23. The Chair of GRE reported on the results of the seventy-third session of GRE (for details, see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73).

50. The representative of France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement in Regulation No. 48 for auto-levelling of headlamps equipped with any Light Emitting Diodes (LED) light sources (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73 and WP.29-166-23). The representative explained that, if LED were treated the same way as other lights sources, more LED headlamps would be fitted on new vehicles, and thus improving road safety and reducing CO2 emissions. WP.29 noted that recent studies indicate that the type of light source does not seem to be a major factor of headlamp glare, and that GRE had established an IWG to review all levelling requirements in Regulation No. 48 (para. 25 above). The EU representative stressed that also for this subject OLA should be involved to provide their analysis and preferred option.

19. The World Forum recalled the oral report of the Chair of GRE given during the 166th session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1116, paras. 23-25) and approved the report.

34. GRE addressed this issue in conjunction with agenda item 4 (para. 10 above).

2. GRE considered and adopted the agenda proposed for the seventy-third session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/1 and Add.1) as reproduced in GRE-73-01-Rev.1 (including the informal documents distributed during the session). GRE also adopted the running order for the session (GRE-73-07).

Proposal to further update UN R86 which highlights changes being made to Supplement 6 (document WP.29/2015/26 based on GRE/2014/30) adopted during the March 2015 WP.29 session.

44. The expert from the Netherlands, chairing the informal Group on Agricultural Vehicle Lighting Installation (AVLI), informed GRE about the progress made by AVLI under Phase II of its mandate and introduced a draft proposal for the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 86 (GRE-73-02). The experts from Austria, France, Italy and UK commented on this proposal and, in particular, on remaining square brackets in paragraph 6.5.1. and paragraph 3. of Annex 6. GRE invited AVLI to take these comments into account when finalizing the proposal for official submission to the next session of GRE. GRE also noted that Mr. Gerd Kellermann (Germany) would no longer be in a position to co-Chair AVLI and that this position would be taken over by Mr. Timo Kärkkäinen (Finland). GRE thanked that Mr. Kellermann for his contributions and welcomed Mr. Kärkkäinen.

7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group on “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and three possible timelines for completing its activities (GRE-73-22). On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from Germany proposed a concept for simplification based on the introduction of a new part B into Regulation No. 48 and using it as a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of the individual device Regulations would be moved (GRE-73-05-Rev.1). The individual device Regulations would only contain references to part B of Regulation No. 48. A revised Regulation No. 48 and an example of a revised device Regulation were also presented (GRE-73-03 and GRE-73-04). IWG SLR requested GRE to provide guidance on the proposed simplification approach.

8. Various experts reiterated their support to the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations, but pointed out that, before providing guidance to IWG SLR, they would need more time to study the proposed approach and its consequences. In particular, GRE identified the following issues that would need to be addressed:
a) The impact of amendments (supplements or new series of amendments) to part A and/or part B of Regulation No. 48 on individual device Regulations and vice versa;
b) Some Contracting Parties do not apply Regulation No. 48, but apply specific device Regulations. If the common provisions of these Regulations are included in Regulation No. 48, such Contracting Parties would not be in a position to vote on amendments to these common provisions or object to their adoption;
c) The issues under (a) and (b) above could be solved by moving the common provisions of the device Regulations into a special Resolution similar to R.E.3, rather than to Regulation No. 48. Referencing this Resolution in the device Regulations would make its provisions legally binding;
d) Use of dynamic or static references to HRD in the device Regulations: dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons.

9. GRE noted that some of these issues would require guidance from the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and/or WP.29. GRE invited all experts to transmit to the secretariat their comments and questions on the proposed approach before 24 April 2015. The secretariat was requested to seek advice from OLA on legal issues. GRE agreed that the Chair would report to WP.29, at its June 2015 session, on the progress in the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations and would ask WP.29 to provide guidance on the approach proposed by IWG SLR and, if required, to extend the mandate of the IWG SLR. Meanwhile, IWG SLR was requested to continue its activities to revise device Regulations with a view to preparing a full package for the next session of GRE, bearing in mind that a final decision with regard to HRD (a new part of Regulation No. 48, a new Resolution, etc.) would be taken at a later stage depending on the guidance provided by WP.29 and OLA.

10. On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from IEC proposed, for the purposes of simplification, to separate data sheets for various light sources from Annex 1 of Regulations Nos. 37, 99 and 128 and to include them in a repository document (resolution) administered by WP.29 (GRE-73-23). GRE noted that this approach had already been endorsed by WP.29 at its November 2014 session and that official documents with amendment proposals would be submitted to the next session of GRE.

7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group on “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and three possible timelines for completing its activities (GRE-73-22). On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from Germany proposed a concept for simplification based on the introduction of a new part B into Regulation No. 48 and using it as a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of the individual device Regulations would be moved (GRE-73-05-Rev.1). The individual device Regulations would only contain references to part B of Regulation No. 48. A revised Regulation No. 48 and an example of a revised device Regulation were also presented (GRE-73-03 and GRE-73-04). IWG SLR requested GRE to provide guidance on the proposed simplification approach.

8. Various experts reiterated their support to the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations, but pointed out that, before providing guidance to IWG SLR, they would need more time to study the proposed approach and its consequences. In particular, GRE identified the following issues that would need to be addressed:
a) The impact of amendments (supplements or new series of amendments) to part A and/or part B of Regulation No. 48 on individual device Regulations and vice versa;
b) Some Contracting Parties do not apply Regulation No. 48, but apply specific device Regulations. If the common provisions of these Regulations are included in Regulation No. 48, such Contracting Parties would not be in a position to vote on amendments to these common provisions or object to their adoption;
c) The issues under (a) and (b) above could be solved by moving the common provisions of the device Regulations into a special Resolution similar to R.E.3, rather than to Regulation No. 48. Referencing this Resolution in the device Regulations would make its provisions legally binding;
d) Use of dynamic or static references to HRD in the device Regulations: dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons.

