5. GRSP noted that the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at its November 2010 session (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1087, para. 109) agreed to transmit to GRSP two proposals amending the terms of reference of the informal group on gtr No. 7 Phase 2 (GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12). Accordingly, the Chair of the informal group, informed GRSP on the work progress of the group and its intention to focus on a revised work plan:

1. new height requirements;
   
2. a dynamic test to mitigate both short and long term whiplash injuries rather than on low and high test speed pulse;
   
3. evaluate dummies, their use and injury criteria to reflect high biofidelity human body mechanism in real world accidents.

6. He informed GRSP of his intention to submit a new proposal amending the terms of reference based on GRSP-48-33 (superseding GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12), including the extension of the mandate of the group until 2013, to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and AC.3 at their March 2011 session. GRSP recommended that its experts provide comments onto GRSP-48-33 to the expert from Japan by January 2011.

7. GRSP also noted that three informal groups: (i) pole side impact, (ii) harmonization of side impact dummies and (iii) gtr No. 7 Phase 2, scheduled a joint meeting in Brussels for the week 28 February to 4 March 2011.

8. Finally, GRSP took note of GRSP-48-18, GRSP-48-19 and GRSP-48-38 tabled by the expert from India and agreed to keep them for reference in the agenda of its future sessions.

5. GRSP noted that the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at its November 2010 session (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1087, para. 109) agreed to transmit to GRSP two proposals amending the terms of reference of the informal group on gtr No. 7 Phase 2 (GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12). Accordingly, the Chair of the informal group, informed GRSP on the work progress of the group and its intention to focus on a revised work plan:

1. new height requirements;
   
2. a dynamic test to mitigate both short and long term whiplash injuries rather than on low and high test speed pulse;
   
3. evaluate dummies, their use and injury criteria to reflect high biofidelity human body mechanism in real world accidents.

6. He informed GRSP of his intention to submit a new proposal amending the terms of reference based on GRSP-48-33 (superseding GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12), including the extension of the mandate of the group until 2013, to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and AC.3 at their March 2011 session. GRSP recommended that its experts provide comments onto GRSP-48-33 to the expert from Japan by January 2011.

7. GRSP also noted that three informal groups: (i) pole side impact, (ii) harmonization of side impact dummies and (iii) gtr No. 7 Phase 2, scheduled a joint meeting in Brussels for the week 28 February to 4 March 2011.

8. Finally, GRSP took note of GRSP-48-18, GRSP-48-19 and GRSP-48-38 tabled by the expert from India and agreed to keep them for reference in the agenda of its future sessions.

5. GRSP noted that the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at its November 2010 session (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1087, para. 109) agreed to transmit to GRSP two proposals amending the terms of reference of the informal group on gtr No. 7 Phase 2 (GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12). Accordingly, the Chair of the informal group, informed GRSP on the work progress of the group and its intention to focus on a revised work plan:

1. new height requirements;
   
2. a dynamic test to mitigate both short and long term whiplash injuries rather than on low and high test speed pulse;
   
3. evaluate dummies, their use and injury criteria to reflect high biofidelity human body mechanism in real world accidents.

6. He informed GRSP of his intention to submit a new proposal amending the terms of reference based on GRSP-48-33 (superseding GRSP-48-11 and GRSP-48-12), including the extension of the mandate of the group until 2013, to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and AC.3 at their March 2011 session. GRSP recommended that its experts provide comments onto GRSP-48-33 to the expert from Japan by January 2011.

7. GRSP also noted that three informal groups: (i) pole side impact, (ii) harmonization of side impact dummies and (iii) gtr No. 7 Phase 2, scheduled a joint meeting in Brussels for the week 28 February to 4 March 2011.

8. Finally, GRSP took note of GRSP-48-18, GRSP-48-19 and GRSP-48-38 tabled by the expert from India and agreed to keep them for reference in the agenda of its future sessions.

18. The expert from India withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/19 and GRRF-69-18 clarifying Regulation No. 13-H with regard to Brake Assist Systems (BAS).

19. The expert from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/21 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/21/Corr.1 proposing to replace, in Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H, the fixed reference to Regulation No. 10 by a dynamic reference. The expert from CLEPA and OICA proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/34 an alternative wording for the dynamic reference. The GRRF Chair proposed to seek guidance from WP.29 on this issue that is not specific to GRRF but concerns all the groups of experts.

20. GRRF considered and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/32 correcting a figure in Regulation No. 13. GRRF noted that the secretariat had already included this correction in Revision 7 of Regulation No. 13.

21. The experts from CLEPA and OICA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35 clarifying the levels of braking performance in the different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to consider at its next session a revised proposal from CLEPA and OICA taking into account the comments received.

42. GRPE noted a brief report (GRPE-60-21) by the expert from India, chairing the informal group on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV), about the progress made by the informal group at its sixth meeting held in Geneva, on 15 January 2010. The informal group was expected to meet after the GRPE session proper and to consider a number of working papers on a single score evaluation such as CO2 emissions, noise level, gaseous pollutants, the recyclability and type of fuels. Detailed information on these parameters is available at: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grpe/efv07.html.

43. The group agreed to refer the noise issues (EFV-07-05) for detailed consideration to the Working Party on Noise. Referring to the EFV feasibility statement (GRPE-58-02 and GRPE-58-03), the expert from OICA did not agree with the single score evaluation concept. He preferred to follow the integrated well-to-wheels approach as initially agreed in the feasibility study.

44. A number of experts were of the opinion that the future EFV concept document should include a more general part (e.g. preamble) with provisions for the well-to-tank approach and a more detailed part (e.g. regulation, recommendation) with technical specifications (such as the single score concept) for the tank-to-wheel approach focusing on the construction of EFV and their environmental performance.

