6 Mr. Olechiw initiated the discussion of Agenda item 3 the Guide with the presentation of document EVE-08-05 by Mr. Mark Subramaniam of FEV Consulting. The presentation covered three items: 1) Summary of changes made to the Guide, 2) Current findings, activity levels, and recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide, and, 3) Open discussion items. During this discussion, draft 3 of the Guide (EVE-08-03) was also presented for discussion. The four main recommendations from Chapter 5 of draft 3 of the Guide were reviewed, including: 1) vehicle range and energy efficiency testing, 2) method of stating energy efficiency, 3) battery performance and durability, and 4) battery recyclability. Both documents elicited many questions and comments, which are briefly summarized below China clarified that an adjustment to the traffic light chart for market deployment attributes for China should be changed from two green and two red attributes to all green attributes. Also, OICA clarified that there should not be a tick under Driver-user information for the WLTP group in the vehicle attributes traffic light chart.

ACTION 1: The EVE Secretariat will make the two minor revisions requested by China and OICA to draft 3 of the Guide prior to the submission of the document to the GRPE.

Concerning recommendation 1 (vehicle range and energy efficiency testing), under Section 5.1, and the second paragraph above the bullets, it was agreed that the wording “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence should be deleted.

ACTION 2: The EVE Secretariat will adjust wording in Section 5.1, paragraph 2, by deleting “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence.

Most discussion concerned recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency). OICA questioned whether pursuing the recommendation was valuable, considering there was no proposal to develop a comparable methodology for conventional vehicles. OICA also emphasized that for vehicle classification, the fuel type does not matter. Mr. Olechiw clarified there are established metrics for CO2 performance of conventional vehicles in operation, while EVs do not have such a metric; this is misleading because while EVs do not produce emissions during operation, there is still a CO2 penalty, it is just displaced upstream. China emphasized that the methodology proposed in recommendation 2 would be very useful for governments and decision-making in the future and indicated they have some related research information that could be shared with the EVE group. The GRPE Chair agreed, indicating that work on recommendation 2 would be useful for political decision-making, however he was unsure about three things: 1) Does the work under recommendation 2 fall under the scope of WP.29, 2) Are the experts available within the WP.29 forum to conduct this work? Or, Are there other more appropriate groups at the United Nations who could do this work?, and 3) Where would the boundaries be established for the development of a such a methodology? To resolve these issues, the GRPE Chair recommended that if it is not possible to agree on the complete text, text which is not agreed upon should be indicated with square brackets in the Guide when it is submitted formally to the GRPE in March 2014. Also, with respect to recommendation 2, the WP.29 forum should be consulted concerning the three items listed above.

ACTION 3: China will share research information related to recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency) in draft 3 of the Guide with the EVE group via email or during a presentation at the next EVE meeting.

ACTION 4: The EVE Secretariat will consult the WP.29 forum for advice on recommendation 2. Japan also provided comments on the recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide via document EVE-08-06. Japan’s position is that WLTP IWG could take responsibility for recommendation 1 and 3, that recommendation 2 is outside the scope of WP.29 and recommendation 4 needs clarification. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the recommendations in the Guide could be considered by other groups, like WLTP, and that the intention is not to duplicate future work. The GRPE Chair indicated that in the WLTP group, there is a boundary made between energy consumption related to the propulsion of the vehicle and the energy used for auxiliaries; Mr. Olechiw indicated that for EVs, this separation is more difficult.

A general comment from OICA was made concerning Driver-user information and how it is not part of the GRPE mandate. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the mandate of the EVE group was broad, to share information on EVs; Mr. Couroux also clarified that it was not in the interest of the EVE IWG to make recommendations outside the scope of the GRPE, which is outlined in section 1.2.2. of draft 3 of the Guide.

The GRPE Chair made a general comment concerning the need to conduct research and gather information prior to developing a GTR. Following from this, it was suggested that the EVE group look at EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

ACTION 5: The EVE leadership will consider EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

A brief discussion was held on the EV terminology that should be used in the Guide. The GRPE Chair clarified that the Guide should use VPSD terminology and the FEV consultant agreed to make this change for draft 4 of the Guide.

ACTION 6: The FEV consultant will work with the EVE Secretariat to adjust the EV terminology in the Guide to reflect definitions developed by the VPSD working group. Comments on draft 3 of the Guide can be submitted until February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington (Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca). The Guide is targeted to be finalized during the 9th EVE meeting on February 17-18th in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

ACTION 7: All interested parties should submit comments on draft 3 of the Guide by February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca).