OICA stated that WP.29/2011/152 (amendment of WP.29/2011/48/Rev.1) was a surprise to OICA. OICA asked whether the review of the guideline WP.29/2011/152 should be tabled before the revision of the 1958 Agreement will be completed because the influence of the revision of the 1958 Agreement on the guideline would be huge.

EC replied that it might not be an effective approach but the revision of the 1958 Agreement and review of the guideline should be carried forward in parallel. EC suggested that the guideline should be referred to as “WP.29/1044 and any later revisions” whenever appropriate.

OICA explained that the following three sets of data are necessary for type approval:

• i) complete list to be placed in the appendix (or rather placeholder), linked directly or indirectly to the Agreement
• ii) information document for IWVTA to be placed in UN R0
• iii) data necessary (i.e. information documents) for respective UN Regulations

UK pointed out that it takes a lot of time and labor to change an appendix.

The Chairman stated that it was decided at the last Informal meeting to consider a new series of annex which apply to all UN Regulations and requires unanimous agreement within AC1 for amendment.

WP.29 Secretariat replied that it was possible to amend both of the new series of annex and annexed UN Regulations by revising Article 12.

The Chairman indicated that there must be some device to differentiate the voting criteria for the new series of annex (unanimous agreement) and annexed UN Regulations (2/3 agreement).

EC asked OICA about the intention to amend the wording of the proposed actions on page 3 of IWVTA-07-03-Rev.1.

OICA replied that the amendment was proposed to make it clear that CPs have to accept type approvals issued in accordance with the latest version of a UN Regulation, while having the possibility to accept on a voluntary basis approvals granted to an earlier version of the UN Regulation.

Russian Federation suggested that the word “must” should be used in case of accepting type approvals issued in accordance with the latest version of a UN Regulation and the word “may” should be used in case of accepting type approvals issued in accordance with the older version.

OICA stated that it was not allowed to issue type approval in accordance with the older version of a UN Regulation under the current 1958 Agreement, but such type approval could be utilized for certification in Contracting Parties or other countries, where an earlier version may be more appropriate.

UK suggested that the purpose of the amendments must be made clear first, and then consider what amendments might be necessary to achieve the purpose.

Germany stated that issuing type approvals in accordance with the older version of a UN Regulation has no negative effects because EU-WVTA requires only the latest version. While in the EU-WVTA a specific version of UN Regulations is required, the latest version is always accepted.

EC pointed out that amendment of Article 11 would be more preferable to that of Article 12 for the purpose of maintaining older versions as options. EC might consider a new mechanism in Article 11, if it would be considered necessary.

OICA responded that whatever Article is amended, it needs to be ensured that Contracting Parties are able to accept an older version of a UN Regulation and that all signatories to a Regulation can issue a type approval in accordance with the older version, even those CPs who nationally require the latest version.

OICA added that it should not be allowed to invalidate the type approval once issued, even though of course CP’s can decide not to accept nationally these older approvals anymore after a certain date, as specified in the transitional provisions.

UK stated that it would continue COP audit until the type approval should be made invalid by a UN Regulation.

The proposed action “1. Amend Article 12 to clarify the concepts of options (in particular when different levels of stringency are needed to facilitate the application of the Regulation by certain CPs) and alternatives, whilst maintaining the principles that CPs have to accept TA issued in accordance with the latest version of a Regulation, even if these CPs apply an earlier version (or a lower level of stringency). Amend the relevant provisions of Chapter V of WP.29/2011/48/Rev.1 or later revision.” was adopted as final version. OICA summarized that Article 12 is not clear and needs to be amended anyway. It is not adequate to change only the word “alternative” to “option”.

EC proposed that the added paragraph by OICA on page 8 should be removed and then inserted as proposed action “44. Application of UN Regulations nationally is not related to the existence of a type approval system” and this proposal was agreed by the Informal Group.

The WP.29 Secretariat proposed to add the proposed action “9. Consider to add a new article 7 to Appendix 1 of the 1958 Agreement which enable a CP to delegate in writing its presence for the purpose of the determination of the quorum and its right to vote on its behalf to another CP or regional economic integration organization to which the CP belongs” and this proposal was agreed by the Informal Group.