Proposal from the informal working group on Cyber Security and OTA issues (CS/OTA) to update the text:

1. Use of “802.11p” to refer to V2X communications is out of date: 802.11p is properly referred to as 802.11-OCB and other direct communication methods are in use. “V2X” is the preferred term.
2. Platooning is a niche V2X operation and not widely used: The proposal suggests to use more mainstream examples such as cooperative awareness or manoeuvre coordination.

Proposal from the informal group on on Cyber Security and OTA issues for amendments:

1. To reflect updates and the most current version of relevant standards, notably ISO/SAE 21434:2021 and ISO/PAS 5112, and
2. To update the text in line with Supplement 1 to UN R155 (WP.29/2022/54).

Proposal to authorize work on a new UN Regulation for the approval of light vehicles with regard to prevention and mitigation of collisions due to driver error in actuating the accelerator pedal.

Proposal for amendments to Annex 18 regarding special requirements for electronic control systems and for related transitional provisions for its entry into force.

Proposal to prevent activation of an Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C for a minimum of [10] seconds after the system has verified that the road is of a valid type when merging into a roadway. The activation delay of [10] seconds prevents the system from being used during merging from the motorway’s acceleration lane. According to the proposal, the merging process during the acceleration phase is not fully suitable for an automated lane change due to, among other things, the vehicle dynamics and the limited space available. In addition, the delay shifts the driver’s notification of the automatic activation of the ACSF-C system to a time when the vehicle is already in a stable driving condition on the motorway and the driver’s attentional resources are more available to receive the notification. A manual activation of the system remains possible.

This liaison statement aims to inform ITU-T Study Group 16 on the publication of the Technical Reports FGAI4AD-01 and FG-AI4AD-03 concerning an automated driving safety data protocol.

International Telecommunication Union – Radiocommunication sector (ITU-R) Working Party (WP) 5A would like to introduce itself to UNECE WP on Automated/Autonomous Connected Vehicles (GRVA). ITU-R WP 5A addresses the radio communication issue of Land Mobile Service and is responsible for studies related to the Land Mobile Service and wireless access including RLANs (Radio Local Area Networks). Within WP 5A, Working Group (WG) 5A-5 addresses the issues pertinent to new technology, such as ITS (Intelligent Transport Systems), CAV (Connected Automated Vehicles) and MTC (Machine Type Communications).

Proposal for the following amendments:

1. Paragraphs 6.1.1. and 6.1.2.: In the case of category L vehicles application, the same brake lining assemblies could be fitted across a variety of applications. For example, the same brake pads/shoes could be fitted both on vehicle with single disc and on vehicle with double discs. Moreover, the same brake pads/shoes could be fitted both on front application and on rear application vehicle. Since there are too many cases or variables and it’s impossible to have a package based on the axle set for category L vehicles, the proposal of amendment is meant to consider the caliper set/drum set, instead of the axle set.
2. Paragraph 6.1.3.4.: Packaging of brake pads/drums has a limited dimension and it’s impossible to report in the packaging all applications approved, because there is no space available. In addition, should all applications approved be reported in the packaging, the updating of each packaging every time there is a new application available in the market would be needed. This is not feasible and it represents a risk to have a product with no updated information for the final consumer. For these reasons, the proposal aims to allow, as option, to report the approved vehicles/brakes/axle information through digital format (e.g. QR code, website) leading at least to a general catalogue. Moreover, using digital elements, it’s also possible to have a green solution and having a less environmental impact. The modification proposal is optional, and not exclusively for category L vehicles, but it is meant for every type of motor vehicles even if the major criticalities are with category L vehicles because their packaging is smaller than brake pads/drums of passenger car.
3. Paragraph 6.1.4.: The current requirement asks to have fitting instructions inside the packaging with at least an ECE language supplemented by the corresponding text of the language of the country where the product is sold. It means two options:
   • To have a specific fitting instruction for each country where the component is sold; or
   • To have a unique fitting instruction with all languages.
   Option 1 is not feasible from management and logistic point of view. Option 2 is not feasible because there is limit space available in the packaging: For example, to be sold in EU (that recognize UN R90), it’s needed to have all official 24 languages of the EU in a unique fitting instruction paper, but there are applications where the packaging is too small to contain the fitting instruction paper. For these reasons, the proposal of modification asks the possibility to have these fitting instructions also through digital format only (e.g. QR code, internet website, …). Moreover, using digital elements/formats, it’s possible to reduce the environmental impact because the instructions become paperless. The modification proposal is optional, and not exclusively for category L vehicles, but it is meant for every type of motor vehicle even though the major criticalities are with category L vehicles because their packaging is smaller than brake pads/drums of passenger cars.

