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: 2010-07-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, report, road transport, safety standard, transport of dangerous goods, transport safety

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 7.7.2010 
COM(2010)364 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 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

7.1. 

7.2. 

7.3. 

7.4. 

7.5. 

7.6. 

7.7. 

8. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Background .................................................................................................................. 3 

Directive 95/50/EC ...................................................................................................... 4 

Reports from EU Member States and Norway ............................................................ 4 

Calculation of data ....................................................................................................... 5 

Evolution of checks and their outcomes ...................................................................... 5 

Comparison of data ...................................................................................................... 6 

Frequency of checks..................................................................................................... 6 

Breakdown of checks by place of origin...................................................................... 6 

Proportion of non-conforming transport units ............................................................. 7 

Breakdown of non-conforming transport units by place of origin............................... 7 

Frequency of immobilisation of transport units ........................................................... 7 

Breakdown by risk categories ...................................................................................... 7 

Types of penalties ........................................................................................................ 8 

Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 8 

Annex I – Evolution of the number of checks, non-conformity and category 1 infringements. 9 

Annex II - Frequency of checks per million tonne-kilometre .................................................. 11 

Annex III - Breakdown of checks by place of origin............................................................... 12 

Annex IV – Proportion of transport units not conforming to ADR ......................................... 13 

Annex V - Breakdown of transport units not conforming to ADR by place of origin............. 14 

Annex VI - Frequency of immobilisation of transport units not conforming to ADR............. 15 

Annex VII - Breakdown by risk categories.............................................................................. 16 

Annex VIII – Types of penalties per transport unit not conforming to ADR .......................... 17 

Annex IX – Annual road freight transport of dangerous goods in million tonne-kilometres .. 18 

. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
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. 

Directive  95/50/EC  provides  that  each  Member  State  has  to  send  the  Commission  for  each 
calendar year not later than twelve months after the end of that year a report on the application 
of the Directive2. The Directive also provides that the Commission has to send the European 
Parliament  and  the  Council  at  least  every  three  years  a  report  on  the  application  of  the 
Directive by the Member States3.  

The  report  from  the  Commission  is  based  on  the  annual  reports  received  from  the  Member 
States.  This  is  the  fourth  report  on  the  application  of  Council  Directive  95/50/EC  in  the 
Member States and it covers years 2006-2007. The first report4 covered years 1997-1998, the 
second report5 years 1999-2002 and the third report6 years 2003-2005.  

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  road7,  as  amended8, 
introduced harmonised rules for the transportation of dangerous goods between the Member 
States as well as nationally within the Member States. 

The technical annexes to Directive 94/55/EC are identical in terms of content to the technical 
annexes to the international ADR-agreement9. 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  harmonise  across  the 
Community the conditions under which dangerous goods are transported by road and thereby 
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 sets out the rules governing the transport units and transport operations. 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 

9 

OJ No L 249, 17.10.1995, p. 35, as last amended by Commission Directive 2004/112/EC of 13 
December 2004 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 95/50/EC (OJ No L 367, 14.12.2004, 
p. 23)  
Article 9(1) thereof 
Article 9(2) thereof 
COM(2000) 517 final, 06.09.2000 
COM(2005) 430 final, 15.09.2005 
COM(2007) 795 final, 13.12.2007 
OJ No L 319, 12.12.1994, p. 7 
Directive last amended by Commission Directive 2004/111/EC of 9 December 2004 adapting to 
technical progress Council Directive 94/55/EC (OJ No L 365, 10.12.2004, p. 25) 
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 2009-2011 version. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
It should be noted that Directive 94/55/EC was repealed as from 30 June 2009 and replaced 
by  Directive  2008/68/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  24  September 
2008 on the inland transport of dangerous goods10. However, Directive 2008/68/EC maintains 
the same approach to that of 94/55/EC as regards the inclusion of the technical provisions of 
ADR. 

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 that a sufficient level of checks is 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 a 
harmonised checklist used by Member States as well as a list of infringement codes. In 2004 
the Annexes to the Directive were amended11 and the infringement code system was changed 
to include three risk categories as from 2005.  

