Report from the Commission on the implementation in 1993-1994 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport - (18th report by the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport)
Date: 1997-12-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, driving period, rest period, road safety, transport regulations

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels,  12.12.1997 
COM(97) 698  final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

on the implementation in 

1993-1994 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 
on the harmonisation of certain social legislation 
relating to road transport 

(18th report by the Commission on the implementation 
of the social legislation relating to road transport) 

Contents 

Contents 

Executive Summary 

1. 

2. 

Introduction 

' 

National  initiatives 

2.1 

Regulatory measures 

2.2 

Administrative measures 

3. 

Penalties 

3.1 

Scales 

3.2 

Changes 

4. 

Relations  and co-operation between the Member  States 

4.1 

Concerted checks 

4.2 

Exchanges of information 

5. 

Summary  Tables 

5.1 

Checks: summary 

5.2 

OffenGes:  summary 

6. 

Conclusions  and  comments 

6.1 

Conclusions and comments by Member  States 

6.2 

Conclusions and comments by the Commission 

1 

3 

5 

-  6 

6 

7 

7 

8 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

Annex A 

Table of Penalties 

Annex B 

Summary of Data received from  Member  States 

1. 

Reference  Period 

2. 

3. 

Calculation of minimum checks to be carried out 

Checks 

3.1 

Number of checks at the roadside 

3.2 

Number of drivers checked at premises of undertaking 

3.3 

Number of working days checked at the roadside 

3.4 

Number of working days checked at the premises 
of the undertaking 

Offences:  number of offences  recorded 

16 

17 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

4.1 

4.2 

4.3 

4.4 

Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85: driving period  22 

Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85: breaks 

24 

Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3 820/85 : rest periods 

26 

Article  14 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85: service 
timetable and duty roster 

28 

EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY 

This  Report  sets  out  trends  and  statistics  on  the  Member  States'  inspection  and 
enforcement  activities  in relation to the provisions  of  Regulation  (EEC)  No.  3820/85 
on  driving  times  and rest  periods  during the period  1993-94.  The  Report  is based  on 
statistics provided by the Member States and includes their views on  implementation. 

More  Member  States  have  submitted  more  detailed  information  on  checks  and 
offences  detected  during" this  period.  However  Austria,  Italy  and  Greece  failed  to 
submit data for this period  and Belgium and Portugal  submitted  incomplete statistics. 
This  has  delayed  the production  of  the Report  and  has  limited  an early  and  effective 
comparison  of  statistics.  The  Commission  services  are 
therefore  preparing 
infringement  proceedings  against  Italy  and  Greece  to  ensure  such  inactivity  does  not 
recur,  warning  Belgium  and  Portugal  to tighten  up  their  statistical  co-ordination  and 
advising  Austria,  as  a new Member  State, to provide  the  stipulated  data  for  1995-96 
within the Regulation's required  timeframe. 

The  statistics  show  that  roadside  checks  generally  increased,  although  this  increase 
was  not  reflected  in  checks  on  working  days,  except  in  Spain,  Portugal,  the 
Netherlands  and  Luxembourg.  Checks  at  premises  of  undertakings  increased,  in 
particular on the passenger transport sector.  Overall,  eight Member  States were  above 
the  1% minimum  working  days  checking  limit with  Denmark,  Germany,  Ireland  and 
Spain  achieving  more  than  2%.  Of  the  four  Member  States  falling  beneath  the  1% 
requirement,  Belgium  and  Portugal  have  forwarded  only  partial  data,  which  may 
mask  a  true  picture  of  enforcement  levels,  while  Sweden  and  Finland  were  in  the 
process of reorganising their enforcement agencies. 

The general  rise  in  enforcement  levels  has led to  an  increase  in the  level  of  offences 
detected.  Overall,  offences  in  respect  of  rest  periods  continue  to  account  for  the 
highest  number  of  infringements.  However,  there  has  been  a  general  shift  of  5%  in 
the nature of  offences  detected  from  those relating  to rest periods  and  duty  rosters  to 
those  in  respect  of  'breaks',  although  driving  offences  still  remain  a  constant  and 
significant  proportion  (34%)  of  all  reported  offences.  A  significantly  higher  level  of 
enforcement  activity  by  Spain,  particularly  in  the  passenger  transport  sector,  has 
resulted  in  a  considerable  increase  in  offences  detected.  Germany  has  also  now 
supplied  figures  including  data from  the Lander which  indicate  a major  enforcement 
effort  and associated  high offence  detection rate. Indeed the data provided  shows  that 
within the Union  over  86% of  all detected  offences  are committed  in  Germany  and 
that it has by far  the highest ratio of offences  detected  against working  days  checked. 
The  Netherlands  has  reported  a  notable  decrease  in  offences  especially  amongst  the 
national  road  haulage  sector.  It  is  significant  that  it  is  £lso  one  of  the  top  three 
countries with a high ratio of offences  detected against working days checked. 

Member  States have taken various  initiatives: in particular,  France has issued  uniform 
checking  instructions to all its enforcement  authorities to ensure a common  approach, 
as  well  as  promoting  staff  exchanges  with  other  Member  States  to  broaden  the 
expertise of its staff  and  encourage exchanges of views. The Netherlands  developed  a 
particular  sectoral  approach  to  enforcement  which  appears  to  be  yielding  results  in 

terms  of  reduced  offences.  As  regards  co-operation,  while  the  French  arranged 
fruitful 
joint  actions,  the  Germans  pointed  out  that  the  current  reciprocal 
arrangements  were  insufficient  to  deal  with  the  enforcement  of  the  Regulation  for 
foreign nationals. The Commission will further  elaborate on this matter in a report to 
the Council on the effectiveness  and uniformity of enforcement  practice requested by 
the  Council  in  its  declaration  in  June  1997.  Although  the  figures  provided  for 
penalties  are  difficult  to  compare  accurately,  the  available  data  suggest  a  wide 
disparity between different  Member States and point to the need for  action to ensure 
that sanctions are effective,  proportionate and dissuasive in the context of the Internal 
Market 

Charges of discrimination in enforcement practice between national and non-national 
road  transport operators  have been  levelled  at Member  States  based  on  the  figures 
submitted  and  published  in  this  series  of  reports.  Commission  investigations  of 
complaints  have  not  so  far  revealed  any such deliberate  policy  by  a Member  State 
which would contravene the provisions of the Regulation. In this report, Belgium and 
Luxembourg  check  and  detect  considerably  more  offences  amongst  non-nationals 
than  nationals  -  in  their  defence,  they  are  both  transit  countries.  However  the 
Commission  intends  to  keep  this  aspect  under  closer  scrutiny  to  ensure  an  even 
handed approach to enforcement throughout the Union. 

