110. The representative of the United States of America recalled the discussion on the trilateral white paper submitted by the representatives of Japan, the United States of America and the EU. He informed AC.3 that the original trilateral paper (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/108) had not changed since the June session of AC.3. He added that the comments received on the document were summarized in informal document WP.29-167-24 and that the authors of the trilateral white paper had addressed the comments received. AC.3 started considerations on the responses from the trilateral group to the comments presented in the informal document.

111. The representative of OICA welcomed the responses of the trilateral group to their comments. He suggested that items where mutual agreement existed could be reflected in the final document. He further noted that in practice the 98 Agreement and its UN GTRs do not offer the guarantee that products, complying with the UN GTR, are duly accepted in the markets of Contracting Parties, when the latter have not fully incorporated the UN GTR into their national law, as mandatory or alternative requirement.

112. AC.3 also considered WP.29-167-12 from MEMA/CLEPA/JAPIA. The representative of the three organizations made suggestions to define the programme of work, encouraged Contracting Parties to use domestic regulatory processes to communicate and share information for the sake of full transparency and public participation, such as “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” in the United States of America. She also reiterated a recommendation to WP.29 and AC.3 to establish basic criteria to identify priorities to address the development of UN GTRs and identify possible barriers in developing them.

113. The Chair of AC.3 summed up the discussion by highlighting the fundamental aspects that can improve the good functioning of the 1998 Agreement: (i) negotiation capacity in order to reach harmonization of regulations is essential, (ii) the process of negotiation must be inclusive and (iii) impact assessment studies and related difficulties in a Country (Contracting Party) should not stop other Contracting Parties from proceeding further.

114. Based on his experience in chairing development of UN GTR No.14, the representative of Australia stressed the need for negotiation and compromise in the UN GTR and 1998 Agreement process.

115. AC.3 discussed the use of modules and options within UN GTRs. In addition to alternatives for testing procedures, the use of options and modules in the UN GTR may sometimes be needed on a case by case basis but should be avoided as much as possible in order to safeguard maximum global harmonization and to permit to have a single product that complies with the UN GTR. The expert from ETRTO, based on his experience with the Tyre UN GTR, stated that when starting to develop a UN GTR, Contracting Parties need to deal with existing, different level of technologies that may not be solved at an early stage of the UN GTR development. He added that removing the possibility of modules or options in future UN GTRs may create difficulties. The representative of OICA considered that, while modules may be acceptable in some cases in order to reach acceptable levels of harmonization, contradictory options at the choice of the Contracting Parties should be avoided as much as possible and, if unavoidable for the adoption of the UN GTR, should eventually be solved in a second phase aimed at having unique harmonized vehicle design worldwide.

116. AC.3 also emphasized the need to improve the transposition of UN GTRs in national legislation, which is one of the main points of the trilateral paper.

117. The representative of the EU, announced that considerations on comments received from Transport and Environment (T&E) will be handled bilaterally and reported to AC3 at the March 2016 session.

118. AC.3 decided to keep WP.29-167-12, WP.29-167-24 and WP.29-167-30 on the agenda and to form a drafting group with representatives of OICA, CLEPA/MEMA/JAPIA, the Chair of AC.3 and other interested parties, to review the trilateral white paper.