Situation on the entry into force of the UN Regulation proposals under the 1958 Agreement adopted at the November 2011 World Forum (WP.29-155) session.

58. Agenda item 4.7.3, Regulation No. 67, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/108, Paragraphs 2.20 and 2.21, should be deleted.

Paragraph 17.11.5, correct to read:
“17.11.5. Vehicles with more than one fuel system shall have a fuel selection system.”

Paragraph 17.11.6, should be deleted.

61. Agenda item 4.8.6, Regulation No. 94, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/120, add the following paragraphs 11.1 and 11.2, to read:

“11.1. As from the official date of entry into force of Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments, no Contracting Party applying this Regulation shall refuse to grant UNECE approval under this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments.

11.2. As from 23 June 2013, Contracting Parties applying this Regulation shall grant UNECE approvals only to those types of vehicles which comply with the requirements of this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments."

51. The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/152, WP.29-155-03 and WP.29-155-37. The secretariat was requested to issue them as a basic document for the drafting of UN Regulations, with an official symbol.

18. The expert from OICA presented GRSG-101-21 clarifying the requirements on rear underrun protection devices. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced GRSG-101-26 amending the transitional provisions of draft Supplement 1 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 58, adopted at the previous session of GRSG. Following the discussion, GRSG agreed on the proposal as reproduced in GRSG-101-21-Rev.1 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as a Corrigendum to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/107. [Note by the secretariat: see informal document WP.29-155-04.]

19. The expert from Germany recalled the purpose of documents GRSG-100-25 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/19 proposing to introduce, into Regulation No. 58, more stringent requirements for rear underrun protection devices. The expert from Japan introduced informal documents GRSG-101-10-Rev.1, GRSG-101-27 and GRSG-101-28 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/19. GRSG welcomed the proposals and noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, the expert from Germany volunteered to organize an ad hoc expert meeting to further discuss the open issues. He invited all GRSG experts to attend that meeting, scheduled to be held on 23 January 2012. GRSG agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session in April 2012 on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by Germany, taking into account the outcome of the discussion of the ad hoc meeting.

20. GRSG considered proposals to align the transitional provisions of the 02 series of amendments to the Regulation with the general guidelines adopted in TRANS/WP.29/1044 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/33 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/34). GRSG adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2011/34, as amended below, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2012 session, as draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 58:

Paragraph 31.5., amend to read:
“31.5. As from 48 months …

• (a) … meets the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments;

• (b) … meet the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments."

57. Agenda item 4.7.2, UN Regulation No. 58, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/107,

Paragraph 2.3., correct to read

“2.3. Any vehicle in one of the categories M1, M2, M3, N1, O1 or O2 shall be deemed …

• Where there is more than one rear axle, the width to be considered is that of the widest.
• The requirements of paragraphs 2.3.(b) and 2.3.(c) above shall be satisfied at least on a line:
• (i) At a distance of not more than 450 mm from the rear extremity of the vehicle;
• (ii) That may have interruptions totalling not more than 200 mm."

Paragraph 24.1., correct to read:

“24.1. If the vehicle submitted for approval pursuant to this Regulation meets the
requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or paragraph 25 and has been tested following the conditions set out in paragraph 2.2., approval of that vehicle type shall be granted.”

Paragraph 31.5., correct to read:

“31.5. As from 48 months …

• (a) … meets the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments;
• (b) ….the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments.
  …."

Annex 3, correct to read:

"Annex 3

2/ Strike out what does not apply."

48. The Chair of GRRF stressed the need for clarifying the referencing of UN Regulations (WP.29-155-05). He underlined that both, static and dynamic, references were currently used in UN Regulations. He suggested considering this issue in detail with the Chairs of the other Working Parties. The Chair of GRPE welcomed this initiative and suggested also adding this subject to the agenda of the forthcoming sessions of GRSP, GRPE and GRB for detailed consideration. The representatives of CLEPA and OICA underlined the importance of this matter, with the representative of OICA indicating that this issue was reviewed in detail internally, resulting in the recommendation that a case by case approach would be appropriate in view of the difficulty of defining a universal solution. WP.29 agreed to resume consideration of this issue at its next session in March 2012 and to keep WP.29-155-05 on the agenda as a reference document.

49. The Chair of GRRF also added that the reproduction of parts of standards and the use of references in UN Regulations to private standards should be clarified, especially for those standards which were not freely available (WP.29-155-33). The representative of the United States of America stated that in references to private standards in the US legislation, these standards have to be made freely available. The World Forum agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session and invited the secretariat to contact the different standardization bodies for their positions.

70. Referring to WP.29-155-05 and WP.29-155-33, the GRPE Chair illustrated the issues on referencing of UN Regulations and standards with documents, inviting experts from GRPE to provide him with any information or opinion.

52. The Chair of GRRF reported that he, in consultation with the Chairs of the other GRs, had decided to use static or dynamic references to other UN Regulations on a case by case basis. WP.29 endorsed this approach.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

It was understood, although there was no documentation available at the time, that the European Commission would table an amendment to the proposed Supplement 9 to the 11 Series of Amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94) which was on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29/AC.1. The amendment, which had been proposed by Germany, would replace “system manufacturer” with “vehicle manufacturer”.

In considering this proposal it was concluded that this would be a complete change in the fundamental philosophy behind the work of the informal working group and could, therefore, not be supported.

The group had the understanding that a vehicle manufacturer could also be a vehicle stability function system supplier, i.e. the vehicle manufacturer designs and manufacturers the vehicle stability function. However, it was considered that this may not be clear to people who are not participating in the informal group. Therefore, document AMEVSC-07-05e was created in which all the references to system manufacturer in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 were reviewed and either vehicle manufacturer was added – so as to read “vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer” – or system manufacturer was deleted when it was not necessary to specify vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer.

Following the meeting, the AMEVSC chairman made the views of the group (including AMEVSC-07-05e) known to the European Commission. In response the European Commission advised that the proposal would stand as it was a TCMV decision. Subsequently document WP.29-155-06 was presented by the European Commission.

Note: In response to WP.29-155-06, CLEPA presented documents WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 at the 155th session of WP.29/AC.1. At WP.29 no decision was reached and the proposed supplement was referred back to GRRF for further discussed at the February 2012 session of GRRF.

11. GRRF noted the outcome of the discussion in WP.29 on dynamic/static references to other UN Regulations and private standards (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paras. 48 and 49). GRRF endorsed the recommendation to proceed on a case by case approach awaiting a final decision by WP.29 at one of its next sessions.

12. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1 clarifying the levels of braking performance of vehicles in relation with different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, CLEPA presented GRRF-72-27 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1. GRRF adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their June 2012 sessions, as Supplement 14 to Regulation No. 13-H.

13. Recalling the purpose of WP.29-155-19, the expert from EC withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9. As a consequence, the expert from CLEPA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/7. Nevertheless, the experts from Germany, Japan and OICA expressed their support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9 and their preference to keep it on the agenda. The Chair concluded that the item should be revisited, together with the related document from CLEPA (GRRF-72-17), at the next GRRF session on the basis of a new proposal, if available.

14. The expert from Belgium reported on the progress (GRRF-72-08) made by the informal group on Alternative Method Electronic Vehicle Stability Control (AMEVSC). On behalf of informal group, the expert from CLEPA proposed to use simulation tools to prove compliance of the vehicle stability function (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/2). The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-72-22 on some weaknesses in the current simulation tool. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to refer the proposal back to the informal group. GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by the informal group, taking into account GRRF-72-17, GRRF-72-22 and the comments received. GRRF noted that the informal meeting was scheduled to be held in Brussels (at CLEPA offices) on 10-11 May 2012.

15. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/11 and GRRF-72-28 on the introduction of an electro-hydraulic transmission for electrical brake systems. GRRF noted some concerns and agreed to resume the discussion on this subject to the next session of GRRF on the basis a revised proposal, if available.

80. The World Forum noted the amendments to the status of the Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1073/Rev.4/Amend.2) as well as the status of the priorities and items on which the exchange of views should continue (WP.29–155–07).

81. The World Forum agreed that agenda items 5.2 to 5.5 should be considered by the Executive Committee AC.3.

11. The provisional annotated agenda for the session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1092) was adopted with the amendments noted below:

(a) Addition and amendments of agenda items:
4.2.1. Guidance requested by the Chair of GRRF regarding references to UN Regulations;
4.2.2. Guidance requested by the Chairs of GRRF and GRE regarding the reference and transposition of private standards;
4.14.1. Proposal for Corrigendum 1 to Revision 2 to Regulation No. 13-H (Brakes of M1and N1 vehicles) document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/153;
8.11. Proposal to develop a new Regulation on recyclability of M1 and N1 vehicles;
8.12. Proposal for amendments to the Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure of WP.29;
8.13. United Nations Development Account (UNDA) project.
8.14. Tribute to Ms. Enonler and Mr. Van West.
13.4. Proposal for a new annex to the Special Resolution No. 1 (S.R.1) document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127;
17.5. Quiet Road Transport Vehicles.

(b) Additions and corrections to document references for items:
3.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/65/Corr.1;
4.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/152;
4.6.2. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/150;
4.6.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/151;
4.6.5. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1;
4.7.5. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/110/Corr.1;
4.10.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94/Amend.1;
4.12.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/137/Corr.1;
4.15.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1;
4.16.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1

(c) Items or documents postponed for a later session:
4.15.1. to 4.16.1.

(d) The list of informal documents is reproduced in Annex I to this report.

27. GRSG noted that the draft Global Technical Regulation (GTR) on motorcycle controls, tell-tales and indicators and the report were on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141). The expert from IMMA presented GRSG-101-15 and GRSG-101-16 proposing editorial corrections to the text of the draft GTR and the report. GRSG agreed on both proposals and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as Corrigenda to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141.

[Note by the secretariat: see informal documents WP.29-155-09 and WP.29-155-10.]

115. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed draft UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140, as amended by WP.29-155-09, as reproduced in Annex III to this report) was established in the UN Global Registry on 17 November 2011 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, People’s Republic of China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

116. The technical report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141, amended by WP.29-155-10 as reproduced in Annex III to this report) and the adopted proposal for the development of the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/22) would be appended to the established amendment to the UN GTR. The representative of IMMA emphasized the importance of adopting the UN GTR for real global harmonization

27. GRSG noted that the draft Global Technical Regulation (GTR) on motorcycle controls, tell-tales and indicators and the report were on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141). The expert from IMMA presented GRSG-101-15 and GRSG-101-16 proposing editorial corrections to the text of the draft GTR and the report. GRSG agreed on both proposals and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2011 session, as Corrigenda to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141.

[Note by the secretariat: see informal documents WP.29-155-09 and WP.29-155-10.]

115. Submitted for consideration and vote, the proposed draft UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/140, as amended by WP.29-155-09, as reproduced in Annex III to this report) was established in the UN Global Registry on 17 November 2011 by consensus vote of the following Contracting Parties present and voting: Australia, Canada, People’s Republic of China, European Union (voting for Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), India, Japan, Norway, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa and United States of America.

116. The technical report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/141, amended by WP.29-155-10 as reproduced in Annex III to this report) and the adopted proposal for the development of the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/22) would be appended to the established amendment to the UN GTR. The representative of IMMA emphasized the importance of adopting the UN GTR for real global harmonization

121. The representative of the US introduced the Heavy Duty National Program for greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty engines (WP.29-155-11) and a further programme for new fuel economy and environment labels for a new generation of vehicles (WP.29-155-12), both for inclusion in the Compendium of Candidate Global Technical Regulations. The representative of the Russian Federation welcomed the initiative and added that his government had started to consider a similar legislation.

122. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute informal documents WP.29-155-11 and WP.29-155-12 as official documents for consideration at the next session. The representative of the US would provide the secretariat with the text of the above-mentioned final rules to be listed in the Compendium.

121. The representative of the US introduced the Heavy Duty National Program for greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty engines (WP.29-155-11) and a further programme for new fuel economy and environment labels for a new generation of vehicles (WP.29-155-12), both for inclusion in the Compendium of Candidate Global Technical Regulations. The representative of the Russian Federation welcomed the initiative and added that his government had started to consider a similar legislation.

122. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute informal documents WP.29-155-11 and WP.29-155-12 as official documents for consideration at the next session. The representative of the US would provide the secretariat with the text of the above-mentioned final rules to be listed in the Compendium.

100. The secretariat of WP.1 introduced WP.29-155-14 containing a table for monitoring the actions of the Transport Division in the framework of the global plan for the UN decade of action for road safety. He invited the World Forum either to endorse the actions related to WP.29 or to propose modifications. The World Forum delegated the Chair, assisted by the secretariat, to take detailed consideration of the activities of WP.29 and to communicate either amendments to or endorsement of the document.

101. The World Forum agreed to continue consideration of WP.29-155-13 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/146 at its March 2012 session and invited the secretariat to update them, if necessary.

100. The secretariat of WP.1 introduced WP.29-155-14 containing a table for monitoring the actions of the Transport Division in the framework of the global plan for the UN decade of action for road safety. He invited the World Forum either to endorse the actions related to WP.29 or to propose modifications. The World Forum delegated the Chair, assisted by the secretariat, to take detailed consideration of the activities of WP.29 and to communicate either amendments to or endorsement of the document.

