1. The Working Party on Passive Safety (GRSP) held its sixty-fifth session in Geneva from 13 to 17 May 2019, chaired by Mr. J. Wan Lee (Republic of Korea) due to absence of Mr. N. Nguyen (United States of America) and in compliance with Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedure (TRANS/WP.29/690/Rev.1). Experts from the following countries participated in the work following Rule 1(a) of the Rules of Procedure of the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/690/Rev.1): Belgium, Canada, China, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America. An expert from the European Commission (EC) participated. Experts from the following non-governmental organizations participated: American Automotive Policy Council (AAPC), Consumers International (CI), European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA), Federation International de l’Automobile (FIA), Federation Internationale de Motocyclisme (FIM), Global New Car Assessment Programme (Global NCAP), International Motorcycle Manufacturers Association (IMMA), International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA) and International Motor Vehicle Inspection Committee (CITA).

2. Annex I of the session report lists the informal documents distributed during the session.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/1) proposed for the sixty-fifth session, running order (GRSP-65-05) and annotations
(GRSP-65-25). GRSP informal working groups are listed in Annex VIII of the session report.

GRSP-65-05 | GRSP-65: Running order of the agenda for the May 2019 session

GRSP-65-25 | GRSP-65: Updated provisional agenda

GRSP/2019/1 | Annotated provisional agenda for the 65th (May 2019) GRSP session

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.

GRSP-65-24 | GTR 7: Proposal for Amendment 1 (Phase 2) Updated proposal (based on document GRSP/2019/5) to specify a head restraint height between 720 mm and 830 mm including a new method for measuring the effective height of head restraints, use of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Device (BioRID II) test dummy, and to improve the overall text. This proposal also eliminates the backset measurement test procedure using the HRMD method.

GRSP-65-30 | GTR 7: Amendments to the proposal for amendment 1 (Phase 2) Proposal to amend document GRSP/2019/10. The proposal clarifies the way to apply and to understand GTR7 phase 2 static alternative provisions and aligns the area where the gap is measured to actual practice in UN R17 and FMVSS 202a which consider only gaps over a height of 540mm.

GRSP-65-31 | GTR 7: Draft 9th progress report of the informal group on Phase 2

GRSP-65-32 | Introduction to Revision of GTR 7 - Official Document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/5 and GRSP-65-24

GRSP/2019/10 | GTR 7: Proposal to amend the draft Amendment 1 Proposal to amend the static options of the proposal of amendment 1 of UN Global Technical Regulation No. 7 submitted by the Informal Working Group on the Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (document GRSP/2018/27).

GRSP/2019/5 | GTR 7: Proposal for Amendment 1 (Phase 2) Proposal to specify a head restraint height between 720 mm and 830 mm including a new method for measuring the effective height of head restraints, use of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Device (BioRID II) test dummy, and to improve the overall text. This proposal also eliminates the backset measurement test procedure using the HRMD method.

GRSP/2019/8 | GTR 7: Proposal to amend the draft Amendment 1 Proposal to amend the dynamic option of the proposal of amendment 1 of UN Global Technical Regulation No. 7 submitted by the Informal Working Group on the Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (document GRSP/2018/27).

7. The expert from Germany, on behalf of the Chair of the pedestrian safety IWG, introduced the amendment to M.R.1 for the new Addendum 3 to M.R.1 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/4), incorporating drawings, specifications and the manual of the Flex Pedestrian Legform Impactor (FlexPLI): GRSP-65-01 and GRSP-65-02. The experts from France and the Russian Federation confirmed that the manual and technical specifications should not be translated. However, it was noted that GRSP-65-01 and GRSP-65-02 would not be displayed on the WP.29 website until a disclaimer letter would be provided (see para. 4). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/4 unamended. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal as Amendment 2 to M.R.1 for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.3.

GRSP-65-01 | MR1: Drawings and specifications of Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (FlexPLI)

GRSP-65-02 | MR1: User Manual of Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor

GRSP/2019/4 | MR 1: Proposal for Amendment 2 Proposal to add the specifications of flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (FlexPLI) to the Resolution on test devices.

8. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-17, explaining that the intention of the pedestrian protection test procedures as described in UN GTR No. 9 and UN Regulation No. 127 was to deliver an adequate level of protection for pedestrians in accidents up to an impact velocity of 40 km/h. International Harmonized Research Agenda research has shown that the cumulative frequency curves versus vehicle impact speed for pedestrian injuries and their respective injury causing parts showed that 58 per cent of the child head abbreviated injury scale (AIS) 2+ injuries were addressed to a vehicle impact speed up to 40 km/h, 40 per cent to adult head AIS2+ injuries and 50 per cent of the adult leg AIS2+ injuries respectively. He added that test procedures described in UN Regulation No. 127 and UN GTR No. 9 were meant to represent worst case scenarios. However, it was agreed that this was not the case for all possible scenarios and that also at lower impact speeds higher injury risk could occur due for example to different heights of the vehicle because of adjustable suspension systems. The representative from OICA reminded that during the type approval process the worst case scenario will be considered. GRSP agreed to keep GRSP-65-17 as an informal document for the December 2019 session of GRSP, awaiting further rationales to develop a proposal of amendments.

GRSP-65-17 | GTR 9: Proposal for Amendment 3 Proposal to ensure pedestrian safety across the vehicle height variations that may be produced by active suspensions.

9. The expert from the Republic of Korea, on behalf of the Chair of the IWG on Deployable Pedestrian Protection Systems (DPPS) informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He explained that the group had its fourth meeting in Paris (12-14 March 2019) and that there were some controversial issues remaining such as a verification impactor which was used for testing the ability of the system to determine the most difficult to detect pedestrian within the appropriate pedestrian stature range. Moreover, he also mentioned that the defining of the head impact test area in case of a deployable pedestrian protection system remained an issue. Moreover, he noted that were few contracting parties attending IWG meetings regularly and encouraged broader participation. He also invited experts of concerned parties to have a web-meeting to resolve the above issues before the next meeting, scheduled in September in London. GRSP agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its December 2019 session.

10. The expert from the United States of America, on behalf of the co-sponsors (Japan, Republic of Korea, European Union) informed GRSP that the Chair (United States of America) of the Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Vehicles (HFCV) UN GTR IWG Phase 2, Mr. Nha Nguyen, had retired from the Federal service and was replaced by Mr. Martin Koubek. He provided GRSP with the details of the next IWG meeting, scheduled for 17 to 20 June 2019 in Tianjin, China.

11. The expert from Japan, on behalf of the co-sponsors (Japan, Republic of Korea, European Union) informed GRSP on the work progress of the IWG and provided a summary of some of the most relevant topic of discussion of the last IWG meeting (5 to 7 March 2019) held in Vancouver, Canada. He explained that the meeting was well attended by representatives from various contracting parties, motor vehicle manufacturers, container industries, standard organizations, and academia. He added that the IWG continued the discussions on technical issues such as requirements for heavy duty vehicles and buses, material compatibility, high pressure system reliability, and fire tests and that research and test results we presented. He specified that the five Task Forces (TF) provided their state of progress and issues:

1. TF No.1 – Heavy-duty trucks and buses had extensively discussed the difference of the fuel system to those in light-duty vehicles. TF proposed the revised scope to add heavy-duty vehicles to the categorization of current UN GTR;
2. TF No. 2 – Fuelling receptacle requirements, had planned to submit a final proposal for fuelling receptacle requirements at the next working group meeting;
3. TF No. 3 – Recommendations for test procedures, had progressed well and should complete its work by the summer of 2019;
4. TF No. 4 – Fire test, also progressed well and is scheduled to complete its work in 2019;
5. TF No. 5 – Recommendations from ISO TC197, had recommended a technical information proposal for the rationale section.

12. He finally concluded that IWG aimed to complete its work by the 2020 mandate.

13. The Chair of GRSP reminded GRSP about the decision of the National Highway Transport Safety Administration (NHTSA) to no longer chair the IWG due to a lack of resources. He recalled the statement of the expert from Germany at the December 2017 session of GRSP (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/62, para. 10) that the addenda of M.R.1 which incorporates anthropomorphic test device (crash test dummies) specifications, particularly of side impact dummies (e.g. World Side Impact Dummy fiftieth percentile), be completed as soon as possible. The experts from OICA and Germany underlined that the issue is not limited to cover harmonization of side impact dummies, but all tools used in the UN Regulations. They also stressed that UN GTR No. 14 and UN Regulation No. 135 are linked to an ISO standard. This could lead to legal uncertainty as standards are copyright-protected and in addition are changed more frequently. However, GRSP agreed to focus efforts on tools covered by UN Regulations under its responsibility underlining that the lack of work progress would cause problems at the level of type approval and certification procedures. Therefore, GRSP urged its experts to find a solution for the chairmanship of the group.

14. The expert of the United States of America, informed GRSP that the United States America Chair of the EV GTR IWG, Mr. Nha Nguyen would retire and be replaced by Mr. Ezana Wondimneh. He also updated GRSP on the details of the next meeting, scheduled to take place in Tokyo, Japan (11 to 14 June 2019).

