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).

Proposal to prioritize work towards adopting “secure by design” standards for vehicle architecture and network systems, including attention to automotive safety integrity level (ASIL) methods proposed in ISO 26262.

Copy of document GRRF-81-14: Presentation on French government views on the approval of automated steering at speeds above 10 km/h under UN Regulation No. 79. The principle recommendation is to restrict amendments to UN R79 to lateral vehicle control as speeds above 10 km/h while setting other work on more advanced capabilities (longitudinal + latitudinal, lane change, passing, etc.) for future separate regulations.

Copy of document GRRF-81-14. Presentation on French government views on the approval of automated steering at speeds above 10 km/h under UN Regulation No. 79. The principle recommendation is to restrict amendments to UN R79 to lateral vehicle control as speeds above 10 km/h while setting other work on more advanced capabilities (longitudinal + latitudinal, lane change, passing, etc.) for future separate regulations.

France presentation discussing the potential of a regulation on common requirements of automated driving technologies.

This document proposes a draft text for a resolution on “activities other than those related to driving” that the driver of a vehicle equipped with an automated driving system could undertake when the automated driving system is engaged.

Revised safety considerations for activities other than driving undertaken by the driver in a vehicle when its automated driving system is engaged.

Views and information on use of scenarios in ADS validation and development of ADScene industrial scenario library.

Proposal to amend para. 8.1.5.1. (ADS UNR) of the audit of the safety policy guidance: Change “may state” to “states,” “may address” to “addresses,” and “may therefore describe” to “therefore describes.” The rationale states that using “may” in the interpretation paragraphs seems inappropriate for explaining regulatory intention, and present tense better suits these requirements.

For the purposes of type approval under any UN Regulation requiring the verification of the timing of a system intervention, manufacturers shall provide to the approval authority or its designated technical service information on the method by which the initiation of any system intervention can be objectively identified and retrieved, including specific flags, status bits, event codes on in-vehicle networks, or visual indications on screens; clear instructions and all necessary tools for the Technical Service to extract, access and interpret the signal identifying the initiation; documented procedures including corresponding data sources, resolution, and timing accuracy appended to the type approval test report; and, where a visual indication displayed on a screen is used, documented latency between the earliest internal point at which the system initiates the function and the moment the visual indication becomes visible on the screen, expressed as a fixed value with associated uncertainty, with the documented latency value used to correct the observed timing of the screen indication appended to the type approval test report.