56. The World Forum followed with interest the presentation (WP.29-151-05) made by the representative of the United States of America on the final rule making process in his country to establish the 2012–2016 light-duty vehicle Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) and Greenhouse Gases (GHG) standards.

121. The representative of the US introduced the Heavy Duty National Program for greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty engines (WP.29-155-11) and a further programme for new fuel economy and environment labels for a new generation of vehicles (WP.29-155-12), both for inclusion in the Compendium of Candidate Global Technical Regulations. The representative of the Russian Federation welcomed the initiative and added that his government had started to consider a similar legislation.

122. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute informal documents WP.29-155-11 and WP.29-155-12 as official documents for consideration at the next session. The representative of the US would provide the secretariat with the text of the above-mentioned final rules to be listed in the Compendium.

121. The representative of the US introduced the Heavy Duty National Program for greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty engines (WP.29-155-11) and a further programme for new fuel economy and environment labels for a new generation of vehicles (WP.29-155-12), both for inclusion in the Compendium of Candidate Global Technical Regulations. The representative of the Russian Federation welcomed the initiative and added that his government had started to consider a similar legislation.

122. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute informal documents WP.29-155-11 and WP.29-155-12 as official documents for consideration at the next session. The representative of the US would provide the secretariat with the text of the above-mentioned final rules to be listed in the Compendium.

141. NHTSA Chief Council, Mr. K. Vincent, introduced a joint proposal by Japan, US and EU (WP.29-155-38) requesting the authorization for establishing two informal working groups that would address the safety and environmental requirements for electric vehicles and develop a UN GTR on electric vehicles. He complemented the request with a presentation (WP.29-155-43). The proposal received general support from AC.3. As a timeline, he proposed (i) March 2012 for the adoption of the authorization by AC.3, (ii) spring 2012 for the adoption of the terms of reference for each group, and (iii) 2014 as a possible date for the adoption of the UN GTR. The Chair of GRPE suggested considering the terms of reference of environmental requirements already at the next GRPE session, in January 2012. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-155-38 with an official symbol for its consideration at the March 2012 session.

Only presentations from the USA.

Mr. Jackson presented the status of the US GHG (Greenhouse Gas) rule. The HD National Program was developed by EPA with support from industry, the State of California, and environmental stakeholders, and is a key component of EPA’s response to a Presidential Memorandum issued in May 2010. The final rule was published at the beginning of August 2011 and becomes effective in 2014 followed by a second step in 2017. A second phase of regulations is planned for model years beyond 2018. For HD vehicles, the rule includes two sets of standards, one for the engine (in g/kWh), one for the whole vehicle (in g/ton-mile). The engine GHG emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O) are measured over the FTP and SET test cycles (like for criteria pollutants), while the vehicle CO2 emission is calculated by using the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM). The CO2 standards for pickup trucks and vans are expressed in g/mile and detemined on the chassis dyno. The rule also includes flexibility provisions that allow using early credits. An implementation workshop will be held on 03 November 2011 in Ann Arbor. Questions may be submitted to EPA by 19 October 2011.

The second part of Mr.Jackson’s presentation is covered under agenda item 7.

Mr. Jackson gave an overview of the hybrid test procedures in the US GHG rule. Hybrid testing falls under the advanced technology demonstration and consists of comparing a conventional vehicle with a hybrid vehicle. The results from the two vehicles will be used to determine an improvement factor. Testing will typically occur through either chassis testing or powerpack testing.

The pre-transmission hybrid control volume includes the combustion engine, the motor generator, the RESS and the HCM (hybrid control module). The combustion engine must meet the applicable emission limits. The hybrid system is defined as an engine system that includes features that recover and store energy during engine motoring operation and during braking unrelated to engine motoring. CO2 emission is measured using the same procedures that apply for testing of non-hybrid engines. Mr. Andreae added that this approach minimizes certification afforts and matches with development practices. Evaluation is done by applying charge sustaining conditions laid down in SAE J 2711.

The post-transmission hybrid control volume in addition includes the transmission, vehicle related parameters and a driver model. The post-transmission powerpack test procedure simulates a chassis test with a post-transmission hybrid system. As with pre-transmission powerpack testing, the combustion engine must be criteria pollutants certified, and the CO2emission is measured using 55 mph constant speed, 65 mph constant speed, and a transient duty cycle. Validation from the rulemaking focused on comparison between powerpack and complete vehicle improvement factors. Additional validation testing using the powerpack and chassis dynamometer test facilities at EC is planned in the near future.

PTO testing can be applied to both post-transmission powerpack and chassis dyno testing. PTO testing is a procedure for quantifying the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as a result of running power take-off (PTO) devices with a hybrid powertrain. The complete test for the hybrid vehicle is from a fully charged RESS to a depleted RESS and then back to a fully charged RESS.

