18. The expert from the Netherlands briefed GRB on the Dutch public campaign “Choose the Best Tyre” and on potential benefits of energy-efficient tyres and correct tyre pressure maintenance (GRB-62-01 and Add.1, GRB-62-02-Rev.1). The Chair recalled other Dutch studies on this topic and commended the experts from the Netherlands for the considerable work undertaken and interesting results. He also called for a holistic approach and closer cooperation between the governments and industry in this area.

18. The expert from the Netherlands briefed GRB on the Dutch public campaign “Choose the Best Tyre” and on potential benefits of energy-efficient tyres and correct tyre pressure maintenance (GRB-62-01 and Add.1, GRB-62-02-Rev.1). The Chair recalled other Dutch studies on this topic and commended the experts from the Netherlands for the considerable work undertaken and interesting results. He also called for a holistic approach and closer cooperation between the governments and industry in this area.

21. The expert from WBU called for shared responsibility of drivers and vulnerable road users for road safety and requested that the Audible Vehicle Alert System (AVAS) of QRTV be “ON” while the vehicle is stationary and that the driver should not be able to deactivate (or pause) AVAS (GRB-62-03). He also referred to a study (GRB-62-16) suggesting that the proposed AVAS level of sound did not seem to make QRTV with AVAS more detectable to the average blind person than was QRTV without AVAS. According to the study, more research would be needed to determine a minimal noise level that would satisfy the desire to reduce noise emissions while remaining safe for pedestrians.

2. GRB considered and adopted the agenda.

26. The secretariat reported on the highlights of the 165th and 166th sessions of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1114, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1116, GRB-62-04).

5. The expert from IMMA proposed to correct minor reference errors in Supplement 2 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41 (GRB-62-05). GRB adopted this proposal, as contained in Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2016 sessions.

15. The expert from IMMA proposed collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 41, 63 and 92 to clarify that the provisions on fibrous materials are only applicable if such materials are in contact with exhaust gases (GRB-62-06-Rev.1). Following comments by the experts from Germany and OICA, GRB invited IMMA to revise the proposal and re-submit it to the next session, possibly as an official document.

16. The expert from China briefed GRB on the activities of the China vehicle noise standards working group (GRB-62-10). The experts from Japan informed GRB about the trends of noise regulation in Japan and gave an overview of the future policy for motor vehicle noise reduction (GRB-62-13-Rev.1 and GRB-62-12, respectively). The expert of ISO reported on the activities of his organization on interior noise, with the aim to review ISO 5128 (GRB-62-07). GRB took note of these presentations and felt that some of the issues raised could be included in the programme of work of GRB (see para. 27 below).

27. The Chair presented a list of possible issues for the future GRB activities prepared at an informal meeting convened by the Chair in July 2015 (GRB-62-08). Various experts expressed their interest in pursuing specific items on the list and/or proposed new subjects. To take these comments into account and to prepare an updated and prioritized list, the Chair informed GRB about his intention to convene a second meeting of stakeholders at the beginning of December 2015, the results of which would be reported to the next session of GRB.

27. The Chair presented a list of possible issues for the future GRB activities prepared at an informal meeting convened by the Chair in July 2015 (GRB-62-08). Various experts expressed their interest in pursuing specific items on the list and/or proposed new subjects. To take these comments into account and to prepare an updated and prioritized list, the Chair informed GRB about his intention to convene a second meeting of stakeholders at the beginning of December 2015, the results of which would be reported to the next session of GRB.

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.

16. The expert from China briefed GRB on the activities of the China vehicle noise standards working group (GRB-62-10). The experts from Japan informed GRB about the trends of noise regulation in Japan and gave an overview of the future policy for motor vehicle noise reduction (GRB-62-13-Rev.1 and GRB-62-12, respectively). The expert of ISO reported on the activities of his organization on interior noise, with the aim to review ISO 5128 (GRB-62-07). GRB took note of these presentations and felt that some of the issues raised could be included in the programme of work of GRB (see para. 27 below).

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.

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.

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.

15. The expert from the Netherlands provided an overview of their research projects on tyres and proposed a two-stage tightening of the tyre limits for the rolling resistance coefficient, wet grip index and rolling sound emissions (GRB-66-01 and Add.1, GRB-66-03). He also highlighted the importance of keeping the correct tyre pressure for fuel efficiency and pointed out shortcomings of the EU system for labelling tyres.

