3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/11) proposed for the sixty-eighth session, the running order (GRSP-68-01-Rev.1), virtual meeting guidelines (GRSP-68-17) and the annotations (GRSP-68-04). GRSP informal working groups are listed in Annex IV of the session report.

Proposal to introduce provisions for a Digital User Guide.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

33. The expert from Spain, on behalf of IWG on safer transport of children in buses and coaches informed GRSP about the progress of the group (GRSP-68-03). She explained that the group was examining different configurations of testing (e.g.: seating position, Q dummies with or without CRS, types of CRS) considering bus requirements (UN Regulations No. 80 and 107). She explained that the group was aiming at having a proposal by the December 2022 session of GRSP. The expert from the Russian Federation would like to propose to use the impulse mentioned in UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129 for the frontal impact for vehicles of category M2 since these vehicles have lower mass compared to M3. For the M3 category of vehicles, the Russian Federation proposed to use the impulse used in UN regulation No. 80. The EC representative explained that a study was currently underway in the European Union focusing on appropriate crash test pulses through all vehicle categories and direction of impacts. He announced that he likely would present the outcome of the study at the May 2021 session of GRSP. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2021 session.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/11) proposed for the sixty-eighth session, the running order (GRSP-68-01-Rev.1), virtual meeting guidelines (GRSP-68-17) and the annotations (GRSP-68-04). GRSP informal working groups are listed in Annex IV of the session report.

Proposal for amendments to the injury assessment criteria for frontal and rear impact to specify limit values for tension force and flexion moment measured in the upper neck of the Q0, Q1 and Q1.5 dummies.

23. GRSP resumed discussion on limit values on the chest vertical acceleration of Q-dummies during the dynamic testing of ECRS, on the basis of GRSP-68-05 tabled by the expert from CLEPA. The expert from CLEPA introduced the proposal through a presentation (GRSP-68-10) showing GRSP that collection and analysis of data monitoring was progressing. He further encouraged Contracting Parties to the 1958 Agreement to provide data to support the analysis and the proposed limits. The expert from Spain introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-26), showing the test results conducted by her technical service on the effects of dummy type Q1.5 chin-thorax contact in measuring upper neck forces. GRSP noted that further data collection was needed and agreed to resume discussion on this topic at its May 2021 session.

29. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRSP-68-06, concerning the Korean New Car Assessment Programme results on Micro-Mobility/Quadricycles (L7 Category vehicles). He suggested that it would be difficult to introduce new impact test requirements for L7 vehicles to ensure crash safety at same level equivalent of small passenger vehicles at this stage. He confirmed that Micro-Mobility can comply with other requirements such as door latch, seat strength, safety-belt anchorages and electrical safety after impact. He concluded that GRSP should consider developing requirements for major components of Micro-Mobility as a first step and wished to start cooperation with Japan and with IMMA on overall Micro-Mobility safety. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2021 session.

32. The experts from Sweden gave two presentations (GRSP-68-08-Rev.1; GRSP-68-07), showing the results of a study whether female occupants have the same protection level as male occupants. Swedish experts also explained the issue of the lack of average female crash test dummies. She concluded that the study had shown that: (a) crash related injury risks are higher in females (especially whiplash), (b) females are poorly represented by existing crash test dummies, (c) information about body size (stature and mass) should be included in traffic injury databases and (d) injury data need to be reported for females and males separately. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its May 2021 session.

32. The experts from Sweden gave two presentations (GRSP-68-08-Rev.1; GRSP-68-07), showing the results of a study whether female occupants have the same protection level as male occupants. Swedish experts also explained the issue of the lack of average female crash test dummies. She concluded that the study had shown that: (a) crash related injury risks are higher in females (especially whiplash), (b) females are poorly represented by existing crash test dummies, (c) information about body size (stature and mass) should be included in traffic injury databases and (d) injury data need to be reported for females and males separately. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its May 2021 session.

Proposal to avoid trade barriers for aftermarket accessories being used by riders until specific requirements for the homologation of accessories independent from the helmets are defined.

