Common Position (EC) No 11/2000 of 29 March 1999 adopted by the Council, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, with a view to adopting a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterway
Date: 1999-03-29
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: inland waterway transport, rail transport, road transport, transport of dangerous goods, transport safety

8.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 36/1

I

(Information)

COUNCIL

COMMON POSITION (EC) No 11/2000

adopted by the Council on 29 March 1999

with a view to adopting Directive 2000/.../EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on
minimum examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by
road, rail or inland waterway

(2000/C 36/01)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE
EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Com-
munity, and in particular Article 71(1)(c) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (2),

After consultation with the Committee of the Regions,

Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in
Article 251 of the Treaty (3),

Whereas:

(1)

the improvement of transport safety and the protection
of the environment, especially within the context of the
transport of dangerous goods by road, rail and inland
waterway, are important issues, as is also the human
element in the safe operation of these modes of transport;

(1) OJ C 148, 14.5.1998, p. 21, and OJ C 52, 23.2.1999, p. 16.
(2) OJ C 407, 28.12.1998, p. 118.
(3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 20 October 1998 (OJ
C 341, 9.11.1998, p. 29), Council Common Position of 29 March
1999 and Decision of the European Parliament of ... (not yet
published in the Official Journal).

(2) under the terms of Council Directive 96/35/EC of 3 June
1996 on the appointment and vocational qualification of
safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by
road, rail and inland waterway (4) all undertakings the
activities of which include the transport of dangerous
goods, as well as the loading or unloading related to that
type of transport, are obliged to appoint one or more
safety advisers;
the said Directive does not contain
any detailed provisions aimed at the harmonisation of
examination requirements for safety advisers or any
provisions applicable to examination bodies;

(3) Member States should set up a common minimum
framework for the examination of safety advisers and
the conditions for the examination bodies in order to
guarantee a certain level of quality and to facilitate the
mutual recognition of EC certificates of training;

(4)

to the subjects listed in Annex II

the examination of safety advisers will as a minimum
include a written test consisting of questions relating at
least
to Directive
96/35/EC and a case study whereby the candidates can
demonstrate that they have the ability to carry out the
tasks of a safety adviser;

(4) OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 10.

C 36/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2000

(5) Member States may provide that candidates who intend
to work for undertakings whose activities are concerned
only with specific dangerous goods will be examined only
on subject matters related to their activities; in this case,
the EC certificate of training should clearly indicate the
limits of its validity;

(6)

to approval of

the examination carried out by the examination bodies
will be subject
the Member States’
competent authorities; Member States will define the
criteria applicable to examination bodies in order to
maintain a high level of quality of service; the examination
bodies should be technically competent, reliable and
independent;

(7) Member States

should assist one another

in the

implementation of this Directive,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

(c)

‘undertaking’ shall mean the undertakings specified in
Article 2(a) of Directive 96/35/EC;

(d) ‘examination’ shall mean the examination specified in

Article 5(2) of Directive 96/35/EC;

(e)

(f)

‘examination body’ shall mean any body designated by the
the Member States to hold
competent authorities of
examinations;

‘EC certificate’ shall mean the certificate established in
accordance with the model given in Annex III to Directive
96/35/EC.

CHAPTER II

Examinations

Article 3

CHAPTER I

Scope and definitions

Article 1

1.
The competent authority or examining body shall organ-
ise a compulsory written examination which it may sup-
plement with an oral examination to check whether candidates
possess the necessary level of knowledge required to carry out
the tasks of adviser in order to obtain the EC certificate.

1.
This Directive lays down the minimum examination
requirements for the examination needed to obtain the EC
certificate of training as safety adviser for the transport of
dangerous goods provided for in Directive 96/35/EC.

2.
The compulsory examination shall consist of a written
test adapted to the mode(s) of transport in respect of which
the EC certificate is issued.

2. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure
that safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods are
examined in such a way that they satisfy these minimum
requirements.