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

As  a  preventive  measure,  or  after  having  recorded  infringements  at  the  roadside  which 
jeopardise safety, checks may be also carried out at the premises of undertakings12. There is, 
however, no reporting requirement on these checks in Directive 95/50/EC. 

4. 

REPORTS FROM EU MEMBER STATES AND NORWAY 

When  making  their  reports,  the  Member  States  are  requested  to  use  the  risk  categories  in 
Annex II to Directive 95/50/EC and to present the report in accordance with Annex III of the 
Directive. Norway has always submitted an annual report and has requested to be included in 
the Commission's report to the European Parliament and the Council. 

Not all Member States submitted the information in the standard format. For example, some 
Member States used the codes from the previous checklist (Annex I to the Directive prior to 
the  amendment  of  2004),  some  Member  States  had  their  own  systems  for  categorising 
infringements. 

Reports were received from all Member States for both years 2006 and 2007; however many 
reports were incomplete. These shortcomings have led to gaps in the tables of this report. This 
is indicated by the sign ‘#N/A’ for ‘not available’. 

10 
11 

12 

OJ No L 260, 30.09.2008, p. 13–59 
Commission Directive 2004/112/EC of 13 December 2004 adapting to technical progress Council 
Directive 95/50/EC (OJ No L 367, 14.12.2004, p. 23)  
Sweden indicated that they perform a substantial number of checks and audits at terminals, companies 
and harbours. The Netherlands indicated that they additionally visit transport companies to do checks, 
audits  and  to  distribute  information.  Belgium  indicated  that  besides  inspections  at  the  premises  of 
companies,  the  safety  advisors  report  the  results  of  checks  done  in  the  company  to  the  competent 
authorities.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The summary of the reports from the Member States is provided in the annexes to this report. 
The  presentation  and  the  analysis  of  the  data  have  to  take  into  account  that  the  report’s 
template was amended in 2004. 

Annex I contains the evolution of the number of checks registered in each Member State from 
2003 to 2007, the proportion of transport units not conforming to the rules for 2006-2007 and 
the proportion of infringements of risk category 1 for 2006-2007. 

When  analysing  the  evolution  in  Chapter  6  and  the  statistics  of  7.6  Breakdown  by  risk 
categories, it should be noted that the indicator for Spain is low due to a misinterpretation of 
the number of transport units not conforming to ADR.  

Several  Member  States  have  sent  reports  where  the  sum  of  infringements  differs  from  the 
number  of  transport  units  not  in  compliance  with  the  ADR  provisions.  This  should  not  be 
possible since Member States are asked to report only the most severe infringement category 
for each transport unit.  

5. 

CALCULATION OF DATA 

Member  States  were  requested  to  provide,  if  possible,  their  estimation  of  the  amount  of 
annual transport of dangerous goods in tonnes or in tonnes-kilometres in their report. Only 5 
Member States have provided this information.  

To make objective comparison between the different Member States possible, the volume of 
dangerous  goods  transport  per  Member  States  was  extracted  from  Eurostat  data13.  This 
information was used to estimate of the frequency of checks per million tonne-kilometres.  

There  were  no  Eurostat  statistics  for  Hungary  in  2006  and  for  Malta  in  2006-2007.  For 
Hungary,  the  information  was  extrapolated  from  2007-2008  data.  For  Malta,  the  volume  of 
goods transported was provided by the Maltese competent authority.  

The statistics from Eurostat are presented in Annex IX. 

6. 

EVOLUTION OF CHECKS AND THEIR OUTCOMES 

The table in Annex I provides an overview of the evolution in time of the roadside checks in 
each Member State. The first line gives the number of checks. The second line provides the 
percentage of transport units checked where at least one infringement was found. On the third 
line there is the percentage of checks where the most severe infringement was of category 1, 
i.e. the most serious infringement.  

The data of Annex I begins in 2006 except for the number of checks where the information 
from the previous report is included. 

At  the  end  of  the  table  there  are  averages  for  the  European  Union  and  the  statistics  from 
Norway. 

