EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 7.3.2017 SWD(2017) 100 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation in 2013-2014 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and of Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities



(28th report from the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport) {COM(2017) 117 final}



TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.Social legislation in road transport – objectives and key provisions 4 2.Data submission 5 3.Checks 5 4.Checks compared to the number of enforcement officers and equipment to analyse

tachographs 7 5.Roadside checks 8 6.Roadside checks – type of tachograph 9 7.Checks at premises 11 8.Offences – detection rates 11 9.Offences detected at roadside – detection rates 12 10.Offences detected at premises – detection rates 13 11.Categories of infringements detected at roadside 14 12.Categories of infringements detected at premises 15 13.Relations and cooperation between Member States 15 14.Penalties 23 15.Exceptions granted by Member States 23 16.Comments and proposals 28 17.Interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 and Directive 2002/15/EC 29

17.1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 October 2016 in case C-501/14 29 17.2 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 18 February 2016 in case C‑325/15 29 17.3 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 9 June 2016 in case C-287/14 30 17.4 Requests for a preliminary ruling 30 18.Monitoring and control arrangements of Directive 2002/15/EC in Member States 31 19.Issues in relation to enforcement of Directive 2002/15/EC 31 20.Statistics on checks 32 21.Statistics on infringements 32 22.Stakeholders' views on implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC in Member States 33 23.Statistics on minimum checks to be carried out 34 24.Statistics on number of working days checked at roadside 35 25.Statistics on checks at roadside by the number of drivers checked at roadside by country of registration and type of carriage 36 26. Statistics on checks at roadside by the number of vehicles stopped at roadside check by

country of registration and type of tachograph 37 27.Statistics on checks at premises by the number of drivers, undertakings and working days

checked at premises 38 28.Table of number of undertakings, drivers checked and offences detected by size of the

fleet of all Member States 39 29.Statistics on types of offences at roadside 45 30.Statistics on types of offences at premises 46



1. Social legislation in road transport – objectives and key provisions Social rules in road transport are established by four interrelated acts : Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, which establishes rules on driving times, breaks and rest periods for professional drivers; Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, Directive 2002/15/EC, which sets out complementary provisions on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities and Directive 2006/22/EC, which determines minimum requirements for enforcement of these rules. Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 applies to employed and self-employed drivers engaged in the carriage by road of goods where the maximum permissible mass of the vehicle exceeds 3.5 tonnes and of passengers by vehicles carrying more than 9 persons including the driver. The maximum weekly driving time of a driver should not exceed 56 hours (provided that no more than 90 hours are driven in any two consecutive weeks). The total daily driving time should not exceed 9 hours, although twice a week it can be extended to 10 hours. Breaks should last for at least 45 minutes (which may be separated into a break of 15 minutes followed by 30 minutes) and should be taken not later than 4.5 hours of driving period. The daily rest period is determined at the level of minimum 11 hours, which can be reduced three times a week to 9 hours. The Commission is currently evaluating the Regulation and intends to table a proposal for a targeted revision in 2017 as part of the Road Initiative. Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport provides the basis for the tachograph, which is a device that records driving time, breaks, rest periods and other work. Its purpose is to monitor compliance of professional drivers with driving time provisions of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. The tachograph must be installed in vehicles to which Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 applies. Since the 1st of May 2006 there is an obligation to install a digital tachograph in all new registered vehicles in the EU. There is no mandatory retrofit for vehicles already registered before that date and fitted with an analogue tachograph. Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 was repealed by Regulation (EU) No 165/2014, which sets out obligations and requirements in relation to the construction, installation, use, testing and control of tachographs used in road transport, in order to verify compliance with control with Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, Directive 2002/15/EC and Council Directive 92/6/EEC. It also aims at reducing administrative burden and making fraud to the tachograph more difficult. Directive 2002/15/EC (Working Time Directive) applies to mobile workers such as drivers, crew and other travelling staff, both with the employment or self-employment status. The Directive complements Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 by putting in place limitations on the overall daily and weekly working time of workers in the road transport sector as well as minimum daily/weekly periods of rest and adequate breaks. Working time is defined in the Directive as time devoted to all road transport activities, including driving, loading and unloading, assisting passengers boarding and disembarking from the vehicle, cleaning and technical maintenance and all other work intended to ensure the safety of transport operation. Specific time limits are set out in relation to weekly working time (excluding breaks and periods of availability) which amounts to maximum 48 hours a week or 60 hours, provided that over four months, an average of 48 hours a week is maintained. Moreover, a limitation to 10 hours on daily working time is introduced in case of night work. Each mobile worker is obliged to take a break after working consecutively for 6 hours, which should be at least 30 minutes, if working hours range from 6 to 9 hours and at least 45 minutes, if working time equals to more than 9 hours. Directive 2006/22/EC also called the "Enforcement Directive" aims at verifying compliance and ensuring application of the driver's hours rules established by Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. The Directive promotes harmonised interpretation of social rules in road transport by means of minimum requirements for the uniform and effective checking by Member States. The minimum threshold of checks of the total number of days worked by drivers falling under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 and Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 is set at 3% from 2010. In addition, the total number of working days actually checked should be carried out in proportional manner for checks at roadside and at premises of transport undertakings; 30 % and 50 % respectively. In order to encourage cooperation between Member States, an obligation of minimum 6 concerted roadside checks per year undertaken by two or more enforcement authorities was introduced. 2. Data submission Data has been submitted by all Member States in most of the cases in a timely manner. The quality and consistency of national reports improved constituting a coherent base for this biennial report. All Member States provided data by means of the standard reporting form. Some of the inconsistent or missing data was due to technical constraints during data collection process in some Member States. Furthermore, there were some Member States which still reported that data was collected in not disaggregated manner or in the wrong format which did not allow for their inclusion in the national reports. These issues should be addressed in view of the next biennial report for the years 2015-2016 in order to assure more reliable and better quality overview at the European level. 3. Checks Looking closely at the number of working days effectively checked in relation to the minimum number of working days to be checked, it is noticeable that the majority of Member States performed more checks than required by Directive 2006/22/EC. For the purpose of better illustration of the results, 100% signifies meeting the minimum threshold of 3% of checks. The collected data shows that all Member States reached this threshold, except for Greece (16%), the Netherlands (80%), Croatia (82%) and Lithuania (96%). Even though, Greece increased the number of working days checked compared with the previous period, levels of controls remain significantly below the threshold, already for the 4th time in a row. The Netherlands increased the number of the controls from 64% in 2011-2012 to 80% in this reporting period. Nevertheless, it should be taken into consideration that agreements with various freight and passenger transport operators were concluded in the Netherlands. According to this national arrangement, transport undertakings report back to the national authority on the results of their own monitoring of working and driving times and rest periods. It indirectly provides for an additional one million and a half of driver working days checked, which when added to traditional checks would allow meeting the minimum checks threshold. In this reporting period Denmark, Italy and Latvia showed an improvement in their enforcement performance and met the legitimate threshold of checks. There are several Member States that performed considerably more checks than required by the legislation. These are Austria, Bulgaria, France, Germany and Romania. Bulgaria performed the most of the working days checked compared to the required minimum checks, followed by France and Germany. These three Member States account for a half of the total working days checked in the European Union (75.6 million out of 151 million). Regarding the type of controls, there is a continuous upward trend in working days checked at premises of undertakings. When looking at the total number of working days checked across the EU, 23% of them were controlled at premises in comparison to 20% in 2011-2012 and 18% in 2009-2010. As required by Article 2 of Directive 2006/22/EC, the number of the working days checked at premises should amount to at least 50% of total number of working days checked. However, only the following seven Member States complied with the requirement of minimum checks at premises : Ireland (82%), Croatia (70%), Latvia (69%), Estonia (62%), Lithuania (60%), Slovakia (59%) and Malta (51%). Member States which proportionally had the fewest checks at premises in terms of their overall working days checked are Germany (12%), France (13%), Romania (14%), Austria (15%) and Hungary (16%). It is worth noting that Sweden improved the share of checks at premises from 1% in the previous reporting period to 25% in the current one. 4. Checks compared to the number of enforcement officers and equipment to analyse tachographs