15. The expert from Japan, on behalf of the co-sponsors (China, Japan, European Union and the members of IWG GTR No. 20, Phase 2) reported on the work progress of the IWG meeting of EVS-GTR, Phase 2. GRSP was informed that the last session had been held on 23 and 24 January in Detroit, United States of America. He reported that the meeting had been well represented by various contracting parties, motor vehicle and battery manufacturers and standard organizations. He added that IWG had continued discussions on technical issues, i.e. thermal propagation, water immersion, toxicity and gas management and three-dimensional vibration. As previously reported, IWG was currently conducting research and running tests on thermal propagation and toxicity. He added that the white paper on thermal propagation was ongoing. However, some main items, including field incident data, had not reached consensus and that IWG members would continue to discuss and resolve the items at the next meeting. He concluded that other significant technical discussions included water immersion and vibration of the battery system and that IWG aimed to complete its work by the 2021 mandate. The expert of OICA stressed the need for the various discussion items to be justified by facts and figures.

16. No new information was provided under this agenda item.

17. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-65-08 with a presentation (GRSP-65-09), aimed to introduce an alternative (at the choice of the manufacturer) to the airbag switch-off for frontal airbags in combination with rearward-facing child restraint systems in the rear seat. With a new test procedure, the manufacturer can demonstrate that deactivation of the airbag is not needed. He explained that the proposal aimed to promote new airbag technologies while ensuring the current level of protection for children in rearward faced CRS. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2019 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-65-08 with an official symbol.

GRSP-65-08 | UN R16: Proposal for Supplement 5 to the 07 series of amendments and for Supplement 1 to 08 series of amendments Proposal to introduce an optional (on the choice of the manufacturer) test procedure for frontal airbags in combination with rearward facing child restraint systems in the rear seat to demonstrate that no deactivation of the airbag is needed.

GRSP-65-09 | UN R16: Test methods for airbag deployment as alternative to deactivation Presentation in support of the proposal to allow an option for demonstration that an airbag deployment is safe in the presence of a rear-facing child restraint system in a rear seating position.

18. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/6 to clarify which modification of the vehicle type or the safety-belt or restraint system shall be notified to the Type Approval Authority. GRSP agreed to combine ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/6 with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/25 to extend the requirements for the safety-belt reminder installation not only to the driver’s seat (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/64, para. 15). GRSP finally agreed with both proposals, neither amended, and requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/6 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/25 as Supplement 12 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 16 and as Supplement 5 to the 07 series of amendments, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP/2018/25 | UN R16: Proposal for a corrigendum 1 to the 07 series of amendments Proposal to update the Communication Form since from the 07 series of amendments rear safety belt reminders have been added.

GRSP/2019/6 | UN R16: Proposal for Supplement 12 to the 06 series, for Supplement 5 to the 07 series and for Supplement 1 to the 08 series of amendments Proposal to clarify that modifications need only be notified to the Type Approval Authority when they have an influence on the performance (compliance with technical requirements of UN R16) and/or the documentation required by the UN Regulation.

19. The expert from Finland introduced GRSP-65-04 to raise concerns on head-restraint installation, testing and other interpretations issues. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-18-Rev.1, proposing an amendment to the definition of integrated, detachable and separate head-restraints. The expert from OICA noted that Amendment 1 to UN GTR No. 7 dealt with definitions of such head-restraints and suggested that the transposition of UN GTR No. 7, Phase 2 into the UN Regulation would solve the issue. [At] the same time, he urged that cross references between the UN Regulation and the UN GTR be consistent. So, he proposed to establish a Task Force (TF) to complete harmonization of the two Regulations. The expert from Germany endorsed the establishment of TF but proposed to keep GRSP-65-18-Rev.1 separated from other proposals of alignment to the UN GTR.

20. Finally, GRSP agreed with the proposal of the expert from OICA to establish a TF and to combine GRSP-65-18-Rev.1 once the proposal of amendments to align UN Regulation No. 17 with UN GTR No. 7 were finalized. In the meantime, GRSP agreed to defer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/7 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/9 to its December 2019 session. Moreover, the secretariat was requested to distribute GRSP-65-18-Rev.1, as a new series of amendments with an official symbol at its December 2019 session.

GRSP-65-04 | UN R17: Definition of a head restraint Request for interpretation of UN R17 for testing of head restraints in cases where the head restraint is not mandatory in the vehicle category in question.

