During April 2016, Japan presented a study to GRE-75 on the disturbance due to the use of motorcycle daytime running lamps (DRL) at night (see GRE-75-09). A proposal (GRE/2016/35 supported by GRE-76-03) for automatic switching between DRL and headlamps was then presented during October 2016 at GRE-76. Italy, among others, raised a reservation. This document details Italy’s concerns with the proposal by Japan.

Request for guidance regarding interpretation of UN lighting rules:

1. Is it allowed that the shape of the apparent surface can be the logo of the manufacturer brand or other brand-identifying figures?
2. Is it allowed that the shape of the apparent surface can be the same as an evocative/suggestive figure? Even as an informative figure such as road traffic
   signs?
3. Is the advertising lighting allowed at the national level in the Contracting parties, regarding to its influence on road safety and distraction?
4. Do we have to consider an apparent surface, whose shape is the logo of a brand manufacturer or other brand-identifying figures, as a advertising lighting?

Proposal to address inconsistencies, clarify text, and correct terminology in Regulation No. 48:

• para. 5.7.2.1. editorial alignment of text with current terminology
• replace undefined “effective outlet” terminology with defined “apparent surface” reference
• reintroduction of missing reference to “transverse plane” in paras. 5.10.1. and 5.10.2.
• para. 6.2.9. and related subsequent paragraphs to clarify the application of the 2000 lumen criteria
• para. 6.26.9.2. to correct a cross-reference with UN R23.

Proposal from the special interest group of experts for DRL-L to introduce requirements for automatic switching from daytime running lamps (“DRL”) to headlamp(s) if maximum luminous intensity of DRL is above 700 cd.

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

Proposal to re-insert paragraph 5.11.1.3. with regard to switching between headlamps and DRLs. Although GRE agreed to delete this and related paragraphs during its 77th session (see para. 19 and Annex II of the 77th session report), the Task Force on Headlamp Switching decided upon further review to retain the possibility to switch ON DRLs in conjunction with at least the rear position lamps without the need for the position lamps tell-tale in that case.

Proposal to enable approval of side-marker and position lamps with regard to switching requirements when mutually incorporated. Vehicles include designs where lamps wrap around vehicle corners. In cases where optional side-marker lamps are grouped with a position lamp that is reciprocally incorporated with the direction indicator, it should be possible to switch off the side-marker lamp (as can be done with the position lamp) in order to improve conspicuity of the direction indicator.

Proposal to remove the prohibition against lamps “reciprocally incorporated” with any other lamp. This proposal would align UN R53 with UN R48 and correct an oversight from a previous amendment process.