Commission recommendation of 17 January 2001 on the maximum permitted blood alcohol content (BAC) for drivers of motorised vehicles (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-01-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Union, alcoholism, approximation of laws, narcotic, road safety, transport safety

C 48/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.2.2001

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

of 17 January 2001

on the maximum permitted blood alcohol content (BAC) for drivers of motorised vehicles

(2001/C 48/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

1.1.1. Article 71(1)(c) of the Treaty on European Union
requires that common transport policy in the EU
should include measures
to improve transport
safety. In April 1997, the Commission adopted a
programme of measures to improve road safety (1).
This programme included a specific reference
(pages 20 and 41) to the effectiveness of reducing
inappropriate drinking and driving as an accident
and casualty reduction measure. A follow up
Communication was
adopted on 17 March
2000 (2) which reassessed the priorities in the EU
inappropriate
for improving road safety.
drinking and driving is once again identified as a
key road safety priority.

In this,

1.1.2.

Inappropriate drinking and driving is defined
normally as driver impairment in terms of:

(cid:151) a driver with a blood alcohol content (BAC)
limit which is

a prescribed legal

above
punishable as a criminal offence,

1.1.3. Since

a

inappropriate

the mid-1960’s,

substantial body of
research has analysed the driver impairment effect
of alcohol consumption, and has conclusively
demonstrated the direct correlation between BAC
and the risk of accident involvement. Policies to
and
reduce
driving,
sometimes
reduced BAC
limits, have consistently been regarded in all
motorised countries
a priority to reduce
as
accidents and their consequent casualities (3) (4) (5).
These policies are normally based upon a mixture
of BAC limits, police enforcement, publicity, reha-
bilitation, and legal or administrative sanctions,
with the mix varying according to Member State.

drinking
around

constructed

1.1.4.

of

limit

throughout

In 1988,
forward a
the Commission brought
for a Directive on harmonised BAC
proposal
levels, the aim of which was to set a maximum
BAC
the
0,5 mg/ml
Community (6) (7). This proposal was not adopted
because of the objections of some Member States
on the grounds of subsidiarity. In July 1999, the
Transport Committee of the European Parliament
decided not
reading of
COM(88) 707 final, and requested that a new
proposal be drawn up to better reflect advances
in the assessment of
the measures required to
reduce inappropriate drinking and driving.

to reconfirm its

first

(cid:151) or as a driver with a (BAC) above a prescribed
limit which is punishable by some form of
administrative sanction such as a fine,

(cid:151) or as a driver with a (BAC) below a prescribed
limit but where the driver is judged to be
impaired.

(1) Promoting road safety in the EU: the programme for 1997 to 2001

(COM(97) 131 final).

(2) Priorities in EU road safety: progress report and ranking of actions

(COM(2000) 125).

1.1.5. The Commission considers that both national and
European action to reduce inappropriate drinking
and driving within the EU is best served by a more
harmonised regime of legal maximum BAC limits.
This will provide a clearer and more consistent

(3) A strategic road safety plan for the European Union: ETSC February

1997.

(4) Report of the Working Group on Alcohol, Drugs and Medicines for

the High Level Group. October 1999.

(5) NHTSA reporter Vol. 10, No 2: Spring 1999, No 3: Summer 1999.
(6) COM(88) 707 final.
(7) COM(89) 640 final.

14.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/3

message to drivers in the EU that drinking and
driving is a dangerous activity wherever they are
driving in the EU. However it accepts that there are
long standing national political objections on the
grounds of subsidiarity to such a measure, and
therefore does not intend to renew the original
proposal
in line with the
commitment made in the Communication on
road safety priorities. The Commission therefore
proposes to bring forward a Commission Recom-
mendation which sets out the Commission’s view
on a number of actions relating to:

a Directive

for

(cid:151) BAC limits

(cid:151) random breath testing

national BAC limits. Furthermore, such drivers are
proportionately much more likely to be involved in
road accidents, accounting for up to 20 % of fatal
and serious injuries, and up to 25 % of driver
fatalities. They are still a significant road safety
problem despite large reductions in drinking and
driving road accidents during the past twenty years.

