Report of the Working Party on Passive Safety on its December 2013 session.

17. The World Forum recalled the oral report of the Chair of GRSP given during the 162nd session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1108, paras. 23-25) and approved the report.

Draft 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 127 presented in a consolidated text of the regulation as adopted by GRSP and which aligns the test requirements of UN Regulation No. 127 with UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (Flex-PLI), incorporating Supplement 1 to the original version of the UN Regulation (determination of the headform test points).

17. The World Forum recalled the oral report of the Chair of GRSP given during the 162nd session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1108, paras. 23-25) and approved the report.

Background presentation explaining issues encountered in transposing the GTR on HFCV into a UN (type-approval) Regulation.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Proposal for the text of the UN Regulation transposing the Global Technical Regulation on hydrogen and fuel-cell vehicles into the 1958 Agreement. This version highlights changes from the GTR text.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Proposal based on document GRSP/2012/25 (proposal drafted by the secretariat to consolidate the transitional provisions of UN R16 as a basis for a discussion on simplifying and correcting the text) to consolidate the transitional provisions of UN R16.

17. GRSP agreed to defer discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/25 and GRSP-54-03, pending the adoption of the amendment to the 1958 Agreement so as to keep consistency with the future requirements on transitional provisions.

17. GRSP did not resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/25 and GRSP-54-03, awaiting the adoption of the amendment to the 1958 Agreement and the future requirements on transitional provisions.

Proposal to improve the reproducibility of the luggage impact test described in annex 9 of UN Regulation No. 17.

18. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-54-04, aimed at introducing provisions to define the moment of inertia of the luggage impact test. The expert from Japan introduced GRSP-54-20 proposing to regulate only the lower limit of the moment of inertia of the test blocks. Following the discussion, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised proposal voluntarily prepared by the expert from CLEPA.

Specifications for the Construction, Preparation and Certification of the 50th percentile male Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy, (BioRID-II) anthropometric test device for inclusion in the Mutual Resolution No. 1 on test devices used in UN Regulations and GTR.

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/14) proposed for the fifty-fourth session with the new agenda item 22(g), 22(h), 23 and 24 as well as the running order (GRSP-54-06). The list of GRSP informal working groups (IWG) is contained in Annex VI to the session report.

Proposal of amendments to address various concerns and reflect the outcomes of discussions with the experts from EC, Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, United States of America and OICA.

9. The expert from the EC introduced GRSP-54-07-Rev.1 to clarify provisions of the headform tests and superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/14 (including the final report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/2). The expert from the United States of America stated that, as a general issue, the proposal was not evidence-based (GRSP-54-31) and lacked data from the current method. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on the basis of more data and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-54-07-Rev.1 with an official symbol and to keep GRSP-54-31 as a reference.

Text prepared by the European Commission and Germany to align the test requirements of UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 with those of Amendment 2 to the UN GTR concerning the determination of the headform test points.

7. The expert from Germany, co-Chair of the IWG on pedestrian safety introduced the draft UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (GRSP-54-33) to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI), as a result of the last meeting of the IWG held on 16 and 17 December 2013, prior to the GRSP proper session. He explained that the proposal superseded ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/13, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25 and GRSP-54-08, leaving pending the issues of the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform to bumper test (para. 5.1.1) and for the tolerance of the FlexPLI mass (paras. 6.3.1.1. and 6.3.1.1.3.). The proposal received comments from the expert of the United States of America (GRSP-54-32) who questioned the lack of information concerning the above-mentioned IARVs. He stated that the draft UN GTR could not be recommended unless Contracting Parties would be allowed to choose appropriate IARVs when transposing the UN GTR into their national legislations. In response, the expert from Germany introduced GRSP-54-33-Rev.2 addressing this concern. The expert from OICA regretted the lack of agreement on this last issue which would result in a number of options, thus hampering harmonization.

Proposal for amendments to the bumper test area and headform test procedure.

With informal document GRSP-54-07, the European Commission presented modifications to GTR No. 9 considering the discussion on the headform test procedures in the GTR and also including amendments proposed by other parties. The details as well as the proposed wording were discussed in the GRSP sessions between the 48th session in December 2010 and the 53rd session in May 2013.

This document presents the subsequent changes to UN Regulation 127.

28. With reference to the amendment to UN GTR No. 9 proposed under agenda item 3(b) (see para. 9), the expert from OICA introduced a draft parallel amendment to UN Regulation No. 127 (GRSP-54-09-Rev.1) incorporating GRSP-54-38 and superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/18 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/19. GRSP adopted GRSP-54-09-Rev.1 as reproduced in Annex V of the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 1 to the UN Regulation.

Proposed amendments to clarify the GTR text in alignment with the proposed text for its UN Regulation homologue.

