No C 208/56 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 8. 88 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 85/3/EEC on the 
weights, dimensions and certain other technical characteristics of certain road vehicles 
(88/C 208/16) 
On 1 June 1988 the Council asked the Economic and Social Committee, in pursuance of 
Article 75 of the EEC Treaty, for an Opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
In view of the deadline set by the Council the Committee had to adopt its Opinion at its 
plenary session in June 1988. Mr Perrin-Pelletier was appointed rapporteur-general and 
instructed to draw up the draft Opinion as the subject came within the remit of the Section 
for Transport and Communications. 
The Economic and Social Committee adopted the Opinion set out below at its 256th plenary 
session held on 1, 2 and 3 June 1988 (meeting of 2 June). The Opinion was adopted by a 
large majority, with 2 votes against and 12 abstentions. 
1. Introduction 2. General comments 
1.1. Directive 85/3/EEC of 19 December 1984 (!) laid 
down standards with regard to the weights, dimensions 
and certain other technical characteristics of certain 
road vehicles, mainly combined vehicles used in inter­
national transport. These combined commercial 
vehicles are either road trains or five or six-axle articu­
lated vehicles. Directive 86/360/EEC of 24 July 1986 (2) 
lays down a maximum drive axle weight of 11,5 t for 
these vehicles. 
1.1.1. It will thus be possible, once all the proposed 
provisions come into effect, to achieve, by virtue of 
applying consistent standards to the great majority of 
vehicles employed in international transport, a balance 
between the rational and economic use of these goods 
vehicles, infrastructure maintenance requirements and 
road safety imperatives. 
1.1.2. It is, however, important to recognize that a 
large part of the transport operations is carried out in 
each country using two-axle vehicles and a small but 
not insignificant proportion of international or trans­
frontier transport is also carried out using these 
vehicles. The establishment of standards in respect of 
two-axle vehicles, which is the purpose of the present 
draft Directive, is thus a necessary complement to 
Directives 85/3/EEC and 86/360/EEC. 
1.2. The present draft Directive is also consistent, 
both as regards the limits set and the dates of entry 
into force, with the abovementioned two Directives. 
These earlier Directives, together with their respective 
dates of entry into force and exemptions, have both 
been adopted by the Member States. 
(!) OJNoL2, 3. 1. 1985, p. 14. 
(2) OJ No L 217, 5. 8. 1986, p. 19. 2.1. Views on the proposal as a whole 
2.1.1. Different solutions might be more in line with 
the specific situations applying in particular Member 
States, but it would not be possible to apply them 
throughout the Community. The Committee endorses 
the draft Directive, given that it is fully consistent with 
the earlier Directives (3) and accomodates the major 
economic, social and technical requirements which gave 
rise to these Directives. 
2.2. Consistency with national directives and rules 
2.2.1. The proposed maximum authorized weight 
for rigid two-axle vehicles (18 t) falls midway between 
the maximum and minimum weights authorized in the 
Member States (19 and 16 t respectively). The proposed 
date of entry into force, 1 January 1990, will enable 
adjustments to be made gradually in the case of vehicles 
used in international transport, whilst giving the Mem­
ber States discretion in the case of vehicles used for 
transport within national boundaries. The proposed 
weight limit of 18 t is consistent with that applicable 
to two-axle trailers. Vehicles fitted with towing hooks 
could thus form road trains meeting all the requirements 
of Directive 85/3/EEC. 
2.2.2. The proposed maximum authorized drive axle 
weight (11,5 t) is identical to that laid down in Directive 
86/360/EEC. This is the best possible compromise as it 
makes it possible to reconcile all the various vehicle 
design and utilization criteria. 
2.2.3. The date of entry into force of the 11,5 t drive 
axle weight limit is to be the date set out in Directive 
86/360/EEC. This will not impose any new require­
ments on the various industries and other bodies 
involved in making adjustments. 
(•') Cf. the Committee's Opinions on these two Directives: Opin­
ion of 27 January 1972 (OJ No C 61, 10. 6. 1972, p. 5); 
Opinion of 31 January 1980 (OJ No C 113,7.5. 1980, p. 14). 
8.8,88 Official]ournal of the European Communities l^oC208A^ 
2,3, r^^O^c^^^^C^^^^ 
2.3.1, Although higher weight limits could he msti 
fied, the stipulation of the limits of!8 and ll,Botwdl 
permit the construction of vehicles which are satisfac 
tory in all respects, andparticularly as regards their 
cost and safety, gnBen the distribution of the laden 
weight o^er the two a^les, 
2.3.2, It will be possible to construct versions (rigid 
units and tractors) of the same basic model without 
ma^or modifications, 
2.3.3, In those countries mwhich the weight limits 
are currently lower (Cermany, Ireland, United 
Kingdom) the new limits will not ha^e a noticeable 
effectas regardsdamage to theroads, assuming that 
the vehicles used are of modern design. 
POone at Brussels, 2]une 1988, 
1, Introduction 
1.1, In this new Opimononcooperation between 
the ACP countries and the Community, we reiterate 
our l^een interest in both the provisions of the Convene 
tion and their implementation, 
1.2, The situation in the majority of ACP countries 
continues to deteriorate. Indebtedness, falling raw 
material prices, international monetary instability, low 2,3,4, Asidefromthecasesmwhichthe proposed 
new weight limits represent an increase in the payload, 
the Commission could endeavour to calculate the econ 
omic impact of the proposed measures on transport 
operators in those countries in which higher maximum 
weight limits are currently authorised (Belgium, Creece, 
Spain, Erance, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Por 
tugal^ in POenmarl^ and Italy the weight limits are 18 t. 
2,4, ^^ry,^o^^^^^^^r^^^ro^^^r 
2,4,1, In the absence of objective assessment data, it 
is reasonable to maintain that the overall impact of the 
proposed measures on the level of traffic and road 
safety will be neutral. The same conclusion may be 
drawnin respectof thesocialaspects,given thetype 
of transport operations involved. 
per capita growth rates in the ACP countries and a 
sluggish world economy have tnggeredastate of econD 
omic and social crisis in many of these countries. This 
cnsisisboundto persist since the short and mediums 
term prospects are scarcely optimistic, ^n addition, 
dwindling naturalresourcesandthesharppopulation 
increase will impede long-term development, 
1,3, The future Convention will have rotate account 
of this trend, and provide for effective measures and 
funding to backup the vital development and financial Opinion on the fourth convention between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP) 
and the EEC 
(88BC208^1B) 
On 23 February 1988, the Economic and Social Committee decided, in accordance with 
paragraph4of Article 20 of its Rules of Procedure, to draw up an Opinion on the fourth 
convention between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP) and the EEC, 
TheSectionforE^ternalRelations, which was responsible for preparing the Committees 
worl^,adopted its Opinion on 20 Aiayl988,The rapporteur was Air L^elhomenie, 
At its 256th plenary session(meetmgof3]unel988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion byama^ontywith2votes against and4abstentions^