101. The World Forum agreed to continue consideration of WP.29-155-13 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/146 at its March 2012 session and invited the secretariat to update them, if necessary.

99. The GRPE Chair suggested introducing into R.E.3, a new annex containing key parameters on market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127). The secretariat proposed to also amend Annex 3 to take into account the accession of Albania (WP.29-155-15). The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127, as amended below:

• Annex 2, the title, correct to read:
• “Guidelines on measures ensuring the audibility of hybrid and electric vehicles”.

• Annex 3, second paragraph, amend to read:
• “1 for Germany, …, 53 for Thailand, 54 for Albania, 55 … .”.

90. The representative of India reported on the progress made by the EFV Task Force group during the last session in June 2011 (WP.29-155-16). He outlined the group’s decision to withdraw the original plan to develop a single evaluation concept for EFV and to freeze the activities of the EFV informal group related to the approach of a single score assessment. He sought WP.29s confirmation on that conclusion. He presented the group’s recommendation to develop a progress report listing innovative technologies and their advancements as well as the EFV implementation progress made since the first EFV conference in 2003. He added that the group had identified the need to develop uniform definitions for the new EFV technologies such as different stages of hybrid, electric, hydrogen, other gas powered or dual fuel vehicles. Such an activity could be undertaken in WP.29 with the involvement of different GR groups to develop uniform definitions for the new EFV vehicle technologies such as different stages of hybrid, electric, hydrogen or other gas powered or dual fuel vehicles.

91. WP.29 endorsed the outcome of the EFV Task Force. It was recommended that the progress report should be finalized in due time to become a basic document for exploring the potentials for future regulations at the next EFV Conference. WP.29 agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next sessions on the basis of a concrete document.

82. Mr. N. Koba, Director General for Engineering Affairs of the Road Transport Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan, presented the Japanese action plan for internationalization of the regulation and vehicle certification system (WP.29-155-17). The plan consisted of four pillars focused on: (i) the state-of-the-art technologies in regulations and international standards, (ii) the development of partnerships with other Asian countries, (iii) the establishment of an international whole vehicle type approval system and (iv) the enhancement resources in response to the globalization of regulation and certification system.

83. The representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina gave an overview on the vehicle type approval system carried out in his country (WP.29-155-36), based on best practices and information technologies.

84. Mr. A. Rakhmanov, Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Agricultural Machinery of the Russian Federation presented the governmental priorities and policies in his country (WP.29-155-39). He explained the key principles of the technical regulation concerning safety of wheeled vehicles and on the development of regulations in the Custom Union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation. He also added the efforts of his administration for future introduction of an emergency call system and its harmonization with the corresponding e-call system of the European Union, but he stressed that it was necessary to have the corresponding infrastructure.

85. The representative from South Africa informed WP.29 about the acting role of its delegation in promoting the use of UN Regulations by African countries and fostering their accession to the 1958 Agreement. He added that the Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations of South African Development Community (SADC), joined with the other regional bodies of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and East African Community (EAC) to be part of the Tripartite Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations. He said that the first meeting of this group was held in Kampala, Uganda on 4-5 July 2011 and that, although some nations were members of more than one of these regional bodies, the group counted a total of 26 country members. He informed WP.29 that he made a presentation that was for many participants a first introduction to the activities of WP.29 and he intended to revisit the subject at the next group meeting which would possibly be held in the first quarter of 2012. He mentioned the possibility that, in the future, if representative of member States of the Tripartite Group could not participate at WP.29 sessions, the regional bodies could consider being represented either by their own regional body (COMESA, EAC, SADC), or as a combined tripartite group. WP.29 expressed appreciation for the efforts made by the South African representative and suggested more frequent updates on the progress of these activities.

Flyer for the Conference on Environmentally Friendly Vehicles scheduled for 10-12 September 2012.

92. The representative of US announced the progress in organizing the fifth international EFV conference. She informed WP.29 that the conference with sponsorship including Canada, would be held in Baltimore (Maryland, US) on 10-12 September 2012. She invited all interested WP.29 delegates to attend the conference and, in preparation, requested representatives to share ideas and suggest potential speakers, noting the conference [theme]: “Driving the future today: Innovation, investment and opportunity”.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

It was understood, although there was no documentation available at the time, that the European Commission would table an amendment to the proposed Supplement 9 to the 11 Series of Amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94) which was on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29/AC.1. The amendment, which had been proposed by Germany, would replace “system manufacturer” with “vehicle manufacturer”.

In considering this proposal it was concluded that this would be a complete change in the fundamental philosophy behind the work of the informal working group and could, therefore, not be supported.

The group had the understanding that a vehicle manufacturer could also be a vehicle stability function system supplier, i.e. the vehicle manufacturer designs and manufacturers the vehicle stability function. However, it was considered that this may not be clear to people who are not participating in the informal group. Therefore, document AMEVSC-07-05e was created in which all the references to system manufacturer in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 were reviewed and either vehicle manufacturer was added – so as to read “vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer” – or system manufacturer was deleted when it was not necessary to specify vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer.

Following the meeting, the AMEVSC chairman made the views of the group (including AMEVSC-07-05e) known to the European Commission. In response the European Commission advised that the proposal would stand as it was a TCMV decision. Subsequently document WP.29-155-06 was presented by the European Commission.

Note: In response to WP.29-155-06, CLEPA presented documents WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 at the 155th session of WP.29/AC.1. At WP.29 no decision was reached and the proposed supplement was referred back to GRRF for further discussed at the February 2012 session of GRRF.

11. GRRF noted the outcome of the discussion in WP.29 on dynamic/static references to other UN Regulations and private standards (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paras. 48 and 49). GRRF endorsed the recommendation to proceed on a case by case approach awaiting a final decision by WP.29 at one of its next sessions.

12. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1 clarifying the levels of braking performance of vehicles in relation with different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, CLEPA presented GRRF-72-27 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1. GRRF adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their June 2012 sessions, as Supplement 14 to Regulation No. 13-H.

13. Recalling the purpose of WP.29-155-19, the expert from EC withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9. As a consequence, the expert from CLEPA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/7. Nevertheless, the experts from Germany, Japan and OICA expressed their support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9 and their preference to keep it on the agenda. The Chair concluded that the item should be revisited, together with the related document from CLEPA (GRRF-72-17), at the next GRRF session on the basis of a new proposal, if available.

14. The expert from Belgium reported on the progress (GRRF-72-08) made by the informal group on Alternative Method Electronic Vehicle Stability Control (AMEVSC). On behalf of informal group, the expert from CLEPA proposed to use simulation tools to prove compliance of the vehicle stability function (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/2). The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-72-22 on some weaknesses in the current simulation tool. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to refer the proposal back to the informal group. GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by the informal group, taking into account GRRF-72-17, GRRF-72-22 and the comments received. GRRF noted that the informal meeting was scheduled to be held in Brussels (at CLEPA offices) on 10-11 May 2012.

15. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/11 and GRRF-72-28 on the introduction of an electro-hydraulic transmission for electrical brake systems. GRRF noted some concerns and agreed to resume the discussion on this subject to the next session of GRRF on the basis a revised proposal, if available.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

It was understood, although there was no documentation available at the time, that the European Commission would table an amendment to the proposed Supplement 9 to the 11 Series of Amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94) which was on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29/AC.1. The amendment, which had been proposed by Germany, would replace “system manufacturer” with “vehicle manufacturer”.

In considering this proposal it was concluded that this would be a complete change in the fundamental philosophy behind the work of the informal working group and could, therefore, not be supported.

The group had the understanding that a vehicle manufacturer could also be a vehicle stability function system supplier, i.e. the vehicle manufacturer designs and manufacturers the vehicle stability function. However, it was considered that this may not be clear to people who are not participating in the informal group. Therefore, document AMEVSC-07-05e was created in which all the references to system manufacturer in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 were reviewed and either vehicle manufacturer was added – so as to read “vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer” – or system manufacturer was deleted when it was not necessary to specify vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer.

Following the meeting, the AMEVSC chairman made the views of the group (including AMEVSC-07-05e) known to the European Commission. In response the European Commission advised that the proposal would stand as it was a TCMV decision. Subsequently document WP.29-155-06 was presented by the European Commission.

Note: In response to WP.29-155-06, CLEPA presented documents WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 at the 155th session of WP.29/AC.1. At WP.29 no decision was reached and the proposed supplement was referred back to GRRF for further discussed at the February 2012 session of GRRF.

11. GRRF noted the outcome of the discussion in WP.29 on dynamic/static references to other UN Regulations and private standards (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paras. 48 and 49). GRRF endorsed the recommendation to proceed on a case by case approach awaiting a final decision by WP.29 at one of its next sessions.

12. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1 clarifying the levels of braking performance of vehicles in relation with different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, CLEPA presented GRRF-72-27 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1. GRRF adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their June 2012 sessions, as Supplement 14 to Regulation No. 13-H.

13. Recalling the purpose of WP.29-155-19, the expert from EC withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9. As a consequence, the expert from CLEPA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/7. Nevertheless, the experts from Germany, Japan and OICA expressed their support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9 and their preference to keep it on the agenda. The Chair concluded that the item should be revisited, together with the related document from CLEPA (GRRF-72-17), at the next GRRF session on the basis of a new proposal, if available.

14. The expert from Belgium reported on the progress (GRRF-72-08) made by the informal group on Alternative Method Electronic Vehicle Stability Control (AMEVSC). On behalf of informal group, the expert from CLEPA proposed to use simulation tools to prove compliance of the vehicle stability function (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/2). The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-72-22 on some weaknesses in the current simulation tool. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to refer the proposal back to the informal group. GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by the informal group, taking into account GRRF-72-17, GRRF-72-22 and the comments received. GRRF noted that the informal meeting was scheduled to be held in Brussels (at CLEPA offices) on 10-11 May 2012.

15. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/11 and GRRF-72-28 on the introduction of an electro-hydraulic transmission for electrical brake systems. GRRF noted some concerns and agreed to resume the discussion on this subject to the next session of GRRF on the basis a revised proposal, if available.

99. The GRPE Chair suggested introducing into R.E.3, a new annex containing key parameters on market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127). The secretariat proposed to also amend Annex 3 to take into account the accession of Albania (WP.29-155-15). The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127, as amended below:

• Annex 2, the title, correct to read:
• “Guidelines on measures ensuring the audibility of hybrid and electric vehicles”.

• Annex 3, second paragraph, amend to read:
• “1 for Germany, …, 53 for Thailand, 54 for Albania, 55 … .”.

58. Agenda item 4.7.3, Regulation No. 67, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/108, Paragraphs 2.20 and 2.21, should be deleted.

Paragraph 17.11.5, correct to read:
“17.11.5. Vehicles with more than one fuel system shall have a fuel selection system.”

Paragraph 17.11.6, should be deleted.

26. The secretariat presented the “UNECE roadmap on ITS – 20 global actions to deploy ITS 2012-2020” (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114 and WP.29-155-24), part of the UNECE strategy package on ITS. The package consisted of:

• (a) A background paper with the primary objective of sharing information (including best practices) and raising awareness about the values that ITS solutions could deliver;
• (b) A strategic note identifying the main gaps and impediments for a broader use and faster dissemination of ITS applications; and
• (c) A roadmap outlining the areas and tasks that UNECE could undertake either as a continuation of on-going tasks or as new initiatives.

27. Furthermore, the secretariat informed WP.29 that the roadmap had been presented to and endorsed by the Working Party on Transport Trends and Economics (WP.5), the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety (WP.1), the Working Party on Inland Water Transport (SC.3), the Working Party on Road Transport (SC.1), the Working Party on Intermodal Transport and Logistics (WP.24), the Working Party on Rail Transport (SC.2) and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP.15) before final submission to and adoption by the seventy-fourth session of the Inland Transport Committee (ITC). Implementation and its impact would be regularly monitored and the secretariat would report to its governing bodies. Therefore, monitoring indicators would be developed and agreed on. The secretariat informed WP.29 that the policy segment of the seventy-fourth session of the ITC would be dedicated to ITS. This event would take place in Geneva on 28 February 2012 from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. The World Forum endorsed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114.

28. The representative of OICA requested availability of the feedback received by the secretariat during the consultation process of the strategic note on the Transport Division website.

29. The representative of the EU reported that WP.29-155-25 contained the framework for ITS deployment in Europe.

30. The representative of the United States of America announced the ongoing research on vehicle to vehicle communication that could result in a decision by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2013, to take further action on either research or take steps to approach the rulemaking process within the United States. The representative of Japan informed WP.29 that the ITS informal group would meet in conjunction with the March 2012 session of WP.29.

26. The secretariat presented the “UNECE roadmap on ITS – 20 global actions to deploy ITS 2012-2020” (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114 and WP.29-155-24), part of the UNECE strategy package on ITS. The package consisted of:

• (a) A background paper with the primary objective of sharing information (including best practices) and raising awareness about the values that ITS solutions could deliver;
• (b) A strategic note identifying the main gaps and impediments for a broader use and faster dissemination of ITS applications; and
• (c) A roadmap outlining the areas and tasks that UNECE could undertake either as a continuation of on-going tasks or as new initiatives.

