles

    The support for LEVA-EU’s proposals in favour of a review of light electric vehicle legislation appears to be growing. The Commission has now explicitly confirmed that the Machinery Directive is not suitable for vehicles. In their study for the Commission, TRL recommends the creation of a dedicated approval process for PMDs, separate from Regulation 168/2013 and the Machinery Directive.


    In the Motorcycle Working Group meeting of 17 March, TRL has presented its long-awaited study on so-called Personal Mobility Devices (PMD) and type-approval legislation. The study is aimed at helping the Commission to decide whether current technical legislation for PMDs needs changing. The term PMD covers a broad range of light, electric vehicles such as electric cycles for personal transport or to carry people or cargo, speed pedelecs, e-scooters, monowheels, self-balancing vehicles etc.

    Today, some of these vehicles, such as speed pedelecs or cargocycles with more than 250W come under type-approval. Other vehicles, such as electric bikes with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 250W, e-scooters or self-balancing vehicles are excluded from type-approval and come under the Machinery Directive.

    From the day the association was established, LEVA-EU has argued that both regulatory frameworks are ill-adapted and inaccurate for light, electric vehicles (LEVs). In anticipation of the TRL-study, LEVA-EU had developed an exhaustive position paper. The main point for LEVA-EU is to take LEVs up to 50 km/h out of both Regulation 168/2013 and the Machinery Directive. Instead, the EU should develop a new horizontal Vehicle Regulation, which could be complemented with harmonized standards and, if necessary, for certain vehicles even type-approval.

    TRL has clearly taken LEVA-EU’s arguments on board. One of the objectives of the study was to formulate recommendations for the Commission. Among the 8 recommendations is the following: “Create a dedicated approval process for PMDs separate from Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 and the Machinery Directive.” It even looks like LEVA-EU has won at least one big battle. Shortly before the Motorcycle Working Group meeting, the Commission confirmed in an email to LEVA-EU: “(…) as far as the Machinery Directive is concerned, we would like to inform you that the directive was never meant to cover vehicles for the transport of people on the road. PMD are intended for the transport of people on the road, and as such, the Machinery Directive is not the right safety legal framework for them. In the revision of the Directive we intend to clarify this point.

    This confirmation comes exactly 15 years after ETRA and COLIBI/COLIPED asked the Commission in vain to exclude electric bicycles with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 250W from the Machinery Directive.

    This confirmation also comes at a time when it is becoming painfully clear how difficult, if not impossible, it is to harmonize standards for PMDs under the Machinery Directive. The attempts failed for the EN 17128:2020 and recently also for the PrEN 17404, the draft standard for electric mountain bikes. Furthermore, the harmonization of EN 15194:2017 is under threat following two formal objections. All this makes it increasingly clear that the Machinery Directive is not suitable for vehicles. What’s more, it damages the LEV-businesses who have to comply with this unsuitable Directive whilst being deprived from suitable tools, i.e. harmonized standards, for that compliance.

    The question remains how the Commission is going to follow up on their conclusion that the Machinery Directive is unsuitable. There are only two options available. The first one would be to move the vehicles from the Machinery Directive into Regulation 168/2013. However, this goes against TRL’s recommendation to “ensure that EPACs remain outside the scope of Regulation (EU) No 168/2013”. If EPACs stay out of the Regulation, where would they go instead? Also, how could one justify bringing other light vehicles with the same maximum speed, such as e-scooters, under the Regulation after all? All this points even more towards a separate regulation dedicated to Zero Tailpipe Emmission Vehicles as the only fundamental solution.

    Unfortunately, TRL seems to be supportive of this idea only for vehicles up to 25 or 30 km/h. For vehicles with a higher speed, they only refer to speed pedelecs and thereby make a particularly unfortunate recommendation. They suggest to move speed pedelecs to L1e-A, whilst adding a 1,000W power limit. This is unfortunate because the recommendation does not clarify that type-approval requirements would still need to be adapted to the vehicles. Furthermore, the recommendation does not take into account that L1e-A is currently a technology neutral category. That means it is open to all types of cycles, not only with pedal assistance. Finally, it is unfortunate because this recommendation does not take into account that there are light, electric vehicles with a speed limit of 45 km/h other than speed pedelecs.

    The only positive element in the recommendation for speed pedelecs is the removal of the maximum assistance factor four. In an earlier study on factor four, TRL had concluded that there is no evidence showing that factor four has either a positive or negative impact on safety. However, this conclusion did not lead TRL to recommend the removal of the maximum assistance factor. Apparently, TRL has found something in this new study that has made them change their mind.

    Another disappointing recommendation relates to power limitations. TRL states: “If it is necessary to regulate maximum motor power do so at a level that does not discourage the development of new vehicle configurations (1,000W).” This wording only implies doubt about the necessity of power limits. What’s worse, it doesn’t mention the absolute necessity of requirements to ensure safe control of acceleration, as proposed by LEVA-EU. Hopefully, the full argumentation behind this recommendation will be in the study itself.

    The study is not completed yet. At the Motorcycle Working Group meeting, TRL only showed the following presentation: https://bit.ly/3f4DofZ. LEVA-EU also had the opportunity to respond in the meeting with a short presentation, which is here: https://bit.ly/3vQuFDV

    The Commission concluded that if they were to go ahead with a review, that work would not be initiated before the second half of next year. Such a review would first require a road map and an impact assessment. LEVA-EU will ask the Commission about this timing. It seems to us that, given the urgency of the climate crisis, no further time should be wasted in removing legal bottlenecks to unlock the market potential of light electric vehicles.

    For further details, contact Annick Roetynck, annick@leva-eu.com

    Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

  2. LEVA-EU Position on Review for Zero Emission Tailpipe Vehicles

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Position on Review for Zero Emission Tailpipe Vehicles

    LEVA-EU has published a position paper in which the trade association has developed an exhaustive argumentation for the introduction of the concept of Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicle (ZEV) in Regulation 168/2013. The ZEV-concept covers all light, electric vehicles and allows for much simpler, more accurate and future-proof rules. LEVA-EU has submitted the paper to TRL in the framework of their on-going study for the European Commission.


    LEVA-EU defines a Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicle as “a powered vehicle equipped with a motor that does not produce harmful tailpipe emissions”. Next, LEVA-EU proposes to add an article to Regulation 168/2013 stating “This Regulation does not apply to Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicles with a maximum design speed not exceeding 50 km/h;” Furthermore, LEVA-EU proposes to exclude all Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicles from the Machinery Directive. As a result, this simple legal intervention would exclude all types of electric cycles, e-scooters, monowheels, e-hoverboards, self-balancing vehicles and any other Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicle not yet mentioned explicitly in law today, from the current legal framework, which is totally inappropriate and inaccurate.

    Instead, LEVA-EU proposes to transfer ZEVs into a new horizontal Vehicle Regulation. This European law would specify essential safety requirements to be complemented with harmonised standards and possibly, for certain ZEV-categories, type-approval procedures. In any case, LEVA-EU believes that the form of the legislative framework needs to be decided in consultation with the ZEV-sector.

    1/2mv²

    LEVA-EU’s proposal for new legislation is based on kinetic energy, which equals 1/2mv². LEVA-EU believes that vehicles developing similar levels of kinetic energy must be subject to similar rules. It is unjustifiable to submit vehicles with the same kinetic energy to completely different rules as is the case today.

    As an example, a pedal assisted bike 25 km/h – 250W develops exactly the same kinetic energy as that same vehicle with for instance 300W. And yet, the first is excluded from type-approval, comes under the Machinery Directive and has the same status as a conventional bicycle in all Member States. The 300W edition is an L1e-A, needs type-approval and does not have a clear status in most Member States. The first one is selling by the millions, the second one is virtually non-existing.

