The UN World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) enables governments to cooperate internationally in developing vehicle regulations concerning safety, environmental performance, and energy efficiency.
GlobalAutoRegs is a technical resource for members of the regulatory affairs community interested in this international collaboration.
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Reporting on cyber security issues |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-24 |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 29 Jun 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Reporting on ADS engagement times |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-32 |
|
Proposal for guidance on reporting average feature engagement time in para. 4. The average engagement time is a statistical measure of how long an ADS feature stays engaged per activation (e.g., cumulative time / number of activations). The average is expected to be computed in an aggregated manner, i.e., over the whole fleet of vehicles having the same ADS feature. |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 29 Jun 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Reporting on communications issues |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-23 |
|
Proposal to amend the guidance on reporting safety-relevant communication issues by deleting “Such an occurrence could be reported in case of” and replacing it with “Examples of communication issues could include”, deleting “The remote interaction is unavailable” and replacing it with “Interruption of remote interaction,”, replacing “Information” with “Communication”, adding “the” before “safety threshold”, and adding “(if indicated in the safety case)” after “safety threshold”, and replacing the period after “unavailable” with “, or”. |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 29 Jun 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Proposal to add children and animals to safety-revelent object examples |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-39 |
|
Proposal to add animals and children to examples of safety-relevant objects in para. 6.1.2.8. The revision inserts “Animals and children (in or adjacent to the roadway, under the vehicle carriage, etc)” into the illustrative and non-exhaustive list of safety-relevant objects. The proposal removes ambiguity for manufacturers developing safety cases and ensures consistent treatment across ADS requirements, making explicit that animals and children are safety-relevant objects even though they cannot be expected to respond predictably based on vehicle signals, traffic rules, or common conventions. |
| Submitted by: Sentient Futures |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 08 Jul 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Driving situations with animals |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-38 |
|
Proposal to add animals and other road users as examples of entities an ADS may encounter in driving situations and test scenarios. The revised text adds “animals, or other road users” to the illustrative example in para. 2.33 and para. 2.34, and replaces “pedestrians” with “these entities” in the corresponding sentence about scenario design. This ensures scenario design used to demonstrate ADS competency explicitly accounts for animal encounters alongside pedestrians and other road users. |
| Submitted by: Sentient Futures |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 08 Jul 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| Battery guards for electric and hybrid vehicles |
| Reference Number: EVE-98-02 |
|
EV Guard Oy manufactures battery guards for hybrid and electric vehicles using 3 mm marine aluminum and 8 mm recycled PET composite to protect battery packs, liquid-cooling systems, and electrical connectors. The guards distribute impact force, reduce temperature fluctuations, improve energy efficiency, and are 100% recyclable. The company supplies guards to authorized repair shops. No valid regulation currently applies to aftermarket battery shields; UN R100 does not cover this product, representing a structural gap in regulation. |
| Submitted by: EV Guard |
| Meeting Sessions: 98th EVE session (15 Jul) |
| Document date: 08 Jul 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Discussion Topic | Electric Vehicle Environmental Performance |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Safety case and claims, arguments, and evidence |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-16 |
|
Proposal to delete “the examples given below is not the only possible approach,” add clarification that examples are non-comprehensive and represent one possible approach for documenting claims, arguments and evidence, modify example descriptions to point to regulation requirements 5/7.3.3.2 (a) and (b), and incorporate examples from ADS-20-09 by removing the placeholder “Examples to be provided.” |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 29 Jun 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |
| ADS guidance and interpretation document: Mitigation risk condition end states |
| Reference Number: ADS-21-15 |
|
Proposal to remove the placeholder for guidance on expectations concerning mitigation risk condition end states in para. 7.3.1.14. and replace it with text from ADS-20-09 with one paragraph removed based on ADS-20-50. The revised text specifies that while ADS Performance of DDT requirements set out when an MRC is required, they do not specify the process to achieve the MRC or its end state. MRC end states are expected to be fully stopped with parking brake applied and could include activation of hazard lights. The process to reach an MRC is expected to vary depending on the situation and system capabilities, and possible end state examples include stopping in lane, on shoulder, exiting highway, or navigating to nearest parking spot. |
| Meeting Sessions: 21st ADS session (14-17 Jul) |
| Document date: 08 Jul 26 |
| Relevant to: WP.29 Regulatory Project | Automated Driving Systems, GTR No. 26 | Automated Driving Systems, and UN Regulation No. 185 | Approval of vehicles with regard to their Automated Driving Systems |
| Click here to view the full document file |