98. AC.3 noted the information, as of 15 June 2015, on the status of the Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1073/Rev.13), the status of the priorities (based on WP.29-166-14 as reproduced in Annex II to this report) of the Agreement and items on which the exchange of views should continue. AC.3 also noted that assistance could be obtained from the secretariat (Mr. E. Gianotti) on the obligations of Contracting Parties in the transposition process. Representatives were also reminded of their obligation to send the mandatory reports on the transposition process through their Permanent Missions in Geneva via the “1998 AGREEMENT-MISSIONS List” electronic system to the secretariat to ensure updating of the status document which is the monitoring tool of the Agreement. It was also noted that the number of Contracting Parties to the Agreement had increased, which increases the threshold of minimum number of countries needed to establish the quorum of AC.3. Representatives of Permanent Mission of Contracting Parties to the Agreement, were thus recommended, to participate at AC.3 instead of representatives from the capital if needed.

99. AC.3 continued discussion on the Trilateral White Paper introduced by the European Union, Japan and the United States of America. The representative of India expressed her support for the efforts to improve the implementation of the 1998 Agreement. She added that India would be pleased to share any data or experiences, especially in the area of WLTP. She noted that, due to resource limitations, participation in all working groups was difficult, and a detailed survey assessing priority areas, focus and resource allocation of Contracting Parties might be worthwhile. She stated that India would be ready to assist in this effort. The representative of IMMA referred to the ongoing work on GTRs in the IWG on EPPR — further to the three existing motorcycle GTRs — and emphasized the importance of implementing GTRs. IMMA would provide a more detailed statement at the November WP.29 session. The representative of OICA also expressed their support for the paper and added that the 1998 Agreement was of great importance to the industry. He suggested that improving the functioning of the 1998 Agreement could be a dynamic process that could include a critical review of the Agreement on a periodic basis. The representative of Australia noted the option in the Trilateral paper to focus on prioritising items added to the programme of work on the basis of potential safety and/or environmental benefits.  He underlined this importance given the obligations of Contracting Parties under the 1998 Agreement to implement UN GTRs into domestic regulations. The representative of Germany had two suggestions to improve the document: (i) the current programme of work mentioned in the document could be updated to correspond with the latest status, (ii) a reference to the status of the agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1073/Rev.13) could be added. The representative of the United States of America requested that all comments on the document be sent to him in writing. He would then incorporate all the comments into another document. AC.3 was encouraged to review the document and discuss it with national administrations. AC.3 decided to establish the document as a formal document for submission to AC.3 and WP.29. The proposal of OICA to review the 1998 Agreement every five years would be discussed further at the November session of WP.29.