Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the application by the Member States of Council Directive 95/50/EC on uniform procedures for checks on the transport of dangerous goods by road
Date: 2000-09-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, road transport, safety standard, transport of dangerous goods, transport safety

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 06.09.2000
COM(2000) 517 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND
THE COUNCIL

on the application by the Member States of Council Directive 95/50/EC on uniform
procedures for checks on the transport of dangerous goods by road

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND
THE COUNCIL

on the application by the Member States of Council Directive 95/50/EC on uniform
procedures for checks on the transport of dangerous goods by road

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

DIRECTIVE 95/50/EC

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE BY MEMBER STATES

REPORTS FROM THE MEMBER STATES

CALCULATION OF DATA

THE LEVEL OF CHECKS IN THE MEMBER STATES

THE PROPORTION OF TRANSPORT OPERATIONS INFRINGING THE
LEGISLATION

9.

TYPES OF INFRINGEMENTS

10. TYPES OF SANCTIONS

11. CONCLUSIONS

ANNEX I: MEASURES ON IMPLEMENTATION OF DIRECTIVE 95/50/EC BY

MEMBER STATES

ANNEX II:

SUMMARY ON CHECKS, INFRINGEMENTS AND PENALTIES IN THE
EUROPEAN UNION

ANNEX III: LEVEL OF CHECKS AND PROPORTION OF INFRINGEMENTS

ANNEX IV: NUMBER OF CHECKS AND PROPORTION OF FOREIGN VEHICLES

CHECKED

ANNEX V: CHECKS VERSUS INFRINGEMENTS

ANNEX VI:

INFRINGEMENTS BY TYPE

ANNEX VII: SANCTIONS BY TYPE

2

1. INTRODUCTION

Council Directive 95/50/EC on uniform procedures for checks on the transport of dangerous
goods by road was adopted on 6 October 19951 and Member States had to bring into force the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with it by 1 January
1997.

This report from the Commission is based on the reports received from the Member States
and it is the first report on the application of Council Directive 95/50/EC in the Member
States.

The Directive provides that each Member State shall send the Commission for each calendar
year not later than twelve months after the end of that year a report on the application of this
Directive2. Therefore the first reports by Member States concerning the year 1997 had to be
sent at the latest on 1 January 1999 and concerning the year 1998 at the latest on 1 January
2000.

Directive 95/50/EC also provides that the Commission shall send the European Parliament
and the Council for the first time in 1999 and subsequently at least every three years a report
on the application of the Directive by the Member States3. Due to the fact that not all the
Member States fulfilled their obligation concerning the year 1997 and in order to get a more
full picture of the situation in this field, the Commission wanted to include also the figures for
1998 in this report. Since the last date for the reports from the Member States for the year
1998 was 1 January 2000, the Commission could present this report only in 2000. The
Commission feels however that this report, being more complete, is more useful and justifies
its delay in production.

2. BACKGROUND

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 road4, as amended5,
introduced harmonised rules for the transportation of dangerous goods between the Member
States as well as in national transportation within the Member States.

The technical Annexes to Directive 94/55/EC are, as regards the contents, identical to the
technical Annexes to the international ADR-agreement6. Therefore Directive 94/55/EC
transposes into Community law the technical provisions of the ADR, which lays down
uniform rules for the safe international transport of dangerous goods by road. The added value
of the Directive is that it also extends these rules to cover national traffic in order to

1

2

3

4

5

6

OJ L 249, 17.10.1995, p. 35.
First paragraph of Article 9 thereof.
Second paragraph of Article 9 thereof.
OJ L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 7, Annexes A and B to it published in OJ L 275, 28.10.1996.
Directive amended by Commission Directive 96/86/EC of 13 December 1996 adapting to technical
progress Council Directive 94/55/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with
regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road (OJ L 335, 24.12.1996, p. 43, Amendments to
Annexes A and B published in OJ L 251, 15.9.1997) and Commission Directive 1999/47/EC of 21 May
1999 adapting for
the second time to technical progress Council Directive 94/55/EC on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by
road (OJ L 169, 5.7.1999, p.1).
European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road concluded at
Geneva on 30 September 1957, as amended, the latest version being the 1999 version.

