1. The Working Party on Noise (GRB) held its sixty-sixth session from 4 to 6 September 2017 in Geneva. The meeting was chaired by Mr. S. Ficheux (France). Experts from the following countries participated in the work following Rule 1(a) of the Rules of Procedure of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (TRANS/WP.29/690, Amend. 1 and Amend. 2): China; France; Germany; Hungary; India; Italy; Japan; Netherlands; Poland; Republic of Korea; Russian Federation; South Africa; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland and Turkey. Experts from the European Commission (EC) participated. Experts from the following non-governmental organizations also participated: European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA); European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO); International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS); International Motor Vehicle Inspection Committee (CITA), International Motorcycle Manufacturers Association (IMMA); International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA).

2. GRB considered and adopted the agenda. The list of informal documents is contained in Annex I. The list of GRB informal groups is reproduced in Annex III.

GRB/2017/3 | Annotated provisional agenda for the 66th GRB session

3. No issues were considered under this agenda item.

4. The expert from IMMA proposed to delete the last sentence in paragraph 1.3.2.1., since the scope of the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41 did not cover motorcycles with a sidecar (L4 category of vehicles) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/4). GRB adopted this proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and to the Administrative Committee (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their March 2018 sessions as a draft Supplement 6 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41.

GRB/2017/4 | Proposal for supplement 6 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41 Proposal to delete a description of the L₄ vehicle category (motorcycles with a side car) from Annex 3 to Regulation No. 41. These vehicles fall under the scope of UN R9, having been removed from the scope of UN R41 as of the 04 series of amendments.

5. The expert from EC introduced the ongoing study on Euro 5 sound level limits of L-category vehicles (GRB-66-15) with the aim to investigate the potential for new sound limits of L-category vehicles. He explained that the study takes into account the evolution of sound levels of road vehicles (actual vehicle testing), citizens’ needs and stakeholders interest (feedback gathering), and technical and economic feasibility in the medium term (cost-benefit analysis). The experts from Germany, Netherlands and OICA pointed out that only reducing the sound limits for new vehicles would not achieve the desired results unless accompanied by measures to combat illegal aftermarket products (silencers). The Chair proposed to resume this discussion once the results of the study would be available.

6. The expert from Germany highlighted the existing problems with and possible solutions for the noise emissions of L-category vehicles, including non-original replacement exhaust silencer systems (NORESS) (GRB-66-12). According to him, there was a gap between quiet vehicles during the type approval process and loud vehicles on the streets, because of manipulation with silencers, loopholes and grey areas in the United Nations and the European Union (EU) regulations. For better enforcement of compliance of vehicles in use with the sound limits and as an alternative to measurement of stationary noise, he proposed a simplified pass-by noise test which could be used for road-side checks and periodic technical inspections of type approved motorbikes and their NORESS (GRB-66-17). The experts from France and the Netherlands supported the need for stronger enforcement. The expert from IMMA volunteered to contribute to developing the pass-by noise test.

7. The expert from Japan presented an overview of the current noise regulations in Japan and their expected development in the future (GRB-66-08). In particular, he pointed out that Japan was reviewing the limit value for the acceleration noise of two-wheelers and hoped that these domestic considerations could be synchronized with the GRB deliberations on new limit values in the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41.

8. On behalf of a group of experts, the expert from OICA proposed a number of amendments updating and revising the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6). These proposals received comments from the experts of China, Russian Federation and Switzerland (GRB-66-11, GRB-66-13 and GRB-66-19). The expert from OICA also proposed some further modifications (GRB-66-20).

GRB-66-11 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6 Proposal to increase the measurement precision by requiring measurement to the second decimal and to designate the line DD' as the end point for measurements. The proposal also suggests editorial improvements and corrections.

GRB-66-13 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6 Proposal to delete the proposed amendment to paragraph 6.2.3. of UN R51 which would limit the scope of the additional sound emissions provisions (ASEP) to M₁ and N₁ vehicles equipped with an internal combustion engine operational within the control range of Annex 7. Switzerland submits that the limitation would release manufacturers from responsibility for vehicle sound behavior outside of ASEP in contradiction to the historical interpretation that manufacturers are responsible for ensuring reasonable vehicle sound levels under all conditions, not only within ASEP.

GRB-66-19 | Proposal for amendments to Regulation No.51.03 Proposal to<ol class="alpha"><li>harmonize the definitions of v_BB' in UN R51</li><li>clarify the scope of Annex 1, Appendix 2, paragraph 5 by substituting "Running" for "Suspension" to describe the system addressed</li><li>clarify the procedures for particular cases under Annex 3.</li></ol>

GRB-66-20 | Additional technical remarks and proposals for clarification on R51.03 Consolidation of draft amendments collected by OICA from various sources, including remarks of contracting parties during expert group meetings and meetings, and from discussions within the informal working group on ASEP. The document has been prepared to encourage discussion.