9. GRE noted that some of these issues would require guidance from the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and/or WP.29. GRE invited all experts to transmit to the secretariat their comments and questions on the proposed approach before 24 April 2015. The secretariat was requested to seek advice from OLA on legal issues. GRE agreed that the Chair would report to WP.29, at its June 2015 session, on the progress in the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations and would ask WP.29 to provide guidance on the approach proposed by IWG SLR and, if required, to extend the mandate of the IWG SLR. Meanwhile, IWG SLR was requested to continue its activities to revise device Regulations with a view to preparing a full package for the next session of GRE, bearing in mind that a final decision with regard to HRD (a new part of Regulation No. 48, a new Resolution, etc.) would be taken at a later stage depending on the guidance provided by WP.29 and OLA.

10. On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from IEC proposed, for the purposes of simplification, to separate data sheets for various light sources from Annex 1 of Regulations Nos. 37, 99 and 128 and to include them in a repository document (resolution) administered by WP.29 (GRE-73-23). GRE noted that this approach had already been endorsed by WP.29 at its November 2014 session and that official documents with amendment proposals would be submitted to the next session of GRE.

7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group on “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and three possible timelines for completing its activities (GRE-73-22). On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from Germany proposed a concept for simplification based on the introduction of a new part B into Regulation No. 48 and using it as a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of the individual device Regulations would be moved (GRE-73-05-Rev.1). The individual device Regulations would only contain references to part B of Regulation No. 48. A revised Regulation No. 48 and an example of a revised device Regulation were also presented (GRE-73-03 and GRE-73-04). IWG SLR requested GRE to provide guidance on the proposed simplification approach.

8. Various experts reiterated their support to the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations, but pointed out that, before providing guidance to IWG SLR, they would need more time to study the proposed approach and its consequences. In particular, GRE identified the following issues that would need to be addressed:
a) The impact of amendments (supplements or new series of amendments) to part A and/or part B of Regulation No. 48 on individual device Regulations and vice versa;
b) Some Contracting Parties do not apply Regulation No. 48, but apply specific device Regulations. If the common provisions of these Regulations are included in Regulation No. 48, such Contracting Parties would not be in a position to vote on amendments to these common provisions or object to their adoption;
c) The issues under (a) and (b) above could be solved by moving the common provisions of the device Regulations into a special Resolution similar to R.E.3, rather than to Regulation No. 48. Referencing this Resolution in the device Regulations would make its provisions legally binding;
d) Use of dynamic or static references to HRD in the device Regulations: dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons.

9. GRE noted that some of these issues would require guidance from the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and/or WP.29. GRE invited all experts to transmit to the secretariat their comments and questions on the proposed approach before 24 April 2015. The secretariat was requested to seek advice from OLA on legal issues. GRE agreed that the Chair would report to WP.29, at its June 2015 session, on the progress in the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations and would ask WP.29 to provide guidance on the approach proposed by IWG SLR and, if required, to extend the mandate of the IWG SLR. Meanwhile, IWG SLR was requested to continue its activities to revise device Regulations with a view to preparing a full package for the next session of GRE, bearing in mind that a final decision with regard to HRD (a new part of Regulation No. 48, a new Resolution, etc.) would be taken at a later stage depending on the guidance provided by WP.29 and OLA.

10. On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from IEC proposed, for the purposes of simplification, to separate data sheets for various light sources from Annex 1 of Regulations Nos. 37, 99 and 128 and to include them in a repository document (resolution) administered by WP.29 (GRE-73-23). GRE noted that this approach had already been endorsed by WP.29 at its November 2014 session and that official documents with amendment proposals would be submitted to the next session of GRE.

2. GRE considered and adopted the agenda proposed for the seventy-third session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/1 and Add.1) as reproduced in GRE-73-01-Rev.1 (including the informal documents distributed during the session). GRE also adopted the running order for the session (GRE-73-07).

3. The list of informal documents is contained in Annex I to the report. The list of GRE informal groups is reproduced in Annex III to the report. GRE noted the official document submission deadline of 24 July 2015 for the October 2015 session of GRE (GRE-73-08).

4. GRE took note of the highlights of the November 2014 and March 2015 sessions of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (GRE-73-08). In this context, the expert from EC recalled that, at the March 2015 session of WP.29, the representative of European Union had expressed concerns about the large number of supplements submitted by GRE and that WP.29 had requested GRE to address this issue.

Discussions have arisen within GRRF concerning failure warnings for trailer direction indicators and brake lights. This paper alerts GRE to the absence of a standardized approach to communicating such lighting failures for trailers which may be a subject for consideration under UN R48.

47. At the GRRF request, the secretariat presented the idea of introducing a warning lamp into Regulations Nos. 79 and 13 to light up at any brake application and to indicate the proper functioning of the trailer electrical braking system on some trailers (GRE-73-09). GRE agreed that such lamps do not fall under the scope of Regulation No. 48 and, if required, such an exemption could be introduced explicitly into the definitions of Regulation No. 48.

Proposal from the secretariat to correct an error introduced by Supplement 8 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 74 (WP.29/2014/23).

49. The secretariat proposed to correct an error introduced by Supplement 8 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 74 (GRE-73-10). GRE adopted the proposed correction as contained in Annex II, requested the secretariat to identify its proper legal form (supplement or corrigendum) and submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2015 session.

Proposals from the GRE Task Force on Tell-tales to clarify the regulations.

50. On behalf of the Task Force on Tell-Tales, the expert from the Netherlands proposed amendments to Regulations Nos. 7, 87 and 48 regarding tell-tales indicating a failure (GRE-73-11). To prepare an official document for the next session, he invited GRE experts to send their comments by email.

Proposal to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles. This submission supersedes the earlier formal document GRE/2015/6.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

Proposal to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles. This submission supersedes the earlier document GRE/2015/19.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

38. GRE recalled that a proposal by the expert from Poland to introduce ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulation No. 119 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) was considered in conjunction with agenda item 6 (b) (see para. 19 above).