Only presentations from the USA.

July 2011 notice of the US EPA and NHTSA joint final rule establishing new requirements for the fuel economy and environment label posted on the window sticker of all new automobiles sold in the U.S., corresponding with the US request to list this rule in the Compendium of Candidate GTR.

42. The expert from Italy presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/9/Rev.1 to align UN Regulation No. 96 with the European Directive 2011/87/EU.

43. The expert from the Netherlands identified an error in the proposal, since the ratio between the height of the centre of gravity of the tractor and the average minimum track width of all of the axles should be dimensionless.

44. GRPE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/2012/9/Rev.1, as amended below:

Paragraph 11.19., point (a), amend to read:
“… divided by the average minimum track width for each axle exceeds 0.90, the maximum design speed is restricted to 30 km/h;”
Paragraph 11.19., point (b), amend to read:
“… divided by the average minimum track width of all of the axles exceeds 0.90, the maximum design speed shall not exceed 30 km/h.”

GRPE requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 96.

September 2011 notice of final NHTSA fuel consumption standards and final EPA carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions standards for Combination Tractors; Heavy-duty Pickup Trucks and Vans; and Vocational Vehicles, corresponding with the request to list these regulations in the Compendium of Candidate GTR.

Michael Olechiw, from the US EPA, Chair of the informal working group, welcomed and led introductions of the participants and leadership team:
Chair: Michael Olechiw, United States
Co-Chairs: Chen Chunmei, China and Kazuyuki Narusawa, Japan
Secretary: Stéphane Couroux, Canada

There were approximately 40 participants, representing government, vehicle manufacturers, and non-governmental organizations from around the world.

A brief review of the goals of the EVE group and 2nd Meeting was presented by the Chair. The agenda for the meeting was also presented (document EVE-02-05e).

The Chair reviewed document EVE-02-04e covering agenda item 3 (updated TOR, doc EVE-02-23).

A number of comments were made concerning the wording of the three objectives listed in the Introduction, TOR item 1. The definition of “regulatory requirements” and whether this term is inclusive of standards was discussed and the addition of “identifying gaps” into the objectives was requested by a number of participants. The text was changed accordingly for regulatory requirements. For gaps, it was agreed that the last sentence of the first paragraph under Objectives sufficiently addressed this objective. “Fuel cells” was removed from the list of research areas because it was decided that the working group on fuel cells would cover this area.

In the TOR item 2, Objectives, the definition of “all types of road vehicles” was discussed as to what types of vehicles should be listed, if any at all. The text was changed by removing the types of vehicles in order to maintain flexibility. The inclusion of “cold start” in the potential considerations regarding the environmental aspects of EVs and whether it was a performance or environmental issue was discussed by the group, who decided to leave it as presented in the text.

In the TOR item 3.1, issue b, “Understand and document”, ‘document’ was interpreted by the group as a summary report to be presented to WP.29.

In the TOR item 4, Principle c, a change in procedure was noted where the EVE IWG is no longer required to submit documents to the UNECE for posting on the website as it is done directly by the Chair or Secretary. This text was revised accordingly.

TOR item 5, Timeline, was reviewed by the Chair with the group. The member reporting to the AC.3 was proposed to be the GRPE chair, but not decided. It was agreed that the mandate of the EVE IWG goes until the November session of the AC.3 in 2014.

A member requested the inclusion of a list of acronyms in the TOR and other documents (i.e. agenda), and it was agreed that the TOR would be adjusted by the Secretary to include expanded forms of acronyms.

Text was adjusted according to general agreement on the comments above and the adjusted TOR was presented and accepted on Sept.14 (updated doc EVE-02-23).

Michael Olechiw, from the US EPA, Chair of the informal working group, welcomed and led introductions of the participants and leadership team:
Chair: Michael Olechiw, United States
Co-Chairs: Chen Chunmei, China and Kazuyuki Narusawa, Japan
Secretary: Stéphane Couroux, Canada

There were approximately 40 participants, representing government, vehicle manufacturers, and non-governmental organizations from around the world.

A brief review of the goals of the EVE group and 2nd Meeting was presented by the Chair. The agenda for the meeting was also presented (document EVE-02-05e).

Presentation on US EPA study evaluating Li-ion batteries for electric vehicles and single-wall carbon nanotube (SWCNT) anode technology for use in next-generation Li-ion batteries.

The co-Chair, Mr. Kazuyuki Narusawa, presented the draft EVE-06 meeting agenda (see document EVE-05-14e). There were no changes or comments to the proposed agenda.