GRSP-65-18/Rev.1 | UN R17: Proposal for Supplement 5 to the 08 series and Supplement 2 to the 09 series of amendments Proposal to clarify the definitions of integrated and detachable head restraints.

21. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-19, proposing a Corrigendum to the UN Regulation. GRSP adopted GRSP-65-19, as reproduced in Annex II to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it as Corrigendum 2 to Revision 5 and as Corrigendum 1 to the 09 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 17, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP-65-19 | UN R17: Proposal for corrigenda to Revision 5 and to the 09 series of amendments Proposal to correct the cross-reference to paragraph 5.11. in paragraph 6.4.3.5. The text should refer to paragraph 5.12.

22. The expert from Italy, Chair of IWG on Protective Helmets (IWG-PH), informed GRSP about the work progress of the group which had last convened on 13 May 2019 in Geneva. He explained that IWG had examined and, in principle, agreed on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/11. He underlined that the proposal would be further updated by IWG, according to the results of ongoing research and that the main goal of the proposal was rotational acceleration requirements. The expert from Germany stated that the proposal should be considered as a two-step approach. He clarified that rotational acceleration needed keener research. He added that the proposed, agreed amendment was a compromise stemming from the existing requirements of the UN Regulation. He stated that the draft amendment should be revised within the next two years to incorporate research results. The experts from France and the Netherlands agreed with the expert from Germany and clarified that research should be kept ongoing to incorporate better solutions in the future.

23. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2019 session on the basis of a revised version of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/11, submitted by IWG.

GRSP/2019/11 | UN R22: Proposal for the 06 series of amendments Proposal developed by the informal working group on protective helmets to introduce new categories of helmets and update provisions, including for sun visors. The new series would tentatively be phased in during 2022-2024.

24. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/2, proposing tolerances for the position of the loading device during the test. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/2, not amended. The secretariat was requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/2 as Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 29, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP/2019/2 | UN R29: Proposal for Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments Proposal to introduce a tolerance for the position of the loading device during the test. The loading device is required to be parallel to the x-y plane of the chassis. This proposal would add a z dimension to the x-y plane and set a tolerance such that the loading device may not deviate by more than 5° along the z-axis.

25. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-20 aimed at introducing clarifications on the direction of the vertical component of the chest acceleration, to provide consistency on the test performed by different Technical Services on Child Restraint Systems in accordance to paragraph 7.1.4.2.2. of the UN Regulation. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-65-28 which superseded GRSP-65-20. Finally, GRSP adopted GRSP-65-28 as reproduced in Annex III of the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit GRSP-65-28 as Supplement 17 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 44, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP-65-20 | UN R44: Request for guidance Request for guidance in order to resolve conflicting interpretations of paragraph 7.1.4.2.2. The paragraphs reads, " The vertical component of the acceleration from the abdomen towards the head shall not exceed 30 g except during periods whose sum does not exceed 3 ms.” However, an explanatory note for Technical Services on performing the tests under Annex 15 adds, "The wording of this paragraph [7.1.4.2.2.] refers to accelerations representing tensile loads in the spine of the dummy.” Differing interpretations have resulted in a CRS being approved but then rejected during Conformity of Production review by a separate Technical Service.

GRSP-65-28 | UN R44: Supplement 17 to the 04 series of amendments Proposal to clarify the chest Z axis measurement requirement.

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.

GRSP-65-29/Rev.1 | UN R80: Proposal for the 04 series of amendments Proposal to raise requirements for the attachments and fittings of the seat (as a prelude to the eventual deletion of static test methods in favor of dynamic testing).

GRSP/2018/10 | UN R80: Proposal for the 04 series of amendments Proposal to delete Appendix 5 and thereby end static testing as a compliance option. In addition, this proposal amends Appendix 1 by reducing the forward movement of the head of the manikin to 1.2 m in alignment with UN Regulation No. 14. Further, the proposal would limit the movement of the seat anchorages to 100 mm to ensure a minimum residual space for the passenger between the seats. Lastly, to ensure that seat fixations are reliably fastened after relocation, the proposal would require the necessary information to be marked directly on the seat and provided in the owner’s manual.

