5. The Chair introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 proposing priorities related to WP.29 and its subsidiary bodies activities on Automated Driving Vehicles (ADVs).

6. The expert from Japan mentioned that the framework document work stream proposed in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 should be based on the existing national and regional guidelines to provide the big picture of what GRVA should do. GRVA agreed to make progress on this work stream but noted some minor variations in the precise understanding of what this document should include: a document setting principles and guidelines (compiling existing guidelines) and a document that would also have an operational dimension to guide the future work on ADVs.

7. GRVA also reviewed the other priority items listed in the document and agreed that these priorities proposed can be addressed by GRVA.

8. GRVA discussed the need to address both the activities already started as well as the short-term priorities. Therefore, GRVA discussed the potential structure of GRVA to best address these current activities as well as the new short-term priorities defined in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2. Several proposals for a new structure were presented
(GRVA-02-31, GRVA-02-40, GRVA-02-42 and GRVA-02-47). The Chair also submitted GRVA-02-41 with draft Terms of Reference (ToR) and Rules of Procedures (RoP) for a new Informal Working Group (IWG).

9. The secretariat drafted at the end of the session a consolidation of inputs made by the Contracting Parties during the discussions (GRVA-02-44). GRVA agreed with this consolidation in form of a table as reproduced in Annex II, with the expectation that this would provide a base for continued discussions at the March 2019 session of WP.29.

25. The representative of the United Kingdom, Chair of GRVA, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2. He proposed to delay the adoption of this document until the review of WP.29-177-19, which was under preparation at that time.

27. The representative of the United States of America introduced WP.29-177-08 referring to the work priorities on vehicle automation in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 and proposing principles relevant for the performance assessment of automated vehicles.

48. WP.29 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 with the following amendment:

Table 1 to read:

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.

46. The secretary of the Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 on priority topics for automated and connected vehicles. The expert from the United States of America stressed that even though automated vehicles were different from conventional vehicles for many aspects, crashworthiness remained relevant. He clarified that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 did not yet include the work tasks of GRSP and was mainly a list of tasks for GRVA. He added that this document should be considered a living document and that crashworthiness should be included. He mentioned a few examples of passenger compartment configurations (e.g. passengers lying down or facing the side, lack of a steering wheel), and he added that these different dynamics would involve passengers in a crash. The expert from Germany endorsed the statement of the expert from the United States of America. He added that new tools and computer simulations should be validated. He urged to start a list of detailed subjects as soon as possible that would be examined during the December 2019 session of GRSP. The expert from the United States of America clarified that the vehicle automation was managed by WP.29 and the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) and not by GRVA. He suggested that the expert from Germany raise this issue at WP.29 and AC.3. He reiterated his statement (as per ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2) that currently, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 mainly referred to GRVA tasks and that other topics related to crashworthiness should be addressed by GRSP. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2019 session, awaiting feedback from WP.29 and AC.3 at their June 2019 sessions.

151. The Chair of AC.3 introduced the documents that were considered under this agenda item. AC.3 considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/31/Rev.1, 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 taking into account the decisions on document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 from the 177th WP.29 session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1145, para. 49). AC.3 referred to the discussions on WP.29-178-10/Rev.2, WP.29-178-19, WP.29-178-16/Rev.1, WP.29-178-17/Rev.2 and WP.29-178-18/Rev.1 under agenda item 2.3. Please note that document WP.29-178-17/Rev.2 does not exist. The amended document WP.29-178-17/Rev.1 was reproduced in Annex VI of the session report.