The Commission intends to 

•  take the necessary action to improve data provision 
•  clarify whether enforcement levels in Belgium and Portugal are in accordance with 

minimum requirements 

•  review  minimum  enforcement  levels  including  sanctions  and  come forward  with 

proposals, as appropriate-

•  examine  whether  enforcement  activity  in  some Member  States  is biased  against 

non-nationals and take action as necessary 

•  evaluate the effectiveness  and uniformity  of enforcement  practice in a report to be 

accompanied by proposals where necessary 

•  study  whether  further  changes  to  Community  enforcement  rules  are  needed 

particularly with the introduction of the new tachograph  ' 

•  revise Regulation (EEC) No. 3820/85 

_ 

1. 

Introduction 

This report, which  covers the period  1993-1994,  is the second  in the new series of 
Commission  reports  which exclusively  covers  Regulation  (EEC) No  3 820/85 \  The 
information  provided has been supplied by the Member States on the standard  form, 
introduced by the Decision of 22 February 19932. 

This makes  it simpler to analyse trends  in particular  countries  and  also to  compare 
statistics between the Member States over the past two reports. Unfortunately  the data 
cannot be compared with that supplied for earlier documents. 

While most Member States have submitted their data in a format close to the standard 
form,  their  returns  are  still  not  all  uniform  and  some  of  the  data  submitted  was 
fragmentary,  incomplete  or  for  the  wrong  reference  period.  There  were  delays  in 
returns and in the case of Austria, Italy and Greece no return was made. The returns 
for Finland and Sweden reflected the transitional difficulties  experienced. 

This  report  is  presented  in  a  different  format  to  its  predecessor:  it  highlights  the 
statistical  data in summary form  for  1993-94, sets out any initiatives  communicated 
by Member States and includes the latest developments at Community level to ensure 
Member  States  are  aware  of  the  Commission's  current  concerns,  objectives  and 
proposals. 

1  OJ No L 370, 31.12.1985, p.l. 
2  OJ No L 72, 25.03.1993, p.33 

2. 

National  initiatives 

2.1 

Regulatory  measures 

In France, Decree No 93/218 of  11 February  1993 and Circular No 93-19 of 2 March 
1993  brought  into  operation  most  exemptions  permitted  under  Article  13  of 
Regulation  (EEC) No.3820/85. 

In  Finland,  during  1994  enforcement  was  a matter  for  the  police  alone.  To  enhance 
enforcement  practice,  a  Regulation  was  introduced  to  allow  the  labour  protection 
inspectors  to  include this  aspect of work within their brief.  The  Regulation  was  later 
approved in 1995. 

2.2 

Administrative  Measures 

In France  an  inter-ministerial  circular  issued  on  14 March  1994 led  for  the  first  time 
to  the  use  of  identical  instructions  by  all  road  traffic  enforcement  authorities  as 
regards  speeding,  loading  and  driving  and  rest  periods.  Exchanges  have  taken  place 
between  enforcement  staff  in  France  and  both  the  United  Kingdom  and  Spain. 
Recruitment  and  assimilation  into  the  enforcement  establishment  in  1994  surpassed 
that  in  1993. Individual  officers  received  60  days  training,  majoring  in  enforcement 
psychology  and  the  penal  code.  There  was  investment  in  manual  and  optical 
tachograph reading  equipment. 

In  Finland  a  comprehensive  training  programme  for  policemen  was  introduced  to 
facilitate  checking  driving  times.  Plans  are  in  hand  to  train  the  labour  protection 
inspectors in enforcement  activities. 

In  the  Netherlands,  the  emphasis  has  been  on  developing  preventative  checking 
methods as regards undertakings. 

In  Germany,  fines  with  a  caution  were  meted  out  to  12,107  passenger  carriers-and 
384,251  road  hauliers.  2,528  passenger  vehicle  operators.  71,159  road  hauliers  were 
presented  with  penalty  notices, while 750 and  36,803  respectively  were banned  from 
continuing their journey. 

In the United  Kingdom,  enforcement  on driver's  hours was  increased  with  particular 
locations  being  targeted  as  well  as  suspect  drivers  and  operators.  This  included 
information  from  'silent  checks',  where  a  vehicle's  use  and  location  is  recorded 
without  the  driver's  knowledge  and  followed  by  a thorough  check  of  drivers'  charts 
to  see  whether  all  information  has  been  recorded.  This  helps  to  detect  systematic 
abuse of drivers'hours rules. 

3. 

Penalties 

3.1 

Scales 

Six  Member  States  submitted  information  on  the  scale  of  penalties  imposed  for 
infractions  against the Regulations. A summary is set out in Annex A. To facilitate a 
broader comparison, the Commission has added information  submitted more recently 
by  other  Member  States  at  a  conference  of  National  Experts  in  1995.  The  table 
indicates the wide range of fines  between Member  States for  both major  and  minor 
offences. 

While  Member  States  may  have  differing  views  on  what  constitutes  a  major  or  a 
minor offence,  divergences  such as a maximum penalty of  248 ecu  in Belgium  and 
4,447 ecu in Italy for serious offences  appear to exist. In the light of the Commission 
Communication  on  the role of  sanctions  in  the  Internal  Market1,  which  states  that 
penalties  should  be  effective,  proportionate  and  dissuasive,  it  appears  that  in  some 
countries,  fines  might  be  viewed  by  some  in  the  road  transport  industry  as  an 
occupational  hazard  rather  than  as  dissuasive.  If  they  are not  dissuasive,  ultimately 
they are not an effective  means of enforcement.  The Commission will therefore open 
discussions with the Member States to clarify  and complete the data provided to date, 
with a view to reaching an understanding on this issue. 

