Vehicle and supplier industry perspectives on addressing lane-keeping and lane-change systems within the context of Level 3 and higher automation. Current automated steering provisions adopted under UN R79 implicitly refer to Level 2 automation where the driver is required to maintain constant engagement whereas higher levels of automation would enable the driver to engage in secondary tasks.

Draft proposal from OICA and CLEPA to include provisions for lane-change systems involving a second deliberate action of the driver to initiate a system-assisted lane change, including blind spot detection to avoid collisions. OICA and CLEPA wish to have provisions for such Category C2 systems included in UN R79.

Draft proposal to add provisions for 2-step HMI for Cat. C ACSF systems while keeping the main performance of the system e.g. rear sensor range, critical situations, minimum distance and minimum operating speed, etc.

Input on provisions for dynamic driving tasks, headway control, and minimal risk manoeuvres.

Comments on document ACSF-18-03.

OICA and CLEPA comments on the submission from Germany (ACSF-18-04) proposing requirements for Category B2 ACSF related to the General System Classification / Human Driver Priority / Information to the Driver.

Proposal for requirements for systems able to keep the vehicle in the lane without any driver command on the steering control (B2).

ACSF B2 – Industry Concept for

• Driver Availibility Recognition
• Transition Demand
• Minimum Risk Manoeuvre
• Emergency Manoeuvre

This document aims at providing a better understanding of possible operational restrictions and capacity to safely transfer control back to the driver of a Category B2 ACSF (L3 Automated Lane-Keeping System). It contains examples of different possible detection and coping strategies.

OICA/CLEPA review of industry positions on provisions for the proposed regulation on light vehicle AEBS.

• Justification for Manual Deactivation
• Why 2 step approach for pedestrian protection?
• Regulating urban automated driving vs AEBS requirements

Updated version of document AEBS-06-04.

Proposal of maximum relative impact speeds under the proposed test scenarios.

Proposal to correct Revision 2 of UN R55 to align with the text of Supplement 04 to 01 series of amendments. This proposal removes a subparagraph under paragraph 13.1 that should not have been included in the Revision.

Revision 7 of Regulation No. 13 includes a former version of Figure 1B which was changed with Amend 4 to Revision 6 of UN Regulation No. 13. This correction is also needed for Revision 8, which contains the same error.

CLEPA presentation on the type approval process for replacement brake pads, linings, and drums and the impact of the new approval numbering system adopted under Revision 3 to the 1958 Agreement on approvals and markings of these products.

Proposal to resolve inconsistencies present from Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments resulting from the approval of proposals in documents GRRF/2014/23/Rev.2, GRRF/2015/22 and GRRF/2016/22. The proposal also introduces provisions for L category (motorcycle and related) vehicles.

Proposal to remove ambient light constraints (e.g., 1000 lux threshold) from the draft blind spot information systems text.

Proposal to increase the 0.25 m gap between the vehicle and the bicycle to 0.50 m in order to avoid excessive false positive warnings.

Proposal to add a drawing and text to clarify which requirements apply to which parts of the windscreen wiper.

Proposal to align end-user information provisions with those adopted for UN R44.

Certain enhanced child restraint systems are designed for forward-facing and rearward-facing depending upon the age of the occupant. This proposal would clarify the labeling and packing information to avoid confusion between the requirements for these “dual” systems and exclusively forward-facing CRS.

During its 61st session, GRSP approved Supplement 3 to the 01 series of amendments and Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments. This proposal reinserts text inadvertently omitted during the reproduction of the text as approved during the session.

Pursuant to the concern raised by Spain to avoid a misinterpretation that shoulder strap positioners must be designed to be released before the harness buckle, This proposal clarifies that a shoulder strap positioner may be released before, after, or simultaneously with the harness buckle. The proposal also improves the text with regard to the release of modules from a base.

Proposal of amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/6

CLEPA presentation proposing further study of possible responses to the concerns raised and solution proposed in document GRSP/2018/6 regarding non-integral child restraints (e.g., booster seats) and the risk of injuries from narrow contact with buckle and safety-belt.

Proposal to remove the age and stature characteristics from the definition of an “Infant carrier” to avoid misinterpretations. These seats may be used by children above the age specification provided they fall within the stature limits.

Proposal to explicitly allow the granting extensions for type approvals under the 02 series of amendments and for any approval not affected by 03 series of amendments pursuant to the new guidelines on UN Regulations.

Proposal of corrections to document GRSP/2018/29 (previously submitted by CLEPA) regarding the introduction of booster-cushion provisions into UN R129.

Proposal to clarify the application of GTR 7 Phase 2 static alternative provisions and to modify the allowed range of tolerances under the backset retention and energy dissipations test.

Proposal to clarify the use of the i-Size logo on i-Size boosters.

Labels under UN R129, paragraph 4.5. highlight that the ECRS should not be used by children under 15 months old. This proposal presents the same layout for rearward/forward-facing and for forward-only CRS.

Proposal to clarify that Conformity of Production assessments shall be conducted under the same requirements as those of the original approval or, if applicable, the extension of the approval. This proposal supersedes the proposal to require testing of Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the door panel geometry of the 00 series of UN R129 (document GRSP/2018/31).

Proposal to introduce provisions for the booster cushion category of child restraint systems under UN R129.

Report on CLEPA assessments of the proposed GTR 7 Phase 2 BioRID criteria.