4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/19 and Add.1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-11-02/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received before the session started. (All informal documents submitted are listed in Annex I of this report. Annex II provides the list of Informal Working Groups (IWG) reporting to GRVA.)

5. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-11-01) and noted the technical information contained in GRVA-11-12 for connecting remotely to this hybrid session.

4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/19 and Add.1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-11-02/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received before the session started. (All informal documents submitted are listed in Annex I of this report. Annex II provides the list of Informal Working Groups (IWG) reporting to GRVA.)

5. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-11-01) and noted the technical information contained in GRVA-11-12 for connecting remotely to this hybrid session.

7. The Secretary presented GRVA-11-30, summarizing GRVA-11-03, the document requested by GRVA at its tenth session. He explained that the document was summarizing the deliberations of GRVA, so far, on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the context of vehicle regulations. He added that the document contained the list of statements made by the delegations on this topic. He continued that the document proposed possibilities, in terms of committees, to further discuss this topic and also in terms of documentation, on how to take stoke of the statements received so far. He went through the text of a draft guidance document drafted on the basis of the positions expressed. He asked for comments and input.

8. The expert from France welcomed the document. He stated that such document was necessary. He promised to provide input after the session to the secretariat.

9. The expert from FIA welcomed developments in the field of AI. He welcomed that GRVA took care of it but he noted that most AI were based on interactions with human beings. He wondered how GRVA should consider the involvement of humans in this context. GRVA invited the expert from FIA to provide input on this aspect at the next session, if desired.

10. The expert from Germany welcomed the document as an excellent summary. She added that the document was under review by the experts and that she would send comments to the secretariat.

11. The expert from UK highlighted that AI could have relevance for other WP.29 subsidiary bodies as AI could also impact e.g. emissions.

12. The expert from the USA sought for clarifications about the purpose of this exercise, and what would be delivered, a note, some reporting to WP.29, or a guidance document.

13. The expert from SAE International stressed that discussions in this area needs to stand with proper definitions.

14. The expert from Canada agreed with the expert from SAE International and stressed the importance of definitions before guidance is contemplated.

15. The expert from the Russian Federation advised, on definitions, to first focus on AI as a software that is implemented in an Automated Driving System (ADS), with specific features, affecting safety.

16. The expert from France suggested that a first output under this agenda item should be an information for WP.29 so that WP.29 can then decide on the outcome that should be delivered.

17. GRVA agreed that AI have applications beyond ADAS and ADS and that this should be reported to WP.29.

18. GRVA welcomed the informal document prepared by the secretariat and invited experts to provide input for the preparation of a revised version.

7. GRVA recalled the purpose of GRVA-11-03, a document from the GRVA leadership gathering all positions expressed so far by GRVA regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the context of vehicle regulations.

8. The experts from France, Germany, and CLEPA/OICA submitted comments to the document (GRVA-12-03, GRVA-12-06 and GRVA-12-32). The experts from Canada and the United States of America also provided comments. GRVA advised to inform the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work (AC.2) on the current activities.

9. The expert from FIA fully supported the developments on AI at GRVA. He committed to contribute to the discussions, stating the importance of transparency regarding the technology for the sake of clarity for consumers.

10. GRVA agreed to organize a technical workshop, possibly in March 2022 (before the May 2022 session of GRVA), primarily focusing on common definitions for AI relevant for GRVA activities, and, if possible i.e. if time is available, exploring more in detail the potential role of vehicle regulation(s) and guidance document(s) with regard to AI.

34. The expert from ISO introduced GRVA-11-36, providing an update on the activities of ISO on the Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF). He recalled the purpose of these activities, he explained the status of the standard drafting, completing ISO 26262 on functional safety. He detailed how the SOTIF standard currently being develop could support automated vehicles regulations.

35. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the IWG on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air issues (CS/OTA), reported on the activities of the group (GRVA-11-05).

36. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20, with recommendations on uniform provisions concerning cyber security and software updates, suitable for the purpose of the Contracting Parties of the 1998 and 1958 Agreements. He explained that no UN Global Technical Regulation was envisaged because of the difficulty to define acceptance criteria, which would depend on how a vehicle is equipped. He stated that these recommendations, covering cyber security and software updates and permitting the use of Regulation No. X Software Identification Number (RxSWIN), can be followed and adapted to national circumstances.

37. He reported on the activities of the group concerning the review of the request by the expert from CEMA to remove vehicle categories S, T and T from the scope of UN Regulation No. 156. He explained, that following a technical discussion, the group confirmed that vehicles of these categories were using Over-the-air Software updates and that the scope of UN Regulation No. 156 was fine. He suggested that the scope of UN Regulation No. 155 could be expanded to vehicles of Categories S, R and T as both regulations went hand in hand.

38. He also reported on group’s activities on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20 following a request for clarification on the transition clauses specified in paragraphs 7.3.1. and 7.3.4. with regards to the extension of type approvals first issued before 1 July 2024 and applied for such extension after that date. He explained that the group developed amendments to (a) the UN Regulation No. 155 (Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System, and (b) the respective Interpretation Documents for UN Regulation No. 155 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/59), in order to clarify under which circumstances extensions were possible and which additional information was expected to be provided by the vehicle manufacturer applying for approval.

39. The expert from Canada stated the world of cyber security was very active including on vulnerability assessment tools. He mentioned existing services as suitable mitigation tools. He highlighted that Canada published Transport Canada’s Vehicle Cyber Security Strategy as well as Canada’s vehicle cyber security guidance. He stated that the work of the IWG was not completed.

40. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the group, acknowledged that the world of cyber security was evolving, and that regulations and other activities, as those mentioned above, were going hand in hand.

41. The expert from the United States of America proposed that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20 should be kept at GRVA level for the time being.

42. The expert from the European Commission recalled that the document was mandated by the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles and wondered why it should not be transmitted to WP.29.

43. The Secretary of the IWG explained that some elements were missing in the document and that he would try to provide a corrected version as soon as possible.

44. GRVA agreed that there was no urgency and agreed to consider a revised document at its January 2022 session.

92. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRVA-11-06 with an amendment proposal aimed to resolve problems with installation of stronger spring brake actuators in trailers to realize higher deceleration in the case of emergency braking caused by a cut of the supply line between towing vehicle and trailer. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-11-06 with an official symbol at the next session.

75. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) for M1 and N1, reported (GRVA-11-20) on the activities of the IWG since the May 2021 session of GRVA. He explained that the group wanted to gather experience during the next two years, including on simulation, before submitting amendment proposals addressing tests via simulation.

76. He mentioned that the group produced GRVA-11-07 proposing amendments to the OICA proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22.

77. The expert from Japan, Head of Delegation, proposed minor amendments to the proposal. The expert from Canada proposed clarifications with more accurate references to standards mentioned in the document.

78. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22, as amended by GRVA-11-40 (reproduced in Annex IV of the session report), and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplements for the 00, 01 and 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 152, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

26. GRVA recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/143 and the agreement to reconfirm its content at this session. GRVA reviewed GRVA-11-08, jointly developed by the IWG on DSSAD/EDR and the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157, with an amendment proposal to the official document. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit the amendments to World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and the Administrative Committee of the 1958 Agreement (AC.1), for consideration at their November 2021 sessions.

27. The expert from the United States of America required clarification about the procedure in that case. The secretariat explained the administrative constraints in such as case and agreed to expedite the preparation of documents in line with relevant rules.

GRVA received a progress report from the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157 (GRVA-10-34).

GRVA discussed the coordination of work related to this agenda item in line with the guidance provided by AC.2 (GRVA-08-10).

GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-10-35 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2021 sessions, subject to final review by GRVA at its September 2021 sessions.

118. GRVA reviewed GRVA-11-09, containing a copy of the draft document with the WP.29 Programme of Work for the year 2022.

119. GRVA reviewed GRVA-11-28 containing amendments to the row dedicated to ADAS activities in GRVA-11-09.

120. The expert from China, Vice-Chair of GRVA, suggested that clarifications were provided to avoid overlap between ADAS activities and FRAV activities. The experts from France and the United States of America supported it. GRVA addressed that comment under agenda item 11.