3.2 

Changes 

In France  the  new  penal  code  in  1994  increased  the  fme  for  minor  infringements, 
while abolishing  the repeat offence  provisions.  The commissions  for  administrative 
sanctions were reactivated  through the circular of  7 January  1994 to  better  regulate 
the activities of the profession.  In  1994, it heard cases relating to 53 undertakings  for 
serious  or  repeated  omissions  concerning  transport,  conditions  of  work  and  road 
safety  regulations.  The  majority  of  these  offences  related  to  infringements  of  the 
Regulations  (EEC) Nos; 3820/85 and 3821/85 - inoperative tachographs  or multiple 
offences  in  relation  to  driving  times  and  rest  periods.  Sanctions  comprised  the 
temporary or permanent revocation of all or some of the transport authorisations. 

In Great Britain the maximum fines were increased in October  1992 by means of the 
Criminal Justice Act  1991 which lays down the maximum  amount for  each level of 
fine.  Reference  to  the  level  of  fme  appropriate  to  each  category  of  driver's  hour 
offence (i.e. Level  1  or 2 etc.) is contained in Part VI of the Transport Act 1968. 

Belgium is currently revising the scale of on-the-spot fines for  driving times and rest 
periods. 

1  COM (95)  162/2 

4. 

Relations and co-operation between Member States 

Although  this heading  is  not  included  explicitly  in the standard  form,  a number  of 
Member States made comments on two points - checks and exchanges of information. 

4.1  Concerted checks 

Directive  88/599/EEC  of  23  November  1988  calls  for  an  exchange  of 
information  and mutual assistance on the part of the Member States as regards 
the  implementation  of  the  enforcement  measures.  France  mentioned  that 
fruitful  joint operations have been undertaken with Belgium, the Netherlands, 
Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom. 

Germany  pointed  out  that  offences  committed  by  non-resident  drivers  were 
harder to  detect than those perpetrated  by  resident drivers.  The  co-operation 
envisaged by the Directive between Member States was insufficient  to tackle 
the problem  and  hence  the  number  of  non-resident  drivers  checked  did  not 
reflect the full extent of offences  committed. 

4.2 

Exchanges of  information 

Denmark  reported  that  penalty  notices  had  been  exchanged  with  the 
Netherlands, France, Germany and Sweden. 

The Dutch Traffic  Inspectorate arranged through a private consultancy service 
for an informal working group to be convened at the Hague on  14-15 October 
1996  to  which  representatives  from  all  Member  States  were  invited. 
Representatives from  nine Member States and the Commission  attended. The 
aim of the meeting was to  analyse the difficulties  in the interpretation  of the 
social  legislation  in  the  road  transport  sector  and  the  problems  of  checking 
systems. The group concluded that arriving at a uniform  interpretation  of the 
legislation  would  be  a  difficult  task,  given  the  different  political,  economic 
and  social  aspects  which  impinged  on  the  subject,  More  exchanges  of 
information,  as  well  as  more  basic  reference  guides  on  the  aims  ofjhe 
regulations  were recommended  to  persuade  interested  parties  of  the  need  to 
abide by the rules.  The group  called  for  an initiative  at Community  level to 
reach a consensus on how serious each offence stipulated under the Regulation 
should  be  viewed  and  sanctions  aligned  accordingly.  A  framework  for 
conducting  a  regular  dialogue  on  these  issues  was  recommended  with  the 
Commission taking the lead. 

5.0 

Summary tables 

5.1  Checks: summary 

Number  of  days  actually  checked  as a  proportion  of  the  minimum  number  of 
working days to be checked. 

Member  State 

- a-
Minimum. 
number of 
working days 
to be  checked 

- b-
Number of 
working days 
checked 
(national) 

- c-
Number of 
working days 
(non-national) 

- d-
Total number 
of working 
days checked 

-  e-
Number of 
working days 
checked as a 
proportion of 
the  minimum 
number of 
days to be 
checked 
(d/a) 

Austria 
Belgium (1) 
Denmark  (2) 
Finland  (3) 
France (4) 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal  (2)(5) 
Spain 
Sweden (3) 
United  Kingdom 

665,500 
176,000 
91,300 
1,250,000 
3,690,466 

194,527 

245,898 

1,530,106 
9,096,571 

244,048 
5,885,704 

440,425 
449,859 
40,000 
1,774,154 
14,982,275 

243,248 

935,125 

4,143 

939,268 

49,496 
647,000 
591,250 
1,680,000 
200,000 
2,014,920 

53,990 
651,120 
57,450 
3,035,725 
22,926 

36,736 
94,814 
1,638 
347,927 
1,998 

90,726 
745,934 
88,158 
3,383,652 
27,048 
3,439,391 

66% 
256% 
44% 
142% 
405% 

386% 

183% 
115% 
15% 
201% 
13% 
171% 

Note 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 
(4) 
(5) 

In the Table 5.1 above, as in Tables 3.1 to 3.4 in Annex B, figures relating to checks carried 
out by the gendarmerie, the Ministry of Finance (Customs) and the Ministry of Employment 
and Labour are absent. Since these bodies have detected more than twice as many  offences 
as the Ministry of Transport (see Table 5.2 overleaf  - a total of 21,176 offences  as opposed 
to 8,021) wliich has provided the main figures used here, it may be assumed that they-4iave 
carried out more than twice as many checks as the Ministry  of Transport.  Hence it  follows 
that Belgium has carried out a number of checks well in excess of the required minimum. 
Statistics  for  checks  not  disaggregated  between  nationals/  non-nationals  but  included  in 
overall total (d) 
From 1 January  1994 to 31 December 1994. 
From 1  January  1993 to 31 December 1993. 
In the Table  5.1 above, as in Tables  3.1 to  3.4  in Annex B, all figures  relating  to  checks 
carried out by the Labour Inspectorate and gendarmerie are absent. The statistics represent 
only a partial picture of enforcement activity. 

