1. The Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) held its third session from 3 to 4 June 2019 in Geneva. Experts from the following countries participated in the work, following Rule 1 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (TRANS/WP.29/690 as amended): Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russian Federation, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK). An expert from the European Commission (EC) also participated. Experts from the following non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international organizations participated: the American Automotive Policy Council (AAPC), European Association for Electric Mobility (AVERE), International Motor Vehicle Inspection Committee (CITA), European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA/MEMA/JAPIA), European Garage Equipment Association (EGEA), European Transport Safety Council (ETSC), Federation Internationale des Grossistes, Importateurs et Exportateurs en Fournitures Automobiles (FIGIEFA), International Motorcycle Manufacturers Association (IMMA), International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA).

2. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session and adopted it (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/14). The adopted agenda is reproduced in
GRVA-03-06, including all informal documents received until the session’s starting date. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session as proposed in GRVA-03-01. The informal documents distributed during the session are listed in Annex I of this report.

GRVA-03-01 | GRVA-3: Running order of the agenda

GRVA-03-06 | GRVA-03: Updated annotated provisional agenda

GRVA/2019/14 | Annotated provisional agenda for the 3rd GRVA session

3. The Secretary presented GRVA-03-07, informing GRVA on the highlights of the March 2019 session of WP.29. He highlighted the work done during the WP.29 week on the draft Framework Document on Automated Vehicles and the request from WP.29 to GRVA in para. 49 of the session report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1145. He reported on the activities of the Working Parties on General Safety, Passive Safety, Lighting and Light Signalling regarding automated vehicles. He also reported that WP.29 approved the mandate extension of the GRVA Informal Working Groups (IWGs) on Modular Vehicle Combination, on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF) and the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air issues.

GRVA-03-07 | GRVA-03: Highlights from the 177th (March 2019) WP.29 session

4. The Chair informed GRVA that WP.29 agreed the general approach outlined in the draft framework document on automated/autonomous vehicles (WP.29-177-19) and directed GRVA to use the issues, topics and deliverables from the document as guidance to inform its further discussions on structuring its work and delivery plans. He noted that WP.29-177-19 was distributed by the secretariat with an official symbol (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34) for consideration at the June 2019 session of the World Forum. He also noted that World Forum expected GRVA to report at the June 2019 session on its proposed structure, and to propose Terms of Reference (ToRs) for IWGs in this respect.

5. The Chair mentioned that some Contracting Parties expressed the need to amend the table in the framework document and the Secretary introduced a note by the secretariat GRVA-03-09-Rev.1 capturing positions expressed during the three virtual meetings with the Contracting Parties organized by the Chair aimed at facilitating the development of the ToRs.

6. The expert from EC thanked the secretariat for the preparation of document GRVA-03-09-Rev.1. He asked whether the content of Annex II was necessary as it was also contained in GRVA-03-10. The expert from the United States of America proposed to keep this Annex in square brackets.

7. The expert from Germany welcomed the document. He considered that the list of items in Annex 2 was not exhaustive and therefore should only be provided to the IWG as ideas for consideration. He also noted the ambitious deadlines proposed.

8. The expert from OICA noted the late availability of this document and highlighted the need to ensure the completion of current activities when considering future IWGs.

9. The expert from AAPC requested some clarifications on the scope of activities on Functional Requirements and on VMAD. GRVA agreed to consider this when drafting the ToRs.

10. The expert from ITU highlighted some industrial priorities on localization, data storage for automated driving, driver monitoring and transition demands. He noted the need to make progress on these activities as they could have costly hardware implications in case of delay.

11. The expert from Sweden inquired about the work on Roadworthiness of Automated Vehicles. GRVA responded that these activities were essentially a task of the ACSF group and remained current under the ACSF activities.

12. Following the interventions from the European Commission, Japan, United States of America, GRVA agreed that the work to be done on the drafting of Terms of Reference for IWGs would be performed on the basis of Table 1 in this document.

13. The Chair introduced GRVA-03-10, a draft document containing Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedures for four Informal Working Groups. He explained that he drafted one single document aimed to support the drafting of ToR by providing an overview of all activities to avoid unnecessary overlaps.

14. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-03-11, GRVA-03-12 and GRVA-03-13 with separate Terms of Reference for each of the new IWGs. He stated that he proposed less ambitious deadlines than those of the Framework document.

15. The expert from Spain proposed to merge the approach presented.

16. GRVA noted that the mandate for the Task Force on Cyber Security and OTA issues had been extended by one year by WP.29 in March 2019 and deferred discussion on further activity for this group.

17. The expert from the European Commission preferred to work on the basis of Table 1 in GRVA-03-09-Rev.1. He noted that the work could be done in phases e.g. prioritizing activities on highway, urban and then interurban conditions. He stated that short terms deliveries could be defined without explicitly defining mid-term deliveries at this stage.

18. The expert from OICA preferred a use case approach and a function approach. He stated that priorities should be carefully defined. He recalled as an example that the work on ALKS was prioritizing passenger cars over those for heavy-duty vehicles. He opined that this would not be acceptable for the industry on longer terms.

19. ToRs for the Functional Requirements, Vehicle Test Methods and Data Storage Systems/Event Data Recorders were developed during the session.

20. GRVA reviewed GRVA-03-17 and revised the draft during the session to include references to existing standards and guidelines as proposed by Spain and the United States of America respectively. This approach formed the template for drafting ToRs for the Test Methods group (VMAD) and a revision of the GRSG proposal for an IWG on EDR/DSSAD.

21. GRVA agreed that the draft Terms of Reference as reproduced in GRVA-03-20, GRVA-03-21 and GRVA-03-22 should be transmitted to WP.29 for consideration at the June 2019 session (see Annexes III to V of the session report). GRVA agreed that the work on the items proposed in Table 1 of GRVA-03-09-Rev.1 already started, subject to final endorsement by WP.29 at its June 2019 session.

22. GRVA agreed that the existing objectives of the IWG on ACSF should not be affected by the new IWG on FRAV. GRVA agreed that the IWG on FRAV should structure its activities to allow the leadership of the IWG on ACSF to finish its work e.g. common timing and venues for ACSF and FRAV sessions.

23. GRVA briefly discussed the leadership of the IWG. GRVA agreed on the need for a global representation including Asia/Pacific, Europe and North America. GRVA was informed of Countries willing to contribute to the leadership of the IWGs (see Annex II of the session report). GRVA concluded that the leadership question would be decided by WP.29 at its June 2019 session.

GRVA-03-09/Rev.1 | Preparation for discussion of GRVA informal groups and terms of reference with Japan input

GRVA-03-10 | Delivery of WP.29 Priorities for Vehicle Automated Driving Systems Submission from the GRVA chair.

GRVA-03-11 | Proposal for an Informal Working Group on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV)

GRVA-03-17 | Draft terms of reference for a Functional Requirements for Automated Vehicles (FRAV) informal group Draft proposal developed during side meetings at the third GRVA session.

GRVA-03-20 | Proposed terms of reference for a Functional Requirements for Automated Vehicles (FRAV) informal group Draft document prepared after the GRVA-03 session based upon discussions and decisions during the session.

GRVA-03-21 | Proposed terms of reference for a Validation Methods for Automated Driving (VMAD) informal group Draft document prepared by the GRVA secretariat after the GRVA-03 session based upon discussions and decisions during the session.

GRVA-03-22 | Proposed terms of reference for a data recording and storage informal group Draft proposal prepared by the GRVA secretariat following the GRVA-03 session based upon the session discussions and decisions. The proposal would establish an informal group under GRVA and GRSG to develop provisions for Electronic Data Recorders (EDR) and Data Storage Systems for Automated Driving (DSSAD);

WP.29-177-19 | Proposal for a framework document on automated/autonomous vehicles Document prepared by the WP.29 secretariat pursuant to discussions held among Contracting Parties during the March 2019 WP.29 session.

