26. The expert from Italy presented GRRF-80-31, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2014/23/Rev.2 and GRRF-80-37 and proposing requirements for the approval of replacement brake discs for L‑category vehicles, taking into consideration the latest technologies available in the market as well as comments received during the previous session of GRRF. GRRF adopted the proposal with the following amendments:

(a) the proposed transitional provisions (paras 12.1 to 12.6) shall be deleted;
(b) The note under Table A15/2.9 shall read: “There are no groups…”

27. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2015/22 proposing to enable the approval according to Regulation No. 90 of test groups instead of single variants. GRRF adopted the proposal with an amendment below:

In paragraph 4.2.3.(b), for “approval document” read “communication document”

28. GRRF adopted the proposal as amended and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2016 sessions, as Supplement 3 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 90.

25. The expert from CLEPA presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2016/22 based on GRRF-80-12 proposing amendments to provisions defined for equivalent brake discs and drums and a relaxation of the requirement on the thickness variation for interchangeable replacement discs or drums. The expert presented a revised proposal GRRF-81-04 limiting the thickness variation requirement modification to vehicles of category O2, O3, N3 and M3. The expert from Italy expressed his concern with the proposed requirement relaxation. After discussion, GRRF agreed on the revised document GRRF-81-04-Rev.1. GRRF adopted the proposal amended by Annex IV to the report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2016 sessions, as Supplement 3 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 90.

3. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session as proposed in GRVA-04-01.

38. The expert from ITU made a presentation on Digital Maps (GRVA-04-02) as announced during the last GRVA session. He presented activities related to the development of road databases for highly automated driving in series production light vehicles. He expressed views on the information that such databases should include and also indicated possible use cases for such technologies (supporting e.g. Advanced Emergency Braking Systems on stationary objects, a “sensor” for automated driving). The expert from the Netherlands welcomed the presentation and invited other stakeholders of the digital map industry to present their views at future meetings. The expert from China noted some comments regarding a specific national regulation and explained that GRVA was not the appropriate body to comment on regulation applicable in her Country. The expert from ITU corrected his statement and explained that regulations would play a role in the development of this technology.

36. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-04-03, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/24 proposing an alternative Human Machine Interface (HMI) for ACSF of Category C. The proposal received comments (and GRVA extended the discussion after the end of the official meeting time, without interpretation and without decisions or conclusions).

37. Following further discussion, GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-43) and reproduced in Annex IV. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

65. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-05 and GRVA-04-06, analysing discrepancies between UN GTR No. 3 and UN Regulation No. 78. GRVA invited the expert from IMMA to submit an amendment proposal to UN Regulation No. 78 for review at the next session.

74. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/15, proposing to align UN Regulation No. 78 (Motorcycle braking) with the last amendment to UN GTR No. 3 adopted by GRVA at its September 2019 session.

75. GRVA adopted the proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it (without square brackets) to WP.29 and AC.1 as draft 05 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 78 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

65. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-05 and GRVA-04-06, analysing discrepancies between UN GTR No. 3 and UN Regulation No. 78. GRVA invited the expert from IMMA to submit an amendment proposal to UN Regulation No. 78 for review at the next session.

5. The expert from France introduced GRVA-04-07 informing on activities in his country concerning the development of a test centre for active safety, New Cars Assessment Programmes (NCAPs) activities, vehicle connectivity and automation.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

46. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/10, proposing amendments to the provisions applicable to ACSF of Category B. GRVA adopted the proposal as draft supplements to the 02 and the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 and requested the secretariat to submit them to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

33. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/19 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No.79 based on experience gathered by France, Germany and the Republic of Korea since the entry into force of the 03 series. The proposal received comments (see GRVA-04-09, GRVA-04-46). GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-47) as reproduced in Annex III, as supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No.79 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

51. The expert from Japan also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/16 proposing a new series of amendments to UN Regulation No. [152].

52. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-10 with editorial amendments to the proposal.

53. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended as reproduced in GRVA-04-52 and requested the secretariat to submit it as a draft new series of amendment to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

7. The expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on FRAV, reported on its kick off meeting, a short preparatory meeting that took place one day before GRVA. He reported on the selection of a Secretary, Mr. J. Creamer (AAPC). He stated that the group might create subgroups as necessary and that the group agreed not to limit the scope of its activities (e.g. for vehicle categories and speeds).

8. The expert from the Republic of Korea expressed support for the activities of the group and highlighted the relevance of the work done by the IWG on ACSF. He mentioned the importance for the group to develop a roadmap which would be in line with the activities of the IWG on VMAD.

9. The expert from Sweden stressed the need to address the performance of vehicles not only when new, but also when they are in use. The expert from the Netherlands pointed out the activities of the IWG on VMAD on the acquisition of real-world data supporting a proper evaluation of the technology, also in use.

10. The expert from UK noted similarities between the in-use considerations and the function over lifetime considerations at the Task Force on Cyber Security and OTA issues.

11. The expert from CITA explained the views of his organization and of the IWG on Periodic Technical Inspection (PTI) on this matter, including the Continuous Technical Inspection (CTI) vision. He mentioned that traditional visual inspections during PTI would be complemented by electronic checks.

12. GRVA distinguished between PTI and the continuous evaluation of the integrity of the automated system in use, noting that the latter could serve the purpose of PTI.

13. The Co-Chair of the IWG on FRAV (Germany) explained that the group only met for a preparatory meeting. He announced the invitation for the next meeting would be issued soon after.

14. The expert from the Netherlands, Co-Chair of the IWG on VMAD introduced GRVA-04-18; a status report of the group’s activities. He explained that the group had established subgroups, one dealing with traffic scenarios, one dealing with audits, virtual testing and in use data, and another one dealing with test track and real-world testing.

15. GRVA considered the opportunity provided by the activities on Automated Lane Keeping Systems as a timely occasion to test and demonstrate the validity of the New Assessment/Test Methods (NATM) developed by VMAD, given the fact that the IWG on ACSF would develop conventional tests. GRVA confirmed its expectation that the group shall provide in due time the electrical/electronic system Audit provisions for ALKS.