1.2.2. The Commission estimates that at

least 10 000
road users still die annually in road accidents
involving inappropriate drinking and driving, and
that this is a reasonable benchmark to focus on the
loss to society in the EU. The social value of this
lost life using the EUR 1 million rule formulated in
the EU Road Safety Programme
to
EUR 10 billion per annum.

amounts

(cid:151) harmonisation of measurement standards

for breath testing equipment

2. JUSTIFICATION FOR A MAXIMUM BAC LIMIT OF

0,5 MG/ML

(cid:151) information
practices

exchange

concerning

best

2.1. The benefit of more harmonised BAC limits within

the EU

(cid:151) support for research and development

(cid:151) support

for

Europe-wide

publicity

campaigns

(cid:151) coordinating the use of alcohol-related road

accident data records

the time being,

the Commission does not
For
intend to withdraw the original proposal
for a
Directive in case Member States wish to reactivate
it as a consequence of the Communication.

1.2. The Magnitude of the drinking and driving problem

1.2.1. There have been many assessments of

the road
safety problem of
inappropriate drinking and
driving and what should be done to reduce it (1).
In some Member States it has been estimated that
between 1 % and 5 % of drivers in traffice have
respective maximum
their
BAC levels

above

(1) Reducing traffic injuries resulting from alcohol impairment: ETSC:
January 1995. Report of the Working Group on Alcohol, Drugs and
Medicines for the High Level Group. October 1999.

above

consistent message
and freight vehicles

2.1.1. The main benefit of more uniform legal maximum
BAC limits within the EU is to provide a clearer
to drivers of
and more
passenger
a
that,
certain limit, drinking and driving is a dangerous
activity. From a driver perspective more uniform
limits will also provide a standard reference for
national enforcement, and Europe-wide publicity
campaigns. Where drivers are driving within the
they should be more aware of a more
EU,
uniform limit above which,
they are caught,
they will know they have commited a drink
driving offence.

if

2.2. The determination of an appropriate maximum BAC

limit for the EU

2.2.1. The European Commission is of the view that the
complete detachment of drinking from driving
would significantly reduce road accidents, and
particularly fatalities in road accidents. Available
statistics indicate that at least 10 000 lives could
be saved annually if drink driving was eliminated.
However, the extent to which this ideal state could
be achieved depends critically upon the level of
enforcement
testing and tech-
nological driver restriction) and driver compliance
with the law. Logically the legal BAC limit (and
breath equivalent) required to support
this goal
should be zero, which implies in practice a BAC
measurement
and
between
0,2 mg/ml, depending on the tolerance level that
is allowed for.

(both roadside

0,1 mg/ml

of

C 48/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.2.2001

2.2.2. From a road safety perspective, the complete elim-
ination of inappropriate drinking and driving is the
it has to be accepted that
optimum goal. But
without
credible
acceptance
enforcement, setting a BAC limit that is too low
will not be effective. The Commission view is
that when determining a legal maximum BAC
limit, or
the
following issues need to be taken into account:

in the EU,

regime of

public

limits,

and

(cid:151) the level above which the risk of accident
accident

involvement,
involvement, starts to increase significantly,

especially

fatal

and

(cid:151) the higher risk of accident involvement of some
road user groups, such as inexperienced drivers
and riders of motorised two wheel vehicles,

(cid:151) the need to contribute to driver training and
younger

especially

for

education schemes,
drivers, and,

(cid:151) the potentially greater levels of death,
congestion and

injury,
delay
damage, disruption,
following an accident which larger vehicles
can cause.

2.2.3. The Commission view is

that,

in general,
that
consideration should be made to the fact
towards BAC limits
seem to
public attitudes
for lower limits in the EU (1).
indicate support
research
On
basis
the
the maximum BAC
evidence and analysis,
limit of 0,5 mg/ml,
first proposed on 5
December 1988, should be the recommended
maximum legal limit within the EU.

accumulative

of

3. BAC LIMITS IN MEMBER STATES

3.1. Legal basis

in their national

3.1.1. Most Member States have already invoked a BAC
legislation
limit of 0,5 mg/ml
either as a legal
limit, above which a driver is
deemed to have committed a criminal offence, or
as a BAC limit above which an administrative fine
or additional sanction is incurred. The Commission
recommends that all Member States should adopt

(1) Sartre 95 and 98 (Social attitudes to road traffic risk in Europe).

this maximum limit, and move towards even lower
limits in the interest of
increasing road safety.
However, the Commission believes the choice
of BAC limit, together with its consequential
is a matter for
enforcement and penalties,
national authorities.

