4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-12-27/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received until 24 January 2022. (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 noted the efforts made by the secretariat to find time arrangements to accommodate as much as possible the different time zones from experts attending. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-12-01).

6. The Secretary presented GRVA-12-02 with some highlights of the WP.29 session in November 2021, having relevance for GRVA. He referred to the session report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1161 for more details. GRVA noted the report from the secretariat.

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.

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.

37. The expert from CEMA presented GRVA-12-05, recalling the CEMA position regarding UN Regulations Nos. 155 and 156. He also recalled the request of CEMA to remove the Categories S, R and T from the scope of UN Regulation No. 156. He claimed that the vehicles of these categories, even though similar, were different from other vehicle categories (such as trucks). He acknowledged that over-the-air software updates were performed by vehicle types of these three categories. He pointed at the case of all-terrain vehicles, that were either belonging to the Category L (and as such not being subject to UN Regulation No. 156), or to the Category T (and be subject to UN Regulation No. 156).

38. The expert from Germany mentioned that a market analysis exercise showed that vehicles of Categories S, R and T included automated driving systems on field; such equipment was mature and well developed. She noted that such vehicles were also driven on public roads and that, even though their maximum speed was lower than the one of other vehicles, they were characterized by their high torque and were therefore hard to stop. These vehicles, as such, were therefore posing a risk in traffic that could be addressed by that regulation. She supported the inclusion of these vehicle categories in the scope of UN Regulation No. 155 and to keep them in UN Regulation No. 156. She added that lead-time could be envisaged, and she suggested a transition period of five years.

39. The expert from Italy suggested to remove these three vehicle categories from the scope of UN Regulation No. 156, until appropriate work is conducted.

40. The expert from the European Commission confirmed that the European Union did not mandate the application of UN Regulation No. 156 and that this topic was not considered as a priority for the region. He recalled that the Category L was included in the scope of UN Regulation No. 155, but limited to automated vehicles.

41. The expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland recalled that vehicles of Category L were exempted because they were unlikely to be connected vehicles. He stressed that many new vehicles of the Category T were connected and automated. He therefore supported that they were subject to cyber security requirements. He added that he struggled to understand why Category T vehicle manufacturers would struggle to implement UN Regulation No. 156, as its provisions were primarily about software management. He assumed that reputable firms would already comply with such requirements.

42. The experts from Luxembourg and the Netherlands supported the experts from Germany and from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

43. The expert from Denmark stated that he was not in the position to express any position on this matter as such matters would be relevant for another ministry in his country.

44. The expert from Spain agreed with the expert from Italy.

45. GRVA agreed to keep the three Categories S, R and T in the scope of UN Regulation No. 156 and to resume consideration of this item at the next session in order to develop a road map for their future inclusion in UN Regulation No. 155.

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.

78. The expert from France reported on recent crashes involving concrete mixer trucks, such vehicles being currently exempted from the electronic stability requirements. He presented GRVA-12-07, proposing to remove the exemption for concrete mixers trucks.

79. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of the French proposal and requested the secretariat to distribute GRVA-12-07 with an official symbol at the next GRVA session in May 2022.

81. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/14 as amended by GRVA-13-39, aimed to require the fitment of four axles commercial vehicles over 25 tons with vehicle stability function. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-13-23 containing an alternative proposal addressing the concern raised by the expert from France and based on their statistical review of the configuration of four axle vehicles. He presented GRVA-13-20 containing elements justifying their alternative proposal.

82. GRVA agreed to keep GRVA-13-23 and GRVA-13-39 on the agenda for the session in September 2022.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

75. The expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for HDV proposed revised terms of references for the group, with two new items 7 and 8. GRVA agreed to keep GRVA-12-10 on the agenda until its May 2022 session.

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.

54. The expert from CITA presented GRVA-13-42 (introducing GRVA-13-41), proposing the establishment of a new informal working group to develop a harmonized way to deal with in-vehicle data for sovereign tasks.

55. The expert from Canada felt that the proposal was to regulate the commercialization of in-vehicle data. He stated that the proposal by CITA was confusing, as GRVA already had established an IWG dealing with data, namely the IWG on EDR/DSSAD. He highlighted that the focus should be on data related to safety and that there was no need to regulate infotainment.

