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.

15. The Chairman of the informal group on the Particle Measurement Programme (PMP) reported on the progress made by the group with regard to the heavy duty validation exercise and Round Robin tests (GRPE-60-16). He recommended that the laboratories should monitor and manage the tunnel background and that the sample flow extraction for particle number should be corrected in case of the partial flow dilution system and the particulate mass measurement method. He added that a higher variability of the World harmonized Steady state Cycle (WHSC) was needed too. GRPE endorsed the recommendations and conclusions by the informal group on PMP.

16. GRPE noted the final report on the results of the heavy duty inter-laboratory correlation exercise (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/9).

17. The PMP Chairman introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 and GRPE-60-08 proposing to insert particle number measurement procedures into Regulations No. 49. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 as amended by Annex V (download the session report from the “Documents” section to see this Annex) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 49.

18. The expert from the United Kingdom presented a proposal to clarify, correct and update elements of the provisions of Annex 4a to Regulation No. 83 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8). GRPE adopted the document, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Corrigendum to Supplement 7 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

19. The expert from EC underlined that the same corrections reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8 would apply to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, which had recently been adopted by WP.29 at its March 2010 session on the basis of documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/57 and Corr.1, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/56. GRPE invited the secretariat to also prepare the above corrections as Corrigendum 1 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.

20. The GRPE Chairman invited the PMP group to meet again prior to the next session of GRPE (see para. 57 below) in January 2011.
…
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:
…
7. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Particle Measurement Programme (PMP)

To be held on Wednesday afternoon, 12 January 2011, from 4.00 p.m. till 5.30 p.m.

The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the PMP secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting.

15. The Chairman of the informal group on the Particle Measurement Programme (PMP) reported on the progress made by the group with regard to the heavy duty validation exercise and Round Robin tests (GRPE-60-16). He recommended that the laboratories should monitor and manage the tunnel background and that the sample flow extraction for particle number should be corrected in case of the partial flow dilution system and the particulate mass measurement method. He added that a higher variability of the World harmonized Steady state Cycle (WHSC) was needed too. GRPE endorsed the recommendations and conclusions by the informal group on PMP.

16. GRPE noted the final report on the results of the heavy duty inter-laboratory correlation exercise (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/9).

17. The PMP Chairman introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 and GRPE-60-08 proposing to insert particle number measurement procedures into Regulations No. 49. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 as amended by Annex V (download the session report from the “Documents” section to see this Annex) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 49.

18. The expert from the United Kingdom presented a proposal to clarify, correct and update elements of the provisions of Annex 4a to Regulation No. 83 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8). GRPE adopted the document, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Corrigendum to Supplement 7 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

19. The expert from EC underlined that the same corrections reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8 would apply to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, which had recently been adopted by WP.29 at its March 2010 session on the basis of documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/57 and Corr.1, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/56. GRPE invited the secretariat to also prepare the above corrections as Corrigendum 1 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.

20. The GRPE Chairman invited the PMP group to meet again prior to the next session of GRPE (see para. 57 below) in January 2011.
…
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:
…
7. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Particle Measurement Programme (PMP)

To be held on Wednesday afternoon, 12 January 2011, from 4.00 p.m. till 5.30 p.m.

The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the PMP secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting.

15. The Chairman of the informal group on the Particle Measurement Programme (PMP) reported on the progress made by the group with regard to the heavy duty validation exercise and Round Robin tests (GRPE-60-16). He recommended that the laboratories should monitor and manage the tunnel background and that the sample flow extraction for particle number should be corrected in case of the partial flow dilution system and the particulate mass measurement method. He added that a higher variability of the World harmonized Steady state Cycle (WHSC) was needed too. GRPE endorsed the recommendations and conclusions by the informal group on PMP.

16. GRPE noted the final report on the results of the heavy duty inter-laboratory correlation exercise (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/9).

17. The PMP Chairman introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 and GRPE-60-08 proposing to insert particle number measurement procedures into Regulations No. 49. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 as amended by Annex V (download the session report from the “Documents” section to see this Annex) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 49.

18. The expert from the United Kingdom presented a proposal to clarify, correct and update elements of the provisions of Annex 4a to Regulation No. 83 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8). GRPE adopted the document, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Corrigendum to Supplement 7 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

19. The expert from EC underlined that the same corrections reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8 would apply to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, which had recently been adopted by WP.29 at its March 2010 session on the basis of documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/57 and Corr.1, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/56. GRPE invited the secretariat to also prepare the above corrections as Corrigendum 1 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.

20. The GRPE Chairman invited the PMP group to meet again prior to the next session of GRPE (see para. 57 below) in January 2011.
…
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:
…
7. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Particle Measurement Programme (PMP)

To be held on Wednesday afternoon, 12 January 2011, from 4.00 p.m. till 5.30 p.m.

The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the PMP secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting.

18. The expert from the United Kingdom presented a proposal to clarify, correct and update elements of the provisions of Annex 4a to Regulation No. 83 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8). GRPE adopted the document, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Corrigendum to Supplement 7 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

19. The expert from EC underlined that the same corrections reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8 would apply to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, which had recently been adopted by WP.29 at its March 2010 session on the basis of documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/57 and Corr.1, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/56. GRPE invited the secretariat to also prepare the above corrections as Corrigendum 1 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.
…
34. The expert from OICA recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2009/8 proposing to clarify and update Regulation No. 83 with regard to the specifications for the Flame Ionisation Detector (FID) hydrocarbon analyser. He presented GRPE-60-06 justifying the proposed equivalent measurement method. GRPE noted a number of study reservations. Following the discussion, the Chairman recommended having a final review of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2009/8 at the next session of GRPE in January 2011.

35. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/11 proposing to insert into Regulation No. 83 new specifications for the proportional speed fan which might be used during the testing of vehicles on the chassis dynamometer. GRPE noted some concerns about the air cooling velocity. GRPE adopted the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/11, not amended. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, as Supplement 1 to the 06 series of amendments as well as Supplement 10 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.

36. The GRPE Chairman invited the experts from the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, EC and OICA to jointly prepare a proposal regarding the air cooling velocity for consideration at the next GRPE session.

37. Recalling the discussion at the previous GRPE session, GRPE considered and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/12 tabled by the expert from the Russian Federation. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions as part (see para. 35 above) of Supplement 10 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

15. The Chairman of the informal group on the Particle Measurement Programme (PMP) reported on the progress made by the group with regard to the heavy duty validation exercise and Round Robin tests (GRPE-60-16). He recommended that the laboratories should monitor and manage the tunnel background and that the sample flow extraction for particle number should be corrected in case of the partial flow dilution system and the particulate mass measurement method. He added that a higher variability of the World harmonized Steady state Cycle (WHSC) was needed too. GRPE endorsed the recommendations and conclusions by the informal group on PMP.

16. GRPE noted the final report on the results of the heavy duty inter-laboratory correlation exercise (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/9).

17. The PMP Chairman introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 and GRPE-60-08 proposing to insert particle number measurement procedures into Regulations No. 49. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/7 as amended by Annex V (download the session report from the “Documents” section to see this Annex) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 49.

18. The expert from the United Kingdom presented a proposal to clarify, correct and update elements of the provisions of Annex 4a to Regulation No. 83 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8). GRPE adopted the document, not amended, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2010 sessions, as Corrigendum to Supplement 7 to the 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83.

19. The expert from EC underlined that the same corrections reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2010/8 would apply to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, which had recently been adopted by WP.29 at its March 2010 session on the basis of documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/57 and Corr.1, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/56. GRPE invited the secretariat to also prepare the above corrections as Corrigendum 1 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 83, for consideration by WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2010 sessions.

20. The GRPE Chairman invited the PMP group to meet again prior to the next session of GRPE (see para. 57 below) in January 2011.
…
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:
…
7. Informal meeting of the GRPE working group on Particle Measurement Programme (PMP)

To be held on Wednesday afternoon, 12 January 2011, from 4.00 p.m. till 5.30 p.m.

The agenda of the meeting will be prepared by the PMP secretariat and distributed to the members of the group prior to the meeting.

13. The expert from the United Kingdom withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2010/5. Following the agreement of GRB at its previous session on the need to conclude the work on the test method for additional sound emission provisions (ASEP), the Chair introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2010/9 proposing a possible approach for the incorporation of ASEP provisions into Regulation No. 51. He added that this proposal should be considered as a package only. Referring to GRB-52-15, the expert from the Netherlands presented an updated stringency analysis of the proposed solutions and questioned the term “vehicle of concern”. The Chair presented GRB-52-09 providing a clarification of the understanding of “vehicle of concern” and possible consequences of the proposed approach.

14. The expert from EC welcomed the compromise solution and suggested moving forward with the proposed approach. The expert from Norway preferred to still include a “Not To Exceed (NTE)” value into the new provisions for ASEP. The expert from the United States of America renewed his concerns expressed during the previous session of GRB (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/49, para. 11). The expert from OICA presented a number of comments (GRB-52-12) on the Chair’s proposal for ASEP. He stated that this compromise solution could be acceptable for the automotive industry with the condition of a certain lead time necessary to develop the new cars according to these new specifications.

15. Following the discussion, a large majority of GRB experts agreed on the compromise solution proposed by the Chair. The GRB Chair volunteered to prepare a concrete proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 51, for consideration by GRB at its next session on the basis of an official document.