GRB/2017/6 | Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 <ol class="alpha"><li>Paragraph 1: The scope was originally drafted for the Annex 3 test which refers to normal urban driving. A proposed additional sentence covers the intention of Annex 7.</li> <li>Paragraph 2.8.1.: Adopt the wording from standard ISO 362-1:2015 for clarity. If an electric motor is not operational during the type approval tests, then its power must not contribute to the calculation of the power to mass ratio (PMR).</li><li> Paragraph 2.24., table: Amendments regarding paragraph 2.2.7.4. of Annex 3 because paragraph 2.2.7.4. is new. Amendments also for line BB’ to reflect that the measurement will not end after line BB’. For the speeds vAA’, vBB’ and vPP’, a wrong reference coming from ISO was corrected.</li><li>Paragraph 2.27.: A new definition of “kickdown” was introduced since this term is used in this Regulation. With a large variety of products, it is unclear what "kickdown" exactly means. This definition is a design neutral approach and reflects the intention of Annex 3 and Annex 7.</li><li>Paragraph 2.28.: Prevention of downshift is a legal measure to ensure that the vehicle can be tested within the test conditions as specified by this Regulation.</li><li>Paragraph 3.3.: Deletion of meaningless sentence given the requirement that the vehicles have to be loaded in order to be able to achieve the urban driving conditions as described in paragraph 3.1.2.2. of Annex 3. The sentence has similarly already been deleted in Regulation (EU) No. 540/2014.</li><li>Paragraph 6.2.3.: The current specification requires a hybrid vehicle to be assessed according to the additional sound emission provisions (ASEP), even though such a vehicle does not have the internal combustion engine running within the control range of Annex 7. There will be no valid test result. Such vehicles should be exempted from ASEP.</li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 1: For the test method according to 3.1.2.1 the pre-acceleration length may differ per gear ratio. In this case, it is necessary to report the pre-acceleration length per gear ratio.<li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 2 : Missing elements of the information document have been added, namely "0.2. type" and "3.2.6. pressure charger(s)".</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.1.: Lower temperatures will lead to slightly higher test results due to an increased tyre rolling sound. Thus, testing at lower temperatures will be a disadvantage for the manufacturer. If for practical reasons the manufacturer wishes to carry out tests at lower temperatures, this shall be accepted by the type approval authority.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.1.: For M1 and N1, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. Further, the tolerances are broadened, as research shows, that the impact of the test mass can be neglected in a wide range. For M2, M3, N2 and N3, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. If the test mass of the vehicle is equal to the target mass, the target mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent according to equation (2) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. Consequently this has to be valid also for the test mass mt. If the test mass of the vehicle is lower than the target mass according to equation (12) and (13) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3, the test mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent. Concerning M2 and M3, for clarification and to avoid misunderstanding, the loading conditions for complete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3 were aligned with the requirements for incomplete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3. As a consequence, vehicles of category M2 (M ≤ 3,500 kg) have to be added to the table and their test mass requirement has to be aligned with those of vehicles of category M1 and N1.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.1.: See the above justification for M2, M3, N2 and N3 in paragraph 2.2.1. </li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.4.: If a manufacturer does not produce vehicles with two axles only, he is not able to calculate the right test mass for his vehicles with more than two axles. For calculating the test mass, a vehicle with two axles has to be put on a scale to measure the unladen front axle load, mfa load unladen, and the unladen rear axle load, mra load unladen, for being able to calculate munladen as given in formula (3) of paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. In addition, a new paragraph provides a procedure for calculating the test mass of a virtual vehicles with two axles, based on an existing vehicle with more than two axles, when a vehicle with two axles is physically not available to be put on a scale.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.: Proposal to extend the measurement to a position where misfiring is detectable. A redundant sentence is deleted per paragraph 2.2.4.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1.(d): Clarify gear usage where one gear ratio is above 2 m/s² and the other below a_urban.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1. (e): The suggested changes clarify the proper setup for testing for vehicles with very short gear ratios.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.4.3.: Introduction of specifications for vehicles with only one gear ratio.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.5. : Simplify testing. With a fixed vehicle length, it is not necessary to adjust the test equipment (light barriers, pylons) for each vehicle.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.5.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 4, paragraph 1.: The performance of the fibrous material can be checked by completely removing the fibrous material. This reintroduces an option removed when Annex 5 of the 02 series of amendments was revised.</li> <li>Annex 6, paragraph 2.1.: Proposal to simplify and clarify CoP. During the conformity of production procedures, neither the vehicle nor tyres will have a proper preconditioning. In many cases, the vehicles are foiled and parts may be missing as theft protection. It is very unlikely that the vehicles will have already the same performance as the type approval vehicle. This provision adopts the specifications from the revised ASEP provisions (Informal document GRB-65-26, Annex 7, para. 1). In addition, the range of masses was broadened in the same way as proposed for type approval. </li><li>Annex 6, paragraph 3.: Reference correction.</li></ol>

