EN    EN 
 EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION  
Brussels, 12.10.2012  
COM(2012) 589 final 
2012/0284 (NLE) 
  
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL DECISION 
on the position to be adopted, on behalf of  the European Union, in the Group of Experts 
on the European agreement concerning the work of crews of vehicles engaged in 
international road tr ansport (AETR) of the United Na tions Economic Commission for 
Europe 
(Text with EEA relevance) 
 
 
EN 2   EN EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM  
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL  Evolution of EU and AETR rules  
The European agreement concerning the work of  crews of vehicles en gaged in international 
road transport (European Road Transport Ag reement, ERTA; Accord Européen sur les 
Transports Routiers, AETR) lays down rules on the driving times and rest periods for 
professional drivers. This multilateral agreement has been elaborated under the auspices of the Economic Commission for Europe of the United Na tions (UNECE). It inspired similar rules 
within the European Union, namely Regulation (EC) 561/2006
1 on the driving time and rest 
periods and Regulation (EEC) 3821/852 on the tachograph which is  the recording equipment 
used to check compliance with the rules on dr iving time and rest peri ods. The 27 EU Member 
States and 24 European and Cent ral Asian countries are currently Contracting Parties to this 
agreement.  
In 2006 the EU introduced the di gital tachograph as its obligatory equipment for monitoring 
driving times and rest periods, replacing the an alogue tachograph, which has been in use since 
1985. The AETR Contracting Partie s agreed subsequently to introduce the same digital 
tachograph in their vehicles us ed international tran sport as from 2011. They  agreed at this 
occasion to insert in AETR a new Article 22bis which provides that the specifications of the 
tachograph, although decided unila terally by the EU without pr ior consultation of non-EU 
Contracting Parties when amending Annex IB of Regulation (EEC) 3821/85, are extended 
automatically to all AETR Contracting Parties.  
On 19 July 2011, the Commission made a proposal to modify  Regulation (EEC) 3821/85 on 
the tachograph. The European Parliament voted its opinion on 3 July 2012. In parallel, the 
Council reached a general approach on 27 June in  view of a position of the Council in first 
reading. The amended Regulati on will introduce technological im provements which will have 
important consequences on the specifications of the digital tachograph. In this context, the 
Council inserted a recital according to which “t he Commission will take the appropriate steps 
in UNECE to ensure the n ecessary coherence between Re gulation 3821/85 and the AETR 
agreement.” The Commission's communication "Digital Tachograph: Roadmap for future 
activities"3 also outlined the need to adapt AETR to align it to the latest development in the 
field of tachograph. 
Complaints of non-EU AETR Contracting Parties  
                                                 
1 Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the 
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to  road transport and amending Council Regulations 
(EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85, OJ L 
102, 11.04.2006, p.1 
2 Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/8 5 of 20 December 1985 on recordi ng equipment in road transport, 
OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 8 
3 COM(2011) 454 final 
 
EN 3   EN In 2009 the Commission adopted  Regulation (EU) 1266/20094, which inter alia  addressed the 
so-called "one minute issue"5 (as from 1st October 2011) and intr oduced a second motion 
sensor (as from 1st October 2012). All tachographs fitted in vehicles after these dates were or 
will be required to comply with the new techni cal requirements. By virtue of Article 22bis, 
the non-EU Contracting Parties of the AETR are automatically subjected to these new 
obligations.  
Faced with these developments  in the EU, the Russian Federation, Belarus, Ukraine and 
Turkey became increasingly discontent with the automaticity of the mechanism of Article 
22bis, which they consider unbalanced and inadequate to ensure a harmonised implementation of the digital tachograph. In  2011 they asked the UNECE competent body – 
the Working Party on Road Transport (SC.1) – to address formally this issue. In response to 
this request, in September 2011, SC.1 decided to create a Group of Experts on AETR in order 
to discuss the current situati on in AETR and to make proposals for amending the agreement. 
Need for a common position of EU in AETR  
The AETR Expert Group met twice, on 2 Ma rch and 6 June 2012. During these meetings, 
non-EU Contracting Parties confirmed their willingness to find an acceptable solution 
allowing their involvement in the decision making process and made concrete proposals to 
that effect:  
(a) Firstly, the Russian Federation presented a proposal for a new Article 22bis, which 
would replace the current mechanism of tr ansposition into AETR  of the EU acquis 
with a decision making process placed in the hands of all AETR Contracting Parties. 
An Administrative Committee, constituted of all Contracting Parties, would be set up and would be empowered to define the speci fications of the digi tal tachograph. Each 
Contracting Party would have a vote and decisions would be taken by a simple 
majority of those present and voting. A quor um of half of the Contracting Parties 
would be required.  
(b) Turkey asked the EU to make TACHOnet  accessible by offering a technical solution 
that would suit the needs of all Contracting Parties in terms of privacy concerns and 
costs. It should be noted that currently  the connections to TACHOnet are done on a 
voluntary basis by using sui generis  solutions, but the most common solution 
employed is the indirect connection via th e sTesta point of access of a given EU 
Member State (only Croatia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia connect directly via sTesta).  
(c) Ukraine and Turkey asked if it would be possible for the EU to accede to AETR, 
given its central role in th e devlopment of the tachogra ph. It would guarantee and 
simplify the necessary permanent alignment of the EU legislation with the AETR 
developments.  
                                                