109. AC.3 noted the first progress report of the informal group on phase 2 of the gtr (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/136). The representatives of Japan and the United States of America introduced WP.29-152-13 and WP.29-152-16 respectively, both containing proposals for amending the terms of reference of the informal group. AC.3 agreed to transmit them to the informal group for consideration at its next session during the December 2010 session of GRSP and anticipate a revised proposal for consideration by WP.29 at its March 2011 session.

22. The Chairman of the informal group on Camera Monitor Systems (CMS) presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/21/Rev.1 on camera monitor systems replacing class V and VI mirrors. GRSG adopted the proposal with the removal of the square brackets in para. 6.2.2.2.1.2. and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as draft 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 46.

23. The CMS Chairman recalled ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/22 on camera monitor systems replacing all mirrors in vehicles. The expert of OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/5 amending the wording of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/22. The expert from ISO presented in GRSG-100-23 the progress made on the drafting of the ISO standard dealing with the technical requirements of camera monitor systems, which should be completed by the end of 2013. GRSG agreed to consider again this item at its next session on the basis of a revised version of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/22 prepared by the CMS Chairman, taking into account the comments made by OICA.

24. The expert from the United Kingdom proposed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1 and GRSG-100-26 to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. A number of experts requested more time to study the justifications provided in GRSG-100-26. GRSG agreed to consider again ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1 at its next session and agreed to keep GRSG-100-26 as reference document.

25. The expert from OICA proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/12 to align the provisions on external projections of rear view mirrors with those of Regulation No. 26 (External projections). GRSG noted a number of comments, in particular from France and agreed to consider again this proposal at its October 2011 session.

15. The Chair of the informal group on Camera Monitor Systems (CMS) presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/23 and GRSG-101-03 on new provisions to replace all mirrors by camera monitor systems. He sought the advice of GRSG to prepare the amendments as a Supplement or a new series of amendments to Regulation No. 46. GRSG noted a number of comments and a general support to prepare the new provisions as a Supplement to the 02 series of amendments. The expert from EC raised a study reservation on the proposal. GRSG welcomed a presentation (GRSG-101-14) by the expert from Japan on the results of an ongoing research on the admissible range of use of CMS for indirect
fields of vision. The expert from Germany invited Japan to participate in drafting work of the International Standard Organization (ISO) on the development of a standard dealing with the technical requirements of camera monitor systems. The expert from IRU stressed the importance of the subject and underlined the high potential of CMS to improve road safety. GRSG agreed to resume consideration on the open issues at its next sessions, awaiting the outcome of discussions within the ISO working group. The secretariat was requested to make, in the absence of a revised proposal by the CMS Chair, GRSG-101-03 available with an official symbol.

16. Referring to the discussion at the previous session of GRSG on GRSG-100-26, the expert from the United Kingdom introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1 to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. The expert from OICA proposed a road map (GRSG-101-20) on how to proceed with this topic. He offered to organize a first meeting to be held at the OICA office (Paris) in December 2011. GRSG welcomed this initiative and endorsed the proposed road map. The GRSG Chair underlined the urgency of this activity and invited all interested experts to participate in the meetings. GRSG agreed to resume consideration on this important subject at its next session in April 2012.

17. Recalling the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/12, the expert from OICA introduced GRSG-101-07 to align the provisions on external projections of rear view mirrors with those of Regulation No. 26 (External projections). GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex III, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2012 session, as draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 46.

15. Referring to the discussion at the previous session of GRSG on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1, the expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRSG-102-29 proposing to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. GRSG noted a number of concerns by the experts from the Netherlands, France and OICA. Following the discussion, the expert from the United Kingdom presented a revised proposal (GRSG-102-29-Rev.1). GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex III of the meeting report, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as draft 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 46.

The meeting was chaired by Mr I. Yarnold (UK) and Mr. T. Onoda.

The Agenda in ITS-19-01 was adopted unchanged.

6. The expert from GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/23 on increasing the maximum mounting height of the rear fog lamps. The experts from the Netherlands and France expressed concerns for its potential dazzling effect and its disharmonized use. However, GRE adopted it not amended and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal to WP.29 and to AC.1 at their November 2011 session, as draft Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48.

7. The expert from the Netherlands withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/26 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/26/Corr.1 and announced the preparation of a revised proposal for the October 2011 session of GRE.

8. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRE-65-08 clarifying the exemption of cabs of commercial vehicle from conspicuity markings. The expert from OICA introduced GRE-65-28 extending exemption for marking cabs of the tractor trailers. GRE agreed to remove this item from the agenda of the next sessions unless new proposal was submitted.

18. The World Forum noted the position of GRE (WP.29-153-01) and GRSP (WP.29-153-09) on guidelines for establishing requirements for high-priority warning signals of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) (WP.29-150-22). The representative of the United Kingdom recalled that the lack of an agreed upon definition of ITS implies different levels of intelligent technology. He added that the main attempt of WP.29-150-22 is to define these different levels (or priorities) as a reference for future amendments to Regulations. WP.29 requested the informal group on ITS to finalize a consolidated proposal to be submitted at its June 2011 session for final adoption.

19. The World Forum noted that an ITS background document for information had been developed in collaboration with the Italian Ministry of Transport and the Society for national motorway Initiatives (SINA) and that a strategic note had been prepared by the WP.29 secretariat.

20. The secretariat reported that a public consultation on the strategy of UNECE for ITS deployment had been launched in February 2011. The consultation addressed to all Governments and interested stakeholders would be closed on 31 May 2011. All information was available on the UNECE Transport Division website (see: www.unece.org/trans/events/2011/ITS_Public_Consultation.html). Contributions should be submitted via e-mail: consultation@unece.org.

21. Once the consultation is closed, the secretariat would finalize the strategic note and would present the UNECE Road Map on ITS as a final outcome of the whole process. With the Road Map, UNECE aimed at defining concrete actions to foster the deployment of ITS globally. Such actions could be: annual Round Tables, capacity building workshops, incorporating ITS into the work of all UNECE Working Parties through its legal instruments, etc.

22. The representative of the Russian Federation was of the opinion that innovation challenges in transport, such as ITS, should be solved on a global scale and in a harmonized way. Accordingly, he expressed support to the initiative and offered active cooperation from his country.

20. The World Forum noted that this question had been considered under agenda item 2.1 (see para. 8 above).

39. The GRSG Vice-Chair informed the World Forum about the results made by GRSG during its ninety-ninth session (for more details see the report of the session ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/78).

40. He reported that GRSG had proposed to set up, subject to the consent of the World Forum, an informal group, chaired by Germany, to amend Regulation No. 43 with regard to plastic glazing. He added that the expert from OICA had volunteered to provide secretariat services for this group. The informal group should conclude its tasks by April 2013. The World Forum gave its consent, subject to the approval, at its March 2011 session, of the terms of reference and rules of procedure of the informal group, which would be annexed to the report of GRSG.

41. He reported that GRSG had been informed about the GRE request to take on the responsibility of Regulations Nos. 60 and 121. GRSG was of the opinion that they should remain under its responsibility because these Regulations were transversal and that GRSG was already dealing with tell-tales for motorcycles and the field of vision of the driver. He mentioned that GRSG had agreed that a procedure should be set up to ensure good cooperation between the different WP.29 Working Parties. The World Forum confirmed that a decision on this issue would be taken at its March 2011 session (see para. 35 above).

42. WP.29 noted that GRSG had agreed with the proposal for draft Rule No. 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/135) as well as with the proposal for guidelines on establishing requirements for high-priority warning signals by the co-Chairs of the ITS informal group (WP.29-150-22).

43. The Vice-Chair informed WP.29 about the opinion of GRSG that there was no urgency to adopt the proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2009/123 and its Corrigenda 1 to 4, superseded by ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2010/145) for the revision of the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3). The World Forum recalled its decision to continue consideration of this matter under agenda item 8.7 (see paras. 36 and 91 of this report).

44. The World Forum noted that Mr. Erario (Italy) had been re-elected as GRSG Chair and Mr. Matolcsy (Hungary) as GRSG Vice-Chair for the 2011 sessions.

19. The World Forum recalled that at its March 2010 session the co-Chairs of the informal group on Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) had reported on the progress made by the informal group. Informal document No. WP.29-150-21 contained the major amendments introduced in the guidelines on establishing requirements for high-priority warning signals (WP.29-150-22). It was also recalled that the World Forum had agreed to refer WP.29-150-22 to its GRs and that comments should be transmitted to the secretariat for the submission of an updated proposal to WP.29 for final consideration and adoption at its March 2011 session. The World Forum noted that no meeting of the informal group on ITS was scheduled for this session.

47. GRSP supported WP.29-150-22 as amended by GRSP-48-07 and GRSP-48-07tc (agreed by the Working Party on Lighting and Light Signalling devices (GRE)) and by GRSP-48-13, tabled by the expert from OICA. The secretariat was requested to transmit this to WP.29 for consideration at its March 2011 session.

5. GRSG considered GRSG-100-06 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/33/Rev.1 by the expert from EC on the accessibility of prams. GRSG noted a number of comments, in particular from the United Kingdom (GRSG-100-24). GRSG generally supported this proposal, but was of the opinion that the case of small buses should be better taken into account. GRSG agreed to consider again this proposal at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal prepared by the expert from EC.

6. The expert from France presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/3 proposing to clarify the definition of Class II vehicles designed principally for the carriage of seated passengers. After discussion, GRSG could not support this proposal and agreed to remove it from the agenda.

7. The expert from OICA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/4 on the number of priorities seats. The expert from CLCCR regretted that this proposal had been withdrawn.

8. The expert from IRU withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/9 on driver seats with no suspension system.