3.2. Reductions in BAC limits by Member States

3.2.1. The following Member States have already lowered
their BAC limit since they introduced their first
legal limit:

Member State

Date of change

Current BAC limit
(mg/ml)

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

France

Greece

Germany

Ireland

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

6.1.1998

1.12.1994

1.3.1998

25.8.1995

23.3.1999

27.4.1998

1994

23.11.1983

7.5.1999

1.7.1990

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,5

0,8

0,5

0,5

0,2

3.2.2. However, the following Member States have not
reduced their BAC limits since they were first
introduced into their national legislation:

Finland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

United Kingdom

0,5

0,8

0,8

0,5

0,8

3.2.3. In addition, Spain has adopted a lower BAC limit of
0,3 mg/ml for inexperienced drivers, for drivers of
heavy goods vehicles and buses, and drivers of
vehicles carrying dangerous goods. Austria has
adopted a lower limit of 0,1 mg/ml for the same
broad categories, and also motorcyclists under 18
years of age. The Netherlands are considering
whether
of
adopt
0,2 mg/ml for inexperienced drivers.

lower BAC limit

to

a

14.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/5

4. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MEASURES IN REDUCING INAP-

PROPRIATE DRINKING AND DRIVING

after drinking excessively, as long as the reduction
is also accompanied by effective targeted and
random enforcement.

4.1. Available evidence

4.1.1. Research and statistical analyses indicate that there
are certain categories of drivers who constitute the
core of the drinking and driving problem. They are
typically:

4.2. The need to support legal maximum BAC limits with

effective enforcement

(cid:151) relatively
drivers,

young

and

inexperienced male

(cid:151) drivers who habitually drive with very high

BAC levels, and,

(cid:151) occasional drinkers with low BAC levels
(sometimes even below the maximum allowed
limit) who are relatively less tolerant to alcohol.

4.1.2.

risk

high

even

among

It is difficult to assess the effect of a reduction in
any BAC limit because the specific effect is often,
but not always, obscured by simultaneous changes
in enforcement, penalties and publicity. However,
there is ample evidence from Australia, Japan, the
United States of America and some EU Member
States that, generally, reductions in a BAC limit
supported by effective enforcement, penalties and
publicity, can significantly reduce drinking and
offenders.
driving,
However, the role of rehabilitation is particularly
significant for tackling high risk offenders. There
is also some evidence to show that reductions in
BAC levels
supporting
enforcement and publicity, can also significantly
reduce drinking and driving, but
this probably
implies an unrealistic degree of compliance with
the law. A summary of some of the evidence is
the available
set out
a BAC reduction to
evidence
0,5 mg/ml
at
still
0,8 mg/ml
casualties
among young male drinkers, but also among the
hard core of problem drivers who habitually drive

indicates
for
could not only

in Annex 1. On balance,
that

those Member States

alone, without

reduce

any

campaigns which

4.2.1. Only four Member States (United Kingdom, Ireland,
Italy and Luxembourg) still retain a maximum legal
BAC limit of 0,8 mg/ml. In the case of the United
Kingdom this legal limit has remained unchanged
since it was first set in 1967. The very significant
reductions in inappropriate drinking and driving in
the United Kingdom in the last two decades, where
fatal accidents have been reduced by 70 %, have
been achieved against a background of unchanged
BAC legislation but effective enforcement and
publicity
have modified
drinking and driving behaviour. The Commission
believes that even in Member States such as the
United Kingdom, which have been very successful
in reducing fatal drink-drive accidents,
further
reductions are possible by moving towards a
limit of 0,5 mg/ml and
lower maximum legal
extending other measures. Furthermore, significant
reductions are also possible in those Member States
who have already adopted aa legal maximum limit
of 0,5 mg/ml, of lower, by expanding enforcement
activity and adopting more rigorous penalties for
inappropriate drinking and
drivers convicted of
the Commission endorses
driving.
the view that
random
breath testing is a very cost effective deterrent to
combat drinking and driving.

In particular,

and regular

extensive

5. A LOWER MAXIMUM LEGAL BAC LIMIT OF 0,2 MG/ML

FOR SPECIFIC GROUPS OF ROAD USER

5.1. Inexperienced drivers

5.1.1.

the Commission believes

It is clear that inexperienced (mainly young) drivers
involved in drink-drive
are disproportionately
accidents. Since the risk of
in a
involvement
drink-drive accident by inexperienced drivers is
relatively high compared to more experienced
that a lower
drivers,
BAC limit of 0,2 mg/ml
is appropriate while
drivers are learning to drive, or have only been
in possession of a full driving licence for less
than two years, and recommends that Member
States adopt this lower limit for this vulnerable
group of drivers. Some States may wish to
impose a longer period of possession of the full
driving licence before permitting BAC limits
greater than 0,2 mg/ml.