ACTION 11: The Secretary will post and send the agenda to EVE participants ahead of EVE-06. The Secretary will contact GRPE Secretariat to request conference call capabilities.

Current status of plug-in electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the U.S. market, U.S. regulatory landscape, U.S. government incentives, market drivers and barriers.

Mr. Alson presented on behalf of the U.S.A. and California (EVE-02-19e), Ms. Chen on behalf of China (EVE-02-16e), Mr. Horie on behalf of Japan (EVE-02-17e), Mr. Choi on behalf of Korea (EVE-02-15e), and Mr. Couroux on behalf of Canada (EVE-02-13e).

Highlights of interesting discussion points following the presentations:

• - Canada’s alignment with the USA on light and heavy duty vehicle GHG emission standards.
• - EV penetration under the US CAFE/GHG LDV rule for 2025, estimated to be approximately 3%.
• - EV labelling.

Proposed agenda for the Electric Vehicle Environmental Performance informal group session planned for 14 January 2013.

The Chair presented a draft agenda for the EVE IWG meeting #4 to be held during the GRPE in January, which was adjusted according to discussion (document EVE-02-21e).

Research topics and open discussion items from the second Electric Vehicle Environmental Performance informal working group.

Presentation on Environment Canada and US EPA joint program.

Joint EC/EPA presentation

Mr. Giallonardo presented working paper HDH-11-08. He indicated that the program was focused on Post-TM testing. Several months of trials and high hybrid manufacturer involvement were needed for being able to run the tests. The complete set-up basically represents a chassis dyno test operated a powerpack test. It was only used for a relative comparison between hybrid and non-hybrid vehicles. It was concluded and confirmed by EPA that chassis dyno testing and powerpack testing compare pretty well for CO₂, but differences were observed for criteria pollutants, especially NO_x.

Final Terms of Reference for the informal working group on the environmental performance of electric vehicles.

53. Introducing GRPE-65-03 and GRPE-65-31, the secretary of the informal group on EVE summarized the progress made. He explained that the approach adopted to provide recommendations to GRPE is centred on a Regulatory Reference Guide organized around attributes that characterize electric vehicles, batteries, charging infrastructure and market deployment support mechanisms, with specific attention to their relation with the environment. Potential gaps in the current regulations will be also taken care of in the reference guide. Contracting Parties and other stakeholders are expected to contribute to the guide with information through a specific questionnaire. Seeking GRPE approval, he also introduced GRPE-65-04-Rev.1, containing revised terms of reference (objectives, organization and structure, operating principles and timeline) of the group.

54. GRPE acknowledged the progress made and approved the updated EVE terms of reference, as reproduced in Annex V. The group should meet in conjunction with the next GRPE session, in June 2013, following the EVE meeting scheduled on 11-12 April 2013 in Tokyo.

The Secretary explained that at the 158th session of the WP.29, held last November, the AC.3/WP.29 requested that the Terms of Reference and a Progress Report for the EVE be presented at the 159th session, to be held in March 2013. For this reason, the EVE Secretariat has submitted documents GRPE-65-03 and GRPE-65-04 to be reviewed during GRPE held later this week. The Secretary reminded EVE members that the Terms of Reference were approved by the EVE at the EVE-02.

The representative from Volkswagen / OICA commented that in the vehicles attributes approach, consumer information was excluded.

The Chair responded by suggesting displaying the illustration of vehicle attributes document presented at EVE-03 (EVE-03-02e) and noted that the vehicle labeling attribute may address this concern.

The Secretary provided an update on the approval of the terms of reference by AC.3. The Secretary reminded participants that at the 158th session of the WP.29, held in November 2012, the AC.3/WP.29 requested that the Terms of Reference and a Progress Report for the EVE be presented at the 159th session, to be held in March 2013. The EVE Secretariat has submitted and obtained approval of documents GRPE-65-03 and GRPE-65-04 by GRPE in January 2013. The Terms of Reference were subsequently added to the GRPE 65th session report for presentation at AC.3. The GRPE report was, however, not submitted in time for presentation to AC.3 at the 159th session in March and will instead be considered at the 160th session in June.

6. The Secretary provided an update on the approval of the terms of reference by AC.3. The Secretary reminded participants that at the 158th session of the WP.29, held in November 2012, the AC.3/WP.29 requested that the Terms of Reference and a Progress Report for the EVE be presented at the 159th session, to be held in March 2013. The EVE Secretariat has submitted and obtained approval of documents GRPE-65-03 and GRPE-65-04 by GRPE in January 2013. The Terms of Reference were subsequently added to the GRPE 65th session report for presentation at AC.3 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRPE/65). The GRPE report was, however, not submitted in time for presentation to AC.3 at the 159th session in March and was instead submitted for adoption at the 160th session in June 2013. The Secretary confirmed the 65th GRPE report was approved by WP.29 in June 2013, and as a result the terms of reference were also approved (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1104).

US EPA presentation at the Clean Cities Summit held in Indianapolis on June 28, 2011, transmitted to GFV courtesy of Jeff Seisler representing NGV Global and Clean Fuels Consulting.

• The US Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) has issued rules related to conversions of petrol vehicles to CNG that are intended to (and will) make conversions easier and less expensive than full compliance requirements that have been in place for retrofit system suppliers since about 1994.
• Prior to 1994 gasoline vehicles were allowed by unofficial ‘administrative exemption’ to be converted without being considered to be ‘tampering’ by EPA. In 1994 regulations changed (at the request of the NGV advocates) and EPA began using a more serious certification process, which was in place since 1994 and became one reason NGV conversions were so expensive in the US.
• A three tier, aged-based system was established that was more flexible for NGV conversions of cars more than 2 years old yet still requires monitoring and compliance with EPA ‘relaxed’ requirements.
• Vehicles are classified as: new (less than 2 years olds); Intermediate age (two years up to ‘useful life’; and out of useful life (OUL) (not specified in years, but presumably 5-7 years)
• Requirements are to check on functionality of OBD system when operating on the alternative fuel instead of certification like OBD demonstration.

US input on the draft reference guide on electric vehicle environmental requirements, including review of US electric vehicle regulatory and policy activities (labeling, incentives, consumer awareness, SAE cooperation, etc.).

The Secretary presented documents EVE-05-03e and EVE-05-04e displaying the most recent proposed Reference Guide Outline and Questionnaire. The Secretary thanked all Contracting Parties and industry for the overwhelming responses to the questionnaire. In total, completed questionnaires were submitted by 9 contracting parties/industry.

The Secretary reviewed the most recent draft of the Reference Guide Outline (EVE-05-03e), pointing to changes that were made in responses to previous comments (see responses to action items under Item 2). Mr. Johan Renders requested clarification on the development of a gtr; the secretary responded that according to the Terms of Reference the development of a gtr by EVE IWG would require the EVE IWG to seek a new mandate from AC.3. Mr. William Coleman also suggested the attributes for infrastructure could be better handled under EVS while noting the importance of ensuring that it was covered in either IWG. A discussion led by Mr. Johan Renders also followed on the attributes that did not exactly fit the mandate of WP.29. The Secretary confirmed these attributes were covered in Terms of Reference and also reminded participants of decision to include these attributes in an appendix. The participants agreed.

ACTION 3: Participants were invited to submit any further comments to the Reference Guide Outline to the Secretary prior to the next meeting of EVE IWG planned for June 3rd during the 66th session of GRPE.

The discussion on the Reference Guide Outline was followed by presentations by Contracting Parties on their completed questionnaire. Ms. Chunmei Chen (China), Mr. Stéphane Couroux (Canada), Mr. Nobutoshi Horie (Japan) and Mr. Michael Olechiw (U.S.) presented documents EVE-05-11e, EVE-05-07e, EVE-05-09e and EVE-05-12e, respectively. A number of technical questions followed each of the presentation. Mr. Stéphane Couroux confirmed the financial allocation for electrified vehicles ranged depending on the type of vehicle (from hybrid to full electric having higher incentive). It was also confirmed that labelling was a voluntary agreement in Canada, whereas it was a regulatory requirement in the U.S. Mr. Nobutoshi Horie confirmed that Japan would need further consideration before adopting WLTP, and that it would not be earlier than 2016. Mr. Michael Olechiw confirmed equivalents units of energy were used for label for EVs, but not for diesel. Mr. Michael Olechiw also confirmed that PHEV vehicles were required to run full cycle charge sustaining at best effort.

ACTION 4: Mr. Michael Olechiw to provide further clarification on utility factors for California in response to a question by Mr. Kazuyuki Narusawa.

Mr. Ed Pike, a consultant from Energy Solutions hired by Canada to support the development of the Reference Guide, subsequently presented document EVE-05-05e. The presentation summarized input from contracting parties and also served to highlight requirements that are different in one or more countries. The presentation also sought input from participants on attributes that could merit further analysis to inform the development of recommendations for the Reference Guide and/or eventually the development of future gtr. While it is recognized that a number of gtr are under development, and with more or less consideration for EVs, participants were asked if there is need to conduct limited research or recommend further research under the Reference Guide for one or more attributes that can affect EVs differently from conventional vehicles. For examples, participants were asked whether heating or A/C were believed to have a significant effect on EVs efficiency and range determination as indicated by certain data; and are thermal stand-by battery thermal management losses significant, does battery state of charge affect battery efficiency, etc.? Participants were also asked if there was interest in further researching information on charging infrastructure, battery recycling or incentives. Similarly, it was also asked if greater efforts should be made to collect information on motorcycles, medium- or heavy-duty vehicles.