3

harmonise across the Community the conditions under which dangerous goods are transported
by road and consequently to improve at the same time road safety at national level.

Annex A to Directive 94/55/EC lists the dangerous goods that may be carried by road and
gives rules for packaging, labelling and for describing goods in the transport documents.
Annex B gives rules governing the vehicles and transport operations.

3. DIRECTIVE 95/50/EC

In the context of Directive 94/55/EC and in order to further improve the level of safety in the
transport of dangerous goods and to ensure a sufficient level of checks to be carried out in a
harmonised way, the Council adopted on 6 October 1995 Directive 95/50/EC on uniform
procedures for checks on the transport of dangerous goods by road. This Directive includes
the harmonised checklist used by Member States as well as the harmonised list of
infringement codes. This enables a reliable comparison between the enforcement in Member
States to be done.

These uniform checks concern all road transport activities concerning dangerous goods in the
territory of a Member State or entering it from third countries irrespective of the country of
registration of the vehicle. The Directive aims at ensuring a representative proportion of
consignments of dangerous goods transported by road to be randomly checked covering at the
same time an extensive portion of the road network.

As a preventive measure or after having recorded infringements, which jeopardise safety at
the roadside, checks may be also carried out at the premises of undertakings.

4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE BY MEMBER STATES

By the end of 1999 all the Member States except Ireland have notified the national measures
on implementation of the road checks Directive. However, it must be noted that, in spite of
the rather long period provided for the legislative process, not all the Member States were
ready with their measures on the target date. A list of the legislation of the Member States
implementing the Directive is given in Annex I.

5. REPORTS FROM THE MEMBER STATES

A report for 1997 and/or 1998 has been received from the following Member States: Belgium,
Denmark, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Finland,
Sweden, and the United Kingdom. No report has been received from Greece, Ireland or
Portugal.

reports,

When making their
the Member States were invited to use the harmonised
infringement codes of Annex II to the Directive and present the report in accordance with
Annex III of the Directive. Not all Member States followed this pattern. Some Member States
used the codes from the checklist (Annex I to the Directive), some had their own system of
grouping the infringements. Therefore these data had to be converted into the harmonised
codes. For infringements that did not correspond to any of the 13 codes, code 14 as "Other
infringements" was used.

The summary of the reports is given in Annex II to this report. The summary table contains
the information on the number of checked vehicles and the number and types of infringements
as well as the number and types of penalties, all classified geographically (whether the vehicle
checked was registered in the Member State which performed the check or in another

4

Member States or in a third country). Under the types of penalties, the cases where further
journey was prohibited until the full remedy of the infringement were classified as warnings.

6. CALCULATION OF DATA

Member States had the obligation to give in their report their estimate of the amount of
transportation of dangerous goods in tonnes or in tonnes-kilometres. This data was used in all
the calculations. For those Member States that did not provide this information a proportion
of 8 %7 of all goods transported was used for the estimation of the amount of transported
dangerous goods8. Furthermore an average journey of 110 kilometres9 and an average load of
dangerous goods of 10 tonnes10 were used in the calculations.

On basis of this data the number of journeys was calculated. This figure in relation with the
number of checks in the country gives the frequency of checks in the form of how many
journeys were made per checked vehicle. This is summarised in Annex III.

7. THE LEVEL OF CHECKS IN THE MEMBER STATES

One of the aims of the Directive is the further improvement of the level of safety by ensuring
a sufficient level of checks to be carried out. In order to estimate this factor better, the
calculated frequency of road checks in the Member States was classified into four groups.
This gives also a convenient way of comparison between the enforcement activities in the
Member States. The table showing this classification is given in Annex III.

The groupings by Member States are the following:

In Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden vehicles are checked on average
more often than once in every 500 journeys. This means that the probability to be controlled
is more than 0.2 % in these countries.

In France, Luxembourg and Finland vehicles are checked on average more often than once
in every 1000 journeys. This means that the probability to be controlled is more than 0.1 % in
these countries.

In Belgium and the United Kingdom11 vehicles are checked on average more often than
once in every 2000 journeys. This means that the probability to be controlled is more than
0.05 % in these countries.