9. The secretariat introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/10 deleting the cross reference to Regulation No. 66 on the strength of superstructure. GRSG adopted the proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to the World Forum on Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and the administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) for consideration at their November 2011 session, as part of draft Supplement 1 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 107 (see also para. 14).

10. GRSG considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/18 prepared by the experts from France, Germany, Norway and Sweden to introduce requirements on fire detection systems. After discussion, GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in GRSG-100-31 and Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as draft 05 series of amendments to Regulation No. 107.

11. The expert from Spain presented GRSG-100-03 on flat monitors located on the roof of the gangway. GRSG noted a number of comments and agreed to reconsider this topic at its next session. The secretariat was requested to make GRSG-100-03 available with an official symbol.

12. The expert from Russian Federation introduced GRSG-100-07 clarifying the Russian version of Regulation No. 107. GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex II and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as draft Corrigendum 1 to Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments and as draft Corrigendum 7 to Revision 2 to Regulation No. 107.

99. The Chair of the informal group on Phase 2 of gtr No. 7, introduced WP.29-153-28 and WP.29-153-29, containing respectively a proposal for amending the terms of reference and the second progress report of the informal group. He explained that the group was focusing on a dynamic test to mitigate both short and long-term whiplash injuries rather than on low and high test speed pulse as was previously agreed upon in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/25. He concluded that a gtr proposal was scheduled for adoption by AC.3 in June 2013, pending the finalization of injury criteria. AC.3 adopted WP.29-153-28 and requested the secretariat to prepare a revised version developing the amendment and to transmit it to GRSP. AC.3 also requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-153-29 with an official symbol.

12. GRE agreed to consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/53 under item 4.(a) of the agenda (see para. 7).

6. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/49 from the GTB expert introducing the vehicle speed as a criterion for operating adaptive stop-lamps. GRE noted a number of comments and agreed to reconsider this document at its March 2012 session, possibly with a demonstration by GTB on vehicles complying with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/49 requirements.

7. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/62 by the expert from Germany together with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2011/53 by the experts from the United Kingdom and CLEPA, both on the conspicuity marking of commercial vehicles. GRE could not reach a final decision on these proposals and agreed to reconsider this issue at its next session on the basis of a joint revised proposal by the experts from Germany, United Kingdom, CLEPA and all interested experts (Focal point: Mr. Mainz – karl.manz@kit.edu.

8. GRE agreed to remove from the agenda the issue raised by the expert from the Netherlands concerning the way to avoid inadvertent changes to the colour allowed for front positions lamps in Regulation No 48.

38. Upon the request of WP.29 at its March 2010 session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1083, para. 27), GRB noted the guidelines on establishing requirements for high-priority signals (GRB-52-01). As no Regulation currently under the responsibility of GRB was referring to warning signals or control systems, it was a general opinion that GRB was not concerned by the guidelines. Nevertheless, GRB agreed to review, at its next session in February 2011, the proposed text on auditory warnings (GRB-52-01, page 10).

See below.

UK presented the document AEBS/LDWS-16-02 and OICA presented the document GRRF/2011/39.

The Chair expressed concern that the OICA proposal could be understood as a means to exclude some vehicles from the scope. However OICA clarified that these vehicles with nonpneumatic rear axle suspension may be approved.

CLEPA questioned which authority could verify the meaning of the “available on the market” and “validated”. OICA clarified that this was precisely the reason why such wording had been elaborated.

J was keen to have a visibility of the future.

S supported the OICA position on this topic.

The Chair, as representative of the European Commission, considered this OICA document as being proposals for amendments to the working document GRRF submitted to WP.29. The European Commission considered that the Preamble should be just a guidance and should therefore not entail any restriction of the freedom for the Contracting Parties to mandate AEBS, and therefore should not be introducing a legal uncertainty. UK suggested replacing the proposed date by the 01 Series of amendments. Japan was keen that a Contracting Party can mandate the AEBS on these vehicles BEFORE the date of the 01 Series of amendments.

D found such additional paragraph in the preamble as proposed by OICA not necessary.

NL acknowledged the problems with the rigid suspension, and could support the UK proposal as more flexible.

F supported the addition of a new paragraph, but requested to add the reason why such further development is needed.

RUS proposed to meet the request from J with the addition of a sentence addressing the parameters that should be taken into account when approving these vehicles.

S clarified that the text in the Introduction is not such important, rather the text in paragraph 5.

OICA provided further technical clarifications about the difficulty for the vehicles with rigid rear axle suspension to comply with the text requirements and be simultaneously robust and reliable.

The Chair pointed out that the UK proposal only addresses the Introduction, and pointed out that the OICA proposal for the Preamble is linked with the proposed changes to paragraph 5.1.1.

OICA clarified for the experts that J does not face such problem of pitch angle as the vehicles are not of the same types, and hence does not need particular technology for addressing the large pitch angle problem.

The new wording for the additional paragraph in the Introduction was then developed per document GRRF-71-27.

CLEPA, UK, RUS and D could accept the proposal for compromise of the new text.

J had still concerns and had a reservation toward the new proposal. In addition they were keen to come back to this item after consideration of paragraph. 5.1.1.

S proposed to replace the wording “sensor technology” by “system”. This provoked a further debate which again improved the wording.

NL and F could support the new wording as well.

OICA also could support the compromise.

Conclusion: additional paragraph adopted in the Introduction to be proposed per document GRRF-71-27.

18. The expert from OICA presented GRSG-101-21 clarifying the requirements on rear underrun protection devices. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRSG-101-26 amending the transitional provisions of draft Supplement 1 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 58, adopted at the previous session of GRSG. Following the discussion, GRSG agreed on the proposal as reproduced in GRSG-101-21-Rev.1 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as a Corrigendum to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/107. [Note by the secretariat: see informal document WP.29-155-04.]

19. The expert from Germany recalled the purpose of documents GRSG-100-25 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/19 proposing to introduce, into Regulation No. 58, more stringent requirements for rear underrun protection devices. The expert from Japan introduced informal documents GRSG-101-10-Rev.1, GRSG-101-27 and GRSG-101-28 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/19. GRSG welcomed the proposals and noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, the expert from Germany volunteered to organize an ad hoc expert meeting to further discuss the open issues. He invited all GRSG experts to attend that meeting, scheduled to be held on 23 January 2012. GRSG agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session in April 2012 on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by Germany, taking into account the outcome of the discussion of the ad hoc meeting.

20. GRSG considered proposals to align the transitional provisions of the 02 series of amendments to the Regulation with the general guidelines adopted in TRANS/WP.29/1044 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/33 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/34). GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/34, as amended below, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2012 session, as draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 58:

Paragraph 31.5., amend to read:
“31.5. As from 48 months …

• (a) … meets the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments;

• (b) … meet the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments."

61. Agenda item 4.8.6, Regulation No. 94, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/120, add the following paragraphs 11.1 and 11.2, to read:

“11.1. As from the official date of entry into force of Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments, no Contracting Party applying this Regulation shall refuse to grant UNECE approval under this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments.

11.2. As from 23 June 2013, Contracting Parties applying this Regulation shall grant UNECE approvals only to those types of vehicles which comply with the requirements of this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments."

19. The expert from Germany introduced GRPE-63-14, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/2 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/3 and amending UN Regulation No. 101 with respect to the determination of the electric range (including the possibility to allow the communication of a lower-than-tested value for consumers), the electrical energy consumption and the CO2 emissions of hybrid electric vehicles.

20. The expert from Japan pointed out, that with the development of the WLTP GTR, updated testing procedures for hybrid electric vehicles will be introduced.

21. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/2, as amended by GRPE-63-14, and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June sessions, as a supplement to the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation 101.

38. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-63-15, containing a proposal to correct the wrong references to a few paragraphs in UN GTR No. 4.

39. GRPE requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-63-15 as an official document for consideration at its June 2012 session.

40. The expert from the UK withdrew GRPE-63-03, since the amendments included in it were already incorporated in GRPE-63-22.

41. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-63-17 (developed in close cooperation with Japan), clarifying ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2011/15 on an amendment to UN GTR No. 5. He explained that GRPE-63-17 improves the disablement conditions of OBD system monitors.

42. GRPE requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-63-17 for consideration as an official document at the next session of GRPE (June 2012).

22. The expert from the UK introduced GRPE-63-02, proposing a corrigendum to UN Regulation No. 83. After having considered comments received during the GRPE session from other experts, he volunteered to submit an updated proposal on UN Regulation No. 83.

23. The expert from OICA submitted a proposal to add transitional provisions to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 101 (GRPE-63-08), to align the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 83 with the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 101.

24. GRPE agreed and requested the secretariat to distribute GRPE-63-08 as an official document for consideration at the next GRPE session in June 2012.

25. The expert from OICA introduced GRPE-63-16, proposing to align UN Regulation No. 83 with the EU Regulation No. 566/2011. He explained that the initial transposition of the Euro 5 requirements initially into UN Regulation No. 83 could not take these amendments into account because they were still under discussion.

26. The expert from Poland raised a concern on the definition of cold start suggested by the text. The expert from OICA agreed that this issue should be analysed before submitting an official working document.

27. The GRPE Chair invited the experts from OICA to prepare an updated version of the proposal taking into account the comments received and to send it in due time to the secretariat.

This document proposes to add the use of poly-alpha-olefin filters and to correct an error in the particle number measurement diagram in UN Regulation 49.