In comparison with the previous reporting period the number of enforcement officers involved in checks in all Member States decreased by 16% from 73 thousand to approximately 61 thousand. The drop was proportionally the most noticeable in four Member States and outweighed the significant increases in other Member States. However, the increase was noted in the number of control officers trained to analyse the digital tachograph by almost two thousand. There was as well a slight decrease of 8% in the number of equipment to analyse the tachographs in comparison with the previous reporting period. Table 1 – National Enforcement National Enforcement Member States number of control officers involved in checks number of control officers trained to analyse the digital tachograph number of units of equipment provided to control officers to analyse the tachograph AT 950 950 485 BE 3,727 3,563 128 BG 256 256 220 HR 230 230 130 CY 11 11 4 CZ 707 707 143 DK 110 110 90 EE 227 203 18 FI 460 560 133 FR 6,000 6,000 3,500 DE 15,423 4,400 2,742 EL 3,279 328 148 HU 135 135 70 IE 12 12 12 IT 10,569 3,496 661 LV 18 18 12 LT 657 79 79 LU 27 27 17 MT 3 2 1 NL 200 300 85 PL 1,265 1,222 786 PT 14,898 1,155 41 RO 318 318 318 SK 40 41 41 SL 341 230 42 ES 500 310 430 SE 231 204 202 UK 617 282 282 TOTAL 61,211 25,148 10,820



5. Roadside checks The percentage of non-national vehicles checked at roadside amounted to 67% in Luxembourg, 66% in Malta, 64% in Belgium, 62% in Slovenia, 61% in Austria and 58% in France and corresponded with the predominance of non-national drivers controlled at roadside. In the case of these Member States a factor of geographical location or a volume of transit operations should also be taken into account. Nevertheless, on the basis of the collected data from the current and previous reporting periods, four of the above mentioned Member States did not restore the balance of controls for the third time in a row and Austria for the second time despite the reminder on non-discriminatory manner with regard to the nationality of the vehicles/drivers in which controls should be performed that was included in the previous Commission report on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport. As regards this group of Member States, to which the reminder was addressed, only Lithuania limited the checks of non-national vehicles from 55% in the period 2011-2012 to 47% in the current period. Moreover, in the current reporting period there was a shift in France to control more non-national vehicles (from 51% to 58%) and drivers (from 51% to 60%). 6. Roadside checks – type of tachograph An important issue in roadside checks seems to link to the type of tachograph the vehicles are equipped with. The digital tachograph was introduced in 2006 and aims at facilitating the enforcement of the social legislation by providing more secure and accurate data, while at the same time simplifying the control procedures. However, Slovenia indicated that despite the growing share of digital tachographs, the complexity and length of control procedures remain problematic. The issue of keeping various forms of data records as well as checking drivers performing activities for several transport operators was brought to light. Austria indicated that in order to follow the uniform procedure and allow the hybrid (analogue/digital) analysis of data records the automated analysis systems were introduced. Moreover, Italy reported that the use of digital tachographs and the associated system of computerised checks have improved the quality of checks, but require extensive training and technical equipment for inspectors as well as more financial resources for that activity. According to Article 2 of Directive 2006/22/EC, the threshold of minimum checks of number of days worked by drivers of vehicles will be raised to 4% once the 90% of vehicles checked are equipped with a digital tachograph. In the current reporting period the share of vehicles checked at the roadside that were equipped with the digital tachograph increased to 64% in comparison to 56% in the previous two consecutive biennial periods 2009-2010 2011-2012, and 32% in the period 2007-2008. Nevertheless, significant fluctuations were observed at national level, with the biggest increases by at least 15 percentage points in Malta, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the United Kingdom. Taking into account the overall average of vehicles equipped with digital tachographs that were controlled at the level of the European Union, there is no base for raising the minimum checks of days worked by drivers of vehicles to 4% in the near future. The number of vehicles equipped with a digital tachograph might serve as an indicator of the fleet composition in Member States because of the obligation of fitting digital tachograph in new vehicles put into service as from May 2006. It stems from the data collected that the highest rate of vehicles equipped with the digital tachograph that were controlled at the roadside was noted in Austria, France and Luxembourg and amounted to 83%. In contrast, in some Member States (Cyprus, Croatia and Greece) these vehicles did not reach the level of 30%. Detailed numbers and percentages of analogue and digital tachographs installed in vehicles checked at the roadside in each Member States are presented below. Table 2 - analogue and digital tachographs installed in vehicles checked at the roadside Member States Analogue tachograph % analogue Digital tachograph in % digital Austria 48,539 17% 241,085 83% Belgium 20,915 34% 40,170 66% Bulgaria 148,468 37% 247,558 63% Croatia 4,580 79% 1,233 21% Cyprus 7,334 95% 387 5% Czech Republic 67,541 43% 88,689 57% Denmark no data reported Estonia 3,396 56% 2,720 44% Finland 2,098 54% 1,802 46% France 160,110 17% 798,791 83% Germany 414,969 26% 1,164,538 74% Greece 18,092 73% 6,828 27% Hungary 53,075 53% 47,997 47% Ireland 17,718 49% 18,244 51% Italy 357,683 55% 286,906 45% Latvia 9,573 56% 7,449 44% Lithuania 43,778 58% 31,654 42% Luxembourg 1,250 17% 5,991 83% Malta 14 40% 21 60% Netherlands 16,368 43% 21,623 57% Poland 328,659 57% 252,870 43% Portugal 31,617 63% 18,383 37% Romania 285,045 39% 439,831 61% Slovakia 3,815 28% 10,055 72% Slovenia 11,873 56% 9,410 44% Spain 196,929 37% 339,951 63% Sweden 18,338 27% 50,100 73% United Kingdom 92,116 53% 81,810 47% TOTAL 2,363,893 36% 4,216,096 64% 7. Checks at premises An increase of drivers checked at premises was noted and amounted to 9.4% from approximately 691thousand drivers in the previous reporting period to almost 756 thousand in the period 2013-2014.

