ITS
Session 23 | Geneva | 27 Jun 2014
1. Adoption of the agenda

The Secretariat explained the agenda and documents for the meeting. Approval was obtained.

ITS-23-01 | Draft agenda for the 23rd ITS informal group session
2. Approval of the minutes of the previous session

A representative of Japan’s MLIT explained technological trends in automated driving in Japan as well as the Japanese government’s views on the issue, and introduced the time schedule, etc. The issue was then discussed.

ITS-23-02 | Notes on the 22nd Session of the Informal Group on “ITS”
3. Report from WP.1

[WP.1 approved amendments to the 1968 Vienna Convention during its March session as described in paragraph 21 and the annex to the meeting report (see document WP.1/145). The amendments revise Article 8 and Article 39 of the agreement. Article 8 specifies that a driver must always be able to control his or her vehicle and the amendments declare the conditions under which autonomous and driver-assist systems would be considered in conformity with this stipulation.

Although approved by WP.1, the amendments will only enter into force at the end of the official notification and adoption process. This process involves a depositary notification of the amendments followed by a 12-month response period after which an announcement is made of the action (any contracting party disagreements, eventually adoption of the amendments). Once the adoption announcement is made, the amendments enter into force after a six-month waiting period.

So while the amendments were accepted by WP.1, their official adoption and entry into force will not come before mid-2016.]

WP.1/145 | Report of the 68th session of the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety
WP.1/2014/1 | Consistency between the Convention on Road Traffic (1968) and Vehicle Technical Regulations Proposal to amend the 1968 Vienna Convention to allow for the use of assistance and/or autonomous systems that control vehicle behavior(s) in place of the driver (which could be viewed to conflict with the Convention requirement that drivers always be able to control their vehicles).

WP.1’s secretariat reported that a draft revision of the Vienna Convention was adopted at the WP.1 meeting in March. To comply with the provisions of paragraph 5 of Article 8 and paragraph 1 of Article 13 which state that every driver shall at all times and in all circumstances be able to control his vehicle, the proposed revision added a supplemental provision regarding the conditions that should be met by the vehicle systems that affect driving. This draft revision is scheduled to be officially published after undergoing technical checks and voting by the Contracting Parties.

WP.1/145 | Report of the 68th session of the Working Party on Road Traffic Safety
WP.1/2014/1 | Consistency between the Convention on Road Traffic (1968) and Vehicle Technical Regulations Proposal to amend the 1968 Vienna Convention to allow for the use of assistance and/or autonomous systems that control vehicle behavior(s) in place of the driver (which could be viewed to conflict with the Convention requirement that drivers always be able to control their vehicles).
4. Report from WP.29

Based on the document ITS 23-03, WP.29’s secretariat presented how automated driving technologies are being addressed by the relevant parties as well as how WP.29 will work on the challenges in the future.

ITS-23-03 | Autonomous vehicles and WP.29
5. Discussion

The Chair (Japan) reported that his proposal to refocus the ITS Informal Group on automated driving was agreed by WP.29 at its latest session.

OICA stressed the importance of discussing not only the technological aspects of automated driving but also its market demand and acceptability to society.

ITU pointed out that the definition of automation levels differs among the relevant organizations and called for collaboration in jointly developing a uniform definition.

Australia proposed that each Contracting Party carry out an analysis and work efficiently so that the risks would not be left out.

The UK mentioned the social responsibility for automated driving technology. In addition, since this technology contains issues that exceed the scope of WP.29, they emphasized the need to put resources into important issues and develop standards by 2020 in collaboration with related organizations outside of the automotive industry as well.

Germany called for a definition of automation technology and for making such definition uniform internationally. They also proposed developing international standards for automated parking systems.

With regard to refocusing the ITS Informal Group on automated driving, Japan declared that it would amend the ToR and create a work plan for the Informal Group so as to be able to choose its future course.

6. Any other business

None.