Request to maintain in the Compendium of Candidates Listing Number 1 – Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standard and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control; Requirements; Final Rule.

Request to maintain in the Compendium of Candidates Listing Number 2 – Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements; Final Rule.

Request to maintain in the Compendium of Candidates Listing Number 3 – Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Non-road Diesel Engines and Fuel; Final Rule.

WP29 to consider the request from USA for authorisation to develop a UN GTR on the Determination of Electrified Vehicle Power (DEVP)

59. The Chair of IWG on EVE presented the status report introducing the latest activities of the group (GRPE-80-36). He highlighted the major progress made on battery durability during the last meeting of the IWG on EVE. He requested GRPE to consider GRPE-80-41 as draft request for authorization to develop a new UN GTR on in-vehicle battery durability, as amended in Annex X.

60. The representative from OICA noted that the timeline in GRPE-80-41 had changed to deliver a first draft of the new UN GTR on in-vehicle battery durability and sought further information. The Chair of the IWG on EVE clarified a more aggressive timeline was agreed within the IWG on EVE taking into account the urgency of the issue and also bearing in mind that the topic is new and most provisions would need to start from a blank sheet as there is no precedent and no national legislation on this topic. The representative from OICA confirmed that developing new methods for simplified in-service conformity of battery durability might be challenging. The Chair of the IWG on EVE suggested existing range determination approaches might be used as a proxy for battery deterioration.

61. GRPE adopted the proposal to request authorization for a new UN GTR on in-vehicle battery durability and requested the secretariat to submit Annex X to WP.29 and AC.3 for consideration and vote at their June 2020 sessions as draft request for authorization to develop a new UN GTR on in-vehicle battery durability.

62. The Chair of the IWG on EVE finally thanked the secretariat for organizing a meeting with the leadership team of the Group of Experts on Energy Efficiency (GEEE) and the representatives of the Geneva region to initiate joint activities on the method to state energy consumption of EVs.

63. GRPE acknowledged the progress made by IWG on EVE and noted the request for a meeting room for one day during the GRPE week in June 2020.

28. The representative of the United States of America presented WP.29-179-25 proposing the correction of a printing error in the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles. WP.29 requested the secretariat to prepare Revision 2 to the framework document.

22. The secretariat presented, for information, WP.29-181-05, reflecting the advancement evaluation of the activities listed in the Framework Document on Automated/autonomous Vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34/Rev.2).

28. The representative of the United States of America presented WP.29-179-25 proposing the correction of a printing error in the Framework Document on Automated Vehicles. WP.29 requested the secretariat to prepare Revision 2 to the framework document.

25. The representative of Japan introduced, on behalf of China, European Union, Japan and the United States of America, WP.29-178-10/Rev.2 containing amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 – Framework Document on Automated/autonomous Vehicles. He explained that the amendments included editorial amendments as well as a restructured Table 1 containing details on (i) current activities, (ii) expected future activities and (iii) references to the key safety principles mentioned in the document.

26. The representative of the Republic of Korea introduced WP.29-178-19, proposing additional amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34. The representative of Sweden proposed to insert into Table 1 considerations related to para. 4 (j) regarding vehicle inspection. The representative of CITA supported the position of the representative of Sweden.

27. WP.29 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 as amended by WP.29-178-10/Rev.2 and requested the secretariat to issue it as a reference document with the symbol ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34/Rev.1.

151. The Chair of AC.3 introduced the documents that were considered under this agenda item. AC.3 considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/31/Rev.1, aimed at providing an updated overview of the priorities of the Programme of Work of the development of UN GTRs or amendments to the existing ones taking into account the decisions on document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 from the 177th WP.29 session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1145, para. 49). AC.3 referred to the discussions on WP.29-178-10/Rev.2, WP.29-178-19, WP.29-178-16/Rev.1, WP.29-178-17/Rev.2 and WP.29-178-18/Rev.1 under agenda item 2.3. Please note that document WP.29-178-17/Rev.2 does not exist. The amended document WP.29-178-17/Rev.1 was reproduced in Annex VI of the session report.

NHTSA suggestion to propose the introduction of updated UN R30 provisions into GTR 16 as a separate initiative in order to avoid delays in agreement on Amendment 2.

11. AC.2 reviewed and discussed documents WP.29-177-04 and WP.29-177-08. Following discussions among GR Chairs, Japan offered to merge them into a single framework document on automated/autonomous vehicles to be transmitted to WP.29 for discussion (WP.29-177-19).

27. The representative of the United States of America introduced WP.29-177-08 referring to the work priorities on vehicle automation in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 and proposing principles relevant for the performance assessment of automated vehicles.

156. The Chair of AC.3 introduced the documents that were considered under this agenda item. AC.3 considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/31, aimed at providing an updated overview of the priorities of the Programme of Work of the development of UN GTRs or amendments to the existing ones. AC.3 referred to the discussions on document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 under agenda item 2.3.

157. The Chair of AC.3 proposed that agenda item 17 could be divided into two items: 17.1 on the conventional priority topics in the programme of work of the 1998 Agreement, and 17.2. on priority topics in the programme of work of the 1998 Agreement concerning automated and connected vehicles for consideration.

158. Discussion was inconclusive, and the Chair of AC.3 proposed to prepare and submit an informal document to the fifty-sixth session detailing the proposed changes to the agenda. AC.3 accepted this proposal and deferred continuation of discussions on the matter to the subsequent AC.3 session in June 2019.