13 

Eurostat table "DS-073082": Annual road freight transport of dangerous goods, by type of dangerous 
goods and broken down by activity 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
It should be noted that due to missing data from the Member States reports:  

- 

- 

- 

the total numbers of checks for 2006 and 2007 do not include Estonia; 

the  percentage  of  transport  units  checked  where  at  least  one  infringement  of  the 
provisions was found for 2006 does not include Germany, Estonia or Spain; for 2007 
Estonia and Spain are not included; 

the  percentage  of  category  1  infringements  for  2006  does  not  include  Bulgaria, 
Germany or Portugal.  

Information  on  the  percentage  of  category  1  infringements  can  be  misleading  for  some 
Member States. If more than one infringement per check has been reported, the percentage of 
category 1 infringements tends to be lower than the correct value. For 2006, this was the case 
for  France,  the  Netherlands,  Poland  and  Portugal;  for  2007  for  Bulgaria,  the  Netherlands, 
Poland and Portugal. 

Some Member States have fewer infringements than there were transport units found to be not 
conforming. This is the case for Belgium, Italy, Hungary, Malta and Sweden. This should not 
influence the percentage in a systematic manner. There are cases where the law enforcement 
authorities report only where infringements are found, but do not provide any information on 
the infringements or penalties which ensue. This issue is discussed in more detail in paragraph 
7.6. 

7. 

COMPARISON OF DATA  

The  following  paragraphs  provide  more  detailed  information  and  analysis  on  the  data 
provided by the Member States regarding their checks. Annexes II to VIII illustrate by means 
of bar graphs the situation in each Member State in 2006 and 2007. 

7.1. 

Frequency of checks  

Annex II shows an overview of the frequency of roadside checks in the Member States for the 
years  2006  and  2007.  The  frequency  is  expressed  as  the  ratio  of  the  number  of  checks  per 
million tonne-kilometres of dangerous goods transported in each Member State. 

In 2006, the average in the EU was 2.95 checks per million tonne-kilometres; in 2007, it was 
3.50.  This  implies  an  increase  of  18.6%.  Bulgaria  and  Hungary  have  an  exceptionally  high 
frequency of checks. Without the numbers of Bulgaria and Hungary, the EU average would 
be 2.33 in 2006 and 2.90 in 2007 and the annual increase would be 24.5%. 

7.2. 

Breakdown of checks by place of origin 

Member  States  are  requested  to  categorise  their  statistics  by  place  of  registration  of  the 
transport unit. Annex III of this report shows an overview of checks by place of origin of the 
transport unit. 

In the analysis of the results, the geographic position of each Member State should be taken 
into account; for example on islands there is usually less freight transit by road. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Data  for  2006  is  missing  from  the  following  Member  States:  Bulgaria,  Germany,  Estonia, 
Portugal and Slovakia; for 2007 from Estonia. 

7.3. 

Proportion of non-conforming transport units  

The share of transport units checked with at least one infringement is in Annex IV. 

The  percentage  of  non-conforming  transport  units  differs  considerably  between  Member 
States,  reaching  almost  80%  in  Portugal  while  being  less  than  5%  in  a  number  of  Member 
States. 

Data for 2006 is missing from the following Member States: Germany and Estonia; for 2007 
from  Estonia.  The  indicator  for  Spain  is  low  due  to  a  misinterpretation  of  the  number  of 
transport units not conforming to the rules. 

7.4. 

Breakdown of non-conforming transport units by place of origin 

The  graph  in  Annex  V  shows  the  distribution  of  transport  units  not  conforming  to  the 
provisions according to the place of origin of the transport unit. 

In the analysis of the results, the geographic position of each Member State should be taken 
into account. 

Data is missing for 2006 from the following countries: Germany and Estonia; for 2007 from 
Estonia. Slovakia provided the information but did not report any infringements for 2006. 

7.5. 

Frequency of immobilisation of transport units 

The graph in Annex VI illustrates the percentage of immobilised vehicles amongst those that 
were reported to have an infringement. 