56. The expert from CITA clarified that their proposal focused on the transmission of data, not the collection of data points as developed by the group on EDR/DSSAD.

57. The expert from Canada asked whether there would be a value to have a separate group dealing with this point.

58. The expert from AAPC shared the views of Canada. He recalled that national laws existed and wondered how this would fit in the mandate of WP.29. The expert from ITU felt that this proposal was aimed to use WP.29 to get access to vehicle data for the purpose of CITA members.

59. The expert from CLEPA pointed at the activities of the IWG on DETA.

60. The expert from FIA stated that the priority should not be the commercialization of data. He suggested to remove blockages created by UN Regulation No. 155, instead.

61. The expert from FIGIEFA preferred to address this concern at the European Union level.

62. The expert from CITA clarified that the use case envisaged was only related to sovereign use cases such as periodic technical inspection, as defined in the 1997 Agreement.

63. The expert from the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD, invited the expert from CITA to join the meetings of the IWG on EDR/DSSAD.

64. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this matter, based on a revised proposal from CITA to clarify their position.

16. GRVA received the status report (GRVA-12- 30) from the expert from the Netherlands, Co-Chair of the IWG on VMAD, highlighting the work done on guidelines for the New Assessment/Test Method (NATM), as required by the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles. He described the open issues addressed by the subgroups and the collaboration activities with the IWG on FRAV.

17. He explained that the group convened three times since September 2021 and that the four subgroups met 20 times, in total. He detailed that the second iteration of the master document on NATM grew from 46 pages to 103 pages.

18. GRVA acknowledged that the master document prepared by the IWG on VMAD contained information about the pillars of the new assessment test method and went beyond guidelines. GRVA noted that the IWG on VMAD would develop a second document containing guidelines as there was the need to separate recommendations from the descriptive information.

19. The expert from OICA highlighted the importance of the work done by the group and its subgroups. He inquired whether the task of the subgroup 2 was about pass/fail criteria or about information sharing.

20. The expert from China mentioned the different pillars that composed the NATM. He asked how to apply them and how to ensure that the combination of the four pillars was sufficient. The expert from Canada, Co-Chair of the IWG, referred to Chapter 4 titled “Applying a Multi-pillar Approach to the NATM”.

21. The expert from Sweden inquired whether some activities, in parallel to the development of the VMAD guidelines, would be performed under the framework of the 1958 Agreement and if yes, when. The Chair responded that no Contracting Party to the 1958 Agreement had requested to start regulatory activity at this stage.

22. The expert from the Netherlands highlighted the open question regarding the inclusion (or exclusion) of provisions for the user manual concerning misleading names or names given to systems that imply a different performance of the system than the real one.

23. The expert from ETSC referred to his comment under item 4(a) and pointed at Annex IV, item 1.

24. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-12 to WP.29 for information (in March 2022) and for consideration and vote at its June 2022 session, subject to final review by GRVA at its May 2022 session.

33. The Chair of GRVA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/57, with the proposal for the second iteration of the New Assessment / Test Method (NATM) – Master Document. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/58 amended by WP.29-187-08, a proposal for the NATM guideline for the validation of ADS. He presented WP.29-187-10, including the Guidelines and Recommendations concerning Safety Requirements for Automated Driving Systems. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/60, with the proposal for recommendations on uniform provisions concerning cyber security and software updates suitable for the purpose of the contracting parties to the 1958 and 1998 Agreements.

34. WP.29 congratulated GRVA for these achievements and endorsed the documents ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/57, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/58 as amended by WP.29-187-08 ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/60 and WP-187-10. The Chair requested the secretariat to issue document WP-187-10 with an official symbol for the next WP.29 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

63. The expert from the Russian Federation also reported on activities of the group related to the task assigned by GRVA on the clarification of boundaries between ADAS and ADS. He presented GRVA-12-17. He referred to the literature e.g. the SAE International standard J3016. He mentioned that the key element distinguishing ADAS from ADS levels was the presence of a driver when the system is operating. He clarified that, according to this, DCAS would be an ADAS. He reported on the group’s consideration of ADAS systems claiming an increased performance and that were sometimes referred to as Level 2+. He explained that the group identified the challenges related to some ADAS that would perform similarly to ADS. He added, the task force discussed that the driver should not be the mitigator of risks associated with the operation of an automated system. He continued that taking routines and workload away from the driver would not automatically provide more safety and that systems performing like ADS should be subject to ADS regulations. He concluded by detailing a list of items that the group could focus on to develop regulatory provisions.