16. The IWG on VMAD requested access to ISO/PAS 21448. This document was kindly provided by the International Standardization Organization (ISO) secretariat.

18. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRVA-04-28 with a status report on the activities of the group. The group completed its deliberations on the first required deliverable expected from the group. It drafted GRVA-04-17 comparing both systems EDR and DSSAD.

19. GRVA discussed the purpose of both systems. Following discussions, GRVA agreed that the purpose of DSSAD would address the status of the vehicle and interactions with the driver, research, in use monitoring, legal responsibilities and liability issues.

20. GRVA also discussed the relevant vehicle categories for DSSAD. GRVA decided that the group should focus first on light vehicles.

4. The Secretary presented GRVA-04-16, with the highlights of the June 2019 session of WP.29. He reported on the adoption by WP.29 of the draft Framework Document on Automated Vehicles and the adoption of the Terms of Reference for the Informal Working Groups (IWGs) on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV) (GRVA-04-13), on Validation Methods for Automated Driving (VMAD) (GRVA-04-14), on Event Data Recorder / Data Storage Systems for Automated Driving (EDR/DSSAD) (GRVA-04-15). He also highlighted the adoption of Terms of Reference for the IWG on Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS). He referred to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1147 for more details.

18. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRVA-04-28 with a status report on the activities of the group. The group completed its deliberations on the first required deliverable expected from the group. It drafted GRVA-04-17 comparing both systems EDR and DSSAD.

19. GRVA discussed the purpose of both systems. Following discussions, GRVA agreed that the purpose of DSSAD would address the status of the vehicle and interactions with the driver, research, in use monitoring, legal responsibilities and liability issues.

20. GRVA also discussed the relevant vehicle categories for DSSAD. GRVA decided that the group should focus first on light vehicles.

14. The expert from the Netherlands, Co-Chair of the IWG on VMAD introduced GRVA-04-18; a status report of the group’s activities. He explained that the group had established subgroups, one dealing with traffic scenarios, one dealing with audits, virtual testing and in use data, and another one dealing with test track and real-world testing.

15. GRVA considered the opportunity provided by the activities on Automated Lane Keeping Systems as a timely occasion to test and demonstrate the validity of the New Assessment/Test Methods (NATM) developed by VMAD, given the fact that the IWG on ACSF would develop conventional tests. GRVA confirmed its expectation that the group shall provide in due time the electrical/electronic system Audit provisions for ALKS.

16. The IWG on VMAD requested access to ISO/PAS 21448. This document was kindly provided by the International Standardization Organization (ISO) secretariat.

41. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/21 with provisions on Remote Control Manoeuvring. GRVA recalled that it had already adopted provisions on a majority basis during its second session but had agreed to review them at this session to seek full consensus. The expert introduced GRVA-04-19 with further amendments introducing clarifications.

42. The expert from Germany requested that the session report reflect their statement: “Germany does not see the necessity to regulate this function at UNECE level”. Other experts mentioned that similar provisions could be developed for heavy duty vehicles, too.

43. GRVA agreed to work on similar provisions for other vehicle categories. GRVA also agreed with the amendments to the submitted proposal, reproduced in GRVA-04-19. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit the latest version of the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for review and vote at their November 2019 session.

2. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session and adopted it (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/15) with the update below. The adopted agenda is reproduced in GRVA-04-20-Rev.1, including the informal documents received before GRVA started. All informal documents distributed during the session are listed in Annex I of the session report.

Update:
For WP.29-176-14, read ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/120

17. Due to lack of time, GRVA did not consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/13, describing the principles of the “Three-Pillar Approach”, proposed by the experts from OICA (see GRVA-02-09 and GRVA-02-27).

27. GRVA noted that the presentation of GRVA-02-03 also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3, that the proposal for a test phase would also apply to the software updates work stream. The expert from Japan also supported the document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3. He indicated Japan’s support for the earliest adoption (during this session), since the issue was important and a UN Regulation was needed for the improvement of vehicle safety.

28. The expert from EC provided comments on the proposal (GRVA-02-37).

29. The expert from IMMA presented GRVA-02-18, proposing to exclude vehicles of Category L from the scope of the document.

30. The expert from ITU stated that regulating communication would require specific expertise and that the precedent at the Working Party on General Safety provisions with the UN Regulation No. 144 (Accident Emergency Call Systems) ignored communication aspects and durability provisions. He raised the question whether a vehicle equipped with safety systems based on communication would still be roadworthy in case the communication would no longer function e.g. when the communication system would be obsolete. GRVA agreed that the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air Software Updates was a good example demonstrating that WP.29 was able to attract the required experts with the right expertise and to make very quick progress on such strategic issues. GRVA agreed about the need to discuss the roadworthiness of vehicles in case of the vehicle communication unit obsolescence would impact the well performing of safety systems.

31. GRVA agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3 and GRVA-01-18 on the agenda of the next GRVA session.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air software updates (TF CS/OTA) reported on the activities of the group since June 2019. (Details are provided in GRVA-04-45.) He explained the activities of the test phase and reported that it was positive. He stated that the draft proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2 as amended) worked and provided value. He mentioned that the experience gathered during this phase would be reflected in an interpretation document and that the documents under development would be improved for consideration at the next session of GRVA.

22. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-25, proposing amendments to the scope of the draft regulation. GRVA referred the proposal to the Task Force.

23. The expert from Germany provided comments in GRVA-04-22. GRVA agreed to refer them to the Task Force.

24. The expert from the European Commission recalled that a report would have to be prepared for review at the next session of WP.29. He presented a proposal to clarify the scope of the draft UN Regulation on cyber security (GRVA-04-32). He noted that the challenges of the group were similar to those that the IWG on VMAD would face, when working on audits.

25. The expert from the USA commended the Task Force for its work. But she requested that the technical requirements be prepared (as previously agreed) in a document that could serve the 1998 Agreement as well.

26. The expert from Sweden informed that his country had now established a Cyber Security authority. GRVA welcomed the participation of Cyber Security authorities at the Task Force meetings.