Article 2

For the purposes of this Directive:

(a)

‘safety adviser for the transport of dangerous goods’,
hereinafter referred to as ‘adviser’, shall mean any person
specified in Article 2(b) of Directive 96/35/EC;

(b) ‘dangerous goods’ shall mean goods defined in Article 2 of
and Article 2 of Directive

Directive 94/55/EC (1)
96/49/EC (2);

(1) Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to
the transport of dangerous goods by road (OJ L 319, 12.12.1994,
p. 7). Directive as
last amended by Commission Directive
1999/47/EC (OJ L 169, 5.7.1999, p. 1).

(2) Council Directive 96/49/EC of 23 July 1996 on the harmonisation
of the laws of the Member States with regard to transport of
dangerous goods by rail (OJ L 235, 17.9.1996, p. 25). Directive
amended by Commission Directive 1999/48/EC (OJ L 169,
5.7.1999, p. 58).

3.

(a) The candidate shall be given a questionnaire. It shall
consist of at least 20 open questions relating,
in
accordance with Article 5(4) of Directive 96/35/EC, at
least to the subjects listed in Annex II to the said
Directive. However, use may be made of multiple
choice questions. In that case, two multiple choice
questions shall be equal to one open question.

Among those subjects, particular attention, appropri-
ate to the mode of transport concerned, shall be given
to the following topics:

— general prevention and safety measures;

— the classification of dangerous goods;

— general packaging requirements, including tanks,

tank containers and rail tankers;

— danger markings and labels;

— references in transport documents;

— handling and stowage;

— the vocational training of crews;

— vehicle papers and transport certificates;

8.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 36/3

— safety instructions;

— transport equipment requirements.

(b) Candidates shall carry out a case study in connection
with Annex I to Directive 96/35/EC whereby they can
demonstrate that they have the ability to carry out the
tasks of adviser.

(c) Member States may provide that candidates who intend
to work for undertakings specialised in the transport
of certain types of dangerous goods shall be tested, in
accordance with Annex II of Directive 96/35/EC, only
on matters related to their activities.

The approved examination body shall be designated in

2.
writing. Such approval may be of limited duration.

Article 5

Member States shall assist one another in implementing this
Directive.

Each Member State shall submit on a regular basis to the
Commission the compendium of questions referred to in
Article 3(4). The Commission shall inform the other Member
State thereof.

These types of goods shall be:

— class 1 (explosives);

— class 2 (gases);

— class 7 (radioactive material);

— classes 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2, 8 and 9

(solids and liquids);

— UN numbers 1202, 1203, 1223 (mineral oils).

The heading of the EC certificate must clearly indicate
that it is valid only for types of dangerous goods
referred to in this paragraph and on which the
adviser has been examined in accordance with the
requirements defined in (a) and (b).

4.
The competent authority or examination body shall
gradually establish a compendium of the questions which have
been included in the examination.

CHAPTER IV

Final provisions

Article 6

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this
Directive by 31 December 1999 at the latest. They shall
forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

When the Member States adopt these measures, they shall
include a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied
by such a reference upon their official publication. The
Member States shall
lay down the manner in which such
references shall be made.

The Member States shall communicate to the Com-
2.
mission the texts of the provisions of national law which they
adopt in the field governed by this Directive.

CHAPTER III

Criteria applicable to examination bodies

Article 7

Article 4

This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication
in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

If Member States do not take direct charge of the
the

1.
organisation of
they shall appoint
examination bodies on the basis of the following criteria:

the examination,

Article 8

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

(a) competence of the examination body;

(b) specification of the examination arrangements proposed

by the examination body;

Done at Brussels ...

(c) measures intended to ensure the impartiality of the examin-

For the European Parliament

For the Council

ations;

(d) independence of the body as regards any natural or legal

persons employing advisers.

The President

The President

...

...

C 36/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2000

STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL’S REASONS

I.

INTRODUCTION

On 20 March 1999, the Commission forwarded to the Council a proposal for a Council Directive on
the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous
goods by road, rail or inland waterway (1).

The proposal is based on Article 71(1)(c) of the EC Treaty.

