CS/OTA informal group proposal for a document to assist with the implementation of the new UN Regulation on cybersecurity management. This document is also available with track changes in a word document format and portable document format.

Proposal to improve the text with editorial clarifications and restructuring.

Presentation raising concerns over discrepancies and risks of misinterpretation in the application of the regulation by technical services.

Proposal to clarify that the Approval Authority should postpone granting a cybersecurity management approval in the absence of agreement on the common interpretation of a provision where the interpretation of the Approval Authority has raised comments from other authorities under the review procedure provided for in paragraph 5.3.4.

Proposal from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M1 and N1 to supplement the proposals of document GRVA/2020/26 to improve the text on a number of issues.

Proposal from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M1 and N1 in order to supplement the proposals of document GRVA/2020/27 to improve the text on a number of issues.

Proposal from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M1 and N1 in order to supplement the proposals of document GRVA/2020/35 to improve the text on a number of issues.

This proposal revises the changes proposed in document GRVA/2020/7 based on stakeholder feedback. The proposal introduces provisions for M₁ vehicle to allow for lateral accelerations up to 40% greater than the 3 m/s² limitation for a period up to two seconds in order to in order navigate unexpected changes in the radius of the curvature of a bend and avoid driving behaviour that may be unexpected and/or confusing to the operator and following vehicles.

Proposal for amendments to document GRVA/2020/22.

Proposal for an alternative to ensure user attentiveness when activating a remote-controlled parking system.

Proposal to modify the following elements:

1. paragraph 5.6.4.2.3., delete “temporarily”
2. paragraph 5.6.4.5.2.1., replace “actually” by “anticipated to be”
3. paragraph 5.6.4.6.6., B1 shall resume “in a timely manner”
4. paragraph 5.6.4.6.8.1., clarify the suppression criteria
5. paragraph 5.6.4.7., define distance tolerances for lane-change critical distances
6. Annex 8, Paragraph 2., Carry over the language already adopted for ACSF B1: “At the manufacturer’s discretion and with the agreement of the Technical Service, a lane with a width of less than 3.5 m may be used, if the correct function of the system on roads with wider lanes can be demonstrated.” and allow for lower temperature and wet surface test conditions, and
7. Annex 8, Paragraph 3.5.1.2. (j), amend the pass condition with regard to direction indicator deactivation.

Consolidated proposal incorporating comments from OICA/CLEPA, CITA, Germany, and AVERE (including most recent proposal to the 7th GRVA session).

Proposal to clarify the text with regard to:

1. paragraph 2.6., Definition of an imminent collision
2. paragraphs 5.1.9 and 7.1.4., Lifetime of the system
3. paragraph 5.2.3.3., Traffic Rules and Safety Distance to the front
4. paragraph 5.2.5.2. – “anticipated TTC” in cut-in scenario
5. paragraph 6.2.5.1., Deactivation by input to driving controls
6. paragraph 6.2.6., Transition to assisted driving
7. paragraph 6.4.4., Examples of information to the driver
8. Annex 5 – Tests
   • Section 5.1. contains physical tests that have to be performed at the time of type approval
   • Section 5.2. aims to confirm at the time of type approval, that the system complies with the corresponding provisions of the main text. This confirmation shall be done by at least one physical test per provision, if possible due to the nature of the provision, and may be supported by further evidence.
   • Section 5.3. is a collection of additional scenarios, that the ALKS could encounter. Whether they are relevant to the ALKS depends on its ODD. So either the manufacturer explains why his system will not need to handle these scenarios, or has to explain the behaviour of the ALKS.
   • larify the content of par. 5.2. by rewording the provisions similar to that of the core text.

This document proposes a new 04 series of amendments to Regulation 79 with regard to a system that aims at bringing the vehicle to a safe stop in case of driver unavailability, defining a “risk mitigation function”.

Proposal to permit manoeuvring assistance in defined low speed driving situations to reduce damages and injuries.