C 48/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.2.2001

5.2. Riders of two-wheel motor vehicles

risk

from alcohol

5.2.1. Riders of two-wheel motor vehicles have a risk of
being killed or seriously injured in a road accident
which statistically is many times higher than for a
car driver. Riders, especially young inexperienced
riders, who drink and drive could be particularly
at
impairment. Although
available statistics at a European level are far
fatality statistics
from conclusive, some national
indicate that riders of two-wheel motor vehicles
do not mix drinking and driving to the same
extent as car drivers, and that they already adopt
a more responsible attitude to their greater risk of
accident involvement. However, because in some
States very young riders (as young as 14) are
allowed to drive low-powered two-wheel motor
vehicles, and the age profile of riders is relatively
low in the EU, a lower limit would seem appro-
instilled
priate to reinforce good riding habits
during training. The Commission believes that the
relatively high risk of road accident involvements
by this road user group should be reflected by a
for
lower maximum BAC limit of 0,2 mg/ml
riders,
that Member States
adopt this lower limit.

and recommends

5.3. Drivers of goods vehicles (up to 3,5 tonnes GVW)

and buses (more than eight passenger seats)

is greater

5.3.1. Available statistics indicate that the risk of a large
bus being involved in a fatal or serious injury road
accident
than for a car, per vehicle
kilometre, reflecting the much greater passenger
occupancy of buses and their operational charac-
teristics. For a large goods vehicle the risk is about
the same as for a car, per vehicle kilometre. These
relative risks also apply for the total casualty risks
involving these vehicles. However,
in accidents
because buses carry many more passengers than
cars their associated occupant casualty risk per
occupant kilometre is very much lower. Never-
theless EU statistics
fatal accidents
involving large goods vehicles and buses account
for about 18 % of all fatal accidents in the EU.

show that

5.3.2. Although road accident
enough

statistics are not yet
comprehensive
detailed
a
to make
evaluation of relative risk across the EU, there are
factors other than risk which also need to be
considered in relation to determining appropriate

that,

large vehicles. Once
BAC limits for drivers of
large vehicles have
involved in a road accident,
the potential
to cause severe property damage,
disruption, delay, and traffic congestion especially
in tunnels, on bridges, on main arterial roads, or in
densely populated urban areas. The Commission
in
believes
Community freight
traffic
during the past decade, a uniform maximum BAC
limit of 0,2 mg/ml is appropriate for all drivers of
large goods vehicles and buses and recommends
that Member States should adopt such a lower
limit.
the Commission notes that some
operators already adopt a no alcohol policy for
their professional drivers.

and bus passenger

considering

growth

Indeed,

the

5.4. Drivers of vehicles carrying dangerous goods

5.4.1. There is no evidence to suggest

that vehicles
carrying dangerous goods are any more likely to
be involved in a road accident than vehicles not
carrying dangerous goods, or
cars. However,
accidents
involving vehicles carrying dangerous
goods have the potential to be very serious. The
Commission believes that a lower maximum limit
of 0,2 mg/ml is appropriate for drivers of vehicles
carrying dangerous goods and recommends that
such a limit shoud be adopted. Most vehicles
carrying dangerous goods will be greater than 3,5
tonnes GVW.

6. THE ESTIMATION OF A FATALITY REDUCTION EFFECT
INAPPROPRIATE

REDUCE

FROM MEASURES
TO
DRINKING AND DRIVING

6.1. The available evidence

6.1.1. Estimation of

the

the magnitude of
reductions

fatality
in BAC limits,
reduction effect of
supported by national enforcement and publicity,
is an extremely complex task. Available estimates
from Europe, the United States of America, Japan
and Australia of the degree of accident and casualty
reduction from lowering BAC limits, combined
to reduce inappropriate
with parallel measures
drinking and driving, vary widely, but
they
indicate that such action is very effective. The
effects can be cumulative, but will be heavily