27. Furthermore, the secretariat informed WP.29 that the roadmap had been presented to and endorsed by the Working Party on Transport Trends and Economics (WP.5), the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety (WP.1), the Working Party on Inland Water Transport (SC.3), the Working Party on Road Transport (SC.1), the Working Party on Intermodal Transport and Logistics (WP.24), the Working Party on Rail Transport (SC.2) and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP.15) before final submission to and adoption by the seventy-fourth session of the Inland Transport Committee (ITC). Implementation and its impact would be regularly monitored and the secretariat would report to its governing bodies. Therefore, monitoring indicators would be developed and agreed on. The secretariat informed WP.29 that the policy segment of the seventy-fourth session of the ITC would be dedicated to ITS. This event would take place in Geneva on 28 February 2012 from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. The World Forum endorsed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114.

28. The representative of OICA requested availability of the feedback received by the secretariat during the consultation process of the strategic note on the Transport Division website.

29. The representative of the EU reported that WP.29-155-25 contained the framework for ITS deployment in Europe.

30. The representative of the United States of America announced the ongoing research on vehicle to vehicle communication that could result in a decision by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2013, to take further action on either research or take steps to approach the rulemaking process within the United States. The representative of Japan informed WP.29 that the ITS informal group would meet in conjunction with the March 2012 session of WP.29.

104. The World Forum agreed, in principle, with the proposal by OICA to initiate the work to a new UN Regulation on recyclability of M1 and N1 vehicles to be annexed to the 1958 Agreement. WP.29 invited the representative of OICA to elaborate a detailed proposal for consideration at the March 2012 session. The representative of Japan recommended verifying if this proposal was covered by the scope of the 1958 Agreement.

68. The expert from OICA introduced WP.29-155-26, proposing to develop a new UN Regulation on recyclability of vehicles, following the development of legislation on the end-of-life of vehicles concerning M1 and N1 vehicles in several areas of the world.

69. GRPE welcomed this initiative and agreed to consider further developments on this issue.

50. The representative of France as Chair of the informal group on IWVTA, informed the World Forum about the group’s progress during the recent sessions held in Tokyo and Paris. He underlined the need to amend the 1958 Agreement and that one of the aims of the group was to provide a basis for facilitating the accession of emerging economies to the Agreement. The representative of Japan outlined the inventory for the review of the 1958 Agreement and a possible road map (WP.29-155-32). Contracting Parties were invited to ensure broader participation in the work of the informal group. The representative of France proposed to the World Forum:

• • to endorse the road map and the inventory listed in WP.29-155-27.
• • to add to the agenda of the March 2012 session, an item specifying the way to involve GRs in developing the IWVTA concept.
• • to extend the informal group’s mandate in order to prepare a revision of the 1958 Agreement, including a report to WP.29 for its March 2013 session.

In addition, he raised two questions for answers from WP.29 at its March 2012 session:

• • how to keep previous series of amendments of the UN Regulations available for the CPs and emerging countries desiring to use them.
• • how to add in the Agreement, a new administrative disposition which should apply to all CPs but be decided and amended by the Administrative Committee AC.1 by unanimity of present and voting CPs.

The World Forum endorsed these proposals.

Technical Secretary illustrated the outline of the document “Proposal for candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA and the guideline for GRs to review technical regulations applicable to IWVTA” (IWVTA-09-04) and introduced comments submitted by GR Chairpersons on the document.

Germany recommended that IWVTA Informal Group should coordinate and consolidate GR activities and report to WP.29 because it would not be effective for each GR to approach WP.29 with different positions on various issues. Germany also stated the necessity of a special meeting attended by GR Chairpersons and IWVTA Informal Group to discuss the guideline issues and to clarify open questions, which could be held on Thursday afternoon of WP.29 session.

The Chairman stated that it would be difficult to hold such a meeting in June because Enforcement Informal Group meeting is scheduled on the afternoon of June 28 (Thursday).

Germany replied that Thursday afternoon of November WP.29 session would be appropriate for the meeting because GRRF and GRB do not have meetings until September.

Japan explained about “IWVTA ambassador” which was new to the IWVTA Informal Group. Japan suggested that CPs attending IWVTA Informal meetings should proactively consider becoming IWVTA ambassadors because it would play an important role of liaison between GRs and IWVTA Informal Group.

OICA supported the proposal of Germany and added that a special meeting attended by GR Chairpersons and IWVTA Informal Group should be held periodically.

OICA proposed to remove items for individual unit such as headlamp from the candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA. OICA also proposed to add consideration of the possibility of virtual testing to the reviewing points by GRs.

UK stated that it would be natural for the industry to pursue virtual testing but it would be difficult for GR to forward it because virtual testing has uncertainties.

EC stated that basic concept for virtual testing should be placed in “Placeholder” and individual cases should be considered at each GR.

OICA agreed with EC on the approach to forward virtual testing.

Germany pointed out the importance to communicate with GRs via IWVTA Ambassador because it would be difficult for GRs to understand the guideline only through papers.

The Chairman supported the proposal by Germany because direct report to AC1 from GR might cause some confusion.

EC stated that it was legitimate for IWVTA Informal Group to update and summarize the progress of each GR in reviewing IWVTA technical regulations at IWVTA Informal meeting and report it to WP.29 to be held in the following week, which enabling us to take a consistent approach to WP.29.

Japan asked OICA its intention to raise the issue of virtual testing. More specifically, Japan asked, if OICA intends to offer another new proposal regarding virtual testing since the inventory (WP.29-155-27) already includes virtual testing as main issues.

OICA replied that it would like the concept of virtual testing to be introduced in the placeholder of the revised 1958 Agreement and the possibility for virtual testing on a case-by-case basis to be considered by respective GR.

UK stated that there has been no agreement regarding virtual testing so far.

Next, IWVTA Informal Group discussed OICA comments on the flow chart for “Guideline for each GR to review technical regulations applicable to IWVTA” (IWVTA-09-10) and agreed to amend it as follows.

• Step 0: ”Approve the candidate of technical regulation items applicable to IWVTA” was amended to read as “Approve in principle the candidate of technical regulation items applicable to IWVTA”.
• -Step 1/2: “each GR reports to WP.29” was amended and read as “each GR reports to IWVTA Informal Group / IWVTA Informal Group coordinates and consolidates GR all activities and reports to WP.29”
• -Step 3: “Final consultation process between each GR and IWVTA Informal Group to reconsider the list of UN Regulations applicable to IWVTA, if necessary” was added.

Next, IWVTA Informal Group discussed OICA comments on the candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA (IWVTA-09-09).

OICA put remarks of “No” for the items whose contents were unclear, such as item “Running system”. OICA also stated that items for individual parts would be unnecessary for IWVTA.

EC asked whether OICA regarded NTA as necessary on top of IWVTA approval if OICA said “No” for the nationally applicable unique items.

OICA responded that eliminating NTA is ideal but in practice it is difficult. OICA suggested taking a three-step approach illustrated by the document IWVTA-04-10; start with Step1 allowing national requirements and NTA, evolve over time to Step 2 reducing national requirements, and finally reach Step 3 realizing complete mutual recognition of WVTA.

OICA added that OICA did not say parts requirements should not be considered, rather the relation between the parts requirements and their installation requirements should be reviewed and might be rearranged.

Japan stated that it was important to firstly put all national requirements on the agenda of this meeting even if some of them might be given lower priority. Then, if there were national requirements which were judged to be inappropriate as the international regulations in this meeting, those regulation could tentatively be removed from the candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA.

OICA had concern that the existence of ten or more items which has no UN Regulations might hinder the whole process to review technical regulations applicable to IWVTA. OICA suggested that items having no UN Regulations should be considered at a later stage.

EC proposed to prioritize the candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA.

Germany stated that adding national requirements to technical regulations applicable to IWVTA has lower priority.

The Chairman asked the meaning of “No” expressed in OICA comments; second priority or elimination?

OICA responded that “No” meant the necessity of the item was unclear. OICA did not request to eliminate the items with the remarks “No” right away. Rather, OICA would like GR members to take OICA comments into consideration in reviewing technical regulations applicable to IWVTA.

Japan stated the issue of reproduction and reference to private standards in UN Regulations should also be considered.

CLEPA pointed out eliminating parts requirements might lead to a loophole in IWVTA.
OICA replied that the loophole would be prevented by stipulating the necessity of type approval on parts in the provision of installation requirements such as R48.

EC suggested that a remark “covered by R48” should be added to the note for the lamp unit items.

In conclusion IWVTA Informal Group agreed, in principle, to report the document IWVTA-09-04 to WP29 for its consideration with a note saying the candidate items for technical regulations applicable to IWVTA would be prioritized later and reported to WP.29 at its June session.

The Russian Federation representative, WP29 Chairman, Mr. B. Kisulenko informed informal group about the new Custom Union Regulation on Motor Vehicle Safety, which was adopted in December 2011 and will enter into force from 1.01.2015 for the Russian Federation, Belorussia and Kazakhstan. This Regulation is based on Russian Regulation on Motor Vehicle Safety, and also uses ECE UN Regulation and GTRs as normative references. After 1.01.2015 no national legislation in the Russian Federation, Belorussia and Kazakhstan for motor vehicles will exist.

[The meeting schedule was discussed before moving to agenda item 6]
Japan proposed to hold kickoff meetings of the two Sub-groups on May 23-24 in Tokyo. However, it was made clear that the week of May 21 falls on GRSG meetings.

IWVTA Informal Group agreed on the meeting schedule as follows.

• -June 20 (Wednesday) at OICA in Paris: the 1st Sub-group meeting to draft the revision of the 1958 Agreement
• -June 21 (Thursday) at OICA in Paris: the 1st Sub-group meeting to draft UN R0
• -June 22 (Friday) at OICA in Paris: the 10th IWVTA Informal meeting
• -September 26* (Wednesday) at European Commission in Brussels: the 2nd Sub-group meeting to draft the revision of the 1958 Agreement
• - September 27* (Thursday) at European Commission in Brussels: the 2nd Sub-group meeting to draft UN R0
• -November 7 (Wednesday) at OICA in Paris: the 3rd Sub-group meeting to draft the revision of the 1958 Agreement
• - November 8 (Thursday) at OICA in Paris: the 3rd Sub-group meeting to draft UN R0
• - November 9 (Friday) at OICA in Paris: the 11th IWVTA Informal meeting

Note: At the 9th IWVTA Informal meeting, it was decided to hold September meeting on 25 and 26. However, the meeting dates have been shifted to 26 and 27 due to the availability of a conference room in EC.

54. Under agenda item 4.6.2, UN Regulation No. 19 document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/150, paragraph 14.2. for Supplement 3, read Supplement 2.

52. The World Forum noted the good progress made by the informal working group on DETA. The informal working group sought the advice of WP.29 on a number of issues (WP.29-155-31) at the March 2012 session. In this respect, the Chair of DETA announced the intention of the group to submit a detailed roadmap for consideration by WP.29. The World Forum requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-155-31 with an official symbol.

50. The representative of France as Chair of the informal group on IWVTA, informed the World Forum about the group’s progress during the recent sessions held in Tokyo and Paris. He underlined the need to amend the 1958 Agreement and that one of the aims of the group was to provide a basis for facilitating the accession of emerging economies to the Agreement. The representative of Japan outlined the inventory for the review of the 1958 Agreement and a possible road map (WP.29-155-32). Contracting Parties were invited to ensure broader participation in the work of the informal group. The representative of France proposed to the World Forum:

• • to endorse the road map and the inventory listed in WP.29-155-27.
• • to add to the agenda of the March 2012 session, an item specifying the way to involve GRs in developing the IWVTA concept.
• • to extend the informal group’s mandate in order to prepare a revision of the 1958 Agreement, including a report to WP.29 for its March 2013 session.

In addition, he raised two questions for answers from WP.29 at its March 2012 session:

• • how to keep previous series of amendments of the UN Regulations available for the CPs and emerging countries desiring to use them.
• • how to add in the Agreement, a new administrative disposition which should apply to all CPs but be decided and amended by the Administrative Committee AC.1 by unanimity of present and voting CPs.

The World Forum endorsed these proposals.

48. The Chair of GRRF stressed the need for clarifying the referencing of UN Regulations (WP.29-155-05). He underlined that both, static and dynamic, references were currently used in UN Regulations. He suggested considering this issue in detail with the Chairs of the other Working Parties. The Chair of GRPE welcomed this initiative and suggested also adding this subject to the agenda of the forthcoming sessions of GRSP, GRPE and GRB for detailed consideration. The representatives of CLEPA and OICA underlined the importance of this matter, with the representative of OICA indicating that this issue was reviewed in detail internally, resulting in the recommendation that a case by case approach would be appropriate in view of the difficulty of defining a universal solution. WP.29 agreed to resume consideration of this issue at its next session in March 2012 and to keep WP.29-155-05 on the agenda as a reference document.

49. The Chair of GRRF also added that the reproduction of parts of standards and the use of references in UN Regulations to private standards should be clarified, especially for those standards which were not freely available (WP.29-155-33). The representative of the United States of America stated that in references to private standards in the US legislation, these standards have to be made freely available. The World Forum agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session and invited the secretariat to contact the different standardization bodies for their positions.