9. The expert from Italy expressed concerns about the suggested extension of the sound pressure level measurement to line BB’ plus 20 m, with the aim to properly assess the possible “backfire”. According to him, this modification would be a new requirement which should be introduced by means of a new series of amendments with transitional provisions, rather than by a supplement, as proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6. He also pointed out that the above modification would need to be accompanied with a similar change in the relevant ISO standard. The experts from Germany, Japan, Sweden and Switzerland supported this amendment proposal in the form of a supplement. The expert of the Russian Federation supported the proposal as a supplement and agreed that Regulation No. 51 and the ISO standard should be aligned. The experts from France and EC were of the view that a new series of amendments would be more appropriate.

GRB-66-11 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6 Proposal to increase the measurement precision by requiring measurement to the second decimal and to designate the line DD' as the end point for measurements. The proposal also suggests editorial improvements and corrections.

GRB-66-13 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6 Proposal to delete the proposed amendment to paragraph 6.2.3. of UN R51 which would limit the scope of the additional sound emissions provisions (ASEP) to M₁ and N₁ vehicles equipped with an internal combustion engine operational within the control range of Annex 7. Switzerland submits that the limitation would release manufacturers from responsibility for vehicle sound behavior outside of ASEP in contradiction to the historical interpretation that manufacturers are responsible for ensuring reasonable vehicle sound levels under all conditions, not only within ASEP.

GRB-66-19 | Proposal for amendments to Regulation No.51.03 Proposal to<ol class="alpha"><li>harmonize the definitions of v_BB' in UN R51</li><li>clarify the scope of Annex 1, Appendix 2, paragraph 5 by substituting "Running" for "Suspension" to describe the system addressed</li><li>clarify the procedures for particular cases under Annex 3.</li></ol>

GRB-66-20 | Additional technical remarks and proposals for clarification on R51.03 Consolidation of draft amendments collected by OICA from various sources, including remarks of contracting parties during expert group meetings and meetings, and from discussions within the informal working group on ASEP. The document has been prepared to encourage discussion.

