ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(81)157
Vol.1981/0039

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenneetdelaCommunautéeuropéennedel'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiésconformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
InaccordancewithCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
CommunityandtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity(OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocumentsinthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung(EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeitzugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

COMMISSION
OFTHE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
GeneralSecretariatCOM(81)157final
Brussels,7thApril1981
FOROFFICIAL USEONLY
NEGOTIATIONS FORTHEACCESSION OFPORTUGAL
PROPOSALS ONTRANSPORT
(Commission communication totheCouncil)
COM(81)157final

Introduction
1.This communication deals with Portugal 'sacceptance ofthe
acquis conuminautaire inthefield oftransport .Itconcerns thereplies
which theCommission considers should begiven totherequests made by
Portugal intheaccession negotiations fortemporary derogations inthis
field *
2.Portugal setoutthesubstance ofitsrequests initsstatements of
19October 1979 and6June 1980 .Itstask wasmade easier bytheinitial
examination ofsecondary legislation which hadthen already been carried
outbytheCommission andthePortuguese Delegation .ThePortuguese
requests ,which originally numbered ten ,were reduced tothree inthe
statement of6June 1980 ,notably following certain technical contacts
held inMay1980 inconnection with thevisit toLisbon byMrBurke ,who
wasthen theMember oftheCommission with responsibility fortransport .
3.ThePortuguese requests therefore concern thefollowing three acts :
Council Regulation (EEC)No1463/70of20July 1970 ontheintroduction
ofrecording equipment inroad transport ;
Council Directive 77/143/EECof29December 1976 ontheapproximation of
thelaws oftheMember States relating toroadworthiness tests formotor
vehicles andtheir trailers ;
Council Directive 75/130/EECof17February 1975 ontheestablishment of
common rules forcertain types ofcombined road/rail carriage ofgoods
between Member States (andCouncil Directive 79/5/EECof19December 1978).
Itshould benoted that Portugal made nomention initsstatements ofthe
duration ofthetransitional periods itintended torequest .
A
4«Todate theCommunity hasnottaken upaposition onthesubstance of
thePortuguese requests .Ithasonly asked Portugal ,initsstatement of
7December 1979 1toback upitsrequest fortemporary derogations with
more substantial supporting arguments andtogive precise details ofthe
time-scale envisaged .
5»Although Portugal hassupplied nodetails concerning thetime–limits ,
itgave detailed supporting arguments relating totheapplication of
Council Directive 75/l30/EECinamemorandum dated 18December 1979 ,
presented tothe Conference .
^MEMO-P/l/79of18December 1979 *

Detailsweresuppliedconcerningtheothertworequestsatthetechnical
meetingsheldinJuly1980betweenPortugueseexpertsandCommission
officials.
6.'Itshouldbenotedthattheproposalsarebasedontheacquis
communautaire asitstandstoday.Accordingly,theyareentirelywithout
prejudicetoanymeasuresontransportwhichmaybetakenbytheCommunity,
whichwouldobviouslyformpartoftheacquiscommunautaire asfromtheir
adoption.
7.Lastly,itshouldbeaddedthatPortugalhasstressedthatinthe
eventofitsaccedingtotheCommunitybeforeSpain,therewouldbea
transitproblemvis-a-visSpain.Thisquestiondoesnotdirectlyconcern
theaccessionnegotiations andshould,ifnecessary,bedealtwithata
laterstage.

SPECIFIC PROPOSALS
ThefollowingsetsoutthePortuguesepositioninrespectofthethree
actsforwhichPortugalhasrequestedtemporaryderogations andalsothe
supportingargumentsgivenbyPortugal,followedineachcasebythe
Commissionproposal.
I.CouncilRegulation (EEC)ITo1463/70of20July1970ontheintroduction
ofrecordingequipmentinroadtransport
(a)Portugueseposition
Initsstatementof6June1980,Portugalstressedthattheuseofrecording
equipmentinroadtransportwasunknowninPortugalandthatapartfromthe
possiblepsychological problemsfacingdrivers,therewasalsothephysical
problemofinstallingsuchapparatusonPortuguesevehicles.
(
Portugalstated,however,thatnationallegislation wouldshortlycome
underreviewtomeettheCommunityrequirement ofcompulsoryuseofrecording
equipmentsothatasfromaccessionitcanberequiredaspartofthe
equipmentofallnewvehicles,includingvehiclesusedininternational
carriageandthosetransporting dangerousgoods.Portugalalsostatedthat,
pendingaccession,recordingequipmentandrecordsheetsforuseinvehicles
registeredinPortugalwouldbetype-approved inaccordancewithnational
standards.
Withregardtoothervehicles,Portugalrequestedatemporaryderogation-
thoughwithoutspecifyingitsduration-inviewofthetimeneededtoinstall
andadjusttherecordingequipment.