45. The GRPE Chairman suggested that the informal group should again meet in conjunction with the next session of GRPE in January 2011 (see para. 57 below).
…
57. For its sixty-first session to be held in Geneva, Palais des Nations, GRPE decided to start on Monday, 10 January 2011, at 10.00 a.m. until Friday, 14 January 2011, 5.30 p.m., subject to confirmation by the secretariat (see GRPE-61-01). For that purpose, the following time schedule and provisional agenda was suggested:
…
8. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV)

To be held on Friday afternoon, 14 January 2011, from 2.30 p.m. till 5.30 p.m. The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the EFV secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting. This meeting will be held without interpretation.

33. The Secretary informed GRB of the progress made during the sixth and seventh meetings of the informal group on environmentally friendly vehicles (EFV) which was held in Geneva on 11 June 2010 (GRPE-60-21 and EFV-07-05). GRB noted that the eighth informal meeting on EFV would be held in conjunction with the forthcoming session of the Working Party on Pollution and Energy (GRPE) in January 2011. GRB also noted the approach proposed by the EFV Chair to consider, as a first step, a single score evaluation of environmentally friendly vehicles such as parameters on CO2 emissions, noise level, gaseous pollutants, the recyclability and type of fuels. Detailed information is available at: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grpe/efv07.html.

34. GRB welcomed the proposed structure (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/60, para. 44) of the future EFV concept document in a more general part with provisions for the well-to-tank approach and a more detailed part with technical specifications or recommendations for the tank-to-wheel approach, focusing on the construction of EFV and their environmental performance.

35. With regard to the parameters on noise (EFV-07-05), GRB would like to have a detailed discussion on this issue and suggested holding the ninth informal group on EFV prior to the next session of GRB in the morning of 15 February 2011.

42. GRPE noted a brief report (GRPE-60-21) by the expert from India, chairing the informal group on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV), about the progress made by the informal group at its sixth meeting held in Geneva, on 15 January 2010. The informal group was expected to meet after the GRPE session proper and to consider a number of working papers on a single score evaluation such as CO2 emissions, noise level, gaseous pollutants, the recyclability and type of fuels. Detailed information on these parameters is available at: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grpe/efv07.html.

43. The group agreed to refer the noise issues (EFV-07-05) for detailed consideration to the Working Party on Noise. Referring to the EFV feasibility statement (GRPE-58-02 and GRPE-58-03), the expert from OICA did not agree with the single score evaluation concept. He preferred to follow the integrated well-to-wheels approach as initially agreed in the feasibility study.

44. A number of experts were of the opinion that the future EFV concept document should include a more general part (e.g. preamble) with provisions for the well-to-tank approach and a more detailed part (e.g. regulation, recommendation) with technical specifications (such as the single score concept) for the tank-to-wheel approach focusing on the construction of EFV and their environmental performance.

45. The GRPE Chairman suggested that the informal group should again meet in conjunction with the next session of GRPE in January 2011 (see para. 57 below).
…
57. For its sixty-first session to be held in Geneva, Palais des Nations, GRPE decided to start on Monday, 10 January 2011, at 10.00 a.m. until Friday, 14 January 2011, 5.30 p.m., subject to confirmation by the secretariat (see GRPE-61-01). For that purpose, the following time schedule and provisional agenda was suggested:
…
8. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV)

To be held on Friday afternoon, 14 January 2011, from 2.30 p.m. till 5.30 p.m. The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the EFV secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting. This meeting will be held without interpretation.

33. The Secretary informed GRB of the progress made during the sixth and seventh meetings of the informal group on environmentally friendly vehicles (EFV) which was held in Geneva on 11 June 2010 (GRPE-60-21 and EFV-07-05). GRB noted that the eighth informal meeting on EFV would be held in conjunction with the forthcoming session of the Working Party on Pollution and Energy (GRPE) in January 2011. GRB also noted the approach proposed by the EFV Chair to consider, as a first step, a single score evaluation of environmentally friendly vehicles such as parameters on CO2 emissions, noise level, gaseous pollutants, the recyclability and type of fuels. Detailed information is available at: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29grpe/efv07.html.

34. GRB welcomed the proposed structure (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/60, para. 44) of the future EFV concept document in a more general part with provisions for the well-to-tank approach and a more detailed part with technical specifications or recommendations for the tank-to-wheel approach, focusing on the construction of EFV and their environmental performance.

35. With regard to the parameters on noise (EFV-07-05), GRB would like to have a detailed discussion on this issue and suggested holding the ninth informal group on EFV prior to the next session of GRB in the morning of 15 February 2011.

(a) Proposal for Supplement 37 to the 03 series of amendments:
5. GRE considered and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2010/51, not amended, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2010/35 (amended by GRE–64–58) as amended by Annex II and GRE-64-39 as reproduced in Annex II of this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposals to WP.29 and the Administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) at their March 2011 sessions, as draft Supplement 37 to the 03 series of amendments.

(b) Proposal for Corrigendum 2 to Supplement 35 to the 03 series of amendments:
6. GRE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2010/34 not amended and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 at their March 2011 sessions, as draft Corrigendum 2 to Supplement 35 to the 03 series of amendments.

© Proposal for Corrigendum 2 to Supplement 34 to the 03 series of amendments:
7. GRE adopted GRE-64-28 as reproduced in Annex II of this report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 at their March 2011 sessions, as draft Corrigendum 2 to Supplement 34 to the 03 series of amendments.

(d) Proposal for Corrigendum 1 to Supplement 36 to the 03 series of amendments:
8. GRE adopted GRE-64-29 as reproduced in Annex II of this report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 at their March 2011 sessions, as draft Corrigendum 1 to Supplement 36 to the 03 series of amendments.

(e) Proposal for Corrigendum 2 to Revision 5:
9. GRE did not support GRE-64-31.

18. The expert from India withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/19 and GRRF-69-18 clarifying Regulation No. 13-H with regard to Brake Assist Systems (BAS).

19. The expert from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/21 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2010/21/Corr.1 proposing to replace, in Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H, the fixed reference to Regulation No. 10 by a dynamic reference. The expert from CLEPA and OICA proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/34 an alternative wording for the dynamic reference. The GRRF Chair proposed to seek guidance from WP.29 on this issue that is not specific to GRRF but concerns all the groups of experts.

