Proposal to insert a new definition of functional test configuration, amend para. 2.1.1.2. to clarify that test conditions are agreed between manufacturer and technical service and that tables provide guidance which may be extended or amended depending on vehicle characteristics, add tables specifying basic vehicle test conditions for “50 km/h mode,” “Brake mode,” and “Active ADS Mode,” add an alternative “Brake mode” with active ADS for vehicles where braking mode cannot be applied with ADS operational without ADS feature(s) activated, add AECS and AVAS test condition tables, and insert a new table cross-referencing UN Regulations with specific provisions and test configurations to demonstrate compliance with UN R10.

Proposal for conducting the ADS Active Test Specified in Annex 6 to clarify ADS Active Mode, clarify methods to activate ADS using test equipment or by modifying in-vehicle ADS-related ECU software, clarify test objects for ESA at component-level or system-level, and clarify test methods when ADS cannot be activated in an anechoic chamber, including testing in a non-active state using warning indicators and diagnostic functions, and testing when errors occur upon ADS activation. The proposal defines ADS Active Mode as representative ADS functions remaining operational using sensors whose inputs can be simulated within the anechoic chamber environment, with alternative test methods including application based on ESA or subsystem test results, testing with ADS not activated using steady-state driving conditions with pass/fail criteria verifying no communication errors, ECU malfunction, freeze, shutdown, or ADS system malfunctions occur, and testing with simulated sensor outputs using data from real-world driving or representative driving scenarios.

Proposal to add a new example and update text based on discussions by the OPI group aimed at finalizing the GID. The revised text adds that the ADS does not transit to a safe state in accordance with the manufacturers defined response as documented in the safety case, and removes provisions regarding the chosen stop location. The group agreed to further work in the next phase on situations where the chosen stop location could have contributed to a collision involving the ADS vehicle before it has moved from that location.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1. concerning the scope and contents of the manufacturer’s SMS safety policy.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1.(a) concerning the definition of the principles and objectives upon which the SMS is built, operated, and maintained.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1.(b) concerning the general recognition of the inherent risks of ADS-related activities throughout their life cycle, including the risks of the parties involved.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1.(c) concerning the organizational structure and the safety governance elements and their appropriateness for the needs of the organisation.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1.(e) the description of the means/approaches to engage people within the organisation in the culture of safety.

Proposal to delete the requirement that competence is expected to be actively developed and maintained through structured training and insert that this point focuses on the existence and maintenance of SMS training plans to support competence for the SMS management in para. 8.1.6.1.(b).

Proposal to revise the guidance text in para. 8.1.8.1.(c) by deleting “This element ensures the existence of effective communication channels, both internally and externally, to support awareness and information sharing.” and inserting “This point focuses on the existence of communication channels, both internal and external, to support awareness and information sharing.” The proposal follows comments received in the 18th ADS Workshop where discussion of the SMS section in a dedicated small drafting group was requested, and the current text aims at streamlining the text.

Based on ADS-21-68/Rev.1, amend para. 3.2.3.(b) to clarify that the regulation requires the safety level of ADS to be at least to the level of a competent and careful human driver as a general concept and technology-neutral comparator, that manufacturers should explain how they determine and apply this concept accounting for national specificities including those that might arise in relevant cases, that different approaches or combinations of approaches may be used varying depending on the safety concept, claims and argument structure, and approach to safety assessment, that no single approach is presumed better, that manufacturers may use more than one approach, that driver population reference data sets should be subject to appropriate selection, processing and interpretation, and to provide non-exhaustive examples of reference driver based approaches and behaviour-based approaches.

Proposal to add resources providing guidance on Safety Performance Indicators. The added resources include J3237, Dynamic Driving Task Assessment (DA) Metrics for Automated Driving Systems; AVSC00006202103, Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium (2021) Best Practice for Metrics and Methods for Assessing Safety Performance of Automated Driving Systems (ADS); AVSC00008202111, Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium (2021) AVSC Best Practice for Evaluation of Behavioural Competencies for ADS-Dedicated Vehicles (ADS-DVs); SAE J2944, Operational Definitions of Driving Performance Measures and Statistics; and SAE J3197, Automated Driving System Data Logger.

Proposal to revise guidance text in para. 8.1.6.1.(d) to delete the statement that the intention is to ensure safety promotion contributes to ongoing learning and improvement, reinforcing the adaptive nature of the SMS, and insert revised text stating that this point focuses on continued evaluation contributing to ongoing learning so that the SMS remains effective, allowing an adaptive nature through modification and adaptation supported by safety recordkeeping.

Proposal to improve guidance on para. 8.1.8.1. which focuses on aspects that support safety and safety culture such as people, competencies, and communication.

Proposal to amend the interpretation of para. 8.1.5.1.(d) to replace “a key” with “an”, delete “effective”, and insert “processes” before “of the SMS”. The proposal streamlines guidance text on SMS safety policy to improve clarity in describing how safety policy demonstrates management commitment to safety through approval by the accountable executive and supports promotion of safety and continuous improvement of the SMS.

Proposal to modify para. 8.1.7.1.(h) to replace “aims to ensure that” with “focuses on”, replace “Assessment of how organizations coordinate” with “Assessment that organizations coordinate”, delete “and product reviews” from the list of change management triggers, and delete “the approach and output from various” before “monitoring procedures” and delete “including operational data, safety reports and performance indicator” from the examples of monitoring procedures.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.6.1.(a) concerning verification that reactive and proactive practices for risk management are in place.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.6.1.© concerning verification that the risk management activity includes risks from third parties.

Proposal to improve the interpretation of para. 8.1.6.1.(d) concerning verification that the risk management activity covers and is performed over the entire lifecycle.

Proposal to improve the list of examples of risk-management practices to support para. 8.1.6.1.