    Very simple categorisation

    Following on to this principle of kinetic energy, LEVA-EU proposes a very simple categorisation based on speed and weight only. There would be a distinction between vehicles with a maximum speed of 25 or 30 km/h and vehicles with a maximum speed of 45 or 50 km/h. LEVA-EU insists that the limits must be set in consultation with the ZEV-sector. There may well be an argument for 30 and 50 km/h because this is in line with speed limits used by road management authorities. It would make it easier for ZEVs to go with the flow of the traffic, whilst today through their design they have slightly lower speed limits of 25 and 45. These have never been decided upon any scientific or other research. They were just copied from conventional mopeds.

    LEVA-EU proposes to split up the two speed categories in low-weight and higher-weight vehicles. Again, the limits should be set in consultation with the ZEV-sector. The low weight and low-speed vehicles would be regulated by the provisions of the new, horizontal Vehicle Regulation in combination with harmonized standards. LEVA-EU points out that there are already a number of standards available and others in preparation. For the 3 other categories, LEVA-EU leaves the option open of Vehicle Regulation plus harmonized standards or specific type-approval. Again, the decision needs to be made in consultation with the ZEV-sector.

    Call for consultation

    Throughout the position paper, LEVA-EU really stands up for a better representation of and consultation with the ZEV-sector. Today, the forum for preliminary discussions on the corrections, amending and review of L-category type-approval legislation is the Motorcycle (sic) Working Group. This forum is dominated by internal combustion engine moped and -motorcycle experts, both among the Member State representatives and the stakeholders. LEVA-EU is the only stakeholder to exclusively represent ZEV-companies.

    In the Motorcycle Working Group a number of stakeholders are fighting to keep the technical rules as they are. That is proof in itself of the extent to which these rules prevent the development and marketing of ZEVs. With that, the organizations totally deny the fact that new types of ZEVs are needed to address new types of users, to convince even more people to trade unsustainable mobility for sustainable mobility by means of ZEVs. Electric bicycles with a throttle for instance have the right to exist, for instance for people who are physically incapable of pedalling all the time, as needed with pedal assist only. In the case of carriage of goods and people, the obstruction caused by current regulations and the need for new concepts/solutions is even bigger. Because the voice of the ZEV-sector is drowned out by the voice of parties who consider ZEVs an existential threat, from which they must protect their business, the Commission has not (yet) entered into an in-depth dialogue with the ZEV-sector. LEVA-EU calls on the Commission to no longer postpone that consultation.

    Regulate speed differently

    LEVA-EU also proposes some fundamental changes to the terms of use for ZEVs. For instance, speed limits by design must no longer be used to regulate traffic. Just as is the case for all other vehicles (except conventional mopeds), traffic speed must be regulated by local speed limitations decided by traffic management authorities.

    Some member states don’t have dedicated speed limits on cycle paths/cycling infrastructure. LEVA-EU believes that member states must impose maximum speed limits specifically on cycle paths, which need to be used in a smart way. These limits should still allow to achieve and not to hinder the potential of the ZEVs. For instance, on a separate wide, good quality path with low traffic, the speed limit should allow non-low speed ZEVs such as speed pedelecs to use their full potential. All ZEVs should then be given the option to use cycle paths provided they keep to the maximum speed and whilst observing potential local rules on dimension limits. If they want to go faster, they must go on the road, provided the speed limit there does not exceed the ZEV speed limit by design. Another example: in cycling streets a speed limit of 30 km/h or even lower may be imposed, whilst all ZEVs both low and non-low speed are allowed on condition that they keep to that local speed limit.

    European harmonisation

    Regulating speed through local speed limits rather than through the design of the vehicle, just as is the case for all other vehicles, will improve the access to different types of ZEVs and therefore reduce the desire for increasing the vehicle’s speed limit by tampering. It will also simplify the policing of speed limitations for ZEVs.

