106. The representative of the EU informed AC.3 that the IWG on Environmental and Propulsion Performance Requirements (EPPR) had reported to GRPE in January that EPPR preferred a stand-alone OBD regulation. He added that the main justification for this conclusion was based on five elements: (i) the transposition of the regulations of the 1998 Agreement into the regulations of the 1958 Agreement was deemed much more complex if the requirements would be integrated into UN GTR No. 5, (ii) Contracting Parties might find it less complicated to accede to a stand-alone UN GTR than a UN GTR including requirements and procedures for both Heavy Duty (HD) diesel OBD and Powered Two-Wheelers (PTWs), (iii) alignment with UN GTR No.5 would be difficult because EPPR is considering a staged OBD approach, (iv) the OBD concept in UN GTR No. 5 is different than the EPPR concept, and (v) interpretation on the use of OBD and priorities may be different for PTWs and HD diesel vehicles. He added that the conclusions from the IWG on EPPR were endorsed by GRPE at its January session.
107. The representative from IMMA fully supported the creation of a separate UN GTR.

108. The representative of the United Kingdom recalled that the structure of UN GTR No. 5 was designed in such a way that further vehicle categories could be included. He added that a generic protocol was chosen that could be used for various vehicle categories including low volume vehicle types with the intention to permit relevant economies of scale. He expressed the view that the motorcycle industry might lose this opportunity if a new separate UN GTR on OBD for Category 3 vehicles was chosen, depending on how much would be taken over from UN GTR No. 5.

109. The representative of Germany supported the creation of a new UN GTR, and added that a case-by-case assessment should be made to determine if the goal was to create gtrs based on vehicle category or on areas related to horizontal items.

110. The representatives of Japan expressed their country’s support for the proposal, anticipating that Contracting Parties might find it less complicated to accede to a stand-alone UN GTR for Category 3 vehicles than an amendment to UN GTR No. 5.

111. AC.3 recommended at this stage that the IWG continue to work on the creation of a new specific UN GTR.