Proposal for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51: Revised
Download in .pdf format

Amendments agreed to document GRB-58-04 during the 58th session of GRB.

Reference Number: GRB-58-17/Rev.1
Date: 4 September 2013
Related Documents:
GRB-58-06/Rev.1 | Revised proposal for draft 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51
GRB-58-17 | Proposal for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51
Discussion(s):
Working Party on Noise | Session 58 | 2-4 Sep 2013

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).

7. The expert from EC informed GRB about the work progress of the EU regulation on the noise emission and introduced a revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 submitted by the GRB Expert Group on UN Regulation 51 (GRB-59-04-Rev.1). He clarified that the proposal was based on GRB-58-17-Rev.1, outcome of the GRB expert group meeting and on the latest update of the EU regulation. He clarified that one of the major modifications introduced was the deletion of Annex 11 on the Audible Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) which should become part of the UN GTR on Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) and come into force in due course. The experts from EC and OICA pointed out the difficulties in aligning the texts of the draft EU regulation on the noise emission and UN Regulation No. 51, due to different definitions and legal languages used.

8. The experts from Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland, EC, ETRTO, OICA as well as the Chair addressed the issue whether or not to delete the footnote after the table with sound level limits in paragraph 6.2.2.1. of GRB-59-04-Rev.1 which refers to the last column “Phase 3” and reads as follows: “To be reviewed and confirmed or modified at the latest one year after entry”. GRB noted that this provision corresponds to Article 7 of the draft EU regulation on the noise emission and aims to review the appropriateness of the noise limits in the future. However, the legal implications of the footnote seemed unclear. GRB invited the expert from EC to clarify this issue with the EU legal services. In the meantime, GRB agreed to put the footnote in square brackets and resume consideration at a later stage. GRB also extensively discussed the wording of paragraph 6.2.2.1 (sound limit values and categories of vehicles) introducing exceptions for limit values applicable to certain categories of vehicles.

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.

13. GRB noted that this agenda item was de facto covered in the framework of the discussion under agenda item 3(a). Thus, GRB agreed that, for its next session, agenda items 3(a) and 3 (b) should be combined and mention as references only GRB-59-04-Rev.1 and GRB-59-10-Rev.1. Finally, GRB agreed to remove ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/7, GRB-58-08, GRB-58-09, GRB-58-10, GRB-58-14 and GRB-58-17-Rev.1 from the agenda of the next session.

Working Party on Noise | Session 59 | 28-30 Jan 2014

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).

7. The expert from EC informed GRB about the work progress of the EU regulation on the noise emission and introduced a revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 submitted by the GRB Expert Group on UN Regulation 51 (GRB-59-04-Rev.1). He clarified that the proposal was based on GRB-58-17-Rev.1, outcome of the GRB expert group meeting and on the latest update of the EU regulation. He clarified that one of the major modifications introduced was the deletion of Annex 11 on the Audible Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) which should become part of the UN GTR on Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) and come into force in due course. The experts from EC and OICA pointed out the difficulties in aligning the texts of the draft EU regulation on the noise emission and UN Regulation No. 51, due to different definitions and legal languages used.

8. The experts from Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland, EC, ETRTO, OICA as well as the Chair addressed the issue whether or not to delete the footnote after the table with sound level limits in paragraph 6.2.2.1. of GRB-59-04-Rev.1 which refers to the last column “Phase 3” and reads as follows: “To be reviewed and confirmed or modified at the latest one year after entry”. GRB noted that this provision corresponds to Article 7 of the draft EU regulation on the noise emission and aims to review the appropriateness of the noise limits in the future. However, the legal implications of the footnote seemed unclear. GRB invited the expert from EC to clarify this issue with the EU legal services. In the meantime, GRB agreed to put the footnote in square brackets and resume consideration at a later stage. GRB also extensively discussed the wording of paragraph 6.2.2.1 (sound limit values and categories of vehicles) introducing exceptions for limit values applicable to certain categories of vehicles.

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.

13. GRB noted that this agenda item was de facto covered in the framework of the discussion under agenda item 3(a). Thus, GRB agreed that, for its next session, agenda items 3(a) and 3 (b) should be combined and mention as references only GRB-59-04-Rev.1 and GRB-59-10-Rev.1. Finally, GRB agreed to remove ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/7, GRB-58-08, GRB-58-09, GRB-58-10, GRB-58-14 and GRB-58-17-Rev.1 from the agenda of the next session.