49. The expert from EC, on behalf of the task force (see paras. 32, 34 and 45) introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 and amendment GRSP-66-04-Rev.1. The expert from EC clarified that an alternative test would be foreseen, though not specifically mentioned in the proposal: (a) American FMVSS, (b) CMVSS or (c) Korean KMVSS standard. He clarified that the proposed testing procedure could be considered as a “worst case”. He also urged the adoption of the proposal for mandatory application as from July 2022 because of its revision to the General Safety Regulation of the EU. The expert from OICA stated that the time pressure from EC was understandable, however he expressed concerns with the severity of the “alternative” test method in comparison to the basic needs of the 1958 Agreement and that the method therefore could not be called “equivalent”. He underlined that the goal of this alternative was to limit the number of tests to manufacturers, not to increase the severity. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 as reproduced in Addendum 1 to this report and agreed to leave para. 2.8 of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 in square brackets awaiting the outcome of EVS IWG or GRSP deliberations at its May 2020 session. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 as proposal for a new UN Regulation concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to fuel system integrity and safety of electric power train in the event of a rear-end collision, for consideration and vote at the June 2020 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

49. The expert from EC, on behalf of the task force (see paras. 32, 34 and 45) introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 and amendment GRSP-66-04-Rev.1. The expert from EC clarified that an alternative test would be foreseen, though not specifically mentioned in the proposal: (a) American FMVSS, (b) CMVSS or (c) Korean KMVSS standard. He clarified that the proposed testing procedure could be considered as a “worst case”. He also urged the adoption of the proposal for mandatory application as from July 2022 because of its revision to the General Safety Regulation of the EU. The expert from OICA stated that the time pressure from EC was understandable, however he expressed concerns with the severity of the “alternative” test method in comparison to the basic needs of the 1958 Agreement and that the method therefore could not be called “equivalent”. He underlined that the goal of this alternative was to limit the number of tests to manufacturers, not to increase the severity. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 as reproduced in Addendum 1 to this report and agreed to leave para. 2.8 of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 in square brackets awaiting the outcome of EVS IWG or GRSP deliberations at its May 2020 session. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/38 as proposal for a new UN Regulation concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to fuel system integrity and safety of electric power train in the event of a rear-end collision, for consideration and vote at the June 2020 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

35. GRSP considered a proposal (GRSP-67-19-Rev.1) tabled by the experts from Japan to amend the definition of REESS (see paragraphs 16, 18 19 and 25). GRSP adopted the proposal, as reproduced by Annex X to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal as draft Supplement 1 to the original version of the new UN Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/76) on the approval of vehicles with regard to fuel system integrity and safety of electric power train in the event of a rear-end collision, for consideration and vote at the November 2020 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1. However, the Chair of GRSP was requested to seek guidance from WP.29 to recommend the above Supplement as binding from the date of its adoption by AC.1, in advance of its entry into force, in order to have a consistent application of the UN Regulation by all contracting parties to the Agreement.