GRB/2017/6 | Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 <ol class="alpha"><li>Paragraph 1: The scope was originally drafted for the Annex 3 test which refers to normal urban driving. A proposed additional sentence covers the intention of Annex 7.</li> <li>Paragraph 2.8.1.: Adopt the wording from standard ISO 362-1:2015 for clarity. If an electric motor is not operational during the type approval tests, then its power must not contribute to the calculation of the power to mass ratio (PMR).</li><li> Paragraph 2.24., table: Amendments regarding paragraph 2.2.7.4. of Annex 3 because paragraph 2.2.7.4. is new. Amendments also for line BB’ to reflect that the measurement will not end after line BB’. For the speeds vAA’, vBB’ and vPP’, a wrong reference coming from ISO was corrected.</li><li>Paragraph 2.27.: A new definition of “kickdown” was introduced since this term is used in this Regulation. With a large variety of products, it is unclear what "kickdown" exactly means. This definition is a design neutral approach and reflects the intention of Annex 3 and Annex 7.</li><li>Paragraph 2.28.: Prevention of downshift is a legal measure to ensure that the vehicle can be tested within the test conditions as specified by this Regulation.</li><li>Paragraph 3.3.: Deletion of meaningless sentence given the requirement that the vehicles have to be loaded in order to be able to achieve the urban driving conditions as described in paragraph 3.1.2.2. of Annex 3. The sentence has similarly already been deleted in Regulation (EU) No. 540/2014.</li><li>Paragraph 6.2.3.: The current specification requires a hybrid vehicle to be assessed according to the additional sound emission provisions (ASEP), even though such a vehicle does not have the internal combustion engine running within the control range of Annex 7. There will be no valid test result. Such vehicles should be exempted from ASEP.</li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 1: For the test method according to 3.1.2.1 the pre-acceleration length may differ per gear ratio. In this case, it is necessary to report the pre-acceleration length per gear ratio.<li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 2 : Missing elements of the information document have been added, namely "0.2. type" and "3.2.6. pressure charger(s)".</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.1.: Lower temperatures will lead to slightly higher test results due to an increased tyre rolling sound. Thus, testing at lower temperatures will be a disadvantage for the manufacturer. If for practical reasons the manufacturer wishes to carry out tests at lower temperatures, this shall be accepted by the type approval authority.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.1.: For M1 and N1, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. Further, the tolerances are broadened, as research shows, that the impact of the test mass can be neglected in a wide range. For M2, M3, N2 and N3, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. If the test mass of the vehicle is equal to the target mass, the target mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent according to equation (2) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. Consequently this has to be valid also for the test mass mt. If the test mass of the vehicle is lower than the target mass according to equation (12) and (13) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3, the test mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent. Concerning M2 and M3, for clarification and to avoid misunderstanding, the loading conditions for complete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3 were aligned with the requirements for incomplete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3. As a consequence, vehicles of category M2 (M ≤ 3,500 kg) have to be added to the table and their test mass requirement has to be aligned with those of vehicles of category M1 and N1.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.1.: See the above justification for M2, M3, N2 and N3 in paragraph 2.2.1. </li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.4.: If a manufacturer does not produce vehicles with two axles only, he is not able to calculate the right test mass for his vehicles with more than two axles. For calculating the test mass, a vehicle with two axles has to be put on a scale to measure the unladen front axle load, mfa load unladen, and the unladen rear axle load, mra load unladen, for being able to calculate munladen as given in formula (3) of paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. In addition, a new paragraph provides a procedure for calculating the test mass of a virtual vehicles with two axles, based on an existing vehicle with more than two axles, when a vehicle with two axles is physically not available to be put on a scale.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.: Proposal to extend the measurement to a position where misfiring is detectable. A redundant sentence is deleted per paragraph 2.2.4.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1.(d): Clarify gear usage where one gear ratio is above 2 m/s² and the other below a_urban.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1. (e): The suggested changes clarify the proper setup for testing for vehicles with very short gear ratios.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.4.3.: Introduction of specifications for vehicles with only one gear ratio.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.5. : Simplify testing. With a fixed vehicle length, it is not necessary to adjust the test equipment (light barriers, pylons) for each vehicle.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.5.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 4, paragraph 1.: The performance of the fibrous material can be checked by completely removing the fibrous material. This reintroduces an option removed when Annex 5 of the 02 series of amendments was revised.</li> <li>Annex 6, paragraph 2.1.: Proposal to simplify and clarify CoP. During the conformity of production procedures, neither the vehicle nor tyres will have a proper preconditioning. In many cases, the vehicles are foiled and parts may be missing as theft protection. It is very unlikely that the vehicles will have already the same performance as the type approval vehicle. This provision adopts the specifications from the revised ASEP provisions (Informal document GRB-65-26, Annex 7, para. 1). In addition, the range of masses was broadened in the same way as proposed for type approval. </li><li>Annex 6, paragraph 3.: Reference correction.</li></ol>

10. Given a large number of amendment proposals to Regulation No. 51, including the ones transmitted by the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Additional Sound Emission Provisions (ASEP) (see para. 12 below), GRB consolidated and provisionally adopted these proposals, as contained in Annex II. At the same time, GRB was not in a position to reach consensus on whether or not the adopted proposals would require a new series of amendments and/or transitional provisions. GRB decided to come back to this issue at its next session in January 2018. Meanwhile, the secretariat was requested to submit, in December 2017, the adopted text (Annex II) to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2018 sessions as a draft Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51, upon the understanding that any possible modifications, to be decided by GRB in January 2018, could exceptionally be submitted to WP.29 as a corrigendum or addendum to the original WP.29 document.

GRB-66-13 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/6 Proposal to delete the proposed amendment to paragraph 6.2.3. of UN R51 which would limit the scope of the additional sound emissions provisions (ASEP) to M₁ and N₁ vehicles equipped with an internal combustion engine operational within the control range of Annex 7. Switzerland submits that the limitation would release manufacturers from responsibility for vehicle sound behavior outside of ASEP in contradiction to the historical interpretation that manufacturers are responsible for ensuring reasonable vehicle sound levels under all conditions, not only within ASEP.