20. GRRF considered and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/32 correcting a figure in Regulation No. 13. GRRF noted that the secretariat had already included this correction in Revision 7 of Regulation No. 13.

21. The experts from CLEPA and OICA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35 clarifying the levels of braking performance in the different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to consider at its next session a revised proposal from CLEPA and OICA taking into account the comments received.

21. Recalling the discussion at the previous session of GRPE, the Chairman of the informal group on Worldwide harmonized Motorcycle emission Test Cycle (WMTC) introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/10 proposing to introduce limit values into gtr No. 2. He reported that the discussions on the proposal were still ongoing on the following three issues:
(i) final set of limit values,
(ii) reference fuel and
(iii) durability requirements.

He announced his intention to hold a further meeting in Brussels on 13-14 September 2010 to resolve the remaining open issues. He expected to submit the final proposal to GRPE for consideration at its next session.

22. The expert from IMMA raised concerns (GRPE-60-04) and suggested improving the text of ECE/TRANS/WP.2/GRPE/2010/10. The expert from Japan proposed to amend the provisions in part 1 (preamble) regarding reference fuel (GRPE-60-14). The expert from the United States of America presented GRPE-60-07 proposing a number of improvements and clarifications to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/10. The experts from India and Canada supported these comments. GRPE agreed to refer these informal documents to the WMTC informal group for a detailed consideration.

23. The GRPE Chairman expressed his intention to inform WP.29 and AC.3 in June 2010 about the status and he recommended having a final review of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/10 at the next session of GRPE in January 2011.

84. WP.29 considered the proposals for amending the UN publication “WP.29; how it works, how to joint it”, known as the “Blue Book”. Contributions from China, Japan and the United States of America were announced. The representative of Germany suggested reorganizing Chart 1 (Organization of WP.29). WP.29 invited its representatives to submit their contributions and comments by 6 June 2011 and requested the secretariat to prepare a revised version of the publication for consideration at its June 2011 session.

2. The chairman informed the group that data had been received from India, but not yet from China. The Chinese delegation explained that they did not yet have agreement from their administration to submit their data, but hoped that they may be able to submit it soon. The chairman noted that, in view of the timescales, the group would now need to proceed with the cycle development without the Chinese data, although once received this could be considered in any subsequent analysis and amendment of the cycle.

3. India gave a presentation on their data collection in and around 6 different cities. Their data gathering included 12 cars, 2 SUVs and 4 light goods vehicles encompassing petrol, diesel and natural gas fuelled vehicles. Weekday, weekend, on-peak and off-peak driving was covered in the data gathering. 68,370km of data gathering in total was submitted. India noted that the only deviation from DHC’s data gathering guidelines was that the drivers were drivers of company vehicles and did not pay for their own fuel.

7. Japan presented their analysis and proposal for gearshift points based on the driving database (document DHC-09-03). They proposed fixed gearshift points based on vehicle speed and acceleration in the cycle. Mr Steven commented that the conclusion that gearshift point was independent of the number of gear ratios was influenced by the vast majority of the 157 vehicles in the database having 5-speed gearboxes. Mr Haniu noted that the gearshift points for the 4-speed and 6-speed gearboxes were well within the 5-speed gearshift ranges. Mr Steven also noted that the proposed Light Duty Commercial Vehicle gearshift points were at lower speeds than for passenger cars and that this was not representative for higher power to mass ration goods vehicles.

8. Clutch disengagement points on decelerations were based on typical vehicle speeds at 1000rpm in the gear selected, with the remainder of the deceleration being completed with the clutch disengaged.

9. OICA noted that at certain points in the cycle with the proposed gearshift points vehicles were required to accelerate in second gear from very low vehicle speed. This would necessitate slipping the clutch in most cases which would adversely effect repeatability. The vice chair noted that this would be reviewed based on experience in validation 1 and that “troughs” in the cycle trace could be “lopped” (increased to a slightly higher speed) if necessary.

10. It was agreed that alternative gearshift point proposals were welcome and that these could be trialled alongside the Japanese proposal in validation phase 1.

11. Japan proposed that, in the absence of data, first gear should be selected 5 seconds prior to pull-away for consistency with existing test cycles. OICA felt that this was not representative. It was agreed that an alternative proposal would be welcome, but that the 5 second period would be retained until such a proposal had been considered.

12. Mr Ichikawa noted that comments had been received from India on the documents and draft cycle and would be circulated to the group. The vice chair noted India’s comments related in particular to the ability of low power vehicles to follow the cycle, these vehicles may need to be exempted from Medium and High phases, and potentially require an alternative Low speed phase. India also requested that their gear shift data be considered in developing gearshift points (they commented that gearshift behaviour differed in India due to the prevalence of 4-speed gearboxes).

29. The Chair of the informal group on the tyre gtr reported on the progress made by the group. GRRF noted that the group would meet again on 16 September 2011 and that a proposal should be submitted to GRRF for consideration at its February 2012 session. GRRF agreed to refer GRRF-71-32 by the expert from India to the informal group.

In the absence of a representative from India, the secretary presented working paper HDH-07-07 by India. India proposes that the chassis dyno method can be used by Contracting Parties who have chassis dyno capabilities as an option to the HILS method.

The US GHG rule also includes complete hybrid vehicle certification on the chassis dyno. Coastdown testing to develop road load coefficients is performed consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 1066. Coastdown requirements are largely based on SAE J1263 with some modifications. To correct fuel economy or emission results for net energy change of the RESS, the procedures specified for charge-sustaining operation in SAE J2711 are used.

Mr. Schulte indicated that chassis dyno testing of hybrid vehicles needed additional input compared to conventional vehicles, which is not a simple approach. Mr. Dekker confirmed that chassis dyno testing of hybrid vehicles is more complicated than for conventional vehicles. Mr. Jackson informed that SAE is updating the standard 2711. It was agreed to rely the assessment of chassis dyno testing on inputs from ongoing hybrid testing programs at different Contracting Parties.