7

8

9

10

11

Knowing that transportation of dangerous goods constitutes approximately 6 to 10 % of the overall
figure of transported goods, a range of the amount of transported dangerous goods was calculated. The
chosen average value of 8 % gives in fact the same results as regards the groupings of the Member
States in the following chapters as the extreme values of 6 % and 10 %.
The data concerning all goods transported comes from the statistical pocketbook "1999 EU Transport in
Figures", issued by Eurostat.
This is the known average figure for the Member States, with the lowest average journey of about 90
kilometres and the highest of about 130 kilometres.
This was the actual average load for all the checked vehicles in one Member State. If on the other hand
it is taken into account that a major part of the transport of dangerous goods concerns substances of
class 3, inflammable liquids and notably fuel, which are transported in tank vehicles of a capacity of
10-30 tonnes and which normally return empty, the same average figure of 10 tonnes is obtained.
The United Kingdom has indicated that approximately 1500 checks have been made in addition to the
figure in their report, but did not keep statistics on these additional checks. This figure has, therefore,
not been included in the calculation, but even if it had been, the grouping of the United Kingdom would
not have been changed.

5

In Denmark and Italy vehicles are checked on average less often than once in every 4000
journeys. This means that the probability to be controlled is less than 0.025 % in these
countries.

On basis of this information it can be concluded that in the countries where most checks are
made, the frequency of the checks is roughly ten times more than in the countries where the
least number of checks is made.

the
In order to assess the equality of checks between domestic and foreign operators,
performed checks by each Member State and the proportion of foreign vehicles checked is
presented in Annex IV. This proportion does, indeed, vary considerably. However, as the
highest proportion (about 40 % and above) of foreign vehicles checked are in the transit
countries (Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Austria) the proportions still seem
reasonable taking into account geographical positions. Therefore it may be concluded that
there is no indication that the checks are not balanced in this aspect.

8. THE PROPORTION OF TRANSPORT OPERATIONS INFRINGING THE
LEGISLATION

The proportion of transport operations infringing the legislation was calculated referring all
infringements (whether concerning the vehicle,
the
transported goods) to the checked vehicle and, in most cases, on the presumption that there
was only one infringement per vehicle. As there could have been more that one infringement
per vehicle, this may result in an artificially high figure. On the other hand this proportion is
exact for Belgium and Sweden with a figure comparable with the proportion calculated for
other Member States. The information on the proportion of infringements is given in Annex
III.

the documentation or

the driver,

It was found that, depending on the country, from 10 % to over 80 % of the checked vehicles
were violating the legislation, which clearly shows that the road checks are needed and
constitute an important tool in improving safety in the transport of dangerous goods.

Member States were classified into four groups according to the proportion of infringements.
The groupings by Member States are the following:

In Spain and France about 10 % of checked vehicles were found to be infringing the
legislation.

In Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom about 20 % of checked vehicles
were found to be infringing the legislation.

In Denmark and Sweden about 30 % of checked vehicles were found to be infringing the
legislation.

In Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria and Finland over 40 % of checked vehicles were
found to be infringing the legislation.

When compering the frequency (proportion) of checks with the proportion of infringements,
no correlation can be found. This is illustrated in the graph in Annex V.

6

9. TYPES OF INFRINGEMENTS

The types of infringements are categorised as 13 harmonised codes in Annex II to the
Directive. In addition a further code 14 was used for infringements which did not correspond
to any of the 13 defined categories. Consequently, the 14 codes used are the following.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

Goods not authorised for transport;

Absence of consignor's declaration on the conformity of the goods and their
packaging with transport regulations;

Vehicles which, on checking, display leaks of dangerous substances due to the lack
of leakproof integrity of tanks or packages;

Vehicles with no type-approval certificate or with a non-regulation certificate;

Vehicles lacking appropriate orange panels or with non-regulation orange panels;

Vehicles without safety instructions or with inappropriate ones;

Inappropriate vehicle or packaging;

Driver without a regulation vocational
dangerous goods by road;

training certificate for the carriage of

Vehicles lacking fire extinguishers;

Vehicles or packages without regulation danger labels;

Vehicles lacking transport/accompanying documents, or with particulars relating to
the dangerous goods on board which are not in compliance with the regulations;

Vehicles not covered by a bilateral/multilateral agreement or not in compliance with
the agreement;

Overfilling of tank;

Other infringements.