70. Referring to WP.29-155-05 and WP.29-155-33, the GRPE Chair illustrated the issues on referencing of UN Regulations and standards with documents, inviting experts from GRPE to provide him with any information or opinion.

105. The Chair of the World Forum presented a proposal for amendments to its Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure (WP.29-155-34). It was agreed to continue consideration of this proposal at the March 2012 session, on the basis of an official proposal to be prepared by the secretariat.

129. The representative of Germany informed AC.3 about the ongoing activities of the informal group on UN GTR No. 9 Phase II, to solve the pending issues for the incorporation of the flexible legform impactor (Flex-PLI) in the Phase II of the UN GTR No. 9 and in the draft UN Regulation on pedestrian safety (WP.29-155-35). He announced that the first meeting of the informal group was planned to be held on 1 and 2 December 2011 tostart (i) the technical discussion, (ii) to finalize the draft terms of references and (iii) the work plan for submission to the December 2011 session of GRSP.

130. AC.3 agreed to develop an amendment to the UN GTR No. 9 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/148) sponsored by the Netherlands. The secretariat was requested to prepare a corresponding AC.3 document and to transmit it to GRSP for consideration.

82. Mr. N. Koba, Director General for Engineering Affairs of the Road Transport Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan, presented the Japanese action plan for internationalization of the regulation and vehicle certification system (WP.29-155-17). The plan consisted of four pillars focused on: (i) the state-of-the-art technologies in regulations and international standards, (ii) the development of partnerships with other Asian countries, (iii) the establishment of an international whole vehicle type approval system and (iv) the enhancement resources in response to the globalization of regulation and certification system.

83. The representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina gave an overview on the vehicle type approval system carried out in his country (WP.29-155-36), based on best practices and information technologies.

84. Mr. A. Rakhmanov, Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Agricultural Machinery of the Russian Federation presented the governmental priorities and policies in his country (WP.29-155-39). He explained the key principles of the technical regulation concerning safety of wheeled vehicles and on the development of regulations in the Custom Union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation. He also added the efforts of his administration for future introduction of an emergency call system and its harmonization with the corresponding e-call system of the European Union, but he stressed that it was necessary to have the corresponding infrastructure.

85. The representative from South Africa informed WP.29 about the acting role of its delegation in promoting the use of UN Regulations by African countries and fostering their accession to the 1958 Agreement. He added that the Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations of South African Development Community (SADC), joined with the other regional bodies of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and East African Community (EAC) to be part of the Tripartite Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations. He said that the first meeting of this group was held in Kampala, Uganda on 4-5 July 2011 and that, although some nations were members of more than one of these regional bodies, the group counted a total of 26 country members. He informed WP.29 that he made a presentation that was for many participants a first introduction to the activities of WP.29 and he intended to revisit the subject at the next group meeting which would possibly be held in the first quarter of 2012. He mentioned the possibility that, in the future, if representative of member States of the Tripartite Group could not participate at WP.29 sessions, the regional bodies could consider being represented either by their own regional body (COMESA, EAC, SADC), or as a combined tripartite group. WP.29 expressed appreciation for the efforts made by the South African representative and suggested more frequent updates on the progress of these activities.

51. The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/152, WP.29-155-03 and WP.29-155-37. The secretariat was requested to issue them as a basic document for the drafting of UN Regulations, with an official symbol.

141. NHTSA Chief Council, Mr. K. Vincent, introduced a joint proposal by Japan, US and EU (WP.29-155-38) requesting the authorization for establishing two informal working groups that would address the safety and environmental requirements for electric vehicles and develop a UN GTR on electric vehicles. He complemented the request with a presentation (WP.29-155-43). The proposal received general support from AC.3. As a timeline, he proposed (i) March 2012 for the adoption of the authorization by AC.3, (ii) spring 2012 for the adoption of the terms of reference for each group, and (iii) 2014 as a possible date for the adoption of the UN GTR. The Chair of GRPE suggested considering the terms of reference of environmental requirements already at the next GRPE session, in January 2012. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-155-38 with an official symbol for its consideration at the March 2012 session.

82. Mr. N. Koba, Director General for Engineering Affairs of the Road Transport Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan, presented the Japanese action plan for internationalization of the regulation and vehicle certification system (WP.29-155-17). The plan consisted of four pillars focused on: (i) the state-of-the-art technologies in regulations and international standards, (ii) the development of partnerships with other Asian countries, (iii) the establishment of an international whole vehicle type approval system and (iv) the enhancement resources in response to the globalization of regulation and certification system.

83. The representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina gave an overview on the vehicle type approval system carried out in his country (WP.29-155-36), based on best practices and information technologies.

84. Mr. A. Rakhmanov, Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Agricultural Machinery of the Russian Federation presented the governmental priorities and policies in his country (WP.29-155-39). He explained the key principles of the technical regulation concerning safety of wheeled vehicles and on the development of regulations in the Custom Union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation. He also added the efforts of his administration for future introduction of an emergency call system and its harmonization with the corresponding e-call system of the European Union, but he stressed that it was necessary to have the corresponding infrastructure.

85. The representative from South Africa informed WP.29 about the acting role of its delegation in promoting the use of UN Regulations by African countries and fostering their accession to the 1958 Agreement. He added that the Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations of South African Development Community (SADC), joined with the other regional bodies of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and East African Community (EAC) to be part of the Tripartite Group on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations. He said that the first meeting of this group was held in Kampala, Uganda on 4-5 July 2011 and that, although some nations were members of more than one of these regional bodies, the group counted a total of 26 country members. He informed WP.29 that he made a presentation that was for many participants a first introduction to the activities of WP.29 and he intended to revisit the subject at the next group meeting which would possibly be held in the first quarter of 2012. He mentioned the possibility that, in the future, if representative of member States of the Tripartite Group could not participate at WP.29 sessions, the regional bodies could consider being represented either by their own regional body (COMESA, EAC, SADC), or as a combined tripartite group. WP.29 expressed appreciation for the efforts made by the South African representative and suggested more frequent updates on the progress of these activities.

128. The Chair of the informal group on Phase II of UN GTR No. 7, introduced the third status report of the informal group (WP.29-155-40). He reported that the group had met seven times and that the last meeting was held in Washington, D.C. on 10 June 2011. He informed that the group had been addressing the head restraint height issue in two parts: (i) the procedure for measuring and determining effective height of the head restraint rather than physical height, and (ii) recommendations for the height requirement. He said good progress has been made on evaluating the rear impact dummy (BIORID II) device, although he explained that an issue relating reproducibility has been highlighted and that this was currently being investigated further. Notwithstanding unforeseeable delays, he underlined that the group had still been working to provide recommendations to GRSP at its 2012 sessions. He concluded that the next meetings of the informal group were scheduled in Geneva on 5-6 December 2011, prior to the GRSP session and in London during the week beginning 19 March 2012, in conjunction with the informal groups on harmonization of side impact dummies and Pole Side Impact. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-155-40 with an official symbol.

132. The Chair of the informal working group reported about the progress made by the group after 15 sessions. He added that the addition of technical issues (i.e. rolling resistance, modification of the scope) had resulted in a certain delay in the development of Phase I of the UN GTR (WP.29-155-41), which would have also an effect in the development of Phase II. He requested to extend the timeline for Phase I by 12 months, until June 2013 and added than an estimation for the completion of Phase II would be made at a later stage. AC.3 gave its consent for this extension.

140. The representative of the US introduced a proposal to develop a UN GTR on quiet road transport vehicles (WP.29-155-42) and indicated that his country and Japan had volunteered to be the technical sponsors, with the US chairing the informal working group under GRB. He indicated that the EU has been invited to co-sponsor the UN GTR. He proposed to update the proposal before submitting it for consideration at the March 2012 session of AC.3. The proposal, which would cover the presence, location, direction and operation of vehicles for visually impaired road users, received general support. The Chair of GRB stated that GRB expertise did cover all the above-mentioned matters with the exception of safety related matters. The representative of the US suggested that the group of GRB experts could be completed by adding safety experts from GRRF, GRSG and GRSP, if necessary. AC.3 agreed to inform the experts of these Working Parties about the development of the UN GTR, inviting them to participate at its sessions.

141. NHTSA Chief Council, Mr. K. Vincent, introduced a joint proposal by Japan, US and EU (WP.29-155-38) requesting the authorization for establishing two informal working groups that would address the safety and environmental requirements for electric vehicles and develop a UN GTR on electric vehicles. He complemented the request with a presentation (WP.29-155-43). The proposal received general support from AC.3. As a timeline, he proposed (i) March 2012 for the adoption of the authorization by AC.3, (ii) spring 2012 for the adoption of the terms of reference for each group, and (iii) 2014 as a possible date for the adoption of the UN GTR. The Chair of GRPE suggested considering the terms of reference of environmental requirements already at the next GRPE session, in January 2012. AC.3 requested the secretariat to distribute WP.29-155-38 with an official symbol for its consideration at the March 2012 session.

Excellent overview of WP.29 by Juan Ramos, Chief, Vehicle Regulations Section and Secretary to WP.29.

Guidelines on the scope, administrative provisions and alternative requirements in Regulations annexed to the 1958 Agreement.

The secretariat gave feedback from the meetings on the IWVTA that were held on 20 to 22 June in Paris. The proposals from DETA (DETA-15-03) were not discussed in the 2 working groups but only in the informal group IWVTA, which expressed its concerns on the proposed mandatory use of DETA for all approvals.

DETA took note of a proposal (DETA-15-06) from the chairman and the secretariat for a more limited amendment of the 1958 Agreement, which has been changed during the meeting according DETA-15-06rev.1. In addition the UN secretariat suggested to align the wording with document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1 and replace “ equipment” by “systems and components”.

After a discussion the DETA group concluded that the following approach could be suggested to IWVTA:

• - a limited amendments to article 5 of the Agreement stating that the notification concerning approvals should be according the procedures in a new appendix (placeholder) with administrative provisions;
• - the administrative provisions should give several options for the distribution of type approval data including the possibility of the use of a common secure electronic data exchange system (DETA),
• - the specification in each regulation which procedure might or has to be used (for Regulation 0 the DETA system) and
• - in cases where the Unique Identifier will be used or otherwise requested in a separate Regulation the DETA system shall be applied.

The ECE stressed this to be structured in the DETA meetings for showing the benefits of DETA.

To give further input to the next meetings of the two IWVTA subgroups all delegated will inform the secretariat before the end of August with topic that has to be dealt with in the relevant placeholder, which the chair and secretariat will convert into a proposal for IWVTA in September.

30. GRSG noted that the revised general guidelines for UN regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1) were now available on the UNECE website.

31. The GRSG Chair invited all experts to use this document when preparing future proposals for amendments especially with respect to transitional provisions.

27. The expert from OICA presented GRSG-103-26, proposing to introduce the concept of “revision of approvals” into some Regulations under the responsibility of GRSG, especially UN Regulations Nos. 18, 26, 34, 35, 43, 58 and 61. GRSG welcomed the proposal and agreed to give a detailed consideration at its next session in April 2013. The expert from France stated that the provisions proposed for UN Regulations Nos. 26 and 61 could be removed from GRSG-103-26 in the event that the World Forum adopts, at its forthcoming session in November 2012, documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/86 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/89. The secretariat was requested to distribute GRSG-103-26 with an official symbol, taking into account the revised general guidelines for UN regulatory procedures (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1).

53. The Secretary to AC.1 reported on the progress in preparing Revision 3 of 1958 Agreement, including UN Regulation No. 0 on IWTA (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/53 and WP.29-162-04), as well as the proposed revised guidelines for supplements and series of amendments to UN Regulations (WP.29-162-18) whose main elements are as follows:

a) Contracting Parties may apply former versions of UN Regulations, “engraved in stone”;

b) establish common date (e.g. 1 September each year) of entry into force of new series of amendments to UN Regulations;

c) only one new series of amendments per year would be allowed;

d) in case of several series of amendments in force, for every supplement the respective GR and WP.29 should indicate the series of amendments it refers to. The secretariat should prepare separate documents for each series of amendments for adoption by WP.29 and AC.1;

f) the guidelines for transitional provisions established by WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1) would be amended accordingly.

54. GRE took note of the above information and expressed no objections to setting the common annual date of entry into force of new series of amendments on 1 September.

39. The IWVTA Ambassador reported on the progress made by the IWG on IWVTA and the availability of the draft UN Regulation No. 0 (WP.29-162-04). He highlighted the ongoing discussion on the relevant content of lists A and B for UN Regulation No. 0, noting that UN Regulation No. 85 was in list A and that both UN Regulation No. 101 and WLTP were listed in List B. He echoed the comments made by the Chair on WLTP (see para. 10 above).

40. The secretariat also reported on the progress made on draft Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/53) and referred to WP.29-162-12-Rev.1 as well as WP.29-162-18. He added that the draft Revision 3 of the Agreement included some new elements:

(a) Allowing Contracting Parties to grant type approvals according to former versions of UN Regulations;

(b) Triggering the mandatory application by Contracting Parties of new series of amendments to UN Regulations on a common commencement date (e.g. 1 September each year). These elements would permit to yearly collect into a single amendment to UN Regulation No. 0 all newly adopted amendments to existing UN Regulations and new UN Regulations;

41. The secretariat added that the Group was proposing to better follow the definitions of Supplements and series of amendments to ease the IWVTA process and that a set of amendments to a UN Regulation would only be permitted once a year. He concluded that guidelines for transitional provisions (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1) would be amended accordingly.

