| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document Title | Venoliva Study: Impact assessment of the policy options | ||||||||
| Reference Number | GRB-52-14 | ||||||||
| Date |
7 Sep 2010
|
||||||||
| Source(s) | TNO and EC | ||||||||
| Rulemaking Area(s) | UN R51 Vehicle Noise | ||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||
| UNECE server | .pdf format | ||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||
| GRB | Session 52 | 6-8 Sep 2010 |
10. The expert from EC informed GRB of the ongoing procedure to set up a proposal for new sound limit values and presented the draft final report (GRB-52-07) on the comparison of two noise measurement methods, based on type approval data received during the 2-year monitoring process. GRB followed with interest a presentation on the final results of a study (GRB-52-13) on the vehicle noise limit values (VENOLIVA), including possible policy options for the reduction of noise limit values. GRB noted also a presentation on the impact assessment of the policy options (GRB-52-14) of that study. 11. Referring to GRB-52-11, the expert from OICA raised concerns about the huge gap between the outcome of the VENOLIVA study and the results of the first test measurement programme, which had initially been performed already in 2004—2005 with huge financial efforts, by the automotive industry jointly with Japan and the United States of America (TRANS/WP.29/GRB/39, para. 8). He questioned the methodology applied for the evaluation of the noise measurement data. He also wondered why the data of a number of vehicles types have been removed from the database. He stated that the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) had launched parallel evaluations, by two independent consultants, of the noise measurement data collected during the monitoring phase. He stated that the final report on these evaluations would be published in the near future and announced his intention to make the report available to all GRB experts. The expert from ETRTO expressed his doubts on the exaggerated amounts of costs mentioned in the VENOLIVA study as well as the statement on the low influence of tyres and the torque effect on noise levels. He suggested having a detailed consideration on these issues together with the experts from EC and OICA. 12. Concluding the discussion, the Chair invited all GRB experts to send their comments on the VENOLIVA study, not later than by the end of September 2010, to the |
||||||||