Proposal to clarify the requirements with regard to daytime running lamps and direction indicators in order to prevent DRL from masking or otherwise interfering with the visibility of the direction indicator lamps. Germany believes that the current text produces different interpretations with different results that risk degrading vehicle safety.

16. To improve road safety, the expert from Germany proposed to reduce the intensity of a daytime running lamp (DRL) in situations where a direction indicator is activated during the functioning of DRL (GRE-73-14). The experts from Canada, France, Netherlands, UK and OICA supported the idea of the proposal, but pointed out the need to further discuss its technical details. GRE invited experts to transmit their comments, if any, to the expert from Germany and requested him to submit an official document for consideration at the next session.

Supplemental presentation in support of document GRE/2015/3: Proposal for Supplement 9 to the 05 series of amendments and Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48.

14. The expert from GTB proposed to clarify the application of paragraph 5.7.1.3. on separating the rear direction indicator lamps and stop lamps (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/3 and GRE-73-15). The experts of France, Germany, Japan and UK did not support this proposal and pointed out that it was not sufficiently clear and allowed different interpretations. GRE invited GTB to revise the proposal based on the comments received.

Proposal to delete the angle of incidence provision that was developed to ensure that the vehicle registration plate is illuminated. Given current technologies (e.g., LED lamps), the performance requirements of Annex 5 can be met without reference to the angle of incidence.

51. The expert from IMMA proposed to modify the provisions on the angle of incidence in Annex 5 to Regulation No. 50 (GRE-73-16). GRE noted that this issue should be considered in conjunction with possible changes to Regulation No. 4 and invited CLEPA to look into this issue. IMMA was requested to submit an official document to the next session.

Proposal to reduce glare problems for drivers by deleting the exemption in Regulation No. 48 that allows manual leveling for dipped-beam headlamps, effectively mandating automatic leveling.

Comments on the proposal to introduce new requirements for automatic leveling systems as a means to reduce driver glare (document GRE/2015/5).

17. The experts from OICA and GTB proposed to introduce new criteria on the automatic levelling of headlamps based on the outcome of the GTB glare and visibility studies (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/5). The expert from Poland suggested further modifications to this proposal (GRE-73-28). The experts from Germany and Japan proposed to impose automatic levelling in all cases, in order to reduce glare problems for drivers (GRE-73-18). Following an in-depth exchange of views on these three documents, GRE realized that no consensus could be found as long as there was no single proposal.

18. To make progress on this issue and prepare a comprising proposal, GRE decided to establish an Informal Working Group with a draft title “on Visibility, Glare and Levelling” (IWG VGL), for which the experts from Germany and Poland agreed to act as Chair and Secretary, respectively. GRE requested IWG VGL to submit its terms of reference for consideration at the next session of GRE and mandated the Chair to obtain, in June 2015, the consent of WP.29 for the establishment of this IWG.

Comments on document GRE/2015/6 proposing to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone and to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

Comments on the proposal to align the requirements of UN Regulation No. 10 with regard to electromagnetic compatibility of trolleybuses with the electrical standards in Annex 12 to UN Regulation No. 107 (document GRE/2014/41).

26. The expert from Belgium referred to their proposal for amendments on the electromagnetic compatibility of trolleybuses (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/41) and asked GRE to postpone the consideration of this issue to the next session, due to the ongoing consultations with OICA. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed corrections to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/41 (GRE-73-20). The expert from Canada, who had chaired GRE in 2014, reported on his bilateral consultations with the Chair of the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG) and their agreement that this issue belongs to the scope of Regulation No. 10 and, thus, should be dealt with by GRE. GRE decided to revert to this matter at the next session and invited the experts from Belgium, the Russian Federation and OICA to submit a joint proposal.

TF examined the documents submitted by Belgium and the proposals from the Russian Federation. The representative from France requested to recall the background of the proposals, and OICA explained the story behind the Belgium paper, on trolley buses. OICA mentioned that trolley buses are like hybrid vehicles, since they can operate either:

• in bus mode (not connected to the grid)
• in trolley mode (connected to the grid)
• in charging mode (connected to the grid)

OICA outlined that, currently, UN regulations needs to include one sentence saying that trolley buses, when operating in bus mode (moving) or when connected to the grid for charging, should refer to R10. Otherwise, when operating in trolley mode (moving and connected to the grid), the railway standard should be used (IEC 62236-3-1). The proposal for the sentence to be included is: “R10 is applicable when the trolley vehicle is in motion without connection to external power source or when it is connected to the power grid for stationary charging.”

This additional sentence should be added either in R10 or in R107. The representative from France underlined that TF should seek advice from GRE about where to include it. TF agreed with that approach and proposed to further add to the sentence some figures to make it more explanatory. OICA will then prepare a proposal and will discuss it during next TF meeting.

Trolley buses manufacturer, present during the meeting, mentioned that they should go back and check with the representative from Belgium about retracting or amending their former document in the direction of how TF has decided to proceed.

In addition to the sentence to be added to the UN Regulations, TF commented the document Mutual Resolution No. 2 (M.R.2) of the 1958 and the 1998 Agreements (WP.29/1121), containing Vehicle Propulsion System Definitions (VPSD), should be amended. Item 44. reads: “Electric trolley vehicles are not covered in vehicle regulations at this stage.” TF commented that trolley vehicles should then be covered by vehicle regulations in the situation mentioned above (bus mode). As this document is a Resolution, and has no binding aspect, this modification could be done at later step, but it should be mentioned to GRE, and/or WP.29.

The representative from the Russian Federation joined the meeting via teleconference at the end of the meeting, and asked about TF conclusions on trolley buses. The general opinion of the Russian Federation was to agree with the TF plan to move forward, but will proceed with further check on their end, and will comment TF activity based on the TF meeting minutes.