Proposal to address risks related to activities other than driving and to clarify that a declaration of a maximum operational speed that exceeds 60 km/h is possible, but not required.

Proposal to amend the proposal from Germany regarding lane-change functionality:

1. paragraph 5.2.1. – lane keeping
2. paragraph 5.2.6.1. – risk to safety of the vehicle occupants and other road users
3. paragraphs 5.2.6.2. and 5.2.6.3. – preconditions for a lane change procedure
4. paragraph 5.2.6.5. – timing of a lane change maneuver
5. paragraph 5.2.6.6. and its sub-paragraphs – criticality of a lane change maneuver
6. paragraph 7.1.3. – rear detection range
7. Annex 5. – test cases for rear detection range, lane change.

The intention of the proposed amendment is to clarify the existing text on continued support of an ACSF B1 if the boundary conditions are exceeded. It clarifies that under certain circumstances, e.g. if there are no lane markings present or if the vehicle has already drifted substantially out of the lane such that the lane may no longer be recognized, a continuation of support may no longer be possible or reasonable.

The proposal aims to correct 5 types of inconsistencies:

1. The reference to Annex 4 is repeated in each sub-paragraph and should instead be stated once in each paragraph.
2. Acronyms are used inconsistently. Proposal to use them consistently throughout similar to UN-R79, e.g. Emergency Manoeuvre (EM), and when used in the text as “emergency manoeuvre”
3. Each sub-paragraph has a heading, this helps understand the structure and should be carried over to par. 8.1., 9.1. and 9.2. as well, the wording for the heading of par. 9.1. and 9.2. are derived from UN-R155 and UN-R156 respectively.
4. Consistent use of term throughout, e.g. R₁₅₇SWIN without blank, Cyber Security as two words as used in UN-R155
5. Editorial corrections, e.g. missing paragraph numbers, missing full stop in the paragraph number.

Proposal to include all vehicle categories M and N in the scope of UN R157.

The intention of the proposed amendment is to clarify the existing text on continued support of an ACSF B1 if the boundary conditions are exceeded.

This document is password protected. Please contact the GRVA secretariat for access.

Under the initial ALKS regulation and its reference to the new cyber security requlation, manufacturers are permitted to use an alternative software identification system instead of the proposed RxSWIN format. This proposal seeks to clarify the use of such alternative identifications in the approval process.

Japan supports the proposal from Germany (GRVA-07-03) to establish an informal working group to develop requirements for heavy-duty vehicle VRU AEBS. Japan proposes to adapt provisions from UN R152 on light vehicle AEBS.

Proposal to ensure that the information provided regarding software updates is accessible for use in type approval, conformity of production, market surveillance, recalls and Periodic Technical Inspection (PTI).

Presentation regarding requirements for stop lamp illumination with regard to various types of braking systems, including those of electric vehicles.

Proposal to clarify the explanation of the requirements of paragraph 7 and Annex 1 of the UN R156 (software updates and software updates management systems) and provide information on what may be used to evidence those requirements.

Proposal to clarify the explanation of the requirements of paragraph 7 and Annex 1 of the UN R156 (software updates and software updates management systems) and provide information on what may be used to evidence those requirements.

Proposal to replace the specification of the type and size of brake caliper and brake disc for brake lining CoP assessment with specifications for a pad area and thickness of the original approval. The original specification corresponds to obsolete caliper and rotor configurations no longer in widespread use.

Proposals for improvements and clarifications to the text of UN R152 from the AEBS informal working group.

Updated proposal from the EDR/DSSAD informal group for a new UN Regulation on Event Data Recorders.

Update proposal from the EDR/DSSAD informal working group for Guidance on EDR Performance Elements Appropriate for Adoption in 1958 and 1998 Agreement Resolutions or Regulations.

This document is intended to provide guidance on the major human factors challenges to be considered when providing remote support and control to assist vehicle operation under automation.

Proposal to correct requirements for type-IIA (endurance braking performance) tests.

This document was produced during an informal meeting (on 23 September 2020) of interested experts who reviewed the ALKS-related documents presented at GRVA on 24 September 2020.