 
4 Commission Regulation (EU) No 1266/2009 of 16 December 2009 adapting for the tenth time to 
technical progress Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, OJ 
L 339, 22.12.2009, p.3 
5 The rounding to 60 seconds in the recording of driving time in case of frequent and short stops. 
 
EN 4   EN It was also proposed that the future Administ rative Committee should not only be empowered 
to adopt technical specifications of the digital tachogr aph, but also to modify the social rules 
which are in scope of the AETR. However, the Co mmission considers that this idea is out of 
scope, currently not justified and does not  intend to propose any follow up to it.  
The next meetings of the Expert Group are scheduled on 25 October and 3 December 2012. It 
can be expected that the EU w ill be asked to take a clear and firm position so that the Expert 
Group can finalise its work. Given the importan ce and scope of the proposals made and since 
the matters covered by AETR are of exclusive competence of the EU, a simple on the spot 
coordination would not be sufficient and a fo rmal coordinated position at EU level is 
necessary.  
2. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO AETR 
In view of the foregoing, it could be considered  to preserve the current mechanism of Article 
22bis and to block the ongoing discussions in the AETR Expert Group. However, this would 
not be a veritable option. In such a scenario, the social and tachogra ph rules would no longer 
be properly enforced by the non-EU  AETR countries. Declarations  in this sense have already 
been made by Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. They  warned that they w ould no longer accept to 
be obliged to use a device the technical co ntent of which they cannot influence.  
It should be noted that some 8% of internationa l transport by EU registered hauliers is with 
third countries on an EU average, the overwhe lming part of it with AETR countries. The 
share of transport with non EU AETR countries can be more than 30% in certain Member 
States. Moreover the EU is a net exporter of manufact ured goods to its AETR partners and the 
majority of these goods are carried out by EU hauliers. Any dispute between the EU and its 
AETR partners would therefore be  detrimental to the EU's road freight transport industry.  
Recent developments in Russia create additiona l complications. The Russian fleet potentially 
in scope of the European social rules is estimated at 4 to 5 million vehicles. Currently, only a 
small percentange of those vehicl es perform international trans port in scope of AETR and are 
equipped with a tachograph. However, this situ ation will change, as Russia has decided in 
2012 to make the use of tachographs mandatory fo r national transport. It is therefore likely 
that Russia will be increasingly enclined to use its own tachograph in transports with the EU. 
It appears therefore to be unequi vocally in the EU's interest to engage in a revision of the 
current tachograph system. In view of th e aforegoing, the Commission proposes an EU 
position concerning the following amendments to AETR to be taken in the AETR Expert 
Group.  
a. Modification of Art. 22bis  
A modification of Art. 22bis would lead to the establishment of an Administrative Committee 
in Geneva under the auspices  of UNECE. As a consequence,  non-EU AETR partners would 
be able to influence the adaptation of tachograph to technical  progress through the 
Administrative Committee. This newly created  AETR Committee would take its decisions 
with a simple or qualified majority.  
This scenario would create a problem of cohe rence between the specif ications adopted by the 
Administrative Committee in Ge neva and those adopted by the Commission after the opinion 
of the Committee on the adaptation to technical  progress established by Regulation (EEC) 
3821/85. The possible incoherence would encroach on the powers of the Committee 
 
