Updated MLIT report raising concerns over the way approval numbers reflect the supplements covered. The draft Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement requires that each approval number include the applicable supplement number; however, the application for a change of the supplement number does not constitute application for an extension of the approval. As a result, the approval number will not be changed even if a different supplement comes into force, resulting in a product having a supplement number that is different from the actual number of the supplement in force.

Updated report from Japan’s MLIT consideration of the IWVTA procedures, identifying concern over the definition and verification of information contained in type approvals. Attachment 1 to this report lists the various items from type-approval certificates that MLIT found difficult to verify independently.

Proposal to clarify that the component approvals underpinning a vehicle type approval do not have to have been issued to the same manufacturer, but that the responsibilities of the manufacturer applying for vehicle type approval to the type approval authority nonetheless remain intact.

Report highlights that regulations under IWVTA may not apply equally to two vehicles of the same type; for example, application of high voltage protection provisions only to electrified vehicles, but not their ICE homologue.

Illustration of the UN Regulation approvals information sheet as proposed in the related document SGR0-19-13, superseding the previous attachment SGR0-19-13/att.1.

Explanation that discontinuation of production does not invalidate a type approval. Approvals may be withdrawn for non-conformity, but otherwise, approvals remain valid indefinitely.

Under the proposed international whole vehicle type approval, Annex 4 to the regulation would provide the list of component regulations. Annex 4 will be updated over time to incorporate new or updated regulations that comprise a whole vehicle approval. These changes in requirements will impact whether a vehicle has a universal or limited approval and will require communication between the holder of the approval and the issuing type approval authority; however, the obligations and procedures for maintaining this coordination are not spelled out in the UN R0 text. Japan proposes a manufacturer obligation to notify of the authority of its intentions when an amendment to Annex 4 would impact an existing approval in its possession.

Proposal to clarify the procedure and information to be provided by the manufacturer in the event of a change to a whole vehicle approval type.

When a series of amendments to any UN Regulation included in a whole vehicle approval is changed, it needs to be considered as an extension of approval to UN R0 even if the series of amendments to R0 remains unchanged. Therefore, the text of Revision 3 to the 1958 Agreement (Paragraph 7) should be changed to include the extension/revision criteria for UN R0.

Request for clarification on procedures in paragraphs 7.4 and 7.5 of the Revision 3 to the 1958 Agreement.

Proposal for the UN R0 Pretest Task Force in response to issues and concerns raised during the first validation round by Contracting Parties and other stakeholders.

Table of reports received on issues or concerns uncovered during the initial validation of the proposed regulation on whole vehicle type approvals.

Report on the consideration of additional UN Regulations for incorporation into the proposed international whole vehicle type approval regulation.

Paper by the WP.29 secretariat to outline possibilities for regulatory provisions covering the performance of automotive systems under conditions other than those tested in the framework of type-approval or self-certification, with TPMS as a case study.

Revised proposal, based on document GRRF/2016/38 and revising GRRF-82-24, to:
a) Align definitions and contents of paragraphs with the other tyre regulations (UN R30, R54, R117, 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;
d) Clarify which markings shall be moulded on both sidewalls of the tyre; and those which shall be moulded on one sidewall only;
e) Add information in the certificate to clarify the relationship with the certified products;
f) Align definitions with Regulation EU 167/2013 which defines vehicles in category S as “interchangeable towed equipment” and includes tread patterns for ‘implement traction tyres’ that consist of blocks rather than lugs or cleats;
g) Eliminate redundant marking requirements;
h) Clarify the inflation pressure to be used for measurements and tests and related tyre markings;
i) Align the current rules for calculating the dimensional limits in accordance with ISO, all major tyre standards, and as proposed for UN R30, R54, and R75.

Proposal to correct paragraph number references due to the recent renumbering of definitions.