2. GRB considered and adopted the agenda.

Further refined version of the proposal (incorporating comments received during the 62nd GRB session) in document GRB/2016/2 intended to update and clarify the regulation. The proposal refines definitions, removes the “AWD” abbeviation for “audible warning device” to avoid confusion with its more common use for “all wheel drive”, adds T category agricultural vehicles to the scope, modifies some administrative communications, and proposes three-direction acoustic measurements. The proposal also aims to structure the regulation to enable its application to additional sound warning devices not presently regulated at the international level, excluding acoustic vehicle alerting systems (AVAS) which will be subject to a separate regulation on minimum vehicle sound levels.

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

This proposal was made after consultations with OICA in order to provide for consistency in terminology used and to match the drawing in Annex 4 with the modified
provisions. The added word “warning“ is underlined.

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

Proposals to modify the draft Supplement 5 to UN R28:

On new para. 14.3.6.: editorial clarification. (The purpose of fixing the height should be restricted for taking measurement in a particular test.)

On para. 6.2.1.1. and para. 6.2.1.3.: Since sound level meters on the market don’t meet the latest standard yet, IMMA proposes to use same IEC standard as in ECE R51.03: IEC 61672-1:2002.

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

Comments on the draft Supplement 5 to UN R28.

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

Presentation from CATARC proposing improvements to the test procedures under UN R28.

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

Proposal to update and clarify the regulation. The proposal refines definitions, removes the “AWD” abbeviation for “audible warning device” to avoid confusion with its more common use for “all wheel drive”, adds T category agricultural vehicles to the scope, modifies some administrative communications, and proposes three-direction acoustic measurements. The proposal also aims to structure the regulation to enable its application to additional sound warning devices not presently regulated at the international level, excluding acoustic vehicle alerting systems (AVAS) which will be subject to a separate regulation on minimum vehicle sound levels.

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

Proposal to clarify the test procedure by explicitly excluding first gear where possible from the ASEP control range.

4. The expert from IMMA proposed to clarify the test procedure in Annex 7 on Additional Sound Emission Provisions (ASEP) (GRB-63-10). GRB adopted the proposal (Annex II) and requested the secretariat to submit it to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and the Administrative Committee (AC.1) for consideration and vote at their June 2016 sessions as a draft Supplement 5 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41.

Presentation of related ISO activities and prospects for cooperation in the future development of UN R51 ASEP.

6. The expert from ISO informed GRB about the activities of his organization to contribute to the GRB work on revising the ASEP provisions (GRB-63-11).

Consolidated version of UN Regulation No. 59 incorporating the revisions recommended by the Informal Working Group on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59 as approved by GRB during its 58th session in order to align the UN R59 with the latest EU decisions.

7. GRB noted that the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 59 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/4) and Supplement 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/63) had come into force on 8 October 2015 and on 20 January 2016, respectively.

Further refinements to the 02 series of amendments prepared by the Informal Working Group on UN Regulations Nos. 51 and 59. This submission proposes to clarify the amended text of document WP.29/2015/4 which was adopted during the March 2015 WP.29 session.

7. GRB noted that the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 59 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/4) and Supplement 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/63) had come into force on 8 October 2015 and on 20 January 2016, respectively.

Proposal to modify the marking requirements to replace PSI with kilopascals (“kPa”). The intent is to harmonize the pressure indication and avoid confusion between UN Regulation No. 54 and US FMVSS 119 or FMVSS 139. The proposal would also change the measurement units for drum speed from min^-1 to km.h^-1 in alignment with the requirements with other tyre regulations and align the wording in Annex 7, Appendix 1 with the text of the Regulation.

33. The expert from ETRTO introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/12, a revised proposal to amend the tyre marking requirements and also containing the amendments previously proposed by the expert from Slovakia. GRRF adopted the proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2016 sessions, as part of the draft Supplement 21 to Regulation No. 54 and as part of the draft Regulation No. 117.

9. GRB was informed that the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF), at its February 2016 session, had adopted amendment proposals to Regulation No. 117 with the aim to align some definitions and paragraphs with Regulations Nos. 30, 54 and 75. The adopted proposals also included a definition of “manufacturer” from the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) and amended the tyre marking requirements.

Proposal to:
a) Align definitions and content with the other tyre regulations (UN Regulations Nos. 30, 54, 75 etc.);
b) Include a definition of “manufacturer” extracted from the resolution “R.E.3”;
c) Adopt a common definition and use of the terms “Manufacturer’s name”, “Brand name”, “Trademark”, “Trade description” and “Commercial name” and their links; and
d) Add information in the certificate to enable approval authorities to more easily understand the products the certificate addresses.

31. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/11 together with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/13 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/14 respectively under agenda items 7(c) and 7(g) below, proposing revised clarifications of the definitions. GRRF adopted the proposal and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2016 sessions, as draft Supplement 18 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 30, as part of the draft Supplement 21 to Regulation No. 54 and as draft Supplement 9 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117.

40. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/14 together with the corresponding document relevant for Regulation No. 30 (see para. 31 of the session report). The expert from ETRTO introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/12 addressing both Regulations Nos. 54 and 117 during the review of amendments proposal for Regulation No. 54 (see para. 33).

9. GRB was informed that the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF), at its February 2016 session, had adopted amendment proposals to Regulation No. 117 with the aim to align some definitions and paragraphs with Regulations Nos. 30, 54 and 75. The adopted proposals also included a definition of “manufacturer” from the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) and amended the tyre marking requirements.

Proposal to increase the stringency of tyre noise limits from 1 November 2020.

12. The expert from the Netherlands presented a study (GRB-62-09 and Add.1) on noise emission from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) tyres of a specific size which were found to be around 1 dB(A) lower than the one from replacement tyres of the same size. The expert, thus, proposed to further reduce the limit values for OEM tyres in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11 and Add.1).

13. The expert from Switzerland expressed his support for the general direction of the Dutch proposal. The experts from Germany and EC were of the view that, at this stage, it would be premature to tighten the tyre noise limits of Regulation No. 117. The expert from France called for a holistic approach to this issue. The experts from ETRTO and OICA expressed doubts about the representativeness of the tyre sample used in the Dutch study. The expert from ETRTO also delivered comments on the proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-17). Finally, GRB invited all experts to further study the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session.

10. The expert from the Netherlands presented several videos demonstrating tyre-rolling noise from trucks on a quiet road surface and recalled his proposal to reduce the limit values for tyres in Regulation No. 117. The expert from EC pointed out that, at this stage, EC could not express any opinion on this proposal and that internal discussions among EU member States should first be planned and held on the issue. The expert from the Netherlands informed GRB that his country had already sent a proposal to this extent to EC and the European Parliament.

12. The expert from the Netherlands recalled their earlier study on tyre performance (GRB-62-11 and Add.1) and presented the outcome of a new study on this subject. In addition to tyre noise, the new study addressed rolling resistance and wet grip for tyres sold in 2013-2016 in the Netherlands. According to the expert, the results had demonstrated a consistent trend for better performance in all aspects and tyre classes. Therefore, he proposed to tighten the limit values in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11-Rev.1 and Add.1).

13. The expert from ETRTO made a reservation about the sampling of tyres in the Dutch study and drew the attention of GRB to the fact that the limit values in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 had been introduced only in 2012 and that the transitional periods to comply with these limits were still ongoing. The expert from the Russian Federation argued in favour of setting new target values well in advance, in order to give the industry sufficient time to prepare for their introduction. The experts from Germany and OICA recalled the past experience in noise Regulations and pointed out that only tightening the tyre noise limits would not necessarily improve the real situation on the streets. The Chair shared their views and called for a more holistic approach prior to taking a decision.

14. GRB noted that the same proposals had been raised by the Netherlands at the EU level and that internal EU discussions were under way. GRB was of the view that the Working Party on Braking and Running Gear (GRRF), which also deals with Regulation No. 117, should be informed about the Dutch proposals. The expert from the Netherlands expressed his willingness to present the issue to GRRF. Finally, GRB agreed to revert to this subject at one of its future session, based on GRRF and EU deliberations.

Presentation in support of the proposal to increase the stringency of tyre noise limits from 1 November 2020.

12. The expert from the Netherlands presented a study (GRB-62-09 and Add.1) on noise emission from the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) tyres of a specific size which were found to be around 1 dB(A) lower than the one from replacement tyres of the same size. The expert, thus, proposed to further reduce the limit values for OEM tyres in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11 and Add.1).

13. The expert from Switzerland expressed his support for the general direction of the Dutch proposal. The experts from Germany and EC were of the view that, at this stage, it would be premature to tighten the tyre noise limits of Regulation No. 117. The expert from France called for a holistic approach to this issue. The experts from ETRTO and OICA expressed doubts about the representativeness of the tyre sample used in the Dutch study. The expert from ETRTO also delivered comments on the proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-17). Finally, GRB invited all experts to further study the Dutch proposal and decided to revert to this issue at the next session.

