Proposal to clarify the definition of “Option” as used within Global Technical Regulations and to introduce the concept of “Alternative”. In principle, the proposal seeks to distinguish between protocols for the same requirement that allow divergent compliance thresholds (e.g., differing stringency) and those that provide equivalent assessment of performance through different means. “Option” would refer to the former while “Alternative” would refer to the latter. In the case of one or more options, the proposal would require Contracting Parties to work towards the elimination of the divergent performance requirements.
175. AC.3 started discussion on the informal document WP.29-175-27, submitted by the representative of OICA. However, due to the numerous comments and the lack of time, AC.3 requested interested parties to submit their comments directly to the representative of OICA and to resume consideration on the basis of a new document incorporating the comments at its November 2018 session.
153. The representative of OICA introduced WP.29-173-05, “Proposal to amend Special Resolution 2” (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1124). He stated that OICA, representing the global auto industry, re-confirmed its strong support for Special Resolution 2 as an important step towards an improved functioning of the 1998 Agreement.
154. He noted that WP29-173-05 took into account comments made at the June 2017 AC.3 session. He added that his intention was to clarify the concepts of options and alternatives, based on the experience gained in the development of several existing global technical regulations. He emphasized the position of OICA that such clarification would constitute a further improvement and that it would help in the development of new or amended global technical regulations.
155. Due to the lack of time, AC.3 agreed to allocate more time to discuss it at its March 2018 session and to keep it still as an informal document.
| WP.29-175-27 |