Proposal to allow LED light source approval based on photometric criteria in place of the current minimum criteria of 1000 lumens.

34. The expert from France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/22 and GRE-73-26). This proposal received comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands. The expert from Poland suggested a different approach on this issue (GRE-73-21). The Chair invited the experts from France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, CLEPA and IEC to prepare a revised proposal for the next session.

7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group on “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and three possible timelines for completing its activities (GRE-73-22). On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from Germany proposed a concept for simplification based on the introduction of a new part B into Regulation No. 48 and using it as a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of the individual device Regulations would be moved (GRE-73-05-Rev.1). The individual device Regulations would only contain references to part B of Regulation No. 48. A revised Regulation No. 48 and an example of a revised device Regulation were also presented (GRE-73-03 and GRE-73-04). IWG SLR requested GRE to provide guidance on the proposed simplification approach.

8. Various experts reiterated their support to the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations, but pointed out that, before providing guidance to IWG SLR, they would need more time to study the proposed approach and its consequences. In particular, GRE identified the following issues that would need to be addressed:
a) The impact of amendments (supplements or new series of amendments) to part A and/or part B of Regulation No. 48 on individual device Regulations and vice versa;
b) Some Contracting Parties do not apply Regulation No. 48, but apply specific device Regulations. If the common provisions of these Regulations are included in Regulation No. 48, such Contracting Parties would not be in a position to vote on amendments to these common provisions or object to their adoption;
c) The issues under (a) and (b) above could be solved by moving the common provisions of the device Regulations into a special Resolution similar to R.E.3, rather than to Regulation No. 48. Referencing this Resolution in the device Regulations would make its provisions legally binding;
d) Use of dynamic or static references to HRD in the device Regulations: dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons.

9. GRE noted that some of these issues would require guidance from the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and/or WP.29. GRE invited all experts to transmit to the secretariat their comments and questions on the proposed approach before 24 April 2015. The secretariat was requested to seek advice from OLA on legal issues. GRE agreed that the Chair would report to WP.29, at its June 2015 session, on the progress in the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations and would ask WP.29 to provide guidance on the approach proposed by IWG SLR and, if required, to extend the mandate of the IWG SLR. Meanwhile, IWG SLR was requested to continue its activities to revise device Regulations with a view to preparing a full package for the next session of GRE, bearing in mind that a final decision with regard to HRD (a new part of Regulation No. 48, a new Resolution, etc.) would be taken at a later stage depending on the guidance provided by WP.29 and OLA.

10. On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from IEC proposed, for the purposes of simplification, to separate data sheets for various light sources from Annex 1 of Regulations Nos. 37, 99 and 128 and to include them in a repository document (resolution) administered by WP.29 (GRE-73-23). GRE noted that this approach had already been endorsed by WP.29 at its November 2014 session and that official documents with amendment proposals would be submitted to the next session of GRE.

7. GRE took note of the progress of the Informal Working Group on “Simplification of the Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations” (IWG SLR) and three possible timelines for completing its activities (GRE-73-22). On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from Germany proposed a concept for simplification based on the introduction of a new part B into Regulation No. 48 and using it as a Horizontal Reference Document (HRD) to which the common provisions of the individual device Regulations would be moved (GRE-73-05-Rev.1). The individual device Regulations would only contain references to part B of Regulation No. 48. A revised Regulation No. 48 and an example of a revised device Regulation were also presented (GRE-73-03 and GRE-73-04). IWG SLR requested GRE to provide guidance on the proposed simplification approach.

8. Various experts reiterated their support to the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations, but pointed out that, before providing guidance to IWG SLR, they would need more time to study the proposed approach and its consequences. In particular, GRE identified the following issues that would need to be addressed:
a) The impact of amendments (supplements or new series of amendments) to part A and/or part B of Regulation No. 48 on individual device Regulations and vice versa;
b) Some Contracting Parties do not apply Regulation No. 48, but apply specific device Regulations. If the common provisions of these Regulations are included in Regulation No. 48, such Contracting Parties would not be in a position to vote on amendments to these common provisions or object to their adoption;
c) The issues under (a) and (b) above could be solved by moving the common provisions of the device Regulations into a special Resolution similar to R.E.3, rather than to Regulation No. 48. Referencing this Resolution in the device Regulations would make its provisions legally binding;
d) Use of dynamic or static references to HRD in the device Regulations: dynamic references could provide more benefits in terms of simplifying the text, but some Contracting Parties might prefer static references for legal reasons.

9. GRE noted that some of these issues would require guidance from the United Nations Office for Legal Affairs (OLA) and/or WP.29. GRE invited all experts to transmit to the secretariat their comments and questions on the proposed approach before 24 April 2015. The secretariat was requested to seek advice from OLA on legal issues. GRE agreed that the Chair would report to WP.29, at its June 2015 session, on the progress in the simplification of the lighting and light-signalling Regulations and would ask WP.29 to provide guidance on the approach proposed by IWG SLR and, if required, to extend the mandate of the IWG SLR. Meanwhile, IWG SLR was requested to continue its activities to revise device Regulations with a view to preparing a full package for the next session of GRE, bearing in mind that a final decision with regard to HRD (a new part of Regulation No. 48, a new Resolution, etc.) would be taken at a later stage depending on the guidance provided by WP.29 and OLA.

10. On behalf of IWG SLR, the expert from IEC proposed, for the purposes of simplification, to separate data sheets for various light sources from Annex 1 of Regulations Nos. 37, 99 and 128 and to include them in a repository document (resolution) administered by WP.29 (GRE-73-23). GRE noted that this approach had already been endorsed by WP.29 at its November 2014 session and that official documents with amendment proposals would be submitted to the next session of GRE.

Presentation on activities, especially LED retrofit study.

53. GRE took note of a status report of the GTB Working Group on Light Sources (GRE-73-24), including the outcome of the GTB LED retrofit feasibility study. Some LED retrofit samples were showcased to demonstrate the equivalence criteria.