10. The expert from the Netherlands presented several videos demonstrating tyre-rolling noise from trucks on a quiet road surface and recalled his proposal to reduce the limit values for tyres in Regulation No. 117. The expert from EC pointed out that, at this stage, EC could not express any opinion on this proposal and that internal discussions among EU member States should first be planned and held on the issue. The expert from the Netherlands informed GRB that his country had already sent a proposal to this extent to EC and the European Parliament.

12. The expert from the Netherlands recalled their earlier study on tyre performance (GRB-62-11 and Add.1) and presented the outcome of a new study on this subject. In addition to tyre noise, the new study addressed rolling resistance and wet grip for tyres sold in 2013-2016 in the Netherlands. According to the expert, the results had demonstrated a consistent trend for better performance in all aspects and tyre classes. Therefore, he proposed to tighten the limit values in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 (GRB-62-11-Rev.1 and Add.1).

13. The expert from ETRTO made a reservation about the sampling of tyres in the Dutch study and drew the attention of GRB to the fact that the limit values in the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117 had been introduced only in 2012 and that the transitional periods to comply with these limits were still ongoing. The expert from the Russian Federation argued in favour of setting new target values well in advance, in order to give the industry sufficient time to prepare for their introduction. The experts from Germany and OICA recalled the past experience in noise Regulations and pointed out that only tightening the tyre noise limits would not necessarily improve the real situation on the streets. The Chair shared their views and called for a more holistic approach prior to taking a decision.

14. GRB noted that the same proposals had been raised by the Netherlands at the EU level and that internal EU discussions were under way. GRB was of the view that the Working Party on Braking and Running Gear (GRRF), which also deals with Regulation No. 117, should be informed about the Dutch proposals. The expert from the Netherlands expressed his willingness to present the issue to GRRF. Finally, GRB agreed to revert to this subject at one of its future session, based on GRRF and EU deliberations.

UN R51 specifies that conditioning of a silencing system is necessary only in cases where exhaust gases come into contact with silencer fibrous materials. This proposal would apply the same concept in L category noise regulations.

11. The expert from IMMA presented revised collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 41, 63 and 92 to clarify that the provisions on fibrous materials are only applicable if such materials are in contact with exhaust gases (GRB-63-02). GRB adopted the proposals (Annexes III – VI) and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2016 sessions as a draft Supplement 2 to the 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 9, a draft Supplement 5 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 41, a draft Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 63 and a draft Supplement 1 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 92.

Presentation on urban noise research at Chalmers University.

12. The expert from CAETS delivered a presentation (GRB-63-05) in which he argued in favour of a holistic and long-term approach to sound urban planning with a view to preventing negative effects on health and well-being of populations.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

Explanation of recommendations developed for the European Commission by LAT, TNO, Heinz Steven, and TÜV Nord for the improvement of the regulations with regard to additional sound emission provisions.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

Presentation on urban noise research at Chalmers University.

12. The expert from CAETS delivered a presentation (GRB-63-05) in which he argued in favour of a holistic and long-term approach to sound urban planning with a view to preventing negative effects on health and well-being of populations.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

Based on the outcomes of a European Commission study, proposal to clarify the text and align its provisions with other vehicle sound regulations, especially UN R41, including to replace references to “two wheeled moped” with the term “L1 category vehicles” (and consequently to replace references to “moped” with “vehicle”) and to replace the term “noise” with “sound” (except for references to background noise) throughout the regulation.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

Based on the outcomes of a European Commission study, proposal to clarify the text and align its provisions with other vehicle sound regulations, especially UN R41.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

20. GRB recalled the WP.29 request to introduce, in the medium term, an alternative acronym for “Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (RESS) in Regulation No. 92 (WP.29-165-16). As a replacement, the experts from IMMA and OICA proposed a new term “Non-Original Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (NORESS). GRB preliminary agreed with this proposal and noted that it was already used in the amendment proposal for Regulation No. 92 (GRB-63-09).