14.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/7

in driver attitudes and
influenced by changes
behaviour. The available evidence (summarised in
Annex 1) suggests that a concerted effort to reduce
inappropriate drinking and driving in the EU,
based around a regime of uniform EU-wide BAC
supported by national enforcement and
limits
publicity, could realistically reduce fatalities
in
road accidents
involving inappropriate drinking
and driving by about 10 %. This is not a scien-
a
tifically
reasonable minimum target based upon inter-
national evidence.

calculation

represents

based

but

6.1.2.

should be recognised that

It
the relationship
between the maximum legal BAC limit and the
incidence of inappropriate drinking and driving is
not clear because many other factors influence
drinking and driving behaviour. The proportion
of drivers killed who were found to be over their
relevant BAC limit varies widely between Member
States, although the Commission estimates it to be
approximately 25 % for the EU as a whole. The
proportion of killed drivers found to be over the
is reported to be higher in
national BAC limit
North America where the legal BAC limit varies
between 1,0 and 0,8 mg/ml, and much lower in
Japan where
at
0,5 mg/ml since 1970. On the other hand the
United Kingdom has significantly reduced inappro-
priate drinking and driving over the last twenty
years by a mixture of enforcement and penalties
linked to regular publicity campaigns, all coor-
dinated around a limit of 0,8 mg/ml which has
not been reduced since it was first set in 1967.

been fixed

limit has

the

6.1.3. Different approaches have been used to reduce
inappropriate drinking and driving in response to
national circumstances with different degrees of
success. The Commission takes the view that
the appropriate mix of
the many measures
available to reduce inappropriate drinking and
driving should be decided by Member States,
but that in the context of a common transport
policy these are best arranged around a more
uniform regime of BAC limits.

6.2. The Distribution of fatality reduction effects

6.2.1. A 10 % reduction in all EU fatalities in accidents
involving inappropriate drinking and driving would
save some 1 000 lives annually. This represents

be

and

sober

drivers

road users. However,

2,5 % of the total fatality toll in road accidents in
the EU. Available evidence indicates that about two
thirds of the lives saved annually would be drivers
over the relevant BAC limit and the remaining
vehicle
third would
occupants and other
the
proportions of fatalities saved will vary between
Member States. Greater
reductions are possible
but depend mostly upon the level of enforcement,
especially in those Member States where current
are
levels of
In
particular,
extensive breath-testing
strategies, in which drivers will perceive that they
have a significant chance of being tested, are a
cost-effective deterrent despite the concomitant
requirement to increase funding for this activity.

enforcement
the use of

relatively

low.

around

drink-drive policies

6.2.2. The recommended general limit of 0,5 mg/ml, with
for certain categories of driver, will
0,2 mg/ml
affect
some Member States more than others
because 10 Member States already arrange their
national
a BAC
maximum limit of 0,5 mg/ml. Sweden adopted a
lower BAC maximum limit of 0,2 mg/ml in 1990
and two Member States already invoke lower limits
for
categories of driver. Consequently
accident and casualty reduction effects arising
from reduced maximum BAC limits will vary
between Member States, but they will be mostly
of national
effectiveness
determined
enforcement and driver compliance.

special

the

by

7. ECONOMIC IMPACT

7.1. The (cid:145)economic problem(cid:146) in remote rural areas

7.1.1. For

assumptions
and

reduction to 0,5 mg/ml

those Member States who still have

a
(particularly
maximum BAC limit of 0,8 mg/ml
is argued
it
the United Kingdom and Ireland),
could, under
that
a
drinking
certain
to a
behaviour
sales and economic loss.
reduction in alcohol
This could arise for
in remote
retailers (pubs)
rural areas to which the only means of transport
is by private car, and where drivers reduce either
their consumption of alcohol, or the frequency of
pub visits, or both.

driving practices,

concerning

lead

C 48/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.2.2001

backed

national

the Community,

7.1.2. The Commission view is that the social value of
accident reduction from lower drink-drive limits
by
throughout
effective
and
publicity, is more than likely to outweigh possible
economic loss in some regions. There is no reason
why driving habits, as well as drinking habits,
cannot change to adapt to the need to separate
driving from drinking above BAC levels proven
to be detrimental to driving ability.

enforcement,

training,

up

7.1.3.

