20. The expert from the Netherlands presented a discussion paper (GRB-61-01 and Add.1) exploring the possibility of introducing a noise label system for vehicles and providing an initial model for such labelling. In particular, he suggested that a labelling system for private cars rely on scores for interior noise, powertrain noise (engine and exhaust system), and tyre noise. The experts from Austria, France, Germany and OICA raised practical questions regarding the potential advantages of such a labelling system for customers. The expert from the European Commission pointed out that labelling falls under the competence of the Community and that the EU internal procedures should be followed. GRB decided to come back to this issue at the next session.

20. The expert from the Netherlands presented a discussion paper (GRB-61-01 and Add.1) exploring the possibility of introducing a noise label system for vehicles and providing an initial model for such labelling. In particular, he suggested that a labelling system for private cars rely on scores for interior noise, powertrain noise (engine and exhaust system), and tyre noise. The experts from Austria, France, Germany and OICA raised practical questions regarding the potential advantages of such a labelling system for customers. The expert from the European Commission pointed out that labelling falls under the competence of the Community and that the EU internal procedures should be followed. GRB decided to come back to this issue at the next session.

24. The experts from France and Germany, co-chairing IWG QRTV for a UN Regulation, briefed GRB on the progress in preparing a draft UN Regulation on QRTV under the 1958 Agreement and on its key aspects (GRB-61-02, GRB-61-10). GRB noted that a draft Regulation would be officially submitted to the next session of GRB in September 2015, as foreseen by the IWG mandate. The Chair invited GRB experts to provide IWG with their comments on a draft QRTV regulation as soon as possible and/or to take part in the work of IWG.

25. GRB confirmed that, for the time being, a new QRTV Regulation would cover electric and hybrid electric vehicles of categories M and N only. GRB agreed that stationary noise and the pause-switch function would be optional in stage 1. GRB also agreed that a maximum AVAS sound level should be introduced into a QRTV Regulation, with a view to protecting environment. The expert of WBU concurred with this view.

All changes made during this meeting are shown in documents REG58-QRTV-02-02 & …02-03 with tracked changes. A new and clean document (REG58-QRTV-03-01) will be consolidated from those two documents as the working basis for the 3rd meeting.

18. The expert from the Netherlands recalled the two studies presented at the previous session of GRB and introduced further arguments for tightening tyre noise limits in Regulation No. 117, together with the text of draft amendments (GRB-61-03 and Add.1). The expert from ETRTO questioned if the pool of tyres selected for the Dutch studies had indeed been a representative sample (GRB-61-18). He further pointed out that, for the time being, the tyre industry was busy meeting the requirements of 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 which had recently come into force, in November 2012. According to him, until the completion of this process by 2018-2020, it would be premature to consider further reducing of tyre noise limits. The experts from China, Norway and Switzerland agreed that the proposal by the Netherlands needed further study. The experts from France and Germany pointed out various problems with labelling of tyres. GRB invited experts to provide their comments on the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session on the basis of a new informal document containing the draft amendment proposals tabled by the expert from the Netherlands in GRB-61-03.

12. The expert from the Netherlands presented a study (GRB-62-09 and Add.1) on noise emission from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) tyres of a specific size which were found to be around 1 dB(A) lower than the one from replacement tyres of the same size. The expert, thus, proposed to further reduce the limit values for OEM tyres in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11 and Add.1).

13. The expert from Switzerland expressed his support for the general direction of the Dutch proposal. The experts from Germany and EC were of the view that, at this stage, it would be premature to tighten the tyre noise limits of Regulation No. 117. The expert from France called for a holistic approach to this issue. The experts from ETRTO and OICA expressed doubts about the representativeness of the tyre sample used in the Dutch study. The expert from ETRTO also delivered comments on the proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-17). Finally, GRB invited all experts to further study the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session.

18. The expert from the Netherlands recalled the two studies presented at the previous session of GRB and introduced further arguments for tightening tyre noise limits in Regulation No. 117, together with the text of draft amendments (GRB-61-03 and Add.1). The expert from ETRTO questioned if the pool of tyres selected for the Dutch studies had indeed been a representative sample (GRB-61-18). He further pointed out that, for the time being, the tyre industry was busy meeting the requirements of 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 which had recently come into force, in November 2012. According to him, until the completion of this process by 2018-2020, it would be premature to consider further reducing of tyre noise limits. The experts from China, Norway and Switzerland agreed that the proposal by the Netherlands needed further study. The experts from France and Germany pointed out various problems with labelling of tyres. GRB invited experts to provide their comments on the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session on the basis of a new informal document containing the draft amendment proposals tabled by the expert from the Netherlands in GRB-61-03.

