OICA proposes:
HWT-PTI held meetings on 8 July, 13 August, and 19 August, with further meetings planned for 28 September, 3 November, and 24 November 2026. Work focuses on three items: revised wording for neutral state of passing beam under discussion, cut-off and kink point commenting on UN R149 Annex 5 and 6, and provision for PTI awaiting outcomes of earlier work items.
The 78th session of the GRE Informal Working Group on Simplification of UN Lighting and Light-Signalling Regulations was held in Brussels, 10-12 June 2026. SLR decided not to include a new Part 7 on Colour-fastness in Annex 6 to Regulation 150-01 and will submit a consolidated correction proposal to GRE-95. Discussion on apparent surface definitions and single lamp distance requirements will resume at SLR-79, with wider consideration of related topics including glare and direction indicator visibility. Baseline documents for Regulations 48, 53, 74, and 86 were reviewed and updated versions will be prepared for the next session. The next SLR meeting will be held in Tokyo on 7-11 September 2026.
This document discusses single lamp distance requirements in context of Apparent Surface simplification pursuant to discussions with Contracting Parties. The current 75mm separation value was not based on studies but on considerations. A 1999 IENGF Milano study concluded that larger distances are acceptable for symmetric constellations, with AFS lighting units spaced up to 200mm. A minimum 600mm separation is mandatory if right and left mounted functional unit identification is required. No evidence of increased accident risk, misidentification of signal, reduced conspicuity, or regulatory enforcement issues from current single lamp separation distances exists. The simplified CAD-based Apparent Surface concept will be based on light emitting surface with clear outer lens disregarded. GTB suspended work on this topic due to insufficient consensus and difficult stakeholder alignment, pending additional information on single lamp separation distance.
Japan submitted comments on RXSWIN assignment at the 38th CS/OTA IWG. Q.1 asks whether, when a type approval is extended from UN R156-00 to UN R156-01, RXSWIN may be assigned at extension time, and if a UN Regulation refers to RE.3 Annex 7 through a supplementary amendment after UN R156-01 transitional provisions become applicable, whether RXSWIN is assigned at that time. Q.2 asks whether Approval Authorities other than the Authority granting approval are expected to have access to the OEM’s Auditable Register, as access information appears provided only to the Approval Authority concerned through paragraph 9.5.2. Q.3 asks whether software updates affecting type approval can be performed under Regulations that do not reference RE.3 Annex 7.
Proposal to amend para. 7.2.1.2.2. to delete, in cases where RXSWINs are not held on the vehicle, the requirement that the manufacturer shall declare the software version(s) of the vehicle or single ECUs with the connection to the relevant type approvals to the Approval Authority and that this declaration shall be updated each time the declared software version(s) is updated, and add that the link between the software version(s) and the RXSWINs shall be declared.