Proposal to clarify and align the French version of the text with regard to its English counterpart and the provisions on locking devices for each vehicle door.

Proposal to correct a cross-reference with regard to an ISOFIX exemption.

Proposal to correct an oversight by adding the minimum requirement for at least a two-point lap belt (Br3, Br4m, Br4Nm) for use with rearward facing child restraints for M₃ as is already the case for M₂ vehicles.

Proposal to correct a cross-reference regarding an ISOFIX anchorage exemption.

Proposal to amend document GRSP/2017/40 in order to clarify the performance requirements for impacted doors (i.e., determination of whether a door remained closed during the test) and to reduce the proposed force level from 500 N to 400 N for the test to open the door.

Proposal to align end-user information provisions with those adopted for UN R44.

Certain enhanced child restraint systems are designed for forward-facing and rearward-facing depending upon the age of the occupant. This proposal would clarify the labeling and packing information to avoid confusion between the requirements for these “dual” systems and exclusively forward-facing CRS.

During its 61st session, GRSP approved Supplement 3 to the 01 series of amendments and Supplement 2 to the 02 series of amendments. This proposal reinserts text inadvertently omitted during the reproduction of the text as approved during the session.

Pursuant to the concern raised by Spain to avoid a misinterpretation that shoulder strap positioners must be designed to be released before the harness buckle, This proposal clarifies that a shoulder strap positioner may be released before, after, or simultaneously with the harness buckle. The proposal also improves the text with regard to the release of modules from a base.

Proposal of amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/6

CLEPA presentation proposing further study of possible responses to the concerns raised and solution proposed in document GRSP/2018/6 regarding non-integral child restraints (e.g., booster seats) and the risk of injuries from narrow contact with buckle and safety-belt.

Proposal to require rigid barrier frontal crash testing for commercial use quadricycles (i.e., four-wheeled vehicles with unladen mass not more than 400 kg (550 kg for goods-carrying vehicles), not including the mass of batteries in the case of electric vehicles and whose maximum continuous rated power does not exceed 15 kW).

Global NCAP letter of November 2016 supporting attention to the crashworthiness of L-category four-wheeled vehicles (L6/L7) via a “new global standard”.

December 2015 notes prepared by Global NCAP in safety awareness following “Safer Cars in India” program.

Proposal to amend to document GRSP/2018/10 in order to clarify the torque specification for attaching seats and to delay the proposed entry into force.

Proposal clarify that only a 3-point-belt shall be permitted for the driver seating position in order to address differing interpretations among Technical Services regarding which requirements apply for driver position seat-belt approval.

Clarification with regard to the possibility to install side-facing seats in buses of category M₂ and M₃ of classes A and I.

Proposal to introduce references to specifications for the construction, preparation and certification of the Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (FlexPLI).

Proposal to remove the age and stature characteristics from the definition of an “Infant carrier” to avoid misinterpretations. These seats may be used by children above the age specification provided they fall within the stature limits.

Proposal to explicitly allow the granting extensions for type approvals under the 02 series of amendments and for any approval not affected by 03 series of amendments pursuant to the new guidelines on UN Regulations.

The video used during the presentation can be downloaded separately.

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 to update a reference regarding ISOFIX exemptions permitted under paragraph 5.3.8.8. (related to vehicles with one seat position per row). The reference should read 5.3.8.8. and 5.3.8.9.

Proposal to update a reference regarding ISOFIX exemptions permitted under paragraph 5.3.8.8. (related to vehicles with one seat position per row). The reference should read 5.3.8.8. and 5.3.8.9.

Proposal to introduce objective criteria for evaluating whether a door remains latched following the pole impact test. Under UN R135, rear doors on the impacted side of the vehicle not directly struck by the pole may nonetheless be subjected to heavy loads and therefore need to be assessed. This proposal corresponds to a similar clarification already introduced into UN R95 on side impacts.

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