43. The expert from AVERE introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/7 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/8 (and their respective amendments in GRVA-05-08 and GRVA-05-24), proposing amendments to the ACSF provisions, resuming the discussion started in September 2019. He mentioned the support provided by the expert from the United Kingdom. The experts from Sweden and France provided comments. The experts from Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Norway expressed concerns. The expert from the Netherlands explained that the dynamics problems reported by the manufacturer, member of AVERE, were not due to the provisions in the Regulation but were due to design choices made by this manufacturer. The experts from the European Commission, Korea and United Kingdom and Northern Ireland supported the proposals; the expert from OICA, too. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed alternative proposals (GRVA-05-59) improving the text. The expert from the United Kingdom proposed GRVA-05-57 aimed at addressing the comments expressed by the expert from Sweden. GRVA reviewed all revised proposals produced by the expert from AVERE during the week but remained divided. GRVA agreed to review a revised proposal at the sixth session of GRVA, if time allows.

44. The Chair of GRVA noted the division of GRVA on this matter. He proposed that GRVA performs a general review of the Regulation at its September 2020 session.

72. GRVA noted that the review of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/11 by the Task Force on ADAS was still ongoing. The expert from AVERE withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/7.

50. The expert from AVERE introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 proposing revised amendments to the ACSF of Category C provisions (time range during which the lane change manoeuvre is initiated) in UN Regulation No. 79. The experts from UK, European Commissions and Japan supported the proposal. The expert from Korea supported the proposal and indicated that a longer time than the one proposed would be preferable. The expert from the Netherlands opposed to the proposal for the same reasons as the one expressed in September 2020. The expert from Norway also opposed to the proposal. He wondered about the possible benefits of stretching the limits. The expert from France supported the proposal but pointed out inconsistencies in the drawing compared to the provisions in the text. The expert from OICA supported the proposal. The expert from AVERE provided answers to the statements and questions raised. The Chair asked if all doubts were cleared. The experts from the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and Finland still had reservations to the proposal but agreed that it could be further discussed at a task force meeting.

72. GRVA agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on the agenda for the September 2022 session.

70. GRVA agreed, following the recommendation of the TF on ADAS, to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on its agenda for the January 2023 session.

71. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-14-25, detailing an amendment proposal to the provisions on the activation of Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C to reduce the driver’s confusion.

72. The expert from Japan supported the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supported the intention of the proposal and suggested to review the text proposed.

73. The expert from Germany was not in favour of GRVA-14-25. He suggested to address this concern via a better human-machine interface requirement.

74. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-24/Rev.1, aimed at addressing the comment from the expert from Germany. The expert from Germany welcomed the modifications proposed but still had concerns with the wording of paragraph 5.6.4.5. because it would introduce a weak requirement, difficult to verify. GRVA agreed in principle with the aim of the proposal but required an improved wording for consideration at its January 2023 session.

94. The expert from OICA offered to withdraw ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2011/9, even though the content of the proposal was still relevant and important for his organization. Similarly, the expert from AVERE withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10. GRVA agreed that the Task Force on ADAS would aim at addressing the matters, too.

95. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2023/6, as amended by GRVA-15-30. He recalled the context of the proposal, already discussed at the fourteenth session of GRVA. He mentioned that their proposal received comments (GRVA-15-09) and that he addressed them with the amendment included in GRVA-15-52. The secretariat read the letter of the expert from Sweden, absent, who expressed support for ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2023/6, as amended by GRVA-15-09.

96. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-15-53 with further provisions for an automatic change to a standby mode. GRVA agreed that a “suitable time delay” was one option to ensure that the vehicle has already reached a regular lane of travel, but GRVA could not identify a fixed time value and therefore agreed that such value could be subject to agreement between the manufacturer and the technical service during the approval process.

97. Following discussions, GRVA reached agreement on GRVA-15-54 and agreed to note in this report the justification and context related to GRVA-15-53, as summarized in para. 96 above.

98. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2023/6, as amended by GRVA-15-54, and requested the secretariat to submit it as a supplement to the 03 series and 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 (steering equipment) to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2023 sessions.