The UN IWG on Cyber Security and OTA issues held its 39th session on 3 September 2026. The provisional agenda (TFCS-38-01/Rev.3) and minutes from the 38th session (TFCS-38-13) were adopted. Regarding R155 amendments: multistage vehicle proposals (GRVA/2026/28, GRVA/2026/29, TFCS-39-08) will be submitted as informal documents with a merged paragraph; component approval proposals (TFCS-39-04) had STU references removed and discussion continues; remote operation for ADS proposals were not discussed but participants are invited to consider a general refresh of Annex 5. RXWIN application proposals (TFCS-39-05, TFCS-39-06, TFCS-39-07, TFCS-39-08, TFCS-39-09, TFCS-39-10, TFCS-39-11, TFCS-39-12) were presented; items 1, 4, and 6 were agreed, item 5 was agreed in principle, and items 2 and 3 regarding R155 and R157 applicability require revised wording. Netherlands expressed concerns about vehicle discontinuation and multiple type approvals. Administrative provisions regarding Type Approval Authority for CSMS/SUMS (GRVA/2026/30, TFCS-39-02, TFCS-39-07) were discussed without consensus. Out-of-scope vehicle approvals (TFCS-38-03) discussion was deferred to a separate workshop. Two informal documents will be provided to GRVA.

The agenda includes adoption of the provisional agenda and minutes from the thirty-eighth session; proposals for amendments to R155 concerning multistage vehicles, separate technical units and component approval, and remote operation for automated driving systems; review of cyber and software requirements in the ADS Regulation; application of RXSWIN to R156; administrative provisions in R155 and R156 regarding Type Approval Authority for CSMS/SUMS and issuing approvals for out-of-scope vehicle types; and preparation of GRVA 26.

Proposed changes to align RxSWIN provisions with the RxSWIN template adopted through WP.29-197-06, remove the proposed requirement to comply with UN R156/01 or later from R157 and R171, remove amendments to UN R155 as decided by the IWG CS/OTA, apply the RxSWIN amendments also to earlier series of amendments in R13, R13-H, R79, R131, R152, R157, and R171, update references to the latest version of R.E.3, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/78/Rev.8, in earlier series, and correct paragraph references and improve structure in R89, R139, R140, R155, R156, and R171.

Proposal to amend GRVA/2026/27, which proposes amendments to UN R13, UN R13-H, UN R79, UN R89, UN R130, UN R131, UN R139, UN R140, UN R152, UN R156, UN R157, UN R171, UN R175, and UN R178:

• Throughout these regulations, amend references to the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3) as document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/78/Rev.8,
• insert new definitions for Software Identification Numbers referring to R.E.3 Annex 7 para. 2,
• amend requirements for software identification to require manufacturers provide necessary information allowing Technical Services to uniquely identify hardware and software configurations,
• insert new provisions allowing vehicle manufacturers to apply for new approvals differentiating software versions for vehicles already registered in the market from new vehicles,
• amend production discontinuation provisions to clarify production is not considered definitively discontinued if manufacturer intends to obtain subsequent extensions of approval for software updates of registered vehicles,
• insert new items in annexes regarding additional information on software identification and software updates including R_xSWIN identification, whether held on vehicle, how to read if not held on vehicle, and relevant parameters for vehicle identification.

OICA, CLEPA, and CLCCR oppose the requirement in GRVA/2026/30 for a single Approval Authority to issue the Certificate of Compliance for CSMS/SUMS and vehicle type approval. They contend the approach would create multiple approvals of the same Management System, imposing administrative burden and creating unresolved legal consequences if a CoC is challenged. The organizations propose adding a new paragraph 5.1.5. instead of paragraph 5.1.3. e) to permit mutual agreement between Approval Authorities, allowing usage of a CoC issued by another Approval Authority, with such agreement documented in type approval documentation.