90. The representative of India reported on the progress made by the EFV Task Force group during the last session in June 2011 (WP.29-155-16). He outlined the group’s decision to withdraw the original plan to develop a single evaluation concept for EFV and to freeze the activities of the EFV informal group related to the approach of a single score assessment. He sought WP.29s confirmation on that conclusion. He presented the group’s recommendation to develop a progress report listing innovative technologies and their advancements as well as the EFV implementation progress made since the first EFV conference in 2003. He added that the group had identified the need to develop uniform definitions for the new EFV technologies such as different stages of hybrid, electric, hydrogen, other gas powered or dual fuel vehicles. Such an activity could be undertaken in WP.29 with the involvement of different GR groups to develop uniform definitions for the new EFV vehicle technologies such as different stages of hybrid, electric, hydrogen or other gas powered or dual fuel vehicles.

91. WP.29 endorsed the outcome of the EFV Task Force. It was recommended that the progress report should be finalized in due time to become a basic document for exploring the potentials for future regulations at the next EFV Conference. WP.29 agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next sessions on the basis of a concrete document.

Comments from India concerning: (a) Endurance, Low Inflation Pressure & High Speed Performance tests as per FMVSS 139; (b) “C” type tire marking; © Snow tire definitions; (d) Harmonization of light truck & commercial vehicle tires; and (e) Tire ID Number.

Proposals from the Indian delegation to improve the working draft of the GTR (document TYREGTR-12-01) pursuant to the 16 September 2011 session of the Tyre GTR informal group, including certain IEC and FMVSS references.

24. On behalf of the informal group on the Tyre GTR, the expert from ETRTO reported on the work progress done by the group during the meeting prior the GRRF session proper.

He presented the proposed structure and the draft preamble for the new GTR on tyres (GRRF-72-23).

He informed GRRF on the remaining open issues still to be considered: amongst others the scope, the tyre identification number and the manufacturer reference code. The expert from the United States of America volunteered to review the preamble with respect to a more neutral certification procedure.

Referring to GRRF-72-16, the expert from India acknowledged that the informal group had already considered his concerns.

GRRF noted that the next meeting of the informal group was scheduled to be held in Geneva on 29 June 2012 to further develop GRRF-72-23.

GRRF noted the consent of WP.29 at its November 2012 session to go forward with a two-phase approach and to consider the requirements e.g. for rolling resistance, wet grip, light truck and commercial tyres only in the second phase.

GRRF agreed to have, at its next session in September 2012, a detailed review of the draft GTR (first phase) on the basis of an official document to be prepared by the informal group.

88. The representative of India informed WP.29 about the progress made by the task force group of the EFV informal working group concerning the preparation of the report covering the automotive technology progress on EFV since 2003. He announced that this report would be presented at the fifth EFV Conference, scheduled to be held in Baltimore (USA). He suggested a time line for the elaboration of the report (WP.29-156-17) and proposed that the task force group should have a final session in conjunction with the EFV Conference to conclude the report.

Phase 1 validation results of Indian vehicles using the low-powered vehicle cycle version 1.4 and comments concerning issues pertaining to WLTC Version 5 based on India validation 1b results.

Update from India on the status of work with the United States on the preliminary report on aspects of environmentally friendly vehicles, such as automotive technologies, alternate fuels, electric, hybrid, fuel cell, solar, and air vehicles, aerodynamics, consumer labeling, tires, etc.

62. The representative of India informed the World Forum about the progress of the task force group (TFG) of the EFV informal working group (WP.29-157-14). He stated that a preliminary report on various aspects on EFVs had been prepared by India, revised by the United States of America, and forwarded to all TFG members for final review. He invited all Parties to submit their comments.

63. The representative of Japan informed WP.29 that their comments to the report had been transmitted. The representative of Germany announced his intention to provide his comments as soon as possible.

Progress report by the Environmentally Friendly Vehicles Task Force Group, especially concerning the preparation of a report reviewing the progress of automotive EFV technologies since 2003.

71. The representatives of India and the United States of America introduced a summary report of the WP.29 work on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles between 2003 and 2012 (WP.29-158-17) and briefly illustrated the process followed by the EFV Task Force Group for its preparation (WP.29-158-16).

72. The World Forum requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-158-17 with an official symbol at the March 2013 session for consideration and possible adoption. The Chair of GRPE suggested discontinuing the activities of the EFV informal working group and the EFV Task Force Group. The World Forum agreed to consider this suggestion at its March 2013 session.

51. The Chair of the EFV informal group recalled that a summary report of the WP.29 work on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles between 2003 and 2012 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/33) was introduced as an informal document (WP.29-158-17) at the last WP.29 session, in November 2013, and that it will be distributed at the March 2013 WP.29 session for consideration and possible adoption. Having clarified that this report was also accompanied by a document describing the process followed by the EFV task force group for its preparation (WP.29-158-16), he briefly reported on the success of the fifth EFV Conference, held in Baltimore (Maryland, USA) on 10-12 September 2012.

52. GRPE congratulated the EFV informal working group and task force group for their work and agreed that the adoption of the summary report by WP.29 shall conclude the EFV activities. EFV will not appear as an agenda item in the future.

EFV informal group report “Environmentally Friendly Vehicles and the World Forum For the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP. 29), 2003 – 2012: Ten Years of Progress and Future Trends”.

71. The representatives of India and the United States of America introduced a summary report of the WP.29 work on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles between 2003 and 2012 (WP.29-158-17) and briefly illustrated the process followed by the EFV Task Force Group for its preparation (WP.29-158-16).

72. The World Forum requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-158-17 with an official symbol at the March 2013 session for consideration and possible adoption. The Chair of GRPE suggested discontinuing the activities of the EFV informal working group and the EFV Task Force Group. The World Forum agreed to consider this suggestion at its March 2013 session.

Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV) and the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP. 29) 2003 – 2012, ten years of progress and future trends: report on the activities of the World Forum on the progress made for the development and use of EFV.

51. The Chair of the EFV informal group recalled that a summary report of the WP.29 work on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles between 2003 and 2012 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/33) was introduced as an informal document (WP.29-158-17) at the last WP.29 session, in November 2013, and that it will be distributed at the March 2013 WP.29 session for consideration and possible adoption. Having clarified that this report was also accompanied by a document describing the process followed by the EFV task force group for its preparation (WP.29-158-16), he briefly reported on the success of the fifth EFV Conference, held in Baltimore (Maryland, USA) on 10-12 September 2012.

52. GRPE congratulated the EFV informal working group and task force group for their work and agreed that the adoption of the summary report by WP.29 shall conclude the EFV activities. EFV will not appear as an agenda item in the future.

76. The World Forum considered and adopted the final report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/33) of ten years of activities in evaluating the concept of Environmentally Friendly Vehicles (EFV). WP.29 noted that the work completed during the decade was very positive, being the basis for the current development of UN Regulations and GTRs. It was agreed to freeze the activities of the EFV informal working group and the EFV Task Force, which could be re-activated in future, if needed.

Comments from India on informal documents GRRF–73-11 and GRRF-73-10 proposing to clarify and align the texts of GTR No. 3 and UN Regulation No. 78 on motorcycle braking systems.

18. The expert from IMMA introduced GRRF-74-35, superseding GRRF-73-10, proposing to clarify some provisions and to simplify the test procedures in Regulation No. 78. The proposal received several comments, including GRRF-74-34, introduced by the expert from India. GRRF agreed to reconsider IMMAs proposal on the basis of an updated official document taking into account the comments received. The expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare the document and to submit it in due time to the secretariat. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/7, a proposal to amend certain requirements in Regulation No. 78. GRRF considered that clarification of the intention of the proposal and further justification was necessary. The expert from IMMA agreed to amend the document in line with the comments received and submit for consideration at GRRFs September 2013 session.

19. The expert from IMMA introduced GRRF-74-36, superseding GRRF-73-11, introducing similar amendments to those proposed for Regulation No. 78. The Chair noted the requirement for a Contracting Party to sponsor this proposal. The expert from Italy volunteered to clarify before the next AC.3 session if Italy would sponsor this amendment. GRRF agreed to reconsider IMMAs proposal on the basis of an updated official document taking into account the various comments received. The expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare the document and to submit it in due time to the secretariat.

Proposed revision to ensure that a minimum horizontal and vertical movement ratios on the apparent surface of direction indicators is maintained in the proposal by France and Germany for lamps with spatial variation of the intensity under UN Regulation No. 48.

26. GRE considered two proposals introduced by the experts of France and Germany, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2013/13 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2013/14, introducing provisions for variations of the apparent surface of direction indicators. The expert from OICA introduced amendments to the proposals (GRE-69-27 and GRE-69-28). Introducing GRE-69-18 and GRE-69-19, the expert from the Netherlands expressed the concern about the lack of signal uniformity that this proposal would create. GRE requested an assessment of impact upon safety relating to direction indicators with variable apparent surface. The majority of experts from Contracting Parties opposed the proposal made by Germany and France but agreed to resume consideration on this issue on the basis of a revised proposal by the experts from France and Germany. GRE agreed to keep GRE-69-17, GRE-69-18 and GRE-69-30 on the agenda of its October 2013 session.

India explained their proposal for structure in document No 07.

The basic idea is to split the GTRs based on vehicle category (2, 3 and 4-wheeled in different GTRs) and then group the test types. UN Regulations can then be created based on the work done for the GTRs.

There was a discussion regarding what test types that could be grouped together.

The group also discussed the different approaches taken for the WLTP where all requirements are put into one GTR and for HDV where the different procedures and tests are separated into different GTRs (WHDC, OBD and OCE). The chair found that the group would prefer a structure more similar to HDV with different GTRs for the different requirements or procedures.

It was agreed by the group that the proposal from India was interesting but that it will give a very large number of new GTRs and UN Regulations.

Japan stressed the importance for them to put priority to OBD and Evap. as they have a national obligation until 2016.

India volunteered to reflect on the discussion and provide an amended proposal where they will consider grouping the test types and vehicle categories in order to reduce the number of new GTRs and UN regulations. India promised to come back within a couple of weeks.

India presented their revised proposal, document EPPR-03-02e:

• India prefers to give priority for GTR’s first and subsequent transposition to ECE for categories covered both in SR 1 and RE3.
• India suggested discussing quadricycles first under the ’58 agreement, as these vehicles are not included in the categorization of SR1.
• India proposed:
  
  • To group tailpipe emissions: Cold start pollutant emissions (type I), Idle (II) & CO2 (VII), and make an amendment to GTR2.
  • To group EVAP and crankcase emissions in a new GTR
  • To create a separate, new GTR for OBD
  • To create a separate, new GTR for durability
  • To create a separate, new GTR for performance related tests

• India proposed to give priority to EVAP, OBD and tailpipe emissions.
• India suggested to put 2-wheel (L1, L3 & L4-categories) and 3-wheel vehicles (L2 & L5-categories) under a common GTR, but separated in different annexes of the GTR. India added L3 can be given priority.

Comments on the text prepared by the International Motorcycle Manufacturers Association (IMMA) to modify provisions concerning the sharing of components within combined braking systems (CBS) in order to adapt to technological progress.

21. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/34. He added that IMMA would like to address the comments made by India (GRRF-75-25). GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised document, which the expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare.

Proposal to clarify the text of the regulation.

5. Following a bilateral discussion with OICA, the expert from India withdrew GRRF-75-24 and requested OICA to provide clarifications on the table in Annex 3 to UN Regulation No. 131. GRRF agreed to resume consideration of this item at its February 2014 session on the basis of a revised document.

Comments on the text prepared by the Italy to modify GTR No. 3 provisions concerning the sharing of components within combined braking systems (CBS) in order to adapt to technological progress.