GRB-66-19 | Proposal for amendments to Regulation No.51.03 Proposal to<ol class="alpha"><li>harmonize the definitions of v_BB' in UN R51</li><li>clarify the scope of Annex 1, Appendix 2, paragraph 5 by substituting "Running" for "Suspension" to describe the system addressed</li><li>clarify the procedures for particular cases under Annex 3.</li></ol>

GRB-66-20 | Additional technical remarks and proposals for clarification on R51.03 Consolidation of draft amendments collected by OICA from various sources, including remarks of contracting parties during expert group meetings and meetings, and from discussions within the informal working group on ASEP. The document has been prepared to encourage discussion.

GRB/2017/6 | Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 <ol class="alpha"><li>Paragraph 1: The scope was originally drafted for the Annex 3 test which refers to normal urban driving. A proposed additional sentence covers the intention of Annex 7.</li> <li>Paragraph 2.8.1.: Adopt the wording from standard ISO 362-1:2015 for clarity. If an electric motor is not operational during the type approval tests, then its power must not contribute to the calculation of the power to mass ratio (PMR).</li><li> Paragraph 2.24., table: Amendments regarding paragraph 2.2.7.4. of Annex 3 because paragraph 2.2.7.4. is new. Amendments also for line BB’ to reflect that the measurement will not end after line BB’. For the speeds vAA’, vBB’ and vPP’, a wrong reference coming from ISO was corrected.</li><li>Paragraph 2.27.: A new definition of “kickdown” was introduced since this term is used in this Regulation. With a large variety of products, it is unclear what "kickdown" exactly means. This definition is a design neutral approach and reflects the intention of Annex 3 and Annex 7.</li><li>Paragraph 2.28.: Prevention of downshift is a legal measure to ensure that the vehicle can be tested within the test conditions as specified by this Regulation.</li><li>Paragraph 3.3.: Deletion of meaningless sentence given the requirement that the vehicles have to be loaded in order to be able to achieve the urban driving conditions as described in paragraph 3.1.2.2. of Annex 3. The sentence has similarly already been deleted in Regulation (EU) No. 540/2014.</li><li>Paragraph 6.2.3.: The current specification requires a hybrid vehicle to be assessed according to the additional sound emission provisions (ASEP), even though such a vehicle does not have the internal combustion engine running within the control range of Annex 7. There will be no valid test result. Such vehicles should be exempted from ASEP.</li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 1: For the test method according to 3.1.2.1 the pre-acceleration length may differ per gear ratio. In this case, it is necessary to report the pre-acceleration length per gear ratio.<li><li>Annex 1, Appendix 2 : Missing elements of the information document have been added, namely "0.2. type" and "3.2.6. pressure charger(s)".</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.1.: Lower temperatures will lead to slightly higher test results due to an increased tyre rolling sound. Thus, testing at lower temperatures will be a disadvantage for the manufacturer. If for practical reasons the manufacturer wishes to carry out tests at lower temperatures, this shall be accepted by the type approval authority.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.1.: For M1 and N1, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. Further, the tolerances are broadened, as research shows, that the impact of the test mass can be neglected in a wide range. For M2, M3, N2 and N3, the current provision has led to ambiguities about its meaning. The proposed new sentence clarifies the meaning. If the test mass of the vehicle is equal to the target mass, the target mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent according to equation (2) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. Consequently this has to be valid also for the test mass mt. If the test mass of the vehicle is lower than the target mass according to equation (12) and (13) in paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3, the test mass shall be achieved with a tolerance of ±5 per cent. Concerning M2 and M3, for clarification and to avoid misunderstanding, the loading conditions for complete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3 were aligned with the requirements for incomplete vehicles of category M2 (M > 3,500 kg) and M3. As a consequence, vehicles of category M2 (M ≤ 3,500 kg) have to be added to the table and their test mass requirement has to be aligned with those of vehicles of category M1 and N1.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.1.: See the above justification for M2, M3, N2 and N3 in paragraph 2.2.1. </li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 2.2.7.4.: If a manufacturer does not produce vehicles with two axles only, he is not able to calculate the right test mass for his vehicles with more than two axles. For calculating the test mass, a vehicle with two axles has to be put on a scale to measure the unladen front axle load, mfa load unladen, and the unladen rear axle load, mra load unladen, for being able to calculate munladen as given in formula (3) of paragraph 2.2.7.1. of Annex 3. In addition, a new paragraph provides a procedure for calculating the test mass of a virtual vehicles with two axles, based on an existing vehicle with more than two axles, when a vehicle with two axles is physically not available to be put on a scale.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.: Proposal to extend the measurement to a position where misfiring is detectable. A redundant sentence is deleted per paragraph 2.2.4.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1.(d): Clarify gear usage where one gear ratio is above 2 m/s² and the other below a_urban.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 1.1.2.1.4.1. (e): The suggested changes clarify the proper setup for testing for vehicles with very short gear ratios.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.4.3.: Introduction of specifications for vehicles with only one gear ratio.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.1.5. : Simplify testing. With a fixed vehicle length, it is not necessary to adjust the test equipment (light barriers, pylons) for each vehicle.</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 3, paragraph 3.2.5.3.: Reference correction</li><li>Annex 4, paragraph 1.: The performance of the fibrous material can be checked by completely removing the fibrous material. This reintroduces an option removed when Annex 5 of the 02 series of amendments was revised.</li> <li>Annex 6, paragraph 2.1.: Proposal to simplify and clarify CoP. During the conformity of production procedures, neither the vehicle nor tyres will have a proper preconditioning. In many cases, the vehicles are foiled and parts may be missing as theft protection. It is very unlikely that the vehicles will have already the same performance as the type approval vehicle. This provision adopts the specifications from the revised ASEP provisions (Informal document GRB-65-26, Annex 7, para. 1). In addition, the range of masses was broadened in the same way as proposed for type approval. </li><li>Annex 6, paragraph 3.: Reference correction.</li></ol>