The share of drivers checked at premises of all drivers controlled both at roadside and premises over 2013-2014 amounts to 9% in comparison to 7.3% in 2011-2012, and confirms a growing tendency in relation to 5% in the period 2009-2010. A group of four Member States, namely Bulgaria (21%), France (12%), Germany (13%) and Spain (15%) controlled almost 61% of all drivers checked at premises. 8. Offences – detection rates It is worth pointing out that 43.7% of the total number of offences detected in Europe was reported in Germany and together with Austria (11.6%), Poland (8.5%) and Italy (7.9%), these four Member States covered 71.7% of offences reported both at roadside and premises. A significant discrepancy is noted between France and Germany in terms of ratios between working days checked, respectively 20% and 24%, and numbers of offences detected, corresponding to 5.4% and 43.7%. This distinctiveness is comparable with the previous reporting period. In view of such discrepancies, the enforcement practices across Europe should be aligned in order to create the common enforcement area, where checks in comparable circumstances lead to corresponding outcomes. There is a big disparity between Member States as regards the detection rate ranging from 0.04 in Bulgaria, 0.39 in Romania, 0.52 in Hungary, 0.55 in Latvia and 0.58 in France to 7.24 in Austria, 5.31 in Cyprus and 4.64 in Slovakia of offences detected per 100 working days checked. Moreover, these national rates noted big variations seen against the last reporting period. In some Member States there were significant drops like in Finland from 6.75 to 1.68 and Hungary from 3.73 to 0.52, which might suggest either higher awareness of social legislation among drivers and undertakings or lower effectiveness of controls. In contrast, some Member States increased rates of detected offences, namely Cyprus from 0.66 to 5.31 and Austria from 4.5 to 7.24, which could indicate enhanced controls of compliance with the social legislation in these Member States. In quantitative terms, significant rises of offences detected were observed at national level, in the following Member States in comparison with the previous reporting period : Austria (87%), Latvia (71%), Romania (58%), Spain (46%), Belgium (38%), and Poland (38%). In addition Sweden detected 2 times as many offences as in the last period and Cyprus 7 times as many offences. On the other side, there are Member States with large declines in offences detected, as Hungary (72%), France (49%), Greece (49%), Slovenia (47%), Bulgaria (46%), Italy (36%), the United Kingdom (31%) and Germany (24.7%) in spite of increases in numbers of working days checked by Member States such as Hungary (101%), Slovenia (18%) and Italy (5%). The national fluctuations between this and previous reporting period do not form a consistent pattern in comparison with the changes between period 2009-2010 and 2011-2012. Some Member States which noted recently drops in offences detected were the ones with increases beforehand or the other way around the current increases were preceded by significant declines. 9. Offences detected at roadside – detection rates Looking closely at Member States, diverse fluctuations can be observed between the last two reporting periods. Some Member States noted very high growths of detection rate; such as Cyprus by 94%, Austria by 60%, Sweden by 34% or Lithuania by 31%. In addition, the detection rate of Belgiumin the last reporting period was 3.6 times as high as the detection rate in the period 2011-2012. Some Member States had lower detection rates in comparison with the previous period, namely Greece by 69%, Hungary by 67%, Bulgaria by 50%, Ireland by 36% as well as Luxembourg where the detection rate was lower by 32%. Despite considerable changes at national level, the overall detection rate of offences during roadside checks across the Union noted a minor increase. Hence, this does not provide a sufficient basis for drawing solid conclusions on the developments in effectiveness of controls in the Union. 10. Offences detected at premises – detection rates It should be pointed out that Germany detected 51% of all offences at premises in the Union. Together with Italy (11%) and Poland (almost 16%) these three Member States cover around 78% of all detected violations at premises. Decreases in the offences at premises in Germany and Italy were compensated by the growth in Poland, which resulted in the same share of offences detected at premises by these three Member States as in the period 2011-2012. The number of offences detected in Germany corresponds with the highest frequency of offences detected per 100 working days checked (14.01), which even though it decreased by 37%, still was almost four times higher than the European average of 3.54. In Italy the rate declined from 8.98 to 5.10 in the period 2013-2014, which might imply greater awareness of social legislation among undertakings. This conclusion might be supported by the offence rate per undertaking, which decreased in Italy by 41% as compared to the last period. In quantitative terms, Italy informed of the yearly developments over the last three years when the number of offences detected at premises declined considerably from almost 126 thousand in 2012 to 89 thousand in 2013 and then to almost 47 thousand in 2014. It stated that this figure confirms checks being an encouraging factor for businesses to operate in the road transport sector in greater compliance with the rules. However, the reversed trend is noted in Poland, where the rate of offences detected per 100 working days checked at premises grew from 3.45 to 5.42 and the offence rate at premises per undertaking increased from 24.01 in the previous reporting period to 37.32 in the present one. In Germany the offence rate per undertaking, after dropping between periods 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 from 81 to 55, remained at the same level in the current period.

Slovakia indicated that checks at premises revealed a general improvement; i.e. increased awareness of transport-related social legislation in comparison with previous period. This seems to be confirmed by a drop of offences rate detected at premises in Slovakia from 6.64 to 5.34. There are vast disparities in offence detection rates at premises per 100 working days checked between Member States. Member States like Germany, Cyprus and the Netherlands have at least 7 offences reported per 100 working days checked, whereas Bulgaria (0.02), Greece (0.09), Latvia (0.03), Portugal (0.03), Romania (0.23), France (0.54), the United Kingdom (0.48) and Spain (0.63) have exceptionally low offence rate. The ratio of offences detected at premises to the number of drivers checked confirms this disparity. In some Member States multiple offences are detected per driver, namely Cyprus (approximately 9 offences per driver), Germany (approximately 7 offences per driver) and Malta (approximately 12 offences per driver). On the other end of the scale, there are Member States with very few offences detected per driver, such as Bulgaria (1 offence detected per 183 drivers checked), Denmark (1 offence per 11 drivers), Greece (1 offence per 54 drivers), Latvia (1 offence per 15 drivers), Portugal (1 offence per 93 drivers), Romania (1 offence per 15 drivers). However, this cannot be seen as a sole indicator of the compliance level with the rules in Member States. As additional factors such as number of drivers checked, scope and level of detail of checks, national enforcement practices, use of risk rating systems, etc. would need to be considered. Hence, in order to create a level playing field in the transport sector, there is a need to improve and align the enforcement of transport-related social legislation across the EU. 11. Categories of infringements detected at roadside The proportions of roadside violations remained at relatively similar levels as in previous years. For two categories, namely driving time (18%) and breaks (17%) substantial decreases were noted : respectively 4 and 3 percentage points. The infringements of rules on rest periods remained at the same level of 25%. Whereas for violations of rules on availability of records for 28 days an increase was observed from 16% to 17%, from 12% to 13% for recording equipment and from 5% to 9% for lack of records for other work. When looking closely at the offences for recording equipment (13%), the distinction between the incorrect functioning and the misuse or manipulation of the recording equipment can be made. The latter stands at 11%, significantly up from 5% in the previous reporting period. This is in line with signals from enforcement authorities from Member States such as the Netherlands and Finland, which indicated the noticeable increase in the number of cases involving manipulation of tachograph. However, the quantification of this trend should be treated with caution due to the significant amount of data missing in the previous reporting period. The proportion of offences involving the manipulation of the recording equipment was particularly high in some Member States, namely 45% in the United Kingdom, 25% in Poland and the Netherlands, 21% in Ireland and 18% in Belgium and Germany. This represents a significant increase in comparison with the previous reporting period when the rate stood at 32% in the United Kingdom, 21% in the Netherlands, 17% in Poland, 15% in the Ireland and 6% in Belgium. Germany did not provide this data for the period 2011-2012. This development shows a stronger emphasis being put on verifying the recording equipment on vehicles and/or an increased number of recording equipment being manipulated. Therefore, the appropriate enforcement techniques, equipment, training of control officers, etc. enabling targeted controls and detecting manipulation devices and fraud became more needed than ever. Greater dynamics in types of offences detected at roadside were witnessed in certain Member States. In reference to driving time violations, in Belgium and Spain, the proportion almost doubled in comparison with the previous reporting period and in Sweden and Austria it increased significantly by 34% and by 20%, respectively. On the other end, there are France and Germany, where driving time offences represented 13% and 20% of all offences at roadside against 23% and 24% during years 2011-2012. Concerning offences committed against rules on 28 days record, they remained almost equal to around half of all detected at roadside offences in Bulgaria (47%), Italy (44%) and Latvia (42%). Despite the fact that offences related to breaks, driving time, rest periods declined from 67% in 2011-2012 reporting period to 60% in the current period, the corresponding increase in the number of offences linked with records keeping and tachograph use indicates the shift towards concealing the infringements of rules on driving times, breaks and rest periods. 12. Categories of infringements detected at premises As in the previous period, the most detected types of offences were violations of rules on breaks (33%, down by 1 percentage point), rest periods (increased by 1 percentage point to amount to 24%), driving time (decrease by 2 percentage points and equalled to 14%) as well as driving time records (growth by 2 percentage points to 19%). The number of offences in relation to recording equipment and lack or availability of records for other work remained steady and stood at 4% and 6%, respectively. 13. Cooperation between Member States According to Directive 2006/22/EC, Member States are obliged to undertake not less than six concerted roadside checks per year with at least one other Member State. Six Members States did not provide information on concerted checks, which is interpreted as non-fulfilment of this requirement. In this context, only half of Member States reached the threshold of the minimum number of concerted checks, which shows deterioration in comparison with the previous period not only in terms of reporting quality but as well in the amount of international initiatives undertaken. Cooperation between Member States remains mostly between neighbouring Member States. Furthermore, almost half of Member States indicated that the collaboration; in terms of concerted checks and/or exchanges of experience, data, staff, takes place within the framework of Euro Contrôle Route (ECR). Moreover, it was noted by several Member States that ECR has proved useful in exchanging information regarding best enforcement practice, new technologies and data exchange. The cooperation between Member States based on concerted checks, joint training initiatives or exchanges of experience and information plays a crucial role in achieving the objectives of the social legislation in the road transport sector; i.e. improved level playing field, road safety and harmonisation of working conditions. Therefore, the European Commission will put forward solutions to promote and reinforce the cooperation between Member States by means of not only strengthened enforcement of rules in place but as well a possible proposal of complementary measures enabling achievement of this objective.