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

16. The experts from France and Germany, in their capacity of Co-chairs of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on a Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) Regulation under 1958 Agreement, reported on the status of QRTV-related work (GRB-63-13). GRB noted that WP.29, at its March 2016 session, would consider a draft QRTV Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/26). At its November 2015 session, WP.29 decided to extend the mandate IWG on QRTV Regulation with a view to addressing concerns raised by WBU (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1118, paras. 24, 100-102), namely sound pressure levels, optional installation of the Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) pause switches and sound emissions when stationary. IWG on QRTV Regulation would also consider the possible extension of the scope of the QRTV regulation to vehicles of L categories.

17. To reflect the above new tasks, the experts from France and Germany proposed to update the Terms of Reference (ToR) of IWG on QRTV Regulation (GRB-63-14). GRB adopted the revised ToR, as reproduced in Annex VII.

16. The experts from France and Germany, in their capacity of Co-chairs of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on a Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) Regulation under 1958 Agreement, reported on the status of QRTV-related work (GRB-63-13). GRB noted that WP.29, at its March 2016 session, would consider a draft QRTV Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/26). At its November 2015 session, WP.29 decided to extend the mandate IWG on QRTV Regulation with a view to addressing concerns raised by WBU (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1118, paras. 24, 100-102), namely sound pressure levels, optional installation of the Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) pause switches and sound emissions when stationary. IWG on QRTV Regulation would also consider the possible extension of the scope of the QRTV regulation to vehicles of L categories.

17. To reflect the above new tasks, the experts from France and Germany proposed to update the Terms of Reference (ToR) of IWG on QRTV Regulation (GRB-63-14). GRB adopted the revised ToR, as reproduced in Annex VII.

Proposal for the establishment of a new UN Regulation governing the approval of audible vehicle alerting systems for quiet vehicles moving at low speeds. This proposal can be considered as the first phase of the regulation. In response to concerns raised by the World Blind Union, GRB agreed to extend the mandate of the informal working group that developed this text in order to consider further measures to address the WBU concerns.

16. The experts from France and Germany, in their capacity of Co-chairs of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on a Quiet Road Transport Vehicles (QRTV) Regulation under 1958 Agreement, reported on the status of QRTV-related work (GRB-63-13). GRB noted that WP.29, at its March 2016 session, would consider a draft QRTV Regulation (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/26). At its November 2015 session, WP.29 decided to extend the mandate IWG on QRTV Regulation with a view to addressing concerns raised by WBU (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1118, paras. 24, 100-102), namely sound pressure levels, optional installation of the Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) pause switches and sound emissions when stationary. IWG on QRTV Regulation would also consider the possible extension of the scope of the QRTV regulation to vehicles of L categories.

17. To reflect the above new tasks, the experts from France and Germany proposed to update the Terms of Reference (ToR) of IWG on QRTV Regulation (GRB-63-14). GRB adopted the revised ToR, as reproduced in Annex VII.

66. The World Forum considered the draft proposal for a new Regulation concerning the approval of quiet road transport vehicles (QRTV) under item 4.13.1 and recommended its submission to AC.1 for voting.

20. GRB noted that the draft Regulation on quiet road transport vehicles (QRTV) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/26) had been adopted by WP.29 and AC.1 at their March 2016 sessions and would enter into force as Regulation No. 138 in October 2016 (Depository Notification C.N.125.2016.TREATIES-XI.B.16 of 5 April 2016).

Proposal for a 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation on quiet road transport vehicles to prohibit the use of a pause function for the alert sound.

19. The expert from Japan pointed out that AVAS is of critical importance for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians, especially of people with impaired vision, and proposed amendments to the draft QRTV Regulation prohibiting the pause function (GRB-63-12). The expert from WBU supported this proposal and expressed his concerns about the pause switch that would allow defeat of the safety device. GRB noted that the wording of the proposal might be improved and invited the expert from Japan to submit an updated text as an official document for consideration at the next session.

13. The expert from EC informed GRB about a study on how to enhance the sound test requirements for mopeds, three-wheeled vehicles in Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and replacement exhaust silencing systems for L categories (L1 to L5) in Regulations Nos. 92 before the European Union (EU) could accept these Regulations (GRB-63-18). This study included public consultations and had been launched in response to frequent requests by citizens to improve the sound level of mopeds and three-wheeled vehicles as well as of replacement silencers for all L-category vehicles. On a similar note, the expert from EC reported about the ongoing public consultations on the EU Environmental Noise Directive1 (GRB-63-18-Add.1).