5.2 

Offences:  summary 

Number  of  ofTences  recorded: Articles  6, 7, 8 and  14 of  Regulation  (EEC)  3820/85 
Overview  by  Member  State 

Member 
State 

^ 

PASSENGERS 

GOODS 

Total 

Nationals 

EEC 

Third 
countries 

Total 
non-
nationals 

Nationals 

EEC 

Third 
countries 

Total 
non-
nationals 

8,021 
3,266 
1,282 
•47,642 
907,530 

12,493 

778 
•  20,824 
1,857 
48,305 
309 
9,336 

4,952 

177,728 

1,001 

545 
4093 
18 

1,535 

-

_ 

9 

134 

200 

267 

251 

1,550 

1,978 

1,541 

3,528 

2,602 

44,814 

116,424 

681,460 

** 1,282 

258 
19 

4,818 
3,247 

Austria 
Belgium  *** 
Denmark 
Finland 
France 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
Spain 
Sweden 
United 
Kingdom 
Note 
*  Figures are from  1 January 1993 and include the first semester of 1994. 
**  Total figure only available. 
*** The following figures have not been incorporated into the Table above, nor in Tables 4.1- 4.4 in 

5 
962 
258 
47,580 

222 
15,706 
1,580 

545 
3,956 
18 

3 
57 
1 
725 

223 
**7,087 

86 
1,470 

6 
63 
1 

137 
-

61,304 

3 
6 
-

**714 

9,700 

1,001 

251 

65 

Annex B, as they were not suitably disaggregated: 

Gendarmerie: 
Ministry of Finance 
Ministry of Employment and Labour: 
Total 

Total 
17,329 
3,625 

222 (in 1994 only) 

21,176 

Number  of  offences  recorded: Articles  6,  7, 8 and  14 of  Regulation  (EEC)  3820/85 
Overview  by  category  of  offence  (includes  passengers  and  goods;  nationals,  EEC 
and  third  countries) 

Article 
6 
7 
8 
14 

Type of offence 

~  Driving periods 

~ 

Breaks 
Rest periods 
Service timetable and duty 
roster 

Number of offences* 
356,188 
261,871 
414,763 
19,738 

TOTAL 

I 

1,052,560 

* excludes unattributed figures 

10 

6. 

Conclusions  and  comments  on  all  the  trends  observed  in  the  fields  in 
question 

6.1 

Conclusions  and comments  by the Member States 

In  France,  comparison  between  the  statistics  for  the  first  half  of  1993  and 
1994  indicate  a  consistency  of  roadside  checks  of  all  vehicles  (164,593  for 
1993  as  opposed  Jo  166,058  for  1994)  with  a  slight  increase  of  1%  in  the 
number  of  passenger  vehicles  (9,165  coaches).  The  number  of  working  days 
checked  at  the  roadside  went  up  by  1.5%  from  544,226  to  552,427.  The 
number  of  drivers  checked  at  the  premises  of  their  undertaking  rose  by  7% 
from  23,594  to  25,731  and  the  number  of  working  days  checked  at  the 
premises of the enterprise rose by 42% - 402,788 working days in the first  half 
of  1994.  The  number  of  offences  under  the  Regulation  represents  more  than 
54% of the total number of offences  recorded on the road. 

Sweden  pointed  out  that  due  to  the  reorganisation  and  reallocation  of 
responsibilities  for  checking on the roadside and at the premises  of  enterprises 
a  system  was  not  yet  in  place  to  gather  a  complete  set  of  statistics.  Those 
figures  given  only  represented  a  proportion  of  the  actual  work  undertaken. 
Like  Finland,  Sweden  had  only  become  party  to  the  EEA  agreement  with 
effect  from  1  January  1994. 

Belgium  reported  that  driving  and  rest  period  offences  were  by  far  the  two 
biggest  categories  of  reported  offences  committed  by  drivers  of  goods 
transport  and  passenger  transport.  By  placing  an  emphasis  on  the  employers' 
responsibility,  it was  hoped  to  reduce the  number  of  offences.  Between  1992 
and  1993  there  had  been  a  decrease  of  34%  in  the  number  of  tachograph 
infractions  coming before the courts, while the number of on-the-spot fines  for 
such offences  had  risen  by  13% for  nationals  and  by  6.7%  for  non-nationals. 
1994  saw  an  upward  trend  in  all  three  statistics  with  an  increase  in  court 
proceedings  of  28.7%,  in  spot  fines  for  nationals  of  115%  and  for  non-
nationals of 30.8%. 

The Netherlands  reported  that they  had targeted  the  market  sectors  where^the 
offences  are most frequent  by a specific random checking method  to  maximise 
impact.  Other  offences  were  checked  by  a  signalling  system  for  which  the 
random method was not appropriate. Premises were also selected  for  checking 
on this basis. 

The introduction of a new Dutch law relating to carriage of goods  by  road  led 
to  an  increase  in the  number  of  goods  transporters  and  goods  vehicles  on  the 
road.  Notwithstanding  this ' increase,  a  positive  development  as  far  as  the 
number of recorded  offences  in the Netherlands was noted. 

None of the other Member.States made any comments under this heading. 

11 

6.2 

Conclusions  and comments  by the Commission 

recognises  however 

Regulation  (EEC)  No.  3820/85  currently  provides  an  important  Community 
basis  for  setting  maximum  driving  time  and  rest  periods  for  road  transport 
operators.  Effectively  and  uniformly  applied,  it  can  be  an  essential  part  of 
efforts  to  enhance  road  safety,  transport  efficiency  and  fair  competition.  The 
that  Member  States  have  differing 
Commission 
perceptions  about  the  implementation  of  this  legislation.  There  are  differing 
authorities  within  Member  States  to  enforce  the  Regulation's  provisions, 
checks  and  controls  are  carried  out  with  varying  degrees  of  frequency  and 
intensity,  and  infringements  are penalised  at different  levels. The potential  for 
circumvention,of the current recording  equipment  is recognised  as is the  need 
for  greater  co-operation  between  Member  States  to  ensure  a  co-ordinated 
approach to  enforcement. 

In  response,  the  Commission  has  adopted  a  two  pronged  approach:  liaison 
to  foster  administrative  co-operation,  a  common 
with  national  officials 
interpretation  of  the  legislation  and  a  consistent  approach  in  its  application; 
and  enhanced  enforcement  through  the  development  and  adoption  of  a  digital 
tachograph  -  a  Common  Position  was  agreed  at  the  Council  meeting  on  17 
June  1997 - and other pending legislative initiatives. 

6.2.1 

Incomplete  data  continues  to  present  problems  for  comparisons  between 
states. 