Table 3 – Overview of concerted checks undertaken by each Member State Austria Concerted checks: 6 concerted checks per year with ECR/TISPOL Member States. Exchange of experience, data, staff 4 bilateral and 2 multilateral initiatives (involving 26 persons in bilateral initiatives and 8 in multilateral). Subject of exchange: driving time checks, manipulation of recording equipment, technical checks and securing of loads. Member States involved: ECR/TISPOL Member States. Belgium No data provided. Bulgaria In 2013: 6 joint checks with the Romanian Control Authority (ARR) carried out in Romania and Bulgaria. In 2014: Joint checks with the Romanian Control Authority (ARR) carried out in Romania and Bulgaria: 8 checks Exchange of information on detected infringements committed by Bulgarian drivers in Germany, Hungary, Austria, Spain, Great Britain, Italy, Latvia, Romania, Slovenia. Croatia No data provided. Cyprus In 2014 an officer of the Department for Labour Inspection attended a conference concerning the new Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 in Ispra, Italy. Czech Republic In 2013: Inspectors were involved in 3 multilateral concerted checks organized by ECR, 1 trilateral organized also by ECR, 5 bilateral concerted checks with Germany, 2 with Slovakia, 1 with Hungary and 1 with Poland. Inspectors attended 3 ECR workshops and 2 meetings of expert groups. In 2014: Inspectors were involved in 2 multilateral concerted checks organized by ECR, 1 trilateral organized also by ECR, 5 bilateral concerted checks with Germany, 1 with Slovakia and 1 with Hungary. Inspectors attended 3 ECR workshops and 3 meetings of expert groups. Denmark The National Police participated in concerted checks organised by TISPOL – frequency not indicated. Estonia In 2013: 2 concerted roadside checks with the Latvian Police and 2 concerted roadside checks with the Finnish Police. In 2014: 2 concerted roadside checks with the Latvian Police and 1 with the Finnish Police. 2 multilateral concerted checks with Finland, Latvia and Lithuania. Finland Sweden and Norway regularly send reports to Finland concerning Finnish drivers and undertakings that have committed offences against regulations on driving and rest times in the territory of the States concerned. The data is supplied to the Occupational Safety and Health Inspectorate carrying out checks in undertakings. France Participation in 8 ECR concerted checks in 2013 and 8 in 2014 on the subject of cabotage, ADR, tachograph fraud, technical checks and securing of loads. In 2013 and 2014 France organised cooperation sessions on bilateral exchange with Germany (gathering 16 to 18 participants from both Member States) and multilateral cooperation sessions (gathering controllers from ECR Member States). France participated in multilateral exchanges organised by ECR Member States; i.e. in 2014 in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Poland). Attendance at TISPOL/ECR Master Class on tachograph fraud at least once a year by 2 controllers. Germany 5-6 ECR coordinated checks each year with the inspecting officers from France, Austria, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Poland (duration 1 week), focus on social legislation in the road transport sector, technical roadside inspections and load restraints. 10-15 exchanges of experience under ECR, TISPOL per year, in which 2-10 inspectors participate. Greece No information provided. Hungary In 2013: Multilateral controls (Slovakia, Poland and Germany) in the framework of Hungary-Czech Republic cooperation in Pardubice and Zlin, Czech Republic. Participation in ECR exchanges in Leiden, Metz. Attendance at the TISPOL/ECR Master Class on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück. 3rd Central European regional roadside check action in Zala County in June with the participation of Austria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia. 2 bilateral controls with Slovenia and 1 with Austria. ECR exchange programme in Budapest with participation of 23 experts from Austria, Slovakia and Romania in September. In 2014: Multilateral controls (Slovakia, Germany, Poland) in the framework of Hungary-Czech Republic cooperation (May in Mala Lucivna, Slovakia). 3 bilateral controls undertaken with Slovenia and 1 with Romania 2 regional roadside check events with the participation of several Member States (Poland, Slovakia, Romania in April and Poland, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Croatia, Germany in June). Participation in ECR exchanges (Pula, Wroclaw, Metz and Bedford). Attendance on two occasions at the TISPOL/ECR Master Class on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück. Ireland 9 concerted checks in 2013 and 2 concerted checks in 2014 with Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. Attendance at exchange programmes organised by the Dutch, French, and Hungarian Authorities (6 officers attended). Biannual meetings between senior management personnel from VOSA and RSA and a project group on maximising the benefits of coordinated enforcement agreed terms of reference between Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom was set up reviewing compliance and other matters relating to road safety. The group produced a recommendations document which is currently being implemented. Participation in ECR working group meetings in relation to training and enforcement practice. Italy During 2014, the Traffic Police, as part of the activities organised by TISPOL took part in joint European checking and safety campaigns on the carriage of goods and passengers aimed at reducing the number of victims of road accidents as part of the European Action Plan 2011-2020. These joint international operations to combat offences and conduct 'thematic' campaigns last a week. Moreover, during 2014, the Traffic Police Service, during the six-month Presidency of the Council of the European Union, proposed and coordinated a joint operation named TENT-IT, from 28 November to 5 December 2014, with the aim of carrying out checks on Europe's road networks, paying particular attention to trans-European corridors, to ensure safety by means of a wide-ranging campaign at both national and European level targeting professional road haulage, particularly of dangerous goods, and passenger transport. During the TENT-IT operation, 8 217 heavy vehicles (HGVs and buses) were checked, 1 249 of which were registered abroad; 1 575 offences against national and EU legislation specific to road transport were detected, along with 1 425 violations of the Highway Code. In addition, 31 criminal offences were detected in the course of the operation. Latvia 10 concerted roadside checks with Lithuania in 2013 as well as 8 concerted roadside checks with Lithuania and 3 checks with Estonia in 2014. Participation in CORTE Enforcement working group. Lithuania In 2013: 18 joint vehicle-checking exercises with officials from the Polish and Latvian inspectorates. Joint checks were carried out with Polish officials in the Kalvarija (LT) – Budzisko (PL) border zone, and with officials from the Latvian inspection body in the Saločiai (LT) – Grenctāle (LV), Smėlynė (LT) – Medumi (LV), Obeliai (LT) – Subate (LV), Būtingė (LT) – Rucava (LV) and Kalviai (LT) – Meitene (LV) border zones. 4 joint inspections with ECR Member States of freight and passenger vehicle. In 2014: 18 joint vehicle-checking exercises with officials from the Polish and Latvian inspectorates. Joint checks were carried out with Polish officials on the Kalvarija (LT) – Budzisko (PL) border section, and with officials from the Latvian inspection body on the Saločiai (LT) – Grenctāle (LV), Smėlynė (LT) – Medumi (LV), Obeliai (LT) – Subate (LV), Būtingė (LT) – Rucava (LV) and Kalviai (LT) – Meitene (LV) border sections. 8 joint checks with ECR Member States of freight and passenger vehicles. Luxembourg In 2013: The Customs and Excise Administration undertook: 19 checks with various ECR Member States à Dudelange- -Zoufftgen, 5 checks Benelux in Sterpenich (LU-BE-NL), 3 checks LU-DE near Trèves (Markusberg, DE), 1 exercise Interregio (LU-DE), 3 exercises BENEFRALUX (LU-BE-NL-FR), 2 operations Hazeldonk (LU-BE-NL), 1 operation BFL Grande Région (LU-BE-FR). In 2014: The Grand-Ducal Police undertook 6 concerted checks in Saarland (DE), Wittlich (DE) and Wasserbillig (LUX). The Customs and Excise Administration undertook: 7 checks with various ECR Member States in Dudelange-Zoufftgen, 3 checks LU-DE near Trèves (Markusberg, DE), 1 exercise Interregio (LU-DE), 2 exercises BENEFRALUX (LU-BE-NL-FR), 2 operations Hazeldonk (LU-BE-NL), 1 operation BFL Grande Région (LU-BE-FR), 1 operation GrenzAG II (LU-DE). The cooperation (checks, training, etc.) with other Member States usually takes place within the framework of ECR, TISPOL or bilateral and trilateral relations. The concerted checks were performed the most often with France, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. 4 multilateral exchanges and 3 workshops in 2013 and attendance at the TISPOL/ECR Master Class on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück, Malta No concerted checks undertaken. Netherlands No data provided. Poland In 2013: Participation in 8 ECR coordinated control weeks (focus on transport of dangerous goods, tempering with tachograph, technical checks, carriage of passengers and goods). During these concerted checks 26064 vehicles were controlled, resulting in 9348 infringements. Attendance at two TISPOL/ECR Master Classes on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück. Participation in 5 trainings and inspectors exchanges with Member States such as the Czech Republic, Germany and Estonia. In 2014: Participation in 8 ECR coordinated control weeks (focus on cabotage, securing of loads, transport of dangerous goods, technical checks, recording equipment). During these concerted checks 18914 vehicles were controlled, resulting in 6360 infringements. Attendance at two TISPOL/ECR Master Classes on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück. Participation in 13 trainings and inspectors exchanges with Member States such as Hungary, Romania, Germany, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Slovakia and Slovenia. Portugal No information provided. Romania In 2013: 7 concerted checks organised by ECR, with the Netherlands, France, Spain, Belgium, Austria, Poland, Hungary, the United Kingdom, Bulgaria, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Czech, Slovenia. 4 multilateral exchanges of experience organised in France, (Metz), Hungary (Budapest and Miskolc) and the Netherlands (Leiden) under the aegis of ECR. 3 ECR workshops organised in Germany (Koln) and twice in Belgium, (Brussels). 1 master class organised by ECR in Germany (Osnabruck). 1 regional roadside check organised in Hungary (Zaa). In 2014: 8 concerted checks organised by ECR, with the Netherlands, France, Spain, Belgium, Austria, Poland, Hungary, the United Kingdom, Bulgaria, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Czech, Slovenia. 2 multilateral exchanges of experience organised in Croatia (Pula) and Hungary (Miskolc) under the aegis of ECR. 4 workshops organised in Germany (Koln), Belgium (Brussels), and Serbia (Belgrade) under the aegis of ECR and European workshop on cargo securing and technical roadside inspections in Hungary (Szeged) and assisted by representatives of the European Commission. 1 bilateral exchange Romania-Hungary organised by Romania at Nagylac border. Slovakia In 2013 and 2014 concerted checks were carried out with the Czech Republic (7 times), Hungary (4 times) and Poland (1 time). Checks with the Czech and Polish partners focused on monitoring of social legislation in road transport and with Hungary on detecting any tampering with the recording equipment. The National Labour Inspectorate organised in 2014 the multilateral checks of social legislation in the transport sector with the participation of Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. The multilateral inspection was attended by 30 participants, carrying out controls at three checkpoints. Slovenia 3 concerted checks with Hungary in 2013 and 2 in 2014, 3 concerted checks each year with Croatia. Active observer in ECR. In years 2013 and 2014 inspectors participated in organised concerted checks in other Member States such as Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain and Germany. Spain 11 ECR coordinated controls (5 in 2013 and 6 in 2014 on driving and resting times, tachograph, dangerous goods, overloading, bus transport and cabotage. Sweden No information provided. United Kingdom 7 concerted checks in 2013 and 8 in 2014 held in conjunction with ECR members including Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Lithuania. Exchange visits during 2013/14 - 3 in the Netherlands, France and Poland. Exchange workshops on various subjects including ADR, Load Security (Brussels and Sveged). Attendance at 2 TISPOL/ECR Master Class on tachograph manipulation in Osnabrück and 2 on cabotage as well as a further workshop on Regulation 3821/85. Hosting a multi-lateral exchange at Cardington for 15 delegates from across Europe, this also included three for UK examiners in order to share experiences and working practices.