14. Based on the outcome of the study, the expert from EC proposed a set of collective amendments to Regulations Nos. 9, 63 and 92 (GRB-63-03, GRB-63-05, GRB-63-07, GRB-63-08, GRB-63-09). The experts from France, Germany, IMMA and OICA delivered a number of remarks on these documents. GRB invited all experts to transmit their written comments, if any, to the expert from EC. Finally, GRB decided to continue consideration of these amendment proposals at its next session based on official documents to be submitted by the expert from EC.

20. GRB recalled the WP.29 request to introduce, in the medium term, an alternative acronym for “Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (RESS) in Regulation No. 92 (WP.29-165-16). As a replacement, the experts from IMMA and OICA proposed a new term “Non-Original Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (NORESS). GRB preliminary agreed with this proposal and noted that it was already used in the amendment proposal for Regulation No. 92 (GRB-63-09).

Status report on the work to harmonize definitions and terms.

28. [The GRPE Chair] announced that the IWG on Vehicle Propulsion System Definitions (VPSD) would submit a formal proposal for a new Mutual Resolution on Vehicle Powertrain Definitions for the June 2015 session of GRPE.

29. He introduced the informal documents, which list the acronyms and abbreviations used in UN Regulations (WP.29-165-17) and highlighted the problem of using the acronym ‘RESS’ to describe both the ‘Non-original Replacement Exhaust Silencer System’ and the ‘Non-original Replacement Exhaust System and Rechargeable Energy Storage System’ (WP.29-165-16). The World Forum endorsed the content of document WP.29-165-16 and referred the choice to its subsidiary bodies. The secretariat added that the document WP.29-165-17 would be made available on the UNECE website and it would continue to be updated on a regular basis.

23. GRB noted that WP.29, at its March 2015 session, had considered a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in Regulations (WP.29-165-17) and noted that the acronym RESS “Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” is used in Regulation No. 92. However, RESS is widely used as “Rechargeable Energy Storage System”, for example, in Regulations Nos. 10, 12, 94, 95 and 100. For this reason, WP.29 had requested GRB to introduce, in the medium term, an alternative acronym for “Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” in Regulation No. 92 (WP.29-165-16). GRB invited experts and, in particular, IMMA to study this issue and decided to revert to it at the next session.

20. GRB recalled the WP.29 request to introduce, in the medium term, an alternative acronym for “Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (RESS) in Regulation No. 92 (WP.29-165-16). As a replacement, the experts from IMMA and OICA proposed a new term “Non-Original Replacement Exhaust Silencing System” (NORESS). GRB preliminary agreed with this proposal and noted that it was already used in the amendment proposal for Regulation No. 92 (GRB-63-09).

26. GRB recalled the WP.29 request to introduce, in the medium term, an alternative acronym for ‘Replacement Exhaust Silencing System’ (RESS) in Regulation No. 92 (WP.29-165-16). GRB noted that this issue was addressed in document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRB/2016/5 adopted at this session (see para. 15 above).

23. The secretariat reported on the highlights of the 167th session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1118, GRB-63-06).

Overview of discussions for the future development of vehicle noise regulations prepared by the GRB secretariat.

24. The Chair presented a revised list of possible issues for the future GRB activities compiled at the second informal meeting in December 2015, together with written comments by some experts (GRB-62-08-Rev.2). GRB noted that some of these issues could be addressed directly by GRB while some others might require the establishment of informal working groups (IWG). In particular, IWGs were suggested in relation to Regulations Nos. 41 and 51 for the ASEP provisions and for pass-by noise tests of vehicle in-use (during roadside checks and periodic technical inspections). The experts from France and Germany preliminarily volunteered to chair, respectively, these groups. The experts from China, Japan, Hungary, EC, IMMA and OICA expressed their support for the creation of these IWGs. GRB decided to take a decision on their establishment at its next session.

25. The expert from EC delivered a number of additional comments on GRB-62-08-Rev.2. In particular, he indicated that the ASEP provisions (in a light version) and pass-by tests were also necessary for Regulations Nos. 9 and 63, as proposed in documents GRB-63-07 and GRB-63-08. For possible new sound level limits in Regulations Nos. 9, 63, 92 and 117, as well as for re-treaded tyres, he pointed out that such limits may only be proposed after discussions with the EU member States in due time, subject to internal planning and availability of resources.

26. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed to amend the list of possible future activities, in the long term, with the following issues: infrasound and preparing a definition of quiet vehicles. The expert from ETRTO was of the view that it would be premature to address re-treaded tyres and pointed out that GRRF should also be involved in considerations of this issue.

27. GRB invited the Chair to update the list based on the comments received and decided to revert to this issue at its next session.