The figures on infringements are given in Annex II and in the graph in Annex VI.

Numerically the most significant infringements, i.e. those which account for more than about
five per cent of infringements are the following.

7.

9.

5.

11.

Inappropriate vehicle or packaging;

Vehicles lacking fire extinguishers;

Vehicles lacking appropriate orange panels or with non-regulation orange panels;

Vehicles lacking transport/accompanying documents, or with particulars relating to
the dangerous goods on board which are not in compliance with the regulations;

14.

Other infringements.

7

Each of these accounts for from 5 % to 43 % of the total reported infringements.

The types of infringements that did not occur significantly, i.e. those which constitute less
than one per cent of infringements are the following.

2.

1.

3.

12.

Absence of consignor's declaration on the conformity of the goods and their
packaging with transport regulations;

Goods not authorised for transport;

Vehicles which, on checking, display leaks of dangerous substances due to the lack
of leakproof integrity of tanks or packages;

Vehicles not covered by a bilateral/multilateral agreement or not in compliance with
the agreement;

13.

Overfilling of tank.

On the basis of these results it may be concluded that not all the infringement codes in Annex
II to the Directive are well chosen, as the most significant part of the infringements had to
been classified as "other infringements". This is in part connected with the fact that many
points of the checklist in Annex I to the Directive and used by the enforcing authorities are
not taken into account in the infringement codes. An example of this is that when controlling
the equipment of the vehicle and the equipment for the driver only the lack of fire
extinguishers is taken as a harmonised code: thus all the other faults have to be classified as
"other infringements". Some infringements of the code list seem not to occur at all, e.g.
overfilling of tank. On basis of this consideration should be given to changing Annex I and
Annex II to the Directive.

10. TYPES OF SANCTIONS

The Member States use four different kinds of sanctions, namely a warning, a fine, a
prosecution and a prison sentence.

The most commonly used sanctions are imposed directly by the enforcement authorities.
These include an oral or written warning which might be complemented by a prohibition on
continuing the journey until the infringement has been corrected, and a fine.

A prosecution may result in an acquittal, a fine and as a final result in some cases a prison
sentence.

The fine is the most common sanction in use and represents about 70 % of the sanctions
imposed. Ranked second are warnings, with or without required corrective action, which is
used in a quarter of the cases. Prosecution has been reported for a little less than 5 % of the
cases, whilst prison sentences occur very seldom, approximately in one case per two
thousand. These proportions are shown in the table in Annex II and in the graph in Annex
VII.

Statistics on sanctions show that most infringement cases are deemed not too serious, since
prosecutions and especially prison sentences are rare, but on the other hand about 70 % are
deemed sufficiently serious to merit a fine.

8

11. CONCLUSIONS

Most of the Member States did perform roadside checks on the transportation of dangerous
goods in 1997 and 1998. These checks have been proven to be very useful on many grounds.

The fact that checks are conducted means that the companies dealing with the transport by
road of dangerous goods are beforehand taking better care to obey the rules. There is
obviously the need to have a sufficient level of these checks in order them to be a deterrent.

Justification for checks is clearly seen in the proportion of vehicles found in checks to be
infringing the legislation. Between 10 and 80 % of the vehicles checked (according to
Member States) were found to be infringing the legislation, with a weighted EU average of
about 20 %. This clearly shows that the frequency of checks could be higher in some
countries, even if no direct correlation between the frequency of checks and the number of
infringements has been found.

The number of checks per 1000 vehicles varies considerably between Member States.
Unfortunately some Member States performed no checks during the period of 1997-1998 (or
at least have not sent a report on the checks to the Commission). In the most active Member
States approximately 10 times more checks are made than in the least active Member States.
In the majority of Member States at least one vehicle per thousand on the road is checked.
Such a level of control seems to be satisfactory for the aims of both improving safety in the
transport of dangerous goods and, at the same time, ensuring a more harmonised practise
throughout the European Union.