14. Penalties Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 sets out that Member States shall lay down rules on penalties that are to be effective, proportionate, dissuasive and non-discriminatory. Member States shall notify the Commission of these measures and the rules on penalties. For the current report, the Commission has been notified of the following: In 2014 Belgium and France introduced into their national legislation a prohibition of spending the regular weekly rest periods on board a vehicle and established sanctions for violation of these provisions. In France the penalty of up to one years' imprisonment and the fine of up to €30 000 might be imposed on the transport undertaking for organisation of work of its employees in such a way that the regular weekly rest period is not taken outside the vehicle. Belgium introduced an administrative fine for taking the regular weekly rest period aboard the vehicle, which amounts to €1 800. In Belgium, the infringement can only be deduced from practical circumstances in the moment the infringement is being committed. There is no retroactive proof required for previous rest periods. Other changes of national penalty systems include implementation of the guarantee money system in Latvia. On the basis of the information submitted, the system requires that in case of road transport infringements, a foreign driver pays the guarantee money in a maximum amount of foreseen fine on the spot. In the contrary case, the vehicle might be immobilised and the driver stopped. When the decision on the amount of fine is taken then the Latvian authorities would repay the money. It is as well possible to pay a fine on the spot. Italy established new procedures for implementing the precautionary measure of administrative confiscation and the accessory penalty of immobilising a vehicle. Luxembourg introduced the obligation to pay fines (from €145 to €250) on the spot for the infringements classified as minor and serious by the EU legislation. In addition, following Regulation (EU) No 181/2011 concerning the rights of passengers in bus and coach transport entailed the introduction of new penalties in Bulgaria. 15. Exceptions granted by Member States According to Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, Member States may grant exceptions from the application of provisions on driving times, breaks and rest periods, provided that certain specific conditions are met and that the overall objectives of the Regulation are not prejudiced. Member States are obliged to inform the Commission of the exceptions granted. Following the update in May 2016, the list of exceptions has been completed by information provided from Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Romania and Slovenia. The majority of updates were due to the update regarding the extension of the distance travelled from 50 km to 100 km in Article 13 (1) (d), (f), (g), which is the result of the modification through the tachograph Regulation. The same up-to-date information is also available on the Commission's website. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/modes/road/social_provisions/driving_time/doc/national_exceptions_regulation_2006_561.pdf . National exceptions Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France* Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden United Kingdom 13.1 a: non-competing public authorities1 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X1 13.1 b: agricultural etc. own activity < 100 km2 X X X X X X X X2 X X2 X X X X X X X X X X X2 X2 X X2 13.1 c:agricultural/forestry tractors <100 km3 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X3 X X X 13.1 d: <7,5 tons universal services <100 km4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X X4 X X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X4 X X4 X X4 X4 13.1 e: operating on islands <2300 square km5 X X X X X X5 X X X X X X5 X X 13.1 f: <7,5 t <100 km gas/ electricity6 X6 X6 X6 X6 X6 X6 X X6 X X6 X6 X6 X6 X X6 X 13.1 g: instruction/ examination driving licence/CPC7 X X X X X X X X X7 X X X7 X X X X X X X X 13.1 h: sewerage/flood protection/water etc8 X8 X X X X X X X X8 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.1 i: non-comm. passenger transp. between 10-17 seats9 X X X X X X X9 X X9 X X X X X X X X X X 13.1 j: circus/funfair10 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X10 X X 13.1 k: mobile projects for education X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.1 l: milk/animal feed from/to farms11 X11 X X X X X X11 X X11 X11 X X X X11 X11 X X X X X X X11 X X 13.1 m: transporting money/ valuables12 X12 X X X X X X X X X X X12 X X X X X X X X X 13.1 n: animal waste or carcasses13 X X X X X X X X X13 X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.1 o: hub facilities14 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X14 X X X X X X 13.1 p: live animals farms -> markets and vice versa<100km15 X X15 X15 X15 X15 X15 X15 X15 X X15 X X15 X15 X15 X15 X15 X X15 X X15 X15 X * This Member State failed to provide updated information. 1.The following Member State introduced additional restrictions: a.The United Kingdom: a vehicle does not fall within the description specified unless the vehicle: (a) is being used for the provision of ambulance services- (i) by a relevant National Health Service (NHS) body, or (ii) in pursuance of arrangements made by or at the request of a relevant NHS body, or made with the Secretary of State or with the Welsh or Scottish Ministers; (b) is being used for the transport of organs, blood, equipment, medical supplies or personnel - (i) by a relevant NHS body, or (ii) in pursuance of arrangements of the kind mentioned in paragraph (a)(ii) (c) is being used by a local authority to provide, in exercise of social services functions - (i) services for elderly people, or (ii) services for persons to whom section 29 of the National Assistance Act 1948 (welfare arrangement for physically and mentally handicapped persons) applies;