It should be noted that the Commission does not
recommend a total ban on alcohol for drivers. In
addition, the use of public transport, car-sharing,
nominating a non-drinking driver, moderating
drinking behaviour or switching from alcoholic to
non-alcoholic drinks, are all available options to
Inevitably there is a
maintain social drinking.
should be
conflict of
remembered
an
economic cost of EUR 1 million and that failure
to reduce inappropriate drinking and driving has a
the
real economic impact
recommendation is to improve road safety and
not to support the alcohol market in some regions.

interest here, but
every
that

it
road death has

too. The purpose of

7.2. The need for additional resources to enforce lower

BAC limits

7.2.1. Any introduction of

of

the

is critical

lower maximum BAC limits
in drinking and
will, depending on changes
driving behaviour,
the burden upon
increase
police enforcement officers for a given level of
enforcement resources. The national enforcement
to force down the number of
effort
to inappropriate drinking and
accidents due
driving. The recent
from the European
report
Working Group on Alcohol, Drugs and Medicines
enforcement.
importance
highlighted
Currently the level of enforcement throughout the
Community varies significantly. The adoption of
lower drink-drive BAC limits will inevitably mean
that more resources will be required for effective
enforcement and deterrence, especially in Member
States where enforcement levels are relatively low.
Without a meaningful increase in police resources
lower drink drive limits
for enforcement activity,
limited
could be
police resources could be taken up with processing
more drivers detected with relatively low BAC
levels and reduce the detection rate of more
serious offenders more likely to cause serious
accidents.

counter productive because

but

deterrent

and need

resourcing. However,

7.2.2. Sustained enforcement is essential to generate an
effective
enforcement
effect,
programmes such as random breath testing are
expensive
it
should be noted that random breath testing is
very cost-effective and is clearly worth investing
in. Even so, it is not unreasonable to expect that
the cost of
increased enforcement necessary to
bring about a reduction of 1 000 fatalities a year
in the EU, within a regime of more harmonised
BAC limits, will be less than the conservative
EUR 1 billion a year valuation of
the expected
fatalities saved. In addition, it should be recognised
that
increased liaison between national police
forces offers the scope for improving the effec-
tiveness
existing
of
enforcement resources.

enforcement

within

8. THE REQUIREMENT FOR ROAD ACCIDENT STATISTICS

8.1. At the national level

a

and

road

accident,

following

8.1.1. The report of the European Working Group on
Alcohol, Drugs and Medicines highlights the short-
comings of current statistics concerning alcohol-
alcohol-testing of
related accidents. Systematic
the
drivers
recording of the results for statistical analysis,
is
essential to be able to monitor the effectiveness
of measures to reduce inappropriate drinking and
In some Member States, even though
driving.
police enforcement
the results of
fully recorded in national
alcohol
road accident databases. Complete aclohol
test
results would provide the
(breath and blood)
means to compare the incidence of inappropriate
drinking and driving between different groups of
drivers.

is expanding,

tests are not

8.2. At EU level

8.2.1.

If all such test results were also provided to the
European Community Road Accident Database
(CARE) (1) the sample size would be significantly
increased for analysis of BAC distributions (and
breath equivalents) of different road user groups
at a European level. This would provide a unique
European data source for informing and moni-
toring the effects of drinking and driving policies.

(1) Council Decision 93/704/EC.

14.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/9

on

action

programme (1)

There is substantial analytical added value to be
derived from the pooling of breath and blood
In addition, within the
alcohol test level results.
injury
community
the
prevention in the field of public health,
epidemiological monitoring of injuries by means
of a community system for collection of data and
information on injuries is being promoted (Euphin:
European Union
Information
injury indicators based upon
Network). Core
mutually
providing
nationally
information including
indicators from other relevant policy areas will be
provided (e.g. safety at work, transport and civil
protection).

accepted
representative

Public Health

standards

and

9. STANDARDS FOR ALCOHOL TESTING EQUIPMENT

9.1. The need for mandatory EU standards

reported broad support

9.1.1. The European Working Group on Alcohol, Drugs
and Medicines
from
Member States for the setting of mandatory EU
breath
measurement
testing equipment
the results of which can be
used as evidence in a court of law.

evidential

standards

for

9.1.2. The ability to supplement blood test results with
those taken from breath testing machines is an
important means of expanding police enforcement.
Member States with a maximum BAC limit of
0,5 mg/ml use a breath equivalent measurement
(BRAC) of either 0,22 or 0,25 microgrammes of
alcohol per millilitre of breath. But
the various
breath-testing devices currently on the market
to varying degrees of accuracy. This
operate
means
that Member States have to allow for
measurement error in both their BAC and BRAC
equivalent levels for tested drivers. The allowance
for measurement error varies between Member
States.

9.1.3.