33. The expert from the EC gave a presentation (GRPE-63-04) focusing on the main amendments proposed for UN Regulation No. 49 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/4). The proposal aims at aligning the requirements of the UN Regulation with those of EU Regulations EC No. 595/2009 and EU No. 582/2011 (Euro VI pollutant emission levels). He added that the proposal was submitted as the 06 consolidated series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 49, also incorporating the amendments proposed in the 05 series.

34. Even if Japan has not adopted UN Regulation No. 49, the expert from Japan noted that Worldwide harmonized Heavy-Duty Certification procedure (WHDC) was developed for compression ignition engines, expressing concerns on its use for positive ignition engines.

35. The expert from the UK introduced GRPE-63-22, containing a proposal to amend ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/4 in order to include poly-alpha-olefin as a test aerosol material, and including the correction of an error in one of the figures.

36. The expert from OICA preferred to avoid the references to the CS 68649-12-7 and CS 68037-01-4 standards included in GRPE-63-22.

37. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/4, as amended by GRPE-63-22 after deleting the reference to CS standards (removing the text “CS 68649-12-7 and CS 68037-01-4” from GRPE-63-22) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2012 sessions, as 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 49.

Proposal to revise document GRRF/2012/5 concerning C1, C2, and C3 rim measurement, including the proposal of an Appendix 4.

31. GRRF reviewed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/2 clarifying in Regulation No. 117 the current wet grip testing method and adding specific performance requirements for C3 snow tyres. GRRF agreed to go forward with the proposed agenda of the March 2012 session of WP.29, but to include some minor editorial corrections transmitted by the expert from ETRTO to the secretariat.

32. The expert from ETRTO recalled the purpose of GRRF-71-11 justifying the insertion of provisions for snow tyres of class C2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/29). GRRF adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/29 and agreed to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as part (para. 25 above) of draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117, subject to a final review by GRB and GRRF at their next sessions in September 2012.

33. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/5 proposing to amend the definition of the measuring rim for C1, C2 and C3 tyres. Following the discussion, the expert from France presented a revised proposal (GRRF-72-24) taking into account the comments received. GRRF adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/5 as reproduced in Annex VII and agreed to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as a separate document for draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of Amendments to Regulation No. 117, also subject to a final review by GRB and GRRF at their next sessions in September 2012.

34. The expert from ETRTO proposed to clarify the title of Regulation No. 117 and its Annex 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/10). GRRF adopted the proposal and it was agreed to have a final review by GRB and GRRF at their next sessions in September 2012. The secretariat was requested to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as part (paras. 25 and 32 above) of draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117.

Proposal developed through the GTR7-Phase 2 informal group (BioRID II) to add a new section to the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles for “test devices” that would provide a cross-index of test tools referenced in UN Regulations and addenda to cover their specifications and use.

93. The representative of the United Kingdom presented informal document WP.29-156-18 proposing to amend the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) and to introduce discrete addenda as a repository for each specified test device. Following extensive discussion, the World Forum agreed that the development of a Special Resolution (S.R.2) could provide greater certainty for Contracting Parties to the 1998 Agreement on the definition of test devices or equipment used to determine compliance with particular requirements of UN GTRS. The representatives of the United States of America and the United Kingdom agreed to work together with the secretariat to bring forward a revised proposal for consideration at the 157th session of WP.29.

Submission aimed at introducing provisions to permit the effective upper belt anchorages of M2 and M3 vehicles to be adjusted below the current minimum height specified in paragraph 5.4.3.6, when subject to certain additional requirements.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/3 aimed at introducing requirements to permit the effective upper belt anchorages of M2 and M3 vehicles to be adjusted below the minimum height required by the Regulation. GRSP noted that the proposal did not address any child restraint system (CRS) type approved according to UN Regulation No. 44. Accordingly, the expert from Germany suggested resuming discussion on the issue of CRS in buses at the next GRSP session. GRSP, finally adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/3, as amended by Annex III to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2012 sessions as draft Supplement 5 to the 07 series of amendments.

22. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/4 tabled by the experts from Belgium and Germany to solve errors concerning the anchorage angles (α1 and α2) and GRSP-51-08, tabled by the expert from OICA, to solve an error in the requirements of front seats of vehicle of category M1. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/4 not amended and GRSP-51-08, as reproduced in Annex III to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit both proposals to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2012 sessions as part of (see para. 21 of this report) draft Supplement 5 to the 07 series of amendments.

Submission from the United Kingdom to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. This document revises document GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1.

15. Referring to the discussion at the previous session of GRSG on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1, the expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRSG-102-29 proposing to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. GRSG noted a number of concerns by the experts from the Netherlands, France and OICA. Following the discussion, the expert from the United Kingdom presented a revised proposal (GRSG-102-29-Rev.1). GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex III of the meeting report, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as draft 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 46.

Proposal from the United Kingdom to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles as adopted by GRSG at its 102nd (April 2012) session.

15. Referring to the discussion at the previous session of GRSG on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2010/29/Rev.1, the expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRSG-102-29 proposing to reduce the blind spot on the passenger side of N2 and N3 vehicles. GRSG noted a number of concerns by the experts from the Netherlands, France and OICA. Following the discussion, the expert from the United Kingdom presented a revised proposal (GRSG-102-29-Rev.1). GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex III of the meeting report, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as draft 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 46.

Draft for a special resolution concerning test tools and devices necessary for the assessment of compliance under UN Regulations and GTR. This resolution would be the repository for current information on the specifications of dummies and other tools referred to in the regulations.

5. The expert from the United Kingdom, Chair of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the ongoing activities of the group:

(a) The informal working group had made good progress on development of a proposal to redefine the height of the head restraints in terms of its “effective” rather than absolute height and to deliver a new procedure for its measurement. It was noted that the actual value to be ascribed as a height requirement was sensitive and that it may be more efficient to discuss this during GRSP proper sessions rather than during the meetings of the informal working group.

(b) The informal group had noted that there are differences in some dimensions of the various three-dimensional H point machines (3-D “H”) in the market and that some manufacturers use tighter tolerances for their machines than those defined in the Society of American Engineers (SAE) standard. The informal working group is considering whether new tolerances for the 3-D H machine should be specified and, if so, whether this should be specific to UN GTR No. 7 (and UN Regulation No. 17) or for all UN Regulations and UN GTRs where the machine is used. The expert from SAE was invited as members of the informal working group and it was hoped that proposals for a transparent and open definition of the machine could be agreed.

(c) Regarding the dynamic test to assess the risk of whiplash injury, it was confirmed that the group is working for an agreement to define only the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II) within the UN GTR (replacing the current reference to the Hybrid III dummy). The development of injury criteria was of critical importance to the delivery of this outcome but unfortunately research in this area has not proceeded as scheduled.

6. The Chair of the informal working group reminded GRSP that the European Enhanced Vehicle Safety Committee (EEVC) recommended BioRID II as a unique choice for a kinematic assessment and that GRSP had received a proposal from the experts of Japan and the EC to adopt this approach into UN Regulation No. 17. He added that an initial assessment of the data from the recent EC study suggested that the reproducibility question for BioRID was not an issue when used for kinematics. He indicated that the drafting of UN GTR currently provides for BioRID to be introduced as an option to Hybrid III and this possibility, using the kinematic approach, remained. Finally, he announced that the next meeting of the informal working group was scheduled on 18-19 of June 2012 in Munich, Germany.

7. The expert from Germany, Chair of the BioRID Technical Evaluation Group (TEG), introduced the status report (GRSP-51-22) of the group. He underlined that the dummy response was sensitive to the change of parts and that certification tests and better control of material properties might be needed.

8. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRSP-51-23 detailing the main conclusion of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7 Phase 2 concerning the height of head restraint issue. Moreover, through GRSP-51-24 he underlined the actual need for increasing head restraint height. The expert from OICA stated that the discussion should focus first on the definition of the measurement method and then on the height thresholds. Referring to the first phase of the UN GTR, the expert from OICA reminded GRSP that EEVC conclusion at that time was for introducing a limited increase of the height and of a backset of 40 mm to maximize cost benefits. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2012 session on possible proposals on draft UN GTR No. 7 phase 2 submitted by the informal working group. It was also recommended that similar proposals would also be simultaneously made in the same time to UN Regulation No. 17 to keep the texts of the two Regulations aligned.

9. GRSP noted the decision of WP.29, at its March 2012 session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1095 para. 93) to develop a Special Resolution No. 2 (S.R.2) for a protocol to manage drawings, calibration and maintenance associated with test tools. As a follow up of this discussion the Chair of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7 Phase 2 introduced GRSP-51-37 as a concrete proposal based on the inclusion of BioRID II dummy as a start. The proposal received in principle the endorsement of GRSP and experts were invited to send further comments in due time to the Chair of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7, to allow him to prepare an updated proposal for the June 2012 session of WP.29 for consideration.

United Kingdom recommendations for the draft terms of reference for the proposed informal working group on revision and amendments to international L-category vehicle requirements in the area of environmental and propulsion performance.

50. The expert from Japan introduced a proposal for corrigendum to UN GTR No. 2 (GRPE-64-05), to correct some equations in accordance with the units used, as well as a figure on the gear use during acceleration phases.

51. The experts from India and IMMA requested more time to analyze this document in detail.

52. Taking the new criteria for corrigenda into account, GRPE considered the proposal from Japan as an amendment rather than a corrigendum and requested the expert from Japan to ask for a mandate to amend UN GTR No. 2 from WP.29 and AC.3. GRPE also asked Japan to discuss with India and IMMA the concerns expressed and to submit an updated version of GRPE-64-05, so that the secretariat can distribute it as an official document for consideration at the next GRPE session, in January 2013, subject to the consent of WP.29 and AC.3 on a mandate to amend UN GTR No. 2.

