48. The Chair of GRE presented a concept for the simplification of lighting and light-signalling Regulations based on a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of numerous individual device Regulations would be moved (WP.29-166-22). He introduced two options for HRD: (a) insert a new part B in Regulation No. 48 or (b) establish a new Resolution under WP.29, and invited the World Forum to provide guidance on the preferred option. He also mentioned that, as part of the simplification exercise, GRE had put on hold a number of adopted amendment proposals, awaiting consolidation with other amendment proposals for the same UN Regulations. WP.29 noted that OLA had pointed out legal implications, which the use of a new part B of Regulation No. 48 could entail, and called for seeking a general solution in the framework of the ongoing Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement (WP.29-166-18). The EU representative welcomed this explanation but added that this was a legal problem for which OLA should be requested to extend their analysis and to provide their preferred option. In case a Resolution is not the legally optimum solution OLA shall be requested to provide alternative solutions.
7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and of its forthcoming meetings. The secretariat informed GRE about the guidance provided by the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and WP.29 on different options for the so-called Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1116, WP.29-166-18 and GRE-74-15). In particular, OLA had pointed out that using a new part B of Regulation No. 48 as HRD would contradict the terms of the 1958 Agreement. With regard to establishing a new Resolution, OLA had indicated that Regulations can only be amended in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 12 of the Agreement and that a Resolution cannot be employed to amend a Regulation. OLA had also proposed, as an alternative solution, to amend the 1958 Agreement with a specific procedure applicable in those cases when an amendment to one Regulation would affect the application of other Regulations.
8. The expert from EC was of the view that the alternative solution proposed by OLA would bring no results, in view of its complexity and the advanced stage of work on Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement. He also expressed concerns about the regulatory status of a new Resolution outside the legal text of the 1958 Agreement. The expert from UK shared these concerns. Various experts raised questions on using dynamic or static references to HRD in the individual device Regulations. GRE noted that dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons. GRE also wondered about the correlation between amendments to HRD and supplements or new series of amendments to individual device Regulations, including transitional provisions. GRE requested IWG SLR to address the identified issues and to report to the next session on its findings.