Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.

Proposal to correct errors in the text of the 02 series and its supplements.

Proposal to increase the usability and safety of the ELKS and to align the technical requirements with technological progress:

• Ensure that an ELKS is not adversely affected by magnetic or electrical fields
• Clarify when the system shall automatically deactivate to prevent unintended consequences, which should be at least detailed in the vehicle’s operating instructions as a minimum
• Include dashed lane markings for CDCF and road edges for ELKS, ensuring all systems fitted meet the highest safety standards and utilise the latest technology to prevent unintended lane departures 1
• Include the latest lane markings located in Annex 3 to UN Regulation 130. This is important as the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation 130
  includes Australian lane markings, ensuring compatibility
• Eliminate the option for an acoustic warning for LDWS to reduce confusion with the CDCF intervention acoustic warning required in paragraph 6.6.4.
• Correct minor grammatical errors
• Enhance usability by establishing system response limits, where recent research has highlighted the prevalence of consumers turning these lifesaving systems off
• Ensure consistent and repeatable testing.

Proposal to:

1. Clarify that the PBC values listed in para. 2.14. are minimum values,
2. Align the collision-warning requirements of para. 5.2.1.1. with those for the pedestrian and bicycle scenarios under paras. 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.3.1., and
3. Clarify para. 5.2.1.2. based on feedback from a recent public consultation in Australia.