12. The expert from the Netherlands presented a study (GRB-62-09 and Add.1) on noise emission from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) tyres of a specific size which were found to be around 1 dB(A) lower than the one from replacement tyres of the same size. The expert, thus, proposed to further reduce the limit values for OEM tyres in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11 and Add.1).

13. The expert from Switzerland expressed his support for the general direction of the Dutch proposal. The experts from Germany and EC were of the view that, at this stage, it would be premature to tighten the tyre noise limits of Regulation No. 117. The expert from France called for a holistic approach to this issue. The experts from ETRTO and OICA expressed doubts about the representativeness of the tyre sample used in the Dutch study. The expert from ETRTO also delivered comments on the proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-17). Finally, GRB invited all experts to further study the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session.

3. GRB considered and adopted the agenda.

30. The secretariat reported on the highlights of the 164th session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1112, GRB-61-04).

8. On behalf of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59, the expert from OICA introduced further proposals for amendments to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/3 and Corr.1). The expert from Japan expressed concerns about a relaxation clause for a specific category of vehicles included in these proposals (GRB-61-05) and proposed an alternative wording. Further corrections were suggested by the experts from the Netherlands (GRB-61-08), Spain, the European Commission and OICA. Finally, GRB adopted the proposals, as amended by Annex III to this report.

9. GRB recalled that, at its previous session, it had adopted the draft 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/58, para. 5 and Annex III) which had subsequently been submitted to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2015 sessions as document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3. With regard to the additional proposals adopted at this session (para. 8 above and Annex III to this report), GRB noted two options for their processing:

• (i) submit them separately to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 session as a draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51; or
• (ii) combine them with the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3) in a single document and submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions. In this case, WP.29 and AC.1 would be requested not to consider document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3 in March 2015.

10. GRB supported option (ii) and mandated its Chair to report about this decision to WP.29, AC.1 and the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (AC.2) at their sessions in March 2015. GRB also noted that IWG on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 had completed its tasks and that the extension of its mandate was not necessary.

14. GRB continued its consideration of the revised proposal for new time measurement accuracy for the rolling resistance method (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/8). The expert from Japan introduced several modifications to this proposal (GRB-61-06). GRB adopted the proposal, as contained in Annex V to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions as a draft Supplement 8 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117. GRB also noted that the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF), at its February 2015 session, would consider a corrigendum to Supplement 6 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2015/9).

12. The expert from ERTRO introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/8 to propose new time measurement accuracy for instrumentation involved in the rolling resistance method (Annex 6 to the UN Regulation). The expert from Japan reiterated his reservation that the proposed accuracy might be too strict and asked GRB to postpone the consideration of this item to the next session. The expert from the Russian Federation agreed with this suggestion. GRB recalled that this issue had already been discussed several times and felt that a final decision should be taken at the next session. Meanwhile, experts from Japan, Russian Federation, ETRTO, as well as from other Contracting Parties were invited to finalize their consultations.

66. Agenda item 4.8.7, Regulation No. 117, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/65, insert the following correction:
Annex 4, the title, footnote 1, shall read: “replace “paragraph 12.9” with “paragraph 12.8””

4. GRB resumed discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/4 by OICA proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 28, in particular, a reduction in the prescribed sound level of the audible warning device from 93 to 87 dB(A). The expert from IMMA suggested further changes to this proposal (GRB-61-07). GRB adopted the proposal, as amended by Annex II to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and the Administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions as draft Supplement 4 to the original series of amendments to Regulation No. 28. GRB noted that the adopted modification of the prescribed sound level makes this requirement less stringent and, thus, does not need a new series of amendments with transitional provisions.

3. Through a presentation (GRB-60-16), the expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/4 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 28, in particular, a reduction the prescribed sound level of the audible warning device from 93 to 87 dB(A). While the expert from the Republic of Korea supported this proposal, the experts from India and IMMA requested a study reservation. GRB agreed to revert to this issue at its January 2015 session.

8. On behalf of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59, the expert from OICA introduced further proposals for amendments to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/3 and Corr.1). The expert from Japan expressed concerns about a relaxation clause for a specific category of vehicles included in these proposals (GRB-61-05) and proposed an alternative wording. Further corrections were suggested by the experts from the Netherlands (GRB-61-08), Spain, the European Commission and OICA. Finally, GRB adopted the proposals, as amended by Annex III to this report.