In half of the countries more than about 30 % of the checked vehicles were found to be
infringing the legislation, which is a significantly high figure. The most common
the lack of fire
infringements concern the use of inappropriate vehicle or packaging,
extinguishers, the lack of orange panels showing that the vehicle is transporting dangerous
goods, the lack of transport documents concerning the load of dangerous goods and diverse
non-classified infringements. On the other hand infringements that hardly ever occur are the
absence of the consignor's declaration, the transportation of non-authorised goods, leakage
and the use of vehicles which are not covered by bilateral or multilateral agreements. Only
one single case in the EU was reported involving the overfilling of a tank.

Many infringements were classified under "Others" due to the incompatibility between the
checklist used by the enforcement authorities and the harmonised codes. This fact would seem
to justify a possible future modification of both lists. In order to even better harmonise the
road checks on the transport of dangerous goods in the European Union, the Commission
intends to examine the possibilities of amendments to Annexes I and II to the Directive
95/50/EC. This could be done in an appropriate way together with the Member States after
adoption of the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Directive
95/50/EC which will introduce a regulatory committee for the adaptation to technical progress
of these Annexes.

The most commonly used sanction was a fine followed by a warning, which might have been
complemented by a prohibition on continuing the journey unless the infringement was
corrected.

On the basis of this report the Commission would like to stress that road checks are an
effective tool
in revealing the problems connected with the safety of the transport of
dangerous goods and indirectly in improving it and therefore the Commission recommends

9

the level of checks in the Member States to be such that a vehicle should be checked at least
once every 1000 journeys, on average. At the same time the Commission would like to point
out to the Member States that the harmonised infringement codes should be used in the
reports.

10

MEASURES ON IMPLEMENTATION OF DIRECTIVE 95/50/EC BY MEMBER STATES

ANNEX I

Belgium B

Arrêté royal du 19.10.1998 portant exécution de la directive 95/50/CE du Conseil du
6.10.1995 concernant des procédures uniformes en matière de contrôle des transports de
marchandises dangereuses par route/Koninklijk besluit van 19.10.1998 ter uitvoering van de
richtlijn 95/50/EG van de Raad van 6.10.1995 betreffende uniforme procedures voor de
controle op het vervoer van gevaarlijke goederen over de weg

Moniteur belge/Belgisch Staatsblad, 26.11.1998 p. 37941

Entry into force 1.1.1999

Denmark DK

- Bekendtgørelse nr. 762 af 20.8.1996 om vejtransport af farligt gods. Trafikmin.,4.kt.,j.nr.
1995-4402-32. Lovtidende A 1996 hæfte nr. 132 udgivet den 30.8.1996 s. 4579. OBEK

- Trafikministeriets cirkulære nr. 151 af 4.10.1996 om kontrol med vejrtransport af farligt
gods. Trafikmin., j.nr. 1995-4402-32. OCIR

Entry into force 1.1.1997

Germany D

Verordnung über die Kontrollen von Gefahrguttransporten auf der Strasse und in den
Unternehmen GGKontrollV vom 27. Mai 1997, Bundesgesetzblatt Jahrgang 1997 Teil I Nr.
35, 9.6.1997

Entry into force 1.9.1997

Greece GR
Προεδρικό ∆ιάταγµα αριθµός

Entry into force 11.10.1999

Spain E

256/99,

ΦΕΚ Α αριθµός

της

209

11.10.1999

Resolución de 21.11.1996, de la Dirección General de Ferrocarriles y Transportes por
Carretera, sobre la inspección y control por riesgos inherentes al transporte de mercancías
peligrosas por carretera, Boletín Oficial del Estado número 303 de 17.12.1996 Página 37328
(Marginal 28065)

Entry into force 1.1.1997

11

France F

Circulaire du Ministère du 20.10.1997 portant transposition de la directive 95/50/CE du
Conseil du 6.10.1995 concernant des procédures uniformes en matière de contrôle des
transports de marchandises dangereuses par route, Journal Officiel du 4.12.1997 Page 17502

Entry into force 4.12.1997 (Legislation on this subject existed even before that date)

Ireland IRL

The Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road Act, 1998, Number 43 of 1998. This is only the
first step; Directive has not yet been implemented.

