Official Clarification on In-Vehicle Emergency Systems and Electronic Vehicle Passports
An official note from Russia’s Ministry of Industry and Trade states that vehicles employing an in-vehicle emergency call system similar to the ERA-GLONASS setup, when paired with the EVAK emergency call unit sourced from Kazakhstan, will not qualify for electronic vehicle passports within the Russian Federation. The reasoning behind this stance centers on device compatibility concerns and regulatory alignment, as discussed in automotive news coverage shared via a Telegram channel and later referenced in communications between Vasily Shpak, Deputy Minister, and Ilya Minkin, the Director General of Electronic Passport JSC. The ministry’s position emphasizes that the functional pairing of these components does not meet the required regulatory criteria for passport issuance. The broader takeaway is that cross-border device configurations must align with domestic standards before they can be recognized under Russia’s vehicle documentation framework. These insights are attributed to official ministry communications and corroborated by industry analyses.
The document clarifies that the In-Vehicle Emergency Call System, when configured with an EVAK profile, does not satisfy the requirements listed in the annex of Regulatory Technical Regulation TR CU 018/2011. This regulation governs safety standards for wheeled vehicles, and the noncompliance directly impacts the system’s qualification under the national safety documentation framework used within the Russian Federation. The emphasis here is on ensuring that all in-vehicle safety technologies meet the precise technical and procedural specifications prescribed by TR CU 018/2011 before they can be certified for use with electronic vehicle passports.
Summarizing the cited provisions, any vehicle equipped with an in-vehicle emergency call device that fails to meet TR CU 018/2011 standards is not eligible for an electronic vehicle passport. This establishes a clear compliance barrier tied to the device’s technical characteristics and the operational criteria mandated by the regulation. The rule is designed to guarantee interoperability within the country’s safety, documentation, and regulatory ecosystem, preventing mismatches between hardware capabilities and the federation’s official passport requirements.
Key issues highlighted include how information is transmitted via a tone modem, the potential for interference with other vehicle systems during communications with the operator over cellular networks, and several additional conditions that raise concerns about reliable operation within Russian networks. The correspondence also points out that EVAK devices do not meet the GLONASS-related requirements defined by the national GOST standards, underscoring a broader mismatch with established infrastructure expectations. This assessment signals that conformity with domestic radio and navigation standards is a central prerequisite for any device to be considered for vehicle documentation and safety certification.
The discussion extends to broader industry implications, including observed software challenges reported by a former president of a major German automotive brand. These issues have emerged in comparative assessments of electric vehicle performance and are presented as factors that could influence the competitive standing of such vehicles relative to local and regional benchmarks. The analysis reflects how technical gaps in emergency communications, satellite navigation compatibility, and regulatory alignment may affect market positioning and acceptance within Russia and neighboring markets. The overall message concerns how regulatory standards shape the integration of emergency systems with national infrastructure, potentially guiding manufacturers toward compatible configurations. The sources for this discussion are official ministry communications and industry press analysis.