WP.29/2019/34 | Framework document on automated/autonomous vehicles

24. 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 (GRVA-03-02) on the work of the group (recommendations, a draft regulatory text with provisions for the approval of a manufacturer Cyber Security Management System and provisions for the approval of a vehicle with regards to cyber security), including the ongoing testing activities. He clarified that the outcome of the work did not aim at specifying technical solutions, preventing all kind of cyber security events to happen, securing systems outside of the vehicles (e.g. pendrives), specifying durability requirements, listing all risks and corresponding mitigation solutions, but rather a systems-based approach to security management.

25. He explained that the current testing phase was aimed at checking the robustness of the proposal. He noted that manufacturer involvement represented seventy per cent of the global sales. The expert from AVERE confirmed that North American manufacturers were involved in the testing phase. The output could result in the production of interpretation guidelines if necessary.

26. He answered to the questions raised by the GRVA experts. He confirmed that the work was involving Contracting Parties using the regime of self-certification, but that no Country had indicated their intention to become a sponsor in the sense of the 1998 Agreement.

27. The expert from the European Commission requested clarifications about the purpose of the non-regulatory text in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2019/2. He noted the importance to define pass/fail criteria (also for audits) in the context of mutual recognition of type approvals. He expressed the need to consider covering hardware updated in this context. He stated that cyber security impacts privacy protection and mentioned other regulations in other jurisdictions that could complement or impact the ongoing work, such as the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

28. The expert from France proposed to revisit the definition of a type in the regulatory draft. He proposed to consider the vehicle architecture as one discriminatory feature.

29. The expert from Germany expressed support to the test phase work and expressed the need to consider lifetime provisions.

30. The expert from CLEPA explained that their industry would have a role to play to support cyber security and asked that GRVA consider provisions that would address their role.

31. The expert from Sweden noted the proposal on slide 16 of GRVA-03-02 “UNECE may decide to develop a harmonized framework on [the post production and vehicle support by the manufacturer] topic” and proposed to reflect on this point.

32. The expert from Spain expressed concern with the lack of guarantee over the whole life cycle and proposed to look at practices of other industry sectors to explore best practices. She also noted that these activities were linked with the activities of existing cyber security authorities and that frameworks were already existing. She stated that the outcome of the test phase should result into amendments instead of interpretation documents.

33. The expert from ITU stated that basic requirements should be built in the communication side and that support provisions could be linked to the life of the communication system (He mentioned as an example the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) protocol shutdown).

GRVA-03-02 | Overview of the recommendations on cyber security Presentation on the work of the Task Force on Cybersecurity and Over-the-Air Software Updates.

GRVA/2019/2 | Proposal for a Recommendation on Cyber Security Proposal from the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air Software Update Issues to provide recommendations for the mitigation of risks of unauthorized access to critical automated vehicle software systems, including a proposal for a new UN Regulation.

34. The expert from FIGIEFA introduced GRVA-03-16 proposing amendments to ECE/TRAN/WP29/GRVA/2019/2. She mentioned the importance for the after sales sector to take into consideration their needs when drafting provisions. She proposed that Approval Authorities should, as neutral entities, determine independently from manufacturers the companies that are authorized parties. She proposed that the Regulation specifies that the manufacturers shall share with authorized parties: data, function calls and resources inside of the vehicle to allow third parties to provide services to maintain safety and security of vehicles during their lifetime. She also proposed to replace throughout the proposal “life cycle” by “life time”.

35. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force, explained that the Contracting Parties were able to nominate Approval Authorities according to their competencies (1958 Agreement, Article 2, para.2). He explained that the group did not reach consensus on the post production and support duration issue and that in that case existing national regulations would apply. He confirmed that the work of the group did not conflict with other regulations such as the European GDPR. He also confirmed that the group did not discuss in detail the level of access required in GRVA-03-16.

36. The expert from France stated that the Regulation should not freeze the market for repair and maintenance. But he also expressed concerns with safety and cyber security risks posed by automotive product modification and access as proposed in GRVA-03-16. The expert from Sweden also expressed interest to the position expressed in the document and agreed with France on the need for the right balance between access and security.

37. The expert from OICA stated that the access right matter is not a cyber security one. He added that such provisions clarifying access to data for the purpose of balanced market would be relevant for a Regulation dealing with access right issues.