64. The outcome of the work done by the task force on boundaries between ADAS and ADS received comments from the European Commission, France, FIA and OICA. GRVA agreed to resume consideration of this item.

62. The expert from the Russian Federation, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Advanced Driver Assistant Systems (ADAS), introduced GRVA-12-18 with a status report of the activities performed by the group. He emphasised his intention to speed up the process and suggested the creation of a drafting group. He mentioned the reduced participation in recent meetings, with a usual attendance of 80 experts dropping recently to 50 experts and called for more engagement. He reported on the two workstreams of the group, on UN Regulation No. 79 and on a new regulation on a subset of ADAS that the group calls Driver Control Assistance Systems (DCAS). He detailed items from the current group’s discussions.

65. The expert from OICA recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/11 (aimed to include truck-trailer data transmission in the Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF) of Category C provisions in UN Regulation No. 79) and introduced a revised proposal (GRVA-12-19). GRVA adopted GRVA-12-19 and requested the secretariat to edit it and 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.

51. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/11, an amendment proposal to the ACSF of Category C provisions, with the main aim to include a truck-trailer data transmission. He proposed that the industry would invite for a specific workshop to discuss this until June 2021. He announced that OICA was targeting the adoption of an amendment proposal on this matter at the September 2021 session of GRVA.

GRVA adopted the provisional agenda prepared for the session, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/18, with the following insertion: Item 12(d) “Arrangement of meetings” (See GRVA-10-20/Rev.1).

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.

35. The expert from Japan, co-organizer (together with the secretariat) of workshops on the implementation of UN Regulation No. 155, reported on recent activities (GRVA-12-21). GRVA thanked Japan and the secretariat for these efforts to build capacity and support uniform application of the regulation.

11. GRVA received a progress report (GRVA-12-22) from the expert of the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV), on the activities of the group. He introduced GRVA-12-23, highlighting the significant progress made on the draft proposal for guidelines and recommendations concerning Safety Requirements for Automated Driving Systems (ADS). He detailed the four sections of the document, the purpose, the terms and definitions, the guidelines to describe an ADS and recommendations. He explained that these draft guidelines were providing a safety driven framework.

12. GRVA went through GRVA-12-03. The Co-Chair of the IWG explained that Table 1 in the document provided recommendations that would be expended with a third column, that would include criteria against which the safety recommendations in the column one and the detailed provisions in column two could be assessed.

13. The expert from ETSC highlighted the importance of the coordination between the IWGs on FRAV and on Validation Method for Automated Driving (VMAD) and advised that the coordination meetings involving the leadership of the two groups should systematically review the user requirements as the latter were not fitting the current VMAD structure.

14. The experts from OICA and CLEPA welcomed the progress made by the IWG on FRAV.

15. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-23 to WP.29 at its March 2022 session.

11. GRVA received a progress report (GRVA-12-22) from the expert of the United States of America, Co-Chair of the IWG on Functional Requirements for Automated and Autonomous Vehicles (FRAV), on the activities of the group. He introduced GRVA-12-23, highlighting the significant progress made on the draft proposal for guidelines and recommendations concerning Safety Requirements for Automated Driving Systems (ADS). He detailed the four sections of the document, the purpose, the terms and definitions, the guidelines to describe an ADS and recommendations. He explained that these draft guidelines were providing a safety driven framework.

12. GRVA went through GRVA-12-03. The Co-Chair of the IWG explained that Table 1 in the document provided recommendations that would be expended with a third column, that would include criteria against which the safety recommendations in the column one and the detailed provisions in column two could be assessed.