Lack  of  data  from  Member  States  continues  to  hinder  a  comprehensive 
comparison.  The reasons vary from  country to  country: for  recent  Community 
entrants,  the  organisational  restructuring  to  implement  the  Regulation  means 
that statistics,  if available,  cannot yet be broken  down;  for  others their  current 
division of  responsibilities  means the presentation  of  an incomplete  picture of 
the enforcement  efforts  carried out; Austria,  Italy  and  Greece simply  failed  to 
make  a  return.  The  Commission  is  opening  discussions  with  those  Member 
States  who  have  failed  to  submit  comprehensive  statistics  to  ensure  that  this 
does  not  happen  again.  Should  there  be  a  number  of  national  authorities 
involved  in enforcing  the provisions of the legislation,  the Commission  would 
strongly  suggest  that  one  be  nominated  to  act  as  co-ordinator  for  statistical 
purposes. 

The delay in publication of data due to the delay in receipt allows lessons to be 
drawn  only  some time  after  the event.  Community  measures  cannot  then  take 
into  account  any  specific  national  difficulties  if  they  are  not  communicated. 
Accordingly,  Member  States  are  reminded 
that  they  should  have  submitted 
their  data  for  the next  report,  the  nineteenth,  covering  1995  and  1996,  by  30 
September  1997 at the latest. 

12 

6.2.2  Increases in the number of vehicles subject to the Regulation from 1991-
92 to  1993-94 have been concentrated within the smaller Member  States 
such as Ireland and the Benelux countries. 

The  increased  activity  within  the  smaller  Member  States,  particularly  the 
Benelux countries which are primarily transit countries, points to the need for 
a higher level of enforcement  activity.  This  indeed occurred  in the Benelux. 
While  it  is  difficult  to  accurately  compare  statistics  for  Germany  between 
these two periods, the number of vehicles  subject  to  the Regulation  dropped 
significantly  in  this  country,  with  a  consequent  downturn  in  the  minimum 
number  of  vehicles  to  be  checked  during this  period.  The United  Kingdom 
and, to a lesser extent, Spain also experienced this downturn. 

6.2.3  There has been a general rise in checks undertaken  and offences  detected 

Overall within the EU, the number of enforcement  checks rose. This may also 
partially explain the general rise in the number of offences  detected, although 
the  deterrent  effect  of  increased  enforcement  activity  especially  within  the 
Netherlands may have contributed to a downturn in their overall offence rates. 

The Netherlands has devised a system of enforcement which targets high risk 
market sectors  and attributes the downturn  in  its overall  offence  rate  to this 
approach. The transferability  of this approach to the enforcement  agencies of 
other Member States would merit examination by other Member States, given 
the Dutch success in reducing offence levels. 

6.2.4  There has been a shift in the nature of offences  detected towards * breaks'. 

Since the last report there has been a 5% increase in the number of  'breaks' 
offences  detected, with a consequent decline in those relating to  rest periods 
and  duty  rosters.  Driving  time  offences  have  remained  a  constant  and 
significant  proportion (34%) of total offences  detected.  Nevertheless,  overall 
offences  in respect of rest periods continue to account for the highest number 
of infringements. 

6.2.5  The  minimum  standard  has  been  reached  by  an  increasing  number  of 

those Member States submitting data. 

A  larger  proportion  of  Member  States  which  submitted  data  required  to 
confirm  compliance  with  the  minimum  check  of  1%  easily  surpassed  this 
basic standard, with Denmark, Germany, Ireland  and Spain attaining a check 
of  over  2%.  There  is  generally  a  noticeably  upward  trend  in  the  level  of 
enforcement  throughout  most  Member  States  which  provides  a  reassurance 
among  States  that  enforcement  is  continuing  to  be  given  priority  by  their 
neighbours.  In  particular,  there  are  noticeably  high  rates  of  enforcement 
activity and consequent infraction  detection levels in Germany. The provision 
of comprehensive statistical data in this instance has helped to indicate the full 

13 

extent  of  Germany's  enforcement  effort.  Recognition  of  similar  efforts  in 
other Member States can only be given if full  statistics are made available. 

6.2.6 

Interpretation  of  Regulation  (EEC)  No  3820/85  continues  to  be  refined 
through  rulings  made  by 
the  European 
Communities. The  period  covered  is up to the start  of 1997. 

the  Court  of  Justice  of 

In its ruling of 9 November  1995 on case C-235/94, the Court established  that 
Article  12  does  not  authorise  a  driver  to  derogate  from  the  provisions  of 
Articles  6,  7 or  8 of the Regulation  for  reasons known before  the journey  was 
commenced.  In  reaching  its  ruling  the  Court  noted  that  exemptions  are 
authorised  under  Article  12  only  on  the  condition  that  road  safety  is  not 
jeopardised.  Before  a journey  begins,  neither  drivers  nor  employers  are  in  a 
position  to  say  whether  that  condition  will  be  fulfilled.  It  is  when  an 
unforeseen  event occurs capable of justifying  a derogation  from  the regulation 
that the driver must take into account the requirement of ensuring road  safety. 

Case  C-335/94  dealt  with  two  principal  questions:  the  définition  of  vehicles 
used  for  rubbish  collection  services,  as  referred  to  in  Article  4(6)  of  the 
Regulation;  and  secondly,  whether  the  exemption  under  Article  4(6)  for 
'vehicles  used  in  connection  with...rubbish  collection  and  disposal'  overruled 
the application  of national  legislation on driving times  and  rest  periods  to  this 
category.  In its ruling  of  25 January  1996 the Court  defined  vehicles used  for 
rubbish collection  services and found  that the derogations  contained  in Article 
4(6) do not preclude the ability of Member  States to make national  regulations 
in the field of driving time for vehicles in this category. 

In  case  C-29/95  (Eckehard  Pastoors,  Trans-Cap  GmbH v  Belgium) the  Court 
ruled  on  23  January  1997 that  Article  6  of  the  Treaty  disallowed  a  national 
regulation,  made on the basis of Council Regulations  (EEC) Nos  3820/85  and 
3821/85,  under  which  only  non-resident  offenders  who  do  not  choose  the 
specified  on-the-spot fine but  instead  opt for  their  case to be  pursued  through 
the courts  are obliged under caution to pay for  each infraction  a predetermined 
amount  which  is  greater  than  the  amount  payable  for  an  on-the-spot  fine, 
otherwise their vehicle is impounded. 