42. The GRPE Chair clarified that no further action was needed from GRPE at the moment.

9. The representative of Japan briefed AC.2 on the progress of the International Whole Vehicle Type Approval System (IWVTA) Group. OICA had submitted a formal proposal to revise paragraph 3 of the frozen text of the revision of the 1958 Agreement. After discussions, the Group had decided not to change the frozen text, but to address the concern of OICA in the revised guidance document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044 currently under development by the informal group. This issue would be revisited at the September meeting of Subgroup for the 1958 Agreement. The representative also briefed the Committee about the meeting of the Subgroup on UN Regulation No. 0. As a result of the discussions at their meeting, the small group on the definition of vehicle type agreed to introduce a new concept, ‘IWVTA type’ which would group vehicles of a type with the same level of conformity in one IWVTA type. The informal group on the Database for the Exchange of Type Approval (DETA) also agreed on a procedure to produce the relevant vehicle specific data for each vehicle.

54. The Chair of the informal group on IWVTA reported on the outcomes of the last meeting. He reported that OICA had made a formal proposal to revise paragraph 3 of the frozen text of the revision of the 1958 Agreement. After discussions, the group decided not to change the frozen text, but to address the concern of OICA in the revised guidance document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1 currently under development. This issue would be revisited at the September meeting of Subgroup for the 1958 Agreement. The representative of OICA clarified he had withdrawn his proposals so as not to risk delaying the final decision on the revision of the 1958 Agreement in many Contracting Parties. The Chair of IWVTA also reported that the decision of the informal group not to amend the current frozen text was also in line with the request from the Russian Federation to keep the frozen text unchanged.

55. The representative of OICA stated that the procedure to grant extensions of existing approvals, following the entry into force of a new supplement, is already addressed by the General Guidelines for United Nations Regulatory Procedures and Transitional Provisions in UN Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.1, para. 30). However, the representative of the EU was not in the position to confirm this statement in a general manner, as it is deemed to require further discussion and interpretation in its specific context.

80. The World Forum noted the amendments to the status of the Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1073/Rev.4/Amend.2) as well as the status of the priorities and items on which the exchange of views should continue (WP.29–155–07).

81. The World Forum agreed that agenda items 5.2 to 5.5 should be considered by the Executive Committee AC.3.

86. The World Forum noted the amendments to the status of the Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1074/Rev.2/Amend.2). WP.29 noted the delay in issuing the Depositary Notification of Rule No. 2, due to the pending correction of an error in the French text of the Agreement.

11. The provisional annotated agenda for the session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1092) was adopted with the amendments noted below:

(a) Addition and amendments of agenda items:
4.2.1. Guidance requested by the Chair of GRRF regarding references to UN Regulations;
4.2.2. Guidance requested by the Chairs of GRRF and GRE regarding the reference and transposition of private standards;
4.14.1. Proposal for Corrigendum 1 to Revision 2 to Regulation No. 13-H (Brakes of M1and N1 vehicles) document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/153;
8.11. Proposal to develop a new Regulation on recyclability of M1 and N1 vehicles;
8.12. Proposal for amendments to the Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure of WP.29;
8.13. United Nations Development Account (UNDA) project.
8.14. Tribute to Ms. Enonler and Mr. Van West.
13.4. Proposal for a new annex to the Special Resolution No. 1 (S.R.1) document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127;
17.5. Quiet Road Transport Vehicles.

(b) Additions and corrections to document references for items:
3.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/65/Corr.1;
4.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/152;
4.6.2. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/150;
4.6.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/151;
4.6.5. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1;
4.7.5. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/110/Corr.1;
4.10.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94/Amend.1;
4.12.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/137/Corr.1;
4.15.4. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1;
4.16.1. Add ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1

(c) Items or documents postponed for a later session:
4.15.1. to 4.16.1.

(d) The list of informal documents is reproduced in Annex I to this report.

73. The GRPE Chair invited GRPE experts to provide him with comments on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093. He expressed his intention to identify a person in charge of the GRPE coordination activities related to the development of the International Whole Vehicle Type Approval (IWVTA) system, and invited experts to express their interest.

61. GRPE noted that WP.29 adopted the GRPE proposal to introduce into R.E.3 a new annex containing key parameters on market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127), including some editorial and administrative amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paragraph 99). The adoption of the introduction of a similar annex into S.R.1 is foreseen for the March session of WP.29/AC.3.

62. The Chair requested GRPE experts to voice their position on the need for further activities in this field. The expert from OICA recalled that, in the Organization’s position, the adopted guidelines needed to be considered as a first achievement. She expressed a preference to move forward with the addition of other parameters already discussed in the framework of this work, and she announced her intention to investigate whether there were still reservations from Contracting Parties.

63. The GRPE Chair invited the expert from OICA to work with interested Contracting Parties and, if appropriate, to develop a document for consideration at the next GRPE session.

66. The expert from the USA presented a proposal on the Terms of Reference for the informal working group on Electric Vehicles and Environment (EVE) (GRPE-63-13). On behalf of all the co-sponsors: the EU, Japan and the USA, he underlined the need to establish two informal working groups addressing the safety and environmental issues of electric vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/36), as approved by WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093) in its last session. He informed GRPE that the co-sponsors aim to: (a) exchange information on current and future regulatory requirements for electric vehicles in different markets; (b) minimize the differences between these regulatory requirements, with a view toward facilitating the development of vehicles to comply with such requirements; and (c) where possible, develop common requirements in the form of UN GTRs. He reminded GRPE that the informal group on EVE is expected to address environmental issues, while another informal group, established in the GRSP framework, should focus on Electric Vehicle Safety.

67. The GRPE Chair welcomed the proposal and invited GRPE experts that send their comments on the proposal to the expert from the USA (delaney.maureen@epa.gov). He concluded that there is no intention, at the moment, to develop a UN GTR on environmental issues (while such a development is likely in the case of safety). He stated the expectation that this initiative would reinforce the work undertaken on electric vehicles by other groups (like HDH and WLTP).

37. GRRF noted that the report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093 of the November 2011 session of WP.29 was available at the WP.29 website. The following major issues were highlighted (reference to the report of WP.29):

(a) Situation on the delays in publishing procedure of documentation (paras. 4 and 14);
(b) Availability of documentation in the three authentic languages (paras. 15-17);
(c) Instructions and rules of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) for Corrigenda (para. 19), specifying that Corrigenda should aim exclusively at correcting, without modifying the meaning or substance of the text of the treaty:

• (a) physical errors on typing, printing, spelling
• (b) lack of conformity of the treaty with the official records, and/or
• (c) lack of concordance between the texts of the different authentic languages.

(d) Recommendations from OLA that the terms “UN Regulations”, “UN Global Technical Regulations” and “UN Rules” could be used in administrative and informative documents, but not in legal documents (subject to a revision of the text of the 1958, 1997 and 1998 Agreements) (para. 20).

The informal document WP.29-158-12 was withdrawn by Russia.

The proposed regulatory text still includes bracketed text that was presented for review and guidance by the Contracting Parties. These passages were addressed in the 155th WP.29 session and resolved in paragraph 39 of the session report (document WP.29/1093). The request is for the Secretariat to make these changes prior to submitting the text to the UN Office of Legal Affairs for approval following the expected vote of the Forum to adopt the new regulation.

Proposal as stipulated above unanimously adopted.

The Chair recalled the background as follows:
2-step approach :

• • 1st step :
  • - N2 > 8 t
  • - M2 with non-hydraulic braking system
  • - M3 with non-hydraulic braking system
  • - N3 with non-hydraulic braking system

• • 2nd step:
  • More stringent criteria for the vehicles specified in step 1, + introduction of criteria for the following vehicle types and classes:
    • - N2≤8 t with hydraulic braking system
    • - M2 with hydraulic braking system
    • - M3 with hydraulic braking system

1st step and 2nd step for vehicles covered by step 1 finalized – expected to be adopted at
November 2012 session of WP29.

2nd step for vehicle types with no criteria in step 1 needs to be developed now – deadline for
decision: November 2013 session of WP29, i.e. 3 years in advance of the 2016 deadline.

The Chair concluded that this group will have to work fast and some additional meetings are
expected to be decided for the following months.

Corrections to the calendar of meetings of WP.29 and its subsidiary bodies for 2012 (Annex II of the report).

37. GRRF noted that the report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093 of the November 2011 session of WP.29 was available at the WP.29 website. The following major issues were highlighted (reference to the report of WP.29):

(a) Situation on the delays in publishing procedure of documentation (paras. 4 and 14);
(b) Availability of documentation in the three authentic languages (paras. 15-17);
(c) Instructions and rules of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) for Corrigenda (para. 19), specifying that Corrigenda should aim exclusively at correcting, without modifying the meaning or substance of the text of the treaty:

• (a) physical errors on typing, printing, spelling
• (b) lack of conformity of the treaty with the official records, and/or
• (c) lack of concordance between the texts of the different authentic languages.

(d) Recommendations from OLA that the terms “UN Regulations”, “UN Global Technical Regulations” and “UN Rules” could be used in administrative and informative documents, but not in legal documents (subject to a revision of the text of the 1958, 1997 and 1998 Agreements) (para. 20).

13. The World Forum noted the programme of work and availability of documentation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2012/1). WP.29 representatives were invited to revise the programme of work and to communicate to the secretariat any amendment deemed necessary.

14. The secretariat informed the World Forum about some corrections to the calendar of sessions for 2012 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093/Corr.3). The World Forum noted a draft calendar of sessions for the year 2013 (WP.29-156-01). The Chair of GRSG suggested advancing the April 2013 session by one week. The secretariat was invited to submit to WP.29 the final calendar of sessions for 2013 when Conference Services confirms the availability of meeting rooms.

15. The World Forum noted the list of informal working groups of the World Forum and its subsidiary Working Parties (WP.29-156-02). The Chair of GRB indicated that the informal working group on motorcycle noise emissions had concluded its work and that a new mandate was in the process of adoption for the informal working group on Quiet Road Transport Vehicles.

16. The World Forum adopted the instructions of the GRs for preparing Corrigenda (WP.29-156-03) as reproduced in Annex II to this report. The secretariat was requested to transmit the instructions to all subsidiary Working Parties.

37. GRRF noted that the report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093 of the November 2011 session of WP.29 was available at the WP.29 website. The following major issues were highlighted (reference to the report of WP.29):

(a) Situation on the delays in publishing procedure of documentation (paras. 4 and 14);
(b) Availability of documentation in the three authentic languages (paras. 15-17);
(c) Instructions and rules of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) for Corrigenda (para. 19), specifying that Corrigenda should aim exclusively at correcting, without modifying the meaning or substance of the text of the treaty:

• (a) physical errors on typing, printing, spelling
• (b) lack of conformity of the treaty with the official records, and/or
• (c) lack of concordance between the texts of the different authentic languages.

(d) Recommendations from OLA that the terms “UN Regulations”, “UN Global Technical Regulations” and “UN Rules” could be used in administrative and informative documents, but not in legal documents (subject to a revision of the text of the 1958, 1997 and 1998 Agreements) (para. 20).

37. GRRF noted that the report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093 of the November 2011 session of WP.29 was available at the WP.29 website. The following major issues were highlighted (reference to the report of WP.29):

(a) Situation on the delays in publishing procedure of documentation (paras. 4 and 14);
(b) Availability of documentation in the three authentic languages (paras. 15-17);
(c) Instructions and rules of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) for Corrigenda (para. 19), specifying that Corrigenda should aim exclusively at correcting, without modifying the meaning or substance of the text of the treaty:

• (a) physical errors on typing, printing, spelling
• (b) lack of conformity of the treaty with the official records, and/or
• (c) lack of concordance between the texts of the different authentic languages.

(d) Recommendations from OLA that the terms “UN Regulations”, “UN Global Technical Regulations” and “UN Rules” could be used in administrative and informative documents, but not in legal documents (subject to a revision of the text of the 1958, 1997 and 1998 Agreements) (para. 20).

25. The World Forum noted the calendar of sessions for the year 2012 (WP.29-154-16) as reproduced in Annex II to this report. The World Forum noted the programme of work and availability of documentation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/1/Rev.2). WP.29 representatives were requested to revise the programme of work and to communicate to the secretariat any amendment deemed necessary.

46. GRE noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/48/Rev.1, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/48 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/48/Add.1, could be adopted at the November 2011 session of WP.29 and that further amendments linked to the revision of the 1958 Agreement, presently discussed by the IWVTA group, could be incorporated in a second step. GRE agreed to remove this topic from the agenda.

51. The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/152, WP.29-155-03 and WP.29-155-37. The secretariat was requested to issue them as a basic document for the drafting of UN Regulations, with an official symbol.

This proposal was adopted with amendments at the 156th World Forum/WP.29 session.