The presentation was followed by substantial technical discussions on a number of the above listed topics. While there were no recommendations or agreements to further research any given topics, all participants agreed that it would be important to prioritize activities. Mr. Johan Renders indicated that all participants are working in an environment with budgetary constraints, and would then expect results of the meetings. Mr. Michael Olechiw reminded participants that only task for this group is to determine if one or more of the discussed topics is important enough to warrant a recommendation for further research or recommendation in the Reference Guide. If we do not know, we need to conduct minimum research or testing prior to finalizing the Reference Guide.

ACTION 5: The Secretary will invite the chairs of other IWGs to participate in a discussion on priorities for EVE and the next meeting scheduled for June 3rd during GRPE 66th session in Geneva.

ACTION 6: Mr. Stéphane Couroux will inquire on available EV test data in Canada.

Review of the Heavy-Duty Hybrids informal group efforts to develop emissions and energy consumption test procedures.

Mr. Michael Olechiw, on behalf of the HDH IWG Chair, presented document EVE-05-08e by conference call. The participants were informed of the outcome of the last meeting from March 19-22 in Sweden, which also included the first drafting session for the gtr. The next meetings of HDH IWG are planned for June 4th in Geneva during GRPE 66th session (14th meeting) and October 22nd in San Diego (15th meeting). The 2nd drafting session is planned for June 3rd in Geneva during GRPE 66th session or May 29th in Brussels. The development of a draft gtr is targeted from December 2013 and a final gtr for mid-March 2014. Mr. Michael Olechiw confirmed there was no immediate need for support from EVE IWG.

Mr. Kazuki Kobayashi, the Chair of WLTP-E-Lab Sub Group, presented document EVE-05-13e summarizing the activities of the WLTP and more specifically the test procedure. Mr. Kazuki Kobayashi also reminded participants of the phased approach and timelines for the development of the WLTP gtr. It is expected that a gtr under phase I will be submitted to GRPE in August. Approval of the gtr by GRPE is expected at a special session in November 2013 during the 161st session of AC.3. The gtr would subsequently be submitted to AC.3 in January for approval at 162th session in March 2014. Mr. Kazuki Kobayashi also confirmed the start of work for phase 2 in parallel to the completion of phase 1. The presentation by Mr. Kazuki Kobayashi was followed by substantial discussions on the effect or considerations for a number of attributes that may affect EVs performance differently than ICEs. Mr. Michael Olechiw and Mr. Ed Pike requested clarifications on cold temperature testing for EVs. Mr. William Coleman confirmed that EVs or ICEs were subject to same test conditions and also clarified that the WLTP test at normal ambient temperatures would be run without operating a heater. Mr. William Coleman also expressed disappointment regarding the consideration of “regional” utility factors and that these factors were more locally than regionally dependant (e.g. city vs. country). Mr. Kazuki Kobayashi expects that all of these issues will be further analysed during phase 2.

The Co-Chair of the EVS IWG, Ms. Chunmei Chen, summarized the activities and next steps. The activities of the group were started in April 2012, with subsequent meetings in U.S. on April 23 – 25, 2012 and Bonn on Oct. 23 – 25, 2012. The 3rd meeting of EVS IWG is scheduled for April 16-18, 2013 in Tokyo Japan. The group is working towards the development of a gtr that would ensure the same safety to EVs and ICEs. The EVS IWG will be considering two options moving forward; 1) a 2-phase approach with gtr using only available information to meet current timelines and 2) develop a complete gtr with a longer timeline. The EVS IWG will be assessing the two options at its next meeting.

Mr. William Coleman, on behalf of the Chair of the VPSD, presented an update on the activities of the group. Mr. William Coleman reported that the group continues to discuss and assess existing definitions. The intent is to continue working in a smaller group given difficulty of task, but that input from other IWGs will soon be required. It is expected that a draft document will be circulated in the coming weeks for discussion at the GRPE 66th session in Geneva.

ACTION 2: The Secretary will coordinate input to the VPSD document from EVE IWG membership.

Mr. Guido Gielen, on behalf of the Chair EPPR IWG, presented document EVE-05-10e to summarize the activities of the group. Mr. Guido Gielen presented an overview of the scope under consideration for the development of a gtr, including EU legislation under development and the classes of vehicles that are covered. Contracting parties were invited to collaborate in harmonising environmental and propulsion performance requirements for L-category vehicles. EC will be hosting 2nd L-EPPR meeting in Brussels, 25 – 26 April 2013. Mr. William Coleman and Mr. Johan Renders strongly recommended a close collaboration of EPPR, WLTP and EVE, which was agreed by all.