11. The expert from ISO proposed to introduce an option of indoor testing, according to standard ISO 362-3, in Annex 3 to Regulation No. 51 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/8). This proposal received comments from the experts of France, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden and OICA. GRB decided to revert to the proposals at the next session and invited all experts to study the document and to send their questions and comments to ISO.

GRB/2017/8 | Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 Proposal including indoor testing as an alternative to type approval tests of Annex 3 to Regulation No. 51 including ISO 362-3.

12. The expert from China reported on noise problems and driving conditions in China in relation to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (GRB-66-21). In particular, he pointed out that further research would be needed to identify a relationship between the test cycles and noise problems as well as to develop a test method which would cover both the driving behaviours and noise issues. The Chair invited IWG ASEP to address these issues in cooperation with China.

GRB-66-21 | Noise problems and driving conditions in China based on R51.03

13. On behalf of IWG ASEP, the expert from France presented its status report to GRB (GRB-66-14). In particular, IWG ASEP had agreed to propose some improvements in the current Annex 7 as soon as possible, as laid down in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/5, and then to develop a more general and strategic approach of revising Annex 7. The expert from the Russian Federation commented on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/5 (GRB-66-06). GRB agreed to merge these proposals with the other proposed amendments to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (see para. 9 above).

GRB-66-06 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/5 Proposal to increase the precision of the lane of travel measurements by extending to two digits after the decimal point and to designate the line DD' for the end of the measurements. The introduction of the line DD’ would impact the minimum length of the section after the line BB’ to be coated per ISO 10844.

GRB-66-14 | Status report to GRB of the ASEP II informal group

GRB/2017/5 | Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 Proposal to<ol class="alpha"><li>amend the scope to be design-neutral and reflect the driving situations covered by the Regulation;</li><li>highlight that ASEP apply to vehicles and their electric sound enhancement systems such as the Audible Vehicle Alert System (AVAS) and silencers equipped with an active cancelling system</li><li>update the "backfire" assessment procedure; and</li><li>clarify the gear ratio anchor point in Annex 7 as defined via Annex 3</li></ol>

14. The expert from EC introduced draft amendments on powered cycles (GRB-66-09). GRB noted that these proposals would first be endorsed at the EU level and then officially submitted to the next session of GRB. The Chair invited experts to provide their comments to the expert from EC.

GRB-66-09 | Proposals for amendments to Regulation No. 63 Proposal to exclude pure electric vehicles, including vehicles with auxiliary electric propulsion, from the scope of the regulation. This proposal has been submitted to complement WP.29/2017/4.

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

GRB-66-01 | Tyres in Europe: Tightening of tyre limits and further suggestions for improvement

GRB-66-01/Add.1 | Tyres in Europe presentation

GRB-66-03 | Proposal for amendments to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 Proposal to increase the stringency of tyre noise limits starting from 1 November 2020.

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

GRB-66-01 | Tyres in Europe: Tightening of tyre limits and further suggestions for improvement

GRB-66-01/Add.1 | Tyres in Europe presentation

GRB-66-03 | Proposal for amendments to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 Proposal to increase the stringency of tyre noise limits starting from 1 November 2020.

GRB-66-22 | Tyre sound limit trade-offs

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

GRB-66-03 | Proposal for amendments to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 Proposal to increase the stringency of tyre noise limits starting from 1 November 2020.

