38. The experts from Sweden and Austria, as Chairs of the IWG on Equitable Occupant Protection (EqOP) delivered a detailed presentation on the work of the IWG, including its goals, a review of all the work it had carried out since its establishment, a timeline of past and future events, the work carried out by each of its five task forces and the conclusions so far.
39. The expert from the United States of America noted the vast amount of work the IWG is conducting and advised its chair that, per specific guidance by WP.29 in its June 2024 session, the IWG should sequence its efforts on a smaller set of initial priorities rather than working in parallel on all identified topics, to better achieve tangible progress. He further encouraged the IWG to identify concrete priorities to address identified inequities so that GRSP and WP.29 may greenlight mandates to amend existing regulations or develop new assessment tools such as guidelines on virtual crash testing (VCT).
40. The IWG Chairs explained that the group was already prioritizing its work, based on a data driven approach. They referred, as examples, to the work on rear impacts and the proof of concept that the VCT task force intends to deliver in 2027. However, they cautioned that they were not yet ready to start modifying Regulations.
41. The expert from OICA supported the comments made by the expert from the United States of America. He also highlighted the importance of waiting for the outcome of Task Force 1 identifying the issues that need to be addressed, to avoid wasting time and resources on unnecessary tasks. Similarly, he cautioned that before embarking on a methodology based on VCT it would be desirable to ensure that this would be accepted by all contracting parties.
42. The expert from Canada supported the comments made by the expert from the United States of America and added that the list of priorities for IWG EqOP should be balanced with other GRSP priorities (see also paragraph 65 in section XXVII of the session report).
43. The expert from the Kingdom of the Netherlands explained that VCT allowed covering a wide range of scenarios but that it would then be backed by validation in the form of physical testing. VCT should therefore be viewed as something to be done in addition, and not instead of, physical testing. He concurred with the IWG Chairs, emphasizing that the group was already prioritizing its work.
44. After further informal discussions, it was agreed that the top priorities for IWG EqOP were:
45. The chairs of the IWG submitted a revised report (informal document GRSP-76-21-Rev.2) clearly stating these priorities, which was supported by Italy, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Austria, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, United States of America and Japan, with no opposition.