4. The expert from Germany presented an analysis of the current diverging requirements and challenges for reversing alarms of M and N categories of vehicles and called for harmonization in this area in the framework of the 1958 Agreement (GRB-64-06). As an example of a possible solution, he mentioned amending Regulation No. 28 with the provisions on reversing alarms (GRB-64-05). The expert from Turkey recalled its alternative proposal, at the March 2016 session of WP.29, to establish a new Regulation on vehicle reversing sound warning devices (WP.29-168-04).

5. GRB was of the view that, before taking a decision on the legal form of reversing alarm requirements, this issue would need to be studied further. The experts from China, France, Germany, Hungary, Republic of Korea, Spain, Turkey and OICA expressed their interest in participating in this work. The Chair invited the expert of Germany to solicit comments from GRB experts with a view to preparing proposals for the next session. The expert from Japan pointed out the need to cooperate with the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG) on devices for indirect vision (Regulation No. 46) which could be an alternative to reversing alarms.

4. The expert from Germany presented an analysis of the current diverging requirements and challenges for reversing alarms of M and N categories of vehicles and called for harmonization in this area in the framework of the 1958 Agreement (GRB-64-06). As an example of a possible solution, he mentioned amending Regulation No. 28 with the provisions on reversing alarms (GRB-64-05). The expert from Turkey recalled its alternative proposal, at the March 2016 session of WP.29, to establish a new Regulation on vehicle reversing sound warning devices (WP.29-168-04).

5. GRB was of the view that, before taking a decision on the legal form of reversing alarm requirements, this issue would need to be studied further. The experts from China, France, Germany, Hungary, Republic of Korea, Spain, Turkey and OICA expressed their interest in participating in this work. The Chair invited the expert of Germany to solicit comments from GRB experts with a view to preparing proposals for the next session. The expert from Japan pointed out the need to cooperate with the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG) on devices for indirect vision (Regulation No. 46) which could be an alternative to reversing alarms.

3. The experts from Germany, Japan, Republic of Korea and Turkey outlined the present situation with reversing alarms at the national level, identified the existing problems in this field and proposed solutions (GRB-65-06, GRB-65-07-Rev.1, GRB-65-13, GRB-65-14 and GRB-65-19). The expert from the Netherlands suggested using white noise alarms that, according to him, have advantages over the traditional tonal noise alarms that beep (GRB-65-17).

4. GRB agreed that, rather than amending Regulation No. 28, a new Regulation on reversing alarm should be prepared. GRB noted that the main issues of the future Regulation would be its scope (categories of vehicles), the possible existence of a pause switch and the alarm sound composition (sound levels and frequencies). GRB agreed that there was no need to establish a new informal working group and that the initial drafting would be carried out by a small group (task force) of interested parties. The expert from Germany volunteered to steer the work of the task force with the assistance of OICA. The experts from Japan and Turkey pointed out that, if need be, they could also act as sponsors.