(b)Commission proposal
TheCommission proposes that Portugal should apply asfrom accession ,as
ithasalready agreed ,theCommunity rules onrecording equipment with
regard tonewvehicles ,vehicles used ininternational carriage andthose
transporting dangerous goods .
With regard toother vehicles ,theCommission ,"bearing inmind the
concession already made byPortugal with regard tothevehicles specified
above ,proposes that Portugal 'srequest foratemporary derogation should
beaccepted inprinciple .Thederogation should ,however ,beofshort
duration ,aswasagreed inthecase ofthepreceding accessions .The
Commission therefore proposes that recording equipment beintroduced
within three years from thedate ofaccession .This would give Portugal
sufficient time toimplement adetailed programme covering all the legal
andtechnical aspects involved insetting upcalibration stations for
therecording equipment ,especially ifsuch aprogramme were established
straight away .TheCommission proposes that Portugal beinvited to
supply details ofsuch aprogramme totheConference before itreaches
itsfinal stage ,when thederogation will beconfirmed .
II.Counci'l Directive 77/l43/S5Cof29December 1976 ontheapproximation
ofthe laws ofthe Member States relating toroadworthiness tests for
motor vehicles and their trailers
(a)Portugal *sposition
Initsstatement of6June 1980 ,Portugal explained that thederogation
requested -theduration ofwhich itdid notspecify -was justified by
theneed torestructure thepublic departments responsible fortechnical
control ofvehicles ,toprovide them asfrom accession with thetechnical
andhuman resources tomeet theobligations laid down inDirective 77/143/EEC ,
particularly asregards thechecks specified inAnnex IItotheinstrument .
Portuguese legislation onperiodic inspections does notspecify what
checks aretobecarried outonvehicles ,butmerely contains abroad
requirement forchecking safety conditions andcompliance with the
relevant standards .

-3-
Portugal stated that ,apart from legislative action andconsiderable
investment ,compliance with theobligations laid down inthedirective
will involve adopting implementing measures ,constructing suitable
installations ,fitting them outwith technical resources andstaffing
them with specialist personnel .According tothePortuguese Delegation ,
even ifthey were adopted immediately itwould bedifficult toapply
andextend this series ofmeasures insuch away astooperate asystem
ofperiodic inspections capable ofaminimum ofefficiency andcovering
allthePortuguese vehicles affected bythe_directive .
ThePortuguese Delegation also stated that during thederogation period
theobligations under thedirective will beimplemented gradually by
applying them first tovehicles forinternational carriage 3.ndthen to
others .
(b)Commission proposal
TheCommission proposes that adistinction bemade between interns /tional
andnational transport .
With regard tointernational transport between Member States ofthe
Community ,theCommission proposes that Portugal should implement the
directive inquestion within twoyears from thedate ofaccession andshould
atthat point provide every guarantee that Portuguese heavy vehicles engaged
inintra-Community transport havd actually undergone roadworthiness tests ,
forexample byjinking theissue ofauthorizations with such tests .
With regard tonational transport within Portugal ,theCommission proposes
that Portugal begiven four years from thedate ofaccession inwhich to
implement infull thedirective inquestion .However ,itsuggests that
Portugal berequested toendeavour toapply thedirective instages frorr
accession ,beginning with theoldest vehicles . .TheCommission proposes that
Portugal beinvited topresent adetailed programme forimplementing the
directive totheConference ,before itreaches itsfinal stage ,when the
derogation will beconfirmed .

-4-
III.Council Directive 75/130/EECof17February 1975 ontheestablishment
ofcommon rules forcertain types ofcom"bined roai/rail carriage of
goods between Member States (andCouncil Directive 79/5/EECof
19December 1978 )
*
Itmust first bepointed outthat theobjective ofDirective 75/130/EEC
istheliberalization oftrade .Itisaimed atmaking itpossible for
lorries tobetransported over long distances byrail without prior
authorization (whereas under bilateral transport agreements prior
authorization isneeded ),thus helping torelieve congestion ontheroads
and toencourage rail transport .
(a)Portugal's position
Forthis directive tooPortugal omitted tospecify theperiod forwhich it
intended torequest adeferment ofimplementation .Intheparticular case
ofthis directive ,hoiirever ,itstated that itwished toobtain "along
transitional period "inview ofthetechnical andeconomic difficulties
which would arise from theapplication oftheprovisions inquestion .
On18December 1979 "thePortuguese Delegation transmitted amemorandum
especially devoted totheproblems arising outoftheimplementation of
Directive 75/130/EEC.
Inthis memorandum ,Portugal justifies itsposition bystressing that in
Portugal there areno"suitable stations "within themeaning ofthe
directive and that itwill not bepossible toimplement thedirective
until aregular road/rail service using suitable stations isestablished .
Furthermore ,Portugal wasconcerned tostress that theviability of
such aregular service would beaffected bythedifference ingauge between
theFrench railways andthePortuguese andSpanish railways .

(b)Commission proposal-5-
Itisclear that Portugal 'sreal concern isbasically toensure that
Portuguese transport operators arenotplaced atadisadvantage vis-a-vis
Community and–especially –Spanish operators .Although itiscertain
that infrastructure consisting ofloading andunloading stations capable
ofhandling road/rail transhipment andvice versa arenecessary forthe
implementation ofthedirective ,ontheother hand theliberalization
measures whose application thedirective isintended tofacilitate could
beimplemented even before anysuch stations areconstructed onPortuguese
territory .Onthat assumption ,however ,thePortuguese operators are
afraid ofnotbeing able tomatch thecompetition with regard tosuch
traffic from other Community andSpanish operators .
TheCommission must point out ,however ,that Spain ,which didnotrequest
anyderogation inthis matter ,hadoriginally raised thequestion ofthe
railway gauge when itwasconsidering asking foraderogation .Spain
subsequently decided that this argument was notareasonable oneand it
would ,consequently ,seem even less logical toraise itinthese
negotiations .
TheCommission considers ,moreover ,that 'the basic aimofthedirectives
inquestion istheliberalization ofcombined transport andthat
Portugal must observe this principle
asfrom itsentry into theCommunity .TheCommission further
considers that theperiod oftime between now andPortugal 'saccession
would besufficient inwhich tocarry outthephysical adjustments
necessary ,should Portugal consider itworthwhile todoso.
TheCommission therefore considers that thePortuguese request in
respect ofthetwodirectives inquestion should notbegranted .