Proposal to correct an ISOFIX definition as referring to the “ISOFIX position” and to clarify that the driver’s seat would not be required to be fitted with ISOFIX anchorages regardless of the vehicle seat configuration.
Proposal to correct an ISOFIX definition as referring to the “ISOFIX position” and to clarify that the driver’s seat would not be required to be fitted with ISOFIX anchorages regardless of the vehicle seat configuration.
21. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-52-19, aimed at exempting vehicles with one seating position per row from ISOFIX provisions and at introducing exemptions for vehicles not intended to transport children during normal use. The proposal received some comments from GRSP experts; the secretariat was requested to divide the proposal into two separate official documents for the May 2013 session of GRSP.
20. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/3, aimed at introducing exemptions for vehicles not intended to transport children during normal use. The expert from United Kingdom suggested that the proposal should include amendments to the type approval certificate (Annex 1 of the UN Regulation) which clearly address this exemption. Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/3 as amended by Annex III to this report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2013 sessions as draft Supplement 5 to the 07 series of amendments to the UN Regulation.
21. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4 aimed at exempting vehicles with one seating position per row from ISOFIX provisions. He justified that new concepts designed for urban mobility would not technically allow the installation of ISOFIX anchorages. The proposal received comments from the German expert (GRSP-53-11) arguing that the ISOFIX system should be promoted as much as possible in a broad range of vehicle configurations. The expert from OICA argued that GRSP-53-11 would not consider the consequences of vehicle weight increase (approximately 1 kg) and national legislation in several countries that forbid the transport of children on front seats. In principle, GRSP agreed to further study the ISOFIX requirements to address new mobility solutions. Thereby, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2013 session, based on comments (i.e. list of concept vehicle configurations) provided by the IWG on child restraints systems (CRS) and from the experts of Contracting Parties to the 1958 Agreement. Moreover, the secretariat was requested to distribute GRSP-53-11 with an official symbol and to have ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/9 as a reference on the agenda of the next session.
16. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-54-19-Rev.2 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, aimed at introducing exemptions under certain conditions for vehicles equipped with one seating position per row. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as part (see. para. 15) of draft Supplement 6 to the 07 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/15 at its May 2014 session, excluding paragraph 5.3.8.8. as already agreed with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4.