This agenda item relates to UN R16 Safety belt systems.
Working Party on Passive Safety | Session 57 | 18-22 May 2015

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.

16. The expert from Korea introduced the issue (GRSP-57-24) concerning the extension of mandatory fitting of safety-belt reminders (SBR) to rear seats as a basis to increase the low wearing rates of safety-belts in the rear seats in Asian countries. Referring to GRSP-57-24, the expert from Japan introduced GRSP-57-17-Rev.2, jointly prepared with the experts from EC and Korea, providing the basis for a proposal of amendments to the UN Regulation to introduce SBR in the rear seats. GRSP noted that the United States of America was developing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on the same matter that probably would be publicly available by the end of 2015. The expert from OICA argued that the issue of wearing rate should have a multidisciplinary approach including education and that a standalone technical solution would not solve the issue, but add burden costs to consumers. The expert from Germany added that the great wearing rate of safety-belts in his country was successfully achieved thanks to strong law enforcement. The expert from the Netherlands made a similar statement. The expert from France supported the validity of the request. However, he raised a study reservation and confirmed the need of a robust cost-benefit analysis and rationale to justify the proposal. The expert from Denmark supported the proposal, though he questioned the proposed deactivation time duration of SBR and the exclusion of multi-purpose vehicles from the scope of the proposal. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-17-Rev.2 with an official symbol.

17. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-09 proposing to introduce a new fixture to verify space availability of universal lateral facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) “lie-flat” (GRSP-57-07-Rev.1). He urged the introduction of this envelope to allow the installation of universal “lie-flat” CRS to address special medical needs such as premature born children having inability to support heads. He stated that the current ISOFIX fixture of UN Regulation No. 44 was too large and suggested through his proposal the introduction of a fixture having a volume within those representing rear-facing and forward-facing volumes (excluding side volumes). The expert from OICA suggested that the proposed fixture should not be used to identify an i-size position because otherwise it would reduce the availability of i-size positions in the vehicle. Moreover, he suggested that the proposal would refer to a vehicle specific position. The comments from the expert of OICA were generally supported by the experts from France, Germany, EC and the Netherlands. Finally, GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-57-07-Rev.1 back to the IWG, to be discussed as a full-package with the provisions of UN Regulation No. 129 (see para. 30 below).

18. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRSP-57-18 aimed at ensuring that the safety retractor would work properly in the highest and the lowest adjustment positions and other issues related to testing CRS compatibility on vehicle seating positions. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-18 with an official symbol.

Working Party on Passive Safety | Session 58 | 8-11 Dec 2015

19. The expert from CLEPA reiterated that presentation (GRSP-58-01-Rev.1) introduces provisions (GRSP-58-20 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/20) for fixtures that would verify the availability of space on universal lateral facing CRS “lie-flat”. He explained that this kind of CRS addressed children with medical needs and urged its introduction. The expert from France underlined that the issue concerning the introduction of this kind of CRS was whether to consider them as universal or non-universal, and to suggest a proper definition. The expert from the Netherlands suggested that “lie-flat” CRS cannot be considered i-Size type. The expert from CI made a similar statement which suggested that the two new proposed envelopes introduce a new category of CRS, and also added that the matter should be further discussed in the IWG. Finally GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-58-20 to the IWG on CRS for further revision.

20. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/21, aimed at better clarifying the availability of space for CRS installation. He suggested that a clear classification and schematic ranking of CRS be discussed within the IWG. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-58-33) to introduce a proposal of amendments (GRSP-58-15-Rev.1) that simplify information for consumers in the owner’s manual. He reminded GRSP that i-Size was conceived to completely eliminate the need for vehicle handbook instructions since all positions were marked. Specifically, he proposed to define two types of information: (i) customer needs and (ii) CRS manufacturers when type approving their systems. The proposal received comments addressing transitional provisions and the possibility of removing them from the proposal.

21. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/21 and on GRSP-58-15-Rev.1, pending possible revision by the IWG at its May 2016 session.