121. The expert from the United States of America requested that the text related to DSSAD and EDR was inserted in the document.

122. The expert from Japan requested that Japan was noted as initiator of the AEBS activities together with Germany.

123. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland requested that the row with ALKS indicated June 2022 as deadline.

124. The expert from Germany supported it and suggested that the European Commission was also noted as initiator for the ALKS activities.

125. The Secretary suggested to align the mandate date of the IWG on Cyber Security and OTA issues with the agreed date at WP.29, November 2022.

126. GRVA requested the secretariat to provide these suggestions to the Secretary to WP.29.

6. The Secretary presented GRVA-11-10 with some highlights of the WP.29 session in June 2021 having relevance for GRVA. He referred to the session report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1159 for more details. GRVA noted the report from the secretariat.

108. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-11-11 on behalf of the IWG on The Database for the Exchange of Type-Approval Documentation (DETA). He referred to Schedule 5 in the Revision 3 of the 1958 Agreement that sets the grounds for the use of the feature called Unique Identifier (UI). He explained that the IWG on DETA was developing, on the basis of the activities of the Working Party on Lighting and Light-signalling (GRE), the “summary document” that could be stored in DETA to facilitate the use of UI. He clarified that the subsidiary bodies of WP.29 (GRs) would be in charge to define the content of the summary document. He recalled the importance of defining which Regulation would not allow the use of UI.

109. The expert from the Russian Federation suggested that OICA should provide guidance on which regulations should prohibit the use of UI.

110. GRVA requested the secretariat and the experts from OICA to prepare a document with the list of Regulations for which the use of Unique Identifier should not be allowed.

111. GRVA agreed to resume discussion on the proposed summary document at its next session.

4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/19 and Add.1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-11-02/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received before the session started. (All informal documents submitted are listed in Annex I of this report. Annex II provides the list of Informal Working Groups (IWG) reporting to GRVA.)

5. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-11-01) and noted the technical information contained in GRVA-11-12 for connecting remotely to this hybrid session.

32. The exert from ISO introduced GRVA-11-13, presenting the activities of the ISO working group developing publicly available specification concerning safety and artificial intelligence for road vehicles. GRVA noted the link with the activities under agenda item 3 and agreed to receive updates at a next session.

33. The expert from ISO introduced GRVA-11-14, providing an overview and guidance of the steps for developing and validating an automated vehicle equipped with a safe automated driving system, considering safety-by-design, verification and validation methods for automated driving as well as cyber security. GRVA also welcomed future updates at next sessions.

58. The expert from FSD presented GRVA-11-15 (also on behalf of CITA). He recalled the existing regulatory activities on remote access to in-vehicle data within the Motor Vehicles Working Group of the European Commission and within GRVA. He described the current situation with regard to remote access to in-vehicle data and explored, in the case GRVA would be willing to deal with this item, the implications of relying on ISO 20077 (extended vehicle), which only allows data transfer via Business to Business (B2B) transactions. He highlighted that such system would not be appropriate for sovereign use cases, including Market Surveillance Activities and Periodic Technical Inspections. He advocated for a trust centre to be developed that would manage access to in-vehicle data. He based his explanation on an example (DSSAD) and highlighted the importance of the separation of duties in that context and the importance for authorities to get access to these data.

59. The expert from AAPC noted that this matter was touching on EDR/DSSAD. He raised the question: who owns the data? He suggested that access to data would be best managed at regional level. He noted that courts had the right to ask for data.

60. The expert from FIA mentioned that the CITA/FSD presentation was close to what FIA presented at previous sessions.

61. The expert from Norway thanked CITA/FSD for the informative presentation.

62. The expert from Germany asked what was the role and the place of the citizens in the model presented.

63. The expert from FSD answered that the consumers were recognized, and that consent could be managed, being a part of the trust centre role. He answered to the comment from AAPC that the model presented was referring, as an example, to DSSAD but that it was not exclusive. He explained that the trust centre would be a governance tool and that other examples could have been chosen, such as in-service monitoring. He stressed the importance of a trusted storage that is needed for courts as well as all other stakeholders, including authorities and citizens. He also recognized the value of the concept presented by FIA.

64. The expert from FIGIEFA supported the approach presented. She noted the diverging technical aspect but the converging overall goals. She stated that the discussions should continue, also at regional level with the European Commission Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (DG GROW). Their technical expert mentioned that the technical approach would not be sufficient; both “write” and “read” access and further clarification could be discussed at the European level.

65. The experts from CLEPA and OICA promised to review the presentation in detail and to send comments.

66. GRVA invited the Chair and the secretariat to approach the Committee on the Coordination of Work (WP.29/AC.2). GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item at its next session to discuss the role of GRVA. GRVA noted that the IWG on EDR/DSSAD could perform a first review of the topic presented by CITA (related to EDR/DSSAD) at one of its next sessions, as time allows.

49. The expert from CITA presented GRVA-12-14/Rev.1, giving an overview of the content in GRVA-12-11/Rev.1 and GRVA-12-40, regarding remote access to in-vehicle data. He recalled various models and technical solutions presented to WP.29 and GRVA to enable such access, e.g. to third parties and for sovereign use cases such as Periodic Technical Inspection or Market Surveillance. He proposed a role for GRVA in that field, i.e. to prepare the design of vehicles so as to enable data collection, transmission and guaranty authenticity (no repudiation) of the data. He called on for the establishment of an ad hoc group that would perform a full assessment, possibly using the assessment template proposed in GRVA-12-40.

50. The expert from FIA explained that he was more in favour to have this matter addressed in Brussels by the European Commission. He explained that GRVA should not negatively influence the access to in-vehicle data because of UN Regulations Nos. 155 and 156.

51. The expert from ITU explained that all models listed in the document would create an unnecessary cyber security risk. He claimed that the role of regulations was to create the conditions under which the vehicle manufacturers should make data available as per the terms of that regulation.

52. The expert from OICA felt that this topic was relevant to national or regional levels and was not sure if the United Nations had a role to play in this. He explained, even though OICA was not fundamentally against a new group, the current workload associated with GRVA activities was already high and therefore explaining the defensive position expressed.

53. The expert from AAPC echoed the positions expressed by ITU and OICA.

54. The expert from CLEPA stated that there was a value for GRVA to host this conversation.

55. The expert from the United States of America supported the position expressed by AAPC. He felt that it was premature to create a group on this matter.

56. The expert from Germany proposed to distinguish two aspects of this matter: (a) the technical aspects related to data transmission and cyber security and (b) the national and regional laws on data privacy.

57. The expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland agreed that there were challenges related to national laws, but he also supported a harmonized approach on how to share data, as data would not only benefit the vehicle owner but also the whole transport system.

58. The expert from Austria supported a discussion at GRVA on this matter.

59. The expert from CITA welcomed the comments received and stated the importance of cyber security, of national and regional laws but also the need for harmonization activities at GRVA level to avoid the situation where potential national laws would lead to different technical solutions that would impair the aim of data sharing.

60. GRVA agreed to further discuss the role of GRVA with regards to remote access to in-vehicle data at its May 2022 session and consider approaching AC.2 and WP.29 in June 2022 for further guidance regarding future proceedings concerning that matter.

68. The expert from the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS), introduced GRVA-11-16, with a status report of the activities performed by the group. He detailed the activities under the two workstreams on the review of amendment proposals to UN Regulation No. 79 and on the drafting of a new Regulation. He explained that the group was envisaging to develop a new UN Regulation on Dynamic Control Assistance Systems (DCAS), as a subset of ADAS, with a structure derived from the one of UN Regulation No. 157 and incorporating outcomes from the IWG on VMAD concerning audits and tests (including virtual testing). He confirmed that the draft was addressing both the DCAS performance and DCAS interactions with human drivers.

69. The expert from Finland mentioned the excellent work of the group, but was not sure whether the new UN Regulation should address DCAS or ADAS, as the name DCAS could suggest it would also address higher level of automation, as the word “driver” was missing in DCAS. He also raised the importance to involve the Global Forum for Road Traffic Safety (WP.1). The position was also supported by the experts from Sweden and Denmark.

