4. The expert from the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He clarified that notwithstanding the progress of the last meeting held in February 2014, outstanding points remained, i.e. on injury criteria. He added that the next meeting had been scheduled on early September 2014, in Berlin. He stated that the IWG had suggested that the issue of the head restraint height would be resolved by GRSP rather than the IWG. He finally announced that a revised official proposal for a UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the December 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1), to incorporate the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II).

5. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and to resume discussion on the height of the head restraints (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) at its December 2014 session.

4. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-64-38, to present the proposed Amendment 2 (GRSP-64-39-Rev.1 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/27) to UN GTR No. 7 (Phase 2 of the UN GTR on head restraints), jointly prepared with the experts from Japan and the Netherlands. He explained that the proposal still has several items, in several square brackets, to be solved. However, he added that the draft amendment would introduced five main changes to the UN GTR:

1. Procedure for establishing the height of the head restraint base on the head contact rather than at its absolute height;
2. Height measurement test procedure;
3. Deletion of the backset measurement test procedure using the H-point machine method;
4. Introduction of the backset measurement test procedure using the R-point method; and
5. Introduction of the dynamic performance test procedure, by using the Biomechanical Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID) and empirical criteria instead of biomechanical (due to the absence of an absolute medical definition of whiplash) to establish seat performance.

6. Finally, GRSP experts were invited to provide comments to GRSP-64-39-Rev.1 and GRSP-64-40 to the expert from Japan by the end of January 2019. Moreover, it was agreed that IWG organize a webex meeting to allow the expert from Japan to submit an official proposal of amendments, which would also incorporate GRSP-64-25 (see para. 16 of this report) by 15 February 2019.

4. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-32, to present the proposed Amendment 2 (GRSP-65-24 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/5) to UN GTR No. 7 (Phase 2 of the UN GTR on head restraints), jointly prepared with the experts from Japan and the Netherlands. He explained that the proposal has removed several square brackets and therefore solving the main issues. He added that the draft amendment would introduce: (a) injury criteria focusing on Neck Injury Criteria (NIC) namely upper and lower neck flexion and extension, (b) BioRID as an option for contracting parties to Hybrid III still and © procedure for establishing the height of the head restraint based on the head contact rather than at its absolute height. He clarified that the proposal that would need still some changes, will be complemented by a proposal of Addendum 1 to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 to insert drawings and specifications of the BioRID, to be presented at the December 2019 session of GRSP. Moreover, the experts from France and Russian Federation announced that they would not need the translation of the BioRID manual or other dummy specification and can be dealt with in English only. GRSP noted that all these specifications, when they would be submitted, shall need a disclaimer letter from the dummy manufacturer concerning copyright claims and that they might be upload on the M.R.1 website without any copyright infringements.

5. [At] the same time, the expert from Japan introduced the ninth status report of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Head Restraints (GRSP-65-31). The expert from CLEPA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/8 and introduced GRSP-65-30 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/10 amending the static options of the proposal.

6. Finally, GRSP experts were invited to provide comments to GRSP-65-24 to the expert from Japan by 13 September 2019. Moreover, GRSP requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-65-30 and GRSP-65-31 with an official symbol and agreed to seek consent of WP.29 and AC.3 to extend the mandate of the IWG until June 2020.

4. The expert from Germany, by way of GRSP-66-41 presented Amendment 1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/26) to UN GTR No. 7 (Phase 2 of the UN GTR on head restraints) that had been prepared by the expert from Japan as technical sponsor of the informal working group (IWG). He explained that the proposal had resolved all the main issues, i.e., in square brackets: (a) text of the preamble, (b) text of the Regulation and (c) injury criteria. He added that the proposal to include the Biomechanical Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID) UN test tool in Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1) was still in final review, and that an agreement was in progress with the dummy manufacturer on disclaiming any copyright infringements. The expert from Japan introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/26 to highlight the main issues resolved by IWG.

5. GRSP recommended that (a) Amendment 1 to UN GTR No. 2 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/26), as amended below, (b) the final progress report (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/21), not amended and (c) the authorization to develop the work ECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/25/Rev.1 be established in the global registry. The secretariat was requested to submit the Amendment, report and authorization to WP.29 and to the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) for consideration and vote at their June 2020 session as Amendment 1 to UN GTR No. 7. GRSP also agreed to suspend discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/20 since the subject was considered to not be in the IWG mandate, though future consideration would follow a new authorization to develop the work.

<i<Annex 3, paragraph 2.1.1., shall be deleted.

6. GRSP, agreed to resume consideration on this subject at its May 2020 session on the basis of a proposal of Addendum to M.R.1. to incorporate drawings, specifications and manual of the BioRID test tool. GRSP also agreed that consideration on this subject would have as a prerequisite that the dummy manufacturer provide the set of drawings for the test tool and agree to have the disclaimer on intellectual property rights removed from the drawings.

5. Concerning the height of head restraints, the expert from the Netherlands reminded GRSP that a proposal with new thresholds had been submitted last year (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) and that the new measurement method agreed by the IWG was guaranteeing good repeatability. The expert from OICA argued that the new test method by itself was reducing the measured height of the head restraints by about 30 mm and that the additional severity due to the new thresholds referenced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 needed further justification. The expert from India was of the opinion that an anthropometry study should be carried out to investigate the consequences of increased height of head restraints.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.

8. GRSP finally agreed to refer GRSP-58-26 back to the IWG, to incorporate all the comments from ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/34, and resume discussion on this subject at its May 2016 session.