16. The expert from ETRTO was of the view that the selections of tyres in the Dutch studies was not representative enough for the European market and volunteered to submit to the next GRB session a more comprehensive analysis. The expert from OICA supported the ETRTO view and proposal. He further introduced the results of a recent study of C1 summer tyres (GRB-66-22) according to which no tyre was performing equally well in rolling sound and handling. The expert from Germany acknowledged the progress achieved in rolling sound and pointed out the need to find a compromise for the three tyre parameters in question. He also agreed that the tyre labelling system would need to be improved.

17. The Chair was of the view that amending the limit values in Regulation No. 117 would first require a general agreement of all stakeholders, including the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF). Finally, GRB decided to continue the discussion at the next session.

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.

15. The expert from the Netherlands provided an overview of their research projects on tyres and proposed a two-stage tightening of the tyre limits for the rolling resistance coefficient, wet grip index and rolling sound emissions (GRB-66-01 and Add.1, GRB-66-03). He also highlighted the importance of keeping the correct tyre pressure for fuel efficiency and pointed out shortcomings of the EU system for labelling tyres.

16. The expert from ETRTO was of the view that the selections of tyres in the Dutch studies was not representative enough for the European market and volunteered to submit to the next GRB session a more comprehensive analysis. The expert from OICA supported the ETRTO view and proposal. He further introduced the results of a recent study of C1 summer tyres (GRB-66-22) according to which no tyre was performing equally well in rolling sound and handling. The expert from Germany acknowledged the progress achieved in rolling sound and pointed out the need to find a compromise for the three tyre parameters in question. He also agreed that the tyre labelling system would need to be improved.

17. The Chair was of the view that amending the limit values in Regulation No. 117 would first require a general agreement of all stakeholders, including the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF). Finally, GRB decided to continue the discussion at the next session.

15. The expert from ETRTO assessed the latest proposals from the Netherlands for stricter tyre noise limits, as presented at the sixty-sixth session of GRB (GRB-67-08). He pointed out some limitations in the data subset used in the Dutch study and questioned the methodology used to derive the new proposed limits from the data subset. The expert from the Netherlands replied to the ETRTO comments (GRB-67-18).

16. The experts from Germany and OICA pointed out that the Dutch study had been based on tyre labels which might be incorrect. The expert from the Russian Federation drew the attention of GRB to the need for a holistic approach to the tyre rolling noise in the system “tyre/road surface”. The Chair noted two different approaches for tyre selection by the Netherlands and ETRTO: the Dutch study focused on the most popular tyres of several brands covering about 90 per cent of the market, while ETRTO was concerned about a much wider selection of brands to ensure market choice.

17. GRB invited the Netherlands, ETRTO and other stakeholders to work together with the aim to undertake a holistic study of tyres on the market. Finally, GRB agreed to resume the discussion at the next session.

16. The expert from China briefed GRB on the activities of the China vehicle noise standards working group (GRB-62-10). The experts from Japan informed GRB about the trends of noise regulation in Japan and gave an overview of the future policy for motor vehicle noise reduction (GRB-62-13-Rev.1 and GRB-62-12, respectively). The expert of ISO reported on the activities of his organization on interior noise, with the aim to review ISO 5128 (GRB-62-07). GRB took note of these presentations and felt that some of the issues raised could be included in the programme of work of GRB (see para. 27 below).

16. The expert from China briefed GRB on the activities of the China vehicle noise standards working group (GRB-62-10). The experts from Japan informed GRB about the trends of noise regulation in Japan and gave an overview of the future policy for motor vehicle noise reduction (GRB-62-13-Rev.1 and GRB-62-12, respectively). The expert of ISO reported on the activities of his organization on interior noise, with the aim to review ISO 5128 (GRB-62-07). GRB took note of these presentations and felt that some of the issues raised could be included in the programme of work of GRB (see para. 27 below).

17. The expert from the Netherlands presented a policy indicator for road traffic noise emissions (GRB-62-14 and Add.1) that determines the effect of noise control at source on average noise levels at the dwelling facade and on estimated numbers of annoyed and sleep disturbed people. According to the expert, the indicator had been calculated for the Netherlands, showing a potential reduction of up to 50 per cent in annoyed and sleep disturbed people, if tighter limits for vehicles and tyres were introduced and road surfaces were improved. He also suggested that the policy indicator be applied for the whole EU. The experts from ETRTO and OICA commented on the proposed concept. The Chair proposed to continue the discussion in the future, taking into account comments from the industry.

