74. The representative of the Russian Federation presented proposals to the World Forum for amending UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133). WP.29 agreed to transmit the proposals to AC.4 for consideration at the March 2014 session.

63. The representatives of Estonia, Finland, Hungary, the Netherlands and Romania noted the parallel development of amendments to the UN Rules annexed to the 1997 Agreement and the corresponding EU Directive. They requested to delay (WP.29-162-09) the submission of the proposed amendments to UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133) to the Administrative Committee of the 1997 Agreement (AC.4), making sure that their obligations would not conflict with the EU Directive. Theye stated that if the amendments to UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 are adopted, they would not be harmonized with the current EU Directive. The Chair of GRRF recalled the discussion outcome at GRRF that the most pragmatic approach would be to consider aligning the amendments to the 1997 Agreement and the EU Directive as much as possible as these activities were progressing nearly in parallel.

64. The representative of the Russian Federation noted that WP.29 at its 156th session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1095, para 84) had confirmed the importance of Periodical Technical Inspection (PTI) of vehicles for road safety and had agreed to extend the scope of UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 to cover vehicles of categories M1, N1 and O1 making the 1997 Agreement more useful for emerging economies and for those countries not having a PTI system. He added that, accordingly, WP.29 had agreed to defer to a later stage the alignment of the provisions of both UN Rules to the corresponding EU Directive. He expressed the wish that the submission of the proposal for amendments to UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 should not be further delayed, given the safety and environmental implications of these amendments.

65. After examination with the Contracting Parties present, WP.29 saw no possibility to organize the vote on the amendments to the UN Rules and recommended not to hold the AC.4 session.

112. No supplementary information was provided beyond agenda item 7.2. (see paras. 70 and 71 above).

70. The representative of the Russian Federation introduced WP.29-163-17, containing amendments to the proposed amendments to UN Rules 1 and 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133). WP.29 agreed on a detailed discussion of WP.29-163-17 at its next session in November 2014 and requested the secretariat to distribute it with an official symbol. The representative of CITA was invited to prepare a document with the differences between the proposals for amendments to UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2, as modified by WP.29-163-17, and the recently adopted EU Directive (2014/45/EU) on this matter. The representatives of Finland and the Netherlands expressed their preference for aligning the date of entry into force of both the EU Directive and the draft amendments to UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2. The Vice-Chair proposed to investigate the use of transitional provisions addressing the comment expressed above.

78. The representative of the Russian Federation introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132/Rev.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133/Rev.1 proposing amendments to UN Rules No. 1 and 2. The representatives of Finland and the Netherlands indicated that the documents would need further amendments to be fully aligned with the corresponding EU directives. WP.29 noted that six out of the twelve Contracting Parties to the Agreement were EU member States and that any divergence between the UN Rules and the corresponding EU Directive would be unacceptable. WP.29 agreed not to hold the session of the Administrative Committee of the 1997 Agreement (AC.4).

77. The World Forum agreed to defer consideration of this item, awaiting the outcome of the work of IWG on PTI.

74. The representative of the Russian Federation, co-Chair of the Informal Working Group on Periodic Technical Inspection (IWG on PTI) reported on the continuation of the update of Rules Nos. 1 and 2 where good progress had been made. He expected the finalised proposals to be ready for vote in AC.4 at its June 2016 session.

72. The representative of the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of IWG on PTI, presented the revised proposal for Revision 2 to Rule No. 1 and draft amendments to Rule No. 2 developed by the group. He noted that the documents were harmonized with the provisions of the latest Regulations, annexed to the 1958 Agreement, and harmonized with the European Directive 2014/45/EU, Customs Union Regulation and other national legislations.

73. He explained that to ease the conditions for accession to the 1997 Agreement by the majority of Member States of the United Nations, the group proposed to exclude M1 and N1 vehicle categories from the scope of the Rules.

74. He, however, recalled that WP.29 at its 156th session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1095, para 84), had decided to extend the scope of the UN Rules to M1 and N1 vehicle categories, which had been reconfirmed at its 162nd session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1108) and that the corresponding draft amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132/Rev.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133/Rev.1) had been developed by the Russian Federation and CITA. He noted that a limited number of the Contracting Parties attended IWG on PTI and asked, therefore, for guidance by WP.29 on the subject.

75. The representative of Finland proposed to keep M1 and N1 vehicle categories in the scope of the Rules.

76. The representative from Hungary confirmed that for his country UN Rules covering M1 and N1 vehicle categories, harmonized with EU legislation, would be necessary.

