the establishment of unece wp.29 implementation guideline ... 02... · fauziana l, mohd hafzi mi,...

Supplement to the MCP 01/2012

The Establishment of UNECE WP.29 Implementation Guideline in Malaysia

MCP 02/2012

MCP 02/2012

The Establishment of UNECE WP.29 Implementation Guideline in Malaysia Supplement to the MCP 01/2012 Fauziana Lamin Mohd Hafzi Md Isa Noor Faradila Paiman Siti Atiqah Mohd Faudzi Fuad Abas, P Eng Wong Shaw Voon, PhD

_______________________________________________________________________________MIROS©2012AllRightsReserved

Publishedby:

MalaysianInstituteofRoadSafetyResearch(MIROS)Lot125‐135,JalanTKS1,TamanKajangSentral,43000Kajang,SelangorDarulEhsan,Malaysia.

Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing‐in‐Publication Data National regulatory implementation guideline : UNECE WP.29 in Malaysia

: supplement to the MCP 01/2012 / Fauziana Lamin ... [et al.] (MCP 02/2012) ISBN 978‐967‐5967‐29‐0 1. United Nations. Economic Commission for Europe. 2. Motor vechiles‐‐Malaysia. 3. Automobiles‐‐Malaysia. I. Fauziana Lamin. II. Malaysia. Kementerian Pengangkutan. III. Malaysia. Kementerian Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri. IV. Malaysia. Kementerian Perdangangan Dalam Negeri, Koperasi dan Kepernggunaan. 343.094

Forcitationpurposes

FauzianaL,MohdHafziMI,NoorFaradilaP,SitiAtiqahMF,FuadA&WongSV(2012),TheEstablishmentofUNECEWP.29 ImplementationGuideline inMalaysia: Supplement to theMCP01/2012,MCP02/2012,KualaLumpur:�MalaysianInstituteofRoadSafetyResearch.

Printedby:MIROS

Typeface :CalibriSize :11pt

DISCLAIMERNoneofthematerialsprovidedinthisreportmaybeused,reproducedortransmitted,inanyformorbyany means, electronic or mechanical, including recording or the use of any information storage andretrievalsystem,withoutwrittenpermissionfromMIROS.Anyconclusionandopinionsinthisreportmaybe subject to reevaluation in the event of any forthcoming additional information or investigations.

The Establishment of UNECE WP.29 Implementation Guideline in Malaysia Supplement to the MCP 01/2012

iii

Contents

Page Acknowledgements iv 1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Objectives and Outcome 4

2.0 Methodology 5

2.1 Procedure Identification 6 2.2 Guideline Documentation 6 2.3 Stakeholders Engagement 9 2.4 Final Review 13

3.0 Chronology of Events 18 4.0 Conclusion 21


iv

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Ministry of Transport Malaysia (MOT), Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), Ministry of Domestic Trade, Co-‐operatives and Consumerism (MDTCC), Automotive Engineering Division of the Road Traffic Department, Department of Standards Malaysia (STANDARDS MALAYSIA), Malaysia Automotive Institute (MAI), SIRIM Berhad (AEC), SIRIM QAS International Sdn Bhd, Malaysian Automotive Association (MAA) and Motorcycle and Scooter Assemblers and Distributors Association of Malaysia (MASSAM) for their strong commitment in a series of discussions during the development process. We would also like to place on record our appreciation to Y.Bhg. Dato’ Solah Mat Hassan, Director General of Road Transport Department for providing valuable inputs and assistance in completing the guideline. Our deepest gratitude also goes out to Mr. Juan Ramos Garcia, Secretary of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations, UNECE WP.29 for his precious contributions in reviewing the guideline and bestowing his best knowledge.


1

1.0 Introduction The World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) was created in 1952 as a permanent working party consisting of experts on technical requirements of vehicles. It serves as a platform for a global forum, allowing for open discussions on motor vehicle regulations. Participation of the WP.29 is open to all United Nations Member States and regional economic integration organisations (EC). They may participate fully in the activities of the World Forum and may become a contracting party to the Agreements administered by WP29. Non-‐governmental organizations (NGOs) may also participate in the WP29 forum or in its working groups by providing consultative capabilities. Three international agreements on motor vehicles are administered by the WP.29; the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 Agreement on the construction of vehicles, and the 1997 Agreement on periodical technical inspections. The objectives of the agreements are to increase road vehicle safety, vehicle environmental performance and facilitate vehicles trade. Since 4th April 2006, Malaysia has acceded to the 1958 Agreement (UN Vehicle Regulations) and the 1998 Agreement (UN Global Technical Regulations) as a Contracting Party. The Malaysian Ministry of Transport (MOT) has been appointed as the responsible government agency in coordinating and participating in WP.29 activities in Malaysia. After a series of discussions, the first National Steering Committee Meeting was held on 9th October 2007. The committee was chaired by the Secretary General of the Ministry of Transport Malaysia. Malaysia has incorporated the relevant UN Regulations into Road Transport Act 1987 and Environmental Quality Act 1974.


2

As a Contracting Party, Malaysia has been given a unique identification number called E-‐mark and Malaysia is eligible for the E52 marking. In addition, for the implementation of UNECE WP.29, four main committees need to be appointed which are:

1. Administrative Committee (AC) – A committee established by the Ministry of Transport Malaysia (MOT). The committee administers the operations and the implementation of UN Regulations in Malaysia as well as Malaysia’s commitment to the 1958 Agreement as a Contracting Party (E52). The committee also serves as secretariat to the National Steering Committee of WP.29 in Malaysia.

2. Type Approval Authority (TAA) -‐ The authority of a Contracting Party which is responsible for the approval of wheeled vehicles, equipments and parts, for issuing and withdrawing of approval certificates. It also acts as the contact point for Type Approval Authority of other Contracting Parties, as a designator of the Technical Service(s) and it ensures that the manufacturer meets the obligations regarding the conformity of production.

3. Competent Authority (CA) – An appropriate accreditation body acting on behalf of Type Approval Authority for the assessment of Technical Service(s).

4. Technical Service (TS) -‐ An organization or body designated by the Type Approval Authority of a Contracting Party as a testing laboratory to carry out tests, or as a conformity assessment body which carries out the initial assessment and other tests or inspections on behalf of the Type Approval Authority, making it possible for the Type Approval Authority itself to carry out those functions.

In Malaysia, agencies listed in Table 1 have been appointed as the responsible body for the above mentioned committee. The Technical Service will be designated once the procedure is ready to be implemented. Consequently, a systematic depository system needs to be established for each committee, named as registry for the purpose of recording all details including communications, from applying to deciding all applications, test data, reports and complaints. The depository system is important in ensuring the transparency, traceability and accessibility of all relevant information. Each registry will be administered by one (1) registrar as summarised in Table 1.


3

Table 1 Agencies appointed and their respective registry and registrar for the implementation of UNECE WP.29 in Malaysia

Committee Responsible Agency

Registry Registrar

Administrative Committee (AC)

Ministry of Transport

AC Registry Registrar of AC Registry

Type Approval Authority (TAA)

Road Transport Department

TAA Registry Registrar of TAA Registry

Competent Authority (CA)

Standard Malaysia

CA Registry Registrar of CA Registry

Thus, a set of guidelines is needed as reference for the implementers, manufacturers as well as consumers in relation to type approval of automotive components and VTA of new vehicles entering Malaysian market. For that reason, the Malaysian Ministry of Transport, (MOT) had enlisted the assistance of the Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS) in drawing up a guideline on UN Regulations and VTA implementation in Malaysia. After thorough discussions and reviews, the National Regulatory Implementation Guideline of UNECE WP.29 (MCP 01/2012) has been formulated. This guideline contains the process flow, responsibilities and documentations that are related to UNECE WP.29 and VTA implementation in Malaysia. The process flow presented in this guideline covers activities at a macro level, whereas micro level activities will be determined by the respective agencies/bodies. However, all procedures are subjected to the latest UNECE WP.29 requirement. This report highlights the overall guideline development stage including methodology and chronology of events. MIROS hopes that the development process and recommendations provided in this report will be of benefit for UN Regulations implementation in Malaysia and future development of national guidelines.


4

1.1 Objectives and Outcome

The National Regulatory Implementation Guideline was developed to achieve the following objectives:

a. To provide a systematic description of specific activities to the relevant agencies involved in the implementation of UNECE WP.29 in Malaysia.

b. To explain in detail the procedures of implementing the UNECE WP.29 Regulation in Malaysia.

c. To have a systematic and proper coordination between the relevant agencies involved.

d. To have a uniform system of reporting with regards to the repository system.