    All ZEVs up to 5O km/h should be subject to the same traffic rules as bicycles, for instance allowed to ride in two directions in one-way streets for motorised traffic, allowed to turn right at traffic lights, allowed to use waiting areas in front of motorised traffic at traffic lights, allowed to ride in front of motorised traffic in “cycling streets” etc. Obviously, those facilities should only be granted if feasible. In this respect, it may be necessary to consider dimension restrictions for certain use. With that however, it is important to strive for a European harmonized approach so as not to create a new bottleneck that hampers free circulation of goods in the single market.

    No more cycle paths

    LEVA-EU also calls for renaming all infrastructure, now known as cycling infrastructure, such as cycle paths, cycle streets, cycle highways, cycle parking, etc. as ZEV infrastructure. Member states must not only rename the infrastructure, but they also need to redesign traffic signs, traffic pictograms, etc. to represent all ZEVs instead of bicycles only. This will improve cyclists’ and motorists’ perception of ZEVs. Today, cyclists often feel that the infrastructure is their exclusive territory and, when the infrastructure is scarce, they consider other ZEV-users as intruders. This results in irritation and in the worst case in conflicts. Motorists are not yet used to the fact that, today there are many more different light vehicles on the road than just bicycles. Renaming and resigning infrastructure may well contribute to raising their awareness of the changing traffic scene.

    Member states must consult

    Finally, the Commission must take an initiative aimed at organizing consultation between member states on terms of use for ZEVs. This will definitely contribute to raising awareness of member states on ZEVs as well as to exchanging best practice. That will in turn speed up the adaptation of traffic rules and road infrastructure to ZEVs and allow them to realize their full potential thus making a huge contribution to the objectives of the Green Deal.

    LEVA-EU invites all ZEV-stakeholders to read the full position paper and to respond to it. You can find it here: https://bit.ly/36SrBwv

    Let us know whether you agree with our proposals or whether you have ideas to further improve our proposals. Please send your reactions to LEVA-EU Manager Annick Roetyck, annick@leva-eu.com.

    Overview of LEVA-EU’s proposal

    Speed in the table below is the maximum speed at which the motor propels the vehicle with or without addition of muscular power

    Maximum WeightMaximum SpeedTechnical RulesTerms of use
    Maximum limit to be determined in consultation with LEV-sector25/30 km/h to be set in consultation with LEV-sectorHorizontal Vehicle Reg. + Harmonized standardsIdentical to (e)-bikes – but no use of dedicated low-speed ZEV-infrastructure above specified width – no helmet obligation if more than 2 wheels and ROPS
    Maximum limits above limit set in previous category to be determined in consultation with LEV-sector25/30 km/h to be set in consultation with LEV-sectorHorizontal Vehicle Reg. + Harmonized standards or Specific Type-Approval for these vehiclesIdentical to (e)-bikes but no use of dedicated low-speed ZEV-infrastructure above specified width – no helmet obligation if more than 2 wheels and ROPS
    Maximum limit to be determined in consultation with LEV-sector45/50 km/h to be set in consultation with LEV-sectorHorizontal Vehicle Reg. + Harmonized standards or Specific Type-Approval for these vehiclesPossibility of (e)bike helmet – use of LEV-dedicated infrastructure only up to maximum speed as decided by local traffic management authorities – specific theoretic driving licence exam – if practical exam than specific for and with vehicle concerned
    Maximum limits above limit set in previous category limits to be determined in consultation with LEV-sector45/50 km/h to be set in consultation with LEV-sectorHorizontal Vehicle Reg. + Harmonized standards or Specific Type-Approval for these vehiclesno helmet if ROPS – use of LEV-dedicated infrastructure only up to maximum speed as decided by local traffic management authorities and under specific width – specific theoretic driving licence exam – if practical exam than specific for and with vehicle concerned
    Vehicle type and speedKinetic Energy in Kilojoules, assuming rider weight 70 kg
    Human running without vehicle, 25 km/h1.69 KJ
    Very Lightweight Bicycle or Electric Vehicle, 10kg riding at 25km/h1.93 KJ
     L1e-A powered cycle 500W, 25kg, e.g. throttle up to 25 km/h,  riding at 25km/h2.29 KJ
    Electrically assisted cycle 250W, 25 kg, assistance up to 25 km/h riding at 25km/h2.29 KJ
    Electrically assisted cycle, 25 kg, assistance up to 25 km/h, riding at 30 km/h3.30 KJ
    Very Lightweight Bicycle, 10kg riding at 35km/h3.78 KJ
    Moped (L1Be), 50kg riding at 45 km/h9.37 KJ
  3. Second TRL-survey on-line

    Comments Off on Second TRL-survey on-line

    The second TRL on-line survey for their study on safety requirements for LEVs is online until 4th January.


