Proposal to temporarily remove Category L vehicles from the scope of the draft cyber-security and software update processes UN Regulations.

Proposal from Germany to introduce additional definitions, clarify the management system certification process, enable the withdrawal (revocation) of a vehicle type approval, to require the vehicle manufacturer to maintain an Information Security Operations Centre (ISOC) to handle servicing of its vehicle fleet, and to improve the processes for identification of risks and threats and their mitigation.

The 01 series of amendments aims at increasing the performance requirements in the Car to Pedestrian
scenario by permitting only reduced maximum impact speed compared to the original version of this
Regulation. Thereby the same maximum impact speed is required for the Car to Pedestrian as for the
Car to Car scenario. However, in the original proposal (GRVA/2019/16), the permitted maximum impact speed for an N₁ vehicle erroneously corresponds to that of an M₁ vehicle. This proposal corrects the error.

Pursuant to discussions during the 9th session of the informal working group on AEBS for M₁/N₁, paragraphs 6.5.2. (pass conditions regarding “car-to-car moving” collision warning) and 6.6.2. (pass conditions regarding the collision warning in the Car to Pedestrian scenario) were deleted given that pass conditions were already defined by the general requirements. For consistency, this proposal would delete the pass conditions under the car-to-car stationary scenario.

Safety of the Intended Functionality standard. Password protected for use within WP.29. Please contact the GRVA secretariat for access.

Proposal to amend the text for consistency.

Presentation in support of the proposals for the 01 series of amendments and for Supplement 1 to UN R152 (respectively, documents GRVA/2019/16 and GRVA/2019/17.

The False Reaction scenarios in Annex 3-Appendix 2 were based on UN R131 (on-highway heavy vehicles) without verification of their applicability to urban light vehicles. Japan has begun research and anticipates proposing changes to the UN R152 scenarios in the near future. This proposal identifies scenarios under study and recommends tolerances for the vehicle and pedestrian dummy placements. Japan also raises concerns over the provision “the AEBS shall not provide a collision warning” in cases where there is no imminent collision risk.

Presentation on Tesla experience with hands-on lane-keeping and automated lane-change systems, especially with regard to lateral acceleration and distance limits under UN R79.