70. The expert from the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of the IWG on ADAS, clarified that the levels of automation envisaged were assistance levels according to the definitions provided in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1040 and that the group was developing an approval framework for systems around the driver, which would be useful to industry and would clarify the assistance that can be given to drivers.

71. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/8, as amended by GRVA-11-17 (reproduced in Annex III), and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplements for the 02, 03 and 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

48. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/8 as amended by GRVA-09-37 on continued support of ACSF of Category B1 when the boundary conditions are exceeded. The proposal received comments from the experts from France and UK. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this proposal at its next session.

46. The expert from Japan, co-organizer of the workshop on the implementation on UN Regulation No. 155 that took place on 8 July 2021, introduced GRVA-11-18, explaining the purpose of the workshop and reporting on the outcomes of this workshop.

47. The expert from France announced that their Approval Authority was going to issue a Cyber Security Management System Certificate of Conformity. GRVA clarified that the activities performed under the workshop on the implementation of UN Regulation should not stop Contracting Parties to issue type approvals.

48. GRVA agreed that the secretariat together with National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory (Japan) organize further workshops on the implementation of UN Regulation No. 155.

105. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-11-19, a presentation providing details on the regulatory act on Automated Driving Systems adopted in Germany in 2021. He detailed the variety of use cases covered, the infrastructure and ODD requirements, the technical requirements and the approval of the technology and authorization regarding the use to operate. The presentation received questions from the experts from China on the timeline, from Italy on the use of specific registration plates, and from France on potential definitions for autonomous shuttles. The expert from Germany highlighted that an ordinance was envisaged to clarify details.

75. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) for M1 and N1, reported (GRVA-11-20) on the activities of the IWG since the May 2021 session of GRVA. He explained that the group wanted to gather experience during the next two years, including on simulation, before submitting amendment proposals addressing tests via simulation.

76. He mentioned that the group produced GRVA-11-07 proposing amendments to the OICA proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22.

77. The expert from Japan, Head of Delegation, proposed minor amendments to the proposal. The expert from Canada proposed clarifications with more accurate references to standards mentioned in the document.

78. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22, as amended by GRVA-11-40 (reproduced in Annex IV of the session report), and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplements for the 00, 01 and 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 152, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

106. The expert from China introduced GRVA-11-21 providing information about activities performed in China regarding their Framework of Automated Driving Standard System, providing details regarding Intelligent and Connected Vehicles and the related general technical requirements for automated driving systems, as well as proposals and suggestions derived from the experience gathered in China, for GRVA: (i) to consider dealing with the vehicle operating on both public road and limited areas, (ii) to promote the organic combination of FRAV and VMAD work results, (iii) to clarify the relationship between Automated Driving Systems and Advanced Driver Assistance System and (iv) to regulate other technologies or functions, such as on-board positioning system, as the basic function to serve the automated driving.

107. GRVA agreed that the Task Force on ADAS could develop a document clarifying the boundaries between ADS and ADAS. GRVA reflected on the suggestion (ii), noted above, and agreed that proposals could be made by the experts to the IWG on FRAV to consider not only motorway but also other use cases. GRVA noted the coordination efforts made by FRAV and VMAD. Concerning the suggestion (iv), GRVA recalled the preference to regulate the performance instead of the technology. The expert from International Telecommunication Union stated the merits of developing provisions for the assessment of positioning systems for ADS. GRVA recalled that any Contracting Party may submit a proposal for activities in any relevant area and agreed to discuss at its next session whether further items for regulation should be considered such as the performance of positioning technologies.

96. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-11-22, modifying ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26, with amendments to the stop lamp activation criteria He proposed that GRVA would harmonise stop lamp activation thresholds for regenerative braking in UN Regulation No. 78 with new provisions in UN Regulation No. 13-H.

97. The expert from Japan stated that the proposal can be supported. He noted however that automatically commanded braking was not considered in the current text of UN Regulation No. 78. He added that, if automatically commanded braking would be introduced in UN Regulation No. 78, then consistency between UN Regulation No. 78 and UN Regulation No. 13-H would be needed.

98. The expert from IMMA also presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27, proposing reference updates to standards that were recently revised.

99. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26 as amended by GRVA-11-22 (as reproduced in Annex V of the session report) and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit them as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 78 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

104. The expert from France introduced GRVA-11-23, providing an overview of the French Decree on automated vehicles’ conditions of use and automated road transport systems’ commissioning. He explained that the decree covered automation levels up to fully automated systems, provided that there are under supervision of a person in charge of remote intervention and are deployed on predefined paths or zones. He continued that the decree contained definitions such as the one for Automated Road Transport System (ARTS) and general safety provisions for these systems, as well as requirements for the driver or the person in charge of remote intervention and specify responsibility principles (including criminal liability) as set in ordinance 2021-443 dated 14 April 2021. The presentation received clarification questions from Japan about the scope of ARTS, including the system only or the system and the human, and about the handling of emergency vehicles.

20. The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV), presented the informal group’s status report (GRVA-11-25). He referred to a consolidation of FRAV working documents (GRVA-11-24) that presented current elements of the FRAV discussions. He explained that GRVA-11-24 reflected work in progress, including elements still under review, that this document followed the FRAV framework for safety requirements covering all ADS configurations, intended uses, and limitations on use (such as Operational Design Domain (ODD) constraints). He continued that the framework was based on manufacturer descriptions of each ADS with provisions to ensure uniformity and measurable/verifiable ODD specifications. He detailed that the safety requirements were structured for application to each ADS based on the manufacturer description and that FRAV was pursuing an approach (a) to user safety based on the roles users may play during a given trip (e.g., passenger, fallback user, driver) and (b) to ADS interactions with other road users based on detection of object properties that enable object recognition and classification at a level sufficient to determine the appropriate response(s). He reported that FRAV was first developing safety requirements at a general level and anticipated working in parallel with the IWG on Validation Method for Automated Driving (VMAD) to develop technical specifications for these requirements. He highlighted the close relationship between performance requirements and the scenarios used to assess performance (i.e., the requirements ensure safe ADS navigation of the nominal and safety-critical traffic scenarios developed by VMAD) and in this regard, the increasing FRAV collaboration with VMAD (as expected). He mentioned the corresponding three workstreams on the performance of the Dynamic Driving Task (DDT), interactions with other road users, lighting and the new workstream related to data collection together with the IWG on Data Storage System for Automated Driving (DSSAD)/ Event Data Recorder (EDR). He reported that FRAV had sent initial recommendations to the EDR/DSSAD informal group on data collection for ADS as requested, and that FRAV expected to provide further input, including examples for applying its recommendations. He concluded by mentioning that this work on data collection may also be relevant to the VMAD work on ADS in-service monitoring and reporting.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland asked whether means to increase transparency on the workstreams could be identified. He explained that there were many meetings, that were difficult to follow.

22. The expert from the United States of America answered that the group was carefully addressing this point, making sure that the workstreams would not work aside of FRAV. He explained that the workstreams were informal and dynamic, to address specific technical details, and that their work was fully discussed in plenary FRAV sessions.

20. The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV), presented the informal group’s status report (GRVA-11-25). He referred to a consolidation of FRAV working documents (GRVA-11-24) that presented current elements of the FRAV discussions. He explained that GRVA-11-24 reflected work in progress, including elements still under review, that this document followed the FRAV framework for safety requirements covering all ADS configurations, intended uses, and limitations on use (such as Operational Design Domain (ODD) constraints). He continued that the framework was based on manufacturer descriptions of each ADS with provisions to ensure uniformity and measurable/verifiable ODD specifications. He detailed that the safety requirements were structured for application to each ADS based on the manufacturer description and that FRAV was pursuing an approach (a) to user safety based on the roles users may play during a given trip (e.g., passenger, fallback user, driver) and (b) to ADS interactions with other road users based on detection of object properties that enable object recognition and classification at a level sufficient to determine the appropriate response(s). He reported that FRAV was first developing safety requirements at a general level and anticipated working in parallel with the IWG on Validation Method for Automated Driving (VMAD) to develop technical specifications for these requirements. He highlighted the close relationship between performance requirements and the scenarios used to assess performance (i.e., the requirements ensure safe ADS navigation of the nominal and safety-critical traffic scenarios developed by VMAD) and in this regard, the increasing FRAV collaboration with VMAD (as expected). He mentioned the corresponding three workstreams on the performance of the Dynamic Driving Task (DDT), interactions with other road users, lighting and the new workstream related to data collection together with the IWG on Data Storage System for Automated Driving (DSSAD)/ Event Data Recorder (EDR). He reported that FRAV had sent initial recommendations to the EDR/DSSAD informal group on data collection for ADS as requested, and that FRAV expected to provide further input, including examples for applying its recommendations. He concluded by mentioning that this work on data collection may also be relevant to the VMAD work on ADS in-service monitoring and reporting.

21. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland asked whether means to increase transparency on the workstreams could be identified. He explained that there were many meetings, that were difficult to follow.

22. The expert from the United States of America answered that the group was carefully addressing this point, making sure that the workstreams would not work aside of FRAV. He explained that the workstreams were informal and dynamic, to address specific technical details, and that their work was fully discussed in plenary FRAV sessions.

137. The Secretary presented GRVA-11-26, a publication (brochure) that UNECE would publish within the next months, dealing to technological developments and governmental responses at international level, related to ADAS and ADS. The expert from France asked whether the publication could be also published in French.

138. GRVA welcomed the draft publication of UNECE “all you need to know about Automated Vehicles” and agreed that delegations should send comments until 15 October 2021.

81. GRVA noted the status report of the IWG on AEBS for Heavy Vehicles (GRVA-11-27). GRVA provided guidance, upon request by the group, on the deactivation related provisions, and suggested their alignment with those in UN Regulation No. 152.

82. GRVA noted the second question regarding the interpretation of the test conditions. GRVA invited the Special Interest Group (SIG) on Regulation No. 157 and the Task Force on ADAS to check it, at a future occasion, and agreed to discuss it back at the next GRVA session.

118. GRVA reviewed GRVA-11-09, containing a copy of the draft document with the WP.29 Programme of Work for the year 2022.

119. GRVA reviewed GRVA-11-28 containing amendments to the row dedicated to ADAS activities in GRVA-11-09.

120. The expert from China, Vice-Chair of GRVA, suggested that clarifications were provided to avoid overlap between ADAS activities and FRAV activities. The experts from France and the United States of America supported it. GRVA addressed that comment under agenda item 11.

121. The expert from the United States of America requested that the text related to DSSAD and EDR was inserted in the document.

122. The expert from Japan requested that Japan was noted as initiator of the AEBS activities together with Germany.

123. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland requested that the row with ALKS indicated June 2022 as deadline.

124. The expert from Germany supported it and suggested that the European Commission was also noted as initiator for the ALKS activities.

125. The Secretary suggested to align the mandate date of the IWG on Cyber Security and OTA issues with the agreed date at WP.29, November 2022.

126. GRVA requested the secretariat to provide these suggestions to the Secretary to WP.29.

95. The expert from Italy informed GRVA (GRVA-11-29) of their intention to submit a proposal for amendments to UN GTR No. 3 at the next session of Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) that would propose to adapt UN GTR No. 3 to technical and standardization progress, introducing provisions for the activation of the stop lamp under regenerative braking and updating the references to ASTM standards to enable the use of the new ASTM standard reference test tyre F2493 for the measurement of the Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC). He asked for comments on that proposal. The expert from Canada explained that, in their view some further work would be needed, for example, on the definition proposed in para. 2.25. and other small items.

85. The expert from Italy informed GRVA that he had submitted to the WP.29 secretariat in December 2021 a request for authorization to amend UN GTR No. 3, for consideration at the March 2022 session of AC.3. He detailed the technical matters to be addressed to harmonize UN Regulation No. 78 and UN GTR No. 3. He clarified that GRVA would be invited to consider introducing provisions for the activation of the stop lamp under regenerative braking and updating the references to ASTM standards to enable the use of the new ASTM standard reference test tyre F2493 for the measurement of the Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC). GRVA encouraged the expert from Italy to further discuss this item at the next AC.3 session.

86. GRVA agreed to keep GRVA-12-15 on the agenda as a reference document until its next GRVA session in May 2022.

92. The expert from Italy recalled the purpose of GRVA-12-15 and presented GRVA-13-17 superseding it. He detailed the proposed harmonization of UN GTR No.3 with UN Regulation No. 78.

93. The expert from Canada explained that the technical requirements applicable in his country do not impose a deceleration threshold when a brake lamp must be lit. He noted that adding such a threshold in UN GTR No. 3 would require to provide justifications for such an amendment that would highlight the safety benefit associated to it, as well as details on the costs it would generate. He asked whether some background information regarding some definitions could be provided so that it would become clearer what systems fall in the scope of the definitions.

94. GRVA invited delegations to share information on the safety benefits and costs considerations related to the 1.3 m/s2 threshold for the brake light activation and on the genesis of the new definition proposed.

7. The Secretary presented GRVA-11-30, summarizing GRVA-11-03, the document requested by GRVA at its tenth session. He explained that the document was summarizing the deliberations of GRVA, so far, on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the context of vehicle regulations. He added that the document contained the list of statements made by the delegations on this topic. He continued that the document proposed possibilities, in terms of committees, to further discuss this topic and also in terms of documentation, on how to take stoke of the statements received so far. He went through the text of a draft guidance document drafted on the basis of the positions expressed. He asked for comments and input.

8. The expert from France welcomed the document. He stated that such document was necessary. He promised to provide input after the session to the secretariat.

9. The expert from FIA welcomed developments in the field of AI. He welcomed that GRVA took care of it but he noted that most AI were based on interactions with human beings. He wondered how GRVA should consider the involvement of humans in this context. GRVA invited the expert from FIA to provide input on this aspect at the next session, if desired.

10. The expert from Germany welcomed the document as an excellent summary. She added that the document was under review by the experts and that she would send comments to the secretariat.

11. The expert from UK highlighted that AI could have relevance for other WP.29 subsidiary bodies as AI could also impact e.g. emissions.

12. The expert from the USA sought for clarifications about the purpose of this exercise, and what would be delivered, a note, some reporting to WP.29, or a guidance document.

13. The expert from SAE International stressed that discussions in this area needs to stand with proper definitions.

14. The expert from Canada agreed with the expert from SAE International and stressed the importance of definitions before guidance is contemplated.

15. The expert from the Russian Federation advised, on definitions, to first focus on AI as a software that is implemented in an Automated Driving System (ADS), with specific features, affecting safety.

16. The expert from France suggested that a first output under this agenda item should be an information for WP.29 so that WP.29 can then decide on the outcome that should be delivered.

17. GRVA agreed that AI have applications beyond ADAS and ADS and that this should be reported to WP.29.

18. GRVA welcomed the informal document prepared by the secretariat and invited experts to provide input for the preparation of a revised version.

25. The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD, informed GRVA on the achievements of the group so far as well as on the progress made on the current projects regarding EDR and DSSAD (GRVA-11-31). She explained the proposed DSSAD work plan, focusing on the inventory of best ADS storage practices and the activities on DSSAD performance elements for ADS, in coordination with FRAV and VMAD. She detailed the schedule of meetings for the group until the next session of GRVA.

28. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced the report of the Special Interest Group (SIG) on UN Regulation No. 157, provided in GRVA-11-32. He explained the progress made by the group on the provisions developments related to higher speeds for ALKS concerning: (i) following distances (in line with traffic rules), (ii) smooth and anticipatory driving that avoids inducing string instability in traffic, (iii) strategies to mitigate collisions with wrong way drivers and pedestrians, forward detection ranges along with control strategies to adapt speed if braking performance and/or detection range is impaired and (iv) new performance model introduced for reference. He mentioned the open points still under consideration.

29. GRVA clarified that no decision would be taken at this session, GRVA reviewed the long list of proposals and reference documents under this agenda item and requested the secretariat to remove outdated documents from the agenda for the next session.

30. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced GRVA-11-33 (amendment proposal by the SIG to raise the specified ALKS maximum speed up to 130 km/h), upon request from the expert of France.

28. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced the report of the Special Interest Group (SIG) on UN Regulation No. 157, provided in GRVA-11-32. He explained the progress made by the group on the provisions developments related to higher speeds for ALKS concerning: (i) following distances (in line with traffic rules), (ii) smooth and anticipatory driving that avoids inducing string instability in traffic, (iii) strategies to mitigate collisions with wrong way drivers and pedestrians, forward detection ranges along with control strategies to adapt speed if braking performance and/or detection range is impaired and (iv) new performance model introduced for reference. He mentioned the open points still under consideration.

29. GRVA clarified that no decision would be taken at this session, GRVA reviewed the long list of proposals and reference documents under this agenda item and requested the secretariat to remove outdated documents from the agenda for the next session.

30. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced GRVA-11-33 (amendment proposal by the SIG to raise the specified ALKS maximum speed up to 130 km/h), upon request from the expert of France.

17. The expert from Germany presented GRVA-07-63, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/32 with a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (ALKS), aimed at increasing the maximum speed (from 60 km/h to 130 km/h) for ALKS. She also introduced a second proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/33) aimed at introducing provisions for ALKS performing lane changes. The experts from Austria, China, Denmark, European Commission, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic or Korea, Sweden and UK were rather supportive. They provided ideas and technical comments to improve the proposals. The expert from Switzerland opposed to the proposed speed increase (up to 130 km/h), stating that it would be counterproductive and as Switzerland was reviewing traffic rules based on the adopted 60 km/h. The experts from Japan, Canada and USA did not support the proposals and referred to FDAV as the reference document guiding the work of GRVA on automation. The expert from SAFE stated the need for a clear roadmap, mentioned the challenges for the Technical Services and the Approval Authorities with regards to Level 3 technologies and supported the comments from the European Commission regarding the need for a Regulation addressing Automation on motorways.

18. It was recalled that the expert from UK was working on a proposal for provisions for lane change during the minimum risk manoeuvre.

19. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-07-26, introducing a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (GRVA-07-31), aimed at extending the scope of the Regulation to heavy vehicles. They recalled that these vehicle categories were already in the scope of the activities of the former IWG on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF), which drafted UN Regulation No. [157].

20. GRVA noted that its work priorities on automation were defined by WP.29 in the FDAV. GRVA also noted that a number of Contracting Parties were willing to work on amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and therefore decided to consult the Administrative Committee for the coordination of work (AC.2).

21. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRVA-07-07, highlighting some inconsistencies between the different parts of UN Regulation No. [157]. He mentioned discrepancies on the use of the term “system”. He questioned the need for Appendix 3 to Annex 4. He then introduced amendment proposal GRVA-07-06 on behalf of the European Commission and the Russian Federation. The expert from OICA responded to the proposal (GRVA-07-59). He also briefly introduced GRVA-07-30, proposing editorial changes to the Regulation and GRVA-07-21 with substantial amendments to the Regulations.

22. The Chair mentioned other informal documents (GRVA-07-27, GRVA-07-45, GRVA-07-56, GRVA-07-62 and GRVA-07-66), proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and invited the stakeholders to prepare a consolidated document with amendment proposals that could generate consensus at GRVA. Interested parties developed GRVA-07-69-Rev.1.

23. GRVA adopted the amendment proposals marked in green and yellow in GRVA-07-69-Rev.1 (see Annex III of the session report). GRVA requested the secretariat to correct the abbreviations, as appropriate, and to submit it without the text in red as supplement to UN Regulation No. [157], for consideration and vote by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) its Administrative Committee for the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) at their March 2021 sessions.

24. Following the interpretation request by the expert from France (GRVA-07-39), GRVA agreed that ALKS should in principle detect “approaching emergency vehicles” as per traffic rules, noting that a definition of approaching emergency vehicles as well as other clarifications should be developed as soon as possible.

27. GRVA received a progress report from the expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157 (GRVA-12-36) on the activities of the group. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4, aimed at proposing provisions addressing lane change manoeuvres and increasing the maximum design speed of ALKS, up to 130 km/h.

28. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-12-20. She announced that some discussions were still taking place and that a revised document would be produced in the course of the week. The expert from EC recalled that the document had been discussed by the IWG on EDR/DSSAD and considered by GRSG, as it had been initially drafted as an amendment to UN Regulation No. 160 (EDR). He explained that following discussions, it was advised that the provisions should be inserted in UN Regulation No. 157, and that therefore the document had then been submitted to the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157. The expert from CLEPA confirmed that the industry did not have issues with the proposal but that a few last-minute clarifying amendments to the document were necessary. The expert from AAPC mentioned that he would circulate the proposal among his members, with the aim to provide feedback, if possible, during the week.

29. Later in the week, GRVA considered a revised document (GRVA-12-20/Rev.1). The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD, requested the possibility for her group to review the revised proposal, at a meeting taking place one working day after GRVA. Accordingly, GRVA agreed to keep the text contained in the document in square brackets.

30. GRVA reviewed GRVA-12-51 and GRVA-12-51/Rev.1 (note: document not available) prepared during the week and requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-52 (based on formal documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4 and informal documents GRVA-12-34, GRVA-12-35, GRVA-12-20/Rev.1 (including square brackets) to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions, subject to final review by GRVA at its May 2022 session.

31. The experts from the Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets introduced GRVA-11-34, with a presentation of the coalition, its missions and activities, in line with the recommendation of WP.29 (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1159, para. 21).

100. The expert from Italy presented GRVA-11-35, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. He explained that Annex 15 was leading to a high number of groups to be tested and therefore was inducing an overproportioned test workload due to the grouping criteria.

101. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 90 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

102. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland questioned the relevance of the amendments proposed in Table 1 in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. The expert from Italy volunteered to provide more details for review at the next session.

103. GRVA agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29 at its twelfth session.

34. The expert from ISO introduced GRVA-11-36, providing an update on the activities of ISO on the Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF). He recalled the purpose of these activities, he explained the status of the standard drafting, completing ISO 26262 on functional safety. He detailed how the SOTIF standard currently being develop could support automated vehicles regulations.

23. The expert from Canada, Co-Chair of the IWG on VMAD, presented the progress report of the group (GRVA-11-37). He recalled the purpose of the ongoing activities and the corresponding deliverables expected from the group. He also recalled the structure of the New Assessment/Test Method (NATM) – Master document. He detailed the activities accomplished by the four VMAD subgroups. He concluded his report by summarizing the three main points the presentation: (a) substantial work has been accomplished on the second iteration of NATM; (b) the draft second iteration of the NATM Master Document would be submitted for consideration at the twelfth session of GRVA; and (c) FRAV and VMAD agreed to select a few concrete test cases to work on and to foster the existing synchronization between the two groups.

24. Several experts asked for clarifications about the envisaged dates for the document submission. It was clarified that the group expected to submit the document before end of October 2021, if possible as a complete and consolidated document.

19. The expert from France introduced GRVA-11-38 with details about the “Grand Défi” Program on “Trustworthy & Industrial AI” taking place in its country. He detailed the three pillars of the programme: the technological pillar, the norm pillar and the applications conformity assessment pillar. He explained the activities under the technological pillar, he provided details on the project called PRISSMA, a first platform on New Autonomous Mobility under the applications conformity assessment Pillar (primarily focusing on distribution droids and shuttle buses without safety drivers) and he described the activities of the French standardization body (ANFNOR), aimed at setting up a standardization road map (and priorities) and international cooperation, to promote common vision on standardization for AI at EU and international levels.

94. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-11-39, proposing amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP29/2021/73, recently adopted by WP.29 and AC.1. GRVA noted that the official document, currently notified by the Office of Legal Affairs to the Contracting Parties, could not be amended at this stage. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-11-39 as an amendment proposal to UN Regulation No. 13-H with an official symbol at the next session.

83. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-12-25, recalling the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/10, aimed at clarifying paragraph 5.2.22.2. in UN Regulation No. 13-H, which dealt with deceleration thresholds generating braking light signal in the case of regenerative braking and/or automatically commanded braking. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/10 as amended by GRVA-12-24 (reproduced in Annex IV of the session report) and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 13-H to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

75. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) for M1 and N1, reported (GRVA-11-20) on the activities of the IWG since the May 2021 session of GRVA. He explained that the group wanted to gather experience during the next two years, including on simulation, before submitting amendment proposals addressing tests via simulation.