18. The expert from EC reported on amending and supplementing the Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) requirements in Annex VIII to EU Regulation No. 540/2014, based on the provisions of Regulation No. 138 on Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) and its 01 series of amendments (GRB-66-16).

GRB-66-16 | EU Regulation on AVAS requirements Presentation on the status of the transposition of UN R138 on Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) requirements for quiet (e.g., electric) vehicles into EU law. The European Commission expects publication of the new requirements in the October 2017 Official Journal. The Commission is working on the transposition of the 01 series of amendments (prohibiting driver-activated pause functions).

19. GRB noted that the National Rule on Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles in the United States of America came into force on 5 September 2017 and that the work of IWG QRTV GTR would resume shortly.

20. The expert from OICA proposed to slightly modify the wording of the transitional provisions introduced in the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 138 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2017/7). The Chair proposed to postpone consideration of this document until the adoption, at the November 2017 session of WP.29, of the Draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/107) (see para. 30 below).

GRB/2017/7 | Proposal for a new Supplement to the 01 series of amendments of Regulation No. 138 Proposal to align the transitional provisions in the 01 series of amendments with the format introduced following Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement.

21. GRB recalled its previous discussions and decision to draft a new Regulation on reversing alarm (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/63, paras. 3 and 4). GRB reconsidered whether this work should be conducted in the framework of a new informal working group (GRB-66-07) or by means of a task force (TF) and agreed that TF would be sufficient. The expert from Japan volunteered to take the lead, while the experts of France, Germany, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Turkey and EC (subject to availability of resources) declared their interest in taking part in the TF activities.

GRB-66-07 | Proposed terms of reference for an IWG/Task Force to draft a new Regulation on reversing alarms Proposal for a new working group to develop harmonized technical specifications, test procedures and performance requirements for audible warning systems that signal when a category M₃, N₂, or N₃ vehicle is moving in reverse gear.

22. The expert from the Republic of Korea briefed GRB on the status of domestic accidents resulting from reversing vehicles (GRB-66-02). He concluded that M1 vehicles caused the largest number of backup collisions, while N1 and N2 vehicles caused the largest number of fatalities. The expert was of the view that all vehicles should be equipped with at least one safety device for moving backward, like rear view cameras, reversing alarms and parking sensors. The Chair pointed out that GRB should collaborate with the Working Party on General Safety Provisions (GRSG), which was conducting work on rear view cameras. The experts from Germany and OICA were of the view that reversing alarms should be installed on commercial vehicles, while M1 and N1 vehicles should be equipped either with rear view cameras or parking sensors.

GRB-66-02 | Accident status resulting from reversing vehicles

23. No proposals were considered under this agenda item.

24. The expert from EC informed GRB about the EU activities that aim to prevent or reduce the effects of exposure to environmental noise harmful for health (GRB-66-18). According to the expert, this work is conducted in the framework of Directive 2002/49/EC which inter alia provides for a road vehicle (acoustic) classification and a road surface (acoustic) classification. To allow detailed discussions with member States and stakeholders on environmental noise policy issues, the EU Noise Expert Group (NEG) had been established. The expert wondered if there was space for exchange of information between GRB and NEG. The Chair was of the view that GRB and NEG should identify common elements for future cooperation.

GRB-66-18 | Environmental Noise in the European Union Update on the EU Environmental Noise Directive 2002/49/EC intended to avoid, prevent or reduce the effects of exposure to environmental noise harmful for health.

25. The expert from the Netherlands presented a project on labelling road surfaces (GRB-66-05 and Add.1) based on the following criteria: skid resistance, noise reduction, rolling resistance and lifespan. He pointed out that labelling road surfaces could contribute to road safety, public health, sustainability and economies. GRB noted that the project mainly addressed passenger cars and that for trucks a solution would still be found.

26. GRB thanked the expert for the presentation and recalled its earlier considerations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/63, para. 24) that labelling road surfaces could only be introduced as a non-legally binding document, such as a recommendation or resolution. The expert from the Netherlands wondered whether a new annex to the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) could be an appropriate place for that purpose. GRB also noted that WP.29 and its other subsidiary bodies, like GRRF and GRSG, as well as the Working Party on Road Transport (SC.1) might be interested in pursuing the project and should be consulted. GRB invited its experts to send their contributions, if any, to the expert from the Netherlands and to develop for the next session clear ideas on how to proceed. In the interim, the Chair was requested to brief the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (WP.29/AC.2) on the GRB considerations.

GRB-66-05 | Road surface labelling for noise

GRB-66-05/Add.1 | Presentation on road surface labelling for noise

27. No issues were considered under this item.

28. GRB noted that the proposal to change the measuring units for vehicle masses from tonnes to kilograms (GRB-65-03-Rev.1), which was agreed on at the previous session, was submitted to the October 2017 session of GRSG (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2017/20).