13. The expert from Israel, explaining the point of view of the “motorcycle helmet communication”, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19 through a presentation (GRSP-68-15), proposing a temporary solution to the 06 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. He also proposed at the same time a revised definition of accessories allowed to be fitted in type approved helmets. He clarified that this temporary solution should be followed by a new proposal delivered by the IWG and asked that IWG consider some examples for communication accessories requirements as well as for helmets in his presentation. The expert from Sweden introduced GRSP-68-09, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19. She expressed concerns that the issue was affecting the validity of type approval originally granted and she questioned who would bear this responsibility. The expert from the Netherland argued that the Israeli proposal was not acceptable because it was opened to any kind of accessories to be implemented on the helmet. The expert from Republic of Korea supported the proposal tabled by the expert from Israel. The expert from Germany stated that the proposal was a good basis to start discussion, but it was premature to draw specific conclusions. He explained that current requirements of the UN Regulation were aimed at limiting the use of aftermarket products, whose liability was not in the purview of helmet manufacturers. He suggested that GRSP experts engage in their discussions stakeholders from the helmet aftermarket industry (e.g: camera industry). The expert from Spain clarified that accessories should be intended to integrate the securing functionalities of the helmet (e.g.: tear-off films of inner visors, electronic devices and their support. The expert from Italy clarified that the IWG activities were suspended due to the lack of research results that would allow Phase 2 of the UN Regulation to begin and that this issue was not included in the scope of the IWG. Therefore, GRSP agreed to establish an ad hoc group of interested experts to discuss and devise at the earliest convenience a solution on this issue. The experts from France, Republic of Korea, The Netherlands, Israel, Italy, Germany, Spain and from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) stated their availability to participate to the activities of the ad-hoc group. GRSP, also agreed to resume discussion on this agenda item on the basis of the outcome of the ad-hoc group.

23. GRSP resumed discussion on limit values on the chest vertical acceleration of Q-dummies during the dynamic testing of ECRS, on the basis of GRSP-68-05 tabled by the expert from CLEPA. The expert from CLEPA introduced the proposal through a presentation (GRSP-68-10) showing GRSP that collection and analysis of data monitoring was progressing. He further encouraged Contracting Parties to the 1958 Agreement to provide data to support the analysis and the proposed limits. The expert from Spain introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-26), showing the test results conducted by her technical service on the effects of dummy type Q1.5 chin-thorax contact in measuring upper neck forces. GRSP noted that further data collection was needed and agreed to resume discussion on this topic at its May 2021 session.

Proposal to clarify that specific vehicle belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) may be fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Request for a GRSP to establish a task force to develop Q dummy specifications under the resolution on test devices.

31. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-68-12, advocating the development of an addendum to the M.R.1 to include Q dummies, used in UN Regulation No. 129. He also suggested the establishment of a task force to develop the work M.R.1. GRSP agreed with the suggestion of the expert from Germany. GRSP noted that the task force would start early 2021 led by the expert from Germany and by the expert from CLEPA. Moreover, the expert from CLEPA clarified that the approach to develop the work would follow the proposal of Addendum to the M.R.1, developed by the expert from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Proposal to clarify that the minimum prescribed dimensions of a CRS do not restrict the maximum dimensions of CRS.

24. The expert from Spain introduced GRSP-68-13, aimed at not considering the maximum dimension for specific vehicle built-in ECRS. The expert from CLEPA raised a time reservation on the proposal. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this topic at its May 2021 session on the basis of a revised proposal by the experts from Spain, CLEPA and OICA.

5. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRSP-68-14, providing the progress report of the Informal Working Group on Deployable Pedestrian Protection Systems (IWG-DPPS). He explained that due to the limitation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the IWG had still open issues and the finalization of a proposal would be expected by May 2022 session of GRSP.

Presentation concerning the approval of helmet accessories sold separately.