In the context of harmonised maximum BAC limits
recommended BAC limits of
in the EU the
include any
0,5 mg/ml and 0,2 mg/ml do not
Setting
allowance
harmonised measurement
testing
equipement
to reinforce
harmonised BAC and BRAC limits based upon
testing
the

for measurement

capability of

simpler way

standards

approved

technical

error.

for

is

a

(1) Decision 372/99/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of
8 February 1999 adopting a programme of Community action on
injury prevention in the framework for action in the field of public
health (1999 to 2003).

for
equipment. The allowable statistical
measurement
closely
harmonised by the development of standards for
testing equipment.

error will

be more

limits

the

rather

since
test

9.1.4. Some Member States also include a generous
tolerance in the measurement of the BAC level to
encourage apprehended drivers to opt for a breath
test
than a more expensive and time
consuming blood test. In Sweden, even though a
relatively low BAC level of 0,2 mg/ml has been
1990,
operational
level
results can allow drivers to
allowable for
drink up to 0,34 mg/ml
in some circumstances.
The purpose of this increased tolerance level is to
increase the level of enforcement, since many more
evidential breath tests than blood tests can be
carried out for a given level of police resources.
inevitably need to be
Such tolerance
to
determined by Member States who have
balance the deterrent effect of the legal BAC limit
against the deterrent effect of a slightly higher but
allowable BAC level at higher levels of enforcement.

tolerance

levels

9.1.5. A draft proposal

for a Measuring Instruments
Directive is currently being developed by the
Commission which,
if adopted, will harmonise
the requirement for the measurement accuracy of
evidential breath-testing equipment
in the EU.
Guidelines for international standards are set by
Internationale MØtrologique
the Organisation
LØgale (OIML) and member countries base their
legislation on these standards.

10. DRIVER IMPAIRMENT THROUGH THE COMBINED EFFECT

OF ALCOHOL AND DRUGS

10.1. The problem of illegal drugs

10.1.1. Recent research into the effects of marijuana on
driving performance (2) concluded that the driver
impairment effects of using cannabis alone,
which produced doses of tetrahydrocannabinol
(THC) of 100 to 200 ug/kg, were not very
different from the impairment effects attributable
to other drugs, or BAC levels above 0,8 mg/ml.
However, it was found that the same doses of
THC when combined with alcohol sufficient to
produce a BAC of 0,4 mg/ml, produced severe
driver impairment effects.

(2) Marijuana, alcohol and actual driving performance NHTSA July

1999.

C 48/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.2.2001

10.2. The problem of legal drugs

10.2.1. The use of legal drugs (medicines), by themselves
or in combination with alcohol, and their driver
impairment effect, is also a very important issue
increased accident risk. But
in the context of
legal drugs, and
there are a huge number of
are by no
their driver
means as comprehensively researched as
the
effects of alcohol have been. For example, Benzo-
diazepines are a widely used group of medicine
which, in combination with alcohol, may be at
least as driver-impairing as
low-dose combi-
nations of alcohol and cannabis.

impairment

effects

10.2.2. The whole issue of the effects of legal drugs on
drivers is,
in itself, a very complex topic, of
which the specific aspect of alcohol combined
with legal drugs
is just one part. However,
Member States may wish to consider how to
deal with this issue in their national legislation.
At a European level,
there will be obvious
benefits to be derived from an exchange of
information concerning research results and
best practice.

10.1.2. This evidence of high risk for drivers and riders,
and the increasing use of cannabis and detection
of THC (as well as other illegal drugs) in drivers
involved in accidents (1), is of growing concern
for road safety in the EU. However, there are
many illegal drugs, and it is unclear how they
all interact with alcohol to impair driving ability.
Furthermore, the EU action plan on drugs 2000
to 2004, endorsed by the European Council of
Feira, asks the Commission and Member States
to undertake research into the effects of driving
under the influence of
illicit drugs and phar-
maceuticals. The possession and use of all
illegal drugs
an offence
is, by definition,
punishable within the context of national legis-
lation. Since possessing or using an illegal drug
is a punishable offence anyway, the question of
whether driving whilst under the influence of
should be treated as a more
illegal drugs
serious offence than drink driving needs to be
considered by Member States, and consequently
this aspect is not addressed in this recommen-
dation.

(1) Literature review on the relation between drug use,

impaired
driving and traffic accidents: Section 2.4.2: European Monitoring
Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction: February 1999.