The  frequency  of  immobilisation  differs  considerably  between  Member  States,  in  Bulgaria 
each  vehicle  with  an  infringement  was  immobilised  in  2006  while  several  Member  States 
reported that no vehicles were immobilised. 

The following Member States have not provided data for 2006: Germany, Italy, Portugal and 
Slovakia; for 2007: France, Italy and Portugal. 

The following Member States reported that there were no immobilisations for 2006: Estonia, 
Spain,  Cyprus,  Lithuania  and  Malta;  for  2007:  Cyprus,  Estonia,  Spain,  Latvia,  Malta  and 
Sweden. 

7.6. 

Breakdown by risk categories 

The graph in Annex VII illustrates the distribution of severity of the infringements. Only the 
highest risk category detected during the check should have been recorded. 

The total number of reported infringements should be equal to the number of transport units 
not  conforming  to  the  rules.  The  last  bar  in  the  graph  of  Annex  VII  is  the  sum  of  the 
infringements divided by the number of non-conforming units. This should be equal to 100% 
because only the most severe infringement should have been reported.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
If this is less than 100%, the report on infringements is not complete. If the sum is higher than 
100% several infringements per check have been reported. 

For  2006,  Bulgaria,  Germany  and  Portugal  did  not  provide  data  on  the  risk  categories. 
Slovakia found no infringements. 

For 2007, all Member States reported the required data. 

7.7. 

Types of penalties 

The graph in Annex VIII illustrates the distribution of penalties by each Member State. 

In the Member States, many different systems for fines and prosecution exist.  

Some  Member  States  indicated  that  more  than  one  penalty  was  reported  per  transport  unit. 
Hence, the sum of the percentages does not have to be equal to 100%. 

The  results  for  Spain  are  abnormal  because  of  a  misinterpretation  of  the  total  number  of 
transport units not conforming to ADR. Furthermore, certain Member States did not provide 
information on some types of penalty. It is not clear whether these penalties were not applied 
or not reported. 

Bulgaria, Germany, Italy and Portugal did not report penalties for 2006; for 2007 this is the 
case for Italy and Portugal. 

8. 

CONCLUSIONS 

All Member States have carried out road side checks according to Directive 95/50/EC. There 
has been an improvement in the volume and quality of the data which has been submitted to 
the  Commission.  Most  Member  States  are  using  the  correct  reporting  formats.  There 
continues  to  be  a  proportion  of  vehicles  found  during  these  checks  that  infringe  the 
legislation. The number of infringements per check appears to be stable. 

The number of checks in the EU increased in the region of 20% from 2006 to 2007, reaching 
some  285 000  annual  checks  in  2007.  Approximately  in  one  check  out  of  eight  an 
infringement was detected. Some 40% of these infringements were of the most serious type. 
Consequently,  almost  10  000  vehicles  were immobilised  following  their  check.  This  clearly 
demonstrates  that  practical  enforcement  of  rules  on  the  transport  of  dangerous  goods  at  the 
roadside is useful and helps to improve safety. 

The  Commission  will  consider  making  recommendations  to  further  harmonise  the 
interpretation and content of the information submitted by the Member States in their annual 
reports. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Annex I – Evolution of the number of checks, non-conformity and category 1 
infringements 

Further information on this table is provided in paragraph 6 of the report. 

COUNTRY/YEAR 

2003 

2004 

No of Checks 

5831 

5420 

2005 
5273

AT  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

BE  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

BG  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

CY  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

CZ  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

DE  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

DK  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

EE  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

EL  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

ES  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 
FI  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

FR  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

HU  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 
IE  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 

2919 

3417 

3835

  11334  17796

106653  103975  88915

311 

621 

708

74 

67

96 

211 

1106

36782  30453  32591

2394 

2536 

2401

22951  28122  23341

  74546  41609

356 

375 

815

2006 

2007 

7580
36,00%
24,55%
4133
39,90%
30,47%
27996
1,24%
23,15%
181
0,55%
0,00%
7691
5,60%
17,87%
86225
20,18%
47,00%
646
52,79%
40,76%
#N/A
#N/A
37,50%
456
16,89%
64,94%
42787
0,19%
66,69%
3025
33,92%
18,62%
6388
22,70%
22,07%
25995
4,30%
27,03%
731
44,60%
24,54%