13. The expert from Israel, explaining the point of view of the “motorcycle helmet communication”, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19 through a presentation (GRSP-68-15), proposing a temporary solution to the 06 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. He also proposed at the same time a revised definition of accessories allowed to be fitted in type approved helmets. He clarified that this temporary solution should be followed by a new proposal delivered by the IWG and asked that IWG consider some examples for communication accessories requirements as well as for helmets in his presentation. The expert from Sweden introduced GRSP-68-09, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19. She expressed concerns that the issue was affecting the validity of type approval originally granted and she questioned who would bear this responsibility. The expert from the Netherland argued that the Israeli proposal was not acceptable because it was opened to any kind of accessories to be implemented on the helmet. The expert from Republic of Korea supported the proposal tabled by the expert from Israel. The expert from Germany stated that the proposal was a good basis to start discussion, but it was premature to draw specific conclusions. He explained that current requirements of the UN Regulation were aimed at limiting the use of aftermarket products, whose liability was not in the purview of helmet manufacturers. He suggested that GRSP experts engage in their discussions stakeholders from the helmet aftermarket industry (e.g: camera industry). The expert from Spain clarified that accessories should be intended to integrate the securing functionalities of the helmet (e.g.: tear-off films of inner visors, electronic devices and their support. The expert from Italy clarified that the IWG activities were suspended due to the lack of research results that would allow Phase 2 of the UN Regulation to begin and that this issue was not included in the scope of the IWG. Therefore, GRSP agreed to establish an ad hoc group of interested experts to discuss and devise at the earliest convenience a solution on this issue. The experts from France, Republic of Korea, The Netherlands, Israel, Italy, Germany, Spain and from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) stated their availability to participate to the activities of the ad-hoc group. GRSP, also agreed to resume discussion on this agenda item on the basis of the outcome of the ad-hoc group.

Proposal to clarify the requirements for the location of ISOFIX systems in case the vehicle type is equipped with rearward facing seats.

47. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRSP-68-16 to clarify the issue of ISOFIX anchorages on seats that are permanently rearward facing. The expert from OICA asked more discussion to develop the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject, at its May 2021 session, on the basis of the outcome of a group of interested parties involving the experts from Germany, Sweden, CLEPA and OICA.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/11) proposed for the sixty-eighth session, the running order (GRSP-68-01-Rev.1), virtual meeting guidelines (GRSP-68-17) and the annotations (GRSP-68-04). GRSP informal working groups are listed in Annex IV of the session report.

Proposal to amend the definitions and specifications as well as the Annex 1, Part 1. It is a revised counterproposal to document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/18 submitted by Germany and the OICA informal document GRSP-67-07.

39. The expert from Japan introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-19) on various issue considered by his country to promote transportation policy in addition to traffic safety. He underlined that the need and preferences from users on small-sized mobility. GRSP agreed on the same conclusion reached under agenda item 15 (see para. 29 above).

Proposal to delete the mass restriction (“a maximum permissible mass not exceeding 3,500 kg”) for M₁ vehicles from the scope.

19. GRSP considered GRSP-68-20, tabled by the expert from Japan to amend the current scope of the UN Regulation. He explained that the proposal was an additional amendment to an amendment adopted by GRSP and tabled by the expert from EC on behalf of the task force to align the UN Regulation to the revised General Safety Regulation of the European Union (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/66 para. 31). He explained that the mass limit for passenger vehicles (M1 categories) was not justified and inconsistent with the current definition of M1 vehicles (which currently has no mass limitation). The expert from EC agreed with the expert from Japan, explaining that was not the original intention to impose this mass limit. The expert from France raised a study reservation to the proposal. The expert from OICA expressed concerns to the proposal since M1 vehicles might have a high mass because derived from N2, or M2. He added that such vehicles (e.g.: motor caravans) were currently exempted as a general rule due to the higher seating reference point (R-point). He added that the proposal would include these types of vehicles and asked clarifications if the proposal would be considered a new series of amendments or a supplement. The expert from Germany agreed that full consideration should be given of motor caravans and raised a study reservation. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2021 session of GRSP and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-68-20 with an official symbol.

41. The Secretary reported on the highlights (GRSP-68-21) of the 182nd session of WP.29 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1155).

48. The expert from IMMA introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-22) about the need of dedicated requirements for swappable Rechargeable Electric Energy Storage Systems (REESS). He clarified that swappable REESS might be mounted in different vehicle models, having different mounting positions. He added that to ensure safe operation of a swappable REESS in different orientations and avoid multiple testing for each vehicle design he would propose to introduce dedicated stricter testing conditions into the UN Regulation. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject on the basis of a possible proposal from IMMA.

