Revised proposal to avoid exceeding the aggregate maximum intensity of the main-beam headlamps (430,000 cd) by removing the double requirement for a sum of reference marks and a sum of maximum luminous intensities which risks generating large rounding errors when the maximum luminous intensities are summed up.

Proposal to align the requirements in UN R48 with updated requirements in UN R149 (UN R48 currently only refers to a light source or light-emitting diode (LED) module(s) for dipped beam (paragraph 6.2.9.) and to light sources of the lighting units for an adaptive front-lighting system (AFS) (paragraph 6.22.9.) while the latest updates to the 01 series of UN R149 requires the communication form to indicate whether the total objective luminous flux of one or more light source(s) or light source module(s) for a dipped beam exceeds 2,000 lumens). This proposal replaces the term “LED module” with “Light source module” and modifies wording to adapt to the introduction of “matched pair” requirements for headlamps and AFS.

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

Proposal to align the requirements for off-road vehicles passing-beam vertical inclination between the 06, 07, 08 series and the 09 series of amendments to UN R48.

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

Proposal to avoid exceeding the aggregate maximum intensity of the main-beam headlamps (430,000 cd) by removing the double requirement for a sum of reference marks and a sum of maximum luminous intensities which risks generating large rounding errors when the maximum luminous intensities are summed up.

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

Proposal from the AVSR task force to amend its earlier document.

Updated proposal to adapt UN R48 for application to ADS vehicles.

Proposal from the Autonomous Vehicles Signalling Reguirements (AVSR) task force to update the text of UN R48 to enable application to vehicles equipped with an Automated Driving System (ADS).

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

LUPC task force mandate to review the requirements of the current suite of lamps under parked conditions and to develop, where necessary, proposals to address the energy indicator and lamp test mode under UN R48.

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

Proposal to introduce provisions for “work lamps”.

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”

Interpretation question on the provision “With the exception of retro-reflectors, a lamp even bearing an approval mark is deemed not to be present when it cannot be made to operate by the sole installation of a light source and/or a fuse.”