20. The expert from France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement in Regulation No. 48 for an auto-levelling device for low beam produced by any LED light sources, while for other light sources this requirement exists only if their reference luminous flux exceeds 2,000 Lm (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21 and GRE-73-25). According to the expert, should LED be treated in the same way as other lights sources, this would lead to more LED headlamps fitted on new vehicles, thus improving road safety and reducing CO2 emissions. The experts from Belgium, Germany, Japan and UK were of the view that this issue should be first referred to IWG VGL and be considered in one package with other proposals regarding levelling (see paras. 17 and 18 above), upon the understanding that a final solution developed by IWG VGL should be technology neutral. The experts from Italy, Spain, EC, CLEPA and OICA not only supported the French proposal as removing discrimination between various technologies of light sources, but also called for its adoption without delay, irrespective of the IWG activities. GRE agreed that the Chair would submit this issue to the June 2015 session of WP.29 for guidance and to report back to GRE at its next session.

34. The expert from France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/22 and GRE-73-26). This proposal received comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands. The expert from Poland suggested a different approach on this issue (GRE-73-21). The Chair invited the experts from France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, CLEPA and IEC to prepare a revised proposal for the next session.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

38. GRE recalled that a proposal by the expert from Poland to introduce ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulation No. 119 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) was considered in conjunction with agenda item 6 (b) (see para. 19 above).

17. The experts from OICA and GTB proposed to introduce new criteria on the automatic levelling of headlamps based on the outcome of the GTB glare and visibility studies (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/5). The expert from Poland suggested further modifications to this proposal (GRE-73-28). The experts from Germany and Japan proposed to impose automatic levelling in all cases, in order to reduce glare problems for drivers (GRE-73-18). Following an in-depth exchange of views on these three documents, GRE realized that no consensus could be found as long as there was no single proposal.

18. To make progress on this issue and prepare a comprising proposal, GRE decided to establish an Informal Working Group with a draft title “on Visibility, Glare and Levelling” (IWG VGL), for which the experts from Germany and Poland agreed to act as Chair and Secretary, respectively. GRE requested IWG VGL to submit its terms of reference for consideration at the next session of GRE and mandated the Chair to obtain, in June 2015, the consent of WP.29 for the establishment of this IWG.

2. GRE considered and adopted the agenda proposed for the seventy-third session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/1 and Add.1) as reproduced in GRE-73-01-Rev.1 (including the informal documents distributed during the session). GRE also adopted the running order for the session (GRE-73-07).

2. GRE considered and adopted the agenda proposed for the seventy-third session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/1 and Add.1) as reproduced in GRE-73-01-Rev.1 (including the informal documents distributed during the session). GRE also adopted the running order for the session (GRE-73-07).

Proposal to introduce a new category, ‘D9S’.

11. The expert from GTB proposed to introduce a new category ‘D9S’ of light sources with dual-level operation into Regulation No. 99 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/2) as well as to amend the testing and approval provisions in Regulation No. 98 to take into account the multi-level aspects of D9S (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/15).

12. Several experts pointed out that the lower level of operation of D9S provide for the objective luminous flux of 2000  300 lm, thus avoiding the need for headlamps with such light sources to be equipped with cleaning devices and automatic levelling. GRE recalled that, according to paragraph 6.2.9. of Regulation No. 48, these additional requirements only apply to headlamps with lights sources whose objective luminous flux exceeds 2,000 lm without taking into account the tolerances specified on the relevant data sheet. GRE agreed that, in the future, headlamps with any new light sources could only be exempted from these additional requirements if their objective luminous flux, together with any tolerance, is below 2,000 lm. GTB was requested to prepare a respective proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 48.

13. Upon this understanding, GRE adopted the above proposals and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and the Administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as draft Supplement 11 to the original series of Regulation No. 99 and draft Supplement 7 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 98, respectively.

Proposal to improve the applicability of paragraph 5.7.1.3.1. (concerning the separation of grouped direction indicator and stop lamps in order to avoid “signal mix”). To improve the present requirements of paragraph 5.7.1.3.1.on the basis of the colour changes concept, three alternative approaches for a suitable separation of direction indicator lamps and stop lamp are proposed:
a) the improved test of the existing paragraph 5.7.1.3.1. clarifies its application to lamps composed of more than one part and deletes the concept of “adjacent” parts of the lamps (that in the past led to different interpretations) in favour of a description of the condition of application of the requirement;
b) the unchanged text of the following paragraph 5.7.1.3.2.;
c) a new paragraph 5.7.1.3.3. to provide for specific electrical connections of the involved functions, in conjunction with the requirements of paragraph 5.9.2.

14. The expert from GTB proposed to clarify the application of paragraph 5.7.1.3. on separating the rear direction indicator lamps and stop lamps (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/3 and GRE-73-15). The experts of France, Germany, Japan and UK did not support this proposal and pointed out that it was not sufficiently clear and allowed different interpretations. GRE invited GTB to revise the proposal based on the comments received.

Proposal to introduce variable daytime running lamps into the regulation.

15. The expert of GTB presented a proposal to introduce optional variable intensity Daytime Running Lamps (DRL) into Regulations No. 48 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/4), together with a proposal to introduce these DRL into Regulation No. 87 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/13) (agenda item 7 (g)). Compared to the current DRL with one level of performance between 400 and 1,200 cd for all ambient conditions, the variable intensity DRL were proposed to have several levels of performance between 200 and 2,000 cd, depending on ambient light conditions.

16. The experts from France and Italy were not in a position to accept this proposal. The experts from Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Poland and UK supported the basic concept of variable DRL and suggested some modifications. GRE also recalled that WP.29 urged GRE to find, in close cooperation with all stakeholders, a solution for DRL for the purpose of listing Regulation No. 48 in an annex to UN Regulation No. 0 (IVWTA) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1112, para. 43). In this context, the expert from Japan informed GRE that his country was not in a position to support the GTB proposal on road safety concerns for motorcycles, because the figure of 2,000 lm was too high. He also stated that Japan did not want to impede IVWTA and had launched a study on DRL whose outcome would be reported to GRE at the next session. GRE invited GTB to take into account the comments received and to prepare, in cooperation with Japan and other stakeholders, a revised proposal for the next session of GRE.