These objectives are expected to generate the ultimate outcome, which is to ensure that vehicles are environmentally sound and safe to be used on Malaysian roads.


5

2.0 Methodology There are four parts to the methodology in developing the National Regulatory Implementation Guideline of UNECE WP.29. As presented in Figure 1, the development process consists of: (i) procedure identification; (ii) guideline documentation; (iii) stakeholder engagement; and (iv) final review. Each of the process is explained in the following subsections. Figure 1 The development process of the National Regulatory Implementation Guideline of UNECE

WP.29

Start

Procedure identification

Guideline documentation

Stakeholder engagement

Final review

End


6

2.1 Procedure Identification The implementation of UN Regulations involves several main activities. For that reason, the primary activities were identified in the initial stage of the development. In view of the current local automotive industry, two types of certification exist: (i) type approval which is based on the UN Regulation(s) for automotive components and; (ii) vehicle type approval for whole vehicles. Nine main procedures have been identified for the type approval certification, which are:

1. Audit 2. TS designation 3. Conformity of Production (COP) 4. Type approval granting 5. Market surveillance 6. Handling complaints 7. Product recall 8. UN Regulation adoption 9. UN Regulation development

In the Vehicle Type Approval (VTA) assessment procedures in Malaysia, one of the procedures involves the evaluation of E-‐mark. Therefore, an appropriate procedure needs to be established as well in order to accommodate this process. Based on the need for this kind of procedure, Vehicle Type Approval (VTA) granting procedure was developed, in addition to the above-‐mentioned nine procedures, in order to harmonise the current VTA practice with the UNECE WP.29 requirements.

2.2 Guideline Documentation For documentation purposes, the layout of the guideline needs to be designed. Several types of layout have been reviewed and the most appropriate one has been chosen. As a result, the procedure is structured into eight sections, as follows:

1. Purpose – This section describes the purpose of the respective procedures. 2. Scope – This section describes the scope of the respective procedures.


7

3. Definitions and acronyms – This section lists all the terms used in the respective procedure and their definitions.

4. Flowchart – This section illustrates the process flow of activities with relevant responsible agencies.

5. Responsibility – This section lists the responsible agencies involved in the respective procedures.

6. Procedure – This section describes the detailed activities of the respective procedure as illustrated in the flowchart section (section 4), responsible agencies and output documents from the activities.

7. Quality records – This section lists all the related records that are to be maintained and its respective custodians.

8. Form – This section lists all the forms required in implementing the respective procedures.

The details of the procedure are described in the initial part of each procedure, as depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Description of the initial part of a procedure layout

Procedures cross-‐linked

to this procedure

Revision history of the procedure

Procedure title Document number Procedure revision number


8

The corrigendum and revision differ in terms of the number of changes made. A new corrigendum is issued whenever a minor change is made in the procedure, whereas a revision is issued after several corrigendum are issued, in which the accumulated small changes become a major change to the previous revision of the procedure. In section 4, activities and agencies that are involved in a procedure are summarized in a flowchart. The details of each activity are explained in Section 6, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 Example of activity description in a procedure

The responsible body(s)/

committee(s) for the specified activity

Activity

Sequence number of the activity referenced

in Section 6

Data/ record/ reports produced from the activity

The responsible body/committee for the specific activity and sub activity


9

Apart from that, literature reviews were also conducted in order to collate, identify and scrutinize relevant information on the current practices of other countries in implementing the UN Regulations. Related materials e.g. guidelines and reports were also gathered and properly documented. After the procedure layout has been standardised and a thorough literature review has been performed, a draft procedure was established. The current practice and stakeholders’ opinions in Malaysia were taken into account during the procedure development.