EN 5   EN established pursuant to Regulation (EEC) 3821/85 and would require an increased effort of 
coordination within Member States and within the EU for establishing the positions to be 
taken in the UNECE bodies, as the Commission would not be able  to express officially its 
position. If the EU becomes Contracting Party to the AETR, the coordinated Union position 
would be expressed by th e European Commission.  
Moreover, a modification of Art. 22bis woul d require strict cond itions on the voting 
arrangements agreed for the newly created AETR Committee. Otherwise it may happen that notwithstanding possible EU internal coordina tion the number of Member States present 
during a meeting of this Comm ittee could be insufficient to oppose inopportune amendments 
proposed by non-EU counterparts.  
For instance, according to the proposal made by th e Russian Federation at the first meeting of 
the Expert Group, the decisions could be taken by a simple majority of those present and 
voting, with a required quorum of half of the current 51 AETR Cont racting Parties. In 
practice, that would mean that decisions could be taken in presence of at least 26 Contracting 
Parties and with at least 14 votes in favour. Bu t at the meetings dedicated to AETR issues, 
typically only 6-7 EU Member States particip ate currently. On the contrary, the big non-EU 
stakeholders (Russia, Turkey, Ukraine) ar e always present and they have shown a good 
capacity of mobilising, when necessary, other C ontracting Parties from CIS or Central Asian 
countries (e.g. Belarus, Kazakhstan). 
b. Modification of Art. 14 to allow for EU accession to AETR 
In the light of the above, the accession of th e EU to AETR should be envisaged. The EU 
accession would preserve a dominant EU position in  the definition of the specifications of the 
tachograph. It would guarantee the harmonised development of the EU legislation and of 
AETR as the rules adopted in Geneva would be directly applicable in the EU internal legal 
order, after their publication in the Official Jo urnal. For Member States , this will avoid the 
legal uncertainty on whether AETR or the EU tachograph rules prevail.  
This modification would require to amend Article  14 of AETR to allow the participation of 
regional integration organisations . The accession itself would have to be done in a second step 
by a Council decision upon Commission proposal.  
It is important to recall that , for AETR purposes, transport operations between EU Member 
States are considered as national transport operations (AETR applies only to international 
transport operations). This has been constan tly the position of the EU and of its Member 
States. When acceeding to AETR in the 70s, th e Member States constituting the Communities 
at that time made a reservation which affirmed this principle. The prin ciple continues to apply 
in spite of the fact that some EU Member St ates entered into the AETR agreement before 
acceeding to the EU and therefore did no t enter the abovementioned reservation. 
Consequently, when acceding, the EU should deposit a similar reservation which would, as a consequence, allow the EU to further develop it s own digital tachograph, to be used in intra-
EU transports. 
It follows that the voting rules of the Administ rative Committee would ha ve to be designed to 
ensure an influential role for the EU. For in stance by means of a qualified majority of two 
thirds of those present and voting (the EU de livering in block the vot es of currently 27 
Contracting Parties out of 51 pot entially present). A quorum of ha lf of the Contracting Parties 
would be required. The EU would coordinate its position on the basi s of a Commission’s 
 
EN 6   EN proposal by using the procedure of Article 218 (9 ) of the TFEU, which allows the Council to 
adopt a position on the Union's behalf in a body set up by an agreement.  
It should be noted that such an  option reflects establ ised practices in international technical 
agreements. For instance the procedure envisa ged would be exactly the one provided in the 
so-called "Revised 1958 Agreement" on the type approval of vehicles6.  
The envisaged accession of the Union would be  consistent with the so-called "AETR 
jurisprudence" of the Court of Jus tice. In its landmark ruling of 19717, the Court stated that 
the area of work of crews of ve hicles in road transport with third countries was a Community 
exclusive competence, and established the prin ciple of parallelism between internal and 
external competences8. The EU has external exclusive competence on the subjects dealt with 
by AETR under the provisions of article 3( 2) TFEU, because AETR affects common rules 
adopted by the European Union since long ago, as  outlined by the AETR case-law of the ECJ. 
An additional argument is that recital 10 of Regulation (EC) No 561/ 2006 provides that, since 
the subject matter of the AETR  falls within the scope of the Regulation, the power to 
negotiate and conclude the Agreemen t lies with the European Union9. 
In addition, Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) n° 2829/77 of 12 December 1977 on the 
bringing into force of the European agreement concerning the work of crews of vehicles 
engaged in international road transport (AETR)10 states that "Agreements to be reached with 
third countries pursuant to Article 2 (2) of the AETR shall be concluded by the Community. 
The measures provided for under Article 3 (2) of  the AETR shall be adopted by the Council 
on a proposal from the Commission".  
c. New article 10bis - Interconnection of  national registers on driver cards  
In accordance with Requirement 268a of Anne x IB of Regulation (EEC) 3821/85, which was 
introduced by Commission Regulation (EU) No  1266/2009, Member States are obliged to 
exchange data electronically in order to ensu re the uniqueness of the tachograph driver cards 
that they issue. This obligation extends to non- EU Contracting Parties of AETR, by virtue of 
Article 22bis.  
To facilitate the compliance with this requireme nt at the EU level, the Commission developed 
and successfully implemented TACHOnet, an IT application allowing the interconnection of 
national registers for driver cards, to verify  across Europe the uniqueness of such cards, in 
view of preventing frauds. The legal basi s for TACHOnet is currently a Commission 
                                                 