Proposal including amendments submitted in GRVA-07-05 and superseding document GRVA-07-47.

Presentation concerning requirements related to electric regenerative endurance braking systems.

Video used in the presentation and a recording of the presentation are available via YouTube.

Chair’s notes on the remote session held under special procedures due to the inability to hold a formal session.

Proposal to clarify the provisions in Annex 3, para. 1.5.3.1. in the case where the batteries have been recharged or replaced with a charged set between the hot performance and recovery procedure such that the linings temperature is no longer at the requisite temperature.

Proposal to introduce requirements for the type approval of Electro-Mechanical Braking (EMB) systems.

Proposal for provisions concerning:

1. B1 lane centering
2. ACSF activation conditions
3. Driver override
4. Clarification of ACSF standby-mode
5. Clarification of “ready-to-intervene"
6. Indication to the driver in case of suppression
7. Clarification of suppression criteria
8. Sensor test before activation.

Proposal to amend Annex 8 (Test requirements for Corrective and Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF)), paragraph 3.5. (Tests for ACSF of Category C) in order to clarify that enabling of the system as part of the test procedure is only necessary when the system is not yet enabled.

Proposal to permit the manufacturer to specify its own formula for the calculation of s_critical. The current formula does not take the dynamic behaviour of vehicles into account and therefore requires gaps that under some traffic conditions don’t usually occur. Since there are different ways of addressing the dynamic behaviour of the vehicles with regard to the original formula, this proposal would allow the manufacturer to specify its own formula provided the safety principle is maintained.

Proposal to clarify that the AEBS may be automatically deactivated in the event that the electronic stability control system is deactivated.

Proposal by the experts from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M1 and N1 in order to improve the Appendix 2 Annex 3 for assessing robustness against false reaction, to introduce new provisions for automatic deactivation of AEBS, and to improve the text in other instances.

Proposal by the experts from the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M₁ and N₁ to introduce provisions for car-to-bicycle scenario in a single step approach. (Alternatively, the IWG has prepared proposals for a two-step approach to introducing the new requirements. GRVA is therefore requested to make a decision on whether car-to-bicycle should be introduced in a single step or in a two-step approach.)

Proposal by the experts from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M₁ and N₁ to introduce provisions for car-to-bicycle scenario as the second step of a two-step approach. (The IWG has prepared a separate proposal for the first step in this two-step approach. GRVA is therefore requested to make a decision on whether car-to-bicycle should be introduced in a single step or in a two-step approach.)

The purpose of this document is to help clarify the requirements of paragraph 7 and Annex 1 of the UN Regulation on uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regards to software update and software updates management system (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/80) and provide information on what may be used to evidence those requirements.

Proposal to introduce provisions for approving single vehicles involved in modular vehicle combinations, e.g. towing trailers, “road trains”.

Proposal to improve the uniformity of requirements for stop lamp illumination with regard to various types of braking systems, including those of electric vehicles.

Proposal to amend the ALKS UN Regulation provisions to enable approval of systems operating at speeds up to 130 km/h.

Proposal to introduce additional requirements for a lane change functionality.

Proposal to introduce provisions for recently developed steering systems that have significantly lower steering gear ratios (i.e. quick steering characteristics).

Proposal by the experts from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS) for vehicles of Categories M₁ and N₁ to introduce provisions for the car-to-bicycle scenario as the first step of a two-step approach. (The IWG has prepared a separate document for the second step of this two-step approach. Alternatively, the IWG has prepared a proposal for a single (all-in-one) approach. GRVA is requested therefore to make a decision on whether car-to-bicycle should be introduced in a single step or in a two-step approach.)

Proposal to introduce requirements for endurance braking systems for vehicles equipped with an electric regenerative endurance braking system. This proposal is an alternative to the text proposed in document GRVA/2020/37.

Proposal to introduce requirements for endurance braking systems for vehicles equipped with an electric regenerative endurance braking system.