(d) is being used by Her Majesty's Coastguard, a general lighthouse authority or a local lighthouse authority; (e) is being used for the purpose of maintaining railways by the British Railways Board, any holder of a network licence (within the meaning of Part 1 of the Railways Act 1993) which is a company wholly owned by the Crown (within the meaning of that Act), Transport for London, any wholly owned subsidiary of Transport for London, a Passenger Transport Executive or a local authority (f) is being used by the British Waterways Board for the purpose of maintaining navigable waterways 2.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Estonia - within a radius of 50 km of the place where the vehicle is usually based, including towns within this area b.France - only vehicles or combinations of vehicles up to 7,5 tonnes and only within a radius of 50 km c.Slovenia – within a radius of up to 50 km d.Spain – agriculture etc. own activity within a range < 50 km e.The United Kingdom - a vehicle which is being used by a fishery undertaking does not fall within the description specified unless the vehicle is being used: (a) to carry live fish, or (b) to carry a catch of fish from the place of landing to a place where it is to be processed 3.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Slovenia - within a radius of up to 50 km 4.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain – within a radius < 50km b.The United Kingdom – vehicles between 3.5 - 7.5 tonnes used by universal service providers within a 50 km radius of the base of the undertaking require a tachograph 5.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.France - operating on islands <400 square km b.Spain – operating on islands < 250 square km 6.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions:

a.Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain – within a radius < 50km 7.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Italy - it refers only to the obligation of equipping and using tachograph b.Luxembourg - exception only for the (learning) driver, instructor must respect Regulation (EC) No 561/20006 8.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Austria: (a) vehicles used by the regional authorities’ road construction offices and driven by employees of the provinces or municipalities are entirely exempted (b) vehicles used in connection with sewerage, flood protection, water, gas and electricity supply, telegraph and telephone services, radio and television broadcasting, and the detection of radio or television transmitters or receivers are entirely exempted where driving of vehicles does not constitute the driver’s main activity (c) vehicles used by household refuse collection authorities are exempted only from the rules on breaks under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 (d) vehicles used in winter by road construction offices, where not covered by the exemption under point 9 a.(a), are exempted only from the rules on breaks under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 b.France - for door-to-door household refuse collection and disposal, only within a radius of 100 km 9.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Estonia - owner/authorised user of a vehicle with 10-17 seats who is a parent of 4/more children, respective entry made on a registration certificate of the vehicle and the vehicle is used for non-commercial passenger transport b.France - not for the transport of children 10.The following Member State introduced additional restrictions: a.Spain - only when own activity 11.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Austria - vehicles used to collect raw milk from farms exempted only from the rules on breaks under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 b.Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as of 1/01/2008, mutually apply the exception from Articles 5 to 9 to vehicles used for milk collection from farms,...etc., only in cases where the service radius does not exceed 100 km c.France - within a radius of up to 150 km of the base of the undertaking

d.Germany – within a radius of 100km e.Spain – milk/animal feed from /to farms within a range < 100 km 12.The following Member States introduced additional restrictions: a.Austria – exception only from the rules on breaks under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 b.Ireland - vehicles specially designed for mobile banking, exchange and saving transactions 13.The following Member State introduced additional restrictions: a.Germany - within a radius of up to 250 km of the base of the undertaking 14.The following Member State introduced additional restrictions: a.The Netherlands – on or between hub facilities within a range of 5 km 15.The following Member State introduced additional restrictions: a.Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden – within a radius < 50km 16. Comments and proposals Finland reiterated that it would be better to target inspections at high-risk undertakings rather than perform checks on the basis of extensive representative sample aiming at achievement of quantitative objectives. In the same context, Ireland indicated that conducting inspections at premises is a priority due to their better effectiveness for ensuring compliance. The enforcement practice is to prosecute operators for offences committed by drivers. Lithuania drew attention to recurrent problems linked to Commission Decision 2009/959/EU as economic operators use the form attesting to periods of driver activity to conceal actual drivers' activities. Drivers arriving to Lithuania from other Member States often submit a form stating they were on leave or resting. These practices render verification whether a driver residing in another country has submitted a form attesting to actual driver activity very complicated. In addition, Italy reported that during checks, inspectors frequently encounter a situation when an operator fails to present the discs of tachographs, thereby preventing the detection of infringements against the rules on driving time and rest periods. In the light of the possible revision of the social legislation in road transport, Slovakia put forward amendments to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, which are considered the most problematic; namely regular weekly rest period, the total accumulated driving time during consecutive weeks and taking a new daily rest period within a period of 24 hours after the end of the previous rest period. These proposals will be duly evaluated by the Commission services in the framework of the impact assessment phase, which aims at definition of potential solutions and assessments of their impacts.



17. Interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 and Directive 2002/15/EC In the recent years the Court of Justice of the European Union shed light on interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 by means of the following preliminary rulings:

17.1. Judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 October 2016 in case C-501/14 The case concerns the immobilisation of a vehicle if the driver, and not the undertaking, has been found liable for the incident. Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport states that both transport undertakings and drivers are subject to specific obligations and can thus be made liable for infringement of their respective obligations. The question submitted by a Hungarian Court was whether in case only the driver was found liable and not the transport undertaking, the national authority can still immobilise the vehicle, preventing not only the driver in question but also all other potential drivers from using the vehicle. The ECJ stated that it is clear from Article 19 of the above Regulation that both transport undertakings and drivers are subject to specific obligations and can therefore both be held liable for infringements of their respective obligations. The Court furthermore underlined that Article 21 of the Regulation expressly refers to "immobilisation" as a possible measure, in case the infringement is serious and some time is needed to remove the cause of the infringement. As regards the nature of the sanctions and measures to be taken by Member States, they have a wide discretion to take action which suits best the specific circumstances. The Regulation does not provide for any harmonisation in this respect. However, the ECJ underlined that Article 19 (1) of Regulation 561/2006 contains provisions resulting from general principles of law: penalties must be effective, proportionate, dissuasive and non-discriminatory. The Court went on applying these criteria to the case in question. It concluded that the immobilisation of the vehicle is a disproportionate measure where only the driver, and not the road transport undertaking, was found liable for the offence committed. It justified this finding by the fact that alternative measures imposed on the driver in question – withdrawal, suspension or restriction of driver's license – would have been equally effective in order to ensure the payment of the fine. Such an alternative measure would prevent the driver from driving whilst would allow the vehicle in question to be used by other drivers. 17.2. Order of the Court of Justice of 18 February 2016 in case C‑325/15 Another preliminary question was raised regarding this time the interpretation of Article 8(8) of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. This Article provides that, if a driver chooses to do so, the daily rest period and the reduced weekly rest periods taken away from base may be taken aboard the vehicle, provided that it has suitable sleeping facilities for each driver and that it is stationary. The referring court was seeking to find out whether this Article precludes national legislation which lays down the conditions under which the driver of a vehicle may claim the reimbursement of accommodation costs incurred in the course of his employment. The Court of Justice stated that the Regulation does not contain any provision relating to allowances that such drivers may be entitled to in the course of their employment and the wording of the provision concerns only the organisation of certain rest periods for drivers while they are working, not compensation for those rest periods. Therefore the question was answered in negative. 17.3. Judgment of the Court of Justice of 9 June 2016 in case C-287/14 The case concerns the principle of liability and in particular the driver’s liability for infringements of the obligation to use tachograph. The referring court asked whether Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 should be interpreted as precluding national legislation, which instead of or in addition to the transport undertaking employing the driver, holds the driver liable for infringements of that Regulation which he himself committed. The Court stated that Member States are entitled to lay down a system of liability of drivers for infringements of the Regulation, and that they have a broad discretion as regards the nature of the applicable penalties. In this context, Member States may establish provisions allowing penalties to be imposed, exclusively of otherwise, on drivers. 17.4. Pending requests for a preliminary ruling The request for a preliminary ruling was lodged by the Belgian court on 19 February 2016 (C-102/16) on the interpretation of Article 8(6) and (8) of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. The question is whether the regular weekly rest period may or may not be taken by the driver inside the vehicle. If the answer to this question is negative, then it is requested to establish whether Member States can lay down a prohibition in their national law on the drivers spending their regular weekly rest periods inside a vehicle. As regards Directive 2002/15/EC, the question from the Spanish court was referred (C-97/16) to the European Court of Justice on definition of “mobile worker” and in particular whether persons providing a transport service by virtue of administrative authorisations of which they are the holders, carried out using vehicles of which ownership of direct power of disposal in them can be regarded as “mobile workers”. Furthermore, the referring court seeks to establish whether Article 3(e) of the Directive should be construed as meaning that, if none or only one of the criteria laid down for a person to be regarded as “self-employed driver” is fulfilled, the view must be taken that the person concerned is a “mobile worker”.