27. Referring to the presentation of the revised General Safety Regulation of the European Union (see agenda item 28 (a)), the expert from EC introduced GRSP-65-14 aimed at broadening the scope to cover, e.g. heavy vans and Sport Utility Vehicles, and proposing an evacuation of occupants through a front door in a crash instead of displacement systems for the front seats. He also mentioned that the dates proposed of entry into force of the draft supplement to the UN Regulation were needed to trigger those of the General Safety Regulation. The expert from Italy suggested a new series of amendments instead of a supplement. The expert from OICA argued that the proposal was demanding for manufacturers of N₁ vehicles and that further discussions on this proposal should start shortly. He added that the provisions for electric vehicles would be amended by the transposition of UN GTR No. 20 into UN Regulation No. 94 in near future so contracting parties should carefully agree on transitional provisions. Therefore, he proposed to establish a TF to cover all crash configurations. The expert from Germany endorsed the proposed TF as the most viable solution.

28. GRSP agreed with establishing a TF, led by EC and handed over GRSP-65-14 as a reference, awaiting an official document delivered by TF before the deadline for submission of official documents of 13 September 2019.

GRSP-65-14 | UN R94: Proposal for amendment Proposal to expand the scope of the Regulation to cover vehicles of category M₁ with a total permissible mass not exceeding 3500 kg and to vehicles of category N₁ with a total permissible mass not exceeding 2500 kg, to provide transitional provisions (May 2022/May 2024) and to make minor adaptations and clarifications to the existing requirements.

29. The expert from EC, introduced GRSP-65-13, on the same subjects introduced under agenda items 14 and 28 (a) in the framework of lateral impact. He also added that barrier structure would be updated at a later stage. GRSP agreed to hand over GRSP-65-13 to TF (see para. 28 above).

GRSP-65-13 | UN R95: Proposal for the 04 series of amendments Proposal to remove restrictions on the scope of the Regulation to M₁ and N₁ vehicles, to provide appropriate transitional provisions and to make minor adaptations and clarifications to the existing requirements.

30. The experts from the Netherlands and OICA introduced GRSP-65-33-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.297GRSP/2019/3) which proposed functional safety requirements that focused on other categories of vehicles other than M₁. The expert from the United States of America reminded GRSP that harmonization shall be kept when UN GTR No. 20 was transposed into UN Regulation No. 100. GRSP agreed to distribute GRSP-65-33-Rev.1 with an official symbol to the December 2019 session of GRSP, awaiting a proposal of amendments that align UN Regulation No. 100 to UN GTR No. 20.

31. The expert from the Russian Federation introduced GRSP-65-07, proposing further improvement of functional safety requirements. The expert from Japan suggested that this extensive revision of safety requirements should be handed over to the IWG on UN GTR No. 20, Phase 2 to be compared or aligned with their ongoing work on the UN GTR. GRSP agreed with the proposal of Japan and to refer it to IWG UN GTR No. 20, Phase 2 and, to resume discussion at its December 2019 session.

GRSP-65-07 | UN R100: Proposal for the 03 series of amendments Proposal to update the text of UN R100, particularly in line with GTR 20 on electric vehicle safety.

GRSP-65-33/Rev.1 | UN R100: Proposal for amendments Proposal to clarify that the warning signal to alert a driver of an M₂ or M₃ vehicle with more than 22 seating positions if the vehicle is in active-driving-possible mode when the driver leaves the seat shall be activated upon leaving the seat, not the vehicle.

GRSP/2019/3 | UN R100: Proposal for Supplement 5 to the 02 series of amendments Proposal to explicitly state that functional safety requirements apply to categories of vehicles beyond M₁ through the addition of the following text marked in <b>bold</b>: <p>When leaving the vehicle, the driver shall be informed by a signal (e.g. optical or audible signal) if the vehicleis still in the active driving possible mode. <b>Moreover, in case of vehicles of category M₂ and M₃, such signal shall already be given when leaving the driver seat.</b></p>

32. No new proposal was provided under this agenda item (see para. 46 below).

33. Referring to agenda item 3(b) (see paragraph 8 above), the expert from Germany suggested postponing discussion on GRSP-65-21 to allow careful consideration of the new provisions of the General Safety Regulation of the European Union, which had proposed an extension of the head impact zone. GRSP agreed to defer discussion of GRSP-65-21 to its December 2019 session and to distribute it with an official symbol.

GRSP-65-21 | UN R127: Proposal of Supplements to the 00, 01 and 02 series of amendments Proposal to ensure pedestrian protection across the vehicle height variations that may be produced by an active suspension system.

34. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/12 and its amendment, GRSP-65-27-Rev.1. He explained that the proposal introduced the booster cushion without a backrest, and concluded the development of UN Regulation No. 129. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/12, as amended by Annex V to the session report, and requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP-65-27/Rev.1 | UN R129: Amendments to document GRSP/2019/12 Final refinements developed during the May 2019 GRSP session to the proposal to include booster cushion categories within the scope of the 03 series of amendments to UN R129 (Supplement 3 to the 03 series).