~ 

6.2.7  Digital  Tachograph  gains  Council  agreement. 

A  Commission  proposal  COM(94)  323  final  of  22  July  1994  modifying 
Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No.  3821/85  on  recording  equipment  in  road 
transport  and  Council Directive  88/599/EEC on standard  checking  procedures 
was  presented  to  the  Council  on  1  September  1994.  The  Council  has  now 
adopted  a  political  agreement  on  this  issue  on  17  June  1997  accepting  the 
introduction of a digital tachograph. 

14 

6.2.8  Exchange of views on enforcement  promoted 

A  meeting of national experts was arranged in  1995  to facilitate  an exchange 
of views  on  inspection  and penalties.  The Joint Committee on road transport 
produced  a  report  in  December  1995  on  aspects  of  organisation  and 
enforcement  of  working  and  driving  time  which  outlined  the  differences 
between  the  Member  States.  In  addition  the  Commission  is  drawing  up  a 
report  at  the  request  of  the  Council  in  relation 
to  the  effectiveness  and 
uniformity of enforcement practice. 

6.2.9  Success rates in detecting offences vary widely 

The  ratio  of  the  total  number  of  offences  detected  to  the  total  number  of 
working  days  checked  reveals  a  wide  disparity  in  the  success  of  Member 
States in targeting potential offenders.  During  1993-94 Germany was the most 
successful  with  6  offences  detected  for  every  100  working  days  checked; 
Finland  (3.2  offences),  the  Netherlands  (2.79  offences)  and  France  (2.68 
offences)  also  show  a relatively  high  detection  rate.  This  contrasts  with  some 
other  Member  States  where  detection  levels  are  below  1  offence  per  100 
working days checked and indeed in one instance where only  1 offence  comes 
to  light  in  every  10,000  working  days  checked.  This  ratio  serves  to  indicate 
the  benefits  to  be  gained  by  an  exchange  of  experience  and  adoption  of  the 
most  effective  and  nationally  appropriate  methods  of  practice  throughout  the 
Union. 

6.2.10  Modification  of Regulation  (EEC) No. 3820/85 

A  Commission  White  Paper  on  the  inclusion  of  sectors  (such  as  road 
transport)  and  activities  currently  excluded  from  the Working  Time  Directive 
(Directive  93/104/EEC)  was  adopted  on  15  July  1997.  The  Commission  is 
actively  considering  how  best  to  revise  the  Regulation  on  driving  times  and 
rest periods in the light of this document. 

6.2.11  Final  comments 

interest.  The 
Effective  application  of  this  legislation  is  in  everyone's 
Commission  encourages  all  Member  States  to  take  further.  co-operative 
initiatives and, as some Member  States have already  done, promote  exchanges 
of  information,  particularly on best practice, to enhance  enforcement. 

The  Commission  is  considering  ways  in  which  the  interpretation  and 
application  of  the  legislation  can  be  improved.  It  is  also  examining  an 
extension  of  the  scope  of  the  Regulation  to  include  other  activities  which 
affect  public  safety. 

15 

' 

Type of penalty 

Annex  A 

248 ecu. 

Serious offences 
2,181 ecu or up to 6 weeks in prison. 

Minor Offences 
22-36 ecu 
62 ecu 
Fine of at least 54 ecu for the driver and  135 for the company,  the amount 
depending on the nature and gravity of the offence. 
Fines are related to income: a 'one day' fine represents 33.3% of a person's 
daily income, with social exemptions. The severity of one breach  is more 
important than the number of breaches in determining the fine levied. The 
average penalty for this type of infringement is 120-137 ecu. 
Prior to  the  introduction  of  the new  Prior to  the  introduction  of  the new 
penal  code  on  1  March  1994,  the  penal  code  on  1  March  1994,  the 
fines were as follows: 

fines were as follows: 

197-455 ecu (455-910 ecu for second  76-2,276  ecu or an imprisonment  of 
between  15  days  and  three  months. 
offences). 
Offenders from other countries could 
deposit in court a sum of  136 ecu per 
infringement  or  between  303  and 
1,158 ecu per criminal offence. 

After  the  introduction  of  the  new  After  the  introduction  of  the  new 
penal  "code* on  1  March  1994,  the  penal  code  on  1  March  1994,  the 
fines 
fines were amended as follows: 

were amended as follows: 

759 ecu maximum. 

3,794 ecu and imprisonment for three 
months. 
1,365 ecu and/or six months 
imprisonment 
4,447 ecu maximum. 

' 

Member State 
^__ 
Austria 
Belgium 
Denmark 
' 
Finland 

France 

Ireland 

Italy 
Netherlands 

Spain 

'. 

16 ecu minimum 
There are set fines for each breach of a provision of the Regulation ranging 
from 45 - 1,365 ecu. 
• 
30-284 ecu. 
__ 

I  284-1,388 ecu (First Category) 
J 1,388-2,414 ecu (Second Category) 

~~ 

__ 

Sweden 
United Kingdom 

Fines range from 139 to 231 ecu. 

Maximum fines for drivers and those 
who  cause  or  permit  driver's  hours 
and  tachograph offences  range  from. 
1,407  ecu  (Level  3)  to  7,034  ecu 
(Level 5), with a lower maximum in 
Northern  Ireland  of  2,814  ecu.  In 
addition  to  a  fine,  the  offences  of 
falsifying  a  chart,  and  altering  or 
forging a seal on a tachograph  carry 
two  years 
a  penalty  of  up 
imprisonment. 

to 

Note 

Entries  for  Austria,  Belgium,  Italy,  Spain  and  Sweden  are  based  on  figures  supplied 
by  national  experts  from  these countries  in  1995. The  ecu  conversion  rate is  that  taken 
at 31  March  1997. Data  for  other Member  States was  not  supplied. 

16 

Annex B 

Statistical data 

1. 

Reference period 

.  From  1  January  1993 to 31 December 1994. 

2. 

Calculation of minimum checks to be carried out 
(Article 2 of Directive 88/599/EEC)1 

Member  State 

Austria 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Finland  (1) 
France  (2) 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland  (3) 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
Spain 
Sweden  (1) 
United Kingdom 

Total number of 
days worked 

Minimum  checks 
( l % o f c) 

Number of days 
worked per driver 
during  the. 
reference  period. 