Italy I

Decreto interministeriale del 3.3.1997, attuazione della direttiva 95/50/CE del Consiglio
dell'Unione europea concernente l'adozione di procedure uniformi in materia di controlli su
strada di merci pericolose, Gazzetta Ufficiale - Serie generale - del 3.4.1997 n. 77 pag. 34

Entry into force 1.1.1997

Luxembourg L

- Règlement grand-ducal du 12.7.1996 modifiant le règlement grand-ducal du 10.4.1986 sur
les transports par route de marchandises dangereuses, Mémorial grand-ducal A Numéro 57 du
27.8.1996, page 1774

- Règlement ministériel du 12.8.1996 modifiant le règlement ministériel du 30.6.1982 sur
l'instruction, l'examen et les cours de recyclage prévus pour l'obtention du certificat de
formation spéciale ADR, Mémorial Grand-Ducal A Numéro 68 du 3.10.1996, page 2030

Entry into force 1.1.1997

The Netherlands NL

Regeling vervoer over land van gevaarlijke stoffen 1997, 29.11.1996, Staatscourant 235 of
4.12.1996

Entry into force 1.1.1997

Austria A

145. Bundesgesetz, mit dem ein Gefahrgutbeförderungsgesetz erlassen wird sowie das
geändert werden,
Kraftfahrgesetz
Bundesgesetzblatt für die Republik Österreich, Nr. 145/1998 ausgegeben am 20.8.1998

Straßenverkehrsordnung

1960

1967

und

die

Entry into force 1.9.1998

Portugal P

Decreto-Lei n.° 77/97 de 5.4.1997, Diário da República I Série A n.° 80 de 5.4.1997, página
1551

Entry into force 5.5.1997

12

Finland FIN

-

-

-

-

-

Laki vaarallisten aineiden kuljetuksesta/Lag om transport av farliga ämnen (719/94),
2.8.1994

valvomiseksi
Liikenneministeriön päätös vaarallisten aineiden tiekuljetusten
suoritettavista tarkastuksista/Trafikministeriets beslut om kontroller för övervakning
av vägtransporter av farliga ämnen (705/96), 1.10.1996

Asetus vaarallisten aineiden kuljetuksesta tiellä/Förordning om transport av farliga
ämnen på väg (632/96), 16.8.1996

Landskapslag om tillämpning av vissa i riket gällande författningar rörande transport
av farliga ämnen (34/76), 1.7.1976, ändring (62/95), 27.7.1995

Landskapsförordning om tillämpning i landskapet Åland av riksförfattningar om
transport av farliga ämnen (66/95), 27.7.1995, ändring (72/96), 7.11.1996

Entry into force 1.1.1997

Sweden S

-

-

-

Lag om transport av farligt gods, Svensk författningssamling (SFS) 1982:821

Förordning om transport av farligt gods, Svensk författningssamling (SFS) 1982:923

Rikspolisstyrelsens föreskrifter och allmänna råd om polisens tillsyn över väg- och
terrängtransporter av farligt gods, Rikspolisstyrelsens författningssamling (RPSFS)
1996:10 FAP 338-1

Entry into force 1.1.1997

The United Kingdom UK

Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974

Entry into force 1.1.1997 concerning Directive 95/50/EC

13

ANNEX II

SUMMARY ON CHECKS, INFRINGEMENTS AND PENALTIES
IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

11. No transport documents

7237

1723

Country of registration:

