Proposal to remove references to age limits in preference for limits based on stature in the definition of “infant carrier”, to update the transitional provisions in line with the new guidelines on regulatory procedures (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.2), especially concerning extensions of approvals, and to replace a reference in para. 16.11 to “vehicle approval” with “Enhanced Child Restraint Systems”.

Proposal to introduce new and modified labeling and to clarify packaging information to distinguish between forward-facing-only, rear-facing-only, and convertible CRS in order to reduce the risk of users misusing these enhanced CRS.

Proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of the booster cushion category of Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

The 01 series of amendments to UN R129 amended the door panel geometry to create a small opening close to the seat bight. This change protected the panel from interaction with the anchorage of the adult seat belt on the test bench (added subsequently in the 02 series). Although Integral ISOFIX Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) do not use the belt, these CRS were also required to use this new door panel geometry. This proposal amends the 02 series of amendments to require Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the original door panel geometry with no opening (except during extensions of approvals in which the new panel geometry was used). The proposal ensures that ISOFIX ECRS designs cannot use the opening to mitigate loads to the ECRS and dummy.

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

Proposal to introduce a definition for “insert” and provisions for their use.

English wording “Upper neck tension force” corresponds to the following Russian wording “Сжимающая сила верхней части шеи”. English wording “Upper neck flexion moment” corresponds to the following Russian wording “Изгибающий момент верхней части шеи”.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Explanatory notes related to formal documents GRSP/2018/ 19 through 22 (superseded by informal documents GRSP-64-02 to GRSP-64-05) submitted by Spain for the 63rd GRSP session.

Proposal to modify the approval markings:

• specify the dimensions of the approval number
• update i-Size universal ISOFIX, Specific Vehicle ISOFIX, i-Size Booster seat and Specific Vehicle Booster seat numbering (omitted in WP29-2018-045)
• rearrange the dimensions mark for arrangements of the approval mark where used in combination with the module mark
• change the 145 cm stature of the Specific Vehicle Booster seat to 150 cm stature as this is the correct upper limit.

Proposal to modify the approval markings for consistency between technical services and approval authorities and between the labels of products approved under the 02 and 03 series. Combinations of approval marks can be made as long as the categories are able to be combined (category-wise as given in paragraph 3.2.2 and as long as it is one approval number). By combining approval marks, space on the Enhanced Child Restraint can be saved and more space is available for clear installation and use instructions. The current layout of the module label in UN R129.02 is technically impossible because the example provides a rectangular shape, with the module and base placed next to each other and joined with a plus mark while the given symbols are on top of each other and joined with an arrow mark.

Proposal to modify the approval markings for consistency between technical services and approval authorities and between the labels of products approved under the 02 and 03 series. Combinations of approval marks can be made as long as the categories are able to be combined (category-wise as given in paragraph 3.2.2 and as long as it is one approval number). By combining approval marks, space on the Enhanced Child Restraint can be saved and more space is available for clear installation and use instructions.

Explanation of informal documents GRSP-64-07 to -09 regarding the rearrangement of approval markings.

Proposal to align the French version with the adopted English version of the text (reference document WP.29/2018/45).

Proposal of corrections to document GRSP/2018/29 (previously submitted by CLEPA) regarding the introduction of booster-cushion provisions into UN R129.

Proposal to clarify the use of the i-Size logo on i-Size boosters.

Labels under UN R129, paragraph 4.5. highlight that the ECRS should not be used by children under 15 months old. This proposal presents the same layout for rearward/forward-facing and for forward-only CRS.

Proposal to specify that, in the case of an infant carrier, the dummy shall be restrained in the Enhanced Child Restraint System before it is installed on the test bench.

Proposal to specify the dimensions of the approval number, correct term from " Regulation No. 129-02" to “UN Regulation No. 129/02”, and change the 145 cm stature of the Specific Vehicle Booster seat to the 150 cm stature as this is the upper limit.

Proposal to specify usage requirements for unfixed CRS inserts.

Proposal to clarify that Conformity of Production assessments shall be conducted under the same requirements as those of the original approval or, if applicable, the extension of the approval. This proposal supersedes the proposal to require testing of Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the door panel geometry of the 00 series of UN R129 (document GRSP/2018/31).

Proposal to introduce provisions for the booster cushion category of child restraint systems under UN R129.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Proposal to clarify that assessment of the DE plane only applies to rearward-facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in UN Regulation No. 44 and therefore does not apply to forward-facing child restraints that maintain structure of the child restraint behind the head of the dummy.

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

Explanation of informal documents GRSP-64-07 to -09 regarding the rearrangement of approval markings.

English wording “Upper neck tension force” corresponds to the following Russian wording “Сжимающая сила верхней части шеи”. English wording “Upper neck flexion moment” corresponds to the following Russian wording “Изгибающий момент верхней части шеи”.

Proposal to remove references to age limits in preference for limits based on stature in the definition of “infant carrier”, to update the transitional provisions in line with the new guidelines on regulatory procedures (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.2), especially concerning extensions of approvals, and to replace a reference in para. 16.11 to “vehicle approval” with “Enhanced Child Restraint Systems”.

Proposal to clarify that Conformity of Production assessments shall be conducted under the same requirements as those of the original approval or, if applicable, the extension of the approval. This proposal supersedes the proposal to require testing of Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the door panel geometry of the 00 series of UN R129 (document GRSP/2018/31).

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

The 01 series of amendments to UN R129 amended the door panel geometry to create a small opening close to the seat bight. This change protected the panel from interaction with the anchorage of the adult seat belt on the test bench (added subsequently in the 02 series). Although Integral ISOFIX Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) do not use the belt, these CRS were also required to use this new door panel geometry. This proposal amends the 02 series of amendments to require Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the original door panel geometry with no opening (except during extensions of approvals in which the new panel geometry was used). The proposal ensures that ISOFIX ECRS designs cannot use the opening to mitigate loads to the ECRS and dummy.