23. The expert from IMMA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/35 and noted the comments by the expert from India (GRRF-75-26). GRRF agreed to revisit this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised document, which the expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare.

Comments on the proposed series of amendments to clarify a variety of requirements, notably concerning test surface requirements, ABS cycling, and peak braking coefficient measurements in UN R78.

20. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/32, as amended by GRRF-75-31. The proposal received some comments. The expert from India presented GRRF-75-27 and confirmed that IMMA took their comments into account in GRRF-75-31. GRRF agreed to revisit this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised document, which the expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare.

Comments on the proposed series of amendments to clarify a variety of requirements, notably concerning test surface requirements, ABS cycling, and peak braking coefficient measurements, in GTR No. 3.

22. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/33 on behalf of the sponsor, Italy. He added that this document was amended by GRRF-75-32. The proposal received some comments. The expert from India presented GRRF-75-28 and noted that IMMA had considered their comments in GRRF-75-32. GRRF agreed to revisit this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised document. GRRF noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/128 may need revision to reflect the progress made by GRRF. The expert from Italy volunteered to prepare the revised document, if necessary.

The 2-3 wheeled vehicle emissions discussions are tending towards several approaches (amendment to GTR 2, new GTR, UN Regulation, etc.) cover different aspects (OBD, evaporative, quadricycles, etc.). India offers further input on this matrix.

Preliminary comments from India on the draft GTR on L-category vehicle crankcase and evaporative emissions (document EPPR-04-06) and the draft durability testing presented in document EPPR-05-08 which may or may not be established through an amendment to GTR No. 2 or as a separate regulation.

India comments on the draft GTR that would establish evaporative emissions test procedures for two-wheeled mopeds and motorcycles.

Appendix to document EPPR-06-04 with specific text proposals for the proposed motorcycle and moped evaporative emissions GTR.

India comments on the draft text for a new global technical regulation on motorcycle and moped on-board diagnostic systems (document EPPR-05-09).

India comments on the working draft amendments to address motorcycle tailpipe emissions when idling, CO2 emissions, and possibly durability testing under GTR No. 2.

India comments on the draft L-vehicle on-board diagnostics global technical regulation (marked in red on the document).

India supports the purpose of the amendments to GTR No. 3 (GRRF/2014/4) and UN R78 (GRRF/2014/5) to provide same safety in the case of a failure in CBS as that of the conventional system of the two independent brakes for two wheelers. However, India believes the application of the amendments to three-wheelers requires additional consideration. Therefore, in order to proceed with amendments concerning CBS for two-wheelers, India proposes changes to the proposed text in order to allow further consideration of three-wheelers.

20. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/5 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/6 as amended by GRRF-76-19 and GRRF-76-36-Rev.1 proposing general clarifications to UN Regulation No. 78 and specific clarifications for the use of Combined Braking Systems (CBS). The proposals received some comments and the expert from IMMA consolidated these requested changes into a revised proposal (GRRF-76-45). The expert from India introduced GRRF-76-32 on three wheelers, which GRRF agreed to revisit on the basis of a revised proposal at its September 2014 session. GRRF requested the secretariat to distribute GRRF-76-45 with an official symbol at the September 2014 session.

India noted an erroneous reference to “ESC” in the original document where “BAS” was clearly intended.

36. The expert from OICA introduced a proposal for a draft Regulation on Brake Assist Systems (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/11 amended by GRRF-76-14 and GRRF-76-33) and a proposal for a draft Regulation on Electronic Stability Control (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/12 amended by GRRF-76-13). Addressing the open question on how to deal with the original Annex 8 of Regulation No. 13-H, he presented GRRF-76-40 and the corresponding proposal amending the draft mentioned above (GRRF-76-22 and GRRF-76-23). GRRF agreed to resume consideration of this item and keep the documentation on the agenda of the September 2014 session of GRRF.

49. The expert from OICA introduced the new documents as well as the proposals for separate UN Regulations on Brake Assist Systems (BAS) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/11) and on Electronic Stability Control (ESC) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/12) extracted from UN Regulation No. 13‑H (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/10). The Chair recalled the purpose of GRRF-76-33 and GRRF-76-34. OICA stated that GRRF-76-34 had been taken into account when drafting the proposals above. He introduced GRRF-78-29 proposing to delete the k-test method prescribed in Annex 7 and only keep the method prescribed in Appendix 2 to Annex 6 to align the UN Regulation with GTR No. 8. GRRF agreed to reconsider this proposal at its seventy-ninth session.

Proposed corrections and clarifications to the draft text of the new regulation to separate ESC provisions from Regulation No. 13-H (document GRRF/2014/12).

49. The expert from OICA introduced the new documents as well as the proposals for separate UN Regulations on Brake Assist Systems (BAS) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/11) and on Electronic Stability Control (ESC) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/12) extracted from UN Regulation No. 13‑H (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/10). The Chair recalled the purpose of GRRF-76-33 and GRRF-76-34. OICA stated that GRRF-76-34 had been taken into account when drafting the proposals above. He introduced GRRF-78-29 proposing to delete the k-test method prescribed in Annex 7 and only keep the method prescribed in Appendix 2 to Annex 6 to align the UN Regulation with GTR No. 8. GRRF agreed to reconsider this proposal at its seventy-ninth session.

In document GRE/2014/9, IMMA proposed the use of different brake lamp activation methods and the introduction of high-mounted stop lamps to improve the conspicuity of “powered two-wheelers” under Regulation No. 53. In this document, India offers a number of editorial recommendations.

In document GRE/2014/7, IMMA proposed to introduce the possibility of interdependent lamps for dedicated motorcycle lamps as Supplement 17 to Regulation No. 50. The concern was that the rear trunk lid commonly used for four-wheeled vehicles may be adapted for future scooter type motorcycles to secure the storage space for helmet, etc. Current lamp requirements impose design constraints that may hamper the proper development of such storage features. In this document, India proposes to clarify that the installation height of the device must be less than or equal to 750 mm.