GRSP/2019/12 | UN R129: Proposal for Supplement 3 to the 03 series of amendments Proposal to include booster cushion categories within the scope of the 03 series of amendments to UN R129.

35. The expert from GlobalNCAP also introduced GRSP-65-06 proposing limit values for the chest vertical acceleration of Q-dummies during dynamic testing of Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS). The expert from CLEPA expressed general concern and raised a time reservation. The expert from United Kingdom stated that a permanent solution was needed. He added that this was not the case to implement the chest vertical acceleration but rather to develop the upper neck tension force on the basis of available data. The expert from EC stated that discussion should be deferred until data was available. The expert from CLEPA expressed similar view and suggested collecting support data before the December 2019 session of GRSP. The Chair of GRSP suggested to create a TF led by a representative of a contracting party to coordinate efforts. GRSP agreed, in principle, with the proposal of Chair and agreed to resume discussion at its December 2019 session on the basis of the outcome of above-mentioned TF research. At the same time GRSP requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-65-06 with an official symbol at its next session.

GRSP-65-06 | UN R129: Proposal for amendment Proposal to introduce chest vertical acceleration (Az) criteria until such time as upper neck tension Force (Fz) and upper neck flexion moment (My) criteria can be established.

36. No new information was provided under this agenda item.

37. The expert from France introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/13, clarifying that rear doors on the impacted side which were not directly struck by the pole, might be subjected to heavy loads. He proposed a similar amendment that had already been adopted for UN Regulation No. 95. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-65-36, agreed with the expert from France to delete the applied force on the front door. Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/13, as amended by Annex VI to the session report and requested the secretariat to resume discussion at its May 2019 session and to submit it as Supplement 2 to the original series and to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 135, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP-65-36 | UN R135: Proposal for Supplement 2 to the 00 and 01 series of amendments 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.

GRSP/2019/13 | UN R135: Proposal for Supplement 2 to the 00 and 01 series of amendments 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.

38. No new information was provided under this agenda item.

39. The expert from EC, introduced GRSP-65-12, covering the same subjects introduced under agenda items 14, 15 and 28 (a) on frontal impact with focus on restraint systems. GRSP agreed to hand over GRSP-65-12 to the TF (see paras. 28 and 29 above).

GRSP-65-12 | UN R137: Proposal for amendment Proposal to expand the scope of the Regulation (to vehicles of category M₁ with a maximum permissible mass not exceeding 3500 kg and to vehicles of category N₁, to provide appropriate transitional provisions and to make minor adaptations and clarifications to the existing requirements.

40. The expert from CI reminded GRSP also to include the L₇ category of vehicles as proposed at the previous sessions. He announced an official proposal to cover this category of vehicles by the December 2019 session of GRSP. The expert from IMMA argued that the L₇ category of vehicles was too broad and suggested that a clear definition be established in the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3). He also questioned the huge growth of L₇ categories as announced by GlobalNCAP. The expert of GlobalNCAP insisted that his statement was based on data published by the UK Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) which indicated L₇ quadricycles as part of the future of mobility. The expert of EC, informed GRSP that provisions of UN Regulation No. 137 on L₇ category of vehicles would not be mandatory in the European Union but would request voluntary testing. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2019 session.

41. The expert from GlobalNCAP introduced a presentation (GRSP-65-34) that highlighted cases of ISOFIX anchorage ruptures of forward-facing CRS. He then proposed to review the UN Regulation that allowed deformations and load configuration tests. The expert from CLEPA stated that these failures should be further investigated, and requested more time and data. The expert from GlobalNCAP clarified that he was only highlighting the issue and was not a position to quantify the number of failures. The expert from OICA requested that all available findings should be analysed to identify the causes. Finally, GRSP agreed to create a group of interested experts to coordinate the research, and to resume discussion on this agenda item awaiting further evidence at its December 2019 session.

