103. The representative of WBIA recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2024/21, proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 78 aimed at inserting specific deceleration requirements for the Speed-Electronically Power Assisted Cycles (S-EPAC), as defined the Working Party on Transport Trends and Economics (WP.5).

104. The representative of Germany noted that he could support the proposal from the technical point of view. He noted, however, some application difficulties as the scope of the regulation referred to the Category L defined in the Consolidated Resolution R.E.3, which did not include S-EPAC. He noted that the current type definition (referring to the engine type) would also require amendments; the maximum speed determination of these vehicle would also need to be clarified. The representative of France shared similar views, he also asked for explanations about para. 9.4. The representative of Japan explained that, in his country, bicycles were not covered by the WP.29 vehicle regulations and that, for this reason, he could not support this proposal.

105. The representative of WBIA confirmed to France that the formula had been taken from paragraph 9.4. because it was deemed to also fulfil the needs for pedal driven vehicles and to avoid proposing a new formula. She acknowledged the importance of ensuring consistency with R.E.3 and reported ongoing efforts to develop a global definition for
S-EPACs: this work had started within WP.5, in a specific group for cycles, where a definition had already been agreed; WP.5 discussions were expected to resume soon. She added that WBIA had informed ITC on the need for dialogue between WP.5 and WP.29 concerning a global definition for S-EPACs. She noted that existing noise regulations already include exemptions for this kind of vehicles.

106. The representative of IMMA did not raise objections on the purpose of the proposal. However, he also noticed the lack of consistency with R.E.3, and the need to resolve this issue before proceeding with the proposal.

107. GRVA agreed to inform GRSG of the proposal and its implication regarding the Category L₁ definition.