The European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee delivered their opinions on the
Commission proposal on 20 October 1998(2) and on 9 September 1998 (3), respectively.

Following the Council’s request for consultation on 25 May 1999, the Committee of the Regions
communicated its decision not to give an opinion by letter on 22 July 1999.

In the light of the European Parliament’s opinion, the Commission forwarded an amended proposal (4)
to the Council on 23 December 1998.

On 29 March 1999, the Council adopted its common position in accordance with Article 251 of the
EC Treaty.

II. OBJECTIVES

1. On 3 June 1996, the Council adopted Directive 96/35/EC (5) with a view to facilitating compliance
with the rules on the prevention of the risks inherent in the transport of dangerous goods.
Directive 96/35/EC covers all undertakings whose activity includes the transport of dangerous
goods or loading or unloading connected with such transport and concerns only transport by
road, rail or inland waterway. It lays down the obligation for the undertakings concerned to
appoint one or more safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods with the task of helping
to prevent the risks to persons, goods or the environment inherent in such activities. An adviser
must hold a Community-type vocational-training certificate issued by the competent authority or
the body designated for that purpose by each Member State. This certificate, which is recognised
by all the other Member States, is valid for the mode or modes of transport concerned and
certifies the vocational qualifications of the advisers. To obtain a certificate a candidate must
undergo training providing him with sufficient knowledge of the tasks defined in Annex I to the
above Directive and pass an examination covering the minimum list of subjects given in Annex II.
Directive 96/35/EC does not contain any detailed provisions for harmonising the examination
requirements for safety advisers or any provisions applicable to the examining bodies. In order,
however, to enable all Member States to provide the necessary training and prior examination,
the Council has laid down a deadline for transposing the Directive that is sufficiently far in the
future, namely 31 December 1999.

(1) OJ C 148, 14.5.1998, p. 21.
(2) OJ C 341, 9.11.1998, p. 29.
(3) OJ C 407, 28.12.1998, p. 118.
(4) OJ C 52, 23.2.1999, p. 16.
(5) Council Directive 96/35/EC of 3 June 1996 on the appointment and vocational qualification of safety advisers

for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail and inland waterway (OJ L 145, 19.6.1996, p. 10).

8.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 36/5

2. The Commission noted that the organisation of examinations already envisaged by certain
Member States might result in differing levels and major discrepancies between the tests, and
therefore thought it advisable to propose minimum harmonisation of the level of training of
safety advisers in order to make transport safer and fix examination requirements at a high level.
It therefore submitted a proposal for a Directive with a view to laying down minimum
requirements for the organisation and content of examinations and conditions for participation
by undertakings wishing to offer their services as examiners.

Since Directive 96/35/EC stipulates that Member States should apply that Directive no later than
31 December 1999, the Commission is proposing that Member States apply the new Directive
six months earlier.

III. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON POSITION

The Council’s common position takes the amended Commission proposal on board, subject to the
amendments given below:

— in Article 3(3)(a), the common position allows more flexibility in the breakdown of examination

questions than proposed by the Commission in Article 3(5)(a).

The Council felt it would be preferable for the Member States to have greater discretion as to the
minimum content of tests. Candidates would have to answer at least 20 questions on subjects
listed in Annex II to Directive 96/35/EC. They might also have to answer multiple-choice
questions, with two multiple-choice questions counting as one open question.

The Council did not think it necessary to divide the subjects listed in Annex II into three groups
and to require that three questions be set on the first group of subjects, two on the second and
one on the third.

The Council felt it would suffice for particular attention to be paid to the subjects in the first
group listed in the amended Commission proposal;

— deletion of Article 4(2) and Article 8 of the amended Commission proposal. Article 4(2) provides
that the Commission must approve, by committee procedure, the conditions of examination of
candidates intending to work for
referred to in Article 4
(Article 3(3)(c) of the common position). Article 8 lays down the committee procedure to be
used.

the specialised undertakings

The Council felt it would be preferable for Member States to be responsible for organising the
testing of candidates intending to work for the above specialised undertakings;

— Article 4 of the common position broadly covers the requirements of Articles 5 and 6 of the

amended Commission proposal;

— in Article 6(1), the date set by the Commission in Article 9(1), namely 30 June 1999, has been put
back and now falls on the same date as set in Directive 96/3/EC, namely 31 December 1999.