18. Monitoring and control arrangements of Directive 2002/15/EC in Member States The majority of Member States restated that they have an enforcement system in place that enables them to carry out checks on compliance with working time provisions. Various national bodies are responsible for monitoring working time rules in Member States. The following bodies in charge of checks can be enumerated: labour protection inspectorates, police, health and safety offices, road safety authorities, road transport administration and road transport departments of competent ministries in charge of transport or labour policies. Member States carry out their checks as part of routine controls at premises of undertakings, at roadside in collaboration typically with police force or targeted checks on the basis of obtained data indicating potential irregularities. The checks on working time seem to go hand in hand with checks on the social rules in most Member States. Sweden informed that the method used for monitoring compliance with the Directive is a "desk inspection" in which the records of hours worked is requested from employers and self-employed drivers. On the basis of information provided, a dialogue is being established with an employer or a self-employed driver to ensure the good understating of the rules and that the necessary measures to follow them are taken. In case the communication does not result in the change of the behaviour, injunctions might be issued or bans imposed, possible in conjunction with fines to increase compliance with the rules. 19. Issues in relation to enforcement of Directive 2002/15/EC Various problems were brought up in relation to performing controls of compliance with working time rules. Recurrent issues of complexity, length and labour intensity of control procedures were mentioned. Ireland reported that prosecuting a case relating to working time by Road Safety Authority is significantly more onerous and complex than for driver's hours and tachograph related infringements.

United Kingdom noted that working time records are not checked at the roadside due to the fact that 17 weeks of records are not required to be held in the vehicle. Moreover, Greece pointed out that certain provisions of this Directive overlap with those of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, which is a source of problems for businesses and workers. Slovenia and Cyprus referred to the difficulty of enforcing the rules in cases when drivers drove alternately vehicles with analogue tachograph, digital tachograph and vehicles exempted from the use of recording equipment. Checks should be carried out by comparing data records which might be in forms of analogue tachograph record, digital data and other manual records or forms. The drivers who are employed in several undertakings present additional difficulty during checks. Some supervision problems occurred for passenger bus transport in Estonia when the length of the line between its start and end point is less than 50 km (almost 60% of all rural lines). Due to the lack of obligation to use tachographs, the check of work and rest times on these lines; both on lines providing service under public service agreements and on commercial lines, is substantially difficult. In such case, the check is based on the work schedules, which might be easily manipulated. In addition, there is no possibility to identify exhausted drivers and exclude them from the road traffic. Therefore, it is planned to introduce as of 1 January 2020 the requirement to use tachographs also on lines under 50 km for the vehicle registered after 1 May 2006. On the other end, Germany and Lithuania informed that no difficulties were encountered when implementing the Directive. 20. Statistics on checks Checks in carriage of passengers Checks in carriage of goods TOTAL Bulgaria 4,424 checks Czech Republic 719 inspections France 1069 drivers 8833 drivers 9,902 drivers 4,784 transport operators Greece 4,072 inspections Luxembourg 399 working days checked 28,665 working days checked 29,064 of working days checked Poland - 1,097 checks of weekly working time (5,368 drivers checked) - 871 checks of break (4,496 drivers checked) - 1,109 checks of night work (5,322 drivers checked) Spain 1,794 interventions for working time 365 interventions for overtime 21. Statistics on infringements Offences in carriage of passengers Offences in carriage of goods TOTAL Austria 176: - 21 weekly working time - 155 break 3825: - 457 weekly working time - 3368 break 4,001 Bulgaria 1,607 infringements of working time Cyprus 8,252 infringements: -7,761 – break - 387 – night wok - 93 - maximum weekly working time - 11 – average weekly working time Czech Republic 310 infringements: - 123 - breaks - 93 - rest periods between shifts - 94 - length of shifts France 186 infringements 4130 infringements 4,316 infringements: - 2,124 - night work - 41 - weekly working time Greece 182 prosecutions 638 fines Ireland 1 initiated prosecution Poland - 160 – weekly working time (357 drivers) - 135 break (239 drivers) - 664 night work (2,281 drivers) Spain 154 offences for working time 32 offences for overtime Finland informed that statistical data will be submitted with the next report for the period 2015-2016. 22. Stakeholders' views on implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC in Member States In Ireland, both employer and employee organisations were of an opinion that the Directive contributed to the health and safety protection of drivers. Nevertheless, Ireland pointed out difficulties with getting a broad scope of views as a vast majority or drivers and a bulk of operators are not represented by trade unions and trade associations respectively. There are two Member States, namely Ireland and Malta, where consulted parties considered that their geographic specificities should have been taken into account by enforcement authorities. The latter country highlighted the risks of ambiguous interpretation in relation to periods of availability when drivers were waiting for loading and unloading. Operators feel that the definition should be reworded, due to the fact in practical terms this is impossible to ascertain since the period regarded as "availability" in most cases could not be determined beforehand. Consulted employers from Ireland and trade unions from Slovenia called for an effective and suitable enforcement of the Directive.

23. Statistics on minimum checks to be carried out

The table below illustrates the required minimum number of working days to be checked as well as the actual number of working days Member States have checked at the roadside and at premises. Member States Minimum checks (3%) for 2013-2014 NUMBER OF WORKING DAYS CHECKED Total At roadside At premises % at roadside % at premises AT 1,408,320 5,256,081 4,484,002 772,079 85% 15% BE 1,449,798 1,624,048 1,144,761 479,287 70% 30% BG 1,885,223.88 9,199,207 4,850,274 4,348,933 53% 47% HR 652,968.00 533,153 161,709 371,444 30% 70% CY 216,000 227,720 118,535 109,185 52% 48% CZ 1,491,608.85 3,804,589 2,932,796 871,793 77% 23% DK 660,000 714,935 445,935 269,000 62% 38% EE 204,600 212,459 81,182 131,277 38% 62% FI 1,114,555 1,444,096 900,410 543,686 62% 38% FR 6,734,194 30,343,701 26,521,082 3,822,619 87% 13% DE 8,994,240 36,043,663 31,574,800 4,468,863 88% 12% EL 2,239,703 347,170 229,082 118,088 66% 34% HU 1,528,209 3,363,655 2,830,268 533,387 84% 16% IE 1,042,300 1,437,556 253,376 1,184,180 18% 82% IT 8,738,028 9,601,942 6,977,619 2,624,323 73% 27% LV 409,141 992,433 310,461 681,972 31% 69% LT 816,102.00 785,028 313,617 471,411 40% 60% LU 159,071 237,881 144,907 92,974 61% 39% MT 1,080 2,245 1,092 1,153 49% 51% NL 1,711,394 1,375,551 1,101,739 273,812 80% 20% PL 6,910,501 10,374,510 6,735,135 3,639,375 65% 35% PT 816,437 1,783,128 1,180,637 602,491 66% 34% RO 2,675,400 10,640,973 9,114,192 1,526,781 86% 14% SK 504,076 588,168 243,256 344,912 41% 59% SL 445,776 579,605 354,431 225,174 61% 39% ES 5,398,758 11,360,688 8,097,845 3,262,843 71% 29% SE 1,029,600 1,633,893 1,227,926 405,967 75% 25% UK 5,291,779 6,505,141 4,250,443 2,254,698 65% 35% TOTAL 64,528,861 151,013,219 116,581,512 34,431,707 77% 23%