3. GRRF focused its work on the text in square brackets in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 (Step 1– original version of the Regulation on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems) and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93 (Step 2–01 series of amendments to the Regulation), both on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29: Requirements for vehicles not equipped with pneumatic rear-axle suspension, requirements for N2 and M2 vehicles, requirements for vehicles not equipped with pneumatic braking and transitional provisions between step 1 and step 2.

4. The Chair of the informal group on Automatic Emergency Braking and Lane Departure Warning Systems (AEBS/LDWS) reported on the progress made by the informal group from the last GRRF session to the meeting held on 12 September 2011 in conjunction with the proper session of GRRF. He introduced GRRF-71-25 as the outcome of the discussion of the informal group. In particular, it was proposed to tackle, in the preamble of the Regulation, vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension. The expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 to add in paragraph 5.1. the possibility for an “optional” type-approval for vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension. The expert from Germany supported this proposal. The secretariat and the expert from EC were of the opinion that these vehicles were already tackled in the preamble (see above) and that the wording for paragraph 5.1. was confusing because by definition a UNECE Regulation was optional. Furthermore, it was not clear for the secretariat which requirements would apply to these vehicles. GRRF could not reach a final decision on this OICA proposal and agreed to let the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) decide whether an “optional” type-approval in paragraph 5.1. was appropriate for vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension.

5. The expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 replacing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/39 to exclude from the scope of the original version of the AEBS Regulation: N2 vehicles below 8 tons, M2 vehicles and vehicles not equipped with pneumatic braking. After discussion GRRF supported this proposal.

6. For the 01 series, the expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 to include all N2 and M2 vehicles in the scope of the Regulation. However, for N2 vehicles below 8 tons and M2 vehicles, it was proposed to set the limit values in Annex 3 at a later stage (before 1 November 2016), in order to give more time to GRRF to develop special requirements for these vehicles. GRRF supported this proposal but with the alternative wording proposed by the expert from EC in GRRF-71-26. GRRF committed itself to develop these requirements in the proposed timeframe.

7. With regard to the timing of the first warning mode for a moving target for collision avoidance requirements (i.e. cells E1 and E2 of the table in GRRF-70-06), GRRF recalled the preference by the expert from Germany, for 2 seconds specifically for legal reasons. However, since a majority of experts favoured 1.4 second, GRRF proposed to remove the square brackets from 1.4 seconds in the table in Annex 3 of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93. Since the requirements of rows 1 and 2 of ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93 became identical, GRRF agreed to merge the two rows of the table.

8. GRRF considered GRRF-71-16 (OICA) and GRRF-71-23 (EC) amending the transitional provisions of the 01 series of amendments. Since GRRF could not reach a final decision, GRRF requested the secretariat to draft the transitional provisions according to the objectives fixed in GRRF-71-30. After discussion, GRRF adopted GRRF-71-30-Rev.2 as reproduced in Annex II. One paragraph reproducing the text of the 1958 Agreement was left in square brackets for final decision by WP.29 at its November 2011 session.

9. In concluding the discussion, GRRF adopted GRRF-71-27-Rev.1 as reproduced in Annex II and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and the administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) as amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93, for consideration at their November 2011 sessions.

See below.

See below.

RUS assumed that the 01 series of amendments will probably be enforced later than the 00 series.

IND informed that the definition 2.3. was missing from document WP29/2011/92.

[This regulation proposal is complete and the EU intends to develop companion regulations for AEBS for lighter vehicles to be put forward in the future. Nonetheless, as is the case for lane departure warning systems, work remains to be completed towards establishing the legal basis for adoption of AEBS, including its potential conflict with the current interpretation of the 1968 Vienna Convention which requires a driver to be in complete control of a vehicle at all times. Therefore, the vote on this regulation is remanded to the June WP.29 session and likely will not be voted upon until the November 2012 WP.29 session.

Japan will introduce AEBS legislation into its national law from April 2012.]

As noted in paragraph 53 under agenda item 4.12 above, the World Forum agreed to defer consideration of this item to its next session. The EU has not yet completed its internal review of the proposed regulation, but strongly suspects it will be positioned for a positive vote in November.

The informal document WP.29-158-12 was withdrawn by Russia.

The proposed regulatory text still includes bracketed text that was presented for review and guidance by the Contracting Parties. These passages were addressed in the 155th WP.29 session and resolved in paragraph 39 of the session report (document WP.29/1093). The request is for the Secretariat to make these changes prior to submitting the text to the UN Office of Legal Affairs for approval following the expected vote of the Forum to adopt the new regulation.

Proposal as stipulated above unanimously adopted.

The experts were informed that WP29 at its 158th session of November 2012 adopted the four documents creating the new regulation on AEBS and its 1st series of amendments. This information can be found in p 26 of the official report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099:

The Chair was of the opinion that some clarification of the text adopted at WP29-158, p 3 of document WP29/2011/93/Amend.1, last sentence of the row 2, was necessary because an interpretation could be that the M3 vehicles with hydraulic braking would not have to fulfil the requirements of row 1 before the 2016 date mentioned in row 2. The authors of the text in cells B-H/2 indeed aimed the vehicles mentioned in cell A/2, but omitted to precise whether the vehicles addressed by the footnote 1 (Vehicles of category M3 with hydraulic braking system) would be subject to the same provisions.

OICA was of the opinion that the vehicles in footnote 1 are part of row2. Then the 1st date would be in Nov 2016. But the expert acknowledged that the wording is such that these vehicles could be approved already as from 2013.

CLEPA did not share the interpretation of OICA, and proposed to discuss this at a later stage.

The question of the true date of the Nov 2013 WP29 session was also raised, leading to the question whether the values should be adopted already at the June session of WP29.

The European Commission representative clarified that the intention is that, once the AEBS and LDWS UN Regulations have entered into force and the EU has acceded to them, UN regulations approvals would be accepted as an alternative to the EU approvals, taking into account that the EU legislation provides for a number of exemptions from the AEBS/LDWS carriage requirements. The representative of the European Commission informed that the European Commission Services were about to send a letter to the UN Secretariat to clarify the way how the EU intends to apply the new UN regulations, in response to the request of the WP.29 Secretariat to CPs to provide information on the application of the 01 series of the AEBS regulation (done, see Annex 1 attached).

Conclusion: items to be addressed at a later stage, to be added in the agenda for next meeting.

This proposal was adopted with amendments at the 156th World Forum/WP.29 session.

3. GRRF welcomed a presentation (GRRF-72-14) by the expert from Japan on their national enforcement of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). GRRF noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29 and its decision that the proposed text in square brackets of paragraph 12.2. be added as a footnote (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, para. 39).

4. GRRF noted the preference of WP.29 not to accept the alternative text relating to voluntary approval and to remove the text in square brackets of the alternative text proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1. The GRRF Chair reported that the work on a revised table of Annex 3 (defining performance requirements for vehicles of categories M2 and N2 ≤ 8 tonnes) would resume with the informal working group on AEBS.

[This regulation proposal is complete and the EU intends to develop companion regulations for AEBS for lighter vehicles to be put forward in the future. Nonetheless, as is the case for lane departure warning systems, work remains to be completed towards establishing the legal basis for adoption of AEBS, including its potential conflict with the current interpretation of the 1968 Vienna Convention which requires a driver to be in complete control of a vehicle at all times. Therefore, the vote on this regulation is remanded to the June WP.29 session and likely will not be voted upon until the November 2012 WP.29 session.

Japan will introduce AEBS legislation into its national law from April 2012.]

As noted in paragraph 53 under agenda item 4.12 above, the World Forum agreed to defer consideration of this item to its next session. The EU has not yet completed its internal review of the proposed regulation, but strongly suspects it will be positioned for a positive vote in November.

The informal document WP.29-158-12 was withdrawn by Russia.

The proposed regulatory text still includes bracketed text that was presented for review and guidance by the Contracting Parties. These passages were addressed in the 155th WP.29 session and resolved in paragraph 39 of the session report (document WP.29/1093). The request is for the Secretariat to make these changes prior to submitting the text to the UN Office of Legal Affairs for approval following the expected vote of the Forum to adopt the new regulation.

Proposal as stipulated above unanimously adopted.

3. The expert from the EC reported on the progress made by the informal group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). He presented an amendment to the Terms of Reference (AEBS-LDWS-01-07-Rev.3) necessary for completing the second step of work by the Informal Group. GRRF endorsed this amendment as reproduced in Annex II to this report. He reminded the Working Party that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2012 session of WP.29. He expected that the European Union would be in position to vote at that session.

4. GRRF noted that the informal group resumed its work on technical requirements on AEBS for vehicles of the category N2 below eight tons as well as the category M2. OICA presented their review of the issues associated with applying the technology to these vehicle classes noting the lack of real world experience (AEBS-LDWS-17-02-Rev.1). The expert from the EC reminded GRRF about the tight time line and the necessity to produce an informal document before the next session of GRRF to finish the work on time. GRRF noted the intention of the informal group to convene again in Paris on 7 December 2012 and in Geneva on 18 February 2013.

The experts were informed that WP29 at its 158th session of November 2012 adopted the four documents creating the new regulation on AEBS and its 1st series of amendments. This information can be found in p 26 of the official report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099:

The Chair was of the opinion that some clarification of the text adopted at WP29-158, p 3 of document WP29/2011/93/Amend.1, last sentence of the row 2, was necessary because an interpretation could be that the M3 vehicles with hydraulic braking would not have to fulfil the requirements of row 1 before the 2016 date mentioned in row 2. The authors of the text in cells B-H/2 indeed aimed the vehicles mentioned in cell A/2, but omitted to precise whether the vehicles addressed by the footnote 1 (Vehicles of category M3 with hydraulic braking system) would be subject to the same provisions.

OICA was of the opinion that the vehicles in footnote 1 are part of row2. Then the 1st date would be in Nov 2016. But the expert acknowledged that the wording is such that these vehicles could be approved already as from 2013.

CLEPA did not share the interpretation of OICA, and proposed to discuss this at a later stage.

The question of the true date of the Nov 2013 WP29 session was also raised, leading to the question whether the values should be adopted already at the June session of WP29.

The European Commission representative clarified that the intention is that, once the AEBS and LDWS UN Regulations have entered into force and the EU has acceded to them, UN regulations approvals would be accepted as an alternative to the EU approvals, taking into account that the EU legislation provides for a number of exemptions from the AEBS/LDWS carriage requirements. The representative of the European Commission informed that the European Commission Services were about to send a letter to the UN Secretariat to clarify the way how the EU intends to apply the new UN regulations, in response to the request of the WP.29 Secretariat to CPs to provide information on the application of the 01 series of the AEBS regulation (done, see Annex 1 attached).

Conclusion: items to be addressed at a later stage, to be added in the agenda for next meeting.

This proposal was adopted with amendments at the 156th World Forum/WP.29 session.

3. GRRF focused its work on the text in square brackets in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 (Step 1– original version of the Regulation on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems) and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93 (Step 2–01 series of amendments to the Regulation), both on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29: Requirements for vehicles not equipped with pneumatic rear-axle suspension, requirements for N2 and M2 vehicles, requirements for vehicles not equipped with pneumatic braking and transitional provisions between step 1 and step 2.

4. The Chair of the informal group on Automatic Emergency Braking and Lane Departure Warning Systems (AEBS/LDWS) reported on the progress made by the informal group from the last GRRF session to the meeting held on 12 September 2011 in conjunction with the proper session of GRRF. He introduced GRRF-71-25 as the outcome of the discussion of the informal group. In particular, it was proposed to tackle, in the preamble of the Regulation, vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension. The expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 to add in paragraph 5.1. the possibility for an “optional” type-approval for vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension. The expert from Germany supported this proposal. The secretariat and the expert from EC were of the opinion that these vehicles were already tackled in the preamble (see above) and that the wording for paragraph 5.1. was confusing because by definition a UNECE Regulation was optional. Furthermore, it was not clear for the secretariat which requirements would apply to these vehicles. GRRF could not reach a final decision on this OICA proposal and agreed to let the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) decide whether an “optional” type-approval in paragraph 5.1. was appropriate for vehicles not equipped with a pneumatic rear-axle suspension.

5. The expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 replacing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/39 to exclude from the scope of the original version of the AEBS Regulation: N2 vehicles below 8 tons, M2 vehicles and vehicles not equipped with pneumatic braking. After discussion GRRF supported this proposal.

6. For the 01 series, the expert from OICA proposed in GRRF-71-24 to include all N2 and M2 vehicles in the scope of the Regulation. However, for N2 vehicles below 8 tons and M2 vehicles, it was proposed to set the limit values in Annex 3 at a later stage (before 1 November 2016), in order to give more time to GRRF to develop special requirements for these vehicles. GRRF supported this proposal but with the alternative wording proposed by the expert from EC in GRRF-71-26. GRRF committed itself to develop these requirements in the proposed timeframe.

7. With regard to the timing of the first warning mode for a moving target for collision avoidance requirements (i.e. cells E1 and E2 of the table in GRRF-70-06), GRRF recalled the preference by the expert from Germany, for 2 seconds specifically for legal reasons. However, since a majority of experts favoured 1.4 second, GRRF proposed to remove the square brackets from 1.4 seconds in the table in Annex 3 of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93. Since the requirements of rows 1 and 2 of ECE/TRANS/ WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93 became identical, GRRF agreed to merge the two rows of the table.