57. The expert from IMMA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/7 with a proposal to amend UN Regulation No. 50, as further corrected by GRE-71-04 and GRE-71-12-Rev.1, introducing the possibility of interdependent lamps for dedicated motorcycle lamps. The expert from India also presented GRE-71-30 containing an amendment to this proposal. GRE generally supported the proposal but, given the late submission of GRE-71-30, decided to revisit this issue at its next session on the basis of a revised document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/7/Rev.1 to be prepared by IMMA.

India comments on the EC proposal for a supplement to the draft global technical regulation on the "measurement procedure for two- or three-wheeled light motor vehicles equipped with a combustion engine with regard to the crankcase and evaporative emissions” and concerning test types III and IV.

India comments on the draft GTR on L-category vehicle evaporative emissions (based on document EPPR-07-04).

Proposal for phased implementation of OBD I considering the current very large volume and field
service conditions in combination with the proposed emission roadmap, envisioning four levels of functionality.

Comments on document EPPR-09-15.

Comments on document GRE/2015/6 proposing to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone and to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

India comments raising concerns over the feasibility of the proposal to combat odometer fraud in used car sales.

16. The expert from FIA gave a presentation (GRSG-108-37) justifying the need for protection against mileage fraud and proposing to set up an informal working group on this subject. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/16 proposing further amendments to the proposal submitted by Belgium and inserting a reference to the common criteria published in ISO/IEC 15408 (GRSG-108-06). He concluded that the common criteria would result in a higher level of stringency in the security requirements for odometers and thus improve the protection of odometers against mileage fraud. The expert from India raised concerns (GRSG-108-39) to the proposal from FIA. The expert from OICA introduced GRSG-108-38 clarifying the subject and presenting the concerns of the automotive industry to the proposal from FIA. GRSG experts were invited to send their comments to the expert from FIA. GRSG did not support the adoption of the proposal but agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/16 and GRSG-108-38 on its agenda as a reference document for further consideration at its next session.

Proposal for corrections to the text.

33. The expert from Germany presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/17 and GRSG-108-48 introducing into UN Regulation No. 58 more stringent requirements for rear underrun protection devices. The expert from IRU informed GRSG about the road transport sector’s point of view (GRSG-108-07) concerning the strengthening of the requirements for rear underrun protection devices, and proposed an amendment to the new paragraph 16.7. The expert from CLCCR raised a number of concerns (GRSG-108-13) and proposed some amendments to the proposed text. The expert from OICA introduced GRSG-108-27 and GRSG-108-28 clarifying the transitional provisions and the text of the new technical requirements proposed by Germany. GRSG noted the concerns raised by the expert from India on the basis of GRSG-108-40.

34. Following the discussion, GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/17, amended as reproduced in GRSG-108-48-Rev.2. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2015 sessions, as draft 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 58.

Proposal to align the draft 03 series (document WP.29/2014/65) with other UN Regulations and Indian standards by specifying the upper weight threshold of the total permissible mass of M1 and N1 vehicles of 2.5 tonnes (rather than the current 2.8 tonnes).

65. The expert from India presented GRSG-108-41 proposing to harmonize the scope of UN Regulation No. 34 and to amend the total permissible mass limit to read “2.5 tonnes” instead of “2.8 tonnes”. The expert from Japan was of the opinion that this amendment would lower the stringency of the provisions of the UN Regulation and, therefore, could not support the proposal. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its forthcoming session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSG-108-41 with an official symbol.

Proposal to align the draft 03 series (document WP.29/2014/65) with other UN Regulations and Indian standards by limiting the upper weight threshold of the total permissible mass of M1 and N1 vehicles to 2.5 tonnes (rather than the current 2.8 tonnes).

16. The expert from India introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/26 proposing to harmonize the scope of UN Regulation No. 34 and to amend the total permissible mass limit to read “2.5 tonnes” instead of “2.8 tonnes”. The expert from Japan raised concerns in the absence of evidence on the need for such an amendment. GRSG endorsed the suggestion by the expert from EC to review the proposal by India, once the application of the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 34 would become mandatory in the European Union. GRSG agreed to remove, in the meantime, this item from the agenda.

Comments on the draft Supplement 5 to the UN R28. The draft supplement aims to refine 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.

3. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced an updated text of Regulation No. 28, with the aim to align its provisions with the current rulemaking practice. (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/7). This proposal received comments from the experts of France, India and OICA (GRB-62-20, GRB-62-18 and GRB-62-21-Rev.1, respectively). In particular, the expert from France proposed to include a modular approach to permit the introduction of other audible signals. GRB invited the expert from the Russian Federation to take these comments into account and to submit a revised document for consideration at the next session.

73. The representative of India presented WP.29-164-25 on the National Automotive Testing and R&D Infrastructure Project (NATRIP) that is creating state of the art testing facilities both for vehicle and component certification as well as for vehicle inspection.

India comments on document EPPR-13-09 “Final proposal for EPPR informal group draft GTR on motorcycle crankcase and evaporative emissions”.

Proposal to clarify the scope of the test procedures with regard to the different engine family classes, especially with regard to Class B vehicles.

India responses to the refinements to the proposal for a new global technical regulation on motorcycle crankcase and evaporative emissions and to Japan’s input concerning the regulation of three-wheeled L-category vehicles (document EPPR-14-13).

Comments from India concerning the Phase 1b amendment to GTR No. 15 (document GRPE/2016/3).

India proposals for amendments to the draft motorcycle OBD working draft text (document EPPR-14-06).

India proposal for the open issue on “Diagnosis Of Open And Short Circuit Faults With Freeze Frame Data For OBD-I Grade A”.

India responses to the proposals in document EPPR-16-05.

India comments on the proposal to enable the approval of sequential activation of light sources of direction indicators lamps for motorcycles.