2.3 Stakeholders Engagement Three main activities were identified in stakeholders engagement which are: (i) identification of stakeholders; (ii) information disclosure; and (iii) stakeholders consultation, as illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4 Flowchart of stakeholders engagement process The first step in the stakeholders’ engagement process is stakeholders identification i.e. determine the related agencies which are directly and indirectly affected by the implementation of UN Regulations in Malaysia. After comprehensive discussions and identification analysis, the following agencies were identified as the key stakeholders:

1. Ministry of Transport (MOT) 2. Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) 3. Ministry of Domestic Trade, Co-‐operatives and Consumerism (MDTCC) 4. Road Transport Department (RTD) 5. Malaysian Automotive Institute (MAI)


10

6. Department of Standards Malaysia (STANDARDS MALAYSIA) 7. SIRIM Berhad and SIRIM QAS International Sdn Bhd 8. Malaysian Automotive Association (MAA) 9. Motorcycle and Scooter Assemblers and Distributors Association of Malaysia

(MASSAM) The second step in the stakeholders’ engagement process is information disclosure i.e. making the information accessible to the stakeholders. Communications were established via emails and phone calls with the contact persons of the respective stakeholders. Official letters and a copy of the draft guideline were later circulated for comments and recommendations. Finally, a two-‐way dialogue process with the stakeholders via face-‐to-‐face discussions (e.g. meetings, workshops), emails, phone calls and letters were made in order to clarify and discuss any arising matters, specifically on the feasibility and contents of the drafted procedures. The consultation and contribution from stakeholders are vital in order to seek inputs for procedure harmonisation. In addition, this engagement is important in order to obtain the full cooperation of the stakeholders, not only during this particular development stage, but also in the later stage of implementing the UN Regulations in Malaysia. Table 2 summarizes the feedback gathered from several stakeholders and actions taken by the MIROS task force team.

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

11

Tabl

e 2

Feed

back

from

sta

keho

lder

s Ag

ency

Ac

tivity

Fe

edba

ck

Actio

n Ta

ken

D

epar

tmen

t of

Sta

ndar

ds

Mal

aysi

a

MIROS – Standard

Malaysia

disc

ussio

n

Standard M

alaysia

has te

chnical experts in aud

it.

The team

disc

ussed and considered

their a

dvice.

MIT

I MIROS – MITI

discussio

n MITI h

as no ob

jection to the guidelines develop

ed by

MIROS

The team

took note.

MAI

MIROS -‐ M

AI

discussio

n MAI had com

mented on

the flow

and

structure of the

following procedu

res:

-‐ Au

dit, Prod

uct R

ecall and

Market Surveillance

The team

revised and improved th

e said procedu

res a

ccordingly.

KPD

NKK

MIROS – MDT

CC

discussio

n MDT

CC has techn

ical experts in market surveillance

and prod

uct recall.

The team

disc

ussed and considered

their a

dvice.

MO

T an

d RT

D

Ministerial disc

ussio

n (M

IROS – MOT – RTD)

MOT and RTD review

ed th

e drafted guideline

The team

revised and improved th

e overall procedu

res a

ccordingly.

RTD

MIROS – RTD

discussio

n RTD will share the existing procedures w

ith M

IROS in

order

to harm

onize

them

with

the

developed

The

initial title

of C

ode

of G

ood

Regulatory

Practice

has

been

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

12

MIROS – RTD

(Dire

ctor General)

discussio

n

procedures.

RTD Director General highlighted that the initial cod

e of practice shou

ld be up

graded into a guideline.

changed

to National

Regulatory

Implem

entatio

n Guideline.

SIRI

M

MIROS – SIRIM

discussio

ns

SIRIM com

mented on

the flow and

structure of the

following procedu

res:

-‐ TS designatio

n and Granting Type App

roval

The

team

explained

the

issues

raise

d by SIRIM

during the second

discussio

n.

MAA

MIROS – MAA

discussio

ns

MAA

com

mented on

the following procedures:

-‐ Ve

hicle Type A

pproval Granting and Prod

uct

Recall

The

team

explained

the

issues

raise

d and some am

endm

ent were

made based on

the discussio

n.

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

13

2.4

Fina

l Rev

iew

After a serie

s of disc

ussio

ns and

all the feedbacks were received, the guideline was revise

d and improved accordingly. The fin

al

document w

as se

nt to

the MIROS Pu

blication Unit for editin

g and pu

blish

ing (Refer to

the National Regulatory Im

plem

entatio

n Guideline

of UNECE WP.29 in M

alaysia

). As m

entio

ned in th

e previous sectio

n, th

e guideline consists of te

n procedures, as summarise

d in Table 3.

The details of each procedure are explained in th

e guideline, which can be referred to

by its sp

ecific do

cument n

umber.