-a-

Total number of 
vehicles  subject 
to Regulation 
(EEC) No. 
3820/85 
(annual average) 
- b-

a xb 

- c-

151,250 
40,000 
41,500 
521,875 
768,847 

66,550,000 
17,600,000 
9,130,000 
125,250,000 
396,046,560 

- d-

665,500 
176,000 
91,300 
1,250,000 
3,690,465 

52,880 

24,324,800 

243,248 

10,760 
129,400 
137,500 
350,000 
100,000 
434,250 

4,949,600 
64,700,000 
59,125,000 
168,000,000 
20,000,000 
201,492,000 

49,496 
647,000 
591,250 
1,680,000 
200,000 
2,014,920 

440 
440 
220 
240 
480 

460 

460 
500 
430 
480 
200 
464 

Note 

(1) 
(2) 
(3) 

From 1 January  1994 to 31 December 1994 
Figures relate to one year 
Figures relate  to  total number  of  goods vehicles  over  1,524  kgs  and  large public  service 
vehicles  registered  in  the  State.  A  number  of  these  would  be  exempted  from  Cojmcil 
Regulation (EEC) No.  3820/85. However there is no breakdown of figures available. 

O J N oL  325 29.11.88. p. 55 

•n/ 

3. 

Checks 

3.1  Number of checks at the roadside 

Member State 

Type of operation 

EEC 

Third 
countries 

Total non-
national 

(1) 

nationals 

other Member 
States 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland  (3) 

France  (4) 

Germany 

Greece 

Ireland  (5) 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden  (3) 

United 
Kingdom 

carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of gqods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total value 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total value 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total value 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 

• 

2,284 
36,322 

(2) 

109,399 

13,000 
18,810 
377,458 
222,594 
3,621,124 

3,826 
59,621 

151 
2,670 

62,291 

^ 

81,623 
1,957,690 

109,176 
2,086,348 

7,607 
97,236 
190,808 
4,044,038 

9,509 
33,651 

1,539 
4,572 

210 
225 

1,749 
4,-797 

946 
10,871 
1,871 
39,293 
40 
503 
42,142 
161,508 

666 

717 
6,068 
7,076 
119,959 
1,341 
23,506 
201,203 
963,220 

7,642 
67,691 
469,707 

162 
388 
247 
5,996 

_ 
5,960 
15,935 

1,108 
11,259 
2,118 
45,289 
40 
503 
48,102. 
177,443 

666 
4,874 
39,879 

Note 

(1) 
(2) 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 

Where the Member States were unable to supply more detailed  figures. 
EEC total, including nationals. 
From 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994. 
From 1 January 1993 to 31 June 1994. 
Where it has not been possible to distinguish between the two types of carriage, the 
following figures apply: nationals: 1,527;  other Member States: 1,324;  third country:  119. 

19 

3. 

Checks 

3.2  Number of drivers checked at premises of undertaking 

Member State 

Austria 
Belgium  (1) 
Denmark (2) 
Finland  (2) 
France  (3) 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland  (4) 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal  (2) 
Spain  (5) 
Sweden  (6) 
United Kingdom 

Carriage of 
passengers 

Carriage of goods 

Carriage on own 
account 

Carriage for hire 
or  reward 

157 
-
-
7,805 
27,240 

1,123 

1,097 
2,148 
-

4,652 

1,737 
-
-
67,821 
104,755 

5,212 

5,306 
9,612 
-
136,269 
708 
28,697 

28 
-
-
3,133 
30,184 

2,728 

24 
2,445 
-

-(5) 

1,866 
-
-
72,493 
101,811 

3,607 

1,062 
7,167 
-

-  (5) 

Note 
(1) 

(2) 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 
(6) 

These statistics include figures provided by the Ministry of Employment and Labour for 
1994 only (Passengers - 24; Goods -193). 
No statistics supplied 
From 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1994 
From July 1993 
Figures unable to be disaggregated 
From 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994. 

20 

3. 

Checks 

3.3  Number of working days checked at the roadside 

Member  State 

Type of transport 

EEC 

Nationals 

other member 
states 

Third 
countries 

Total non 
nationals (1) 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland  (3) 

France  (4) 

Germany 

Greece 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden  (3) 

United 
Kingdom  (5) 

carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total number 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total number  (1) 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 
total number (1) 
carriage of passengers 
carriage of goods 

8,422 
,  124,315 

14,116 
221,030 

569 
10,183 

14,685 
231,213 

(2) 

437,569 

40,000 
58,008 
1,242,018 
417,480 
6,894,156 

" 

-

122,054 
3,125,922 

125,584 
2,512,144 

24,188 
342,422 
247,638 
5,638,066 

3,152 
35,974 

737 
3,175 

7 
224 

744 
3,399 

984 
17,428 
14,152 
239,918 
4,853 
52,597 
361,273 
1,420,907 

22,926 
197,802 
1,560,484 

2,147 
32,820 
3,742 
78,586 
297 
1,341 
64,315 
247,400 

1,998 

487 
1,282 
494 
11,992 

_ 

9,585 
26,627 

— 

2,634 
34,102 
4,236 
90,578 
297 
1,341 
73,900 
274,027 

1,998 

Note 

(1) 
(2) 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 

Where the Member States were unable to supply more detailed  figures 
EEC total including nationals 
From 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994. 
From 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1994. 
Figures unable to be disaggregated. 

21 

3. 

Checks 

3.4  Number of working days checked at premises of undertaking. 

Member  State 

Austria 
Belgium 
Denmark  (1) 
Finland  (2)(3) 
France  (4) 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
Spain  (5) 
Sweden  (3)(5) 
United  Kingdom 

Carriage of 
Passengers 

Carriage of goods 

Carriage on own 
account 

Carriage for hire 
or reward 

4,351 
1,037 

112,239 
441,019 

-

84,227 

5,249 
85,920 
1,471 

253,651 

57,439 
11,226 

950,494 
1,343,916 

811,772 

30,329 
225,210 
27,599 
1,253,545 
2,124 
1,427,454 

33,571 
296,119 

1,029,162 
1,488,816 

6,066 
24,450 

29,512 
286,680 

Note 

(1) 
(2) 
(3) 
(4) 
(5) 

Estimated figures 
No statistics available. 
From 1 January  1994 to 31 December 1994. 
From 1 January  1993 to 30 June 1994. 
Total number provided. 

22 

4. 

Offences 
Number of offences recorded. 

4.1  Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85: driving period. 

