26. The expert from Germany informed GRSP that TF on UN Regulation No. 80 had not started work due to the absence of new proposals as an alternative to the previous proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/10, that had aimed at removing Appendix 5 (static test requirements and procedure) from UN Regulation No. 80. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 which proposed a compromise to the complete deletion of the static test as the static test will provide the basis for a simpler testing of small projects or Class I vehicles. He proposed a two-step approach: (a) the first step was presented with GRSP-65-29 Rev.1 with more stringent requirement for the attachments and fittings of the seat and (b) the second step would be a revision of the static and dynamic test. The expert from the United Kingdom acknowledged the need of small manufacturers to retain a static test as alternative and supported the proposal as a viable compromise. The experts from Finland, Italy and Russian Federation expressed similar views. The expert from Germany acknowledged that GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 had partially solved the problem of construction and fixation, and thus should be intended as a compromise that could be improved in the future. The expert from the Netherlands suggested that in the future, only the dynamic test should be used. Finally, GRSP adopted GRSP-65-29-Rev.1, as reproduced in Annex IV of the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 as new 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 80, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

26. The expert from Germany informed GRSP that TF on UN Regulation No. 80 had not started work due to the absence of new proposals as an alternative to the previous proposal ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/10, that had aimed at removing Appendix 5 (static test requirements and procedure) from UN Regulation No. 80. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 which proposed a compromise to the complete deletion of the static test as the static test will provide the basis for a simpler testing of small projects or Class I vehicles. He proposed a two-step approach: (a) the first step was presented with GRSP-65-29 Rev.1 with more stringent requirement for the attachments and fittings of the seat and (b) the second step would be a revision of the static and dynamic test. The expert from the United Kingdom acknowledged the need of small manufacturers to retain a static test as alternative and supported the proposal as a viable compromise. The experts from Finland, Italy and Russian Federation expressed similar views. The expert from Germany acknowledged that GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 had partially solved the problem of construction and fixation, and thus should be intended as a compromise that could be improved in the future. The expert from the Netherlands suggested that in the future, only the dynamic test should be used. Finally, GRSP adopted GRSP-65-29-Rev.1, as reproduced in Annex IV of the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit GRSP-65-29-Rev.1 as new 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 80, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.