6 Agreement concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment 
and parts which can be fitted to and/or be used on  wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal 
recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these prescriptions - Revision 2 - Including the 
amendments which entered into force on 16 October 1995, OJ L 346, 17.12.1997, p. 81–94 
7 Judgment of the Court of Justice, AETR, Case 22/70 (31 March 1971) 
8 In particular, the Court stated that "to the extent to which Community rules are promulgated for the 
attainment of the objectives of the Treaty, the Member States cannot, outside the framework of the Community Institutions, assume obligations which might  affect those rules or alter their scope". In 
addition "these Community powers exclude the possibility  of concurrent powers on the part of Member 
States, since any steps taken outside the framework of the Community Institutions would be 
incompatible with the unity of the common market and the uniform application of community law."  
9 Article 3 of Regulation 3820/85 established this ground for EU competence in a clear way: "The 
Community shall enter into any negotiation with third countries which may prove necessary for the 
purpose of implementing this Regulation". See al so Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 543/69. 
10 OJ L 34 of 24.12.1977, p.11. 
 
EN 7   EN recommendation11, which would be replaced by a de dicated provision inserted in the 
amendment of Regulation (EEC) 3821/85 current ly being discussed in the European 
Parliament and the Council.  
The proposed amendments of AETR should be used  to introduce a new article (Article 10bis) 
in the text of the AETR, which would make more transparent the obligation enshrined in 
Requirement 268a and confirm the mandatory char acter of the electronic exchange of data 
concerning the driver cards between Contracting Parties. It would generalise and make more 
viable in the long term a pract ice already in place in severa l non EU Contracting Parties who 
decided on a voluntary basis to join TACHOnet on the basis of bilateral agreements with 
individual Member States.  
Under Directive 95/46/EC12, the transfers of data are only possible to third countries which 
ensure an adequate level of prot ection of the personal data. It is therefore proposed to insert an 
obligation to Contracting Parties to ensure an ad equate level of protection of personal data in 
the new Article 10 bis. 
Article 25 (2) of the Directive provides that th e adequacy of the level of protection afforded 
by a third country has to be assessed in the lig ht of the circumstances, including the nature of 
the data and the purpose of the proposed processing operation. In this respect, it is to be noted 
that the sensitivity of the data concerning tachograph cards is rather low. The information stored in national registers (int erconnected via TACHOnet within  the EU) is limited and quite 
generic (name and surname of driver, date and, if  available, place of birth; driving licence 
number and country of issue of driving licence ; status of the driver card and driver card 
number) and in any case already enterily availabl e to the non-EU control officer in the course 
of roadside checks. The autorities having access to these information would be limited to card 
issuing authorities and control officers appointe d to check the compliance with the rules on 
driving time and rest periods of professional dr ivers. Moreover the purpose of the electronic 
exchange of information is only to guarantee th at the national register s of AETR Contracting 
Parties do not contain several active driver  cards delivered to a same driver.  
In these circumstances, it can be reasonabl y assumed that all or most non-EU AETR 
Contracting Parties are able to ensure an adeq uate level of protectio n of the personal data 
related to tachograph cards. In a ny case, in accordance with Article  25 (4) of the Directive, if 
it is found that a third country do es not ensure such an adequa te level of protection, Member 
States would be allowed to take the measures necessary to pr event any transfer of data to the 
country in question.  
Moreover, it should be noted that TACHOnet uses  an EU's internal IT communication system 
(sTESTA) about which there are restrictions on export and implementation applicable to 
certain non-EU States. Among non-EU AETR c ountries, only those c ountries which are 
candidates to accession to the EU are able to connect to TACHOnet directly vis sTESTA. 
Amongst the others, some could arrange, on a voluntary basis, indirect connection with 
individual Member States on the basis of the aforementioned bilateral agreements. However, 
                                                
