Proposal to update and clarify the regulation. The proposal refines definitions, removes the “AWD” abbeviation for “audible warning device” to avoid confusion with its more common use for “all wheel drive”, adds T category agricultural vehicles to the scope, modifies some administrative communications, and proposes three-direction acoustic measurements. The proposal also aims to structure the regulation to enable its application to additional sound warning devices not presently regulated at the international level, excluding acoustic vehicle alerting systems (AVAS) which will be subject to a separate regulation on minimum vehicle sound levels.

Proposal to update the provisions of Regulation No. 92 to a level at least equivalent to the corresponding provisions in the European Union legislation. The document proposes improved terminology and definitions, including new ones, improved sound emission testing conditions and procedures. It also introduces anti-tampering provisions and an “Additional sound emission provisions” (ASEP) statement by the manufacturer.

Based on the outcomes of a European Commission study, proposal to clarify the text and align its provisions with other vehicle sound regulations, especially UN R41.

Based on the outcomes of a European Commission study, proposal to clarify the text and align its provisions with other vehicle sound regulations, especially UN R41, including to replace references to “two wheeled moped” with the term “L1 category vehicles” (and consequently to replace references to “moped” with “vehicle”) and to replace the term “noise” with “sound” (except for references to background noise) throughout the regulation. It proposes improved terminology and definitions, including new ones, improved sound emission testing conditions and procedures. It also introduces sound emission measurement through new testing of in use vehicles in motion.

Proposal to prohibit the use of a pause function for the acoustic vehicle alert system.

Proposal to clarify the regulation with regard to propulsion of the vehicle (replace the term “travel”), definition of the “pause function” (including taking into account the Japanese proposal to prohibit the use of a pause function), and provisions for deactivating AVAS coding in accordance with local market requirements and under conditions outside the scope of the regulation.