76. He mentioned that the group produced GRVA-11-07 proposing amendments to the OICA proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22.

77. The expert from Japan, Head of Delegation, proposed minor amendments to the proposal. The expert from Canada proposed clarifications with more accurate references to standards mentioned in the document.

78. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22, as amended by GRVA-11-40 (reproduced in Annex IV of the session report), and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplements for the 00, 01 and 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 152, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

83. The expert from Korea, technical sponsor to the amendment to UN GTR No. 8 (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/99), recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/34 (as amended by GRVA-09-36), a revised proposal for amendment to UN GTR No. 8 aimed at accommodating new types of steering equipment, low gear systems, not being able to reach the 270 degrees request in the sine with dwell test.

84. GRVA noted the oral report from the expert from the Republic of Korea on their consultations with Canada and OICA regarding the amendment proposal to UN GTR No. 8.

85. The expert from Canada provided oral comments on the amendment proposal to the GTR, that the secretariat reproduced in GRVA-11-41.

86. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this item at its next session.

59. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/34 proposed in accordance with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/99 that provides the authorization to develop an amendment to UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 8. The experts from the USA inquired how the amendment to UN GTR No.8 would solve the issue raised. The expert from the Republic of Korea recalled the context of the proposal, addressing new steering systems with low gear rations. The expert from OICA recalled that this technical discussion took already place under the 1958 Agreement. The expert from Canada offered comments (GRVA-07-64) and questioned the need for a tolerance. He stated the need to verify the impact on safety of such proposal. The experts from the USA and the Netherlands advised to start future activities of this nature under the 1998 Agreement, first.

60. GRVA agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/34 (or on a revised proposal) and on the report corresponding to this amendment at its next session.

95. The expert from Korea, technical sponsor to the amendment to UN GTR No. 8 (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/99), introduced GRVA-09-36 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/34, a revised proposal for amendment to UN GTR No. 8 aimed at accommodating new types of steering equipment, low gear systems, not being able to reach the 270 degree request in the sine with dwell test.

96. The expert from Canada expressed reservation with the revised proposal as it would still open the door to safety issues. He explained that the last paragraph of the amendment proposal should only belong to the test procedure and not to the requirement. He explained that this was up to the test facility or manufacturer to perform the test to reach the maximum operable steering angle without overshoot and not for the regulation to accommodate such overshooting risk with a tolerance.

97. GRVA requested the expert from Canada to work together with the expert from Korea so that progress could be achieved until the next session.

76. GRVA received an oral report from the expert from the Republic of Korea regarding the development of an amendment proposal to UN Global Technical Regulation (GTR) No. 8 (GRVA-12-13).

77. GRVA noted that following discussions, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/12 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/34 were withdrawn by the experts from Canada and the Republic of Korea, respectively.

93. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-11-42, an amendment proposal to clarify the warning actuation requirements in case the parking braking system would be automatically requested to apply the parking brake. GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-11-42 with an official symbol at the next session.

88. GRVA resumed its discussion on park brake warning requirements in the case of electric parking brakes, based on a revised proposal in GRVA-13-22 and the supporting material in the presentation GRVA-13-25. Following discussion, GRVA developed a revised proposal.

89. GRVA adopted GRVA-13-22/Rev.1 (based on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/11 and reproduced in Annex III) and requested the secretariat to submit it, as supplements to the 11 and 12 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2022 sessions.

73. GRVA noted that some inaccuracies were detected by the secretariat in the recent amendment to UN Regulation No. 79, as noted in GRVA-11-43, and agreed to consider a corrigendum or a supplement at its next session.

66. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/6, introducing clarifications and correcting omissions. GRVA adopted it as amended by GRVA-12-43 (reproduced in Annex III) and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplement for the 03 and 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 79, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/19 and Add.1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-11-02/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received before the session started. (All informal documents submitted are listed in Annex I of this report. Annex II provides the list of Informal Working Groups (IWG) reporting to GRVA.)

5. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-11-01) and noted the technical information contained in GRVA-11-12 for connecting remotely to this hybrid session.

4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/19 and Add.1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-11-02/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received before the session started. (All informal documents submitted are listed in Annex I of this report. Annex II provides the list of Informal Working Groups (IWG) reporting to GRVA.)

5. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-11-01) and noted the technical information contained in GRVA-11-12 for connecting remotely to this hybrid session.

35. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the IWG on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air issues (CS/OTA), reported on the activities of the group (GRVA-11-05).

36. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20, with recommendations on uniform provisions concerning cyber security and software updates, suitable for the purpose of the Contracting Parties of the 1998 and 1958 Agreements. He explained that no UN Global Technical Regulation was envisaged because of the difficulty to define acceptance criteria, which would depend on how a vehicle is equipped. He stated that these recommendations, covering cyber security and software updates and permitting the use of Regulation No. X Software Identification Number (RxSWIN), can be followed and adapted to national circumstances.

37. He reported on the activities of the group concerning the review of the request by the expert from CEMA to remove vehicle categories S, T and T from the scope of UN Regulation No. 156. He explained, that following a technical discussion, the group confirmed that vehicles of these categories were using Over-the-air Software updates and that the scope of UN Regulation No. 156 was fine. He suggested that the scope of UN Regulation No. 155 could be expanded to vehicles of Categories S, R and T as both regulations went hand in hand.

38. He also reported on group’s activities on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20 following a request for clarification on the transition clauses specified in paragraphs 7.3.1. and 7.3.4. with regards to the extension of type approvals first issued before 1 July 2024 and applied for such extension after that date. He explained that the group developed amendments to (a) the UN Regulation No. 155 (Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System, and (b) the respective Interpretation Documents for UN Regulation No. 155 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/59), in order to clarify under which circumstances extensions were possible and which additional information was expected to be provided by the vehicle manufacturer applying for approval.

39. The expert from Canada stated the world of cyber security was very active including on vulnerability assessment tools. He mentioned existing services as suitable mitigation tools. He highlighted that Canada published Transport Canada’s Vehicle Cyber Security Strategy as well as Canada’s vehicle cyber security guidance. He stated that the work of the IWG was not completed.

40. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the group, acknowledged that the world of cyber security was evolving, and that regulations and other activities, as those mentioned above, were going hand in hand.

41. The expert from the United States of America proposed that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/20 should be kept at GRVA level for the time being.

42. The expert from the European Commission recalled that the document was mandated by the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles and wondered why it should not be transmitted to WP.29.

43. The Secretary of the IWG explained that some elements were missing in the document and that he would try to provide a corrected version as soon as possible.

44. GRVA agreed that there was no urgency and agreed to consider a revised document at its January 2022 session.

45. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/21 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 as supplement to UN Regulation No. 155 (for consideration and vote by AC.1 in March 2022) and as amendment to the Interpretation document for UN Regulation No. 155 (also for consideration and vote by WP.29 in March 2022).

67. The Chair of GRVA recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/55, proposing amendments to the Interpretation document on UN Regulation No. 155 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/59).

68. WP.29 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/55.

91. The Chair of WP.29 recalled the discussions on this topic and the adoption of document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/55 by WP.29 under agenda item 4.2.3. (see paras. 67-68 above).

75. The expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) for M1 and N1, reported (GRVA-11-20) on the activities of the IWG since the May 2021 session of GRVA. He explained that the group wanted to gather experience during the next two years, including on simulation, before submitting amendment proposals addressing tests via simulation.

76. He mentioned that the group produced GRVA-11-07 proposing amendments to the OICA proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22.

77. The expert from Japan, Head of Delegation, proposed minor amendments to the proposal. The expert from Canada proposed clarifications with more accurate references to standards mentioned in the document.

78. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/22, as amended by GRVA-11-40 (reproduced in Annex IV of the session report), and requested the secretariat to submit it, as draft supplements for the 00, 01 and 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 152, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

GRVA received progress reports from the IWGs on AEBS-HDV (GRVA-10-37) and on AEBS (GRVA-10-40).

GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-10-03 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2021 sessions.