53. The expert from the EC introduced documents GRPE-64-02 and GRPE-64-09. He explained the European process of revising type approval procedures for L-category vehicles, introduced a proposal containing the terms of reference for the establishment of an Informal Working Group on International L-category vehicle approval in the area of Environmental Performance and Propulsion Requirements (IEPPR), confirmed the invitation to GRPE participants to attend a stakeholder consultation workshop on the topic, and briefly outlined its content. He announced that the documents GRPE-64-10, GRPE-64-12 and GRPE-64-22 were to be introduced during the stakeholder consultation workshop.

54. The expert from Switzerland asked whether there would also be other working groups in other Working Parties subsidiary to WP.29. The expert from the EC clarified that the main focus is on environmental issues and that this is not foreseen at the moment, also stating that he would be open to such a development, if needed.

55. The expert from the EC introduced GRPE-64-11, containing draft Terms-of-Reference (ToR) for the IEPRR informal working group. The expert from the UK introduced GRPE-64-26, elaborating on the draft ToR of GRPE-64-11 with the aim to align them with the overall objectives of regulatory harmonization, technology neutrality and real-world representativeness in order to clarify the aims of the group. He explained that GRPE-64-26 also contains the addition of procedural issues such as project plans, document submission deadlines, meeting arrangements. He noted that the candidates as of Chair and Secretary should also be specified once they have been identified.

56. The expert from Japan supported the initiatives of the EC and the UK and expressed interest in the activity. The expert from IMMA thanked the EC and the UK for presenting the draft ToR and for considering items that help its effectiveness. He underlined the notion that the informal group should at least maintain, and ideally increase, current levels of harmonisation, he supported the idea of real world representativeness of the tests considered in this activity, and announced that IMMA is willing to discuss engagement in the informal group after a clarification of its scope and its ToR.

57. GRPE expressed the intention to agree, in principle, to ask for a mandate for the setup of an informal working group as soon as some remaining issues, such as the identification of an informal group Chair and Secretary, will be addressed. The GRPE Chair asked Japan, the UK, the EC, IMMA and other interested Parties to work on this, so that a formal request for a WP.29 mandate can be finalized at the next GRPE session, in January 2013. He also suggested that the work should be set up in a two-step approach, first focusing on the development of a roadmap and then concentrating on the development of the draft Regulation(s).

Proposal from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom to further clarify the test conditions for the requirements on the sensitivity of the sensor system for automatic/adaptive driving beam, revising document GRE/2012/22.

5. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/38 (amended by GRE-68-05) submitted by the expert from GTB revising the requirements on the replacement of light sources. GRE agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal tabled by the expert from GTB, better addressing performance requirements and future technologies.

6. GRE considered a joint proposal from the experts of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom clarifying the test conditions related to the sensitivity of automatic/adaptive driving beam (ADB) sensor systems. GRE adopted this proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/28 amended by GRE-68-22) as amended below and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2013 session as draft:

(a) Supplement 11 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(b) Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(c) Supplement 1 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48

Paragraph 6.1.9.3.1.2. last indent, amend to read:

“6.1.9.3.1.2. …

To verify compliance with (a) and (b) above, the oncoming and preceding power driven vehicle (or vehicle-trailer combination) shall have position lamps (if applicable) and dipped-beam headlamps switched ON."

7. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/29 and GRE-68-16-Rev.1 clarifying the requirement for mandatory manual override for ADB control. GRE adopted the proposal as amended by Annex III to this report. GRE rejected GRE-68-13 proposing additional requirements in case of automatic reactivation. GRE requested the secretariat to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2013 sessions (see para. 6)

(a) Supplement 11 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(b) Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(c) Supplement 1 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48

8. GRE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/26, not amended, proposing to suppress the mandatory fitting of sensors for the adaptive main beam and Adaptive Front-lighting System (AFS) that detect retro-reflectors. The secretariat was requested to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2013 session as part of (see para. 6 and 7):

(a) Supplement 11 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(b) Supplement 4 to the 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48
(c) Supplement 1 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48

Proposal from the United Kingdom and the United States of America for both the 1958 and 1998 Agreements, in which the drawings and technical specifications of any test device used in UN Regulations and UN GTRs could be incorporated as addenda to a Resolution.

76. The representative of the United Kingdom presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 and WP.29-158-19 proposing to develop a Mutual Resolution applicable for both the 1958 and 1998 Agreements, in which the drawings and technical specifications of any test device used in UN Regulations and UN GTRs could be incorporated as addenda. WP.29 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 as amended by Annex III to this report and requested the secretariat to submit this proposal for consideration and vote to AC.3 (see para. 117 below).

5. The expert from the United Kingdom, Chair of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP (GRSP-52-18) about the ongoing activities of the group. He added that the last meeting of the group was held in Geneva on 10-11 December 2012, prior to the GRSP session. He confirmed that the development of injury criteria was of critical importance and that they would be discussed at the next informal group meeting in February 2013. He added that the development of a proposal for a certification procedure of the dummy was in progress and that extensive study funded by the EC identified areas of dummy performance, particularly regarding reproducibility, that required further investigation. The expert from Japan, secretary of the informal working group, complemented the presentation of the expert from the United Kingdom introducing the last status report of the informal working group (GRSP-52-23). He also confirmed the goal of the group to submit a proposal for consideration at the December 2013 session of GRSP.

6. Referring to the discussion held during the November 2012 session of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099, para. 76), GRSP noted that a Mutual Resolution concerning the description and performance of test tools and devices had been adopted (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 and WP.29-158-19) and reproduced as ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1101. GRSP, also noted that as part of the proposal of the UN GTR, a specific addenda for the inclusion of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II) in this Resolution would be prepared by the informal working group.

Copy of the proposal to establish a compendium of the test tools used in Global Technical Regulations (and UN Regulations) to permit such regulations test tools according to a single source rather than having to revise each regulation with each change in tool specifications.

Draft language for amendments and an appendix to the 1958 Agreement that would enable the use of the Data Exchange for Type Approvals. The proposal supports the International Whole Vehicle Type Approval effort and proposes a Unique Identifier to simplify product markings.

The IWVTA subgroup SG58 that is drafting the new text of the 1958 Agreement in order to make the agreement more attraction for new counties will propose that once a new country has become a Contracting Party it acceeds to a Regulation, it can grant approvals to all series of amendments provided it has the technical competence and has to accept approvals to the latest version of the regulation. When approvals are granted to previous series of amendments (the text of former series will be cast in stone) it will be including all supplements for that series of amendments.

The IWVTA subgroup SGR0 prepares a new Regulation 0 for an international whole vehicle type approval. For making it attractive for new countries a certain level of flexibility is needed; two suggestions are made:

• - the secretariat of UNECE suggested a two levels of stringency, level 00 on the lowest level and level 01 of the highest level for the European Union; amendments would have the format of a supplement,

and

• - OICA suggested the approach of a universal type approval with the application of several separate regulation and a lower level on the basis is (some) previous versions of separate UN regulation as a type approval with limited acceptance.

Both subgroups will meet again in January 2013, where the suggestions for amending the 1958 Agreement and the draft Regulation should include proposals from DETA on the application of DETA and the Unique Identifier. These groups might also discuss a proposal from the Netherlands on the numbering of type approvals and their marking.

As one of the major tasks the informal group DETA also considered document DETA-16-04 from the expert from the UK in which an entry will be introduced in the revised 1958 Agreement for the use of the DETA system in article 5 and an Unique Identifier in article 2. Further details (like the use of DETA) should be specified in an appendix [X] to the Agreement.

DETA shall be used where a regulation requires so or when a copy of an approval is requested. The documents to be stored in the database shall be those specified in each Regulation. Where the approval is stored in the database the “standard” approval marking may be replaced by the Unique Identifier. The document is after discussion revised as DETA-16-04rev.1 . Up to 7 December it is possible to send comments on this document to the secretariat of DETA; after that, the result will be sent to WP.29 as official document and to the subgroups of IWVTA as well for discussion in their January meetings. Document DETA-15-06 has been superseded by DETA-16-04Rev.1.

IG-DETA also discussed the topic of access rights and concluded that, once the systems is operational, this has to arranged in a guidance document.

The IG also agreed that document DETA-15-03-rev.1 with amendments to the draft Regulation 0 should be forwarded to the IWVTA-SGR0 as input from the DETA group. If adopted by that SGR0 there is no need to send it to WP.29 as well.

In response to concerns that the term “Special Resolution” applies only to the 1998 Agreement, this proposal would rename the “Special Resolution No. 2” proposal for a test tool concordance under both the 1958 and 1998 Agreements as a “Mutual Resolution”.

76. The representative of the United Kingdom presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 and WP.29-158-19 proposing to develop a Mutual Resolution applicable for both the 1958 and 1998 Agreements, in which the drawings and technical specifications of any test device used in UN Regulations and UN GTRs could be incorporated as addenda. WP.29 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 as amended by Annex III to this report and requested the secretariat to submit this proposal for consideration and vote to AC.3 (see para. 117 below).

5. The expert from the United Kingdom, Chair of the informal working group on UN GTR No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP (GRSP-52-18) about the ongoing activities of the group. He added that the last meeting of the group was held in Geneva on 10-11 December 2012, prior to the GRSP session. He confirmed that the development of injury criteria was of critical importance and that they would be discussed at the next informal group meeting in February 2013. He added that the development of a proposal for a certification procedure of the dummy was in progress and that extensive study funded by the EC identified areas of dummy performance, particularly regarding reproducibility, that required further investigation. The expert from Japan, secretary of the informal working group, complemented the presentation of the expert from the United Kingdom introducing the last status report of the informal working group (GRSP-52-23). He also confirmed the goal of the group to submit a proposal for consideration at the December 2013 session of GRSP.

