6. GRB noted the final report commissioned by the European Commission on vehicle noise limit values (VENOLIVA: GRB-54-01). The expert from Germany introduced GRB-54-03, proposing three stages of reducing vehicle noise limit values for measurement method B, linked to categories of vehicles and transitional provisions. He explained that the proposal was a compromise among environmental benefits, technical feasibility for vehicle manufacturers and cost burden for consumers. The expert from Austria on behalf of the expert from Germany fully supported the proposal. The expert from Norway requested efforts for more ambitious targets and that the Working Group on Pollution and Energy (GRPE) should provide clarification on the noise effects of cold start engine test requirements for the next session of GRB. The expert from Italy supported in principle the proposal. However, he stated that: (i) the additional transitional period in stage 1 for new vehicle registration would be an unnecessary burden for type approval authorities and (ii) for stage 3 a revision clause on limit values would be needed due to its long time span. Moreover, the expert from the United Kingdom also supported the proposal and underlined that the long time period between stages was welcome on the condition of respect to the high power sport cars where platform life is longer than conventional cars. The expert from the Netherlands welcomed the proposal (including vehicle classification) as a good basis for discussion and envisaged particularly stage 3. However, he added that further discussion was needed on limit values and proper time schedule for heavy duty vehicles. The experts from France and Sweden also supported the proposal as a first approach. Finally, the proposal tabled by the expert from Germany received in principle support from GRB experts as a realistic first step of discussion.

7. The expert from Japan introduced GRB-54-14 and GRB-54-16 proposing a review of subcategories of vehicles with respect to the new limit values. He also introduced GRB-54-15 proposing a categorization of Kei N1 vehicles. GRB agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its February 2012 session on the basis of a revised proposal by the expert from Japan. Finally, the expert from the Netherlands volunteered, with the assistance of the expert from OICA, to prepare an informal consolidated version of Regulation No. 51 for the next GRB session, to facilitate future discussions on new limit values and subcategories of vehicles concerning measurement method B.

10. The EC expert informed GRB on the work progress of the European Union (EU) institutions on the EC proposal on vehicle noise. He added that at this stage no political agreement on new limits had been reached at the EU level.

11. The expert from China introduced GRB-56-07, proposing a different scheme to identify vehicle categories. He also added that his proposal would offer an option to cover needs of a broader range of countries. The experts from Japan and OICA endorsed the Power to Mass Ratio index (PMR) as a tool to link noise emission and vehicle performance. The EC expert recalled that to overcome the different national political priorities/classifications, the discussion should be focused on the mutual recognition principle of the 1958 Agreement, i.e. the vehicle complying with the lowest noise level would be accepted everywhere. He recalled that this would not prevent Contracting Parties from having less stringent requirements in their national law for their internal markets. Finally GRB agreed to resume consideration of GRB-56-07 at its February 2013 session to provide study time for experts.

12. GRB considered GRB-56-01 and GRB-56-05 supplementing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/7 tabled by the expert from Japan. He explained that the proposal was based on GRB-55-01, including limit values with some modification of the threshold of subcategories, as a basis for a common position with the proposal tabled by the expert from Germany (GRB-54-03). Moreover, he made a presentation (GRB-56-21) concerning rationales for the proposed Stage 3 of limit values. The EC expert stated that the review of vehicle classification should not only consider the proposals tabled by the experts from Germany and Japan, but also the present vehicle classification in UN Regulation No. 51 and in the EC proposal and verify the rationales for the changes proposed by the experts from Germany and Japan.

GRB recalled that the EC proposal was available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/automotive/documents/proposals/index_en.htm#h2-1

13. Upon the suggestion of the Chair, GRB agreed to verify data and provide a basis for analysis for a power reference value of 160 kW in vehicle category M3 and for the reference value of 140 kW in vehicle category N2. Finally, GRB agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its February 2013 session on the basis of the above test data, if available, and on those existing provided by the experts from China, Japan and EC.

7. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRB-55-10) to introduce GRB-55-01 as an alternative proposal of new limits to GRB-54-03. The proposal received some comments. GRB agreed to resume discussion on this subject on the basis of a concrete proposal of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 tabled by the expert from Japan.

10. GRB agreed to establish a group of interested experts on vehicle noise, led by the expert from EC, with the main goal of (i) finalizing a common proposal on vehicle classification (including subcategories) and (ii) update a proposal of 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 aiming at maintaining consistency with the EU legislation proposal. The schedule of the first meeting of the group was agreed for 19 April 2013, tentatively in Brussels. Finally, GRB agreed to keep as reference in the agenda of the next session informal documents GRB-54-03, GRB-57-07, GRB-57-19 and GRB-57-23 and to resume discussion on the basis of the outcome of the meeting of the group of interested experts.