 
11 Commission recommendation of 13 January 2010 on the secure exchange of electronic data between 
Member States to check the uniqueness of driver cards that they issue, OJ L9/10, 14.01.2010 
12 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the 
protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of 
such data 
 
EN 8   EN this later solution is burdensome for the pa rties involved, is suboptimal by multiplying the 
connection points and does not cove r all the Contracting Parties.  
It might therefore be necessary to create an  alternative IT system to offer to non-EU 
Contracting Parties an alternative electronic  mean of exchanging information with the 
Member States (and countries  candidates to accession) taki ng into acount the security 
constraints of the current TACHOnet and sTESTA  systems. The Commission is in the process 
of launching a study to identify the available technical possibilities for instance by using a 
secured internet-based connecti on. The results of the study should be available by the end of 
2013.  
3. PROCEDURE TO REVISE AETR 
Articles 20 and 21 of the AETR es tablish the mechanism for the revision of the agreement. 
Article 21 is of particular interest for the EU because it allows for a "silent" revision 
procedure which does not suppose  the ratification by Contrac ting Parties of the proposed 
amendments. Since this procedure does not fores ee a formal negotiation procedure, it appears 
appropriate to have recourse to a Counc il decision establishi ng a common position.  
In line with the EU position adopt ed pursuant to Article 218 (9 ) TFEU, Member States shall 
be acting jointly in the interest of the Uni on in engaging the revision of the AETR, in line 
with the duty of sin cere cooperation pursuant to  Article 4(3) TEU  
Given the time necessary to complete the proced ures needed to amend AETR, it is appropriate 
to find a transitional solution to consult AETR  countries in the decisions on changes to 
tachograph taken at the level of  the EU. In this respect, the Commission has already proposed 
in its proposal to amend Regulation (EEC) N° 3821/85 to create a "Tac hograph Forum" which 
would involve experts from both EU Member St ates and non EU Cont racting Parties. The 
intention of the Commission is to consult this  Forum before any decisions on the technical 
updates of Annex IB.  
 
EN 9   EN 2012/0284 (NLE) 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL DECISION 
on the position to be adopted, on behalf of  the European Union, in  the Group of Experts 
on the European agreement concerning th e work of crews of vehicles engaged in 
international road transport (AETR) of th e United Nations Economic Commission for 
Europe 
(Text with EEA relevance) 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular 
Article 90, in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 
After having informed the European Parliament, Whereas: (1) As stated by th e Court of Justice
13 the area of the wo rk of crews of vehicles engaged in 
road transport is an excl usive external competence of the European Union. This 
competence has been exerci sed internally notably by the adoption of Council 
Regulation (EEC) No 543/69 of 25 March 1969  on the harmonization of certain social 
legislation relating to road transport14, Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 
December 1985 on the harmonization of certain  social legislation relating to road 
transport15, Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 of 20 December 1985 on recording 
equipment in road transport16 and more recently by Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of 
the European Parliament and of the Council17. Since the subject matter of the AETR 
falls within the scope of Regulation 561/2006, the power to negotiate and conclude the 
Agreement lies with the Union. The rules in th e area of the work of  crews of vehicles 
engaged in road transport with third count ries, including the ru les on the recording 
equipment used to ensure their complian ce, are a matter falling both under the EU 
Regulations and under the AETR agreement. It is imperative that these rules are 
harmonized; 
                                                 
13 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 31 March 1971, AETR, Case 22/70. 
14 OJ L 77, 29.3.1969, p.49. 
15 OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 1.  
16 OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 8. 
17 OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 1. 
 