Member 

Type of 

PASSENGERS 

GOODS 

State 

offence 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total 
non-
nationals 

PASSENGERS 
AND GOODS 
non-
nationals 
nationals 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland 

France* 

Germany 

Greece 

- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
-fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 

90 

112 

4 

116 

1,266 
24 

2,348 
44 

60 
5 

2,408 
49 

1,356 
24 

2,524 
49 

0 

628 

• 

13,946 
872 
322 

1,072 
6 

806 
6 

1,878 
12 

206,042 
3,990 
5,368 

46,128 
1,206 
1,630 

16,298 
4,272 
22 

62,426 
5,478 
1,652 

219,988 
4,862 
5,690 

64,304 
5,490 
1,652 

14,511 
169 

5,034 
35 

1 

23 

Type of offence 

PASSENGERS 

GOODS 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

Member 
State 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden** 

United 
Kingdom 

-

1 

-

-

294 
86 
91 

54 
14 
11 

-

179 

118 
5 

-

4 

1 

352 

17,024 
48 
32 

- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six. days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 
- daily driving period 
- six days maximum 
- fortnight 

PASSENGERS 
AND GOODS 
nationals 
non-
nationals 

3,112 
377 
334 

282 
85 
86 

total 
non-
nationals 
228 
71 
75 

311 

125 

312 

-

-

54 
14 
11 

2,818 
291 
243 

228 
71 
75 

125 

311 

1 

4 

1 

4,885 

996 

28 

1,024 

5,064 

1,028 

635 
19 
38 

8 
1 

223 

86 

269 
173 
10 

-

-

11. 
14 

8 
1 

753 
24 
38 
17,024 
48 
32 
223 

269 
173 
10 

9 
1 

352 

86 

11 
14 

Note 

•From 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1994 
** From 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994 
*** Data may include figures in respect of a siftall proportion of passenger vehicles 

24 

4. 

Offences 
Number of offences recorded 

4.2  Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No. 3820/85: breaks 

Member 
State 

Type of 
offence 

PASSENGERS 

nationals 

EEC 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark (2) 

Finland 

France (3) 

Germany 

Greece 

- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 

GOODS 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total 
non-
nationals 

• 

PASSENGERS 
AND GOODS 
non-
nationals 
nationals 

(1) 

-

9 
4 

9 
3 

6 

1 

10 
3 

160 
101 

331 
97 

7 
2 

338 
99 

169 
105 

348 
102 

1,321 

6,938 
9,300 

306 
312 

62 
186 

368 
498 

72,424 
100,952 

16,888 
8,142 

10,376 
8,140 

27,264 
16,282 

79,362 
110,252 

27,632 
16,780 

1 

6,769 

2,382 

-

25 

Type of  offence 

PASSENGERS 

GOODS 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total 
non-
nationals 

PASSENGERS 
AND GOODS  (1) 
nationals 

non-
nationals 

384 
188 

-

57 
23 

57 
23 

1,715 
643 

348 
40 

1 

1 

105 

43 

-

-

1 
1 

-

-

9,099 

154 

2 
1 

-

-

-

-

348 
40 

2,099 
831 

405 
63 

206 
21 

211 

82 
12 

3,135 

208 
22 

211 

81 
12 

206 
21 

3,030 

203 

8 

245 

9 

4 

-

4 

288 

4 

9,099 

154 

30 

Member 
State 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden 

United 
Kingdom 
(4) 
Note 
(1) 
(2) 
(3) 

- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
-breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
^ breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 
- driving for more than 
4.5 hours without a break 
- breaks too short 

Where the Member States were unable to supply more detailed  figures. 
Total number provided 
From 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1994. | 

(4) 

Data may include figures in respect of a small proportion of passenger vehicles. 

26 

4. 

Offences 
Number of offences recorded 

4.3  Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3280/85: rest periods 

Member 
State 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland 

France (1) 

Germany 

Greece 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Type of 
offence 

- daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
- daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
-  daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
- daily 
-weekly 
- daily 
-weekly 

PASSENGERS 

nationals 

EEC 

GOODS 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

third 
countries 

total non-
nationals 

PASSENGERS 
AND  GOODS 
nationals 

non-
nationals 

88 
9 

116 
18 
13 

4 

120 
18 

1,010 
41 

1,873 
125 
1,298 

58 
2 

1,931 
127 

1.098 
50 

2,051 
145 

10,900 
1,924 

272 
2 

312 
133 

56 
36 

416 
26 

-

1 

! 

688 
28 

285,816 
6,868 

41,720 
710 

21,610 
586 

63,330 
1,296 

13,993 
64 
296,716 
8,792 

4,341 
62 
64,018 
1,324 

56 
36 

3,736 
254 

145 
94 

_ 

145 
94 

4,048 
387 

201 
130 

1 

-

27 

Member 
State 

Type of 
Offence 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden 

United 
Kingdom (2) 

- daily 
- weekly 
- daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 
-daily 
- weekly 

PASSENGERS 

GOODS 

PASSENGERS 
AND GOODS 

nationals 

EEC 

676 

53 

third 
countries 
6 

-

_ 

71 
21 
2,555 
324 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

EEC 

59 

-

7,787 
4 
584 
59 

2,756 
1 
5 

third 
.countries 
101 

„ 

total non-
nationals 

nationals 

2,857 
1 
5 

8,463 
4 
655 
80 

non-
nationals 
2,916 
1 
5 

844 
144 

29 
11 

Note 

(1) 
(2) 

From 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1994.  . 
Data may include figures in respea of a small proportion of passenger vehicles. 

28 

4. 

Offences 
Number of offences recorded 

4.4  Article 14 of Regulation (EEC) No. 3820/85: Service timetable and Duty 

roster. 

Nationals 

EEC 

Third 
countries 

Total non-
nationals 

Member State 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden 

United 
Kingdom 

Type of 
offence 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty* 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 
Faulty 
Incorrectly 
applied 

84 

7 

46 

2 

6 
2 

! 

» 

\ 

V 

> 
} 215** 
> 
528 

> 
}67** 
} 
8 

24 

24 

32 

24 

1 

7 

-T 

2,618 

15,880 

219 

Note 
•Not to hand. 
** Infringements of Article 14 without distinction. 

29 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(97) 698 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

05  07  14 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-CO-97-718-EN-C 

ISBN 92-78-29182-X 

Office  for  Official  Publications of the European  Communities 

L-2985  Luxembourg 

3>o