7. The expert from Sweden, chairing the informal group on Automated Connections between Vehicles (ACV), reported on the progress made by the group (GRRF-74-42). He introduced the group’s most recent proposal (GRRF-74-22) amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/2 and introducing provisions for ACV. He reported that the informal group updated the previous proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/2), taking into account the concerns of GRRF on interoperability and safety provided by such systems (GRRF-74-23). He added that some additional work was still needed and sought GRRFs guidance, whether the relevant ISO standard shall be referenced or copied into the Regulation. The Chair of GRRF offered to follow up on this issue after the March 2013 session of WP.29. This item would be reviewed at GRRFs September 2013 session on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted in due time by the ACV group.

8. The Chair recalled the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/11 on introducing an electro-hydraulic transmission for electrical brake systems. The expert from Germany reported on the progress made. He added that a revised proposal might be submitted for consideration at the September 2013 session of GRRF. GRRF agreed to resume the discussion at its next session, keeping the document as a reference.

9. The expert from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/3, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2011/34 and proposing clarification on the reference to Regulation No. 10 in Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H. The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-74-13, proposing a similar amendment to Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H but also amending Regulations Nos. 79 and 89 as well as the new Regulations on Advance Emergency Braking System (AEBS) and Lane Departure Warning System (LDWS). Following the discussion, the expert from the Russian Federation withdrew GRRF-74-33. GRRF agreed to reconsider GRRF-74-13 at its next session on the basis of an official document.

10. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/21, proposing to remove the signature of the Type Approval Authority from the test report defined in Annex 12 of Regulation No. 13. GRRF adopted this document and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2013 sessions as part of draft Supplement 10 to the 11 series of amendments to Regulation No. 13 (see para. 5).

20. The expert from FEMFM introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/4 taking into account the remarks received during the previous session of GRRF. He recalled the purpose of the proposal and underlined that so called “chemically and physically identical replacement brake lining assemblies” and “chemically and physically identical drum brake linings” should not have to be retested but should be approved on the basis of the homologation of the original equipment supplier. In that case, the applicants for approval should only demonstrate that they supply the brake lining assemblies or the drum brake linings for the vehicle or brake manufacturer as original equipment for the specific model(s) for which approval is being sought, and that they produce the parts under the same production conditions, quality assurance system, and with the same results of the conformity of production tests as for the original parts. The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-74-19, expressing some concerns with the proposal made by FEMFM. The expert from Spain underlined the need for GRRF to confirm the endorsement of the philosophy behind the proposal made by FEMFM. The expert from the Russian Federation observed that the proposal is consistent with an approach which is already used in other parts of Regulation No. 90. The expert from CLEPA volunteered to organize a meeting with OICA, FEMFM as well as interested Contracting Parties and NGOs interested in this issue. GRRF agreed to resume consideration at its next session.

24. The expert from CLEPA, recalling the purpose of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/4, reported on the work of OICA, CLEPA and CLCCR and introduced GRRF-75-18 amending the original proposal. GRRF noted the completion of technical work. The expert from OICA also introduced GRRF-75-19 supporting the technical content of the proposal but disagreeing with legal aspects such as intellectual property, product liability and reputation issues that may occur. The expert from CLEPA addressed the concerns of OICA (GRRF-75-41). The expert from Spain noted some administrative and procedural difficulties for Type Approval Authorities that this proposal may create. The expert from France requested a justification for the deletion proposed in Annex 4B. GRRF agreed, in principle, with the technical provisions and requested the secretariat to distribute GRRF-75-18 with an official symbol for further consideration at its next session. GRRF requested the Chair to report to WP.29 at its November 2013 session on both the technical and the legal aspects.

29. The expert from CLEPA presented GRRF-74-37, on behalf of CLCCR, proposing to introduce into Regulation No. 79 provisions permitting the type approval of positive steering of trailers using energy supply and electrical control from the towing vehicle. His proposal focused on the energy supply connectors and the transmission of steering control data (digital information interchange). The expert from the Netherlands proposed extending the work to the power supply provisions necessary to guarantee a good functionality as well as a sufficient level of safety. GRRF agreed to add this as a new item on the agenda of the next session.

30. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/5 proposing to align the test speed and braking performance requirements for vehicles of the category M1 and N1 in the event of energy source failure with those in Regulations Nos. 13 and 13-H. GRRF adopted this proposal and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2013 sessions as draft Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 79.

31. The expert from Japan proposed to establish an informal group on LKAS and PAS (GRRF-74-40) and introduced a draft terms of reference as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/5 and GRRF-74-05. He presented GRRF-74-41, showing the need for minimum requirements applying for those systems, if fitted in a vehicle. The expert from OICA introduced GRRF-74-18, objecting to the need for such a Regulation on these new technologies, claiming that Annex 6 of Regulation No. 79 covered those systems. GRRF agreed to reconsider the proposal at its September 2013 session and invited Japan to provide a more detailed justification for such systems, including a cost-benefit analysis if possible.

18. The expert from IMMA introduced GRRF-74-35, superseding GRRF-73-10, proposing to clarify some provisions and to simplify the test procedures in Regulation No. 78. The proposal received several comments, including GRRF-74-34, introduced by the expert from India. GRRF agreed to reconsider IMMAs proposal on the basis of an updated official document taking into account the comments received. The expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare the document and to submit it in due time to the secretariat. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/7, a proposal to amend certain requirements in Regulation No. 78. GRRF considered that clarification of the intention of the proposal and further justification was necessary. The expert from IMMA agreed to amend the document in line with the comments received and submit for consideration at GRRFs September 2013 session.

21. The expert from IMMA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/34. He added that IMMA would like to address the comments made by India (GRRF-75-25). GRRF agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its next session on the basis of a revised document, which the expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare.

19. The expert from IMMA introduced GRRF-74-36, superseding GRRF-73-11, introducing similar amendments to those proposed for Regulation No. 78. The Chair noted the requirement for a Contracting Party to sponsor this proposal. The expert from Italy volunteered to clarify before the next AC.3 session if Italy would sponsor this amendment. GRRF agreed to reconsider IMMAs proposal on the basis of an updated official document taking into account the various comments received. The expert from IMMA volunteered to prepare the document and to submit it in due time to the secretariat.

24. The expert from ETRTO introduced GRRF-74-04 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2012/19 on the testing procedure for snow tyres of the category C3. He also introduced GRRF-74-43 showing some test results justifying their proposal. GRRF agreed on this proposal as amended by Annex VI and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2013 sessions as draft Supplement 4 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117.

25. The expert from ETRTO presented a joint proposal by France, EC and ETRTO (GRRF-74-08) amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/9 on wet grip testing provisions for Tyres of category C2 and C3. GRRF agreed on this proposal as amended in Annex VII to this report and requested ETRTO to provide technical data supporting the choice of the proposed limit values for the next GRRF session in September 2013. GRRF requested the secretariat to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2013 sessions as draft Supplement 5 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 117.

4. The Chair of the informal working group on “Alternative Method to assess the Electronic Vehicle Stability Control system” (AMEVSC) reported on the progress made by the group on using test reports, e.g. according to various annexes of UN Regulation No. 13. He introduced GRRF-74-07, reporting on the work accomplished and the conclusion of the group on the rights and obligations when using a test reports procedure (e.g. as defined in Regulation No. 13, Annex 19) linked to the 1958 Agreement. GRRF endorsed these conclusions. The summary of these conclusions is listed in the form of a table in Annex III to this report.

5. The Secretary to the informal working group on AMEVSC introduced GRRF-74-06 on the use of a simulation tool as an AMEVSC, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2013/10 and especially the justification section. GRRF adopted this proposal as amended below. GRRF requested the secretariat to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their June 2013 sessions as part of the draft Supplement 10 to the 11 series of amendments to Regulation No. 13.

Annex 21, Appendix 1, paragraph 1.4., amend to read:

“1.4. The availability of the simulation tool software, to the software version used, shall be maintained for a period of not less than 10 years following the date of the approval of the vehicle.”

Annex 21, Appendix 2, footnote 1, amend to read: