49. GRRF received an oral report from the Secretary of the IWG on Intelligent Transport Systems / Automated Driving on the outcome of the latest meeting that took place one day before the start of this GRRF session. The Secretary referred to GRRF-82-16 containing the latest document discussed with elements determining the definitions of automation levels. He noted that it was intended to be a living document delivering the conceptual framework, while GRRF was dealing with technical requirements. GRRF noted the importance of the work done by the IWG and supported the view expressed by the Chair on the necessity to allocate more time for this IWG in the framework of the WP.29 activities.

50. Three intergovernmental bodies dealing with automated driving had their sessions during the third week of September 2016, in the Palais des Nations in Geneva. Taking advantage of the experts’ attendance, the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety (WP.1) and the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF) broke their usual work on 20 September 2016 (afternoon) in order to meet together informally in the configuration of the 2016 UNECE ITS flagship event as joint meeting of WP.1, WP.29/GRRF and IWG on ITS/AD experts. This ad hoc meeting, aiming at an in-depth exchange or views and information, was moderated by Mrs. L. Iorio (Chair of WP.1) and by Mr. B. Frost (Chair of GRRF). Mr. J. Valmain (Chair of the Informal Group on Automated Driving) gave a status report on the activities of WP.1 and its informal group. Mr. O. Klöckner (Germany) gave a status report on the activities of the GRRF Informal Working Group on ACSF (Regulation No.79). The WP.1 delegate from Sweden wondered why GRRF was prioritizing its work on technical provisions applicable for lower levels of automation, if it would block technical progress and the introduction of these technologies. The Chair of GRRF noted that no Contracting Party and no other stakeholder presented any request or proposal related to higher level of automation and that no members of the industry expressed the need to do so at this stage. The expert from OICA confirmed some public relations activities on these technologies and explained that they were mostly related to market probing activities. The delegate from Slovakia wondered whether driver training would be necessary in order for drivers to understand and well control these new technologies. The delegate from Germany mentioned the work done on Human Machine Interface (HMI) to minimize system complexity and make systems intuitive for the driver. The WP.1 delegate from Belgium noted the Terms of Reference of the IWG on ACSF. He raised the question whether a driver or a system would be able to identify a highway in the sense of the Regulation. The expert from Finland, responding to the expert from Sweden, added that shuttles, with automation corresponding to those described in the SAE level 4 definition, would be locally or nationally approved. He noted that the work at the WP.1 level might have to be ahead of the regulatory work done at the GRRF level. The Chair of GRRF noted that the use of Remote Controlled Parking (RCP) systems may be prohibited by traffic laws in some Countries. The expert from WP.1 and GRRF experts noted that some future work could be of mutual interest, especially a reflection on secondary tasks that can be performed by drivers during automated driving phases.