27. The expert from FIGIEFA introduced GRVA-04-04 proposing amendments to the scope as well as new proposals related to access to data by authorized parties. She announced that she would support the alternative proposal concerning the scope presented in
GRVA-04-32. The expert from OICA also supported amendments to the scope but not the other amendments proposed in GRVA-04-32. The expert from EC stated the importance to remain vigilant concerning the access to data in vehicles. GRVA transmitted the amendment proposals to the task force.

28. The expert from FIA introduced GRVA-04-40 proposing to clarify the lifecycle and lifetime definitions. He suggested that the lifetime definition should also include the time after a vehicle is deregistered and until it is scrapped. GRVA did not conclude on this item and transmitted the document to the Task Force.

29. GRVA invited the Task Force to prepare the proposal for a new UN Regulation on cyber security, a draft guidance document, a draft resolution with recommendations together with draft requirements in a document that can serve the 1998 Agreement and a report on the test phase.

30. GRVA agreed to request an extension of the mandate of the Task Force for two years.

62. The expert from Italy introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, proposing amendments to UN GTR No. 3 as per the mandate adopted by A.C.3 (ECE/TRANS/WP29/AC.3/47). He also introduced GRVA-04-23 including amendments addressing comments received on the proposal. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended with the below correction and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

In ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, para 10, for 5.1.17, read 3.1.17.

63. The expert from Italy also introduced GRVA-04-24, containing the technical report associated to the proposal. GRVA adopted it and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

64. The expert from IMMA stated his satisfaction concerning the adoption of the amendment proposal to UN GTR No. 3. He mentioned that the outcome of this work was not fully harmonized, especially concerning Electromagnetic Compatibility and defeat device requirements.

62. The expert from Italy introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, proposing amendments to UN GTR No. 3 as per the mandate adopted by A.C.3 (ECE/TRANS/WP29/AC.3/47). He also introduced GRVA-04-23 including amendments addressing comments received on the proposal. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended with the below correction and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

In ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, para 10, for 5.1.17, read 3.1.17.

63. The expert from Italy also introduced GRVA-04-24, containing the technical report associated to the proposal. GRVA adopted it and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

64. The expert from IMMA stated his satisfaction concerning the adoption of the amendment proposal to UN GTR No. 3. He mentioned that the outcome of this work was not fully harmonized, especially concerning Electromagnetic Compatibility and defeat device requirements.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air software updates (TF CS/OTA) reported on the activities of the group since June 2019. (Details are provided in GRVA-04-45.) He explained the activities of the test phase and reported that it was positive. He stated that the draft proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2 as amended) worked and provided value. He mentioned that the experience gathered during this phase would be reflected in an interpretation document and that the documents under development would be improved for consideration at the next session of GRVA.

22. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-25, proposing amendments to the scope of the draft regulation. GRVA referred the proposal to the Task Force.

23. The expert from Germany provided comments in GRVA-04-22. GRVA agreed to refer them to the Task Force.

24. The expert from the European Commission recalled that a report would have to be prepared for review at the next session of WP.29. He presented a proposal to clarify the scope of the draft UN Regulation on cyber security (GRVA-04-32). He noted that the challenges of the group were similar to those that the IWG on VMAD would face, when working on audits.

25. The expert from the USA commended the Task Force for its work. But she requested that the technical requirements be prepared (as previously agreed) in a document that could serve the 1998 Agreement as well.

26. The expert from Sweden informed that his country had now established a Cyber Security authority. GRVA welcomed the participation of Cyber Security authorities at the Task Force meetings.

27. The expert from FIGIEFA introduced GRVA-04-04 proposing amendments to the scope as well as new proposals related to access to data by authorized parties. She announced that she would support the alternative proposal concerning the scope presented in
GRVA-04-32. The expert from OICA also supported amendments to the scope but not the other amendments proposed in GRVA-04-32. The expert from EC stated the importance to remain vigilant concerning the access to data in vehicles. GRVA transmitted the amendment proposals to the task force.

28. The expert from FIA introduced GRVA-04-40 proposing to clarify the lifecycle and lifetime definitions. He suggested that the lifetime definition should also include the time after a vehicle is deregistered and until it is scrapped. GRVA did not conclude on this item and transmitted the document to the Task Force.

29. GRVA invited the Task Force to prepare the proposal for a new UN Regulation on cyber security, a draft guidance document, a draft resolution with recommendations together with draft requirements in a document that can serve the 1998 Agreement and a report on the test phase.

30. GRVA agreed to request an extension of the mandate of the Task Force for two years.

17. Due to lack of time, GRVA did not consider ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/13, describing the principles of the “Three-Pillar Approach”, proposed by the experts from OICA (see GRVA-02-09 and GRVA-02-27).

18. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air Software Updates presented GRVA-02-03, containing a status report of the group’s activities since the previous GRVA session and introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2. He mentioned that the group responded in writing to all the questions and comments received on the proposal.

19. The expert from FIA welcomed the proposal produced by the group but mentioned that it did not reflect their position regarding life time requirements.

20. The expert from OICA wondered whether such aspect raised by FIA would belong to the scope of the 1958 Agreement. The secretariat answered that some precedents could help answering this question e.g. UN Regulation No. 49 (including conformity of in-service vehicles/engines provisions), UN Regulation No. 59 (Replacement (retrofit) silencing systems), UN Regulation No. 83 (including durability requirements and “in use” requirements), UN Regulation No. 90 (Replacement braking parts) and UN Regulation No. 133 (Recyclability of motor vehicles). He stated that he was not aware of any provision of the Agreement that would limit the activities under this Agreement only to the performance of new vehicles. The expert from OICA, Secretary of the Task Force agreed to submit in written an informal document highlighting the difficulty faced by the group with this aspect. He presented, on the last day of the second GRVA session, GRVA-02-46 that described the issue of post-production, understood as the product lifetime starting after the production is definitely discontinued.

21. The expert from Germany and the Netherlands stated that the document should address the three following phases: system/vehicle development, production and post-production.

22. The expert from Japan supported the proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2 and stated the need to adopt this document during this session, since the new UN Regulation proposed in the document was one of the important and needed Regulations for the improvement of vehicle safety.

23. The expert from EC provided comments on the proposal (GRVA-02-37).

24. The expert from IMMA presented GRVA-02-18, proposing to exclude vehicles of category L from the scope of the document.

25. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the Task Force, responding to the advice received from the previous session of GRVA, reported on its proposal for a test phase to assure the draft produced. He presented the aim and the desired output of this activity.

26. GRVA agreed to keep the documents under this agenda item for continued review at next GRVA session. GRVA invited the Task Force to address the comments received and to proceed with the test phase. GRVA noted the need to make further progress on this item and requested the secretariat to explore the possibility to organize a special session of GRVA in May or June 2019.

27. GRVA noted that the presentation of GRVA-02-03 also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3, that the proposal for a test phase would also apply to the software updates work stream. The expert from Japan also supported the document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3. He indicated Japan’s support for the earliest adoption (during this session), since the issue was important and a UN Regulation was needed for the improvement of vehicle safety.

28. The expert from EC provided comments on the proposal (GRVA-02-37).

29. The expert from IMMA presented GRVA-02-18, proposing to exclude vehicles of Category L from the scope of the document.

30. The expert from ITU stated that regulating communication would require specific expertise and that the precedent at the Working Party on General Safety provisions with the UN Regulation No. 144 (Accident Emergency Call Systems) ignored communication aspects and durability provisions. He raised the question whether a vehicle equipped with safety systems based on communication would still be roadworthy in case the communication would no longer function e.g. when the communication system would be obsolete. GRVA agreed that the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air Software Updates was a good example demonstrating that WP.29 was able to attract the required experts with the right expertise and to make very quick progress on such strategic issues. GRVA agreed about the need to discuss the roadworthiness of vehicles in case of the vehicle communication unit obsolescence would impact the well performing of safety systems.

31. GRVA agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/3 and GRVA-01-18 on the agenda of the next GRVA session.

57. The expert from Sweden, Chair of the IWG on Modular Vehicle Combinations (MVC) gave a brief status report on the activities the group. The Secretary of the IWG presented GRVA-04-26 with more details including a workplan aimed at delivering the mandate of the group. The Chair of the IWG mentioned that he would be available to chair the deliberations on the current activities but not for any subsequent phases.

58. GRVA invited the group to prepare a proposal for revised terms of reference for consideration at the next GRVA session.

60. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRVA-04-27 presenting the Electric Mechanical Brakes technology and the necessary changes in UN Regulation No. 13 to accommodate this technology. The expert from the Netherlands stated that such a proposal would also affect Annex 14 of UN Regulation No. 13. The expert from CLEPA answered that they only considered motor vehicles so far and not trailers. The Chair recalled previous discussions of Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF) concerning Electronic Braking Control Systems. He recalled that GRRF had recognised that energy levels in batteries did not reduce linearly or predictably and had therefore agreed on electric control lines (with pneumatic redundancy) but not electric energy lines. He therefore asked whether CLEPA had considered redundancies. GRVA agreed to continue this discussion at its next session.

18. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRVA-04-28 with a status report on the activities of the group. The group completed its deliberations on the first required deliverable expected from the group. It drafted GRVA-04-17 comparing both systems EDR and DSSAD.

19. GRVA discussed the purpose of both systems. Following discussions, GRVA agreed that the purpose of DSSAD would address the status of the vehicle and interactions with the driver, research, in use monitoring, legal responsibilities and liability issues.

20. GRVA also discussed the relevant vehicle categories for DSSAD. GRVA decided that the group should focus first on light vehicles.

40. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/20, proposing amendments to Annex 6. He referred to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/4 and reported on the progress made since then. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-29 with amendment proposals to the official document. GRVA discussed and then adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/20, amended by Annex V, as a draft supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

61. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-30 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 13 concerning the Type II-A test for Battery Electric Vehicles already discussed at the second session of GRVA. The expert from OICA stated the Type II-A test provisions would have weight, packaging and costs implications for BEVs. GRVA noted the safety rationale behind the Type II-A requirement and that technologies to achieve compliance impacted equally on vehicles with other propulsion systems. The expert from CLEPA stated that they support the activity presented by OICA and that they would contribute to the research of an acceptable solution.

71. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-05-39-Rev.1 introducing GRVA-05-38-Rev.1 with a revised proposal for a new endurance braking testing procedure (proposed Type IV test) for Battery Electric and Hybrid Electric heavy Vehicles (including vehicle of Category M3 and N3) not coping with the existing Type II-A test when the traction battery is fully charged.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute the OICA proposal with an official symbol at it September 2020 session.

44. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-31, proposing amendments to the warning requirements for Corrective Steering Functions. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute the document with an official symbol for consideration at the next session.

52. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/11, proposing amendments to the warning provisions applicable to Corrective Steering Function for buses equipped with Lane Warning Departure Warning (LDWS). GRVA adopted the proposal as draft supplements for the 02 and 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 and requested the secretariat to submit it for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their June 2020 sessions.

39. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-33 insisting on the need to develop ALKS provisions for Heavy Commercial Vehicles (HCVs). GRVA agreed that this work stream should not be delayed. GRVA invited OICA to develop proposals in parallel with the those developed by the IWG on ACSF and to keep them as harmonized as possible.

45. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-34, presenting considerations on Truck-Trailer data transmission for UN Regulation No. 79 based on ISO 11992, already referenced in UN Regulation No. 13. He explained that his motivation was to permit that trucks benefit from sensors on trailers. He asked that delegation provided comments in written, as his delegation would like to submit a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 for review at the next session.

17. The expert from Japan introduced GRVA-04-36 with a status report on the activities of the group as well as two requests for guidance by GRVA.

(a) GRVA agreed that an ALKS system may perform a lane change as part of a minimum risk manoeuvre. The expert from Japan asked whether the group should develop testing provisions regarding the lane change procedures. GRVA agreed that the group should envisage to develop provisions related to such manoeuvre as part of the current work stream. GRVA agreed that a future supplement could be developed to address this point, if more time would be needed.

(b) GRVA agreed that an ALKS may have the possibility to cross a lane marking in an evasive manoeuvre. GRVA encouraged the group to develop the corresponding provisions within its current timeframe. Otherwise, the IWG on FRAV would have to address this issue.

6. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRVA-04-37 providing an overview on a self-driving cars project in his country conducted by Yandex, since 2018. He detailed technological aspects of the project and stated the crucial elements necessary to further develop their technology.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

54. GRVA noted that GRVA-04-38 also contained information about the challenges to develop provisions for the Car-to-Bicycle scenario. GRVA agreed to request an extension of the mandate of the group until September 2020.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air software updates (TF CS/OTA) reported on the activities of the group since June 2019. (Details are provided in GRVA-04-45.) He explained the activities of the test phase and reported that it was positive. He stated that the draft proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2 as amended) worked and provided value. He mentioned that the experience gathered during this phase would be reflected in an interpretation document and that the documents under development would be improved for consideration at the next session of GRVA.

22. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-25, proposing amendments to the scope of the draft regulation. GRVA referred the proposal to the Task Force.

23. The expert from Germany provided comments in GRVA-04-22. GRVA agreed to refer them to the Task Force.

24. The expert from the European Commission recalled that a report would have to be prepared for review at the next session of WP.29. He presented a proposal to clarify the scope of the draft UN Regulation on cyber security (GRVA-04-32). He noted that the challenges of the group were similar to those that the IWG on VMAD would face, when working on audits.

25. The expert from the USA commended the Task Force for its work. But she requested that the technical requirements be prepared (as previously agreed) in a document that could serve the 1998 Agreement as well.

26. The expert from Sweden informed that his country had now established a Cyber Security authority. GRVA welcomed the participation of Cyber Security authorities at the Task Force meetings.

27. The expert from FIGIEFA introduced GRVA-04-04 proposing amendments to the scope as well as new proposals related to access to data by authorized parties. She announced that she would support the alternative proposal concerning the scope presented in
GRVA-04-32. The expert from OICA also supported amendments to the scope but not the other amendments proposed in GRVA-04-32. The expert from EC stated the importance to remain vigilant concerning the access to data in vehicles. GRVA transmitted the amendment proposals to the task force.

28. The expert from FIA introduced GRVA-04-40 proposing to clarify the lifecycle and lifetime definitions. He suggested that the lifetime definition should also include the time after a vehicle is deregistered and until it is scrapped. GRVA did not conclude on this item and transmitted the document to the Task Force.

29. GRVA invited the Task Force to prepare the proposal for a new UN Regulation on cyber security, a draft guidance document, a draft resolution with recommendations together with draft requirements in a document that can serve the 1998 Agreement and a report on the test phase.

30. GRVA agreed to request an extension of the mandate of the Task Force for two years.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

36. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-04-03, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/24 proposing an alternative Human Machine Interface (HMI) for ACSF of Category C. The proposal received comments (and GRVA extended the discussion after the end of the official meeting time, without interpretation and without decisions or conclusions).

37. Following further discussion, GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-43) and reproduced in Annex IV. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

55. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/22 with amendments to the testing provisions to accommodate the latest innovations for steering systems. The expert from the Republic of Korea proposed clarifications. GRVA noted that this work stream may impact UN GTR No. 8. GRVA agreed to keep UN Regulation No. 140 and UN GTR No. 8 aligned.

56. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-04-44 drafted together with the secretariat, incorporating the proposal of the expert from the Republic of Korea and also identifying the corresponding paragraphs in UN GTR No. 8. The expert from Korea supported the document and announced that his country can volunteer to sponsor an amendment to UN GTR No. 8. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute this document with an official symbol at its next session.

61. The expert from OICA, recalling the purpose of GRVA-04-44, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/12 with an amendment proposal of the normalized angle (A) amplitude requirement when performing the “sine with dwell” test procedure described in UN Regulation No. 140. He explained that this amendment would be necessary as the current requirement was not suitable for some future steering equipment which would have significantly lower steering gear ratios.

62. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRVA-05-11 proposing to keep the text of UN Regulation No. 140 and UN GTR No. 8 aligned. The experts from the United States of America and Canada offered comments and agreed to review the proposal.

63. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/12 as amended by Annex V of the session report (based on GRVA-05-56) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 140 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions. GRVA supported the initiative of the Republic of Korea. GRVA invited the representative of the Republic of Korea to proceed with the submission of an authorization request to amend UN GTR No. 8 at the next session of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3).

21. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air software updates (TF CS/OTA) reported on the activities of the group since June 2019. (Details are provided in GRVA-04-45.) He explained the activities of the test phase and reported that it was positive. He stated that the draft proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2 as amended) worked and provided value. He mentioned that the experience gathered during this phase would be reflected in an interpretation document and that the documents under development would be improved for consideration at the next session of GRVA.

22. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-04-25, proposing amendments to the scope of the draft regulation. GRVA referred the proposal to the Task Force.

23. The expert from Germany provided comments in GRVA-04-22. GRVA agreed to refer them to the Task Force.

24. The expert from the European Commission recalled that a report would have to be prepared for review at the next session of WP.29. He presented a proposal to clarify the scope of the draft UN Regulation on cyber security (GRVA-04-32). He noted that the challenges of the group were similar to those that the IWG on VMAD would face, when working on audits.

25. The expert from the USA commended the Task Force for its work. But she requested that the technical requirements be prepared (as previously agreed) in a document that could serve the 1998 Agreement as well.

26. The expert from Sweden informed that his country had now established a Cyber Security authority. GRVA welcomed the participation of Cyber Security authorities at the Task Force meetings.

27. The expert from FIGIEFA introduced GRVA-04-04 proposing amendments to the scope as well as new proposals related to access to data by authorized parties. She announced that she would support the alternative proposal concerning the scope presented in
GRVA-04-32. The expert from OICA also supported amendments to the scope but not the other amendments proposed in GRVA-04-32. The expert from EC stated the importance to remain vigilant concerning the access to data in vehicles. GRVA transmitted the amendment proposals to the task force.

28. The expert from FIA introduced GRVA-04-40 proposing to clarify the lifecycle and lifetime definitions. He suggested that the lifetime definition should also include the time after a vehicle is deregistered and until it is scrapped. GRVA did not conclude on this item and transmitted the document to the Task Force.