Proposal to introduce new criteria on the automatic leveling of headlamps based on GTB glare and visibility studies. This proposal is for formal consideration and advice from Contracting Parties, with the expectation that a finalized text will be submitted for adoption at the seventy-fourth session of GRE.

17. The experts from OICA and GTB proposed to introduce new criteria on the automatic levelling of headlamps based on the outcome of the GTB glare and visibility studies (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/5). The expert from Poland suggested further modifications to this proposal (GRE-73-28). The experts from Germany and Japan proposed to impose automatic levelling in all cases, in order to reduce glare problems for drivers (GRE-73-18). Following an in-depth exchange of views on these three documents, GRE realized that no consensus could be found as long as there was no single proposal.

18. To make progress on this issue and prepare a comprising proposal, GRE decided to establish an Informal Working Group with a draft title “on Visibility, Glare and Levelling” (IWG VGL), for which the experts from Germany and Poland agreed to act as Chair and Secretary, respectively. GRE requested IWG VGL to submit its terms of reference for consideration at the next session of GRE and mandated the Chair to obtain, in June 2015, the consent of WP.29 for the establishment of this IWG.

Proposal to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

Proposal to correct an error in Supplement 24 to the 01 series of amendments (document WP.29/2013/14 adopted by the Forum during its March 2013 session). During the compilation of the collective amendment (GRE-68-02-Rev.2), necessary changes to Regulation No. 6 were overlooked. This amendment proposes to align the treatment of categories 1, 1a and 1b with other categories and devices.

21. GTB proposed to correct an error in Regulation No. 6 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/7). GRE approved this proposal, but agreed to postpone to the next session a decision to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to this Regulation in the course of the simplification process.

22. The expert from EC pointed out the administrative burden and legal uncertainty imposed by numerous supplements to lighting and light-signalling Regulations and requested that such amendments be limited to one per year per Regulation. He also expressed concerns about a large number of official documents with amendments proposals submitted by GTB without their prior consideration as informal documents. The expert from GTB stated that his organization would consider how to improve transparency of its work and submissions to GRE. The secretariat clarified that all submissions received earlier than twelve weeks before the session are submitted as official documents for translation, in line with the Rules of Procedure. The expert from UK, chairing the Working Party on Braking and Running Gear (GRRF), informed GRE about the GRRF experiences in dealing with documentation and limiting the number of amendment proposals transmitted to WP.29. Various experts generally supported the idea to collect proposals for amendments to the same Regulation during several sessions of GRE and then to submit them to WP.29 once a year. At the same time, experts called for flexibility and exceptions to this practice, should this be justified by urgent needs of Contracting Parties and/or industry or by emerging new technologies.

23. The Chair drew the following conclusions:
a) Proposals for amendments submitted before the twelve week deadline would continue to be issued as official documents;
b) Official documents submitted to this session of GRE (e.g. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/7) could be adopted in principle, but put on hold until the next session, pending the outcome of the IWG SLR activities;
c) GRE would collect adopted proposals for amendments to the same Regulation to submit them all together to WP.29 at a certain stage. This general rule should be without prejudice to submitting adopted proposals without delay, based on the grounds of urgency and innovation;
d) The provisional agenda would include a new agenda item for pending amendment proposals.

36. GRE recalled that, at the previous session, it approved several amendment proposals to various Regulations, but agreed to postpone a decision to submit them to WP.29 for consideration, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to the same Regulations in the course of the simplification process (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73, paras. 21, 33 and 35). GRE decided to keep these amendment proposals pending.

10. GRE reviewed and unanimously adopted the pending amendment proposals so as to consolidate the existing Regulations before they are frozen and superseded by three new Regulations that are in drafting:

• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/68,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/69,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/71,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/72,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2013/75¹,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/76,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/79,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/83,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/85,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/86,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/87,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/88,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/89,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/90²,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/92³,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/93⁴,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/94,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2014/31,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/32,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2013/55/Rev.1,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/3,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/7,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/16,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/23,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2016/11,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/14⁵
• and Annex IV to ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/75.

34. GRE addressed this issue in conjunction with agenda item 4 (para. 10 above).

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

Proposal to enable the designation of manufacturer electromagnetic compatibility facilities as approved test laboratories for the purpose of assessing conformity with UN R10.

25. The expert of OICA proposed to allow the designation of manufacturer’s laboratories as approved test laboratories for Regulation No. 10 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/9). GRE was not in a position to support this proposal.

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

27. GRE noted that this proposal would be considered at the next session in conjunction with a similar proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 7 (see para. 24 of this report).

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

In paragraph 9, the opportunity has been taken to correct a reference to paragraph 3. of Annex 4. The reference should be to paragraph 4 of Annex 4.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

28. GRE noted that this proposal would be considered at the next session in conjunction with a similar proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 7 (see para. 24 of this report).

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

29. GRE noted that this proposal would be considered at the next session in conjunction with a similar proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 7 (see para. 24 of this report).

Proposal to introduce provisions for variable intensity daytime running lamps (improving performance under certain outlying ambient light conditions) and to update the heat resistance testing in line with technological progress.

15. The expert of GTB presented a proposal to introduce optional variable intensity Daytime Running Lamps (DRL) into Regulations No. 48 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/4), together with a proposal to introduce these DRL into Regulation No. 87 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/13) (agenda item 7 (g)). Compared to the current DRL with one level of performance between 400 and 1,200 cd for all ambient conditions, the variable intensity DRL were proposed to have several levels of performance between 200 and 2,000 cd, depending on ambient light conditions.