7089
36,49%
24,62%
3977
38,52%
47,36%
19206
2,49%
#N/A
75
1,33%
100,00%
6694
5,83%
26,46%
83760
#N/A
#N/A
889
55,46%
34,08%
#N/A
#N/A
20,41%
614
13,36%
52,44%
40023
0,25%
67,90%
2530
36,56%
31,35%
5566
10,28%
26,60%
35555
1,63%
23,10%
630
32,54%
34,15%

9 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2797 

3135 

3963

189 

258

313 

100 

190

403 

417

36

2362 

2138 

1949

  13505

67 

192 

171

6333 

5109 

6375

4178 

3228 

2179

83

6124 

4863 

5762

No of Checks 
IT  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

LT  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

LU  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

LV  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

MT  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

NL  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

PL  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

PT  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

RO  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

SE  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 
SI  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

SK  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 
No of Checks 

UK  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 

No of Checks 

EU  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 

No of Checks 

NO  % Non-conform 
  % Risk Cat. 1 

4105
32,35%
72,82%
311
29,58%
23,91%
190
64,21%
15,75%
823
11,42%
25,53%
33
51,52%
23,53%
2750
26,65%
57,82%
15840
11,14%
27,19%
235
76,17%
#N/A
2914
9,37%
69,60%
4182
29,60%
22,08%
1621
17,89%
42,76%
247
0,00%
#N/A
4851
13,69%
19,13%

244710
12,11%
40,57%

632
34,65%
21,27%

4515
34,55%
69,90%
419
16,95%
15,49%
182
68,13%
49,19%
1609
10,19%
29,27%
75
76,00%
34,09%
7340
14,69%
57,16%
39057
2,96%
15,52%
137
73,72%
42,50%
4517
5,58%
64,77%
4219
20,27%
24,04%
1041
19,50%
39,41%
300
0,67%
0,00%
8221
30,76%
30,01%

285466
14,44%
41,06%

417
34,53%
15,97%

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Further information on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.1 of the report. 

Annex II - Frequency of checks per million tonne-kilometre 

43,85

2006

32,35

6,32

1,81

0,45

6,11

3,57

0,95 #N/A 0,20

3,15

1,09

0,59

0,47

0,38

0,67

0,43

1,18

1,15

0,68

0,11

1,14

5,34

4,85

2,40

2,84

0,48

0,64

2,95

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

EU

57,02

2007

21,36

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

60

50

40

30

20

10

7,19

0

1,89

0,81

5,59

6,72

1,04 #N/A 0,20

3,38

1,64

0,65

0,57

0,40

0,91

0,39

2,68

3,50

0,29

0,07

2,20

2,99

1,65

0,53

1,05

3,50

9,93

8,30

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

EU

EN 

11 

EN 

 
  
 
 
Further information on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.2 of the report. 

Annex III - Breakdown of checks by place of origin 

2006

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

EN 

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

National EU Non EU

2007

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

National EU Non EU

12 

EN 

 
  
 
Further information on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.3 of the report. 

Annex IV – Proportion of transport units not conforming to ADR 

55,46%

36,49%38,52%

2006

76,17%

64,21%

51,52%

36,56%

32,54%32,35%

29,58%

34,65%

26,65%

29,60%

2,49% 1,33%

5,83%

#N/A

#N/A

0,25%

13,36%

10,28%

1,63%

11,42%

11,14%

9,37%

17,89%

13,69%

0,00%

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

52,79%

2007

44,60%

76,00%

73,72%

68,13%

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

39,90%

0,4

36,00%

0,3

0,2

0,1

0

33,92%

34,55%

34,53%

20,18%

16,89%

22,70%

16,95%

10,19%

14,69%

30,76%

20,27%19,50%

1,24% 0,55%

5,60%

#N/A

0,19%

4,30%

2,96%

5,58%

0,67%

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

EN 

13 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex V - Breakdown of transport units not conforming to ADR by place of origin 

Further information on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.4 of the report. 