22. On behalf of the Task Force on Sequential Activation (TF-SA), the expert from Finland reported on its activities and proposed to clarify the requirements for direction indicators with sequential activation in Regulations Nos. 6 and 50 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/20 and GRE-76-10). The proposals received written comments from the experts of France, India and OICA (GRE-76-05, GRE-76-09 and GRE-76-16). Following an extensive discussion, GRE adopted the amended proposals, as laid down in Annex IV. At the same time, GRE was not in a position to reach consensus on whether or not the proposals would require a new series of amendments and/or transitional provisions. GRE decided to come back to this issue at the next session in April 2017. Meanwhile, the secretariat was requested to issue the adopted text (Annex IV) as a document for the June 2017 session of WP.29, upon the understanding that any possible amendments, to be decided by GRE in April 2017, could exceptionally be submitted to WP.29 as a corrigendum or addendum to this document.

28. The expert from Japan introduced a proposal for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 53 with a new requirement for automatic switching from the daytime running lamp (DRL) to the headlamp (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/35, Informal document GRE-76-03). The experts of Finland, Germany and EC supported the proposal. The experts of France, Italy and UK identified technical issues which would need further attention. GRE agreed to revert to this issue at the next session. GRE also noted proposals by the expert from India (GRE-76-06). GRE invited experts to review these proposals and to send their comments to the author before the next session.

87. The representative from India, highlighted in his intervention the role and positive impact of India’s automotive sector on the country’s strong economic growth. He expressed his satisfaction that major vehicle manufacturers had invested in his country. He informed WP.29 that with the significant achievements resulting from India’s 2006 – 2016 automotive mission plan, the Indian Government has recently finalized its Mission plan for the next ten years. The country expects growth in all road categories of road vehicles manufactured, significant progress in application of green technologies as a result of dedicated actions to mitigate environmental concerns, and important progress in the sphere of road safety. He reported that vehicle standards in India were recently subjected to legislative amendments that provide for a leapfrogging to the latest emission standards and the introduction of crashworthiness requirements and norms for pedestrian safety. The representative from India closed his deliberation by emphasizing India’s commitment to transpose GTRs adopted under the 1998 agreement into national regulations. The complete statement of the representative of India is available in Informal document WP.29-170-37.

India comments on certain draft proposals for the amendment of GTR No. 2 on motorcycle emissions contained in the unpublished version 4 of document EPPR-11-15 (only Version 2, EPPR-11-15/Rev.1, has been made available).

Proposal to make the fitting of front position lamps optional and allow for its separate control under certain conditions and to allow for rear positions lamps and registration plate lamps to be lit during the period between the activation of the master switch and the engine start.

26. GRE agreed to postpone to the next session consideration of GRE-77-08 by the expert from India.

31. Due to lack of time, GRE did not consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/27, GRE-77-08, GRE-77-09, GRE-77-17, GRE-78-22 and GRE-78-24.

24. The expert from Japan provided additional explanations to their proposals for the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 53 regarding a new requirement for automatic switching from DRL to the headlamp (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/35 and GRE-77-19). The experts from India and Italy commented on the proposals (GRE-77-09 and GRE-77-17).

25. The experts from Italy, Netherlands and IMMA requested more time to study the proposals and comments. The expert from EC recalled that this matter had already been considered at three consecutive sessions of GRE without a conclusion. He called for the establishment of a task force to tackle the issue. The experts from Japan, India, Italy, Netherlands and IMMA expressed their willingness to participate in the task force. GRE hoped that it would be able to finalize the consideration of the proposals at the next session without establishing a task force. To this end, the Chair urged all experts to study the proposals and provide their comments prior to the next session.

31. Due to lack of time, GRE did not consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/27, GRE-77-08, GRE-77-09, GRE-77-17, GRE-78-22 and GRE-78-24.

40. GRE noted that GRE-77-09, GRE-77-17 and GRE-78-22, which had not been addressed at the previous sessions due to lack of time, had been superseded by other proposals considered at this session.

Review of references to test specifications across standards and request to consider appropriate harmonized language under paragraph 3.14.3.2. of GTR No. 16.

Proposal for additional tyre specifications to

1. add values specified in FMVSS 119, clause S6.2 table II
2. add small rim diameter sizes that will not meet the larger sizes of the GTR

Proposal to correct document GRSG/2016/20 where the reference to “Annex 5, paragraph 4” should be to paragraph 3.

Proposal to correct document GRSG/2017/15 based upon comparison against GTR No. 6. The table being revised is in Annex 18 (not 21). This proposal further corrects several values in the table per the original table developed under GTR 6.

18. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2017/15 as amended by GRSG-113-16 and GRSG-113-30 to fully align the provisions of UN Regulation No. 43 with those of UN Global Technical Regulation (GTR) No. 6. GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2017/15 as reproduced in Annex II to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as draft Supplement 7 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 43 for consideration at their March 2018 sessions.

Two part proposal to a) make the fitting of front position lamps optional and b) allow for its separate control under certain conditions and for rear positions lamps and registration plate lamps to be lit during the period between the activation of the master switch and the engine start.

31. Due to lack of time, GRE did not consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2017/27, GRE-77-08, GRE-77-09, GRE-77-17, GRE-78-22 and GRE-78-24.

39. The expert from India presented GRE-78-24, which replaced GRE-77-08, with the aim to make, under certain conditions, the front position lamp optional for L3 category of vehicles. The experts from Austria, Italy, Finland and Netherlands pointed out the need to study this proposal in more detail. The Chair invited the expert from India to submit an official document for consideration at the next session.

Proposal to replace figures in the original proposal.

29. The experts from India (GRE-78-25) and the Netherlands commented on the technical part of the TF EMC proposals. GRE was of the view that new transitional provisions would have to be submitted as an official document and should be aligned with the Draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations, which were expected to be adopted by WP.29 at its November 2017 session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/107, see agenda item 9, para. 36). GRE requested TF EMC to take into account the above considerations and to submit to the next session a revised consolidated proposal, possibly as a new series of amendments to Regulation No. 10.