EN 10   EN (2) The particular circumstances in which the AETR negotiations took place warrant, by 
way of exception, a procedure whereby the Me mber States of th e Union individually 
deposited the instruments of ratification or accession in a concerted action but 
nonetheless acted in the interest  and on behalf of the Union;  
(3) The next meeting of the Expert Group will take place on 3 December 2012. At that 
occasion; the expert group will possibly ex amine proposals which are leading to an 
amendment of AETR. This will  produce legal effects as re ferred to in Article 218 (9) 
TFEU.  
(4) The EU Member States as Contracting Parties of AETR are under an obligation to 
cooperate in order to engage the mechanis m for the revision of the AETR Agreement 
established in particular in its Arti cle 21, in accordance with Council Regulation 
(EEC) 2829/77 of 12 December 1977 on the bri nging into force of the European 
Agreement concerning the work of crews of vehicles engaged in international road 
transport (AETR)18 and in line with the duty of sin cere cooperation pursuant to Article 
4 (3) TEU; 
(5) In order to achieve a pan-European harm onization in the field of recording equipment 
in road transport (tachographs), it is neces sary that a unique decision-making process 
is put in place, which take s into account the prerogatives of the European Union and 
the interests of third countries which are Contracting Parties to the AETR Agreement; 
(6) Article 22bis of the AETR Agreement cu rrently provides that changes to Council 
Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 concerning th e digital tachograph are automatically 
taken over by all AETR Contracting Parties,  without any formal consultation before 
the adoption of the changes by the European Union. As outlined in the Commission's communication "Digital Tachograph : Roadmap for future activities"
19, the current 
mechanism jeopardises the correct and harm onised implementation of the measures 
introduced in the proposed revision of Council Regula tion (EEC) No 3821/85 and the 
digital tachograph by non-EU Contracting Parties.  It is therefore in the interest of the 
European Union to improve the decisi on-making process as regards digital 
tachographs and AETR and amend accordingly Article 22bis, by creating, in the framework of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), an 
Administrative Committee that  would define the technica l specifications of the 
tachograph for the entire AETR area.  
(7) The specificities of the AETR Agreem ent and of the envisaged decision making 
process in its newly created committee under Article 22bis in addition to the fact the 
European Union has exclusive competence in th e area of the work of crews of vehicles 
engaged in road transport justifies the accession of the European Union to AETR, 
which would also be in line with the AETR  Court ruling in the case 22/70 and would 
also guarantee the effective representati on of the EU’s interests in the UNECE 
proceedings. After its accession, the Un ion's position adopted by the Council, in 
accordance with Article 218 (9 ) TFEU will be expressed by the Commission on behalf 
of the EU who will exercise in the Administrative Committee the votes of all Member States.  
                                                
 
18 OJ L 334, 24.12.1977, p. 11.  
19 COM(2011) 454 final 
 
EN 11   EN (8) Currently Article 14 of AETR does not open the accession to AETR to bodies other 
than States members of the UNECE and Stat es admitted to UNECE in a consultative 
capacity. For that reason, in order to allow the accession of the European Union to AETR, Article 14 should be amended and should provide that European regional 
integration organizations are able to accede to AETR.  
(9) In order to effectively implement Re quirement 268a of Annex IB of Regulation 
3821/85 and, to ensure a more effective scru tiny and control of driver cards in the 
AETR area, and to facilitate the task of control officers, national electronic registers 
should be established and provi sion made for the interconnection of those registers. 
The provisions for the interconnection should be established resp ecting the internal 
security requirements of the Contracting Parties and ensuring an adequate level of 
protection of personal data exchanged, in line with the highest intern ational standards.  
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:  
Article 1 
(1) The position of the Union in the Group of Experts on the European agreement concerning 
the work of crews of vehicles engaged in in ternational road transport (AETR) shall be in 
accordance with the Annex to this Decision and shall be expressed by the Member States 
which are members of AETR, acting join tly in the interest of the Union.  
The Member States shall communicate these proposed amendments to the Secretary-General 
of the United Nations, in accordance with the pr ocedure described in ar ticle 21 (1) of AETR.  
(2) Formal and minor changes to this position may be agreed without requiring that position 
to be amended. 
Article 2 
This decision is addressed to the Member States.  
This Decision shall enter into force on [ ....].  Done at Brussels,  
 For the Council 
 The President 
 
