84. The representative of the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of IWG on PTI, reported on the activities of IWG since June 2019 (WP.29-179-20) and presented WP.29-179-22 with a general overview of the “in–service compliance assessment approach”. He noted that, according to the principles for in-service compliance enforcement addressed by WP.29, a shift towards sustainability of transport systems that includes safety needed to be considered. He added that the increased complexity of vehicles would require these vehicles to be properly maintained throughout their life. He stated that, to meet the above two principles, the continuous compliance of vehicles through their whole life shall be warranted.

85. He listed several procedures servicing the purpose of continuous compliance of the vehicle: Conformity of Production (CoP) and in-service conformity in framework of the 1958 Agreement, market surveillance, PTI and roadside inspections in framework of the 1997 Agreement. He added that the data collected in these processes could be used by the contracting parties for a proper safety management. He mentioned that both international legal acts shall be interconnected and could be united in the future. He recalled that there were precedents: one of them being the Customs Union Regulation on the safety of wheeled vehicles.
86. He proposed that compliance management should:

1. Incorporate procedures to identify compliance obligations and to evaluate compliance risks;
2. Include planning to address compliance risks and to achieve the objectives;
3. Operational planning and control of compliance risks;
4. Performance evaluation and compliance reporting;
5. Managing non-compliances; and
6. Continual improvement of the management.

87. He emphasized that the two principles of integrity and compliance were the basis and thus an opportunity for a sustainable transport system.

88. The Co–Chair of IWG on PTI proposed that information on the results of PTI/Roadside Inspection could be used for in–service conformity purposes as well as information from type approval authorities, warranty claims, contracting party surveillance testing and warranty repair works recorded at servicing.

89. He concluded that there was need to explore the feasibility of introducing provisions, relevant for in-use requirements for vehicles, into the relevant UN Regulations by GRs. PTI/Roadside Inspection could be the element of in-service conformity. He advocated that in-use requirements for vehicles together with test and inspection methods stemming from the relevant UN Regulations should be placed into UN Rules.

90. He advised that the next task was the development of the definitions for:

• In-service conformity;
• In-service compliance;
• Vehicle normal in-service conditions; and
• Vehicle normal useful life period.

91. The representative of Sweden expressed support for the work going on in IWG on PTI. He raised the question of how to take the work forward and to propose provisions.

92. The representative of Italy, Vice–Chair of WP.29, noted that the in-service conformity process involved the manufacturer and the authorities of the country which had granted type approval for a vehicle type, while the PTI process involved the vehicles registered in a given country. He asked how to reconcile these two different scopes and jurisdictions. The Chair of IWG confirmed that this item was currently under discussion.

93. The representative of the Netherlands provided insight on the reasons for their support for the ongoing activities of IWG. He explained that they supported the overall concept presented and that his organization was in charge of both type approval and period technical inspection and that, therefore, they had an interest to manage the implications of technical progress and regulatory updates on the period technical inspection system.