30. The expert from United Kingdom introduced GRSP-68-23, representing the development of Mutual Resolution No. 1, Addendum 1 and concerning the Biomechanical Rear Impact Dummy-II (BIORID-II) UN dummy as part of test tools in UN GTR No. 7 and UN Regulation No. 17 (10 series of amendments) for use in rear impact assessment. He recommended that consideration on this proposal would be made together with GRSP-54-05 (Draft addendum 1 to M.R.1), introduced at the fifty-fourth session of GRSP (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/54, para. 4). He recommended GRSP to provide comments on GRSP-68-23 and GRSP-54-05 before 31 January 2021 for consideration in the final document to be submitted to the May 2021 session of GRSP. It was noted that copyrights were expected to be removed from drawings when the proposal would be finally adopted by WP.29 and AC.3. GRSP agreed with the recommendation of the expert from the United Kingdom and agreed to resume discussion at its May 2021 session.

14. Referring to the request made by the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work of WP.29 (WP.29/AC.2) (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1155, para. 30), GRSP resumed discussion on the belt-guide device type approved as Child Restraint System (CRS) according to UN Regulation No. 44 by the Type Approval Authority of Poland. The expert from the Netherlands introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-24), showing additional test results performed on the belt-guide. He added that the tests confirmed the conclusion laid out in document GRSP-67-05, introduced at the July 2020 session of GRSP and in addition showed that the device does not conform to the dynamic test requirements when tested with the P10 dummy. Therefore, he stated:

1. The belt-guide was not in the scope of the UN Regulation and could not be type approved; as such, the type approval should be withdrawn.
2. The device did not meet several requirements, both technical and with regard to instructions for users and therefore approval should not have been granted.
3. The car design determines the level of protection for a great deal of cases and may result in submarining and/or in injuries in the abdominal area, since the device sold as a child restraint does not offer adequate protection or guidance in this respect.
4. The device could offer better protection than the adult belt itself but lacks the additional protection of a CRS.
5. Since approval of this device was issued erroneously, it shall be withdrawn, and Market Surveillance Authorities should be informed.

1. During last year there had been numerous different unsubstantiated allegations against the belt guide, e.g.: submarining (GRSP-50-09 and GRSP-50-25), vertical component (GRSP-65-20), risk of abdominal injury. However, he added these allegations were not demonstrated.
2. Type-approval tests according to the UN Regulation requirements were conducted by Polish technical service – PIMOT in 2017, which conducted more than 160 tests by using dummies required by the UN regulation (P3, P6 and P10 type), showing satisfactory results.

He concluded that in December 2019, after comparative tests with other CRS showed problems with other type-approved CRS, the discussion in GRSP should be broadened to focus on other CRS as well. The expert from Spain, stated that the focus should be on the interpretation that a belt-guide and similar devices cannot be separately approved as a CRS.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

23. GRSP resumed discussion on limit values on the chest vertical acceleration of Q-dummies during the dynamic testing of ECRS, on the basis of GRSP-68-05 tabled by the expert from CLEPA. The expert from CLEPA introduced the proposal through a presentation (GRSP-68-10) showing GRSP that collection and analysis of data monitoring was progressing. He further encouraged Contracting Parties to the 1958 Agreement to provide data to support the analysis and the proposed limits. The expert from Spain introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-26), showing the test results conducted by her technical service on the effects of dummy type Q1.5 chin-thorax contact in measuring upper neck forces. GRSP noted that further data collection was needed and agreed to resume discussion on this topic at its May 2021 session.

50. GRSP agreed on the main decision list GRSP-68-29-Rev.2, as reproduced in Annex V to this report, taken during the session for approval by silence procedure of 72 hours by the participating delegations to the session as part of the special procedures established for the COVID-19 pandemic period (ECE/EX/2020/L.12).

11. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/12 to clarify the test procedure for the height of head restraints in the case of vehicles having a low roof construction. He added that the current provisions were design restrictive and that the proposal was addressing only integrated head restraints. However, the expert from Japan expressed the following concerns through a presentation (GRSP-68-31-Rev.1) to the proposal:

1. The range of exempted vehicles addressed exemption applicable to bucket-type seats. However, considerations from the expert from Japan shows that this exemption could be applied to any integrated headrest seat. Therefore, not only sport-vehicles but also vehicles with high hoods and low roofs (e.g., low roof sedans, high and/or long hood vehicles and SUVs) would be exempted at manufacturer’s choice.
2. Safety risk to tall occupants. Specifically, in the case of an occupant taller than the average, the safety level of the occupant in the event of a collision would likely decrease.

43. GRSP was informed by the proposal of Road Map on Intelligent Transport Systems that would be presented to the ITC February 2021 session (GRSP-68-32). The secretary of GRVA requested comments of GRSP experts to be sent to his attention by Monday 14 December 2020.

14. Referring to the request made by the Administrative Committee for the Coordination of Work of WP.29 (WP.29/AC.2) (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1155, para. 30), GRSP resumed discussion on the belt-guide device type approved as Child Restraint System (CRS) according to UN Regulation No. 44 by the Type Approval Authority of Poland. The expert from the Netherlands introduced a presentation (GRSP-68-24), showing additional test results performed on the belt-guide. He added that the tests confirmed the conclusion laid out in document GRSP-67-05, introduced at the July 2020 session of GRSP and in addition showed that the device does not conform to the dynamic test requirements when tested with the P10 dummy. Therefore, he stated:

1. The belt-guide was not in the scope of the UN Regulation and could not be type approved; as such, the type approval should be withdrawn.
2. The device did not meet several requirements, both technical and with regard to instructions for users and therefore approval should not have been granted.
3. The car design determines the level of protection for a great deal of cases and may result in submarining and/or in injuries in the abdominal area, since the device sold as a child restraint does not offer adequate protection or guidance in this respect.
4. The device could offer better protection than the adult belt itself but lacks the additional protection of a CRS.
5. Since approval of this device was issued erroneously, it shall be withdrawn, and Market Surveillance Authorities should be informed.

1. During last year there had been numerous different unsubstantiated allegations against the belt guide, e.g.: submarining (GRSP-50-09 and GRSP-50-25), vertical component (GRSP-65-20), risk of abdominal injury. However, he added these allegations were not demonstrated.
2. Type-approval tests according to the UN Regulation requirements were conducted by Polish technical service – PIMOT in 2017, which conducted more than 160 tests by using dummies required by the UN regulation (P3, P6 and P10 type), showing satisfactory results.

He concluded that in December 2019, after comparative tests with other CRS showed problems with other type-approved CRS, the discussion in GRSP should be broadened to focus on other CRS as well. The expert from Spain, stated that the focus should be on the interpretation that a belt-guide and similar devices cannot be separately approved as a CRS.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/11) proposed for the sixty-eighth session, the running order (GRSP-68-01-Rev.1), virtual meeting guidelines (GRSP-68-17) and the annotations (GRSP-68-04). GRSP informal working groups are listed in Annex IV of the session report.

Proposal to clarify the test procedure for the height of head restraints in the case of vehicles having a low roof construction.

11. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/12 to clarify the test procedure for the height of head restraints in the case of vehicles having a low roof construction. He added that the current provisions were design restrictive and that the proposal was addressing only integrated head restraints. However, the expert from Japan expressed the following concerns through a presentation (GRSP-68-31-Rev.1) to the proposal:

1. The range of exempted vehicles addressed exemption applicable to bucket-type seats. However, considerations from the expert from Japan shows that this exemption could be applied to any integrated headrest seat. Therefore, not only sport-vehicles but also vehicles with high hoods and low roofs (e.g., low roof sedans, high and/or long hood vehicles and SUVs) would be exempted at manufacturer’s choice.
2. Safety risk to tall occupants. Specifically, in the case of an occupant taller than the average, the safety level of the occupant in the event of a collision would likely decrease.

Proposal to clarify transitional provisions of the 05 series of amendments to UN R95 (document WP.29/2020/108).

18. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/13, to clarify transitional provisions on possibilities given by earlier series of amendments were maintained valid. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/13, not amended and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal as the draft Supplement 1 to the 05 series of amendment to UN Regulation No. 95, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Proposal to clarify transitional provisions of the 02 series of amendments to UN R137 (document WP.29/2020/110).

28. GRSP noted a similar proposal introduced under agenda item 10 (see para. 18 above) resumed discussion on a proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/14) GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/14, not amended and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal as the draft Supplement 1 to the 02 series of amendment to UN Regulation No. 137, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Proposal to introduce provisions for a Digital User Guide.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Proposal to clarify provisions including the Test Report Template and Dimension Assessment Method.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Proposal to align UN R134 with UN R67 and UN R110 with regard to labelling requirements and to assist emergency services in determining appropriate responses in case of fire.

25. GRSP resumed consideration on a proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/17) tabled by the expert from the Netherlands aimed at identifying hydrogen-fuelled buses which would be consistent with already existing regulated identification for Liquid Petroleum Gas, Compressed Natural Gas and Liquid Natural Gas fuelled buses. GRSP adopted the proposal not amended and requested the secretariat to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/17 as draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 134, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

26. The expert from OICA also noted that further discussions on the UN Regulation would be needed to solve a number of inconsistencies concerning heavy-duty vehicles (trucks and buses). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2021 session on the basis of a proposal tabled by the expert from OICA.

Proposal to clarify that specific vehicle belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) may be fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments. This proposal also amends the existing support leg volume to improve the compatibility between the support leg volume and the Child Restraint Fixtures used for accessing the external dimensions of an ECRS.

21. The expert from CLEPA introduced:

1. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15 and GRSP-68-02-Rev.2 amending it, to provide to consumers information on a digital form.
2. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and GRSP-68-25-Rev.1 amending it, concerning the test report template and dimension assessment method.
3. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18 and GRSP-68-11-Rev.2 amending it, to clarify that specific vehicle-belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) maybe fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.

22. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/18, all as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested to submit them, as whole package, as draft Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129, for consideration and vote at the June 2021 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1.

Proposal to enable the approval of helmet accessories independently of the helmet manufacturers pending the establishment of provisions for the approval of accessories compatible with approved helmets.

13. The expert from Israel, explaining the point of view of the “motorcycle helmet communication”, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19 through a presentation (GRSP-68-15), proposing a temporary solution to the 06 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. He also proposed at the same time a revised definition of accessories allowed to be fitted in type approved helmets. He clarified that this temporary solution should be followed by a new proposal delivered by the IWG and asked that IWG consider some examples for communication accessories requirements as well as for helmets in his presentation. The expert from Sweden introduced GRSP-68-09, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2020/19. She expressed concerns that the issue was affecting the validity of type approval originally granted and she questioned who would bear this responsibility. The expert from the Netherland argued that the Israeli proposal was not acceptable because it was opened to any kind of accessories to be implemented on the helmet. The expert from Republic of Korea supported the proposal tabled by the expert from Israel. The expert from Germany stated that the proposal was a good basis to start discussion, but it was premature to draw specific conclusions. He explained that current requirements of the UN Regulation were aimed at limiting the use of aftermarket products, whose liability was not in the purview of helmet manufacturers. He suggested that GRSP experts engage in their discussions stakeholders from the helmet aftermarket industry (e.g: camera industry). The expert from Spain clarified that accessories should be intended to integrate the securing functionalities of the helmet (e.g.: tear-off films of inner visors, electronic devices and their support. The expert from Italy clarified that the IWG activities were suspended due to the lack of research results that would allow Phase 2 of the UN Regulation to begin and that this issue was not included in the scope of the IWG. Therefore, GRSP agreed to establish an ad hoc group of interested experts to discuss and devise at the earliest convenience a solution on this issue. The experts from France, Republic of Korea, The Netherlands, Israel, Italy, Germany, Spain and from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) stated their availability to participate to the activities of the ad-hoc group. GRSP, also agreed to resume discussion on this agenda item on the basis of the outcome of the ad-hoc group.