5. Concerning the updating of the requirements on the noise test track from ISO 10844:1994 to ISO 10844:2011, GRB agreed on aligning the UN Regulation with the decision taken for UN Regulation No. 117 on this subject (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/16) (see also paras. 16 and 17). Accordingly, the expert from OICA withdrew GRB-57-20 and it was agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/16 for reference. Finally, GRB agreed to defer discussion at its September 2013 session on the basis of a revised consolidated proposal of 03 series of amendments to the UN Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/8) including a new proposal for transitional provisions (GRB-57-17), ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/17 and the provisions of Supplement 8 to the 02 series of amendments (see para. 10).

7. The expert from OICA, secretary of the group of interested expert on vehicle noise, introduced GRB-58-04 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/8, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/16 and GRB-56-12) as a result of discussions in the last meeting of his group held in Brussels on 4 July 2013. The expert from EC, Chair, of the same group clarified that GRB-58-04 was an attempt to merge the provisions of the proposal of the Parliament and the Council of the EU1 with the current proposal of 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 and including additional aspects concerning the Chinese and Japanese markets, which were beyond the scope of the European Union legislation. He added that the outcome of discussions that would follow within GRB would be transmitted to the EU legislators with the aim of harmonizing the proposal with the draft 03 series of amendments. The expert from Japan proposed GRB-58-15 proposing the removal from GRB-58-04 of specifications on audible vehicle alerting system (AVAS) which is still in the process of development in the framework of activities of the UN GTR on Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV). The expert from Japan, Vice-Chair of the QRTV informal working group (IWG), also on behalf of the Chair of the IWG, reported similar concerns and request. The experts from China, the Republic of Korea and OICA supported these remarks. GRB endorsed the proposal made by the expert from Japan by suspending the discussion on AVAS provisions. GRB agreed to incorporate the results of discussion, including those of agenda item 3(b) (see paras. 10 and 11) into GRB-58-17-Rev.1., superseding GRB-58-04. It was noted that provisions still pending or suspended, were placed in square brackets in this document. The Chair of GRB clarified that GRB-58-17-Rev.1 would remain, on an informal basis, as a platform of discussion between the experts from GRB and EU in the group of interested experts on vehicle noise. GRB agreed to resume discussion on this subject on the basis of the outcome of next meetings of the group of interested experts scheduled for the first week of November 2013 and for the second week of January 2014 (both in Brussels).

10. GRB resumed consideration on vehicle categories and their limit values on the basis of the proposal drafted by the group of interested experts (GRB-58-04). The expert from Japan gave a presentation (GRB-58-14) on light vehicles of category N1. Accordingly, he introduced GRB-58-06-Rev.1 amending GRB-58-04. The experts from France and Germany supported the proposal (GRB-58-06-Rev.1), which was incorporated into GRB-58-17-Rev.1 after the discussion. The expert from China partially supported the proposal from Japan. However, he showed in GRB-58-10 that the position of the engine is more relevant for vehicle categories M1 and N1 with a GVW ≤ 2.5 t, with the engine on the front axle and a rear axle drive. He underlined that these kinds of vehicles for these technical reasons produce a higher noise emission and suggested higher limit values (GRB-58-08). He also urged the need of vehicles categorization through their GVW instead of power mass ratio (GRB-58-09), aiming at provisions encompassing vehicle fleets at global level. The expert from France suggested clarifying the correspondence of the proposed vehicle classifications tabled by the expert from China and those proposed in GRB-58-04. The expert from the Netherland expressed concern that the proposals prepared by the expert from China could introduce design restrictions. The expert from Germany proposed further study in the framework of the interested group of experts on the basis of more data provided by the expert from China. He also suggested a three steps approach in finding a common agreement on: (i) vehicle category and subcategory, (ii) measurement method and finally on (iii) limits that eventually could match different scenarios.

11. GRB reproduced the whole discussion on the draft 03 series of amendments in GRB-58-17-Rev.1 as a basis of discussion of the informal group of experts and agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its January 2014 session (see para. 7 above). GRB also agreed to simplify the agenda of the next session by keeping as reference only GRB-58-08, GRB-58-09, GRB-58-10, GRB-58-14 and GRB-58-17-Rev.1.