29. GRVA invited the Task Force to prepare the proposal for a new UN Regulation on cyber security, a draft guidance document, a draft resolution with recommendations together with draft requirements in a document that can serve the 1998 Agreement and a report on the test phase.

30. GRVA agreed to request an extension of the mandate of the Task Force for two years.

33. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/19 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No.79 based on experience gathered by France, Germany and the Republic of Korea since the entry into force of the 03 series. The proposal received comments (see GRVA-04-09, GRVA-04-46). GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-47) as reproduced in Annex III, as supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No.79 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

33. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/19 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No.79 based on experience gathered by France, Germany and the Republic of Korea since the entry into force of the 03 series. The proposal received comments (see GRVA-04-09, GRVA-04-46). GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-47) as reproduced in Annex III, as supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No.79 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

66. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/25, proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 90 on provisions on the approval making and the approval number. The expert from CLEPA thanked the expert from the Russian Federation for having developed an elegant and creative solution to the marking requirement. GRVA supported the proposal. GRVA also agreed to identify the provisions for Category L6 and L7 vehicles as being identical to the M1 and N1 provisions (as noted in GRVA-04-54). GRVA agreed that the Unique Identifier should not be used as an alternative to the marking provisions in the Regulation. GRVA asked the secretariat to add provisions on the marking size for small parts that could not accommodate the size provision in the Regulation. GRVA requested the secretariat to provide a consolidated text to WP.29 and AC.1 for review and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

82. The representative of Germany, on behalf of the IWG on DETA presented the status report (WP.29-178-22) of the activities of the group, and the report of the last session (WP.29-178-23). He informed WP.29 that DETA was operational for the exchange of type approval documentation and that 16 contracting parties already had notified [Germany of] their DETA focal point. He explained that DETA was still being developed to include the Unique Identifier (UI) and the Declaration of Conformance (DoC) functionalities. He presented the expected timeline for their implementation. He invited WP.29 to consider for endorsement the specifications of UI (WP.29-178-26/Rev.1) and DoC (WP.29-178-25). He recommended that WP.29 invite GRs, in the context of UI, to consider whether current additional marking provisions were still to be considered part of the approval marking and could be replaced by the UI marking, or these additional markings have an information character and could be provided by alternative means (e.g. insertion in the Communication Form). WP.29 agreed with this suggestion. This was necessary as the current version of the software was not able to render all marking variations

83. The secretariat insisted on the need to review the specifications of the DETA software extensions (delivering UI and DoC) as these would be the basis for developing these functions and as future amendments to them could have financial implications. He added that IWG was informed of difficulties for the involved parties, software house and sponsors, to establish contracts because contractual clauses would involve parties not being signatories of the contact (e.g. the DETA host).

71. The secretariat presented GRVA-04-49 with priority proposals for GRVA (other than those related to automated vehicles), answering to the request of the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (AC.2) in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1147, para. 7. GRVA commented on the document. The Chair explained that the priorities should be understood in terms of workload to determine the number of sessions per year in a top down approach by AC.2. The secretariat invited the delegations to send written comments in advance of the next session of AC.2 on 12 November 2019.

59. The expert from the Russian Federation presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/18, proposing clarifications on Annex 7 of UN Regulation No. 13. The expert from OICA declared that the clarification was not necessary, as it would have no impact on the test results. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed a compromise including transitional provisions (GRVA-04-50). The expert from the Czech Republic supported the proposal and mentioned that a similar clarification should be provided for similar provisions in Part C of Annex 7. GRVA took note of a notice issued by the European Type Approval Authorities Meeting on this matter, supporting the Russian proposal. GRVA agreed to consider this matter at its next session.

67. The expert from the Russian Federation, recalling previous discussions on this item at the last GRVA session, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/13, proposing clarifications regarding the application of test procedures in Annex 7 to UN Regulation No. 13. GRVA adopted this proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as supplement to the 11 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

51. The expert from Japan also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/16 proposing a new series of amendments to UN Regulation No. [152].

52. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-10 with editorial amendments to the proposal.

53. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended as reproduced in GRVA-04-52 and requested the secretariat to submit it as a draft new series of amendment to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

66. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/25, proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 90 on provisions on the approval making and the approval number. The expert from CLEPA thanked the expert from the Russian Federation for having developed an elegant and creative solution to the marking requirement. GRVA supported the proposal. GRVA also agreed to identify the provisions for Category L6 and L7 vehicles as being identical to the M1 and N1 provisions (as noted in GRVA-04-54). GRVA agreed that the Unique Identifier should not be used as an alternative to the marking provisions in the Regulation. GRVA asked the secretariat to add provisions on the marking size for small parts that could not accommodate the size provision in the Regulation. GRVA requested the secretariat to provide a consolidated text to WP.29 and AC.1 for review and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

2. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session and adopted it (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/15) with the update below. The adopted agenda is reproduced in GRVA-04-20-Rev.1, including the informal documents received before GRVA started. All informal documents distributed during the session are listed in Annex I of the session report.

Update:
For WP.29-176-14, read ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/120

2. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session and adopted it (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/15) with the update below. The adopted agenda is reproduced in GRVA-04-20-Rev.1, including the informal documents received before GRVA started. All informal documents distributed during the session are listed in Annex I of the session report.

Update:
For WP.29-176-14, read ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/120

51. The expert from Japan also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/16 proposing a new series of amendments to UN Regulation No. [152].

52. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-10 with editorial amendments to the proposal.

53. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended as reproduced in GRVA-04-52 and requested the secretariat to submit it as a draft new series of amendment to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

46. Referring to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/17, the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS introduced GRVA-04-38. He noted that para. 6.10 and the Appendix in the working document were in square brackets. The expert from Japan introduced
GRVA-04-39, proposing further amendments to Appendix 2 of Annex 3.

47. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-12 with editorial amendments.

48. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed an editorial correction in para. 7.1.

49. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-11, supporting the provisions in the proposed para. 6.10. for a statistical approach to evaluating AEBS performance on the basis of unsuccessful tests. GRVA decided to reconsider this proposal at its next session. The expert from China informed that their draft national standard included such considerations. He mentioned that his country would consider GRVA’s decision on this point to support harmonization, if timing allows.

50. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-51) with the deletion of the proposed para. 6.10, the correction to para. 7.1 and the amendments proposed in GRVA-04-12 and GRVA-04-39. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 1 to UN Regulation No. [152] to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

59. The expert from the Russian Federation presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/18, proposing clarifications on Annex 7 of UN Regulation No. 13. The expert from OICA declared that the clarification was not necessary, as it would have no impact on the test results. The expert from the Russian Federation proposed a compromise including transitional provisions (GRVA-04-50). The expert from the Czech Republic supported the proposal and mentioned that a similar clarification should be provided for similar provisions in Part C of Annex 7. GRVA took note of a notice issued by the European Type Approval Authorities Meeting on this matter, supporting the Russian proposal. GRVA agreed to consider this matter at its next session.

67. The expert from the Russian Federation, recalling previous discussions on this item at the last GRVA session, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/13, proposing clarifications regarding the application of test procedures in Annex 7 to UN Regulation No. 13. GRVA adopted this proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as supplement to the 11 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

33. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/19 proposing amendments to UN Regulation No.79 based on experience gathered by France, Germany and the Republic of Korea since the entry into force of the 03 series. The proposal received comments (see GRVA-04-09, GRVA-04-46). GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-47) as reproduced in Annex III, as supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No.79 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

48. The expert from Germany presented GRRF-86-13 tabled by the experts from Germany and from the Republic of Korea with a proposal for amendments to the ACSF testing provisions in Annex 8 of UN Regulation No. 79, based on the first experience gathered since the 02 series of amendments of UN Regulation No. 79 entered into force. GRRF welcomed the proposal and provided comments. The experts from Germany and the Republic of Korea volunteered to prepare a revised proposal aimed to avoid prescriptive requirements on the measurement instruments and providing more detailed justification e.g. on the sample rate and the filtering of the lateral acceleration data.

35. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/9 based on GRRF-86-13 proposing clarifications of the Annex 8 testing provisions. The proposal received some comments from Japan, France, Germany and OICA. The expert from France agreed with the suggestion of GRVA to submit a revised proposal with more data for consideration at the September 2019 session. The experts from Japan, Germany and OICA were invited to share with GRVA their test data, supporting their positions.

40. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/20, proposing amendments to Annex 6. He referred to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/4 and reported on the progress made since then. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-04-29 with amendment proposals to the official document. GRVA discussed and then adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/20, amended by Annex V, as a draft supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

35. The expert from UK informed GRVA that the work on this item was ongoing, that the current draft was reproduced in GRVA-01-20 and that the outcome of this work could be incorporated in the future proposal emanating from the IWG on ACSF.

38. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/4 as amended by GRVA-02-19, proposing clarifications to Annex 6 of UN Regulation No. 79. The expert from OICA stated that the amendments proposed would require too much work for the approval of simple braking systems. He added that these amendments would make sense to properly assess Advanced Driver Assistant Systems (ADAS). The expert from EC stated that this proposal would be suitable as an amendment to UN Regulation No. 79 but would not be enough for the assessment of ALKS and ADAS. The expert from Spain mentioned that the Type Approval Authority signature provisions’ implications were too far-reaching to be mentioned in a footnote. Spain also observed that the proposal placed too much responsibility on the Type Approval Authority to identify risks and stated that the manufacturer should have that responsibility. The expert from the Netherlands explained that this work initially started for the purpose of ACSF of Category B2 defined in UN Regulation No. 79 and that this explained why the document was titled “Proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79”. The expert from UK volunteered to submit a revised proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79, addressing the comment received. GRVA agreed that similar provisions should be specifically developed for ALKS and systems with higher levels of autonomy. The Chair noted the implications that this would have on the delivery of a regulatory provision for ALKS.

41. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/21 with provisions on Remote Control Manoeuvring. GRVA recalled that it had already adopted provisions on a majority basis during its second session but had agreed to review them at this session to seek full consensus. The expert introduced GRVA-04-19 with further amendments introducing clarifications.

42. The expert from Germany requested that the session report reflect their statement: “Germany does not see the necessity to regulate this function at UNECE level”. Other experts mentioned that similar provisions could be developed for heavy duty vehicles, too.

43. GRVA agreed to work on similar provisions for other vehicle categories. GRVA also agreed with the amendments to the submitted proposal, reproduced in GRVA-04-19. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit the latest version of the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for review and vote at their November 2019 session.

56. The expert from UK introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/8 and
GRVA-02-08 amending it, proposing to insert technical prescriptions on Remote Control Manoeuvring (RCM) which were systems that were already installed on vehicles without being regulated to date. The expert from Germany did not support the proposal and suggested to insert one sentence in the Regulation that would forbid RCM in vehicles of category M1 and N1. The expert from OICA explained that such system already existed for vehicles of category M1G and that there would be future applications such as reverse assistant for trailers that would bring quantifiable benefits in terms of safety. Following comments and input from the experts from Australia, France and Sweden, the Chair asked GRVA whether the status quo would be acceptable, i.e. do Contracting Parties accept that such systems are permitted and do not require recognition by Regulation. The expert from the Russian Federation summed-up the discussion and suggested to adopt the proposal. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (Annex VII). GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2019 session. GRVA unanimously agreed with this delayed submission until the November 2019, so that the dissent from the experts from Germany and the Netherlands could be considered again during the September 2019 session of GRVA, in view of reaching a broader consensus.

55. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/22 with amendments to the testing provisions to accommodate the latest innovations for steering systems. The expert from the Republic of Korea proposed clarifications. GRVA noted that this work stream may impact UN GTR No. 8. GRVA agreed to keep UN Regulation No. 140 and UN GTR No. 8 aligned.

56. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-04-44 drafted together with the secretariat, incorporating the proposal of the expert from the Republic of Korea and also identifying the corresponding paragraphs in UN GTR No. 8. The expert from Korea supported the document and announced that his country can volunteer to sponsor an amendment to UN GTR No. 8. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute this document with an official symbol at its next session.

