EVS-03-02
Electric vehicle safety global technical regulation outline: co-sponsors' proposal
Downloads
UNECE server
Related documents
Comparison between outline (Part B) and OICA GTR draft.
The chairman explained that the GTR Outline (Part B) serves to list all items which IG will discuss to determine whether they should be added to GTR. Some items might not be included in GTR but they need first to be discussed. The discussions outcome will be included in part A of the GTR.
In the existing version of the Outline the 3rd column on Research indicates whether (further) research is required to decide the necessity to include that item in the GTR. Further columns will be added to the worksheet to identify WHO would perform this research and WHEN the research conclusions would be completed.
The IG Secretary explained that since the 2nd meeting the Excel Outline has been modified by co-sponsors and circulated to the IG. No comments were received. Japan presented a draft paper (Reference document: EVS-03-17e) regarding Part A of the GTR to the IG.
The IG commended the efforts of Japan compiling this document. Following discussion the principle of the paper, as a description of how we approach GTR development, was agreed. A decision on what specific role the paper would serve would be made later considering that the Action Plan has touched on many items listed in the document. Delegates were encouraged to send any comments on the document to the secretary.
Detailed discussions ensued on the Outline document and are summarized below.
a. Electric Vehicle Safety (EVS) IWG- update given by Kazuyuki Narusawa (Japan)
The 3rd EVS meeting was held in Tokyo, Japan on April 16 – 18, 2013 and meeting minutes are in document EVS-03-25e. The meeting was successful, with over 50 participants. An important outcome of the meeting was that the proposed gtr outline (EVS-03-02e) was accepted and a draft gtr justification document was presented by OICA. The EVS terms of reference define that a gtr will be produced in three years, but this gtr would likely need to be revised; there is no consensus on whether to produce a more complete gtr in a longer timeframe, or to remain consistent with the timeline in the terms of reference.