Bearing in mind that one of the aims of the new Directive is to harmonise the organisation and
content of the examinations provided for in Directive 96/35/EC, the Council felt that it would be
wise to set the same transposition date for both Directives;

— deletion of Article 9(3) of the Commission proposal (Article 6 of the common position), which was

intended to introduce a system of penalties.

C 36/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.2.2000

The Council did not think there was any need for the new Directive to include a provision
designed to lay down a system of penalties to apply if the Directive were infringed.

IV. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AMENDMENTS

1. European Parliament amendments adopted by the Council and accepted by the Com-

mission

The Council has followed the amended Commission proposal in adopting the content, if not the
wording, of the following European Parliament amendments:

— in Article 1(2), the common position takes on board the first part of amendment 1, which is an
addition to the wording to indicate the area of activity covered by the safety advisers, namely
the transport of dangerous goods;

— in Article 1(2), the common position takes on board the second part of amendment 1, which is
intended to make clear that provisions of the Directive constitute minimum requirements;

— in Article 3(1), the common position takes account of amendment 2, which is designed to
define more accurately the knowledge which candidates must demonstrate in order to perform
the duties of an adviser;

— in Article 3(1), the common position takes account of amendment 4, which provides that the

compulsory written examination may be supplemented by an oral test;

— in Article 3(3)(a), the common position takes account of amendment 5, which is designed to
amend Article 3(5)(a) of the amended Commission proposal to state that the requirements
laid down as regards questions on the subjects listed in Annex II to Directive 96/35/EC
constitute minimum requirements;

— in Article 3(3)(a), the common position takes on board amendment 7, which is intended to
increase Member States’ ability to grant exemptions restricting the number of subjects for
examination and to issue specific certificates;

— in Article 5, the common position takes account of amendment 9, which is designed to
improve the efficiency of the exchange of information on the catalogue of questions referred
to in Article 3(3) of the amended Commission proposal (Article 3(4) of the common position)
as it provides that Member States are to forward this catalogue to the Commission, which will
inform the other Member States thereof.

2. European Parliament amendments not adopted by the Council, and

(a) not accepted by the Commission

The Council has followed the amended Commission proposal in not adopting:

— the third part of amendment 1, whereby a provision on the mutual recognition of the EC
certificate of training by the Member States and the EEA would be added to Article 1(2) of
the amended Commission proposal.

The Council stressed that this was superfluous, given that the certificate was an EC
certificate established in accordance with the model given in Annex III to Directive
96/35/EC.

8.2.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 36/7

— amendment 3, whereby a provision also requiring candidates to demonstrate their ability
to perform the duties of an adviser by making a case study would be added to Article 3(3)
of the amended Commission proposal.

The Council pointed out that this was already provided for in Article 3(5)(b) of the
amended Commission proposal and appeared in Article 3(3)(b) of the common position.

— amendment 6, adding a new paragraph on the period of validity and renewal of the diploma

to Article 3(5) of the amended Commission proposal.

The Council pointed out that Article 6 of Directive 96/35/EC already contained a provision
to this effect.

— amendment 8, clarifying the criteria laid down in Article 5(b) of the amended Commission
proposal (Article 4(1)(b) of the common position) by adding that examining bodies must
also allow candidates to use certain documents during the examination (documents
permitted).

The Council felt that this addition was already encompassed in the more general concept
laid down both in the amended proposal and in the new wording for Article 4(1)(b):
‘specification of the examination arrangements proposed by the examination body’.

(b) accepted by the Commission

— amendment 10, intended to adjust the deadline for notification for penalties referred in

Article 9(3) of the amended Commission proposal.

Article 6 of the common position does not include Article 9(3), since the Council felt it
preferable not to lay down any specific provisions on penalties in the Directive (see
section III above).