EN 12   EN ANNEX I 
New wording of Article 22 bis (Procedu re for the amendment of Appendix 1B) 
Article 22 bis is replaced by the following Article:  
1. An Administrative Committee shall be established which shall be responsible for deciding 
on amendments to Appendix 1B of the present Agreement. The Administrative Committee shall be composed of all the C ontracting Parties to the Agreement.  
2. The administrative Committee shall be based in  Geneva. Its sessions shall normally be 
held in Geneva. The Committee may decide to hold sessions in other locations.  
3. The Executive Secretary of the United Na tions Economic Commission for Europe shall 
provide the Committee with approp riate secretarial services.  
4. The Committee shall elect a chair and two vice-chairs every two years.  
5. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene the Administrative Committee 
under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe when needed and in any case once per year.  
6. Any Contracting Party may propose amendm ents to Appendix 1B of the present 
Agreement. Any amendment proposal shall be submitted to the Secretariat of the 
Economic Commission for Europe, in writin g, 3 months before the meeting of the 
Administrative Committee at wh ich it is proposed for adoption. The text of any proposed 
amendment shall be communicated in the thr ee ECE languages to a ll Contracting Parties 
at least one month before the meeting of the Administrative Committee at which it is 
proposed for adoption. 
7. A quorum of not less than one half plus one of  the Contracting Parties shall be required to 
be present for the Administrative Committee to be able to adopt decisions. For the determination of the quorum Re gional Integration organizati ons, being Contracting Parties 
to this Agreement, vote with the number of votes of their Member States without their presence in the vote being necessary. 
8. The Administrative Committee shall adopt  decisions by majority vote of those 
Contracting Parties present and voting.  
9. For the purpose of taking decisions, each Contracting Party shall have a vote. The 
representative of a Regional Integration organization Contra cting Party to the Agreement 
delivers the votes of its constituent Member St ates without being their presence in the vote 
necessary. 
10. If a proposal for the amendm ent of Appendix 1B to this Agreement leads to the 
amendment of other articles or annexes of  the Agreement, the amendments to the 
Appendix cannot enter into force before entry into force of amendments relating to other 
parts of the Agreement. If, in such a case, the amendments to Appendix 1B are presented 
simultaneously with the amendments relating to other parts of the Agreement, the date of 
their entry into force shall be determined by th e date established pursu ant to application of 
procedures, which are described in general in Article 21, taking into account the date 
specified in the amendment to Appendix 1B, in the case envisa ged by paragraph 7 of this 
article.  
 
EN 13   EN  
ANNEX II 
Possible wording of Article 14 (Accession to AETR of regional integration organizations) 
Article 14 is modified as follows:  
Paragraph 1a is inserted:  "This Agreement shall also be open for signatu re by regional integra tion organizations. For 
the purpose of this Agreement, a "regional in tegration organization" means any organization 
which is constituted by sovereign States of a given region which has competence in respect of certain matters governed by this Agreement and has been duly authorized to sign an d to ratify, 
accept, approve or accede to this Agreement" 
Paragraph 5 is modified as follows:  5. In respect of each State or regional integration organizations
 which ratifies, or accedes 
to, this Agreement after the deposit of the eight h instrument of ratific ation or accession as 
referred to in paragraph 4 of th is article, the Agreement shall enter into force one hundred and 
eighty days after the deposit by that State or regional integration organization of its 
instrument of ratification or accession. 
 
EN 14   EN  
ANNEX III 
Possible wording of a new Article 10bis 
1. In order to ensure that drivers do not alr eady hold a valid driver card in the sense of 
Appendix 1B of the Annex to the Agreement, Contracting Parties shall maintain national 
electronic registers containing th e following information on driver  cards for a period at least 
equivalent to their period of validity:  
- Surname and first name of the driver - Birth date and, if available, place of birth of the driver - Driving licence number and country of i ssue of driving licence (if applicable) 
- Status of the driver card - Driver card number 2. Contracting Parties shall take all necessary measures to ensure  that the electronic registers 
are interconnected and accessible throughout their territories to card is suing authorities and 
control officers appointed to check the complia nce with the rules on driving time and rest 
periods of professional drivers.  
3. When issuing, replacing and, when necessary, renewing a driver card,  Contracting Parties 
shall verify through electronic data exchange that the driver does not already hold another 
valid driver card. Contracting Pa rties shall ensure an adequate level of protection of the 
personal data exchanged, in line with the high est international standards. This shall include 
that the data exchanged be limited to the data necessary for the purpos e of this verification 
and not used for any other purpo se without the prior authorisa tion of the Contracting Party 
providing the personal data.