The chair explained he understood that there was an agreement at previous meeting, as there were not many comments in January. Formatting of the document would still be necessary because current draft e.g. does not have a title yet.

Italy noted a discrepancy between EPPR-01-02 and the proposed roadmap by TRL (EPPR-02-06): EPPR-01-02 says Final submission is within 2016, whereas in roadmap goes until 2017.

The chairman replied that we have an endorsement of WP29 and if that needs to be changed we need to ask GRPE.

IMMA suggested that the group should decide on the end date as this would determine the work load; 2016 as proposed versus 2017 a more realistic target.

India raised concern about the timeline and suggested L3 should be reviewed first by 2016 and then moving to other categories after.

The chairman repeated that if 2016 is considered as not realistic, we should inform GRPE, or alternatively we could keep 2016, and limit the scope, and after that consider an extension for expansion of the work.

Japan noted they made a comment during previous meeting (Add in Item 2.C), which was agreed according to their understanding. The chair reconfirmed, and there were no objections from the group.
The chair concluded to put square brackets around the dates, and suggested to revise that part, after discussing the mandate document and roadmap.

- Chairman said it was not his intention to have final agreement on this today but to exchange views in order to have a document to be submitted in June (GRPE).
- IMMA suggested the potential need for sub-groups to be mentioned in the ToR, and added that the timing foreseen (2016) seems challenging.
- The chairman replied that the timeline needs to be discussed within the group. Regarding the need for subgroups
the chairman argued for a simple structure where ad-hoc groups could be formed based on the need
during the work (see agenda item #7).
- India commented that the timeline is connected to the scope. If the entire L-category would be in the scope, finishing the work in 2016 will be difficult.
- As outlined in their position document (EPPR-01-06e) Japan supports the amendments (Inf.doc.GRPE-64-26) that UK submitted at last GRPE and would like to amend 2© as follows;

• o “c) work both on Regulation under the 1958 and in particular 1998 Agreements, bearing in mind…”

- UK said they put trust on the chairman to put that trough.
- It was generally agreed that the ToR text is acceptable however the document will be discussed and decided at the next meeting of the IWG in April before submitted to GRPE.