Overview of current US Environmental Protection Agency heavy-duty hybrid powerpack testing activites.

Mr. Sanchez (EPA) gave an overview of the current EPA activities.

He emphasized that transmissions are becoming more important in the evaluation of hybrid vehicles. A post-transmission powerpack method therefore is suitable test method. He indicated that EPA will give their input to the HDH drafting group. EPA is willing to test within their internal programs the WHVC with slopes, but powerpack validation will likely be used instead of chassis dyno validation.

26. The expert from the United States of America reported on the work progress made in his country on silent vehicles with regard to the safety of blind pedestrians (GRB-50-09). GRB agreed with his suggestion to hold a first meeting of the informal group on MSL prior to the next GRB session, in Geneva on Monday morning 15 February 2010. For that purpose, GRB reminded the expert from the United States of America to prepare the draft Terms of Reference of the informal group for consideration at the next GRB session.

Memorandum from the US Environmental Protection Agency on the proposed addition of test procedures for heavy-duty hybrid vehicles to the global technical regulation on heavy-duty vehicle emissions and fuel consumption (WHDC) identifying “a number of open issues that are causing concern for the United States and require resolution prior to considering the Annex for adoption”.

Presentation on scenarios for deployment of electrified vehicles in the United States and impact on power consumption and CO₂ emissions.

Memorandum from the US EPA providing an overview of obstacles to US adoption of the proposed heavy-duty hybrids amendment and possible remedies to overcome these concerns. This memo addresses remaining concerns beyond those presented earlier in document HDH-16-03.

Status of US EPA program to validate the HILS methodology and resolve error codes.

23. The expert from the USA presented GRPE-70-15 reporting on the activities of his Country on a correlation study comparing results obtained according to Annex 9 and those obtained according to Annex 10 (in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/84). He offered to share the outcome of this study with GRPE in June 2015. GRPE welcomed this offer and agreed to further exchange information on the emissions of heavy duty vehicles equipped with hybrid powertrains and their environmental performance evaluation.

Presentation on the scope and content of US EPA activities with regard to vehicle emissions (including heavy-duty, non-road, and light vehicles).

79. The representative of the European Commission (EC) expressed the extreme concern on what media refer to as the Volkswagen (VW) case. She informed WP.29 about the course of action taken by the EC. She reported that the EC had offered to coordinate the flow of information regarding national investigations, and had requested EU Member States (MS) to provide information on measures they planned to undertake or had already undertaken. She added that based on input from MS, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) would develop a common testing method and that the JRC had offered its services to MS who would request it. She informed WP.29 that the EU had already engaged in legislative and regulatory work before the case was revealed, including work on Real Driving Emissions (RDE) and work to reinforce the type approval system (revision of the framework Directive 2007/46/EC).

80. The representative of the United States of America reported that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (WP.29-167-31) had sent two Notices Of Violation (NOV) to VW alleging that vehicles sold in the United States included software that circumvent EPA regulations. He gave details on how the violation was committed, how much the emission level exceeds the limit values and the estimated number of vehicles concerned. He recalled the five key components of the compliance programme of EPA. He added that all manufacturers have been informed that, as a result of these alleged violations, EPA had increased their testing programme. He informed the World Forum about the outstanding collaboration with EPA of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Environment Canada.

81. The representative of Canada added that they also had opened investigations on the issue and were closely collaborating with EPA.

82. The representative of Germany reported that an internal commission had been set up to investigate the VW situation in Germany and Europe. He added that a test procedure had been developed by the German type approval authority, Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA), to identify whether a vehicle contained prohibited defeat device systems, including Type 1 tests in laboratories, Type 1 tests replicated on a test track with portable emission measurement systems, variations in the test cycles as well as RDE tests. So far, of the more than 50 tests that had been planned, half have been finalized, and evaluation of the test results was ongoing. He informed WP.29 that KBA decided officially on an additional assignment to the type approval, which will force VW to recall the vehicles. A software update for the vehicles equipped with 1.2L and 2.0L diesel engine and hardware and software update for vehicles equipped with 1.6L diesel engines, which would start in beginning of 2016 would be performed by the manufacturer and be supervised by KBA in Germany. He also informed WP.29 that the recently revealed issue of CO2 emissions was still under investigation. He concluded that these events might have an impact on WP.29, especially since approvals according to UN Regulations Nos. 83 and 101 were concerned.

83. The representatives of the Russian Federation announced the current status of internal activities dealing with the VW situation in the Russian Federation. He noted the importance of international information exchange and also the cooperation of VW with the Russian administration on the situation.

