2. The chairman informed the group that data had been received from India, but not yet from China. The Chinese delegation explained that they did not yet have agreement from their administration to submit their data, but hoped that they may be able to submit it soon. The chairman noted that, in view of the timescales, the group would now need to proceed with the cycle development without the Chinese data, although once received this could be considered in any subsequent analysis and amendment of the cycle.

3. India gave a presentation on their data collection in and around 6 different cities. Their data gathering included 12 cars, 2 SUVs and 4 light goods vehicles encompassing petrol, diesel and natural gas fuelled vehicles. Weekday, weekend, on-peak and off-peak driving was covered in the data gathering. 68,370km of data gathering in total was submitted. India noted that the only deviation from DHC’s data gathering guidelines was that the drivers were drivers of company vehicles and did not pay for their own fuel.

4. The chairman introduced the options outlined at the last meeting for weighting the regional data in order to produce unified distributions. Contracting parties discussed their preferences for the various options and the weighting factors that resulted from them. The vice chairman summarised that Contracting Parties in the Asia region had concerns that traffic volume based weighting factors based on old traffic volume data did not reflect significant recent traffic growth in some countries, whilst European Contracting Parties had concerns that option 1 would significantly under-represent European driving patterns.

5. India explained that they had updated traffic volume data (from 2010). Mr Ichikawa presented revised traffic volume weighting factors using the latest data from India. These increased India’s weighting factors by three to six percentage points (depending on phase) with corresponding small reductions in Japanese, EU and US weighting factors. The vice chairman asked Contracting Parties who had submitted data if they could accept the weighting factors resulting from this approach. India, Japan, Korea and the European Commission confirmed that they could. European Union Member States were asked to indicate if they disagreed with the Commission’s view, none did so. Other Contracting Parties were asked if they could accept this approach. There were no objections. The revised traffic volume based weighting factors were therefore agreed.

6. Sweden gave a presentation on the possibility of applying regional weighting factors to emissions results from each phase of the test cycle. The vice chairman thanked Sweden for the presentation and noted that this was for further discussion at a later stage.

7. India requested that the analysis of threshold speeds presented at the 7th meeting be supplemented with analysis of 35, 70 and 90km/h and 40, 60, 90 km/h thresholds to demonstrate why these had not been selected. JRC noted that the 40km/h option had been considered in earlier analysis. It was agreed that this previous analysis should be added to document DHC-07-02 which should then be reissued as revision 1.