77. WP.29 requested the IWG on PTI to continue the work on revising UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 and to submit draft amendments, covering both M1 and N1 vehicle categories for the next session.

72. The representative of the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of IWG on PTI, presented the revised proposal for Revision 2 to Rule No. 1 and draft amendments to Rule No. 2 developed by the group. He noted that the documents were harmonized with the provisions of the latest Regulations, annexed to the 1958 Agreement, and harmonized with the European Directive 2014/45/EU, Customs Union Regulation and other national legislations.

73. He explained that to ease the conditions for accession to the 1997 Agreement by the majority of Member States of the United Nations, the group proposed to exclude M1 and N1 vehicle categories from the scope of the Rules.

74. He, however, recalled that WP.29 at its 156th session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1095, para 84), had decided to extend the scope of the UN Rules to M1 and N1 vehicle categories, which had been reconfirmed at its 162nd session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1108) and that the corresponding draft amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132/Rev.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133/Rev.1) had been developed by the Russian Federation and CITA. He noted that a limited number of the Contracting Parties attended IWG on PTI and asked, therefore, for guidance by WP.29 on the subject.

75. The representative of Finland proposed to keep M1 and N1 vehicle categories in the scope of the Rules.

76. The representative from Hungary confirmed that for his country UN Rules covering M1 and N1 vehicle categories, harmonized with EU legislation, would be necessary.

77. WP.29 requested the IWG on PTI to continue the work on revising UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 and to submit draft amendments, covering both M1 and N1 vehicle categories for the next session.

The Co-Chair, Mr. Komarov, informed the group, that the revised proposal for Revision 2 to Rule No. 1 and draft amendments to Rule No. 2, developed by the group, were considered by WP.29 at its the 169th session. In result WP.29 requested the IWG on PTI to continue the work on revising UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 and to submit draft amendments, covering both M1 and N1 vehicle categories for the next session.

The representatives of United Kingdom, Netherland and Japan explained that they have to define their final position regarding the inclusion of light vehicles into the scope of the Rules. Meanwhile they noted that the technical requirements for the vehicles, laid down in the draft amendments to the Rules, could be acceptable. The representative of the Russian Federation supported this conclusion.

Romania and Serbia stated that they preferred to keep light vehicles out of the scope.

ACEA and CITA were in favour of UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2, covering both M1 and N1 vehicle categories, to make them harmonized with the European Directive 2014/45/EU, Customs Union Regulation and other national legislations.
Provided that the task of the IWG on PTI is completing draft amendments to UN Rule 1 and Rule 2 for their possible adoption by AC.4 by voting and following the guidance of WP.29, the group decided to submit the draft amendments to the Rules, covering both M1 and N1 vehicle categories, for the 170-th session of WP.29.

Romania highlighted the importance of having transitional provisions in the amended UN Rules Nos. 1 and 2 to synchronise their enter into force with the Directive 2014/45/EU.

The group agreed that document PTI-05-04 does not require additional modifications except addition of M1 and N1 vehicle categories and their inspection periodicities (item 3). Secretariat of the group volunteered to make necessary corrections and submit the document to WP.29.

The group concluded that document PTI-05-05 shall be added with M1 and N1 vehicle categories and their inspection periodicities (items 2.4 and 3), as well as related to them contents and methods of testing and assessment of deficiencies of vehicles, deleted by the group at previous stages. Secretariat of the group volunteered to make necessary corrections and submit the document to WP.29.

89. The representative of the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of the IWG on Periodical Technical Inspection (PTI) updated World Forum on the work of the group. He thanked the Romanian Automotive Register for arranging the fifth meeting of IWG on PTI in Bucharest. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/87 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/132/Rev.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/88 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/133/Rev.1, by presenting WP.29-170-23.

90. The representatives of Romania and of the Russian Federation informed WP.29 that some Contracting Parties to the 1997 Agreement would not be in the position to vote on these documents at this session, to avoid conflicting dates of entry into force of similar requirements in other regulatory frameworks. WP.29 agreed to not convene the Administrative Committee of the 1997 Agreement (AC.4).

91. The secretariat agreed to provide assistance to the IWG on PTI, to propose transitional provisions addressing the potential issue of conflicting dates of entry into force mentioned above.

92. The representative of the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of the IWG on Periodical Technical Inspection (PTI) updated the World Forum on the work of the group. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/47 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/87 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/48 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/88.

93. The World Forum considered the draft amendments and recommended their submission to AC.4 for voting.