81. The World Forum considered draft amendments under agenda items 4.7.1 to 4.7.12 and recommended their submission to AC.1 for voting, including the latest modifications to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/19 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/20 (agenda items 4.7.7., 4.7.8 and 4.7.9.) adopted by GRVA at its January 2022 session, proposed in WP.29-186-05 and reproduced in Annex V of the session report.

79. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/23, proposing similar amendments, relevant to the 02 series of amendments.

80. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/23 and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft supplements for the 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 152 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

GRVA received progress reports from the IWGs on AEBS-HDV (GRVA-10-37) and on AEBS (GRVA-10-40).

GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-10-03 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2021 sessions.

87. The expert from CLEPA briefly introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/24. He explained that his organization invited GRVA participants to participate in an informal meeting that took place before the GRVA session and that CLEPA received some suggestions and comments from Contracting Parties that his members wanted to address.

88. GRVA agreed to review a revised proposal at its next session.

65. The expert from CLEPA presented GRVA-07-68, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/21 with provisions for the type approval of Electromechanical Braking systems. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-07-46, aimed at improving and finalizing some open items in the CLEPA proposal. The expert from the Netherlands stated that some open items should still be finalized before adoption, such as para. 5.1.1.2. and should address the deterioration over time of the state of charge and the state of health. He also mentioned issues related to temperature differences during a trip that might impact the performance of the system. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this matter at its next session.

98. The expert from CLEPA presented GRVA-09-06, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/21, as amended by GRVA-09-05, providing provisions for the type approval of trucks equipped with electromechanical brakes. He clarified that no trailer with electromechanical brakes was considered in the proposal. He explained the benefits of such system for hybrid electric and electric vehicles. He acknowledged that further work was needed to develop Periodic Technical Inspection and electric storage devices requirements.

99. GRVA agreed to review a revised proposal based on GRVA-09-05, as formal document, at its next session.

80. GRVA noted the oral report of the expert from CLEPA concerning ongoing discussions regarding electromechanical brakes (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/8) and agreed to consider a revised document at its May 2022 session.

83. The expert from CLEPA presented GRVA-13-47, reflecting the ongoing discussions regarding the development of provisions for the type approval of electromechanical brakes (see current status in GRVA-13-05, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/8).

84. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced GRVA-13-19 proposing amendments to Annex XVIII on the assessment of complex electronic systems, based on the most recent provisions introduced in UN Regulation No. 157. He recalled that the review of the complex electronic assessment provisions was initiated when introducing Automatically Commanded Steering Functions of categories A and B in UN Regulation No. 79 and that it was agreed at that time, that UN Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H would need to be updated, too.

85. The expert from OICA inquired the reason why the provisions in UN Regulation No. 157 were used as a reference and why not simpler versions such as the one in UN Regulation No. 79. He recalled that the complexity of systems covered by UN Regulation No. 79 (i.e. Levels 0 to 2) differed from those in UN Regulation No. 157 (i.e. Level 3). He stated that the assessment for a power steering, an anti-lock braking system or an electronic stability function would not necessarily need to be as extensive as for ALKS.

86. The expert from CLEPA supported that Annex XVIII is updated in the context of the activities related to electro-mechanical brakes.

87. GRVA noted CLEPA’s intention to submit an official document, on the basis of GRVA-13-05 for consideration at the September 2022 session of GRVA. GRVA noted the proposal by United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to upgrade Annex XVIII of UN Regulation No. 13 and discussed whether or not to merge it with CLEPA’s document, mentioned above.

89. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/25, an amendment proposal to the electric parking brake provisions in UN Regulation No. 13 already discussed at the previous session. He justified that a new series of amendments was necessary as the proposal would impact the design of vehicles and would therefore need to provide lead time.

90. The expert from Germany confirmed that his previous comments regarding buses were addressed by the proposal tabled at this session.

91. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/25 (without square brackets) and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft 12 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

101. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-09-04 proposing amendments to the parking brake requirements, justified by the fact that Germany registers three fatalities per year involving trucks or buses and inadequate parking brake operation.

102. The expert from OICA responded (GRVA-09-20) to the proposal of the expert from Germany. OICA agreed that the proposal could help to increase safety. He provided comments on the implementation of the requirement modification as well as editorial comments.

103. The expert from UK supported the intention of the proposal. He mentioned possible editorial corrections to the proposal. He highlighted the importance of balanced requirements to avoid unnecessary user frustration.

104. The expert from Germany agreed with the comments provided and volunteered to resume consideration of this item at its next session.

GRVA requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-10-33 with an official symbol for consideration at its September 2021 session or to discuss a revised proposal, if any.

96. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-11-22, modifying ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26, with amendments to the stop lamp activation criteria He proposed that GRVA would harmonise stop lamp activation thresholds for regenerative braking in UN Regulation No. 78 with new provisions in UN Regulation No. 13-H.

97. The expert from Japan stated that the proposal can be supported. He noted however that automatically commanded braking was not considered in the current text of UN Regulation No. 78. He added that, if automatically commanded braking would be introduced in UN Regulation No. 78, then consistency between UN Regulation No. 78 and UN Regulation No. 13-H would be needed.

98. The expert from IMMA also presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27, proposing reference updates to standards that were recently revised.

99. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26 as amended by GRVA-11-22 (as reproduced in Annex V of the session report) and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit them as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 78 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

GRVA agreed to review an official document based on GRVA-10-11 at its September 2021 session.

96. The expert from IMMA introduced GRVA-11-22, modifying ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26, with amendments to the stop lamp activation criteria He proposed that GRVA would harmonise stop lamp activation thresholds for regenerative braking in UN Regulation No. 78 with new provisions in UN Regulation No. 13-H.

97. The expert from Japan stated that the proposal can be supported. He noted however that automatically commanded braking was not considered in the current text of UN Regulation No. 78. He added that, if automatically commanded braking would be introduced in UN Regulation No. 78, then consistency between UN Regulation No. 78 and UN Regulation No. 13-H would be needed.

98. The expert from IMMA also presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27, proposing reference updates to standards that were recently revised.

99. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/26 as amended by GRVA-11-22 (as reproduced in Annex V of the session report) and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/27. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit them as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 78 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

100. The expert from Italy presented GRVA-11-35, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. He explained that Annex 15 was leading to a high number of groups to be tested and therefore was inducing an overproportioned test workload due to the grouping criteria.

101. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 90 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

102. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland questioned the relevance of the amendments proposed in Table 1 in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. The expert from Italy volunteered to provide more details for review at the next session.

103. GRVA agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29 at its twelfth session.

100. The expert from Italy presented GRVA-11-35, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. He explained that Annex 15 was leading to a high number of groups to be tested and therefore was inducing an overproportioned test workload due to the grouping criteria.

101. GRVA adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/28 and requested the secretariat to submit it as draft supplement to UN Regulation No. 90 to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

102. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland questioned the relevance of the amendments proposed in Table 1 in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29. The expert from Italy volunteered to provide more details for review at the next session.

103. GRVA agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29 at its twelfth session.

88. The expert from Italy recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/29 and the questions received at the previous session. He presented GRVA-12-16, including amendment to the initial proposal.

89. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland thanked Italy for addressing their questions and supported the document.

90. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit the document, as amended by GRVA-12-16 (reproduced in Annex V of the session report), as a supplement to the 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 90, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

17. The expert from Germany presented GRVA-07-63, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/32 with a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (ALKS), aimed at increasing the maximum speed (from 60 km/h to 130 km/h) for ALKS. She also introduced a second proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/33) aimed at introducing provisions for ALKS performing lane changes. The experts from Austria, China, Denmark, European Commission, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic or Korea, Sweden and UK were rather supportive. They provided ideas and technical comments to improve the proposals. The expert from Switzerland opposed to the proposed speed increase (up to 130 km/h), stating that it would be counterproductive and as Switzerland was reviewing traffic rules based on the adopted 60 km/h. The experts from Japan, Canada and USA did not support the proposals and referred to FDAV as the reference document guiding the work of GRVA on automation. The expert from SAFE stated the need for a clear roadmap, mentioned the challenges for the Technical Services and the Approval Authorities with regards to Level 3 technologies and supported the comments from the European Commission regarding the need for a Regulation addressing Automation on motorways.