16. The experts from France and Italy were not in a position to accept this proposal. The experts from Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Poland and UK supported the basic concept of variable DRL and suggested some modifications. GRE also recalled that WP.29 urged GRE to find, in close cooperation with all stakeholders, a solution for DRL for the purpose of listing Regulation No. 48 in an annex to UN Regulation No. 0 (IVWTA) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1112, para. 43). In this context, the expert from Japan informed GRE that his country was not in a position to support the GTB proposal on road safety concerns for motorcycles, because the figure of 2,000 lm was too high. He also stated that Japan did not want to impede IVWTA and had launched a study on DRL whose outcome would be reported to GRE at the next session. GRE invited GTB to take into account the comments received and to prepare, in cooperation with Japan and other stakeholders, a revised proposal for the next session of GRE.

30. This issue was considered in conjunction with agenda item 6 (a) (see paras. 15 and 16 above).

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

31. GRE noted that this proposal would be considered at the next session in conjunction with a similar proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 7 (see para. 24 of this report).

This is a proposal to introduce a new HID category (D9S) into Regulation No. 99 with dual-level operation, i.e. with two defined wattage values and corresponding luminous flux values. This new category (D9S) is the first light source in R99 that has two defined power levels. When this dual-level light source is used in a headlamp which is being approved according to Regulation No. 98, the testing and approval provisions must be clearly defined in this Regulation to avoid misinterpretation. Therefore, it is proposed to amend the relevant paragraphs of Regulation No. 98 to take into account the multi-level aspects of D9S and possible future multi-level light sources in Regulation No. 99.

11. The expert from GTB proposed to introduce a new category ‘D9S’ of light sources with dual-level operation into Regulation No. 99 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/2) as well as to amend the testing and approval provisions in Regulation No. 98 to take into account the multi-level aspects of D9S (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/15).

12. Several experts pointed out that the lower level of operation of D9S provide for the objective luminous flux of 2000  300 lm, thus avoiding the need for headlamps with such light sources to be equipped with cleaning devices and automatic levelling. GRE recalled that, according to paragraph 6.2.9. of Regulation No. 48, these additional requirements only apply to headlamps with lights sources whose objective luminous flux exceeds 2,000 lm without taking into account the tolerances specified on the relevant data sheet. GRE agreed that, in the future, headlamps with any new light sources could only be exempted from these additional requirements if their objective luminous flux, together with any tolerance, is below 2,000 lm. GTB was requested to prepare a respective proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 48.

13. Upon this understanding, GRE adopted the above proposals and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and the Administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as draft Supplement 11 to the original series of Regulation No. 99 and draft Supplement 7 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 98, respectively.

32. This issue was considered in conjunction with agenda item 5 (see paras. 11-13 above).

Correction of errors found in the references to “left-hand traffic” and “right-hand traffic” in the text and associated diagrams of Annex 2 of the regulation.

33. The expert from GTB proposed to correct editorial errors in the approval markings of Annex 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/16). GRE approved this proposal, but agreed to postpone to the next session a decision to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to this Regulation in the course of the simplification process.

36. GRE recalled that, at the previous session, it approved several amendment proposals to various Regulations, but agreed to postpone a decision to submit them to WP.29 for consideration, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to the same Regulations in the course of the simplification process (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73, paras. 21, 33 and 35). GRE decided to keep these amendment proposals pending.

10. GRE reviewed and unanimously adopted the pending amendment proposals so as to consolidate the existing Regulations before they are frozen and superseded by three new Regulations that are in drafting:

• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/68,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/69,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/71,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/72,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2013/75¹,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/76,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/79,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/83,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/85,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/86,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/87,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/88,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/89,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/90²,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/92³,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/93⁴,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/94,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2014/31,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/32,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2013/55/Rev.1,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/3,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/7,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/16,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/23,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2016/11,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/14⁵
• and Annex IV to ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/75.

34. GRE addressed this issue in conjunction with agenda item 4 (para. 10 above).

Proposal to align the requirements of UN R113 with those adopted in Regulations Nos. 98, 112 and 123 relating to movement of the cut-off line after heat test and to correct an error in the provisions on the use of LED modules.

36. At request of the expert from GTB, GRE decided to postpone consideration of this issue to the next session.

35. GRE considered a pending proposal submitted by the expert from GTB to align the requirements on moving the cut-off line after heat test with those adopted in Regulations Nos. 98, 112 and 123 and to correct an error in the provisions on the use of light-emitting diode modules (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/17). The experts from Austria, Germany and the Netherlands stressed the urgency of this proposal. GRE adopted the proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2016 sessions as draft Supplement 6 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 113.

This proposal concerns lamps equipped with several light sources and fitted with an operating tell-tale that indicates the failure of any one of these light sources. The current provisions for the failure of one light source (the “N-1” requirement) are difficult to apply as a complete photometric check for all possible combinations of light source failure is required. The revised text follows the approach of supplement 17 to Regulation No. 87 and removes the requirement to check the complete photometric requirement, in case of failure of any light source, when the lamp is fitted on the vehicle with an operating tell-tale.

24. The expert of GTB introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/8 with a proposal to update the provisions relating to failure of light sources when an operating tell-tale is installed. GRE noted that this document was part of collective amendments to various Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/10, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/11, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/12, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/14, ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/18). Following comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands, GRE requested GTB to revise the proposal and submit a new document to the next session.

37. GRE noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/18 would be considered at the next session in conjunction with a similar proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 7 (see para. 24 of this report).

Proposal to introduce provisions for “side-illuminating lamps” that aim to improve the driver’s visibility over the opposite side of the road (on-coming traffic side) and its buffer zone to mitigate the impact of glare from on-coming vehicles.

19. The expert from Poland proposed to introduce optional ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulations Nos. 48 and 119 (agenda item 7 (l)) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/6, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-12, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) with the aim to increase the visibility of pedestrians, animals, etc. for glared drivers. The expert from India suggested corrections to this proposal (GRE-73-19). GRE was of the view that this proposal would not bring additional benefits for road safety and was not in a position to support it.