24. Statistics on number of working days checked at roadside The table below illustrates the number of working days checked at the roadside by country of registration of vehicles Member States NUMBER OF WORKING DAYS CHECKED AT ROADSIDE National vehicles Non-national vehicles Third countries vehicles Total AT 1,783,739 2,626,524 73,739 4,484,002 BE 329,131 776,992 38,638 1,144,761 BG 2,352,227 1,202,722 1,295,325 4,850,274 HR 87,461 25,350 48,898 161,709 CY 117,084 1,451 0 118,535 CZ 1,679,082 1,149,099 104,615 2,932,796 DK 275,820 170,115 No data 445,935 EE 69,740 9,450 1,992 81,182 FI 744,604 77,000 78,806 900,410 FR 10,244,725 15,919,243 357,114 26,521,082 DE 18,540,350 11,636,523 1,397,927 31,574,800 EL 200,654 21,025 7,403 229,082 HU 2,013,172 679,728 137,368 2,830,268 IE 245,800 6,387 1,189 253,376 IT 6,086,606 799,837 91,176 6,977,619 LV 201,832 82,772 25,857 310,461 LT 194,070 54,147 65,400 313,617 LU 43,913 99,953 1,041 144,907 MT 336 756 0 1,092 NL 628,923 447,992 24,824 1,101,739 PL 4,522,631 1,329,894 882,610 6,735,135 PT 1,146,105 34,473 59 1,180,637 RO 7,240,424 1,390,488 483,280 9,114,192 SK 117,733 115,522 10,001 243,256 SL 127,491 49,335 177,605 354,431 ES 6,979,488 1,080,633 37,724 8,097,845 SE 745,198 463,445 19,283 1,227,926 UK 2,144,853 2,026,294 79,296 4,250,443 TOTAL 68,863,192 42,277,150 5,441,170 116,581,512



25. Statistics on checks at roadside by the number of drivers checked at roadside by country of registration and type of carriage Member States ROADSIDE CHECKS Number of drivers checked by country of registration Number of drivers checked by type of carriage Total drivers Nationals Non-nationals (EEA/CH) Third countries Carriage of passengers Carriage of goods AT 289,624 113,353 164,719 11,552 4,501 285,123 BE 103,567 44,378 57,064 2,125 8,026 95,541 BG 396,026 254,651 68,086 73,289 87,425 308,601 HR 6,332 3,435 838 2,059 1,764 4,568 CY 7,721 7,400 321 0 2,053 5,668 CZ 301,741 170,342 118,255 13,144 8,259 293,482 DK 29,729 18,388 11,341 no data 1,524 28,205 EE 6,116 5,321 629 166 298 5,818 FI 68,527 54,901 5,498 8,128 1,661 66,866 FR 1,024,453 411,324 597,259 15,870 60,749 963,704 DE 1,937,601 1,156,382 689,441 91,778 39,506 1,898,095 EL 24,920 20,948 2,523 1,449 17,301 7,619 HU 101,081 71,899 24,276 4,906 8,864 92,217 IE 35,962 32,381 3,540 41 3,135 32,827 IT 644,798 562,802 72,152 9,844 21,228 623,570 LV 17,022 11,805 3,986 1,231 527 16,495 LT 77,548 43,170 17,845 16,533 4,408 73,140 LU 7,332 2,409 4,858 65 300 7,032 MT 39 12 27 0 0 39 NL 37,991 21,687 15,448 856 2,169 35,822 PL 724,366 496,987 106,412 120,967 125,892 598,474 PT 57,754 55,999 1,749 6 7,435 50,319 RO 621,746 497,964 86,848 36,934 145,178 476,568 SK 14,042 6,947 6,344 751 1,459 12,583 SL 21,450 8,227 2,372 10,851 2,312 19,138 ES 648,207 583,538 61,437 3,232 45,276 602,931 SE 43,608 25,194 17,628 786 1,034 42,574 UK 173,926 95,463 74,861 3,602 14,092 159,834 TOTAL 7,423,229 4,777,307 2,215,757 430,165 616,376 6,806,853

26. Statistics on checks at roadside by the number of vehicles stopped at roadside check by country of registration and type of tachograph Member States Number of vehicles checked Nationals Non-nationals Total Analogue Digital %

Analogue %

Digital AT 113,353 176,271 289,624 48,539 241,085 17% 83% BE 21,871 39,214 61,085 20,915 40,170 34% 66% BG 254,652 141,374 396,026 148,468 247,558 37% 63% HR 3,103 2,710 5,813 4,580 1,233 79% 21% CY 7,721 0 7,721 7,334 387 95% 5% CZ 93,894 62,336 156,230 67,541 88,689 43% 57% DK No data EE 5,321 795 6,116 3,396 2,720 56% 44% FI 2,568 1,332 3,900 2,098 1,802 54% 46% FR 405,843 553,058 958,901 160,110 798,791 17% 83% DE 1,118,741 460,766 1,579,507 414,969 1,164,538 26% 74% EL 20,948 3,972 24,920 18,092 6,828 73% 27% HU 75,015 26,057 101,072 53,075 47,997 53% 47% IE 32,381 3,581 35,962 17,718 18,244 49% 51% IT 562,619 81,970 644,589 357,683 286,906 55% 45% LV 11,805 5,217 17,022 9,573 7,449 56% 44% LT 39,927 35,505 75,432 43,778 31,654 58% 42% LU 2,393 4,848 7,241 1,250 5,991 17% 83% MT 12 23 35 14 21 40% 60% NL 21,687 16,304 37,991 16,368 21,623 43% 57% PL 398,831 182,698 581,529 328,659 252,870 57% 43% PT 48,096 1,904 50,000 31,617 18,383 63% 37% RO 604,765 120,111 724,876 285,045 439,831 39% 61% SK 6,876 6,994 13,870 3,815 10,055 28% 72% SL 8,054 13,229 21,283 11,873 9,410 56% 44% ES 476,653 60,227 536,880 196,929 339,951 37% 63% SE 42,739 25,699 68,438 18,338 50,100 27% 73% UK 95,462 78,464 173,926 92,116 81,810 53% 47% Average 36% 64%

27. Statistics on checks at premises by the number of drivers, undertakings and working days checked at premises Member

States CHECKS AT THE PREMISES Number of drivers checked Number of undertakings checked Number of working days checked AT 13,012 1,807 772,079 BE 27,118 5,400 479,287 BG 155,319 11,594 4,348,933 HR 6,292 564 371,444 CY 1,264 568 109,185 CZ 8,331 1,116 871,793 DK 25,666 1,858 269,000 EE 3,074 219 131,277 FI 6,300 1,014 543,686 FR 92,722 11,352 3,822,619 DE 95,510 11,349 4,468,863 EL 5,835 4,072 118,088 HU 7,123 1,505 533,387 IE 9,133 906 1,184,180 IT 32,240 9,488 2,624,323 LV 3,449 391 681,972 LT 17,971 1,568 471,411 LU 2,294 118 92,974 MT 4 2 1,153 NL 9,779 1,414 273,812 PL 31,232 5,287 3,639,375 PT 14,164 1,151 602,491 RO 52,319 15,198 1,526,781 SK 6,403 895 344,912 SL 1,617 306 225,174 ES 116,206 21,277 3,262,843 SE 8,226 221 405,967 UK 3,369 36,966 2,254,698 Total 755,972 147,606 34,431,707

28. Table of number of undertakings, drivers checked and offences detected by size of the fleet of all Member States Size of fleet Number of undertakings checked Number of drivers checked Number of offences detected AUSTRIA 1 211 611 581 2 - 5 552 1,944 1,815 6 - 10 389 2,502 2,336 11 - 20 330 3,172 2,926 21 - 50 233 2,788 2,739 51 - 200 87 1,828 1,826 201 - 500 3 84 104 Over 500 2 83 76 Total: 1,807 13,012 12,403 BELGIUM 1 1,961 1,879 2,130 2 - 5 1,801 4,616 4,305 6 - 10 790 4,759 4,220 11 - 20 454 5,161 4,808 21 - 50 309 6,879 5,333 51 - 200 84 3,449 2,227 201 -500 1 375 0 Over 500 0 0 0 Total: 5,400 27,118 23,023 BULGARIA 1 1,160 15,532 84 2 - 5 3,478 46,596 254 6 - 10 4,058 54,362 296 11 - 20 1,043 13,978 76 21 - 50 695 9,319 50 51 - 200 580 7,766 43 201 - 500 348 4,659 25 Over 500 232 3,107 16 Total: 11,594 155,319 845 CROATIA CYPRUS 1 51 56 58 2 - 5 172 509 926 6 - 10 142 842 1,201 11 - 20 81 914 1,341 21 - 50 80 1,887 1,781 51 - 200 35 1,961 998 201 - 500 3 123 30 Over 500 0 0 0 Total: 564 6,292 6,335