6. Referring to the discussion held during the November 2012 session of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099, para. 76), GRSP noted that a Mutual Resolution concerning the description and performance of test tools and devices had been adopted (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/124 and WP.29-158-19) and reproduced as ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1101. GRSP, also noted that as part of the proposal of the UN GTR, a specific addenda for the inclusion of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II) in this Resolution would be prepared by the informal working group.

Working draft of text to amend the 1958 Agreement and enable the implementation of the data exchange for type approval information.

The IWVTA subgroup SG58 that is drafting the new text of the 1958 Agreement in order to make the agreement more attraction for new counties will propose that once a new country has become a Contracting Party it acceeds to a Regulation, it can grant approvals to all series of amendments provided it has the technical competence and has to accept approvals to the latest version of the regulation. When approvals are granted to previous series of amendments (the text of former series will be cast in stone) it will be including all supplements for that series of amendments.

The IWVTA subgroup SGR0 prepares a new Regulation 0 for an international whole vehicle type approval. For making it attractive for new countries a certain level of flexibility is needed; two suggestions are made:

• - the secretariat of UNECE suggested a two levels of stringency, level 00 on the lowest level and level 01 of the highest level for the European Union; amendments would have the format of a supplement,

and

• - OICA suggested the approach of a universal type approval with the application of several separate regulation and a lower level on the basis is (some) previous versions of separate UN regulation as a type approval with limited acceptance.

Both subgroups will meet again in January 2013, where the suggestions for amending the 1958 Agreement and the draft Regulation should include proposals from DETA on the application of DETA and the Unique Identifier. These groups might also discuss a proposal from the Netherlands on the numbering of type approvals and their marking.

As one of the major tasks the informal group DETA also considered document DETA-16-04 from the expert from the UK in which an entry will be introduced in the revised 1958 Agreement for the use of the DETA system in article 5 and an Unique Identifier in article 2. Further details (like the use of DETA) should be specified in an appendix [X] to the Agreement.

DETA shall be used where a regulation requires so or when a copy of an approval is requested. The documents to be stored in the database shall be those specified in each Regulation. Where the approval is stored in the database the “standard” approval marking may be replaced by the Unique Identifier. The document is after discussion revised as DETA-16-04rev.1 . Up to 7 December it is possible to send comments on this document to the secretariat of DETA; after that, the result will be sent to WP.29 as official document and to the subgroups of IWVTA as well for discussion in their January meetings. Document DETA-15-06 has been superseded by DETA-16-04Rev.1.

IG-DETA also discussed the topic of access rights and concluded that, once the systems is operational, this has to arranged in a guidance document.

The IG also agreed that document DETA-15-03-rev.1 with amendments to the draft Regulation 0 should be forwarded to the IWVTA-SGR0 as input from the DETA group. If adopted by that SGR0 there is no need to send it to WP.29 as well.

Proposal to update noise test-track requirements from ISO 19844:1994 to ISO 10844:2011 and incorporates transitional provisions to allow repaving of existing, non-compliant test tracks with the ISO 10844:2011 standards. This supersedes document GRB/2012/9.

16. The expert from ETRTO introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2013/5, drafted in cooperation with the experts from Poland and the United Kingdom, proposing to update the test track requirements to ISO 10844:2011 as a supplement to the UN Regulation rather than a new series of amendments. He stated that the new test track with tighter tolerances would maintain the same nominal noise behaviour and that its introduction as a new series of amendments was not justified (GRB-57-02). The experts from France endorsed the proposal and stated that technical variations introduced by the new track would not justify a new series of amendments. The experts from Italy and Japan also endorsed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2013/5.

17. GRB finally adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2013/5 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2013/2, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/15 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2012/18) as reproduced in Annex II to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2013 sessions as draft Supplement 4 to the 07 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 117. Moreover, GRB agreed that extensions of type approvals, granted by using the test track in accordance to ISO 10844:1994, may be carried out with the test track built in accordance with ISO 10844:2011, taking into account that this last would not negatively affect type approval noise test results.

44. The expert from Germany reported on the progress made by the informal group on tyre pressure monitoring (TPM) during its meetings held in Bonn on 13-14 October 2008 and on 12 December 2008. He presented their draft proposal for a new regulation for TPMS (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2009/10 and Corr.1) with a number of unresolved issues in square brackets.

45. The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-65-15, GRRF-65-30, GRRF-65-31 and GRRF-65-35 proposing some improvements in the text as well as the technical background for a wider range of under-inflation of the tyres. The expert from the United Kingdom preferred to have a tighter range for the detection of under-inflation, without any tolerance for the accuracy (GRRF-65-36). The expert from ETRTO presented GRRF-65-21 and GRRF-65-22 also supporting a tighter range for the detection of under-inflation for safety reasons.

46. Following a lengthy discussion, the Chairman proposed a compromised text based upon ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2009/10 as reproduced in GRRF-65-40. This text includes, for the diffusion test, a pressure threshold of 20 per cent with no tolerance, but could not agree on the cumulative time necessary to warn the driver [30/60] minutes and on the allowance for the inaccuracies of the measuring equipment [5] kPa. These values would be kept in square brackets and should be considered by WP.29 during its forthcoming sessions. The Chairman announced his intention to inform WP.29 of the remaining open issues and to seek, in this respect, the advice of WP.29 at the forthcoming March 2009 session. The expert from OICA renewed his request about the crucial need to improve the accuracy of pressure gauges at service stations. The secretariat was requested to inform the European Garage Equipment Association (EGEA) of this need.

47. Concerning the time frame, the EC expert recalled the group that TPMS requirements would be made mandatory in the European Union by 2012. Therefore, GRRF agreed (with the exception of the expert from Germany) to adopt the TPMS requirements as an amendment to Regulation No. 64, instead of a new draft Regulation. The expert from the EC was requested to produce a revised document to include the agreed TPMS requirements into Regulation No. 64. GRRF requested the secretariat to submit the adopted proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2009 sessions, as draft new series of amendments to Regulation No. 64, subject to a final review by GRRF at its September 2009 session.

48. Concluding the discussion, the Chairman thanked the experts from Germany for developing their proposal and for managing the competing approaches within the informal group.

Comments from the active and passive safety working groups on the draft guidelines for automatic driver-assist systems.

Revised draft of the driver-assist systems guidelines following input from active and passive safety working parties (GR).

Text prepared by the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in response to the proposal (document GRE/2013/13) from France and Germany to implement direction indicator lamps with a variable apparent surface into UN Regulation No. 6.

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.

Text prepared by the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in response to the proposal (document GRE/2013/14) from France and Germany to implement provisions concerning direction indicator lamps with spatial variation of the intensity within 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.

Text prepared by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to review and simplify the UN R 13-H transitional provisions.

13. The expert from UK, recalling the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/30, reported on the outcome of the group of experts working on updated transitional provisions of UN Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H as reproduced in GRRF-75-40 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/27. GRRF noted a number of comments. GRRF agreed to reconsider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/27, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/28 and GRRF-75-40 at its next session.

Text prepared by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to review and simplify the UN R-13 transitional provisions.

13. The expert from UK, recalling the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/30, reported on the outcome of the group of experts working on updated transitional provisions of UN Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H as reproduced in GRRF-75-40 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/27. GRRF noted a number of comments. GRRF agreed to reconsider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/27, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/28 and GRRF-75-40 at its next session.

Proposal to specify a head restraint height between 720 mm and 830 mm pursuant to the work on phase 2 of GTR No. 7 which includes a new method for measuring the effective height of head restraints.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.

4. The expert from the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He clarified that notwithstanding the progress of the last meeting held in February 2014, outstanding points remained, i.e. on injury criteria. He added that the next meeting had been scheduled on early September 2014, in Berlin. He stated that the IWG had suggested that the issue of the head restraint height would be resolved by GRSP rather than the IWG. He finally announced that a revised official proposal for a UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the December 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1), to incorporate the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II).

5. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and to resume discussion on the height of the head restraints (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) at its December 2014 session.

5. Concerning the height of head restraints, the expert from the Netherlands reminded GRSP that a proposal with new thresholds had been submitted last year (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) and that the new measurement method agreed by the IWG was guaranteeing good repeatability. The expert from OICA argued that the new test method by itself was reducing the measured height of the head restraints by about 30 mm and that the additional severity due to the new thresholds referenced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 needed further justification. The expert from India was of the opinion that an anthropometry study should be carried out to investigate the consequences of increased height of head restraints.

Proposal to refine the text of document GRSG/2013/23 wherein Germany proposed to clarify the provisions on the extended field of vision of heavy goods vehicles across different mirror classes. The text would require assessment of normal and extended fields of vision using a single mirror adjustment and to allow for the loss of up to 10% of the close-proximity field of vision in such configurations. The UK proposes to add the word “simultaneously” in several places to confirm that the mirror can not be re-adjusted during the approval test in order to meet the extended field of view requirements.

27. The expert from Germany presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2013/23 clarifying the introduction of the extended field of vision on heavy goods vehicles that may be covered using different mirror classes. The expert from the United Kingdom proposed some improvements to the proposed text (GRSG-105-22). GRSG adopted the document, as amended below, and requested the secretariat to submit the amendments to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 1 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 46.