Number of checked vehicles

Number of infringements

Type of infringements

1. Goods not authorized

2. Absence of consignor's
declaration

3. Leaks

4. No type-approval certificate

5. No orange panels

6. No safety instructions

7. Inappropriate vehicle or
packaging

8. No vocational training certificate

9. No fire extinguishers

10. No danger labels

12. Not covered by agreement

13. Overfilling of tank

14. Other

Total

Type of penalties

Warning

Fine

Prosecution

Prison sentence

Not known

Total

Country of
check

Other EU

Non-
EU

Not
known

Total

282577

34833

66032

32048

4594

385251

11086

6407

30691

83017

40

81

26

952

4459

416

626

781

603

263

15

49

6

491

1509

127

119

243

133

93

14

0

19217

34833

6292

21011

1732

-

79

0

1

6521

11086

2048

5916

351

-

10

160

445

243

1045

2907

1907

226

583

276

2804

9652

2507

%

0,3%

0,7%

0,3%

3,4%

11,6%

3,0%

2875

3723

4,5%

1212

4371

2591

6350

100

0

2432

5149

3020

2,9%

6,2%

3,6%

16263

19,6%

114

1

0,1%

0,0%

6405

36013

43,4%

30691

83017

100,0%

3701

5381

13150

25,5%

35897

69,7%

17

30

-

2314

30

89

4,5%

0,1%

0,2%

11

8

1

316

777

57

103

196

42

73

953

0

0

3870

6407

1109

3589

214

-

-

29114

8325

4912

9129

51480

100,0%

14

ANNEX III

LEVEL OF CHECKS AND PROPORTION OF INFRINGEMENTS

Number of
vehicles
checked: one
vehicle in

Rounded value
of vehicles
checked: one
vehicle in

Number of
vehicles
checked per
10 000
journeys

Proportion of
vehicles found
with
infringements

Belgium

Denmark

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

the Netherlands

Austria

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

the United Kingdom

Average

Weighted average

1879

4563

171

-

269

882

-

8386

565

380

194

-

577

188

1476

1628

220

5

3

20

-

20

10

-

3

10

20

20

-

10

20

5

55%

28%

18%

-

12%

10%

-

24%

22%

37%

83%

-

50%

30%

22%

33%

22%

2000

4000

500

-

500

1000

-

4000

1000

500

500

-

1000

500

2000

15

ANNEX IV

NUMBER OF CHECKS AND PROPORTION OF FOREIGN VEHICLES CHECKED

Member State

Place of registration of vehicles

Country
of check

Other EU Non-EU Not known

Total number

Proportion of
foreign
vehicles

50%

9%

31%

-

13%

20%

-

2%

62%

39%

47%

-

10%

11%

1%

27%

Belgium

Denmark

1402

478

709

47

10

1

Germany

175986

53142

27163

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

-

-

45317

5959

-

661

15633

-

1763

-

28

-

6

0

Luxembourg

188

301

the
Netherlands

3508

1988

291

Austria

6282

2258

3220

Portugal

-

Finland

2994

-

135

Sweden

14205

1273

the United
Kingdom

14821

192

-

196

486

14

666

-

3928

-

-

2787

526

256291

-

51937

19561

-

1797

489

5787

11760

-

3325

15964

15027

Total number

282577

66032

32048

4594

385251

16

ANNEX V

CHECKS VERSUS INFRINGEMENTS

Checks
Infringements

s
t
n
e
m
e
g
n
i
r
f
n

i

f
o
n
o
i
t
r
o
p
o
r
P

0,45

0,4

0,35

0,3

0,25

0,2

0,15

0,1

0,05

0

B

DK

D

E

F

I

L

NL

A

FIN

S

UK

Frequency of checks

17

ANNEX VI

INFRINGEMENTS BY TYPE

45,0%

40,0%

35,0%

30,0%

25,0%

20,0%

15,0%

10,0%

5,0%

0,0%

d
e
z
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

t
o
n
s
d
o
o
G

.
1

s
k
a
e
L

.
3

l

s
e
n
a
p

e
g
n
a
r
o

o
N

.
5

s
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

i

y
t
e
f
a
s

o
N

.
6

e
t
a
c
i
f
i
t
r
e
c

l

a
v
o
r
p
p
a
-
e
p
y
t

o
N

.
4

l

n
o
i
t
a
r
a
c
e
d
s
'
r
o
n
g
s
n
o
c

i

f
o

e
c
n
e
s
b
A

.
2

i

g
n
g
a
k
c
a
p
r
o

i

l

e
c
h
e
v

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
n
I

.
7

e
t
a
c
i
f
i
t
r
e
c

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

o
N

.
8

i

s
r
e
h
s
u
g
n
i
t
x
e

e
r
i
f

o
N

.
9

18

Proportion of infringements

r
e
h
t
O

.
4
1

k
n
a
t

f
o

g
n

i
l
l
i
f
r
e
v
O

.
3
1

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

o
N

.
1
1

t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
a
y
b

d
e
r
e
v
o
c

t
o
N

.
2
1

l

s
e
b
a

l

r
e
g
n
a
d

o
N

.
0
1

70,0%

60,0%

50,0%

40,0%

30,0%

20,0%

10,0%

0,0%

ANNEX VII

SANCTIONS BY TYPE

Proportion

warning

fine

prosecution

prison

19