Joint EU/Japan/US proposal for the program of work, segmented into

• Existing GTRs – High priority
• Existing GTRs – Low priority
• Existing GTRs – No activities identified for PoW, and
• New priorities
.

126. The representative of the EU introduced WP.29-172-31, jointly prepared by US, Japan and EU, which aimed at providing an overview of the priority of the programme of work, listing priorities for future work in view of the development of new UN GTRs as well as ongoing work on amendments to the existing ones. The representative of the United States of America stated that at a later stage he would be in the position to provide more detailed comments to the document since he was waiting from his administration a list of priorities focused on national needs. The representative from OICA underlined that clarification was needed as to the scope of a UN GTR on Event Data Recorders (EDR) since EDR should not be confused with data storage for automated vehicles. The representative of China informed AC.3 about their activities on automated and connected vehicles, on development of a national standard on intelligent and connected vehicles (ICV) and to provide further information at the next sessions. She finally announced the availability of her country to participate to future activities focused on the development of UN GTRs on autonomous driving.

127. AC.3 requested chairs of working groups and Contracting Party representatives to provide their feedback on WP.29-172-31 by 15 August 2017, to allow the secretariat to distribute it with an official symbol at it November 2017 session.

122. The representative of the European Union introduced WP.29-173-20 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/144) aimed at providing an overview of the priority of the programme of work of the development of UN GTRs or amendments to the existing ones. She finally invited AC.3 to provide more details on new UN GTR activities. The representative of the United States of America underlined that especially for the development of new UN GTRs, sponsors should be assigned. The representative from OICA agreed with most of the proposed subjects, but underlined that:

1. Harmonisation is crucial, but issues on the same subjects already being developed in the framework of the 1958 Agreement should continue to be conducted in parallel;
2. Clarification was needed for the development of a UN GTR on Event Data Recorders (EDR); OICA supported this, but pointed out that there was a difference between EDR and data storage systems for automated vehicles and that the scope of the proposal should be clarified;
3. Clarification of the exact objectives would be welcome on the proposals, especially the one on driver recognition systems.

123. AC.3 agreed in principle on the content of WP.29-173-20 and requested the secretariat to distribute it with an official symbol at its March 2018 session for final revision and endorsement.

124. The representative of Japan stated that, regarding a next step for this agenda, the highly automated driving issue should be discussed not only under the 1958 Agreement but also under the 1998 Agreement, and that there is high possibility for this item to become a new UN GTR activity according to the programme of work.

122. The representative of the European Union introduced WP.29-173-20 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2017/144) aimed at providing an overview of the priority of the programme of work of the development of UN GTRs or amendments to the existing ones. She finally invited AC.3 to provide more details on new UN GTR activities. The representative of the United States of America underlined that especially for the development of new UN GTRs, sponsors should be assigned. The representative from OICA agreed with most of the proposed subjects, but underlined that:

1. Harmonisation is crucial, but issues on the same subjects already being developed in the framework of the 1958 Agreement should continue to be conducted in parallel;
2. Clarification was needed for the development of a UN GTR on Event Data Recorders (EDR); OICA supported this, but pointed out that there was a difference between EDR and data storage systems for automated vehicles and that the scope of the proposal should be clarified;
3. Clarification of the exact objectives would be welcome on the proposals, especially the one on driver recognition systems.

123. AC.3 agreed in principle on the content of WP.29-173-20 and requested the secretariat to distribute it with an official symbol at its March 2018 session for final revision and endorsement.

124. The representative of Japan stated that, regarding a next step for this agenda, the highly automated driving issue should be discussed not only under the 1958 Agreement but also under the 1998 Agreement, and that there is high possibility for this item to become a new UN GTR activity according to the programme of work.

156. The Chair of AC.3 introduced the documents that were considered under this agenda item. AC.3 considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/31, aimed at providing an updated overview of the priorities of the Programme of Work of the development of UN GTRs or amendments to the existing ones. AC.3 referred to the discussions on document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 under agenda item 2.3.

157. The Chair of AC.3 proposed that agenda item 17 could be divided into two items: 17.1 on the conventional priority topics in the programme of work of the 1998 Agreement, and 17.2. on priority topics in the programme of work of the 1998 Agreement concerning automated and connected vehicles for consideration.

158. Discussion was inconclusive, and the Chair of AC.3 proposed to prepare and submit an informal document to the fifty-sixth session detailing the proposed changes to the agenda. AC.3 accepted this proposal and deferred continuation of discussions on the matter to the subsequent AC.3 session in June 2019.