61. The expert from OICA, recalling the purpose of GRVA-04-44, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/12 with an amendment proposal of the normalized angle (A) amplitude requirement when performing the “sine with dwell” test procedure described in UN Regulation No. 140. He explained that this amendment would be necessary as the current requirement was not suitable for some future steering equipment which would have significantly lower steering gear ratios.

62. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRVA-05-11 proposing to keep the text of UN Regulation No. 140 and UN GTR No. 8 aligned. The experts from the United States of America and Canada offered comments and agreed to review the proposal.

63. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/12 as amended by Annex V of the session report (based on GRVA-05-56) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 140 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions. GRVA supported the initiative of the Republic of Korea. GRVA invited the representative of the Republic of Korea to proceed with the submission of an authorization request to amend UN GTR No. 8 at the next session of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3).

62. The expert from Italy introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, proposing amendments to UN GTR No. 3 as per the mandate adopted by A.C.3 (ECE/TRANS/WP29/AC.3/47). He also introduced GRVA-04-23 including amendments addressing comments received on the proposal. GRVA adopted the proposal as amended with the below correction and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

In ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/23, para 10, for 5.1.17, read 3.1.17.

63. The expert from Italy also introduced GRVA-04-24, containing the technical report associated to the proposal. GRVA adopted it and requested the secretariat to submit it to the Executive Committee AC.3 for consideration at vote at its March 2020 session.

64. The expert from IMMA stated his satisfaction concerning the adoption of the amendment proposal to UN GTR No. 3. He mentioned that the outcome of this work was not fully harmonized, especially concerning Electromagnetic Compatibility and defeat device requirements.

50. GRVA agreed with the suggestion of expert from Italy to postpone the consideration of this item until the January 2019 session.

54. The expert from Italy introduced GRVA-02-07 proposing amendments to the original proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2018/9) for amendments to UN GTR No. 3 for harmonization of the GTR and UN Regulation No. 78. The proposal received some comments. The expert from the Netherlands asked why the proposal contained technical requirements that differed from those in UN Regulation No. 78. The expert from Canada highlighted some formulations that could be better defined to facilitate the implementation of the UN GTR into Self Certification regulations.

36. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-04-03, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/24 proposing an alternative Human Machine Interface (HMI) for ACSF of Category C. The proposal received comments (and GRVA extended the discussion after the end of the official meeting time, without interpretation and without decisions or conclusions).

37. Following further discussion, GRVA adopted the proposal as amended (GRVA-04-43) and reproduced in Annex IV. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

37. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-02-24 (based on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2018/2), proposing to insert in the Regulation some provisions for ACSF of Category C with a two-step Human Machine Interface (HMI) approach. The expert from the Netherlands disagreed with the proposed seven seconds as the time during which the second deliberate action by the driver should take place while this time for the one-step HMI approach (latest time by which an automatic initiation should occur), already in force, is limited to five seconds. The expert from France supported the proposal and showed flexibility on the seven seconds value to reach consensus among CPs. The expert from Germany asked whether this proposal would allow one single vehicle to be equipped with both a one-step HMI and a two-step HMI and how the combination of both would work. GRVA invited OICA to consider the issues raised by the experts and requested the secretariat to distribute the proposal with an official symbol for review at its September 2019 session.

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.

45. The expert from AVERE introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/9 as amended by GRVA-05-09. The proposal received comments (GRVA-05-58). The expert from the Netherlands expressed concerns with the proposal as the proposed amendment did not improve safety. GRVA adopted the proposal as reproduced in Annex IV of the session report (based on GRVA-05-09-Rev.3) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as a supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

47. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-05-52, introducing GRVA-05-30 with amendments to the provisions applicable to ACSF of Category C.

48. The expert from CITA introduced GRVA-05-50 with amendment proposals to Annex 8.

49. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-05-53 with amendment proposals to para. 5.6.4.7. (critical situation).

50. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-05-30, GRVA-05-50 and GRVA-05-53 with official symbols at its September 2020 session.

66. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/25, proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. 90 on provisions on the approval making and the approval number. The expert from CLEPA thanked the expert from the Russian Federation for having developed an elegant and creative solution to the marking requirement. GRVA supported the proposal. GRVA also agreed to identify the provisions for Category L6 and L7 vehicles as being identical to the M1 and N1 provisions (as noted in GRVA-04-54). GRVA agreed that the Unique Identifier should not be used as an alternative to the marking provisions in the Regulation. GRVA asked the secretariat to add provisions on the marking size for small parts that could not accommodate the size provision in the Regulation. GRVA requested the secretariat to provide a consolidated text to WP.29 and AC.1 for review and vote at their March 2020 sessions.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

35. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/9 based on GRRF-86-13 proposing clarifications of the Annex 8 testing provisions. The proposal received some comments from Japan, France, Germany and OICA. The expert from France agreed with the suggestion of GRVA to submit a revised proposal with more data for consideration at the September 2019 session. The experts from Japan, Germany and OICA were invited to share with GRVA their test data, supporting their positions.

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.

45. The expert from AVERE introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/9 as amended by GRVA-05-09. The proposal received comments (GRVA-05-58). The expert from the Netherlands expressed concerns with the proposal as the proposed amendment did not improve safety. GRVA adopted the proposal as reproduced in Annex IV of the session report (based on GRVA-05-09-Rev.3) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as a supplement to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.

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.

34. The expert from AVERA presented GRVA-04-53, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/26, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/27 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/28. The presentation contained videos, simulations and fleet data supporting the proposals for amendments to UN Regulation No. 79. The presenters referred to a driving demonstration organized by Tesla in conjunction with GRVA to justify their statements. The proposal received some comments. The contracting parties were not opposed to an evolution of the regulatory provisions based on experience, if the assurance of safety is provided. The expert from AVERE presented revised proposals GRVA-04-41 and GRVA-04-42 aimed at addressing comments received. GRVA noted that some parts of the proposals were also addressed by the proposal submitted by the expert from OICA and agreed to review it.

35. GRVA welcomed the proposal from the expert from the United Kingdom, who volunteered to lead activities on the review of the three AVERE proposals as well as the amendment proposal tabled by OICA in GRVA-04-08 with the aim to prepare a formal proposal until November 2019 in order to meet the deadline for submission of documents for the February 2020 session of GRVA.