79. The representative of the European Commission (EC) expressed the extreme concern on what media refer to as the Volkswagen (VW) case. She informed WP.29 about the course of action taken by the EC. She reported that the EC had offered to coordinate the flow of information regarding national investigations, and had requested EU Member States (MS) to provide information on measures they planned to undertake or had already undertaken. She added that based on input from MS, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) would develop a common testing method and that the JRC had offered its services to MS who would request it. She informed WP.29 that the EU had already engaged in legislative and regulatory work before the case was revealed, including work on Real Driving Emissions (RDE) and work to reinforce the type approval system (revision of the framework Directive 2007/46/EC).
80. The representative of the United States of America reported that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (WP.29-167-31) had sent two Notices Of Violation (NOV) to VW alleging that vehicles sold in the United States included software that circumvent EPA regulations. He gave details on how the violation was committed, how much the emission level exceeds the limit values and the estimated number of vehicles concerned. He recalled the five key components of the compliance programme of EPA. He added that all manufacturers have been informed that, as a result of these alleged violations, EPA had increased their testing programme. He informed the World Forum about the outstanding collaboration with EPA of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Environment Canada.
81. The representative of Canada added that they also had opened investigations on the issue and were closely collaborating with EPA.
82. The representative of Germany reported that an internal commission had been set up to investigate the VW situation in Germany and Europe. He added that a test procedure had been developed by the German type approval authority, Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA), to identify whether a vehicle contained prohibited defeat device systems, including Type 1 tests in laboratories, Type 1 tests replicated on a test track with portable emission measurement systems, variations in the test cycles as well as RDE tests. So far, of the more than 50 tests that had been planned, half have been finalized, and evaluation of the test results was ongoing. He informed WP.29 that KBA decided officially on an additional assignment to the type approval, which will force VW to recall the vehicles. A software update for the vehicles equipped with 1.2L and 2.0L diesel engine and hardware and software update for vehicles equipped with 1.6L diesel engines, which would start in beginning of 2016 would be performed by the manufacturer and be supervised by KBA in Germany. He also informed WP.29 that the recently revealed issue of CO2 emissions was still under investigation. He concluded that these events might have an impact on WP.29, especially since approvals according to UN Regulations Nos. 83 and 101 were concerned.
83. The representatives of the Russian Federation announced the current status of internal activities dealing with the VW situation in the Russian Federation. He noted the importance of international information exchange and also the cooperation of VW with the Russian administration on the situation.
84. The representative of the UK explained his Government’s approach to testing vehicle emissions in response to the VW issue. He said that they had started a test programme investigating a range of Euro 5 and Euro 6 specification vehicles representing top selling products in the UK market from a number of manufacturers. He mentioned that his experts were in close contact with the German authorities to discuss test procedures and to coordinate their programmes where possible. The UK welcomed the European Commission’s coordination activities and involvement of JRC. He stressed that the testing would be done without manufacturer involvement by the UK approval authority (the Vehicle Certification Agency) at independent laboratories and on-road testing, and this could delay results until early 2016. He would provide information to the Working Party as soon as results would be published. He concluded by confirming that VW had engaged constructively with their UK agency handling the recall.
85. The representative of France reported on the initiated test programme which, in total would cover 100 vehicles representative of vehicle fleet in France. These tests were aimed at determining whether the fraud is limited to a few models of the Volkswagen group or if it extends to all models and other manufacturers. France has committed to publishing the test results. The test protocol would be implemented in France by the Union Technique de l’Automobile du motocycle et du Cycle (UTAC) under the control of the French authorities. He concluded that France considers that the VW case was an opportunity to improve the procedure and address past suspicions.
86. The representative of Australia noted that the VW case had revealed a gap in the international regulatory regime and that as it is an international problem, it could only be addressed internationally through a UN Regulation or UN GTR. He sought continued discussion of the issue at WP.29. The representative of Japan expressed his support for this view.
87. The representative of Spain also reported on the intention of his country to test vehicles according to the test procedure defined by Germany.
88. The representative of Italy informed the World Forum that testing had already started in his country in close cooperation with Germany and the European Commission.
89. The representative of OICA recalled that his organization represented the global automobile industry through the various national (or even regional) auto industry associations. He added that in this capacity OICA cooperates with Contracting Parties to develop and clarify regulatory requirements and test procedures so that they are clear, representative, scientific and reproducible. He stated that OICA could not and was not meant to verify whether and how manufacturers comply with the legislative acts, since this is the responsibility of individual manufacturers. He added that the ongoing particular issue should not be used as a pretext to cast suspicion on the entire automotive sector or on a particular technology. He concluded that OICA fully supports the activities in the various countries to solve this important ongoing issue.
90. The World Forum decided to keep this item on its agenda and continue discussions in upcoming sessions.