Paragraphs 15.2.4.5.11.1. to 15.2.4.5.11.3., replace the wording “that it provides” by “that it simultaneously provides” (3 times).

Paragraph 15.2.4.5.12., second subparagraph, replace the wording “However, in that case” by “In such cases” and “that it provides” by that it simultaneously provides".

UK proposal to address concerns raised in the series of proposals to insert provisions for the use of incandescent light sources in the case of light source modules and lamps with non-replaceable light sources.

52. The expert from the UK, introduced GRE-70-39, proposing amendments to the ten documents listed above in reply to European Commission letter (GRE-70-22) stating concerns with GRE documents submitted for WP.29 adoption. GRE agreed on the proposed corrections and requested the secretariat to submit the document as an informal document for consideration at the November 2013 session of WP.29.

Presentation to review the draft regulation that would enable the international type approval of whole vehicles.

The intention of this document is to explain important concepts and to provide guidance for Contracting Parties in order to enable effective and consistent application of the IWVTA process. This revision incorporates discussions from the 8th SGR0 group meeting.

Comments from Australia and the UK on the draft “Proposal for Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement”.

Working draft of the phase 2 revisions to the global technical regulation on head restraints provided to the GRSP at its December 2013 session for informational purposes only.

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

4. The expert from the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He clarified that notwithstanding the progress of the last meeting held in February 2014, outstanding points remained, i.e. on injury criteria. He added that the next meeting had been scheduled on early September 2014, in Berlin. He stated that the IWG had suggested that the issue of the head restraint height would be resolved by GRSP rather than the IWG. He finally announced that a revised official proposal for a UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the December 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1), to incorporate the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II).

5. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and to resume discussion on the height of the head restraints (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) at its December 2014 session.

Bernie Frost explained to the group the further procedure and what he expected the group to deliver. He explained that the text of the draft GTR and the BioRID certification procedures are the main topics for the face to face meeting on 5th and 6th of February 2014 in Brussels. The Working Document presented to 54th GRSP will be the basis for discussion (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24). Comments within the dual pane document shall be removed/resolved. Members shall be well prepared to do so. A further meeting before the GRSP May session shall be held in April. New information on injury criteria research is expected for the April meeting. Bernie Frost pointed out that all open questions shall be solved by September 2014 to be able to send a final document to GRSP for approval.

116. The representative of the United Kingdom reported on the work progress of the IWG on Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/86). He informed AC.3 that some progress was made in improving quality and reproducibility of the [biofidelic] rear impact dummy (BioRID) as a test tool of the draft UN GTR. However, he added that more substantial progress was expected once that current test programme by the National Highway Administration (NHTSA) was finalized. Therefore, he announced that a Webex meeting was planned during the third week of November 2014 and another informal meeting in January 2015. Finally, he announced that the IWG was expected to submit an official proposal for the May 2015 session of GRSP.

Proposal to amend the paragraph concerning the modification of a vehicle type and extension or modification of approval.

Incident reports confirm that occupants of exposed seats have been thrown forward during heavy braking or vehicle impact conditions, often sustaining head injuries from contact with the vehicle floor or other hard structure. Seats particularly affected are those located immediately to the rear of an open wheelchair or buggy space. This proposal aims to reduce this risk by extending existing requirements for exposed seats adjacent to step wells to apply to other exposed seats where there is a risk of the occupant being thrown forward.

9. The expert from UK presented GRSG-108-31 amending the safety prescriptions for buses and coaches to ensure that all occupants of exposed seats, and not just those at risk of being thrown forward into a step well, were provided with a means of protection. GRSG noted general support on the proposal. The Chair invited all experts to send their comments to the expert from UK who committed to submit to the secretariat a revised proposal for consideration at the next GRSG session as an official document.

UN Regulations Nos. 58 and 73 contain exemptions which can be applied by an approval authority and we are concerned that a vehicle which is correctly approved using such an exemption cannot then be required to have an RUPD or sideguards. The UK seeks the views of GRSG on how the wording of the exemptions may be improved to ensure that as many vehicles as possible are fitted with RUPD and sideguards.

35. The expert from UK explained their concerns about the current exemptions in UN Regulations Nos. 58 and 73 (GRSG-108-32). He sought the view of GRSG as to how the wording of the exemptions might be improved to ensure that as many vehicles as possible are fitted with rear underrun protection and side guards. GRSG experts were invited to send their comments to the expert from UK. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session and to keep GRSG-108-32 on its agenda as a reference document.

25. The expert from UK recalled the purpose of GRSG-108-32 on exemptions in UN Regulations Nos. 58 and 73. He announced to revert back to GRSG at its next session with a concrete proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. 73 to ensure that as many vehicles as possible were fitted with rear underrun protection and side guards. GRSG agreed to remove the agenda item and to resume, at the next session, consideration of this subject under the corresponding agenda item on UN Regulation No. 73.

An accident occurred where an N1 security vehicle fatally injured a child who was crossing the entrance to a supermarket car park. The vehicle had been modified from the original specification of the manufacturer by the removal of the side windows and the fitting of plastic glazing on both sides of the driver’s cab area, and a frame of strengthening material fitted to the replacement glazing. This reduced the side vision for the driver of the vehicle. Since UN R125 applies to M1 vehicles, the UK seeks guidance from GRSG on the application of UN R125 provisions to N1 vehicles.

54. The expert from UK presented GRSG-108-33 raising concerns about the absence of an appropriate field of view requirement for drivers of N1 vehicles. GRSG noted support on the principles of the proposal. Some experts raised a study reservation as the proposal would imply a modification to the current scope of UN Regulation No. 125. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session on the basis of a concrete proposal by the expert from UK.

44. Referring to GRSG-108-33, the expert from UK announced to present, at the next session of GRSG, the results of an investigation on the in-use provisions and the absence of an appropriate field of view requirement for drivers of N1 vehicles. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session.

66. Referring to GRSG-108-34, the expert from UK underlined the need to develop a harmonized regulation on data recording for automated vehicles and suggested inserting a new item to the agenda of the 109th session of GRSG. He volunteered to prepare a concrete proposal on this subject. GRSG welcomed and endorsed the suggestion. Following the discussion, the Chair announced his intention to inform WP.29 and its Subgroup on Intelligent Transport System / Automated Driving (ITS/AD) about this future activity by GRSG and to coordinate the work on automated vehicles within the subsidiary Working Parties. GRSG expected to receive guidance from ITS/AD on the need for a new regulation on EDR and the extent of its content.

In the framework of the International Whole Vehicle Type Approval (IWVTA) discussion, it was agreed to split Regulation No. 13-H into three distinct Regulations: on Braking, on Brake Assist Systems (BAS) and on Electronic Stability Control (ESC). In order to complete this task and to ease the implementation work of Contracting Parties relying on the existing text of the Regulation to mandate BAS or ESC, new transitional provisions are proposed.

60. The expert from the UK recalled, on behalf of the group of interested experts dealing with this matter, the purpose of GRRF-79-05, GRRF-79-06 and GRRF‑79‑07 superseding official proposals for separate 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 Regulation No. 13‑H (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/10). She then introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRRF/2015/33 as amended by GRRF-80-32 proposing transitional provisions to make sure that Countries mandating the fitment of ESC or BAS on the basis of the existing text of Regulation No. 13-H would be able to continue to mandate this fitment, unaffected by this extraction. GRRF agreed to reconsider this proposal at its February 2016 session.

Incident reports confirm that occupants of exposed seats have been thrown forward during heavy braking or vehicle impact conditions, often sustaining head injuries from contact with the vehicle floor or other hard structure. Seats particularly affected are those located immediately to the rear of an open wheelchair or buggy space. This proposal aims to reduce this risk by extending existing requirements for exposed seats adjacent to step wells to apply to other exposed seats where there is a risk of the occupant being thrown forward.

11. The expert from UK presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/34 amending the safety prescriptions for buses and coaches to ensure that all occupants of exposed seats, and not just those at risk of being thrown forward into a step well, were provided with a means of protection. The expert from CLCCR underlined the need to also clarify the provisions for standing passengers. The experts from Canada and OICA endorsed that position. Following the discussion, GRSG noted general support on the proposal. GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/34 as reproduced in Annex III to the report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2016 sessions, as part (see paras. 7, 9 and 10 above) of draft Supplement 5 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 107. GRSG agreed to resume, at its next session, consideration of updated provisions for standing passenger on the basis of a proposal by the expert from CLCCR.

Proposal to delete the exclusion of “vehicles designed and constructed for special purposes where it is not possible, for practical reasons, to fit lateral protection devices” from the text. The UK submits that paragraphs 13 and 16 provide specific provisions that address this situation whereas the exclusion clause allows for a broader interpretation that unnecessarily limits the use of lateral protection devices.

30. Recalling the purpose of GRSG-108-32 presented at the previous session of GRSG as well as the discussion of GRSG under agenda item 7 (para. 24 above) on UN Regulation No. 58, the expert from UK introduced GRSG-109-17 proposing to delete paragraph 1.2.2. from the scope of the Regulation to ensure that as many vehicles as possible were fitted with a lateral protection device. The proposal received general support on the principles. However, a number of experts raised concerns on the application of a number of exemptions for special purpose vehicles listed in the Regulation. GRSG noted that such vehicles could be exempted by national/regional legislation.

31. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session and requested the secretariat to circulate GRSG-109-17 with an official symbol.

Comments from the UK proposing new text for the 1997 Agreement on Periodical Technical Inspections for consideration at the 2nd PTI informal group session.

