Proposal to introduce formulae for tyre sizes in Annex 5, Table B, add sizes in Annex 5, Part II, Tables C and E for old sizes that do not follow the guidelines/formulae applicable for high flotation tyres, clarify tyre width tolerances, correct paragraph numbering and references, align the text editorially with UN R30 and to make other editorial improvements,

Proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of Remote Control Manoeuvring (RCM) systems, defined as driver-actuated systems on off-road vehicles used for navigating exceptionally difficult terrain. This proposal seeks to permit remote manoeuvring capability provided that the vehicle is designed to operate off-road and the off-road location is confirmed throughout the whole period that the function is in use.

Formal proposal from the ACDC informal group for consideration by GRRF for a new Regulation on uniform provisions concerning the approval of mechanical coupling components of combinations of agricultural vehicles.

This document consolidates previous documents GRRF/2017/19 and informal document GRRF-84-17 taking into account the request for addition of tyre sizes and tyre classification codes common in the United States and standardised by the Tire and Rim Association, but needed to be added to UN Regulation No. 106 in order to permit their type approval in order to conform to Regulation EU 167/2013 for tyres to be exported to Europe. It includes addition/modifications of some paragraphs to the main text of the Regulation as well as the addition of some tyre size designations to Annex 5 and Annex 7:

1. ISO 4251-4 replaced by ISO 18805
2. Paragraph 2.33.2 deleted since new tables for IF and VF were added to Annex 7
3. Paras 3.2., 3.2.2. and 5.4. modified because “tyres submitted for approval” cannot bear an approval mark until approved and the “only” as it is written can be misunderstood. Para. 3.2.2. was aligned to the wording in other UN Regulations. Reference to para. 3.3 in paragraph 5.4. is deleted because paragraph 3.3 does not refer to specific markings
4. Para 6.1.2. amended to align the wording to the headers in Annex 5 and to correct the reference to the footnote
5. Para 6.2.1. amended to restore the proper references after renumbering resulting from the latest Supplements
6. The amendment of Annex 5, Table 5 adds the value for the overall diameter (D) in column (*) that applies to tyres marked with classification code “I-3”
7. Annex 5, Table 6, Note 1 amended because most of the tyre sizes listed in the table, especially those identified by the “classification code I‐3” (i.e. Traction tread), are currently available in both versions: ‘implement’ to be used on agricultural machinery and ‘IND’ to be used on construction vehicles. The two types of tyres have the same type of size designation and the same dimensions. Therefore some manufacturers identify those tyres with the suffix ‘IND’ rather than with the suffix ‘IMP’ thus applying the variation of load capacity with speed as published in Annex 7 Part E. The reason for this proposal is to avoid a duplication of tables with a new table only replacing the suffix IMP with the suffix IND.
8. The addition of the footnote to Annex 5, Table 7 answers the request by GRRF to introduce appropriate formulae in the Regulation instead of continuously updating Annex 5.
9. References in Annex 7 corrected pursuant to the renumbering following the introduction of three new paragraphs in Supplement 15 approved during the 172nd session of WP.29.
10. Annex 7, Part A amended to conform with Tire and Rim Association specifications for code designated diagonal tyres with speed symbol A8.

Proposal to add markings for the inflation pressure to be used for measurements and tests.

Proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of retreaded tyres marked with the alpine symbol (“3PMSF” or “snowflake symbol”).

In order to have a Regulation on the retreaded tyres with definitions and provisions structured in the same way of those previously introduced in amendments of “new tyres” Regulations, this amendment:

1. Indicates that for the purpose of this Regulation “tyres” means “pneumatic tyres”, so all the text has been reviewed
2. Introduces a definition of :
   • “retreader” copy based on that “manufacturer” in the tyres regulations
   • Brand name", “Trademark”, “Trade description” and “Commercial name” as defined in the tyre regulations
   • Material manufacturer / material supplier
3. Takes into account the rounding rules (already approved in the other tyre regulations) for the calculation of width and diameter of the tyres
4. Aligns the title and the provisions of the para. 12 related to the names and addresses of Technical Services, Approved Laboratories and administrative Department with their equivalent in the tyres regulations

Consolidated version of UN R54 incorporating the proposed amendments in document GRRF/2018/5.

Consolidated version of UN R106 including ETRTO proposed amendments (see documents GRRF/2018/6 and GRRF/2018/7).

This document presents changes agreed by an informal group of experts reviewing the content of Annex 6 since the 84th session of GRRF. The proposal aims to clarify the purpose of Annex 6 and ensure its suitability when used in the assessment of steering systems featuring advances in automation (i.e., ACSF).

Updated text of provisions from the informal group on ACSF for the approval of emergency steering functions and driver-initiated automated lane changing systems.

Proposal of provisions for the approval of emergency steering functions under Regulation No. 79.

Proposal to cease approvals under the 02 series of amendments from September 2020 in order to allow manufacturers adequate time to adapt to the new requirements;

• ESF, ACSF C and unexpectedly ACSF B1 (despite originally assumed to be compatible with ACSF C new requirements),
• new CEL assessment (documentation, tests…) whose scope is also extended to all non-complex electronic systems under series 03.

Regarding the application to “All Types” (e.g. for new registration), industry proposes to leave unchanged the existing vehicles on the market which are approved on the base of national of regional exemptions by Contracting Parties signatories of the UN R79 regulation, given the heavy technical impacts on ACSF C (sensor range…) which are indirectly affecting ACSF B1 systems that were initially assumed to be compatible with cat. C (e.g. 3s hands-off detection instead of 15s, lane centering prior to the lateral movement towards the marking etc.), and the add-on of requirements restricting design possibilities without clear safety benefits (e.g. the use of direction indicators to suppress the procedure).

Japan comments on the changes agreed by the informal group of experts which reviewed the content of Annex 6 and proposed (via document GRRF-85-1/Rev.1) to clarify the purpose of Annex 6 and ensure its suitability when used in the assessment of steering systems featuring advances in automation (i.e., ACSF). The proposal

1. corrects an editorial error by inserting a missing clause in paragraph 1, and
2. deletes the phrase “at least 10%” from paragraph 4.1.1. which changes the current meaning of text with regard to assessment of “the System”
   • Japanese technical services already verify each declared function by the manufacturer under the paragraph,
   • The wording “at least 10%” may result in a decrease in the number of tests where Japan believes number of tests should be decided by the Technical service considering which tests should apply.

mp4 format video from the presentation on the proposal for the 03 series of amendments.

Presentation concerning the introduction of provisions for emergency steering functions.

Proposal for the 03 series of amendments as approved by GRRF.

Transitional provisions for the implementation of requirements for ACSF Cat. C (driver-initiated automated lane-changing systems) and Emergency Steering Functions (ESF) as approved by the GRRF during its 85th session.