17. The expert from the Netherlands presented a policy indicator for road traffic noise emissions (GRB-62-14 and Add.1) that determines the effect of noise control at source on average noise levels at the dwelling facade and on estimated numbers of annoyed and sleep disturbed people. According to the expert, the indicator had been calculated for the Netherlands, showing a potential reduction of up to 50 per cent in annoyed and sleep disturbed people, if tighter limits for vehicles and tyres were introduced and road surfaces were improved. He also suggested that the policy indicator be applied for the whole EU. The experts from ETRTO and OICA commented on the proposed concept. The Chair proposed to continue the discussion in the future, taking into account comments from the industry.

6. The expert from IMMA also proposed to extend, until 1 January 2018, the 1 dB(A) allowance for motorcycles tested in the second gear (GRB-62-15). Taking into account interventions of the experts from Germany and EC, GRB did not support this proposal.

21. The expert from WBU called for shared responsibility of drivers and vulnerable road users for road safety and requested that the Audible Vehicle Alert System (AVAS) of QRTV be “ON” while the vehicle is stationary and that the driver should not be able to deactivate (or pause) AVAS (GRB-62-03). He also referred to a study (GRB-62-16) suggesting that the proposed AVAS level of sound did not seem to make QRTV with AVAS more detectable to the average blind person than was QRTV without AVAS. According to the study, more research would be needed to determine a minimal noise level that would satisfy the desire to reduce noise emissions while remaining safe for pedestrians.

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.

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.

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.

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.

3. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced a revised proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 28 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2016/2, GRB-63-01 and GRB-63-04). The proposal received comments from the experts of China, France and IMMA (GRB-63-17, GRB-63-16 and GRB-63-15, respectively). The experts from Japan and Spain indicated that they would need more time to study the proposal and its consequences and requested that its adoption be postponed to the next session. GRB invited all experts to transmit their comments, before the end of March 2016, to the expert from the Russian Federation who would update the proposal for consideration at the next session.

8. The expert from OICA proposed to clarify the wording of Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.3. (GRB-62-19-Rev.1). GRB adopted this proposal, as contained in Annex III, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2016 sessions as a draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No.51.

67. The representative of EU, Japan and the Chair of GRB welcomed the adoption of the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/62) and acknowledged the work of GRB and its subsidiary bodies.

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.

3. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced a revised proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 28 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2016/2, GRB-63-01 and GRB-63-04). The proposal received comments from the experts of China, France and IMMA (GRB-63-17, GRB-63-16 and GRB-63-15, respectively). The experts from Japan and Spain indicated that they would need more time to study the proposal and its consequences and requested that its adoption be postponed to the next session. GRB invited all experts to transmit their comments, before the end of March 2016, to the expert from the Russian Federation who would update the proposal for consideration at the next session.

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.

3. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced a revised proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 28 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2016/2, GRB-63-01 and GRB-63-04). The proposal received comments from the experts of China, France and IMMA (GRB-63-17, GRB-63-16 and GRB-63-15, respectively). The experts from Japan and Spain indicated that they would need more time to study the proposal and its consequences and requested that its adoption be postponed to the next session. GRB invited all experts to transmit their comments, before the end of March 2016, to the expert from the Russian Federation who would update the proposal for consideration at the next session.

20. The experts from France and Germany, in their capacity of Co-chairs of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on a Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) Regulation under 1958 Agreement, presented a draft QRTV Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2015/9 and GRB-62-22).

19. The expert from the Belgian Road Research Centre (BRCC) presented a new solution for noise reducing pavements, namely the poro-elastic road surface which provides for extreme noise reduction in a range from 7 to 12 dB(A) (GRB-62-23). GRB thanked BRCC for this presentation and looked forward to further studies and presentations on the issue.

25. The secretariat informed GRB about the recent activities of the Subgroup on UN Regulation No. 0, in particular, about its proposal to introduce a new concept of “IWVTA vehicle type” which would group vehicles of a given type and with the same level of conformity.