178. The representative of Canada stated that the group had developed a first draft of the GTR on Determination of Electrified Vehicle Power and had conducted the first round of validation testing. He explained that the IWG on EVE identified some discrepancies between the results from the two test procedures that determine system power and that it would discuss solutions to address those discrepancies at its meeting in April 2019, when it would also determine the extent of time required for moving forward. He noted that the IWG on EVE planned to discuss the potential need for an extension at the upcoming GRPE meeting in May 2019.

180. The representative of the European Union supported the development of specifications for the terms of reference on the power determination of hybrids, which, he stated, would result in a minor delay to the submission of the UN GTR. In terms of battery durability, he stated that the European Union would continue to support the objective of establishing a UN GTR, which should also be viewed in the context of the European Union’s work on the post-Euro 6 and Eco-design as these aims necessitate the establishment of technical requirements.

181. AC.3 adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/33, the request for authorization to develop a new UN GTR on Determination of Electrified Vehicle Power.

6. The Chair recalled that he had initiated an informal consultation over the summer 2018 to collect the list of items that Contracting Parties would wish to be addressed by GRVA. The Chair presented GRVA-01-33 containing the responses received together with those provided in WP.29-175-08 and WP.29-175-29, some 40 items in total. He proposed classifying the items into work streams to facilitate the participation of subject experts, e.g. Data management, Sensors (spatial awareness), Functional requirements, New assessment procedures and “other items”. The GRVA experts confirmed that the document contained all input received.

7. The expert from China offered suggestions on the structure, work programme and meeting arrangements of GRVA (reproduced in GRVA-01-32).

8. The expert from AAPC stated that they would like to support the work done under this agenda item, he suggested assessment criteria to be considered when working on priorities for GRVA.

9. The expert from the United States of America introduced GRVA-01-03 proposing some considerations relevant for the work of GRVA under the 1998 Agreement. The expert from ITU reported on their experience in the Task Force on Cyber Security and Over-the-Air issues (TF CS/OTA) and highlighted the need for assistance from contracting parties when drafting documents to ensure the appropriateness of texts drafted to address specificities of the 1998 Agreement (and the context of self-certification). The expert from Germany, Co-Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Automated Commanded Steering Function (ACSF), recalled the ambition of his group to draft technical requirements suitable for use under both the 1958 and the 1998 Agreements.

10. The expert from the Russian Federation presented GRVA-01-05 with their proposal for priorities. He recalled that decisions on priorities can only be made by the Executive Committee (AC. 3) for items to be handled under the 1998 Agreement. He also recalled the need for a technical sponsor for activities under the 1998 Agreement.

11. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-01-28 with information on the priorities of the industry that would require regulatory activities from GRVA. He regretted that the IWG on ACSF were not drafting provisions for so called Hands-off Lane Keeping Systems as SAE Level 2 even though this technology was already sold in some markets, e.g. in the United States of America. The Co-Chair of the IWG on ACSF and the expert from the Netherlands clarified that the IWG on ACSF considered hand off systems as Level 3 systems and not as Level 2. The Chair noted the differences between the priorities reported in GRVA-01-28 by OICA and those communicated by most of the manufacturers in their media statements. In response the expert from OICA prepared a revised document (GRVA-01-28-Rev.1) but was unable to demonstrate the technological and market priorities questions raised by GRVA. The expert from OICA also presented considerations on possible coordination of work between the subsidiary bodies (GRs) of WP.29. He suggested the nomination of GR Ambassadors on the model of IWVTA Ambassadors.

12. The expert from UITP stated the need to first address the safety of automated shared fleets for use by public transport systems.

13. The expert from ITU stated the need for GRVA to define a cluster around communication, including Platooning.

14. The expert from CLEPA insisted on the need to finalize the work on Automated Commanded Steering Function (ACSF).

15. The expert from GTB presented GRVA-01-06 with considerations on lighting and light-signalling for automated driving systems, highlighting the wish to work on this at the Working Party on Lighting and Light-Signalling (GRE). The expert from the Russian Federation suggested to explore ways to address this issue in the context of the Horizontal Regulation discussions. He mentioned that the presentation had already been made at WP.29. The expert from GTB also raised the question of coordination between GRs on automation as the expert from OICA had done. The expert from Japan recalled that WP.29 agreed to discuss coordination issues on automation. GRVA agreed that coordination issues would naturally be discussed at WP.29.

16. The expert from China introduced GRVA-01-16,

17. GRVA agreed that the items listed in GRVA-01-33 and the classification proposed should be reviewed at the next session under agenda item 4.

18. GRVA reviewed WP.29 informal documents WP.29-175-08 and WP.29-175-29 referred by WP.29 to GRVA as well as the list of items noted in the provisional agenda. GRVA had an extensive discussion on each item. The expert from OICA stated that the ongoing work was adequate to address industry priorities. The experts received clarifications on the meaning of each item by the proposal authors. They exchanged views on the priority that could be assigned to each item as well as the potential necessity to start regulatory activities (or not). GRVA concluded that GRVA is able (from the point of view of knowledge and expertise) to address each item in the list (GRVA-01-39) reproduced in Annex II to this report and was ready to fulfil its mandate as defined by WP.29 and/or AC.3. GRVA agreed to consider other items and possibly extend this list in the coming sessions.