GRSP-65-34 | ISOFIX anchorage failures

42. Discussion was concluded under agenda items 2, 3(a) and 5 (see paras. 4, 7 and 13).

GRSP-65-01 | MR1: Drawings and specifications of Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (FlexPLI)

GRSP-65-02 | MR1: User Manual of Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor

43. The expert from Spain introduced GRSP-65-11, showing that there were no specific requirements for children travelling in buses and coaches, unlike children in passenger cars. She added that specifications in UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129 were only to secure children on M₁ category of vehicles. Therefore, she stated that it was time to establish requirements for securing children in M₂ and M₃ vehicles, based on real accidents in these type of vehicles with the priority of avoiding ejection of occupants. She therefore proposed to develop a new UN Regulation for securing children in buses and coaches and to establish an IWG to develop the work. The expert from Sweden introduced GRSP-65-26, showing that generally, buses in his country were not designed for the transportation of children. The expert from the United States of America provided information through links to how children were transported in his country:
School Bus Safety (NHTSA)
School Bus Facts: Safety Features
Child Safety Restraint Systems Basics video
Introduction to Child Safety Restraint Systems on School Buses video

44. The expert from EC underlined how the rate of wearing safety-belts was dramatically low in buses. He suggested that wearing should be combined with safety-belt reminders and that a study on cost-benefit analysis on their presence on buses would be considered in the work of the IWG proposed by the expert from Spain. The experts from Germany, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Sweden, CLEPA and GlobalNCAP supported the proposal to establish an IWG and to provide a contribution.

45. Finally, GRSP agreed to seek consent of WP.29 at its June 2019 session to establish an IWG on “Securing of Children in buses and coaches” and to request the secretariat to inform the Working Party on General Safety (GRSG) at its October 2019 session.

GRSP-65-11 | Securing of children in buses and coaches

GRSP-65-26 | Securing of children in buses and coaches

46. The secretary of the Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 on priority topics for automated and connected vehicles. The expert from the United States of America stressed that even though automated vehicles were different from conventional vehicles for many aspects, crashworthiness remained relevant. He clarified that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2 did not yet include the work tasks of GRSP and was mainly a list of tasks for GRVA. He added that this document should be considered a living document and that crashworthiness should be included. He mentioned a few examples of passenger compartment configurations (e.g. passengers lying down or facing the side, lack of a steering wheel), and he added that these different dynamics would involve passengers in a crash. The expert from Germany endorsed the statement of the expert from the United States of America. He added that new tools and computer simulations should be validated. He urged to start a list of detailed subjects as soon as possible that would be examined during the December 2019 session of GRSP. The expert from the United States of America clarified that the vehicle automation was managed by WP.29 and the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) and not by GRVA. He suggested that the expert from Germany raise this issue at WP.29 and AC.3. He reiterated his statement (as per ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/2) that currently, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2019/34 mainly referred to GRVA tasks and that other topics related to crashworthiness should be addressed by GRSP. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2019 session, awaiting feedback from WP.29 and AC.3 at their June 2019 sessions.

WP.29/2019/2 | Priority topics for automated and connected vehicles

WP.29/2019/34 | Framework document on automated/autonomous vehicles

47. The expert from the EC introduced GRSP-65-16, explaining the content of the amended General Safety Regulation of the European Union. The new requirements aimed to reduce or to eliminate accidents and injuries in road transport. Moreover, he added that in addition to the safety measures to protect vehicle occupants, the implementation of specific measures to prevent fatalities and injuries of vulnerable users, such as cyclists and pedestrians. As a follow-up, he introduced a new proposal of amendments to UN Regulations (see agenda items Nos. 14, 15 and 23).

GRSP-65-16 | Type-approval requirements for motor vehicles as regards general safety Provisional edition of the adopted text for new vehicle safety requirements in the European Union.

48. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRSP-65-22, explaining that his Government had been trying to reinforce safety regulations on school bus that would secure the traffic safety of children. He added that several regulations have been introduced into KMVSS, such as mandatory installation of stop sign, rear view camera and alarm system when driving in reverse, speed limiter and assistant stairs for getting on/off. He mentioned that last year the Government of Korea had improved the road traffic act so that operation of device in school bus would be mandated to check if all children had gotten off. He explained that the Korean vehicle safety regulations had also been amended to specify requirements on this device and that relevant requirements were added that apply to all kinds of school buses, such as an unloading child confirmation alert system. The additions referred to the requirements of Californian law in the United States of America.

GRSP-65-22 | Korea: Status of sleeping child check system regulation Report on Korea regulation obligating a check of school buses to ensure that all children have left the vehicle. The check involves installation of a device at the back of the bus that will sound an alarm unless engaged within three minutes after engine shutoff.

49. The expert from Italy, introduced GRSP-64-26, explaining that Italian national law supported the obligatory use Unattended Child Reminder Systems by fiscal incentives and information campaigns.

50. Finally, GRSP agreed to establish a new agenda item on the subject of “Children left in cars” and resume discussion at its December 2019 session.