9. GRB recalled that, at its previous session, it had adopted the draft 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/58, para. 5 and Annex III) which had subsequently been submitted to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2015 sessions as document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3. With regard to the additional proposals adopted at this session (para. 8 above and Annex III to this report), GRB noted two options for their processing:

• (i) submit them separately to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 session as a draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51; or
• (ii) combine them with the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3) in a single document and submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions. In this case, WP.29 and AC.1 would be requested not to consider document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3 in March 2015.

10. GRB supported option (ii) and mandated its Chair to report about this decision to WP.29, AC.1 and the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (AC.2) at their sessions in March 2015. GRB also noted that IWG on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 had completed its tasks and that the extension of its mandate was not necessary.

5. On behalf of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59, the expert from OICA introduced a revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5). He explained that the text of this proposal was harmonized, as far as possible, with European Union (EU) Regulation No. 540/2014 on the sound level of motor vehicles and of replacement silencing systems, including a three-phase reduction of the sound level limits. GRB noted that, following the entry into force of phase 2 for new types of vehicles, EU would undertake a detailed study to review the limits of phase 3 and to correct these values, if deemed to be necessary. Other Contracting Parties were invited to conduct similar studies in the future and to transmit their outcomes to GRB. GRB stressed the importance of aligning the timeline for introduction of phases 1-3 of the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 with the step-by-step entry into force of the above EU Regulation. For this reason, GRB agreed that all transitional provisions of paragraph 11. of the proposal should refer to specific dates(i.e., dates identical to those of the EU phase-in). Finally, GRB adopted the proposal, as amended by Annex III to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2015 sessions.

6. The expert from Japan suggested that references to ISO 10844:2011 be put in square brackets for the time being and requested GRB to revert to this issue at the next session.

8. GRB noted that the additional sound emission provisions contained in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/64 had been incorporated into the revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5) and decided to remove ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/64 from the agenda.

15. The expert from France presented the results of testing tyres of commercial vehicles (classes C2 and C3) for the deceleration test method using the dω/dt form for measuring rolling resistance (GRB-61-09). The aim of this study was to compare the measurements obtained at a dedicated and non-dedicated rolling resistance machine. The results at the non-dedicated rolling resistance machine demonstrated a poor repeatability of the measurements, thus leaving open the question whether or not such machines are suitable for the proposed deceleration test method. GRB was of the view that further studies would be necessary and encouraged other laboratories to conduct such tests.

24. The experts from France and Germany, co-chairing IWG QRTV for a UN Regulation, briefed GRB on the progress in preparing a draft UN Regulation on QRTV under the 1958 Agreement and on its key aspects (GRB-61-02, GRB-61-10). GRB noted that a draft Regulation would be officially submitted to the next session of GRB in September 2015, as foreseen by the IWG mandate. The Chair invited GRB experts to provide IWG with their comments on a draft QRTV regulation as soon as possible and/or to take part in the work of IWG.

25. GRB confirmed that, for the time being, a new QRTV Regulation would cover electric and hybrid electric vehicles of categories M and N only. GRB agreed that stationary noise and the pause-switch function would be optional in stage 1. GRB also agreed that a maximum AVAS sound level should be introduced into a QRTV Regulation, with a view to protecting environment. The expert of WBU concurred with this view.

The intent of this document is to report to GRB the state of play of the development of the UN Regulation for QRTV.

The document was reviewed and improvede by the group.

7. The expert from IMMA also proposed to amend paragraph 8.2. of Regulation No. 41 on the conformity of production (GRB-61-11). GRB decided to address this issue at the next session on the basis of an official document by IMMA.

4. The expert from IMMA proposed to amend paragraph 8.2. of Regulation No. 41 on the conformity of production (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/8), thus formalizing the interpretation agreed upon at the fifty-sixth session of GRB (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/54, para. 5). GRB adopted this proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and the Administrative Committee (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their March 2016 sessions as a draft Supplement 4 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41.

5. The expert from the Russian Federation pointed out that Regulation No. 28 had not been updated for a long time and proposed a number of editorial modifications (GRB-61-12). GRB welcomed this initiative and decided to consider it at the next session, based on an official document to be submitted by the expert from the Russian Federation.

3. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced an updated text of Regulation No. 28, with the aim to align its provisions with the current rulemaking practice. (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/7). This proposal received comments from the experts of France, India and OICA (GRB-62-20, GRB-62-18 and GRB-62-21-Rev.1, respectively). In particular, the expert from France proposed to include a modular approach to permit the introduction of other audible signals. GRB invited the expert from the Russian Federation to take these comments into account and to submit a revised document for consideration at the next session.