22. The expert from the Republic of Korea, jointly with the experts from Japan and EC prepared a presentation (GRSP-58-30) on a proposal to introduce provisions on Safety-Belt Reminders (SBRs) in all vehicle seats (GRSP-58-29-Rev.1 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/19). He mentioned the cost benefit analysis carried out by EC and stated that the benefits outweighed costs in Asian countries (available at http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/6662/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/pdf). He added that SBRs had great lifesaving potential, and that from safety-belt use data, it was clear that enforcement was not equal in all countries and may depend on the priorities of the police forces and public protection organisms. He concluded that the use of SBRs, would be an added value. The expert from OICA argued that there was no evidence from cost benefit analyses that SBR devices were effective in increasing the use of safety belts. He also questioned the need of SBRs in commercial vehicles, where the transportation rate of passengers was very low. The expert from Denmark strongly supported the proposal. However, he questioned the need for an activation time on the device. The expert from France supported in principle the proposal, however, he also underlined the need to avoid any misinterpretation in the type approval procedure of these devices and requested a study reservation on the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom supported, in principle, the intention. However, he argued that a high percentage of vehicle occupants already wore safety belts in his country and he, thus, questioned how much value added could be provided by a mandatory installation of SBRs. Finally, he requested a time reservation to study the proposal in detail. The expert from Germany underlined the need for a practical solution and that the mandatory installation of SBR would increase vehicle prices. He also proposed differing approaches for vehicle categories, and questioned the need in the N2/N3 or in the M2/M3 category, where the crew were responsible for fastening the safety belts of occupants. The expert from EC stated that the rate of use was very low in some European countries while the voluntary fitting of SBRs by manufacturers was very high. He also stated that cheap cars without SBRs were sold in European low income countries where the rate of safety belt use was very low.

23. Finally GRSP agreed to establish a task force led by Japan, the Republic of Korea and EC to submit a revised proposal at its May 2016 session. In the meantime, the secretariat was requested to distribute GRSP-58-29-Rev.1 with an official symbol at the next GRSP session.

25. Finally, GRSP agreed to refer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18 and GRSP-58-35 to agenda item 11.

26. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18, aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of the rear seat restraint systems. She explained that the proposal aimed at updating requirements that were originally designed for seating positions that did not yet require three-point safety-belts; she added that the situation had developed with the introduction of load limiters that allowed for further displacement of occupants. Comments from GRSP experts on the proposal were incorporated into GRSP-58-35 during discussion. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/27 that was also linked to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18 because the of displacement of occupants due to safety belt load limiters that were installed on seats other than front seats. He explained that the proposal needed corresponding amendments to UN Regulations Nos. 21, 25 and 80. The expert from OICA argued that the proposal should address just those seating positions that needed energy absorption requirements. The expert from CLEPA also underlined the need to focus the energy dissipation tests on the parts of back seats where actual impacts occur.

27. Finally, GRSP agreed to establish a group of interested experts, led by the expert from the Netherlands, on new restraint system technology to develop provisions on this matter for all the relevant UN Regulations. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2016 session and to refer ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/27 and GRSP-58-35 to the group of interested experts.

41. Referring to discussion held under agenda item 10 (see para. 17 above), GRSP noted GRSP-58-21 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/29) tabled by the expert from CLEPA to introduce provisions for “lie-flat” into the UN Regulation. Accordingly, GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-58-21 to the IWG on CRS.

Documentation
GRSP-58-01/Rev.1 | UN Regulation No. 129 - Completion of Envelopes for integral CRS
GRSP-58-14 | Proposal for an 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (Australia)
GRSP-58-15/Rev.1 | Proposal for an 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (OICA)
GRSP-58-20 | Proposal for Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (CLEPA)
GRSP-58-29/Rev.1 | Proposal for the 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (EC, Korea, and Japan)
GRSP-58-30 | Literature overview with regard to seat-belt reminders (EC, Korea, and Japan)
GRSP-58-33 | Simplification of child restraint systems information in the vehicle manual (OICA)
GRSP-58-35 | Amendments to the proposed Supplement 7 to the 06 series to UN Regulation No. 16 (CLEPA)
GRSP/2015/18 | Proposal for Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (CLEPA)
GRSP/2015/19 | Proposal for the 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (Japan and Korea)
GRSP/2015/20 | Proposal for Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (CLEPA)
GRSP/2015/21 | Proposal for Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 (Netherlands)