Proposal from Spain on behalf of the Technical Services Group (TSG) on UN R129 to allow the head of the dummy to pass the DE plane provided there is a structure (e.g., head pad or backrest) that provides adequate protection for the head. Under UN R129, the combination of a stiffer test bench foam and the design of the test dummy can mean that when testing forward-facing child restraints (including boosters), the dummy’s head often passes the DE plane. The Q-series dummies are not proven to be biofidelic during the rebound phase of the impact test. In such cases, the head pad or backrest provides protection to the child’s head and the energy-absorption properties of this structure will have been tested using the test method described in UN Regulation No. 129.

Proposal from Spain on behalf of the Technical Services Group (TSG) on UN R129 to allow the head of the dummy to pass the DE plane provided there is a structure (e.g., head pad or backrest) that provides adequate protection for the head. Under UN R129, the combination of a stiffer test bench foam and the design of the test dummy can mean that when testing forward-facing child restraints (including boosters), the dummy’s head often passes the DE plane. The Q-series dummies are not proven to be biofidelic during the rebound phase of the impact test. In such cases, the head pad or backrest provides protection to the child’s head and the energy-absorption properties of this structure will have been tested using the test method described in UN Regulation No. 129.

Proposal from Spain on behalf of the Technical Services Group (TSG) on UN R129 to allow the head of the dummy to pass the DE plane provided there is a structure (e.g., head pad or backrest) that provides adequate protection for the head. Under UN R129, the combination of a stiffer test bench foam and the design of the test dummy can mean that when testing forward-facing child restraints (including boosters), the dummy’s head often passes the DE plane. The Q-series dummies are not proven to be biofidelic during the rebound phase of the impact test. In such cases, the head pad or backrest provides protection to the child’s head and the energy-absorption properties of this structure will have been tested using the test method described in UN Regulation No. 129.

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 update the Communication Form since from the 07 series of amendments rear safety belt reminders have been added.

Proposal to prohibit the granting of new approvals under UN R44 from [1 September 2020] and to amend the transitional provisions accordingly.

Latest developments from the GTR 7 informal group to implement the Phase 2 development of the GTR. Phase 2 addresses a new measurement procedure for the effective height of the head restraint and introduction of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Device (BioRID).

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.

Proposal transposing the provisions of the draft GTR 7-Amendment 1 (aka Phase 2) into UN R17. Phase 2 addresses a new measurement procedure for the effective height of the head restraint and introduction of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Device (BioRID).