Proposal to allow ACSF-B lateral acceleration above the maximum limit value in cases where the lane position cannot be maintained by the vehicle (for example, on a tightening curve).

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.

This document outlines the UK’s latest proposals to permit a lane change function during a minimum risk manoeuvre or emergency manoeuvre as part of the forthcoming ALKS Regulation.

12. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland recalled their position on the need to allow ALKS to perform a lane change if necessary, during an emergency manoeuvre. GRVA did not have the time to review in detail his proposal (GRVA-06-11) and agreed to resume this discussion at the GRVA session in September 2020.

24. The Chair regretted that GRVA did not have enough time for reviewing the proposal submitted by the expert from AVERE and also for the proposal submitted by the expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. GRVA agreed to consider these two items at its September 2020 session.

Proposal agreed by interested Contracting Parties to resolve concerns regarding “peer review” of cybersecurity type approvals.

27. The expert from the Russian Federation presented GRVA-07-08, proposing a clarification of para. 5.3.5. of UN Regulation No. [155]. The expert from Japan explained that the proposed clarification should be carefully reviewed as it could lead to restrictions to the rights of Contracting Parties according to the 1958 Agreement. The author agreed and mentioned that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/97 already provided some clarifications.

17. The expert from Germany presented GRVA-07-63, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/32 with a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (ALKS), aimed at increasing the maximum speed (from 60 km/h to 130 km/h) for ALKS. She also introduced a second proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/33) aimed at introducing provisions for ALKS performing lane changes. The experts from Austria, China, Denmark, European Commission, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic or Korea, Sweden and UK were rather supportive. They provided ideas and technical comments to improve the proposals. The expert from Switzerland opposed to the proposed speed increase (up to 130 km/h), stating that it would be counterproductive and as Switzerland was reviewing traffic rules based on the adopted 60 km/h. The experts from Japan, Canada and USA did not support the proposals and referred to FDAV as the reference document guiding the work of GRVA on automation. The expert from SAFE stated the need for a clear roadmap, mentioned the challenges for the Technical Services and the Approval Authorities with regards to Level 3 technologies and supported the comments from the European Commission regarding the need for a Regulation addressing Automation on motorways.

18. It was recalled that the expert from UK was working on a proposal for provisions for lane change during the minimum risk manoeuvre.

19. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-07-26, introducing a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (GRVA-07-31), aimed at extending the scope of the Regulation to heavy vehicles. They recalled that these vehicle categories were already in the scope of the activities of the former IWG on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF), which drafted UN Regulation No. [157].

20. GRVA noted that its work priorities on automation were defined by WP.29 in the FDAV. GRVA also noted that a number of Contracting Parties were willing to work on amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and therefore decided to consult the Administrative Committee for the coordination of work (AC.2).

21. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRVA-07-07, highlighting some inconsistencies between the different parts of UN Regulation No. [157]. He mentioned discrepancies on the use of the term “system”. He questioned the need for Appendix 3 to Annex 4. He then introduced amendment proposal GRVA-07-06 on behalf of the European Commission and the Russian Federation. The expert from OICA responded to the proposal (GRVA-07-59). He also briefly introduced GRVA-07-30, proposing editorial changes to the Regulation and GRVA-07-21 with substantial amendments to the Regulations.

22. The Chair mentioned other informal documents (GRVA-07-27, GRVA-07-45, GRVA-07-56, GRVA-07-62 and GRVA-07-66), proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and invited the stakeholders to prepare a consolidated document with amendment proposals that could generate consensus at GRVA. Interested parties developed GRVA-07-69-Rev.1.

23. GRVA adopted the amendment proposals marked in green and yellow in GRVA-07-69-Rev.1 (see Annex III of the session report). GRVA requested the secretariat to correct the abbreviations, as appropriate, and to submit it without the text in red as supplement to UN Regulation No. [157], for consideration and vote by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) its Administrative Committee for the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) at their March 2021 sessions.

24. Following the interpretation request by the expert from France (GRVA-07-39), GRVA agreed that ALKS should in principle detect “approaching emergency vehicles” as per traffic rules, noting that a definition of approaching emergency vehicles as well as other clarifications should be developed as soon as possible.

30. The expert from United Kingdom introduced GRSP-68-23, representing the development of Mutual Resolution No. 1, Addendum 1 and concerning the Biomechanical Rear Impact Dummy-II (BIORID-II) UN dummy as part of test tools in UN GTR No. 7 and UN Regulation No. 17 (10 series of amendments) for use in rear impact assessment. He recommended that consideration on this proposal would be made together with GRSP-54-05 (Draft addendum 1 to M.R.1), introduced at the fifty-fourth session of GRSP (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/54, para. 4). He recommended GRSP to provide comments on GRSP-68-23 and GRSP-54-05 before 31 January 2021 for consideration in the final document to be submitted to the May 2021 session of GRSP. It was noted that copyrights were expected to be removed from drawings when the proposal would be finally adopted by WP.29 and AC.3. GRSP agreed with the recommendation of the expert from the United Kingdom and agreed to resume discussion at its May 2021 session.