GRVA-03-16 | Cybersecurity: FIGIEFA responses to the EC on the draft regulation

GRVA/2019/2 | Proposal for a Recommendation on Cyber Security Proposal from the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-The-Air Software Update Issues to provide recommendations for the mitigation of risks of unauthorized access to critical automated vehicle software systems, including a proposal for a new UN Regulation.

38. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-03-05, requesting to remove vehicles of Category L from the scope of the draft regulatory proposals. Several contracting parties were in favour to keep the L category vehicles in the scope of the draft regulation. Other agreed that this category could be introduced in the regulation, once experience would be gathered with the type approval of vehicles of Categories M and N. GRVA agreed to keep the Category L in square brackets in the text.

GRVA-03-05 | Proposal for amendments to the draft Cybersecurity and Software Updates Recommendations

39. GRVA agreed to consider the organization of a workshop before the next GRVA session to continue the consideration of this agenda item, once the test phase would be completed and asked the task force to coordinate actions with the secretariat.

40. The expert from the United Kingdom, Co-Chair of the Task Force CS/OTA reported (GRVA-03-03) on the outcome of the group on software updates (recommendations, provisions regarding the approval of a manufacturer software updates management system and the approval of a vehicle with regards to software updates as well as a proposal for a generic annex for relevant UN Regulations for the implementation of the Software Identification Number for a give Regulations “RxSWIN”) including the ongoing test phase.

41. The expert from CLEPA invited GRVA to think about the role of suppliers in this context. The Task Force Co-Chair answered that the software update process is not dependent upon the origin of the base version, it is an end-to-end process for which a non-corrupted software is transmitted to the vehicle, at the right place and the right time.

42. GRVA discussed the appropriate way to involve the Type Approval Authority in the decision, whether or not an updated software triggers a new RxSWIN.

43. The expert from the European Commission supported the work done. He proposed to inform and involve the other WP.29 subsidiary bodies (“GRs”). He added that, for this purpose, clarifications about the benefits and the added value of this work should be provided in written. He also asked for clarifications about the definition of a vehicle type for the the purpose of the draft regulatory texts proposed.

44. The Chair of GRVA inquired whether the group made progress on making the outcome of the work suitable for use under the 1998 Agreement.

45. The expert from the United States of America confirmed that they provided comments. He mentioned the need for a delicate balance because the work under the 1958 Agreement would be continued and consideration should also be given to its suitability for later adaptation for the 1998 Agreement.

46. The expert from OICA supported the work done. He mentioned that this exercise provided for the first time a systematic link between the software, the hardware and the type approval. He explained that the concept “RxSWIN” was defined under the 1958 Agreement but that it could be used outside of the context of the Agreement. He encouraged is all Countries to use it.

47. GRVA discussed the next steps of the work. GRVA noted that the outcome of the test phase would be presented at the next Task Force meeting end of August in Geneva. GRVA discussed the need for a workshop to include type approval and certification experts in the discussion. GRVA requested the Co-Chairs of the Task Force and the GRVA secretary to liaise and organize the workshop.

GRVA-03-03 | Overview of the recommendations on software updates Presentation on the work of the Task Force on Cybersecurity and Over-the-Air Software Updates.

48. No information was provided under this agenda item at this session.

49. No information was provided under this agenda item at this session.

50. No information was provided under this agenda item.

51. No information was provided under this agenda item.

GRVA-02-19 | UN R79: Proposal for amendments to GRVA/2019/4 Proposal to ensure that the safety approach for complex electronics of remote controlled maneuvering addresses malfunctions, non-fault errors, and misuse.

GRVA/2019/4 | UN R79: Proposal for amendments Proposal to clarify the assessments to be conducted by a technical service for complex electronic systems, particularly with regard to advanced driver assistance systems. The proposal includes a new definition to ensure the assessment includes system response to changes in the ambient and/or operating conditions, provisions to ensure that any disabled functions intended for use on a production vehicle are declared and assessed, and a footnote to clarify that the assessment must be reviewed and signed by the same type approval authority as the one responsible for issuing the approval to UN R79.

52. No information was provided under this agenda item.