17. The expert from IMMA proposed collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 41 and 63 to introduce the recently published standard ISO 10844:2014 and to align the transition provisions for new type approvals and extension to approvals (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/5 and GRB-61-13). GRB adopted these proposals, as contained in Annexes VII, VIII and IX to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions.

16. The expert from ETRTO referred to the ongoing work of updating references to the new version of ISO standard 10844:2014 (see para. 17 below) and proposed similar amendments to Annex 3 of Regulation No. 117 (GRB-61-14). The expert of ISO recalled his presentation on the comparison between the 2014 and 2011 versions of ISO 10844 (GRB-60-17) and confirmed that only editorial modifications had been introduced without any technical changes. Thus, GRB agreed that no transitional provisions were required in this case. GRB adopted the proposal, as contained in Annex VI to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions as a draft supplement to Regulation No. 117.

6. The expert from Japan suggested that references to ISO 10844:2011 be put in square brackets for the time being and requested GRB to revert to this issue at the next session.

7. The expert from OICA briefly introduced some additional elements which had been identified by IWG on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 for further consideration and possible inclusion into the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (GRB-60-01). The expert from ISO informed GRB about a new version of ISO 10844:2014 which added a few editorial modifications to the previous version ISO 10844:2014 without changes in the fundamental requirements (GRB-60-17). The expert from China introduced GRB-60-10-Rev.1 and GRB-60-15 in which he suggested higher limit values and a new classification for vehicles of a specific category available on the Chinese market. GRB requested the IWG on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 to consider all these additional aspects and to prepare proposals for the next session, if necessary.

66. Agenda item 4.8.7, Regulation No. 117, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/65, insert the following correction:
Annex 4, the title, footnote 1, shall read: “replace “paragraph 12.9” with “paragraph 12.8””

23. The expert of WBU presented a position paper (GRB-61-15) with concerns about an Audible Vehicle Alert System (AVAS) of Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV). He stressed that AVAS must fulfil four criteria, namely presence, direction, location and operation of a hybrid electric or electric vehicle. He further explained that the AVAS sound must be detectable and locatable, AVAS must be on while the vehicle is stationary and that the driver should not be able to switch off (or pause) AVAS.

21. The expert from CEDR presented the experiences of his organization and its members regarding the use of noise reducing pavements (GRB-61-16). Such pavements were found to be more cost-effective than noise barriers and to reduce noise levels with 2 to 3 dB (max. 6 dB). On the other hand, the lifetime of noise reducing pavements is less than the one of non-noise reducing pavements and the investment costs of noise reducing pavements is higher than the costs of non-noise reducing pavements.

22. GRB noted that three factors contribute to the overall noise production: vehicles, tyres and road surfaces. Thus, a holistic approach should be followed to reduce sound emissions. The Chair recalled that, at present, UN Regulations do not address the issue of road surfaces and that GRB has no mandate for regulating pavements. GRB agreed to continue this discussion at its next session and looked forward to new studies and presentations on the issue.

19. The expert from the Russian Federation presented historical developments of health standards and regulations on internal noise in the former Soviet Union and the Russian Federation (GRB-61-17). He also informed GRB that, as from 1 January 2015, a new regional regulation had come into force in the Customs Union establishing obligatory values for internal noise. He further clarified that his presentation was only for information purposes and that any concrete proposals could only be submitted to GRB when standard ISO-5128 on measuring internal noise, dated back to 1980, would be updated. The expert from ISO reported on ISO activities in this respect. The Chair proposed to keep this issue in the agenda and, as a first step, to consider if the methods for measuring inside noise in the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) should be updated.

18. The expert from the Netherlands recalled the two studies presented at the previous session of GRB and introduced further arguments for tightening tyre noise limits in Regulation No. 117, together with the text of draft amendments (GRB-61-03 and Add.1). The expert from ETRTO questioned if the pool of tyres selected for the Dutch studies had indeed been a representative sample (GRB-61-18). He further pointed out that, for the time being, the tyre industry was busy meeting the requirements of 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 which had recently come into force, in November 2012. According to him, until the completion of this process by 2018-2020, it would be premature to consider further reducing of tyre noise limits. The experts from China, Norway and Switzerland agreed that the proposal by the Netherlands needed further study. The experts from France and Germany pointed out various problems with labelling of tyres. GRB invited experts to provide their comments on the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session on the basis of a new informal document containing the draft amendment proposals tabled by the expert from the Netherlands in GRB-61-03.