GRSP-64-26 | New Legislation for Systems to Prevent Small Children from Being Left Unattended in Vehicles Presentation on Italy's National Law No.117 of 1 October 2018 which makes the use systems to prevent children from being left unattended in vehicles mandatory from 1 July 2019 for M₁, N₁, N₂, and N₃ vehicles.

51. The expert from Korea introduced GRSP-65-23, explaining the Korean safety regulations on micromobility. He explained that the safety regulations were based on requirements of L₇ category vehicle from regulation 168/2013 of the European Union and opinions from manufacturers. He added that this kind of vehicle should be considered as a new category of vehicles and not as a motorcycle category. He further explained four major categories in passive safety for this vehicle: (a) door latch and hinge, (b) strength of safety-belt anchorages, (c) seat anchorages and (d) test of electrical safety of high-voltage system through crash tests. He concluded that a test plan would cover in the future all the main collision configurations with the aim of introducing proper injury criterion for micromobility in KNCAP.

GRSP-65-23 | Korea: Safety Regulations on Micro Mobility related to passive safety Information on the regulation of category L7 micro four-wheeled vehicles.

52. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-65-35, providing information on impact attenuating devices to protect motorcyclists from guardrail posts. The expert from the Republic of Korea expressed a strong interest to develop more effective guard rails for all types of vehicles. The Chair of GRSP underlined that vehicle safety and road barriers shall be triggered to better improve road safety. The expert from Russian Federation fully supported the importance of safe guardrail design and suggested that WP.29 and the Global Forum for Road Traffic Safety (WP.1) should cooperate on this subject. He suggested that a UN Regulation should be developed on this subject. The expert from IMMA underlined the importance of motorcycle friendly infrastructure as part of a safe system design. He supported the proposal to start an exchange on this issue between the relevant fora. The expert from the United States of America informed GRSP that the Federal Highway Administration provides solutions and initiatives to promote safe guardrails: US Federal Highway Administration

Moreover, he also informed GRSP that the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials had developed a “Roadside Design Guide” and a “Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware”, available at:transportation.org.

53. Finally, GRSP agreed to report to the June 2019 session of WP.29 on this issue and receive guidance.

GRSP-65-35 | Impact Attenuating Devices to Protect Motorcyclists from Guardrail Posts

54. GRSP noted that a number of new activities, particularly under the 1998 Agreement, should be revised by his experts to keep acronyms consistent in present and future GRSP work. Furthermore, the expert from EC mentioned that currently in UN Regulations, terminology (likely with the same meaning) concerning head injury needed clarifications: Head Acceptance Criterion (HAC) (UN Regulation No. 80), Head Injury Criterion (HIC) and Head Performance Criteria (HPC). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2019 session.

55. The expert from Japan, on behalf of the IWVTA Ambassador of GRSP, informed GRSP about IWVTA IWG progress and introduced GRSP-65-10 on the six UN Regulations that GRSP had been asked to prioritise as candidates to be inserted in Annex IV of UN Regulation No. 0: UN Regulations Nos. 44, 129, 134, 135, 137, and 145. The expert from CLEPA stated that UN Regulation No. 129 should also be on the priority list to protect children, even though some countries were still considering UN Regulation No. 44. GRSP agreed in principle with the priority list proposed by GRSP-65-10 and agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2019 session.

GRSP-65-10 | IWVTA: Candidate items for GRSP technical regulations applicable under Phase 2 (2018-2022)

56. The Secretary reported on the highlights of the 177th session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1145).

57. The representative of Spain, on behalf of the Chair of the three-dimensional H-point machine IWG, by reiterating his statement (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/64, para. 54), that since the IWG had not progressed as expected, the group would be dissolved and its activity could eventually be handed over to a new group on developing M.R.1 (see para. 13).

58. No new information was provided under this agenda item.

59. The expert from France introduced GRSP-65-03 to clarify rounded edge requirements for parts of an opening roof. GRSP adopted the proposal as reproduced in Annex VII to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it as Supplement 4 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 21, for consideration and vote at the November 2019 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

GRSP-65-03 | UN R21: Proposal for supplement 04 to the 01 series of amendments Proposal to clarify rounded-edge requirements for roof-opening roof devices.

60. GRSP noted that Mr. N. Nguyen (United States of America), Chair of GRSP, would no longer attend the sessions. GRSP listened to his farewell letter, read by the secretariat on his behalf (GRSP-65-15), acknowledged his commitment as Chair of GRSP and continued contributions during all the years of his participation in the sessions. GRSP wished Mr. Nguyen all the best in his future activities and recognized his commitment with a long applause.

GRSP-65-15 | GRSP chair farewell letter