    At the request of the European Commission, TRL is carrying out a study aimed at identifying the minimum safety requirements for safe use of light, electric vehicles on public roads. The study is also meant to assist the Commission in possible changes of vehicle categorization and technical requirements in the L-category. LEVA-EU welcomes this initiative since the trade association has been consistently arguing that current type-approval needs a fundamental change. The legislation creates huge bottlenecks for light, electric vehicles.

    A first on-line survey for the study took place in October. TRL has now launched a second survey, in which they ask to rate a range of potential regulatory measures. The survey will be online until 4th January.

    If you haven’t received a direct email from TRL inviting you to complete the survey and you wish to do so, please contact Rosie Sharp at TRL, rsharp@trl.co.uk.

    In October, LEVA-EU has organized a series of on-line meetings to provide LEV-companies with a better understanding of the current legislation and the problems resulting from those rules. The presentations and on-line recordings of these meetings are available upon simple request to daan@leva-eu.com. There were 4 meetings, respectively on:

    • E-bikes & Speed Pedelecs
    • E-cargobiles
    • PLEVs
    • 3- & 4-Wheels

    In the framework of this ongoing review, LEVA-EU has proposed to introduce the concept of Zero-Tailpipe Emission (ZEV) vehicles to allow all light, electric vehicles to enjoy the same commercial success as electric bicycles with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 25W. Further details on this proposal are here: https://leva-eu.com/leva-eu-proposes-zev-concept-for-light-electric-vehicles-to-give-manufacturers-same-commercial-success-as-e-bikes/

    After this second on-line survey, TRL will organize in January an on-line workshop, in which they will discuss a shortlist of potential measures with the LEVA-sector. The study is expected to be completed by February 2021.

  4. LEVA-EU proposes ZEV-concept for light electric vehicles to give manufacturers same commercial success as e-bikes

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU proposes ZEV-concept for light electric vehicles to give manufacturers same commercial success as e-bikes

    Trade association LEVA-EU, the sole voice for the light electric vehicle (LEV) sector, has unveiled proposals to introduce a new concept for light electric vehicles to remove legal bottlenecks it says are blighting the industry.

    The organisation says bringing in the concept of Zero Tailpipe Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) would finally set them apart from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles such as petrol motorbikes and mopeds when it comes to the lengthy legislation that can be difficult for manufacturers to navigate.

    LEVA-EU proposes to define ZEVs as “powered vehicles equipped with a motor that does not produce harmful tailpipe emissions”.

    Current regulations class all light electric vehicles, except electric bicycles with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 250W, in the same category as mopeds and motorbikes. This law, Regulation 168/2013, leaves manufacturers forced to navigate complicated and costly procedures, and presents considerable safety issues for riders. LEVA-EU says that, as a result, this market is not allowed to develop and LEVs are unable to achieve their potential.

    LEVA-EU has developed a proposal aimed at simplifying the current Regulation 168/2013 in a major way. The proposal focusses on classifying ZEVs based on kinetic energy, that is the energy of mass in motion (i.e. weight X speed).  Consequently, all low-speed ZEVs up to a certain weight and speed limit could be excluded from Regulation 168/2013, with exclusion limits to be discussed with the LEV- industry.

    Exclusion from Regulation 168/2013 means that the vehicles automatically come under the Machinery Directive, which in turn, allows the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) to develop technical standards. Instead of type-approval, manufacturers can comply with this legislation by means of self-certification or certification by a freely chosen testing service. For type-approval, they must seek certification from an officially accredited testing service.