Tabl

e 3

List

of p

roce

dure

s an

d ag

enci

es in

volv

ed

Doc

umen

t Num

ber

Doc

umen

t Titl

e

Des

crip

tion

Rele

vant

Age

ncie

s Inv

olve

d M

IRO

S/VS

B/W

P29-‐

AC/P

001

Audit

This procedure describ

es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns for

cond

uctin

g audits of T

echn

ical Service (T

S),

Type

Approval

Authority

(TAA

) and

Competence

Authority

(CA).

This

procedure is

to be followed by auditors

and audit organizatio

ns w

hen requ

ired by

law, regulatio

n, a

greement,

contract, or

§

AC

§ TA

A

§ CA

§

TS

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

14

policy.

M

IRO

S/VS

B/W

P29-‐

TSD

/P00

2 Technical Service

Desig

natio

n


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and do

cumentatio

ns to be

followed for the designatio

n and renewal

of Techn

ical Service(s)

§

AC

§ TA

A §

CA

§ TS

§ Ap

plicant

M

IRO

S/VS

B/W

P29-‐

CP/P

003

Conformity of

Prod

uctio

n


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns of

Conformity of P

rodu

ction (CoP

).

§

TAA

§ TS

§ Ap

plicant

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐TA

G/P

004

Type App

roval G

ranting


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns of

Granting

Type Ap

proval of automotive

compo

nents or system in

accordance with

§ AC

§

TAA

§ CA

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

15

UN Regulation(s).

§

TS

§ Ap

plicant

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐VT

A/P0

05

Vehicle

Type Ap

proval

Granting


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns of

grantin

g Ve

hicle

Type

Approval,

in

accordance w

ith U

N R

egulation(s) u

nder

the 1958 Agreement.

§

NCV

TA

§ AE

D §

Applicant

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐CH

/P00

6 Co

mplaint Handling


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns of

complaint

hand

ling

procedure

for

complaints related to implem

entatio

ns of

UN

Regulatio

ns

under

the

1958

Agreem

ent.

§

AC

§ TA

A §

TS

§ Manufacturer

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐M

S/P0

07

Market Surveillance


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns

§

OEM

§

TAA

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

16

requ

ired for market surveillance op

eration

cond

ucted

by Type Ap

proval Au

thority

(TAA

) and

Autom

otive Engineering Divisio

n (AED

).

§ AC

§

TS

§ MDT

CC

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐PR

/P00

8 Prod

uct R

ecall


es the process flow

, respon

sibilitie

s and

documentatio

ns of

prod

uct

recall, which concerns cases

whereby manufacturers, concessio

naire

s or official/in

depend

ent impo

rters become

aware of the existence of safety defects in

prod

ucts that are available for supp

ly in

Malaysia

as w

ell as o

ther re

levant markets.

§

NSC

§ NCV

TA

§ TA

A §

Supp

lier

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐RA

/P00

9

Regulatio

n Ad

optio

n This

procedure

applies

to all relevant

agencies, bo

th governmental and

non-‐

governmental, to ado

pt and

implem

ent U

N

§

AC

§ TA

A §

Relevant agencies

The

Esta

blis

hmen

t of U

NEC

E W

P.29

Impl

emen

tatio

n G

uide

line

in M

alay

sia

Supp

lement to the MCP

01/2012

17

Regulatio

ns in M

alaysia

.

MIR

OS/

VSB/

WP2

9-‐RD

/P01

0

Regulatio

n De

velopm

ent

This procedure applies to all activities that

are

related

to the

UN Re

gulatio

ns

developm

ent

includ

ing

the

prop

osal of

new regulations and

mod

ificatio

n of the

existing regulatio

n, w

hich is prop

osed by

Malaysia

as o

ne of the W

P.29 mem

bers.