84. The representative of the UK explained his Government’s approach to testing vehicle emissions in response to the VW issue. He said that they had started a test programme investigating a range of Euro 5 and Euro 6 specification vehicles representing top selling products in the UK market from a number of manufacturers. He mentioned that his experts were in close contact with the German authorities to discuss test procedures and to coordinate their programmes where possible. The UK welcomed the European Commission’s coordination activities and involvement of JRC. He stressed that the testing would be done without manufacturer involvement by the UK approval authority (the Vehicle Certification Agency) at independent laboratories and on-road testing, and this could delay results until early 2016. He would provide information to the Working Party as soon as results would be published. He concluded by confirming that VW had engaged constructively with their UK agency handling the recall.

85. The representative of France reported on the initiated test programme which, in total would cover 100 vehicles representative of vehicle fleet in France. These tests were aimed at determining whether the fraud is limited to a few models of the Volkswagen group or if it extends to all models and other manufacturers. France has committed to publishing the test results. The test protocol would be implemented in France by the Union Technique de l’Automobile du motocycle et du Cycle (UTAC) under the control of the French authorities. He concluded that France considers that the VW case was an opportunity to improve the procedure and address past suspicions.

86. The representative of Australia noted that the VW case had revealed a gap in the international regulatory regime and that as it is an international problem, it could only be addressed internationally through a UN Regulation or UN GTR. He sought continued discussion of the issue at WP.29. The representative of Japan expressed his support for this view.

87. The representative of Spain also reported on the intention of his country to test vehicles according to the test procedure defined by Germany.

88. The representative of Italy informed the World Forum that testing had already started in his country in close cooperation with Germany and the European Commission.

89. The representative of OICA recalled that his organization represented the global automobile industry through the various national (or even regional) auto industry associations. He added that in this capacity OICA cooperates with Contracting Parties to develop and clarify regulatory requirements and test procedures so that they are clear, representative, scientific and reproducible. He stated that OICA could not and was not meant to verify whether and how manufacturers comply with the legislative acts, since this is the responsibility of individual manufacturers. He added that the ongoing particular issue should not be used as a pretext to cast suspicion on the entire automotive sector or on a particular technology. He concluded that OICA fully supports the activities in the various countries to solve this important ongoing issue.

90. The World Forum decided to keep this item on its agenda and continue discussions in upcoming sessions.

The current draft GTR on motorcycle evaporative emissions includes seven options for the test fuel; however, the list does not include the fuel specified under US and Canadian requirements. Therefore, the US and Canada request the addition of a new option corresponding to the fuel specifications laid out in the United States Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 1051, section 501 (40 CFR 1051.501).

79. The World Forum was informed about the latest developments related to the Volkswagen (VW) case.

80. The representative of Germany recalled the testing programme developed by the German type approval authority, Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA), to identify whether different brand vehicles contained prohibited defeat devices. He mentioned that the investigations are ongoing and, therefore no information on the results could be shared yet. He reported that the recall programme of the affected VW vehicles had already been initiated in Germany for a first vehicle type.

81. The representative of the United States of America (USA) introduced WP.29-168-17 to further update on the Notices Of Violation (NOV) sent by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Volkswagen alleging that vehicles sold in the United States of America included software that circumvent EPA regulations. He reported that EPA continues to coordinate with the California Air Resources Board and Environment Canada on testing, and the investigation by the enforcement authorities of EPA is ongoing. He announced that EPA incorporated additional, unpredictable test procedures in response to the VW violations.

82. The representative of the Russian Federation reported on a national VW recall campaign conducted in line with a joint programme of the national competent authorities and the VW company, in the spirit of transparency and partnership.

83. The representative of the European Commission (EC) reported on three different areas of work. First, he informed about the adoption of the first and second package of new Real Driving Emissions procedure (RDE). Second, he updated WP.29 on the new legislation proposed to revise the type approval framework, currently under ordinary procedure in the Council and the Parliament. Third, he recalled the ongoing testing performed in some EU Member States in order to exchange information and views on the performance of vehicles when tested under different conditions.

84. As regards CO2 emissions, the EC representative stated that with the introduction of the World Light duty Test Procedures (WLTP), more realistic measurement results are expected.

85. He recalled the activities of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission on testing methodologies for detecting so-called defeat devices.

86. The representative of Canada informed WP.29 about the ongoing investigation and additional testing taking place in close collaboration with EPA.

87. The representative of Japan reported that no defeat devices had been identified in his country and expressed his willingness to start dealing with RDE and to share information with other countries.