8. GRRF considered GRRF-71-16 (OICA) and GRRF-71-23 (EC) amending the transitional provisions of the 01 series of amendments. Since GRRF could not reach a final decision, GRRF requested the secretariat to draft the transitional provisions according to the objectives fixed in GRRF-71-30. After discussion, GRRF adopted GRRF-71-30-Rev.2 as reproduced in Annex II. One paragraph reproducing the text of the 1958 Agreement was left in square brackets for final decision by WP.29 at its November 2011 session.

9. In concluding the discussion, GRRF adopted GRRF-71-27-Rev.1 as reproduced in Annex II and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and the administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) as amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93, for consideration at their November 2011 sessions.

See below.

See below.

[Deferred to the June session of WP.29.]

See agenda item 4.13.2 above.

Proposal unanimously adopted.

The experts were informed that WP29 at its 158th session of November 2012 adopted the four documents creating the new regulation on AEBS and its 1st series of amendments. This information can be found in p 26 of the official report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099:

The Chair was of the opinion that some clarification of the text adopted at WP29-158, p 3 of document WP29/2011/93/Amend.1, last sentence of the row 2, was necessary because an interpretation could be that the M3 vehicles with hydraulic braking would not have to fulfil the requirements of row 1 before the 2016 date mentioned in row 2. The authors of the text in cells B-H/2 indeed aimed the vehicles mentioned in cell A/2, but omitted to precise whether the vehicles addressed by the footnote 1 (Vehicles of category M3 with hydraulic braking system) would be subject to the same provisions.

OICA was of the opinion that the vehicles in footnote 1 are part of row2. Then the 1st date would be in Nov 2016. But the expert acknowledged that the wording is such that these vehicles could be approved already as from 2013.

CLEPA did not share the interpretation of OICA, and proposed to discuss this at a later stage.

The question of the true date of the Nov 2013 WP29 session was also raised, leading to the question whether the values should be adopted already at the June session of WP29.

The European Commission representative clarified that the intention is that, once the AEBS and LDWS UN Regulations have entered into force and the EU has acceded to them, UN regulations approvals would be accepted as an alternative to the EU approvals, taking into account that the EU legislation provides for a number of exemptions from the AEBS/LDWS carriage requirements. The representative of the European Commission informed that the European Commission Services were about to send a letter to the UN Secretariat to clarify the way how the EU intends to apply the new UN regulations, in response to the request of the WP.29 Secretariat to CPs to provide information on the application of the 01 series of the AEBS regulation (done, see Annex 1 attached).

Conclusion: items to be addressed at a later stage, to be added in the agenda for next meeting.

This proposal was adopted with amendments at the 156th World Forum/WP.29 session.

3. GRRF welcomed a presentation (GRRF-72-14) by the expert from Japan on their national enforcement of Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). GRRF noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29 and its decision that the proposed text in square brackets of paragraph 12.2. be added as a footnote (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, para. 39).

4. GRRF noted the preference of WP.29 not to accept the alternative text relating to voluntary approval and to remove the text in square brackets of the alternative text proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1. The GRRF Chair reported that the work on a revised table of Annex 3 (defining performance requirements for vehicles of categories M2 and N2 ≤ 8 tonnes) would resume with the informal working group on AEBS.

[Deferred to the June session of WP.29.]

See agenda item 4.13.2 above.

Proposal unanimously adopted.

3. The expert from the EC reported on the progress made by the informal group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS). He presented an amendment to the Terms of Reference (AEBS-LDWS-01-07-Rev.3) necessary for completing the second step of work by the Informal Group. GRRF endorsed this amendment as reproduced in Annex II to this report. He reminded the Working Party that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/92/Amend.1 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/93/Amend.1 were listed on the agenda of the November 2012 session of WP.29. He expected that the European Union would be in position to vote at that session.

4. GRRF noted that the informal group resumed its work on technical requirements on AEBS for vehicles of the category N2 below eight tons as well as the category M2. OICA presented their review of the issues associated with applying the technology to these vehicle classes noting the lack of real world experience (AEBS-LDWS-17-02-Rev.1). The expert from the EC reminded GRRF about the tight time line and the necessity to produce an informal document before the next session of GRRF to finish the work on time. GRRF noted the intention of the informal group to convene again in Paris on 7 December 2012 and in Geneva on 18 February 2013.

The experts were informed that WP29 at its 158th session of November 2012 adopted the four documents creating the new regulation on AEBS and its 1st series of amendments. This information can be found in p 26 of the official report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1099:

The Chair was of the opinion that some clarification of the text adopted at WP29-158, p 3 of document WP29/2011/93/Amend.1, last sentence of the row 2, was necessary because an interpretation could be that the M3 vehicles with hydraulic braking would not have to fulfil the requirements of row 1 before the 2016 date mentioned in row 2. The authors of the text in cells B-H/2 indeed aimed the vehicles mentioned in cell A/2, but omitted to precise whether the vehicles addressed by the footnote 1 (Vehicles of category M3 with hydraulic braking system) would be subject to the same provisions.

OICA was of the opinion that the vehicles in footnote 1 are part of row2. Then the 1st date would be in Nov 2016. But the expert acknowledged that the wording is such that these vehicles could be approved already as from 2013.

CLEPA did not share the interpretation of OICA, and proposed to discuss this at a later stage.

The question of the true date of the Nov 2013 WP29 session was also raised, leading to the question whether the values should be adopted already at the June session of WP29.

The European Commission representative clarified that the intention is that, once the AEBS and LDWS UN Regulations have entered into force and the EU has acceded to them, UN regulations approvals would be accepted as an alternative to the EU approvals, taking into account that the EU legislation provides for a number of exemptions from the AEBS/LDWS carriage requirements. The representative of the European Commission informed that the European Commission Services were about to send a letter to the UN Secretariat to clarify the way how the EU intends to apply the new UN regulations, in response to the request of the WP.29 Secretariat to CPs to provide information on the application of the 01 series of the AEBS regulation (done, see Annex 1 attached).

Conclusion: items to be addressed at a later stage, to be added in the agenda for next meeting.

Integrated into the regulation via Amendment 4 to Revision 7.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

4. Documents for consideration at September 2011 GRRF:

4.1. In discussing document AMEVSC-06-01e (GRRF/2011/36) from OICA it was considered that it was too restrictive on the modifier – provided the manufacturer of the original vehicle with commercial leverage – and was not only applicable to Annex 21, but also to Regulation 13 as a whole. Therefore, an alternative proposal for a new paragraph in the regulation was developed under the reference AMEVSC-06-08e (subsequently GRRF-71-15).

4.2. The secretary advised that in reviewing the documentation after the last meeting he had noted that the proposed amendment WP.29/2011/94 did not contain the amendment of the existing references to Annex 19 to include “part 1”, as there are now 2 parts and there should be a reference to part 1 to prevent any confusion. Therefore, document GRRF-71-03 (AMEVSC-06-02) had been raised to correct this situation. In reviewing the proposal the group indicated its agreement.

5. Development of amendments to appendices:

5.1. The text of the proposed amendments to Appendix 1 (AMEVSC-06-03e) was further refined, with the results shown in document AMEVSC-06-12e.

5.2. In reviewing the initial proposal for amendments to Appendix 2 (AMEVSC-06-04e, red text) it was considered that the use of the words “explicit” and “implicit” could lead to misunderstandings. Therefore, they were deleted. However this may need to be re-considered in light of the unfinished discussion regarding Appendix 3. Further refinements were made with the results shown in document AMEVSC-06-13e.

5.3. In developing amendments to Appendix 3 the working document AMEVSC-06-09e inadvertently did not include the amendments already agreed and contained in WP.29/2011/94. Therefore, they have been subsequently included by the secretary in document AMEVSC-06-14e.

It was understood, although there was no documentation available at the time, that the European Commission would table an amendment to the proposed Supplement 9 to the 11 Series of Amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94) which was on the agenda of the November 2011 session of WP.29/AC.1. The amendment, which had been proposed by Germany, would replace “system manufacturer” with “vehicle manufacturer”.

In considering this proposal it was concluded that this would be a complete change in the fundamental philosophy behind the work of the informal working group and could, therefore, not be supported.

The group had the understanding that a vehicle manufacturer could also be a vehicle stability function system supplier, i.e. the vehicle manufacturer designs and manufacturers the vehicle stability function. However, it was considered that this may not be clear to people who are not participating in the informal group. Therefore, document AMEVSC-07-05e was created in which all the references to system manufacturer in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 were reviewed and either vehicle manufacturer was added – so as to read “vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer” – or system manufacturer was deleted when it was not necessary to specify vehicle manufacturer / system manufacturer.

Following the meeting, the AMEVSC chairman made the views of the group (including AMEVSC-07-05e) known to the European Commission. In response the European Commission advised that the proposal would stand as it was a TCMV decision. Subsequently document WP.29-155-06 was presented by the European Commission.

Note: In response to WP.29-155-06, CLEPA presented documents WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 at the 155th session of WP.29/AC.1. At WP.29 no decision was reached and the proposed supplement was referred back to GRRF for further discussed at the February 2012 session of GRRF.

11. GRRF noted the outcome of the discussion in WP.29 on dynamic/static references to other UN Regulations and private standards (see report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paras. 48 and 49). GRRF endorsed the recommendation to proceed on a case by case approach awaiting a final decision by WP.29 at one of its next sessions.

12. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1 clarifying the levels of braking performance of vehicles in relation with different positions of the ignition key. GRRF noted a number of comments. Following the discussion, CLEPA presented GRRF-72-27 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/35/Rev.1. GRRF adopted the proposal, as reproduced in Annex II, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their June 2012 sessions, as Supplement 14 to Regulation No. 13-H.

13. Recalling the purpose of WP.29-155-19, the expert from EC withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9. As a consequence, the expert from CLEPA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/7. Nevertheless, the experts from Germany, Japan and OICA expressed their support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/9 and their preference to keep it on the agenda. The Chair concluded that the item should be revisited, together with the related document from CLEPA (GRRF-72-17), at the next GRRF session on the basis of a new proposal, if available.

14. The expert from Belgium reported on the progress (GRRF-72-08) made by the informal group on Alternative Method Electronic Vehicle Stability Control (AMEVSC). On behalf of informal group, the expert from CLEPA proposed to use simulation tools to prove compliance of the vehicle stability function (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/2). The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-72-22 on some weaknesses in the current simulation tool. GRRF noted a number of comments and agreed to refer the proposal back to the informal group. GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by the informal group, taking into account GRRF-72-17, GRRF-72-22 and the comments received. GRRF noted that the informal meeting was scheduled to be held in Brussels (at CLEPA offices) on 10-11 May 2012.

15. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/11 and GRRF-72-28 on the introduction of an electro-hydraulic transmission for electrical brake systems. GRRF noted some concerns and agreed to resume the discussion on this subject to the next session of GRRF on the basis a revised proposal, if available.

[Adopted by AC.1.]

Integrated into the regulation via Amendment 4 to Revision 7.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

63. The World Forum considered the draft amendment under agenda item 4.10.1 and agreed to postpone the voting of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/94 and Amend.1 to its March 2012 session. WP.29 referred WP.29-155-06, WP.29-155-19 and WP.29-155-20 to GRRF for detailed consideration of the documents at the February 2012 session.

[Adopted by AC.1.]

Proposal incorporated into UN R7 via Revision 6 of the regulation.

Integrated into the regulation via Amendment 2 to Revision 6.

54. Under agenda item 4.6.2, UN Regulation No. 19 document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/150, paragraph 14.2. for Supplement 3, read Supplement 2.

13. The expert from Japan introduced GRE-66-02 correcting some cross references in Supplement 7 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48. GRE requested the secretariat to correct these cross reference, as reproduced below, when issuing Supplement 7 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48.

Paragraph 6.3.6.2.1., last line

• For paragraph 6.3.6.1.2.1. read paragraph 6.3.6.1.2.2.1.

Paragraph 6.3.6.2.3, last line

• For paragraph 6.3.6.1.2.1. read paragraph 6.3.6.1.2.2.1.

14. The expert from GTB withdrew GRE-66-06.

15. The expert from Japan introduced GRE-66-07 clarifying that a tailgate of a truck, which is open and is not locked, is in a “a fixed position”. GRE invited the expert from Japan to prepare a revised proposal with a better wording, for consideration at the next March 2012 session of GRE.

Proposal concerning the retention of headlamp initial aiming. Due to reservations raised over the unusually long transition periods, this proposal was returned to the Working Party on Lighting and Light-signalling for further consideration.

55. Under agenda item 4.6.5 (UN Regulation No. 48), the World Forum agreed to defer consideration of document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 to its June 2012 session, subject to a final review by GRE at its March 2012 session.

17. The expert from OICA introduced GRE-67-27, raising industry concerns about ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21, regarding visibility range, glare and a note to the driver. The expert from Poland presented GRE-67-33 supporting ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21 and GRE-67-37 as a revised version of
ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21. GRE agreed to resume consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21 at its October 2012 session. GRE requested the secretariat to distribute GRE-67-37 with an official symbol for its next session.

18. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/18, introduced by the expert from Germany, intending to eliminate certain inconsistencies in the existing text on reversing lamps. GRE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/18, as amended below, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as draft Supplement 2 to the 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48.

