3. GRRF welcomed a presentation (GRRF-72-14) by the expert from Japan on their national enforcement of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). GRRF noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29 and its decision that the proposed text in square brackets of paragraph 12.2. be added as a footnote (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, para. 39).

4. GRRF noted the preference of WP.29 not to accept the alternative text relating to voluntary approval and to remove the text in square brackets of the alternative text proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1. The GRRF Chair reported that the work on a revised table of Annex 3 (defining performance requirements for vehicles of categories M2 and N2 ≤ 8 tonnes) would resume with the informal working group on AEBS.

[This regulation proposal is complete and the EU intends to develop companion regulations for AEBS for lighter vehicles to be put forward in the future. Nonetheless, as is the case for lane departure warning systems, work remains to be completed towards establishing the legal basis for adoption of AEBS, including its potential conflict with the current interpretation of the 1968 Vienna Convention which requires a driver to be in complete control of a vehicle at all times. Therefore, the vote on this regulation is remanded to the June WP.29 session and likely will not be voted upon until the November 2012 WP.29 session.

Japan will introduce AEBS legislation into its national law from April 2012.]

As noted in paragraph 53 under agenda item 4.12 above, the World Forum agreed to defer consideration of this item to its next session. The EU has not yet completed its internal review of the proposed regulation, but strongly suspects it will be positioned for a positive vote in November.

3. The expert from the EC reported on the progress made by the informal group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). He presented an amendment to the Terms of Reference (AEBS-LDWS-01-07-Rev.3) necessary for completing the second step of work by the Informal Group. GRRF endorsed this amendment as reproduced in Annex II to this report. He reminded the Working Party that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2012 session of WP.29. He expected that the European Union would be in position to vote at that session.

4. GRRF noted that the informal group resumed its work on technical requirements on AEBS for vehicles of the category N2 below eight tons as well as the category M2. OICA presented their review of the issues associated with applying the technology to these vehicle classes noting the lack of real world experience (AEBS-LDWS-17-02-Rev.1). The expert from the EC reminded GRRF about the tight time line and the necessity to produce an informal document before the next session of GRRF to finish the work on time. GRRF noted the intention of the informal group to convene again in Paris on 7 December 2012 and in Geneva on 18 February 2013.

The informal document WP.29-158-12 was withdrawn by Russia.

The proposed regulatory text still includes bracketed text that was presented for review and guidance by the Contracting Parties. These passages were addressed in the 155th WP.29 session and resolved in paragraph 39 of the session report (document WP.29/1093). The request is for the Secretariat to make these changes prior to submitting the text to the UN Office of Legal Affairs for approval following the expected vote of the Forum to adopt the new regulation.

Proposal as stipulated above unanimously adopted.

The experts were informed that WP29 at its 158th session of November 2012 adopted the four documents creating the new regulation on AEBS and its 1st series of amendments. This information can be found in p 26 of the official report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099:

The Chair was of the opinion that some clarification of the text adopted at WP29-158, p 3 of document WP29/2011/93/Amend.1, last sentence of the row 2, was necessary because an interpretation could be that the M3 vehicles with hydraulic braking would not have to fulfil the requirements of row 1 before the 2016 date mentioned in row 2. The authors of the text in cells B-H/2 indeed aimed the vehicles mentioned in cell A/2, but omitted to precise whether the vehicles addressed by the footnote 1 (Vehicles of category M3 with hydraulic braking system) would be subject to the same provisions.

OICA was of the opinion that the vehicles in footnote 1 are part of row2. Then the 1st date would be in Nov 2016. But the expert acknowledged that the wording is such that these vehicles could be approved already as from 2013.

CLEPA did not share the interpretation of OICA, and proposed to discuss this at a later stage.

The question of the true date of the Nov 2013 WP29 session was also raised, leading to the question whether the values should be adopted already at the June session of WP29.

The European Commission representative clarified that the intention is that, once the AEBS and LDWS UN Regulations have entered into force and the EU has acceded to them, UN regulations approvals would be accepted as an alternative to the EU approvals, taking into account that the EU legislation provides for a number of exemptions from the AEBS/LDWS carriage requirements. The representative of the European Commission informed that the European Commission Services were about to send a letter to the UN Secretariat to clarify the way how the EU intends to apply the new UN regulations, in response to the request of the WP.29 Secretariat to CPs to provide information on the application of the 01 series of the AEBS regulation (done, see Annex 1 attached).

Conclusion: items to be addressed at a later stage, to be added in the agenda for next meeting.