13. The expert from ETSC highlighted the importance of the coordination between the IWGs on FRAV and on Validation Method for Automated Driving (VMAD) and advised that the coordination meetings involving the leadership of the two groups should systematically review the user requirements as the latter were not fitting the current VMAD structure.

14. The experts from OICA and CLEPA welcomed the progress made by the IWG on FRAV.

15. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-23 to WP.29 at its March 2022 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.

130. The secretariat presented, on behalf of the GRVA Chair, the proposal for the 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 131 (AEBS for heavy vehicles) pointing out its importance for road safety (item 4.8.1) according to road safety organisations. He also presented the proposal for the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 157 (ALKS) with the extension of the maximum design speed up to 130 km/h and provisions for automated lane changes (item 4.8.2).

131. The World Forum considered draft amendments under agenda items 4.8.1 to 4.8.8 and recommended their submission to AC.1 for voting, subject to the below amendment:

Agenda item 4.8.5., ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/79, title amend to read:

“Proposal for Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13-H”

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.

130. The secretariat presented, on behalf of the GRVA Chair, the proposal for the 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 131 (AEBS for heavy vehicles) pointing out its importance for road safety (item 4.8.1) according to road safety organisations. He also presented the proposal for the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 157 (ALKS) with the extension of the maximum design speed up to 130 km/h and provisions for automated lane changes (item 4.8.2).

131. The World Forum considered draft amendments under agenda items 4.8.1 to 4.8.8 and recommended their submission to AC.1 for voting, subject to the below amendment:

Agenda item 4.8.5., ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/79, title amend to read:

“Proposal for Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13-H”

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.

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.

4. GRVA considered the provisional agenda prepared for this session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/1). GRVA adopted it without modification, as reproduced in GRVA-12-27/Rev.1, a version that included the reference to all informal documents received until 24 January 2022. (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 noted the efforts made by the secretariat to find time arrangements to accommodate as much as possible the different time zones from experts attending. GRVA also agreed on the running order for the session (GRVA-12-01).

92. GRVA reviewed GRVA-12-28, containing a list of UN Regulations prepared by the secretariat in consultation with the experts from OICA, for which the use of Unique Identifier should be prevented.

93. GRVA agreed to keep GRVA-12-28 on the agenda until its next session in May 2022.

73. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced GRVA-12-29, highlighting an amendment proposal adopted at the last session that inadvertently removed the 1 per cent slope criterion for the test track. GRVA supported the proposal and introduced further clarifications addressing omissions, as reproduced in GRVA-12-45.

74. GRVA adopted the document GRVA-12-45 and requested the secretariat to submit it, as amendment to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/19 and ECE/TRANS/WP29/2022/20, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 sessions.

16. GRVA received the status report (GRVA-12- 30) from the expert from the Netherlands, Co-Chair of the IWG on VMAD, highlighting the work done on guidelines for the New Assessment/Test Method (NATM), as required by the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles. He described the open issues addressed by the subgroups and the collaboration activities with the IWG on FRAV.

17. He explained that the group convened three times since September 2021 and that the four subgroups met 20 times, in total. He detailed that the second iteration of the master document on NATM grew from 46 pages to 103 pages.

18. GRVA acknowledged that the master document prepared by the IWG on VMAD contained information about the pillars of the new assessment test method and went beyond guidelines. GRVA noted that the IWG on VMAD would develop a second document containing guidelines as there was the need to separate recommendations from the descriptive information.

19. The expert from OICA highlighted the importance of the work done by the group and its subgroups. He inquired whether the task of the subgroup 2 was about pass/fail criteria or about information sharing.

20. The expert from China mentioned the different pillars that composed the NATM. He asked how to apply them and how to ensure that the combination of the four pillars was sufficient. The expert from Canada, Co-Chair of the IWG, referred to Chapter 4 titled “Applying a Multi-pillar Approach to the NATM”.

21. The expert from Sweden inquired whether some activities, in parallel to the development of the VMAD guidelines, would be performed under the framework of the 1958 Agreement and if yes, when. The Chair responded that no Contracting Party to the 1958 Agreement had requested to start regulatory activity at this stage.