GRB-65-03/Rev.1 | Proposal for amendments to the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) Proposal to replace the use of metric "tonnes" with measurements in kilograms in the definitions of vehicle categories and mass.

29. GRB noted that Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/2) would enter into force on 14 September 2017. The secretariat drew the attention of GRB to several novelties in Revision 3, in particular, a new numbering of type approvals, approval markings and their possible replacement by the Unique Identifier (UI), unless specified otherwise in a UN Regulation.

30. The secretariat also informed GRB about the recent activities of IWG on the International Whole Vehicle Type Approval (IWVTA) and that its final official draft had been submitted to the November 2017 session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/8). Questions and answers on IWVTA were issued as ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/9.

31. The secretariat reported on the highlights of the 171st and 172nd sessions of WP.29 (GRB-66-04).

GRB-66-04 | General information and WP.29 highlights for the 66th GRB session

32. No new information was presented under this agenda item.

GRB-65-15 | GRB subjects for the future Table prepared by the GRB chair of possible subjects for the future development of noise regulations.

33. Upon the request of WP.29, GRB considered the Draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/107) prepared by IWG IWVTA. The expert from OICA pinpointed provision 6.1 (in square brackets) which stipulated that “a Contracting Party may apply additional national provisions for vehicle characteristics not covered by the scope of a UN Regulation”. According the expert, this provision seemed to be counterproductive for the harmonization of vehicle Regulations and should be clarified. The Chair invited GRB experts to consider the Draft Guidelines and to submit their comments, if any, to the secretariat and/or to IWG IWVTA by 20 October 2017.

WP.29/2017/107 | Draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations Proposal from the IWVTA informal group to supersede the current guidelines for regulatory procedures and transitional provisions for UN Regulations (document WP.29/1044 and its Revision 1) with updated general guidelines for establishing or amending UN Regulations, including for the definition of scope, administrative and transitional provisions, use of alternative requirements, and cross-referencing with other regulations. This proposal aims to <ol class="alpha"><li>Streamline future work without superseding provisions of the 1958 Agreement and the existing UN Regulations,</li><li>Clarify rulemaking procedures pursuant to Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement, and</li><li>Ensure "good regulatory practice" through clarifications to avoid divergence between the interpretation of Revision 3 and the application to UN Regulations.</li></ul>

WP.29/2017/107/Add.1 | Draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations

WP.29/2017/107/Corr.1 | Corrigendum to the draft General Guidelines for United Nations regulatory procedures and transitional provisions in UN Regulations

34. The expert from EC proposed amendments to Regulation No. 9 with the aim to introduce ASEP requirements for L₄ and L₅ category vehicles with the power-to-mass ratio (PMR) of more than 50 W/kg (GRB-66-10). The Chair and the expert from Poland raised questions on referencing Global Technical Regulations (GTR) No. 15. The Chair also pointed out that the proposals should be accompanied with transitional provisions and invited the expert form EC to submit updated proposals to the next GRB session as an official document.

GRB-66-10 | Proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. 9 to introduce ASEP requirements for L4 and L5 category vehicles with PMR > 50 W/kg Proposal to align ASEP for high powered L4 and L5 vehicles, used for passenger transport, is proposed in line with UN Regulation No 41.04 due to comparable sound emissions levels of L4 and L5 vehicles with the ones of L3 vehicles and the possibility of applying similar measurement methods for sound emissions for those vehicle categories. This is also supported by the Commission study on enhanced sound requirements for mopeds, quads and replacement silencers of L-category vehicles which resulted in amendments to UN Regulation Nos 9, 63 and 92 (ref. document WP.29/2017/2).

35. For its sixty-seventh session, scheduled to be held in Geneva from 24 (starting at 2.30 p.m.) to 26 (concluding at 5.30 p.m.) January 2018, GRB decided to keep the same structure of the provisional agenda. GRB noted that the deadline for the submission of official documents to the secretariat would be 30 October 2017, twelve weeks prior to the session. The Chair also invited experts to submit informal documents well in advance before the session.

36. In compliance with Rule 37 of the Rules of Procedure (TRANS/WP.29/690 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/690/Amend.1), GRB called for the election of officers. The representatives of the Contracting Parties, present and voting, elected unanimously Mr. Serge Ficheux (France) as Chair and Mr. Andrei Bocharov (Russian Federation) as Vice-Chair for the sessions of GRB scheduled for the year 2018.