Page 2, par. 6.4.5.2., amend to read:

19. GRE resumed consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1. GRE agreed to prepare and adopt a document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.2, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1, including a change of all the references to the 90-month transitional period to a 84-month transitional period, and to furthermore amend all references to Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to Supplement 01 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.2 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2012 sessions and agreed to keep this item on the agenda of its October 2012 session.

[Proposal intended for consideration at the June 2012 WP.29 session.

The EU notes issues that may delay its ability to support the proposal. First, the EU wonders why the proposal contains an unusually long 90 month transition period. If more than seven years is needed before its application, are the provisions really needed? Similarly, the EU wishes to further consider the cost-benefit of the proposed provisions.]

EU notes the unusually long transition period and raises concerns over lack of robust cost/benefit analysis to support the proposed changes, so the Forum sends the proposal back to GRE for futher consideration.

13. GRE agreed to defer consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 (referred back by WP.29) at its October 2013 session.

10. GRE agreed to defer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 to its next session, awaiting the results of a study conducted by GTB.

55. Under agenda item 4.6.5 (UN Regulation No. 48), the World Forum agreed to defer consideration of document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 to its June 2012 session, subject to a final review by GRE at its March 2012 session.

17. The expert from OICA introduced GRE-67-27, raising industry concerns about ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21, regarding visibility range, glare and a note to the driver. The expert from Poland presented GRE-67-33 supporting ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21 and GRE-67-37 as a revised version of
ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21. GRE agreed to resume consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/21 at its October 2012 session. GRE requested the secretariat to distribute GRE-67-37 with an official symbol for its next session.

18. GRE considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/18, introduced by the expert from Germany, intending to eliminate certain inconsistencies in the existing text on reversing lamps. GRE adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRE/2012/18, as amended below, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration at their November 2012 sessions, as draft Supplement 2 to the 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48.

Page 2, par. 6.4.5.2., amend to read:

19. GRE resumed consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1. GRE agreed to prepare and adopt a document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.2, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.1, including a change of all the references to the 90-month transitional period to a 84-month transitional period, and to furthermore amend all references to Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to Supplement 01 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 48. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99/Corr.2 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2012 sessions and agreed to keep this item on the agenda of its October 2012 session.

[Proposal intended for consideration at the June 2012 WP.29 session.

The EU notes issues that may delay its ability to support the proposal. First, the EU wonders why the proposal contains an unusually long 90 month transition period. If more than seven years is needed before its application, are the provisions really needed? Similarly, the EU wishes to further consider the cost-benefit of the proposed provisions.]

EU notes the unusually long transition period and raises concerns over lack of robust cost/benefit analysis to support the proposed changes, so the Forum sends the proposal back to GRE for futher consideration.

13. GRE agreed to defer consideration of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 (referred back by WP.29) at its October 2013 session.

10. GRE agreed to defer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 to its next session, awaiting the results of a study conducted by GTB.

Corrections to the earlier proposal revising the title from “Supplement 8 to the 04 series” to read “Supplement 1 to the 06 series” and changing “90 months” read “84 months”.

10. GRE agreed to defer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/99 and Corr.1 to its next session, awaiting the results of a study conducted by GTB.

This proposal was adopted and integrated into UN R99 as of 15 August 2012.

Integrated into UN R112 as Amendment 3 to Revision 2 as of 15 August 2012.

Integrated into UN R113 as Amendment 1 to Revision 2 as of 15 August 2012.

Integrated in UN R123 as Amendment 2 to Revision 1 as of 15 August 2012.

Note: The 03 series of amendments includes the provisions for camera monitor systems.

Integrated into the regulation as Amendment 1 to Revision 2.

57. Agenda item 4.7.2, UN Regulation No. 58, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/107,

Paragraph 2.3., correct to read

“2.3. Any vehicle in one of the categories M1, M2, M3, N1, O1 or O2 shall be deemed …

• Where there is more than one rear axle, the width to be considered is that of the widest.
• The requirements of paragraphs 2.3.(b) and 2.3.(c) above shall be satisfied at least on a line:
• (i) At a distance of not more than 450 mm from the rear extremity of the vehicle;
• (ii) That may have interruptions totalling not more than 200 mm."

Paragraph 24.1., correct to read:

“24.1. If the vehicle submitted for approval pursuant to this Regulation meets the
requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or paragraph 25 and has been tested following the conditions set out in paragraph 2.2., approval of that vehicle type shall be granted.”

Paragraph 31.5., correct to read:

“31.5. As from 48 months …

• (a) … meets the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments;
• (b) ….the requirements of paragraph 2.3.(b) or paragraph 2.3.(c) or Part III of this Regulation as amended by the 02 series of amendments.
  …."

Annex 3, correct to read:

"Annex 3

2/ Strike out what does not apply."

Proposal adopted and integrated into UN R67 as Revision 3.

58. Agenda item 4.7.3, Regulation No. 67, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/108, Paragraphs 2.20 and 2.21, should be deleted.

Paragraph 17.11.5, correct to read:
“17.11.5. Vehicles with more than one fuel system shall have a fuel selection system.”

Paragraph 17.11.6, should be deleted.

51. After a long discussion, the group agrees to propose the following modifications:

• a. Elimination of definitions 2.20 and 2.21 and of provision of par. 17.11.6
• b. Amendment of paragraph 17.11.5 to read “Vehicles with more than one fuel system shall have a fuel selection system ”.

52. In order to accelerate the approval of such modifications, the group decides also to convey the proposal as a corrigendum to the relevant WP29 document (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/108) that is on the agenda of the next TCMV meeting (23rd meeting of 13 October 2011) .

Integrated into UN R107 as Amendment 3 to Revision 3 as of 15 August 2012.

Integrated into UN R107 as Amendment 4 to Revision 3 as of 15 August 2012.

Integrated into UN R107 as part of Amendment 4 to Revision 3 as of 15 August 2012.

Proposal incorporated into the Regulation through Revision 1.

Integrated into UN R122 as Amendment 3 as of 15 August 2012.

42. GRE noted that WP.29 had adopted, at its June 2011 session, the guidelines on establishing requirements for high-priority warning signals (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/90) as an annex to the report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1091/Add.1). The secretariat reported that the public consultation on the strategic package on ITS deployment had been completed and that upon consolidation of all the comments, the strategic package would be complemented by a road map (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114) to be considered by WP.29 at its November 2011 session and by the Inland Transport Committee (ITC) at its February 2012 session.

26. The secretariat presented the “UNECE roadmap on ITS – 20 global actions to deploy ITS 2012-2020” (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114 and WP.29-155-24), part of the UNECE strategy package on ITS. The package consisted of:

• (a) A background paper with the primary objective of sharing information (including best practices) and raising awareness about the values that ITS solutions could deliver;
• (b) A strategic note identifying the main gaps and impediments for a broader use and faster dissemination of ITS applications; and
• (c) A roadmap outlining the areas and tasks that UNECE could undertake either as a continuation of on-going tasks or as new initiatives.

27. Furthermore, the secretariat informed WP.29 that the roadmap had been presented to and endorsed by the Working Party on Transport Trends and Economics (WP.5), the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety (WP.1), the Working Party on Inland Water Transport (SC.3), the Working Party on Road Transport (SC.1), the Working Party on Intermodal Transport and Logistics (WP.24), the Working Party on Rail Transport (SC.2) and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP.15) before final submission to and adoption by the seventy-fourth session of the Inland Transport Committee (ITC). Implementation and its impact would be regularly monitored and the secretariat would report to its governing bodies. Therefore, monitoring indicators would be developed and agreed on. The secretariat informed WP.29 that the policy segment of the seventy-fourth session of the ITC would be dedicated to ITS. This event would take place in Geneva on 28 February 2012 from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. The World Forum endorsed ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/114.

28. The representative of OICA requested availability of the feedback received by the secretariat during the consultation process of the strategic note on the Transport Division website.

29. The representative of the EU reported that WP.29-155-25 contained the framework for ITS deployment in Europe.

30. The representative of the United States of America announced the ongoing research on vehicle to vehicle communication that could result in a decision by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2013, to take further action on either research or take steps to approach the rulemaking process within the United States. The representative of Japan informed WP.29 that the ITS informal group would meet in conjunction with the March 2012 session of WP.29.

Proposal for the definition of “Exposed conductive part”.

Amendments integrated into the regulation via Revision 5.

Integrated into Revision 7 of the regulation.

Integrated into the regulation through Revision 2.

61. Agenda item 4.8.6, Regulation No. 94, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/120, add the following paragraphs 11.1 and 11.2, to read:

“11.1. As from the official date of entry into force of Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments, no Contracting Party applying this Regulation shall refuse to grant UNECE approval under this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments.

11.2. As from 23 June 2013, Contracting Parties applying this Regulation shall grant UNECE approvals only to those types of vehicles which comply with the requirements of this Regulation as amended by Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments."

Proposal to provide further requirements for electric vehicles and to clarify the definition of “exposed conductive parts”.

Proposal to amend the provisions of Annexes 9B and 9C (with respect to the on-board diagnostic communication protocol) and to clarify some concerns identified during the preparation of legislation implementing the Euro VI emission levels.

Integrated into UN R96 as part of Revision 2 of the regulation.

99. The GRPE Chair suggested introducing into R.E.3, a new annex containing key parameters on market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127). The secretariat proposed to also amend Annex 3 to take into account the accession of Albania (WP.29-155-15). The World Forum adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127, as amended below:

• Annex 2, the title, correct to read:
• “Guidelines on measures ensuring the audibility of hybrid and electric vehicles”.

• Annex 3, second paragraph, amend to read:
• “1 for Germany, …, 53 for Thailand, 54 for Albania, 55 … .”.

61. GRPE noted that WP.29 adopted the GRPE proposal to introduce into R.E.3 a new annex containing key parameters on market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127), including some editorial and administrative amendments (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1093, paragraph 99). The adoption of the introduction of a similar annex into S.R.1 is foreseen for the March session of WP.29/AC.3.

62. The Chair requested GRPE experts to voice their position on the need for further activities in this field. The expert from OICA recalled that, in the Organization’s position, the adopted guidelines needed to be considered as a first achievement. She expressed a preference to move forward with the addition of other parameters already discussed in the framework of this work, and she announced her intention to investigate whether there were still reservations from Contracting Parties.

63. The GRPE Chair invited the expert from OICA to work with interested Contracting Parties and, if appropriate, to develop a document for consideration at the next GRPE session.

136. AC.3 adopted the proposal for recommendations for market fuel quality (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/127) and requested the secretariat to include the adopted proposal into S.R.1.

Pursuant to the decision to delete the phrase "last column of the table” from paragraph 6.1.6. in Regulation No. 7 following changes to the structure of this table, this proposal would delete the same phrase from paragraph 6.1.2. in Regulation No.6. Originally submitted as Corrigendum 1 to Supplement 19 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 6, this proposal was adopted by the Forum as Supplement 22.

65. Agenda item 4.11.1, Regulation No. 6, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/128, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 22 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 6”.

Submitted as Corrigendum 2 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 10, this proposal was adopted by the Forum as Supplement 1 to the 04 series of amendments and integrated into the regulation via Amendment 1 to Revision 4.

66. Agenda item 4.11.2, Regulation No. 10, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/129, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 1 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 10”.

Adopted by the Forum as Supplement 2 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 19 and integrated into the regulation via Amendment 2 to Revision 6.

67. Agenda item 4.11.3, Regulation No. 19, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/130, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 2 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 19”.

68. Agenda item 4.11.4, Regulation No. 48, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/131, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48”.

69. Agenda item 4.11.5, Regulation No. 48, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/132, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 48”.

70. Agenda item 4.11.6, Regulation No. 104, document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/133, amend the title of the document to read:

“Supplement 7 to Regulation No. 104”.

This proposal clarifies the circumstances under which para. 5.11 (related to fire risks of static electricity) applies based on fuel tank design and fuel. OICA submitted the original proposal to clarify that diesel fuel/tanks are outside the scope. See document GRSG-100-11 for full explanation.

72. Agenda items 4.12.1 and 4.12.2, Regulation No. 34, documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/135, amend the titles of the documents to read:

“Supplement 4 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 34”.

Integrated into the regulation via Revision 2.

12. GRSG noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/135 was on the agenda of the WP.29 session in November 2011. The expert from OICA presented GRSG-101-19, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2009/21 and GRSG-100-11, to exempt diesel vehicles from charge dissipation devices. GRSG adopted the proposal, as reproduced below, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their March 2012 sessions, as draft Supplement 5 to the 02 series of amendments of Regulation No. 34:

Paragraph 5.11., amend to read:

“5.11. The fuel tank … shall be avoided.

• If necessary, measure(s) for charge dissipation shall be provided. However no charge dissipation system is required for fuel tanks designed for containing a fuel with a flash point higher than 55 °C as referred to in item 5.1. of the communication form in Annex 1, Appendix 2. Determination of the flash point shall be in accordance with ISO 2719:2002.

• The manufacturer shall … of these requirements."

72. Agenda items 4.12.1 and 4.12.2, Regulation No. 34, documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/134 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2011/135, amend the titles of the documents to read:

“Supplement 4 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 34”.