Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The group discussed how to best proceed (and if) with the development of the RDE GTR following the
concerns raised by USA delegation.
US EPA: want to be sure that the RDE test/process will be valuable for local legislations since the
current version of the GTR (and of the European RDE) would still bring to some legal and practical
concerns. After internal evaluation and alignment, US is not in the position to support the
development of a 2-phases GTR (i.e. phase 1 to meet India and Japan requirements and phase 2 to
better reflect US needs).
Japan: already shared comments to the current version, is very much looking to harmonisation and
hope that a compromise solution could be found with US colleagues to continue developing the GTR.
India: already shared comments to the current version, India would like to stick on the agreed
timeline of the GTR in order to avoid delays or blocks to the development of national regulation, but
could also accept that we go ahead with the development of the two phases at the same time.
EU Commission: the group did great efforts to have a procedure as wide as possible in view of CPs’
local applicability, however there could be room for making the procedure better, more harmonised
and more ambitious. A possible alternative could be to develop since the beginning a GTR including
both Phase 1 and 2, but this would require some changes to the current timeplan and mandate that
was endorsed by GRPE. The new text should look at wide harmonisation and should include broader
requirements to accommodate all CPs.
4. Next meeting:
Next online meeting is scheduled for the 6th of November, webex invitation will follow. Focus is to
finalise the informal document for January GRPE. US EPA may present their technical concerns vs the
current GTR version if possible .