2006

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

National EU Non EU

2007

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

EN 

National EU Non EU

14 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex VI - Frequency of immobilisation of transport units not conforming to ADR 

Further detail on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.5 of the report. 

2006

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

100,00%

95,18%

41,79%

43,71%

42,76%

34,08%

17,07%

9,79%

8,97%

0,00%

#N/A

0,00%

0,00%

10,92%

12,59%

4,39%

25,53%

22,37%

15,38%

#N/A 0,00%

0,00%

2,89%

#N/A

0,16%

#N/A

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

67,21%

67,12%

2007

52,78%

40,76%

33,81%

30,75%

9,70%

12,99%

16,67%

6,49%

9,12%

36,29%

39,41%

34,24%

22,45%

17,46%

0,00%

0,00%

0,00%

#N/A

0,31% #N/A 1,41%

0,00% 0,00%

2,08%

#N/A

0,00%

0,00%

60%

55,55%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

EN 

15 

EN 

 
  
 
Further detail on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.6 of the report. 

Annex VII - Breakdown by risk categories 

...

...

2006

...

...

...

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

EN 

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3

Total

2007

...

...

...

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3

Total

16 

EN 

 
  
Annex VIII – Types of penalties per transport unit not conforming to ADR 

Further detail on this graph is provided in paragraph 7.7 of the report. 

2006

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

EN 

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

Cautions

Fines Other penalties

2007

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

NO

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

Cautions

Fines Other

17 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex IX – Annual road freight transport of dangerous goods in million tonne-
kilometres 

Further detail on this table is provided in paragraph 5 of the report. 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

: 

: 
: 

: 
: 
: 

MS/year  1999 
AT 
BE 
BG 
CY 
CZ 
DE 
DK 
EE 
EL 
ES 
FI 
FR 
HU 
IE 
IT 
LT 
LU 
LV 
MT 
NL 
PL 
PT 
RO 
SE 
SI 
SK 
UK 
NO 

: 
: 
: 
: 

: 

: 

: 

960 
2768 

924 
3545 

1064 
4177 

985
3779

1132
2623

940
2284

972
2473

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 
: 

: 
: 

134
1905
12261  12782  13437  12034
998

2905 

2117 

887 

827 

853 

: 
: 

: 
: 

: 
: 
8998  10690  10300  12036
2253
1946 
8471
8328 

2427 
8132 

2077 
7607 

118
2172
12777
780
25
2040
12185
2401
8797

159
1498
13524
901
24
3875
12669
1818
8701

221
1814
13158
693
286
1975
12474
2165
8825

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

954 

597 

1094
10875  10894  11086  10523
: 

1139 

: 

: 

200 

189 

245 

: 

337
117

1414
10131
1173
327
153

: 

: 

: 

: 
: 

950 

848 

2123 

1680

1664

1571 

: 

: 

1276 

1779 

1775 

: 

: 

1730

: 

: 

1623 
542 

2009
407

: 
10790  11654  10655  10178
908

1085 

1139 

828 

: 

1900

1778
418
406
9899
1120

: 

: 

1450
477
431
7983
886

1468
9935
1151
344
97

2021
3651
2066

1403
11406
383
444
159

2203
3649
1984

1634
620
366
8766
944

1122 
2203 
438 
166 
1875 

1178
1054 
1904
2191 
694
491 
181
224 
1140
1376 
13717  12834  13616
1256
620 
189
276 
3144
2228 
12700  12671  12605
1574
1847 
9441
9755 
1348
1217 
1351
1291 

2317 
9456 
1099 
1340 

933 
193 
3085 

10777  11392  : 

461 
445 
154 
28 
2390 
3267 
2046 
2559 
1743 
571 
517 
7590 
931 

461 
468 
162 

28    

2098 
4708 
1979 
2057 
1409 
631 
562 
7808  : 
1454 

384
364
185

2554
5380
1846
1782
1265
662
281

1018

EN 

18 

   EN