Under the auspices of the US EPA, FEV North America, Inc. conducted an extensive literature review on the subject of EV battery durability for the EVE Informal Working Group. The review examines the electrochemical basis for the deterioration of batteries used in BEV, HEV, and PHEV applications along with testing activities performed on such electrified vehicles and automotive grade cells, battery packs, etc.

16. The representative from the EC, Chair of the IWG on RDE, introduced updated terms of reference and rules of procedure for the IWG on RDE (GRPE-83-31 as revised during the session) detailing expected activities in the months and years to come. The representative from the US supported the updated approach and highlighted opportunities for alignment. GRPE endorsed the updated document and encouraged the IWG on the ambitious harmonization activities.

17. Consequently, the Chair of the IWG on RDE introduced a revised authorization to develop a new UN GTR on RDE (GRPE-83-32 amended during the session as reflected in Annex VIII to the session report). She detailed that the expected UN GTR would go directly into a more comprehensive phase 2, with wider engagement from all parties. The representative from the USA commended the GRPE process and he added that the USA were working on a rule making that was expecting to use the outcomes from the IWG on RDE and the draft phase 2 UN GTR.

18. GRPE requested the secretariat to submit Annex VIII to WP.29 and AC.3 for consideration and vote at their November 2021 sessions as draft revised authorization to develop a new UN GTR on RDE.

32. GRPE agreed to consider a presentation from the representative from the US on the recent proposed rule for Heavy Duty tailpipe emissions (GRPE-86-33) released by US EPA. The representative from the European Commission asked about how the future share of zero-tailpipe emission vehicles (ZEVs) had been calculated, and which kind of ZEVs had been considered. The representative from the US clarified the mandates in certain parts of the US, such as in California had been used as a reference and that no fuel cell vehicles were assumed in the time frame studied. He also added that for example, school buses were assumed to be electrified first, as a vehicle category in which the payback time would be quick and the driving patterns would match the vehicle technical specifications.

33. The Chair asked whether during the development of the US proposed rule, existing UN legal instruments such as UN GTRs Nos. 4 or 10 were taken into consideration. The representative from the US confirmed that the World Heavy-Duty test Cycle (WHDC) was considered but abandoned during the consultation process, as well as off cycle emissions where alignment would still require additional changes in the procedure. He confirmed that the US (through the US EPA) remained committed to harmonize regulation through GRPE.

34. The representative from the European Commission offered to introduce the Euro7/VII proposal at the next session of GRPE, proposing to hold any further discussions about necessary changes in UN GTRs until then. The Chair highlighted the importance of harmonizing provisions, especially on the heavy duty sectors, and invited GRPE to reconsider this topic at the forthcoming sessions of GRPE.

68. The Vice-Chair introduced GRPE-86-41 as his main takeaways from the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) workshop that took place earlier during the week. The representative from Japan introduced GRPE-86-17, the representative from the Russian Federation introduced GRPE-86-19, the representative from the US introduced GRPE-86-40 and the representative from CLEPA introduced GRPE-86-38 on their respective positions with respect to the inclusion of LCA in GRPE activities and the creation of a dedicated IWG to work on the topic.

69. The representative from the European Commission supported the creation of an IWG on LCA, highlighting that the conditions are not yet met to plan to deliver on a UN GTR. Finalization of ToRs, scope and timing of the activities would be considered during the first meeting of the IWG on LCA and introduced for adoption during the next session of GRPE.

70. The representative from the UK supported LCA to be considered by GRPE and to initiate an IWG on the topic. He highlighted the need to have a clear view on the aims, targets and objectives of the IWG. He also was not supportive of any regulatory deliverables at this stage, and that a mutual resolution, for example, could be drafted once a complete LCA picture has been finalized. He concluded that new expertise from outside of GRPE would be needed.

71. The representative from Sweden thanked Japan and the Republic of Korea for the initiative and supported the creation of a dedicated IWG. He also shared his view that regulatory provisions should not be aimed in a first step, and that the IWG should initially focus on information sharing and deliver a resolution.

72. The representative from Switzerland also supported the initiative as an essential activity for GRPE and showed his willingness to be involved. He also stressed on the importance of looking at air quality, water and soil LCA impacts on top of GHG which is the primary target of the IWG on LCA.

73. The Chair indicated that the draft ToRs, as shown in GRPE-86-18-Rev.1, would be discussed during the first meeting of the IWG on LCA and the next session of GRPE.

74. GRPE agreed to create a new IWG on LCA and to include LCA in the GRPE list of priorities.

75. The representative from Japan indicated that Japan would be happy to host the first IWG meeting expected in October 2022, thought a hybrid meeting configuration, with the support of the secretariat. He indicated the draft ToR would be discussed during the meeting. The secretariat offered its support to organize the first meeting of the IWG on LCA.