    LEVA-EU points out that there are already several standards, both published and under development, that could accommodate many of the to be excluded ZEVs. E-bikes with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h -250W have benefited from exclusion since 2002, which has seen millions of them take to the streets without any structural safety problems.

    The organisation says that for ZEVs above the set speed and weight limit, discussions would be needed as to whether a specific type approval should be drawn up or whether they should also be excluded, bringing them under the Machinery Directive.

    LEVA-EU manager Annick Roetynck says type approval for L-category vehicles currently consists of 1,036 pages, many of which are dedicated to emissions and noise, two elements that are irrelevant for ZEVs. It is therefore extremely complicated and costly for ZEV manufacturers to submit their vehicles for type-approval. The result is that there are hardly any L-category light electric vehicles on the market.

    The organisation, which has systematically worked to change legislation to allow for a broader diversity of LEVs, has recently held five online meetings attended by 230 LEV-companies to discuss the type approval issue.

    In July 2020, TRL, the global centre for innovation in transport and mobility, announced that the European Commission had appointed them to carry out a study to “identify the minimum safety requirements for safe use of personal mobility devices (e.g. hover-boards, e-scooters, e-bikes, cargo bikes etc.) on public roads, and how those safety requirements should be regulated.

    The Commission originally intended to limit the regulatory review to e-scooters and self-balancing vehicles only. Thanks to LEVA-EU’s incessant lobbying, the scope of the review has been expanded to include e-bikes, electric cargo bikes and other LEVs.  

    LEVA-EU Manager Annick Roetynck said the current legal framework had allowed for millions of conventional e-bikes to come onto the market, but LEVs coming under Regulation 168/2013 were suffering from severe legal bottlenecks, which hamper the industry.

    She said: “The rules have not been written with light, electric vehicles in mind; they have been written for conventional mopeds and motorcycles. To allow for a broader offer of light, electric vehicles, the rules need urgent updating to remove the legal bottlenecks.

    There are hardly any LEVs in the L-category on the market, while conventional e-bikes excluded from type-approval have been a commercial success for many years.

    This is having an impact on both users and businesses. Roetynck said: “The ‘discrimination’ of e-bikes in L1e-A for instance denies certain user groups access to this sustainable mobility solution. For example, many people with physical problems are unable to use e-bikes with pedal assistance alone, because they don’t know for how long and how far they will be able to pedal.

    To them an electric bike that, for instance, combines pedal assistance with a throttle would be a solution. However, due to type-approval that e-bike will be more expensive than its conventional counterpart, if it were on the market at all. Furthermore, in most member states these e-bikes will be subject to completely different terms of use.

    Another example concerns electric cargo bikes, which become increasingly popular as sustainable last-mile solutions in cities but are currently all limited to pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 250W so that they can avoid type-approval. The market needs vehicles that can transport higher weights but that would require more than 250W, which means that the vehicles would come under Regulation 168/2013.”

    Roetynck said: “Two electric cargo bikes with the same weight and the same speed limit will produce the same kinetic energy, whether they have 250W or 1 kW. Nevertheless, the first is subject to a suitable legal framework, the second to a totally unsuitable legal framework. That needs to change to allow the LEV-market to grow.

    At a LEVA-EU seminar in February 2020, speed pedelec manufacturers extensively testified before the European Commission on the huge difficulties they encounter due to type approval. Speed pedelecs are categorised as L1e-B, mopeds.

    LEVA-EU then decided to add pressure on the European Union in an open letter, urging it to match green transport rhetoric with action on LEVs, which led to the Commission’s review and TRL’s announcement in July.  

    LEVA-EU has pledged to intensify its campaign for the proposed changes over the coming weeks and months. Roetynck added: “Without such change, the EU will never be able to achieve its Green Deal’s objectives, which include a 90% GHG emission reduction by 2050.

    Photo by Dariusz Sankowski on Unsplash

Campaign success

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Member profile

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.