18. It was recalled that the expert from UK was working on a proposal for provisions for lane change during the minimum risk manoeuvre.

19. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-07-26, introducing a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (GRVA-07-31), aimed at extending the scope of the Regulation to heavy vehicles. They recalled that these vehicle categories were already in the scope of the activities of the former IWG on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF), which drafted UN Regulation No. [157].

20. GRVA noted that its work priorities on automation were defined by WP.29 in the FDAV. GRVA also noted that a number of Contracting Parties were willing to work on amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and therefore decided to consult the Administrative Committee for the coordination of work (AC.2).

21. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRVA-07-07, highlighting some inconsistencies between the different parts of UN Regulation No. [157]. He mentioned discrepancies on the use of the term “system”. He questioned the need for Appendix 3 to Annex 4. He then introduced amendment proposal GRVA-07-06 on behalf of the European Commission and the Russian Federation. The expert from OICA responded to the proposal (GRVA-07-59). He also briefly introduced GRVA-07-30, proposing editorial changes to the Regulation and GRVA-07-21 with substantial amendments to the Regulations.

22. The Chair mentioned other informal documents (GRVA-07-27, GRVA-07-45, GRVA-07-56, GRVA-07-62 and GRVA-07-66), proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and invited the stakeholders to prepare a consolidated document with amendment proposals that could generate consensus at GRVA. Interested parties developed GRVA-07-69-Rev.1.

23. GRVA adopted the amendment proposals marked in green and yellow in GRVA-07-69-Rev.1 (see Annex III of the session report). GRVA requested the secretariat to correct the abbreviations, as appropriate, and to submit it without the text in red as supplement to UN Regulation No. [157], for consideration and vote by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) its Administrative Committee for the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) at their March 2021 sessions.

24. Following the interpretation request by the expert from France (GRVA-07-39), GRVA agreed that ALKS should in principle detect “approaching emergency vehicles” as per traffic rules, noting that a definition of approaching emergency vehicles as well as other clarifications should be developed as soon as possible.

27. GRVA received a progress report from the expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157 (GRVA-12-36) on the activities of the group. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4, aimed at proposing provisions addressing lane change manoeuvres and increasing the maximum design speed of ALKS, up to 130 km/h.

28. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-12-20. She announced that some discussions were still taking place and that a revised document would be produced in the course of the week. The expert from EC recalled that the document had been discussed by the IWG on EDR/DSSAD and considered by GRSG, as it had been initially drafted as an amendment to UN Regulation No. 160 (EDR). He explained that following discussions, it was advised that the provisions should be inserted in UN Regulation No. 157, and that therefore the document had then been submitted to the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157. The expert from CLEPA confirmed that the industry did not have issues with the proposal but that a few last-minute clarifying amendments to the document were necessary. The expert from AAPC mentioned that he would circulate the proposal among his members, with the aim to provide feedback, if possible, during the week.

29. Later in the week, GRVA considered a revised document (GRVA-12-20/Rev.1). The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD, requested the possibility for her group to review the revised proposal, at a meeting taking place one working day after GRVA. Accordingly, GRVA agreed to keep the text contained in the document in square brackets.

30. GRVA reviewed GRVA-12-51 and GRVA-12-51/Rev.1 (note: document not available) prepared during the week and requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-52 (based on formal documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4 and informal documents GRVA-12-34, GRVA-12-35, GRVA-12-20/Rev.1 (including square brackets) to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions, subject to final review by GRVA at its May 2022 session.

17. The expert from Germany presented GRVA-07-63, introducing ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/32 with a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (ALKS), aimed at increasing the maximum speed (from 60 km/h to 130 km/h) for ALKS. She also introduced a second proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2020/33) aimed at introducing provisions for ALKS performing lane changes. The experts from Austria, China, Denmark, European Commission, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic or Korea, Sweden and UK were rather supportive. They provided ideas and technical comments to improve the proposals. The expert from Switzerland opposed to the proposed speed increase (up to 130 km/h), stating that it would be counterproductive and as Switzerland was reviewing traffic rules based on the adopted 60 km/h. The experts from Japan, Canada and USA did not support the proposals and referred to FDAV as the reference document guiding the work of GRVA on automation. The expert from SAFE stated the need for a clear roadmap, mentioned the challenges for the Technical Services and the Approval Authorities with regards to Level 3 technologies and supported the comments from the European Commission regarding the need for a Regulation addressing Automation on motorways.

18. It was recalled that the expert from UK was working on a proposal for provisions for lane change during the minimum risk manoeuvre.

19. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-07-26, introducing a proposal for amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] (GRVA-07-31), aimed at extending the scope of the Regulation to heavy vehicles. They recalled that these vehicle categories were already in the scope of the activities of the former IWG on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF), which drafted UN Regulation No. [157].

20. GRVA noted that its work priorities on automation were defined by WP.29 in the FDAV. GRVA also noted that a number of Contracting Parties were willing to work on amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and therefore decided to consult the Administrative Committee for the coordination of work (AC.2).

21. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRVA-07-07, highlighting some inconsistencies between the different parts of UN Regulation No. [157]. He mentioned discrepancies on the use of the term “system”. He questioned the need for Appendix 3 to Annex 4. He then introduced amendment proposal GRVA-07-06 on behalf of the European Commission and the Russian Federation. The expert from OICA responded to the proposal (GRVA-07-59). He also briefly introduced GRVA-07-30, proposing editorial changes to the Regulation and GRVA-07-21 with substantial amendments to the Regulations.

22. The Chair mentioned other informal documents (GRVA-07-27, GRVA-07-45, GRVA-07-56, GRVA-07-62 and GRVA-07-66), proposing amendments to UN Regulation No. [157] and invited the stakeholders to prepare a consolidated document with amendment proposals that could generate consensus at GRVA. Interested parties developed GRVA-07-69-Rev.1.

23. GRVA adopted the amendment proposals marked in green and yellow in GRVA-07-69-Rev.1 (see Annex III of the session report). GRVA requested the secretariat to correct the abbreviations, as appropriate, and to submit it without the text in red as supplement to UN Regulation No. [157], for consideration and vote by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) its Administrative Committee for the 1958 Agreement (AC.1) at their March 2021 sessions.

24. Following the interpretation request by the expert from France (GRVA-07-39), GRVA agreed that ALKS should in principle detect “approaching emergency vehicles” as per traffic rules, noting that a definition of approaching emergency vehicles as well as other clarifications should be developed as soon as possible.

27. GRVA received a progress report from the expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Co-Chair of the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157 (GRVA-12-36) on the activities of the group. He introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4, aimed at proposing provisions addressing lane change manoeuvres and increasing the maximum design speed of ALKS, up to 130 km/h.

28. The expert from Germany introduced GRVA-12-20. She announced that some discussions were still taking place and that a revised document would be produced in the course of the week. The expert from EC recalled that the document had been discussed by the IWG on EDR/DSSAD and considered by GRSG, as it had been initially drafted as an amendment to UN Regulation No. 160 (EDR). He explained that following discussions, it was advised that the provisions should be inserted in UN Regulation No. 157, and that therefore the document had then been submitted to the Special Interest Group on UN Regulation No. 157. The expert from CLEPA confirmed that the industry did not have issues with the proposal but that a few last-minute clarifying amendments to the document were necessary. The expert from AAPC mentioned that he would circulate the proposal among his members, with the aim to provide feedback, if possible, during the week.

29. Later in the week, GRVA considered a revised document (GRVA-12-20/Rev.1). The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD, requested the possibility for her group to review the revised proposal, at a meeting taking place one working day after GRVA. Accordingly, GRVA agreed to keep the text contained in the document in square brackets.

30. GRVA reviewed GRVA-12-51 and GRVA-12-51/Rev.1 (note: document not available) prepared during the week and requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-52 (based on formal documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/3, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/4 and informal documents GRVA-12-34, GRVA-12-35, GRVA-12-20/Rev.1 (including square brackets) to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions, subject to final review by GRVA at its May 2022 session.