Draft proposal to amend the 1997 Vienna Agreement (PTI-02-01)
UK specified several editorial mistakes in the text to be corrected (PTI-02-05). It was proposed to add “appeals and complaints” as an item to be covered by rules for Supervising bodies (Appendix 6, para 3). The proposals were accepted.

FIN (PTI-02-08) supposes that the 1997 Agreement should not contain very detailed requirements for training of inspectors and supervision of testing centres. The training and supervision systems should be made possible to be adapted to local needs. In FIN opinion, the 1997 Agreement should have only general requirements and let the Contracting Parties follow the best way to arrange PTI.

RU noted that the existence of satisfactory arrangements and procedures for ensuring the objectivity and the high quality of the technical inspections, undertaken in accordance with the recommended methods specified in the Rules, is the basis for the mutual recognition of the international technical inspection certificate issued by the Contracting Parties.
If satisfactory requirements for the conformity of PTI process are excluded from the 1997 Agreement, they shall be placed in another UN documents (Rules, guidelines, consolidated resolutions etc.).

The group shall find a balance between the PTI result and strictness and scope of the requirements for the PTI process.

FIN proposes to make electronic PTI certificates permitted as an option. The 1997 Agreement does not explicitly prevent this, but it would be better to specify it clearly in the Agreement. The certificate needs to be available for supervision purposes – for instance, Police or Customs inspection. FIN suggests to amend item 4 in Appendix 2 to read:
“[…] The certificate may also be in electronic form, provided it is accessible whenever needed”.
FIN proposes to amend item 3.1 in Appendix 3, to read:
“3.1. Contracting Parties shall ensure that technical inspections are carried out by inspectors fulfilling the minimum competence and training requirements laid down by the Contracting Party.”
Items 3.2 to 3.5, 4.2 and 4.3 in Appendix 3 can be deleted following to FIN concept.

FIN invited to discuss whether item 2 is necessary in Appendix 4.
These proposals are accepted.

FIN prefers to delete Appendix 5 and 6.
The group decided to return to the subject at the next session. (Agenda next meeting)

RU recalled, that the group has not yet completed the discussion about the form for introduction of requirements for the PTI process. There are at least three kinds of documents: the 1997 Agreement, Rules, annexed to the 1997 Agreement, , or another UN document. RU support the amendments to the 1997 Agreement, since the scope of Rules is not covers the subject and conformity of PTI process is the basis for mutual recognition of ITIC.

The group decided to return to the subject at the next session. (Agenda next meeting). Co-Chairs will prepare a document on the subject for the next session. (Action Co-Chairs)
RO (PTI-02-09) states that the introduction of Appendix 3 to the 1997 Agreement is in line with the new requirements of the Directive 2014/45/EU and it is acceptable. But for the European Union Member states (EU MS) Directive 2014/45/EU requirements will come into force after 20 May 2018. These requirements could be too strict for some countries, making the 1997 Agreement non attractive for them.

In RO opinion, IWG PTI shall discuss three possible scenarios:
1. to keep the Directive’s provisions (as proposed);
2. to introduce the principles of these provisions, but not as strict as in the Directive;
3. to delete these new provisions or introduce them later.

The group decided to return to the subject at the next session. (Agenda next meeting)

RO supposes that definition of “approval” is not appropriate in the 1997 Agreement. Since CPs can apply different Regulations and national/regional standards the definition shall be amended to read:
“approval means a procedure whereby can be certified that a vehicle satisfies the relevant administrative provisions and technical requirements referred to in the national/regional legislation”. The group decided to return to the subject at the next session. (Agenda next meeting)

RO specified that the items of the international technical inspection certificate (Appendix 1) shall be discussed and compared with the roadworthiness certificate provided in directive 2014/45/EU). Several paragraphs of Article 8 of the Directive could be adapted and introduced into the 1997 Agreement.
The group is awaiting RO proposals on this subject. (Action RO)

RO and RS proposed to use the term “authorised” instead of “accredited” in Appendix 2. The proposal was supported in principle.

In Appendix 2, item 1, RO suggested to replace the word “approval” with similar one, since there is definition of the term “approval”. The group is awaiting exact proposals on the subject. (Action all)

RO supposes, that there shall be transitional provisions or exceptions regarding the inspectors that are working in the system before the date of the introduction of these competence and training requirements (Appendix 3) as it was made in item 3 of Article 13 of the Directive.

RS (PTI-02-10) suggested to add “adaptation to technical progress” as additional goal for the 1997 Agreement. It could be added to the end of the second subparagraph of the Preamble.
The group decided to return to the subject at the next session. (agenda next meeting)

In Appendix 5, item 1 (a), RS proposed instead of term “combustion engines” to apply term “powertrain”, covering internal combustion engine, electric machine (electric motor, electric generator, electric motor-generator), fuel cell, etc.
The proposal was accepted.

UK comments on UN Rule No. 1 for discussion during the 2nd PTI informal group session.

Proposal for revised transitional provisions under the regulation.

54. The expert from OICA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/6 removing (as suggested by the IWG on IWVTA) the provisions on ESC and Brake Assist Systems (BAS) from Regulation No. 13-H, taking into consideration the comments received at previous sessions of GRRF as well as the transitional provisions proposed by the expert from UK in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/10. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/7 proposing a new Regulation on BAS. He also introduced a proposal for a new Regulation on ESC (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/8). After discussion, GRRF agreed on the revised proposals in GRRF-81-23, GRRF-81-24 and GRRF-81-25.

Proposal to expand the scope of the regulation by deleting paragraph 1.2.2. which allows for the exclusion of “vehicles designed and constructed for special purposes where it is not possible, for practical reasons, to fit lateral protection devices” from the text. The UK submits that paragraphs 13 and 16 of the regulation provide specific provisions that address this situation whereas the exclusion clause allows for a broader interpretation that unnecessarily limits the use of lateral protection devices. Moreover, exemptions may still be accorded at the national level.

27. The expert from UK reminded GRSG about the purpose of document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/2 (based on GRSG-109-17) amending the scope of the Regulation to ensure that as many vehicles as possible were fitted with a lateral protection device. The expert from CLCCR supported the proposal in principle, but preferred to insert derogations for some niche products (GRSG-110-20-Rev.1). GRSG noted a number of comments.

28. GRSG agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session and requested the secretariat to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/2 and GRSG-110-20-Rev.1 on the agenda as reference documents. Thus, the expert from UK volunteered to prepare a revised document for a final review at the forthcoming GRSG session, taking into account the comments received.

27. The expert from CLCCR introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/18 amending the scope of the Regulation to ensure that as many vehicles as possible were fitted with a lateral protection device and preferred to insert derogations for some niche products (GRSG-110-20-Rev.1). The expert from the United Kingdom raised concerns and preferred to keep the amendments as proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/2 which allows Contracting Parties to object or accept such lateral protection devices. GRSG noted a number of comments on and general support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/18.

28. Finally, GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/18 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2017 sessions, as draft Supplement 1 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 73.

Proposal to delete the Supplement number from the approval since supplements are not extensions and do not require renumbering under 1958 Agreement procedures.

Proposal to delete exhaust and fuel consumption provisions since these attributes are regulated by contracting parties and national authorities.

UK input to confirm basic understanding of the proposed categories of corrective steering and automatically commanded steering functions and to propose requirements under each category.

Proposed changes to the draft amendment to UN R79 on automatically commanded steering functions.

Proposals to delineate the difference between corrective steering (driver assistance) and automatically commanded steering (automated driving) functions, clarify the definition of Complex Electronic Systems, require system deactivation when sensors are blocked, and to require indication of the level/version of software in use.

Proposal to specify that “handrails and handholds at doorways where the associated residual space is not designated for passengers positioned for travel, and where intrusion into the space presents no risk of contact with passengers, shall also be ignored.”

23. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/11 proposing to amend the provisions of UN Regulation No. 66 with respect to intrusion into residual space during the roll over test. The expert from UK presented GRSG-110-16 suggesting an alternative text.

24. GRSG endorsed in general the proposal but noted concerns about the wordings “no risk of contact”. GRSG invited the experts from UK and OICA to review the proposed text and agreed to resume consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/11 at its next session and to keep both documents on the agenda as reference documents.

22. The expert from OICA recalled ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/11 and GRSG-110-16 which propose to amend the provisions of UN Regulation No. 66 with respect to intrusion into residual space during the roll over test.

23. GRSG noted a number of comments on the draft amendments and agreed on the need to reconsider the definition of “residual space”. The GRSG Chair recommended having a final review of an updated text at the next GRSG session. He invited the experts from France, the United Kingdom and OICA to work on a joint proposal.

19. The expert from OICA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2016/11 and informed GRSG that the concern with UN Regulation No. 66 was resolved with an interim solution. GRSG agreed to remove this item from the agenda of its next session.

Review of the October 2015 – April 2016 programme initiated in the UK in response to revelations of emissions testing defeat devices on VW vehicles.

Proposal to amend the transitional provisions of the formal proposal to update UN R106 (GRRF/2017/9).

38. The expert from ETRTO presented a revised proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2017/9 with provisions which were already supported at the last session. He introduced the revised transitional provisions related to new marking requirements. The experts from EC and UK proposed an alternative wording (GRRF-83-14). Both proposals received several comments. Therefore GRRF agreed to adopt the agreed provisions that would not be subject to transitional provisions and to remove the others, as reproduced in GRRF-83-23.

Proposal for a harmonized symbol with option for explanatory text to signify a request for and status of the driver’s hands on the steering wheel when the vehicle is in an ACSF mode.