38. GRE recalled that a proposal by the expert from Poland to introduce ‘side illuminating lamps’ into Regulation No. 119 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/19, GRE-73-13, GRE-73-27) was considered in conjunction with agenda item 6 (b) (see para. 19 above).

This proposal corrects a reference and clarifies the text by deleting the words “with each lighting unit” from paragraph 6.3.3.1. This wording is both redundant to Annex 9 and could lead to an incorrect interpretation that each lighting unit shall meet photometric requirement in all cases in conflict with Annex 9.

39. The expert from GTB withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/20.

Proposal to delete the requirement for automatic leveling devices for all headlamps with light emitting diode (LED) light sources based upon the results of the GTB glare study. The proposal argues that the restriction discriminates against LED light sources based upon an erroneous understanding of light-source relevance to driver glare.

20. The expert from France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement in Regulation No. 48 for an auto-levelling device for low beam produced by any LED light sources, while for other light sources this requirement exists only if their reference luminous flux exceeds 2,000 Lm (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21 and GRE-73-25). According to the expert, should LED be treated in the same way as other lights sources, this would lead to more LED headlamps fitted on new vehicles, thus improving road safety and reducing CO2 emissions. The experts from Belgium, Germany, Japan and UK were of the view that this issue should be first referred to IWG VGL and be considered in one package with other proposals regarding levelling (see paras. 17 and 18 above), upon the understanding that a final solution developed by IWG VGL should be technology neutral. The experts from Italy, Spain, EC, CLEPA and OICA not only supported the French proposal as removing discrimination between various technologies of light sources, but also called for its adoption without delay, irrespective of the IWG activities. GRE agreed that the Chair would submit this issue to the June 2015 session of WP.29 for guidance and to report back to GRE at its next session.

50. The representative of France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement in Regulation No. 48 for auto-levelling of headlamps equipped with any Light Emitting Diodes (LED) light sources (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73 and WP.29-166-23). The representative explained that, if LED were treated the same way as other lights sources, more LED headlamps would be fitted on new vehicles, and thus improving road safety and reducing CO2 emissions. WP.29 noted that recent studies indicate that the type of light source does not seem to be a major factor of headlamp glare, and that GRE had established an IWG to review all levelling requirements in Regulation No. 48 (para. 25 above). The EU representative stressed that also for this subject OLA should be involved to provide their analysis and preferred option.

51. WP.29 stressed that, in line with the text and spirit of the 1958 Agreement, Regulations should be technologically neutral and performance based. Therefore, WP.29 advocated the French proposal and invited GRE to adopt it and to submit it to WP.29 for consideration. WP.29 also pointed out the importance of the newly established IWG for finding a general solution for glare and visibility issues. WP.29 also instructed IWG and GRE to verify, as a matter of priority, that LED headlamps do not produce more glare compared to other light sources, to review all levelling requirements and to report back to WP.29.

14. GRE reverted to the proposal by the expert from France to delete a design restrictive requirement in Regulation No. 48 for an auto-levelling device for low beam produced by light emitting diodes (LED) light sources (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73, para. 20). The secretariat informed GRE about the discussion on this issue at the June 2015 session of WP.29. The World Forum had stressed that Regulations should be technologically neutral and invited GRE to adopt the French proposal and to submit it to WP.29 for consideration (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1116, paras. 50 and 51).

15. GRE was not in a position to reach a consensus on this matter. The experts from Germany and Japan did not support the French proposal and suggested that it first be referred to the Informal Working Group on Visibility, Glare and Levelling (IWG VGL) and considered in one package with various other proposals. The experts from Belgium, Italy, Finland, France, Spain, EC, CLEPA and OICA supported the French proposal and called for its adoption independently from the IWG VGL activities. The experts from Austria and Poland reserved their positions. Finally, in view of the WP.29 guidance, GRE agreed to adopt the proposal in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/21 and to submit it to the March 2016 session of WP.29 for a final decision. The Chair was also requested to brief WP.29 on the different views expressed by experts in GRE.

Proposal to delete the requirement that the total objective luminous flux of all LED modules producing the principal passing (main low) beam of a headlamp be greater than or equal to 1000 lumens because the requirement is design-restrictive, unnecessary given the objective criteria for luminous output and photometric grid points of the regulation, and obsolete given improvements in LED technologies.

34. The expert from France proposed to delete a design restrictive requirement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/22 and GRE-73-26). This proposal received comments from the experts of Germany and the Netherlands. The expert from Poland suggested a different approach on this issue (GRE-73-21). The Chair invited the experts from France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, CLEPA and IEC to prepare a revised proposal for the next session.

Proposal to correct an inconsistency between the regulation text and Figure B of Annex 3.

35. The expert from France proposed to correct an inconsistency in Annex 3 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/23). GRE approved this proposal, but agreed to postpone to the next session a decision to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to this Regulation in the course of the simplification process.

36. GRE recalled that, at the previous session, it approved several amendment proposals to various Regulations, but agreed to postpone a decision to submit them to WP.29 for consideration, awaiting other possible proposals for amendments to the same Regulations in the course of the simplification process (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/73, paras. 21, 33 and 35). GRE decided to keep these amendment proposals pending.

10. GRE reviewed and unanimously adopted the pending amendment proposals so as to consolidate the existing Regulations before they are frozen and superseded by three new Regulations that are in drafting:

• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/68,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/69,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/71,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/72,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2013/75¹,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/76,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/79,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/83,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/85,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/86,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/87,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/88,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/89,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/90²,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ 2013/92³,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/93⁴,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2013/94,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2014/31,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/32,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2013/55/Rev.1,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2014/3,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/7,
• ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/2015/16,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2015/23,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/ GRE/2016/11,
• ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2016/14⁵
• and Annex IV to ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/GRE/75.

34. GRE addressed this issue in conjunction with agenda item 4 (para. 10 above).