12. The expert from Czechia proposed introducing a new call for help signal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/2, GRE-94-48). According to the proposal, the new signal should only be activated automatically based on the conditions of and in combination with the Accident Emergency Call System (UN Regulation No. 144). The call for help signal should be given by the simultaneous operation of all direction indicators and optionally of all stop lamps at a higher frequency, compared to the hazard warning signal.
13. GRE experts recalled the use of the direction indicators for signals in other emergency situations (emergency braking, hazard warning, in the future possibly for children left in vehicles - see para. 46 below) and called for a holistic approach to streamline all types of emergency lighting signals, with the aim to make them easily recognizable for road users. GRE invited Czechia to present their proposal to the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG), in order to align the new signal with the provisions of UN Regulation No. 144, including tests. Finally, GRE agreed to revert to this topic at its next session, based on GRSG views.
14. The expert from OICA introduced revised proposals to prevent the approval of a manufacturer logo under UN Regulation No. 149 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/4, GRE-94-43-Rev.2). GRE could not reach consensus and agreed to resume consideration at the next session.
15. The expert from GTB proposed clarifying the meaning of pair of lamps in case of a design like a band or a strip. This proposal was submitted in a package with an amendment proposal to UN Regulation No. 148 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/6, GRE-94-03). The experts from France, Germany and Italy supported the proposal, while the experts from EC and the Netherlands (Kingdom of) raised concerns that the proposal, if adopted, would legalize some unwanted existing practices. The Chair concluded that more discussions were needed and invited the interested experts to submit a new document to the next session.
16. GRE addressed a draft amendment that was tabled by the expert from GTB with the aim to exclude retro-reflective devices and markings from the requirement of “red light to the front” and “white light to the rear” (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/7, GRE-94-04). Following a brief exchange of views on the proposal justification, GRE agreed to continue consideration at the next session.
17. The expert from GTB proposed introducing selective yellow as an alternative to white for front position lamps and daytime running lamps. This proposal was accompanied by a corresponding amendment proposal to UN Regulation No. 148 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/8, GRE-94-05). As a result of a short discussion, the Chair concluded that more justification for selective yellow was needed and proposed to revert to the topic at the next session.
18. GRE continued consideration of work lamps based on a new document from France (GRE-94-25-Rev.2) and comments from OICA (GRE-94-45). The expert from Japan reiterated their position expressed at the previous session of GRE (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/94, para. 16). As a result of in-depth discussions, GRE adopted this proposal and agreed to incorporate it in the future 10 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48.
19. GRE noted that GTB had withdrawn ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2026/9 and GRE-94-06 on exterior courtesy lamps.
20. The experts from the Task Force on Lamps Under Parked Conditions (TF LUPC) briefed GRE on their progress, introduced proposals for a new series of amendments and highlighted pending issues (GRE-94-27, GRE-94-28). The experts from France and EC raised concerns about the size and colour of the energy status indicator. To resolve those points, all GRE experts were encouraged to participate in the next TF LUPC session in June 2026. The Chair also invited TF LUPC to liaise with IWG SLR with a view to preparing a single consolidated proposal for a new series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48.
21. The expert from the Netherlands (Kingdom of) proposed clarifying the possibility of using a manufacturer logo in side-marker lamps, without preference between restriction or allowance of such a logo (GRE-94-29). OICA stated that they would need more time to study the issue. The experts from France and the United Kingdom were in favour of prohibiting logos in side-marker lamps, but wondered how this should be done administratively, i.e. by a new series of amendments or by a supplement. The Chair concluded that there was no support to logos in side-marker lamps from Contracting Parties and invited the Netherlands (Kingdom of) to submit a working document to the next session.
22. The expert from China presented new warning light patterns for driver’s assistance projections, with the aim to reduce collisions with vulnerable road users (VRUs) (GRE-94-42). Following a brief exchange of views, GRE agreed to continue consideration at the next session.