Australian proposal to allow for a “not to apply at this time” notification rather than the current term expressing “disagreement”. Australia notes that a Contracting Party can perfectly agree with a regulation, but be unable to implement it until a date later than the UN date of “entry into force”.

Document raising concerns that the current draft of the proposed UN Regulation 0 on whole vehicle type approvals would impose new mutual recognition requirements beyond the current 1958 Agreement.

Proposal to replace the term “climate of trust” with a “risk assessment methodology” in addressing conformity of production assessments.

Comments from Australia and the UK on the draft “Proposal for Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement”.

Australia and the UK propose:

• New text for Article 4 (rights and obligations in cases of a non-conforming approval to a UN regulation), particularly to clarify the terminology used (threat to road safety or to the environment….) and to strengthen the provisions;
• New text in Schedule 7, Section 5 to allow the granting of individual “exemption approvals” without committing Contracting Parties to accept such approvals within their own market;
• Changes to Article 3 to clarify that the acceptance of a UN regulation that has been applied is also subject to it meeting any discretionary options allowed for within the regulation;
• Changes to Article 8 so that approvals issued by a CP automatically cease to be valid after a defined period should the CP withdraw from the Agreement; and
• UK acceptance of text proposed by Australia to address CP’s that do not have approval authorities.

Proposal to define procedures for resolving differences in cases where a Contracting Party determines that a product approved by another Contracting Party does not conform with the requirements of the regulation under which it was approved.

Explanations from Japan and Australia concerning specific vehicle marking requirements relevant to the development of the UN regulation to govern international whole vehicle type approvals.

Revisions to the draft regulation on international whole vehicle type approvals.

Presentation of Australian concerns over incompatibilities between its local requirements for top-tether anchorages in child restraint systems and the provisions of UN R14. Since it wishes to participate fully in the IWVTA system, Australia proposes that UN R14 be transferred from the IWVTA List A (single global requirement) to List B (multiple requirements to account for regional differences). Australia also can thus accept UN R16 (occupant restraint systems) on List A. Australia needs more time to reach a position on UN R10 (electromagnetic compatibility).

Annotated update of the first draft of the proposed UN R0 on whole vehicle type approvals.

Proposals to modify UN Regulations 10 and 14 to address requirements under Australian law.

Request to move UN R44 on child restraint systems to the “B list” of regulations (eventual consideration for inclusion in the whole vehicle type approval) from the “A list” of regulations identified for use in the first phase implementation of the IWVTA system.

Proposed text to explain procedures for the withdrawal or revocation of a whole vehicle type approval, including differences between a universal (U-IWVTA) approval and a limited (L-IWVTA) approval.

Australian proposal to adapt UN R14 to current Australian child restraint system anchorage requirements within the context of enabling the use of UN R14 within the international whole vehicle type approval system.