Information concerning ways to address the interests of law enforcement in being able to determine whether a vehicle is being operated by an ADS relative to the enforcement of laws regarding activities permitted to a driver (or conversely, permitted to the occupant of a driver’s seat while the vehicle is under ADS operation).

Presentation (accompanied by supporting documents) to show how this subject is being addressed by other parties outside WP.29/GRVA. The materials are not submitted for as proposals for consideration or adoption.

Password protected. Please contact the GRVA secretariat for more information.

Draft proposal to introduce provisions for the type approval of vehicles with electro-mechanical braking (EMB) systems.

Proposal to improve the applicability of examples given in Tables A1 and B1 in Annex 5 in UN R155 regarding risks due to spoofing of messages or data received by the vehicle.

Proposal to permit the use of virtual testing as an alternative methodology to the physical tests. This approach requires the preliminary assessment of the methodology to be used.

Proposal from the GRVA secretariat to amend the original proposal based on the input of a workshop on the implementation of UN R155 held during 12-13 Jan. 2023.

Proposal to introduce the option of using a QR code (or other type of digital data carrier) to replace the paper installation instructions physically included in the packaging.

Proposal to introduce the option of using a QR code (or other type of digital data carrier) to replace the paper installation instructions physically included in the packaging.

Proposal to amend the guidelines on ADS assessment and test methods. This document is available with tracked changes in pdf version and in .docx format.

Proposal to clarify a logical cascade of actions regarding activation of ACSF B1 and C and the indication on when the vehicle has entered an eligible road based on the following:

1. When the same means is used by the driver to simultaneously activate the Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category B1 (ACSF B1) and of Category C (ACSF C), both functions switch to standby mode when the vehicle enters an ACSF C eligible road. But if the road is non-eligible to ACSF C, then only the ACSF B1 is activated.
2. With the current text of the regulation, once the vehicle moves to an ACSF C eligible road, the driver must operate again the means to activate the ACSF C. This second deliberate action is confusing for the driver since it makes the manipulation more complex. The current wording discourages most drivers from using this assistance function.
3. The proposed wording permits the following, logical, cascade of actions:
   1. The driver has done a deliberate action to activate ACSF B1 and ACSF C (on a non-eligible road); then
   2. He drives into an eligible road, and is clearly informed thereof; then
   3. He initiates a lane change procedure by activating e.g. the direction indicator.
4. This amendment further clarifies the requirement on the indication of when the vehicle enters an eligible road. It gives some examples of the type of indication to be given to the driver, e.g. additional popup or blinking indication, without being design restrictive.
5. A dedicated status indication of an ACSF C off-mode is by nature already different from the standby or active indication. Therefore, the driver is already sufficiently informed on a potential status change.

Proposal from the task force to revise target dates leading to GRVA approval of the text for a new UN Regulation on driver-control assistance systems (DCAS) during its January 2024 session (indicating possible adoption of the regulation by WP.29 during its June 2024 session with entry into force in December 2024).

Outcomes from the 7-8 November 2022 meeting between the WP.29/GRVA/FRAV informal group and the WP.1/IGEAD informal group on areas of common interest:

1. External ADS communication
2. Glossary of terms and definitions
3. Electronic format traffic rules
4. Safe ADS behaviour in traffic.

Consolidated revision prepared by the GRVA secretariat for review. Revision 1 incorporates all valid text up to:

• Supplement 1 to the original version of the Regulation
• 01 series of amendments.

Consolidated version of the regulation prepared by the GRVA secretariat and incorporating all valid text through:

• Supplement 1 to the 01 series of amendments
• Supplement 2 to the 01 series of amendments
• 02 series of amendments.

Proposal to clarify a logical cascade of actions regarding activation of ACSF B1 and C and the indication on when the vehicle has entered an eligible road.

Proposal to clarify a logical cascade of actions regarding activation of ACSF B1 and C and the indication on when the vehicle has entered an eligible road.

