Working Document GRSG/2019/18

This proposal relates to the proposal in document GRSG-116-15. This proposal would:

1. clarify that the application of an AECD approval to other vehicle categories than M₁ and N₁ is not mandatory,
2. align the power supply requirement of Part III, para. 34.1 with the corresponding requirement in Part II, para. 25.1.
3. clarify with regard to para. 34.1 that if the vehicle is equipped with both
   • -a “back-power supply” as listed in para. 35.10.1 and
   • -a “Power supply other than back-up power supply mentioned in paragraph 35.10.1” as listed in para. 35.10.2
   both should be tested according to Annex 9. The “Power supply other than back-up power supply mentioned in paragraph 35.10.1” should indeed only be tested if it is the only power supply for the AECS.
4. Since informal document GRSG-116-15 deletes the existing exemptions in para. 1.3, and hence introduces more severe requirements, the changes should be introduced via a new series of amendments with appropriate Transitional Provisions of 2 years. (In effect, the application of AECS requirements would be based solely on the scope of UN R94 and R95 and no longer takes into account the presence of an airbag and its triggering system. The manufacturers need sufficient time to ensure AECS compliance for new vehicle types and in the same time, the changes should not affect existing vehicle types that were given an AECS type approval already.)

52. The expert from OICA recalled that the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2018/23 was to correct the scope of the UN Regulation. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed further editorial corrections and amendments (GRSG-116-15) which allow contracting parties to apply the relevant requirements to assess compliance of Accident Emergency Call Devices (AECD) designed for installation on vehicles of categories other than M1 and N1. The expert from OICA introduced GRSG-116-10 that clarified the application of an AECD approval and that proposed to continue with a new series of amendments that would give an appropriate lead time for the industry. Both proposals received general support and several comments. The expert from the Russian Federation welcomed the proposed amendments and volunteered to prepare two official documents for GRSG at its next session: (a) a draft supplement with the corrections and clarifications and (b) a draft 01 series of amendments with the broader scope and the transitional provisions.

53. GRSG welcomed that offer and agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session based on a revised, official documents by the Russian Federation.

Proposal to remove the exclusion of M₁ and N₁ not equipped with a side airbag and to specify that the AECS shall be able to output the navigation solution in an NMEA-0183 protocol format (RMC, GGA, VTG, GSA and GSV message), among other clarifications.

52. The expert from OICA recalled that the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2018/23 was to correct the scope of the UN Regulation. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed further editorial corrections and amendments (GRSG-116-15) which allow contracting parties to apply the relevant requirements to assess compliance of Accident Emergency Call Devices (AECD) designed for installation on vehicles of categories other than M1 and N1. The expert from OICA introduced GRSG-116-10 that clarified the application of an AECD approval and that proposed to continue with a new series of amendments that would give an appropriate lead time for the industry. Both proposals received general support and several comments. The expert from the Russian Federation welcomed the proposed amendments and volunteered to prepare two official documents for GRSG at its next session: (a) a draft supplement with the corrections and clarifications and (b) a draft 01 series of amendments with the broader scope and the transitional provisions.

53. GRSG welcomed that offer and agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its next session based on a revised, official documents by the Russian Federation.

Proposal to correct erroneous references (to annexes in the regulation as well as to UN R94 and R95) in the text and to correct an inconsistency in the text (paragraph 26.7.2. refers to situations where the AECS is not equipped with a back-up power supply; however, the subparagraph 26.7.2.3. refers to an AECS with a back-up power supply).