22. The expert from the Netherlands highlighted the open question regarding the inclusion (or exclusion) of provisions for the user manual concerning misleading names or names given to systems that imply a different performance of the system than the real one.

23. The expert from ETSC referred to his comment under item 4(a) and pointed at Annex IV, item 1.

24. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit GRVA-12-12 to WP.29 for information (in March 2022) and for consideration and vote at its June 2022 session, subject to final review by GRVA at its May 2022 session.

91. The expert from Germany provided information on the first approval issued according to UN Regulation No. 157 (GRVA-12-31). He provided details on the time and workload needed to perform the full assessment as required by the regulation. He answered to questions raised by the experts from China and the Netherlands.

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.

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. GRVA received a progress report (GRVA-12-33) by the expert from Japan, Co-Chair of the IWG on Event Data Recorder (EDR) / Data Storage System for Automated Driving (DSSAD) on the current activities of the group.

26. GRVA discussed that the comparison table between EDR and DSSAD was no longer up-to-date and needed to be entirely revisited to clarify that EDR was focusing on crash analysis and that DSSAD was for ADS.

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.

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.

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.

46. The expert from CLEPA presented GRVA-12-37 with corrections proposals to references to the standard ISO/SAE 21434. GRVA adopted the document GRVA-12-37 and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 for consideration and vote at its June 2022 session.

3. WP.29 took note of the special procedures during COVID-19 period, which had been adopted under silence procedure on 26 February 2021 and was informed about the written voting procedures, which took place from 2 to 5 March 2021, for WP.29, AC.1 and AC.3 items envisaged for voting in accordance with the agenda of the 183rd session of the World Forum, as well as of the live voting procedure for WP.29, AC.1 and AC.3 items which had been scheduled to take place during online sessions with interpretation on 10 March 2021.

4. WP.29 adopted the annotated provisional agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1156/Rev.1 and WP.29-183-03) and the running order of the 183rd session (WP.29-183-02).

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

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. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

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.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

73. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland introduced GRVA-12-29, highlighting an amendment proposal adopted at the last session that inadvertently removed the 1 per cent slope criterion for the test track. GRVA supported the proposal and introduced further clarifications addressing omissions, as reproduced in GRVA-12-45.

74. GRVA adopted the document GRVA-12-45 and requested the secretariat to submit it, as amendment to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/19 and ECE/TRANS/WP29/2022/20, to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their March 2022 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.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

84. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-12-48, proposing to allow that the required warning actuation may be delayed until the parking brake was in a stable state. The proposal received comments from France, Germany, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Russian Federation. GRVA agreed that the expert from OICA, in consultation with interested Contracting Parties, would submit a revised proposal on the basis of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/11, at its May 2022 session.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

68. GRVA received a report (GRVA-12-09/Rev.1) from the expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the IWG on AEBS for heavy duty vehicles, on the progress made by the group to upgrade UN Regulation No. 131. He presented ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 (amended by GRVA-12-08), proposing to adjust the performance requirements in UN Regulation No. 131 to the current state of the art.

69. The expert from the Czech Republic highlighted that the upgraded provisions would be a significant contribution to road safety. He denied that the provisions corresponded to the current state of art technology. He explained that this assessment would only be true for a limited number of truck manufacturers and added that smaller truck manufacturers would be impacted as they were not working closely enough with the big systems suppliers for such systems.

70. The expert from ETSC mentioned the potential positive impact on road safety that this amendment, if adopted, could bring.

71. GRVA worked during the week on different options to introduce the requirements related to the vehicle to vehicle and the vehicle to pedestrian use cases and the corresponding transitional provisions as well as the AEBS deactivation conditions, on the basis of positions expressed by Australia, Germany, Japan, CLEPA, ETSC and OICA (GRVA-12-38, GRVA-12-39, GRVA-12-41, GRVA-12-42/Rev.1, GRVA-12-44, GRVA-12-46 and GRVA-12-47). GRVA also discussed provisions restricting the ability to switch off AEBS.

72. GRVA requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/7 as amended by GRVA-12-49 (reproduced in GRVA-12-50/Rev.1), to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2022 sessions.

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.

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.