Revised proposal prepared by the GRVA secretary pursuant to discussions during the 15th session to clarify a logical cascade of actions regarding activation of ACSF B1 and C and the indication on when the vehicle has entered an eligible road based on the following justification:

1. When the same means is used by the driver to simultaneously activate the Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category B1 (ACSF B1) and of Category C (ACSF C), both functions switch to standby mode when the vehicle enters an ACSF C eligible road. But if the road is non-eligible to ACSF C, then only the ACSF B1 is activated.
2. With the current text of the regulation, once the vehicle moves to an ACSF C eligible road, the driver must operate again the means to activate the ACSF C. This second deliberate action is confusing for the driver since it makes the manipulation more complex. The current wording discourages most drivers from using this assistance function.
3. The proposed wording permits the following, logical, cascade of actions:
   1. The driver has done a deliberate action to activate ACSF B1 and ACSF C (on a non-eligible road); then
   2. He drives into an eligible road, and is clearly informed thereof; then
   3. He initiates a lane change procedure by activating e.g. the direction indicator.
4. This amendment further clarifies the requirement on the indication of when the vehicle enters an eligible road. It gives some examples of the type of indication to be given to the driver, e.g. additional popup or blinking indication, without being design restrictive.
5. A dedicated status indication of an ACSF C off-mode is by nature already different from the standby or active indication. Therefore, the driver is already sufficiently informed on a potential status change.
6. Regarding paragraph 5.6.4.2.3.: While entering the eligible road, the driver may be distracted or annoyed by this “prominent” indication. His attention resources shall be totally available during this phase. So the system would switch automatically to standby mode when fulfilling these two conditions: reaching an eligible and regular lane of travel. This second condition may be fulfilled for example by implementing a suitable time delay or by a direct verification of the lane of travel. These criteria should be explained, agreed between the technical service and the vehicle manufacturer.

Proposal to add the text, "In case that saturation of the front tyres happens before the above calculated magnitude angle, this angle may be used as the final steering amplitude, but only if this angle is greater or equal to 6.5 A.” based on the following justification:

1. Reaching fixed amplitude, i.e., fixed steering wheel angular speed due to given 0.7 Hz sine frequency, needs much more torque with quick steering gear ratio systems than with slow steering gear ratio systems, and produces much more wheel steer.
2. Car behavior (yaw rate, lateral acceleration and thus trajectory) is similar for all amplitudes above approx. 7 to 8 A (i.e., more than 7 times the steering wheel angle corresponding to 0.3 g), because front tires are saturated. More steer of the tires doesn’t provide more lateral force, so yaw rate and lateral acceleration don’t increase. Continuing to increase steering wheel amplitude after front tire saturation doesn’t give more information.
3. There might appear in the future some vehicles which have significantly low steering gear ratio (i.e., quick steering characteristics) and may need too much steering wheel torque to achieve the 270 degrees sine amplitude at 0.7 Hz (not reachable by conventional steering robots), then jeopardizing the easy approval of future beneficial steering equipment e.g. steering-by-wire systems.

Text prepared by the GRVA secretary, based on GRVA/2023/2 as adopted by GRVA during the 15th session, to highlight amendments to the approval number and marking provisions with regard to the series of amendments.

Text prepared by the GRVA secretariat based on document GRVA/2023/4 as adopted by GRVA during its 15th session to highlight the approval number and marking provisions pursuant to the series of amendments.

Proposal to require a vehicle stability function on vehicles with four axles commercial vehicles over 25 tons in light of their specific use.

Proposal to introduce provisions for electric regenerative braking systems.

Proposal to introduce new requirements for Complex Electronic Control Systems, in line with the corresponding provisions for passenger cars in UN Regulation No. 13-H

Proposal to introduce an explanation clarifying the possibility for Approval Authorities to recognise Certificates of Compliance for Cyber Security Management Systems (CSMS) issued by the Approval Authority of another Contracting Party.

Proposal to clarify the logical cascade of actions relative to ACSF B1 and ACSF C systems:

When the same means is used by the driver to simultaneously activate the Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category B1 (ACSF B1) and of category C (ACSF C), both functions switch to standby mode when the vehicle enters an ACSF C eligible road. But if the road is non-eligible to ACSF C, then only the ACSF B1 is activated.

With the current text of the regulation, once the vehicle moves to an ACSF C eligible road, the driver must operate again the means to activate the ACSF C. This second deliberate action is confusing for the driver since it makes the manipulation more complex. The current wording actually discourages most drivers from using this assistance function.

The proposed wording permits the following, logical, cascade of actions:

1. The driver has done a deliberate action to activate ACSF B1 and ACSF C (on a non-eligible road); then
2. He drives into an eligible road, and is clearly informed thereof; then
3. He initiates a lane change procedure by activating e.g. the direction indicator.