§

NSC

§ AC

§

TAA

§ GR

§ Re

levant agencies


18

3.0 Chronology of Events On 6th April 2011, MIROS was assigned by MOT to develop a guideline for UNECE WP.29 implementation in Malaysia. To meet this objective, a dedicated task force team had been formed. As a first step, related procedures for the implementation were identified as described in methodology section. This process took about two weeks’ time. Based on a number of literature reviews and analyses of current practices in Malaysia and other countries, the procedures were drafted. In parallel, the identified stakeholders were approached, a series of discussions were held and the drafted document was circulated for comments and reviews. The stakeholders’ engagement process required extra time as MIROS had to coordinate and arrange formal discussions with the related agencies. In addition, stakeholders had requested to extend the submission of the revised document in order to thoroughly review and provide further valuable comments. Further discussions with the RTD Director General on the 21st October 2011, prior to the guideline submission to the Ministry of Transport, led to the identification of two additional procedures (UN regulation adoption and UN regulation development) which needed to be included in the final document. After all the feedbacks were gathered and reviewed, the finalised draft was submitted to the MIROS Publication Unit for formatting and publication. On the 27th February 2012, the final document was submitted to MOT and circulated to all the stakeholders. The activities involved during the development process is summarised in Table 4.


19

Table 4 Chronology of activities

No Date Activity Location 1 6/4/2011 Assignment received from KSU n/a 2 7/4/2011 Formation of MIROS task force MIROS, Kajang 3 13/4/2011 –

26/4/2011 Procedure identification:

§ Audit § TS designation § Conformity of Production

(CoP) § Type approval granting § Vehicle type approval

granting § Market surveillance § Complaint handling § Product recall

MIROS, Kajang

4 27/4/2011 -‐ 29/4/2011

WP.29 RTD Workshop Akademi JPJ, Melaka

5 2/5/2011 – 22/9/2011

Guideline documentation MIROS, Kajang

6 12/5/2011 MIROS-‐DSM discussion Department of Standards Malaysia, Cyberjaya

7 18/5/2011 MIROS-‐SIRIM first discussion SIRIM AEC, Shah Alam 8 1/7/2011 MIROS-‐MDTCC discussion MTDCC, Putrajaya 9 11/7/2011 MIROS-‐MITI discussion MITI, Kuala Lumpur 10 20/7/2011 MIROS-‐SIRIM second discussion MIROS, Kajang 11 26/7/2011 MIROS-‐RTD discussion MIROS, Kajang 12 12/8/2011 MIROS-‐MAI discussion MIROS, Kajang 13 23/9/2011 Completion of first draft 14 2/10/2011 -‐

4/10/2011 WP.29 MIROS task force workshop

Shangri-‐La Hotel, Putrajaya

15 3/10/2011 Ministrial discussion Shangri-‐La Hotel,


20

(MIROS,MOT,RTD) Putrajaya 16 21/10/2011 Presentation of CGRP to RTD

Director General RTD, Putrajaya

17 27/10/2011 Addition of procedures 18 28/10/2011 –

31/11/2011 Development of additional procedures:

§ UN Regulation Adoption § UN Regulation

Development

MIROS, Kajang

19 19/12/2011 Circulation of guideline to MOT and RTD

20 30/12/2011 Circulation of guideline to other stakeholders

21 2/1/2012 – 6/1/2012 Stakeholders review process 22 9/1/2012 –

27/1/2012 Additional time requested by the stakeholders for final feedback submission

23 30/1/2012 – 2/2/2012

Final review MIROS, Kajang

24 3/2/2012 Completion of second draft 25 3/2/2012 –

25/2/2012 Publication process MIROS, Kajang

26 27/2/2012 Submission to MOT 27 15/3/2012 MIROS – MAA discussion MIROS, Kajang 28 16/3/2012 –

31/3/2012 Final publication process MIROS, Kajang


21

4.0 Conclusion The development of the National Regulatory Implementation Guideline of UNECE WP.29 in Malaysia involved four main processes, which are procedure identification, guideline documentation, stakeholders’ engagement and final review. With relentless efforts and continued commitment by all stakeholders in providing comprehensive responses, the national regulatory implementation guideline of UNECE WP.29 was successfully completed. Realising that our country requires an efficient UN Regulations implementation, the completion of this document required a high level of commitment from all involved parties. It is hoped that this guideline will contribute towards improving the local automotive industry and ensuring vehicles are safe to be used on Malaysian roads.

Malaysian Institute of Road Safety ResearchLot 125-135, Jalan TKS 1, Taman Kajang Sentral43000 Kajang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MalaysiaTel : 603 - 8924 9200 Faks : 603 - 8733 2005E-mail : [email protected] : www.miros.gov.my

MALAYSIAN INSTITUTE OF ROAD SAFETY RESEARCH

the establishment of unece wp.29 implementation guideline ... 02... · fauziana l, mohd hafzi mi,...

Documents