14. The expert from the Netherlands presented the outcome of a study (GRB-60-08 and Add.1) of the shifts in tyre sound emission levels in his country between 2007 and 2013, i.e. before and after the revision of tyre noise limits in 2009 (EC/661/2009 and UN Regulation No. 117). The study addressed the most common C1, C2 and C3 tyres in terms of size and manufacturer. The reductions in tyre sound levels between 2007 and 2013 were found to be respectively 1.5, 1.4 and 1.1 dB(A) for C1, C2 and C3 tyres.

15. The expert from the Netherlands informed GRB about the results of two studies (GRB-60-03, GRB-60-13, GRB-60-14) commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment with a view to assessing cost savings that could be achieved in the Netherlands and EU by a switch from currently used tyres to high-performance tyres with A-labels on each parameter of the EU tyre label: energy efficiency, wet grip and noise (so called ‘triple-A’ tyres). According to the studies, moving towards ‘triple-A’ tyres could bring considerable potential benefits for the society in terms of energy, safety and noise reduction, which were estimated to be around 1 billion Euros in the Netherlands and 34 billion Euros in EU per year. In addition, individual consumers could also benefits from substantial fuel cost savings.

16. As a first reaction, the experts from ETRTO and OICA pointed out the rather theoretical character of some assumptions used for these studies, as well as the fact that ‘triple-A’ tyres were not yet available on the market. The expert from the Netherlands added that a common objective of these studies, together with the one mentioned in paragraph 22 above, was to shift the society to better tyres, either by introducing stricter limits or by raising the awareness of tyre labels. Finally, GRB agreed to include this issue in the agenda of its next session and invited experts to submit their comments for discussion.

12. The expert from the Netherlands presented a study (GRB-62-09 and Add.1) on noise emission from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) tyres of a specific size which were found to be around 1 dB(A) lower than the one from replacement tyres of the same size. The expert, thus, proposed to further reduce the limit values for OEM tyres in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11 and Add.1).

13. The expert from Switzerland expressed his support for the general direction of the Dutch proposal. The experts from Germany and EC were of the view that, at this stage, it would be premature to tighten the tyre noise limits of Regulation No. 117. The expert from France called for a holistic approach to this issue. The experts from ETRTO and OICA expressed doubts about the representativeness of the tyre sample used in the Dutch study. The expert from ETRTO also delivered comments on the proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-17). Finally, GRB invited all experts to further study the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session.

9. GRB recalled that, at its previous session, it had adopted the draft 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/58, para. 5 and Annex III) which had subsequently been submitted to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2015 sessions as document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3. With regard to the additional proposals adopted at this session (para. 8 above and Annex III to this report), GRB noted two options for their processing:

• (i) submit them separately to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 session as a draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51; or
• (ii) combine them with the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3) in a single document and submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions. In this case, WP.29 and AC.1 would be requested not to consider document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/3 in March 2015.

10. GRB supported option (ii) and mandated its Chair to report about this decision to WP.29, AC.1 and the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (AC.2) at their sessions in March 2015. GRB also noted that IWG on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 had completed its tasks and that the extension of its mandate was not necessary.

5. On behalf of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59, the expert from OICA introduced a revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5). He explained that the text of this proposal was harmonized, as far as possible, with European Union (EU) Regulation No. 540/2014 on the sound level of motor vehicles and of replacement silencing systems, including a three-phase reduction of the sound level limits. GRB noted that, following the entry into force of phase 2 for new types of vehicles, EU would undertake a detailed study to review the limits of phase 3 and to correct these values, if deemed to be necessary. Other Contracting Parties were invited to conduct similar studies in the future and to transmit their outcomes to GRB. GRB stressed the importance of aligning the timeline for introduction of phases 1-3 of the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 with the step-by-step entry into force of the above EU Regulation. For this reason, GRB agreed that all transitional provisions of paragraph 11. of the proposal should refer to specific dates(i.e., dates identical to those of the EU phase-in). Finally, GRB adopted the proposal, as amended by Annex III to this report, and mandated the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2015 sessions.

6. The expert from Japan suggested that references to ISO 10844:2011 be put in square brackets for the time being and requested GRB to revert to this issue at the next session.

8. GRB noted that the additional sound emission provisions contained in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/64 had been incorporated into the revised proposal for the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2014/5) and decided to remove ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/64 from the agenda.