List of decisions subject to the special “silence procedure” whereby parties may signal any reservations concerning the decisions following the session proper. This procedure was adopted due to the shortened and virtual sessions necessitated by current health and travel restrictions.

Proposal to permit lane changes during a Minimum Risk Manoeuvre (MRM).

Proposal to permit the use of a software identification system that differs from the RxSWIN established under UN R156 on software updates. (This proposal corresponds with a proposal to amend UN R156).

Proposal to expand the scope to include N category vehicles and to apply the minimum performance for service braking systems (5 m/s²) as required in the 11 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13, for vehicles of the Categories M2, M3, N2 and N3. The overall objective of the former Informal Working Group (IWG) on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF) was to develop technical requirements for Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS). The initial limitation to passenger cars (M1 category vehicles) was agreed in order to deliver within the given timeline. After having successfully accomplished the work for the system in a first step, the automotive industry has now reviewed and examined the existing requirements under the premise of including all vehicle categories M and N.

Proposal to permit automatic activation of functions providing continuous lateral and/or longitudinal control after ALKS deactivation.

This document was produced during an informal meeting (on 23 September 2020) of interested experts who reviewed the ALKS-related documents presented at GRVA on 24 September 2020.

Under the initial ALKS regulation and its reference to the new cyber security requlation, manufacturers are permitted to use an alternative software identification system instead of the proposed RxSWIN format. This proposal seeks to clarify the use of such alternative identifications in the approval process.

Proposal to include all vehicle categories M and N in the scope of UN R157.

The intention of the proposed amendment is to clarify the existing text on continued support of an ACSF B1 if the boundary conditions are exceeded.

The proposal aims to correct 5 types of inconsistencies:

1. The reference to Annex 4 is repeated in each sub-paragraph and should instead be stated once in each paragraph.
2. Acronyms are used inconsistently. Proposal to use them consistently throughout similar to UN-R79, e.g. Emergency Manoeuvre (EM), and when used in the text as “emergency manoeuvre”
3. Each sub-paragraph has a heading, this helps understand the structure and should be carried over to par. 8.1., 9.1. and 9.2. as well, the wording for the heading of par. 9.1. and 9.2. are derived from UN-R155 and UN-R156 respectively.
4. Consistent use of term throughout, e.g. R₁₅₇SWIN without blank, Cyber Security as two words as used in UN-R155
5. Editorial corrections, e.g. missing paragraph numbers, missing full stop in the paragraph number.

Proposal to amend the proposal from Germany regarding lane-change functionality:

1. paragraph 5.2.1. – lane keeping
2. paragraph 5.2.6.1. – risk to safety of the vehicle occupants and other road users
3. paragraphs 5.2.6.2. and 5.2.6.3. – preconditions for a lane change procedure
4. paragraph 5.2.6.5. – timing of a lane change maneuver
5. paragraph 5.2.6.6. and its sub-paragraphs – criticality of a lane change maneuver
6. paragraph 7.1.3. – rear detection range
7. Annex 5. – test cases for rear detection range, lane change.

Proposal to address risks related to activities other than driving and to clarify that a declaration of a maximum operational speed that exceeds 60 km/h is possible, but not required.

Proposal to clarify the text with regard to:

1. paragraph 2.6., Definition of an imminent collision
2. paragraphs 5.1.9 and 7.1.4., Lifetime of the system
3. paragraph 5.2.3.3., Traffic Rules and Safety Distance to the front
4. paragraph 5.2.5.2. – “anticipated TTC” in cut-in scenario
5. paragraph 6.2.5.1., Deactivation by input to driving controls
6. paragraph 6.2.6., Transition to assisted driving
7. paragraph 6.4.4., Examples of information to the driver
8. Annex 5 – Tests
   • Section 5.1. contains physical tests that have to be performed at the time of type approval
   • Section 5.2. aims to confirm at the time of type approval, that the system complies with the corresponding provisions of the main text. This confirmation shall be done by at least one physical test per provision, if possible due to the nature of the provision, and may be supported by further evidence.
   • Section 5.3. is a collection of additional scenarios, that the ALKS could encounter. Whether they are relevant to the ALKS depends on its ODD. So either the manufacturer explains why his system will not need to handle these scenarios, or has to explain the behaviour of the ALKS.
   • larify the content of par. 5.2. by rewording the provisions similar to that of the core text.

Presentation raising concerns over discrepancies and risks of misinterpretation in the application of the regulation by technical services.

Proposal to improve the text with editorial clarifications and restructuring.

Proposal to introduce additional requirements for a lane change functionality.

Proposal to amend the ALKS UN Regulation provisions to enable approval of systems operating at speeds up to 130 km/h.

Presentation on the use of simulation tools under type approval and in discussions on the validation of automated driving systems.

Proposal for a new UN Regulation on uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to Automated Lane Keeping Systems designed to operate on highways at speeds up to 60 km/h.

Proposal as approved during the 6th GRVA session for a new UN Regulation on approval requirements for low-speed, on-highway automated lane-keeping systems.

Proposals to clarify provisions for collision avoidance in a cut-in scenario, collision avoidance with regard to crossing pedestrians, on “other activities than driving”, and on “permanent visibility” of the means for the driver to activate and deactivate the system.

Proposal for amendments to the proposed draft Annex 4 on audit/CEL to the new UN Regulation on Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS)

This document outlines the UK’s latest proposals to permit a lane change function during a minimum risk manoeuvre or emergency manoeuvre as part of the forthcoming ALKS Regulation.

Proposal from the VMAD informal group secretary for “Special requirements to be applied to the functional and operational safety aspects of Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS)”.

Proposal for an “Appendix on Traffic Disturbance Critical Scenarios to the Annex on audit/assessment to the new UN Regulation on Automated Lane Keeping systems (ALKS)” applying concepts under consideration by the VMAD informal group to establish performance criteria based on “driver model” responses to traffic scenarios.

Proposal from the EDR-DSSAD informal group to provide requirements for “data storage systems for automated driving” in the draft automated-lane keeping systems type-approval regulation.