39. GRSP noted the proposal of amendments to UN GTR No. 13 (GRSP-54-10) and the consolidated text of the UN GTR incorporating the amendments proposed, submitted by the expert from EC. The expert from OICA suggested a fast adoption of this proposal (basically corrections to the actual text) since their incorporation in the Phase 2 development of the UN GTR would imply more time. He also suggested a pragmatic approach on Phase 2 concerning harmonized crash test requirements by using those applied for conventional vehicles, rather than specific new ones. The expert from United States of America announced a proposal concerning the development of Phase 2 of the UN GTR to the May 2014 session of GRSP. Moreover, he suggested coordinating efforts to have a single document with all the errors noted by interested parties. GRSP, noted that if the proposal was not addressed as part of Phase 2, the expert from the EC should first submit the proposal to AC.3, requesting authorization to develop the amendment. GRSP agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its next session on the basis of revised documents and keep GRSP-54-10 and GRSP-54-11 for reference only.

EC proposals to revise GTR No. 13 based upon items identified during the process of transposing the GTR into the form of a UN Regulation force use in type-approval systems.

39. GRSP noted the proposal of amendments to UN GTR No. 13 (GRSP-54-10) and the consolidated text of the UN GTR incorporating the amendments proposed, submitted by the expert from EC. The expert from OICA suggested a fast adoption of this proposal (basically corrections to the actual text) since their incorporation in the Phase 2 development of the UN GTR would imply more time. He also suggested a pragmatic approach on Phase 2 concerning harmonized crash test requirements by using those applied for conventional vehicles, rather than specific new ones. The expert from United States of America announced a proposal concerning the development of Phase 2 of the UN GTR to the May 2014 session of GRSP. Moreover, he suggested coordinating efforts to have a single document with all the errors noted by interested parties. GRSP, noted that if the proposal was not addressed as part of Phase 2, the expert from the EC should first submit the proposal to AC.3, requesting authorization to develop the amendment. GRSP agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its next session on the basis of revised documents and keep GRSP-54-10 and GRSP-54-11 for reference only.

Proposal for amendments to document GRSP/2013/22.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Text prepared for information only by the Chairman of the informal group on Rechargeable Energy Storage Systems (REESS) to present requirements for electric motorcycles within a consolidated version of UN Regulation No. 100 without prejudicing whether the requirements will be established as an amendment of an existing regulation or as new regulation.

26. The expert from Germany, on behalf of the Chair of the IWG on Rechargeable Energy Storage System (REESS) informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG and introduced for information a first draft amendment to UN Regulation No. 100 (GRSP-54-13). However, GRSP noted that the IWG had not yet decided whether the final proposal would amend UN Regulation No. 100 or would concern a new UN Regulation and that this decision would be taken at its next meeting (on 23 – 24 January 2014, Barcelona, Spain). The expert from Japan introduced GRSP-54-26 suggesting that the IWG exclude vehicle categories L5, L6 and L7 from the proposal, because of the need of more detailed discussion on crashworthiness of such vehicles. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on a proposal drafted by the IWG.

Draft version of the proposed UN Regulation that would transpose Global Technical Regulation No. 14 on pole side-impact protection into the type-approval system of the 1958 Agreement. This draft is presented for informational purposes only pending submission of a final document for consideration by the GRSP.

24. The expert from Australia introduced, for information to GRSP, a draft proposal (GRSP-54-14) for a UN Regulation to transpose the UN GTR on pole side impact into the 1958 Agreement. He urged adopting the proposal in 2014 and that for this task, the IWG on pole side impact was no longer needed. He also underlined that the scope of the proposal was different from that of the UN Regulation No. 95 as well as having different dummies and injury criteria. Therefore, he suggested that the proposal would be a new UN Regulation instead of an amendment to UN Regulation No. 95. GRSP agreed by consensus to resume consideration on this matter at its May 2014 session on the basis of a proposal of a new UN Regulation voluntarily prepared by the expert from Australia.

Consolidated version of UN R127 on pedestrian safety incorporating its Corrigendum 1, Supplement 1, and draft 01 series of amendments that would align the test requirements of UN R127 with GTR No. 9’s Phase 2 (Flex-PLI) and Amendment 2 to (determination of the headform test points).

Consolidated version of the UN Regulation No. 127 including Corr. 1 to the original version, draft Supplement 1 to the original version and the draft 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation.

29. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26 introducing the FlexPLI provisions into the UN Regulation. GRSP considered and adopted GRSP-54-15-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/14, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/20 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26), as reproduced in Addendum 1 to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127. GRSP noted that pending values still in square brackets (paras. 1.1. and 1.4. of Annex IV of GRSP-54-15-Rev.1), would be eventually solved at the May 2014 session of GRSP. Finally, the expert from Japan withdrew GRSP-54-39.

OICA counterproposal to the draft German text that would prohibit systems whereby an occupant could be unintentionally locked inside a vehicle, such as might occur with alarm or emergency locking systems.

14. The expert from Germany withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/16, but with the intention to submit a new proposal to the May 2014 session of GRSP, prepared in cooperation with the experts from Australia and the United Kingdom. The expert from OICA withdrew GRSP-54-16.

Proposal to limit the overlap of this head restraint regulation with UN R17 which also addresses head restraints within the context of seat integrity. The amendment would exempt any vehicle head restraints approved under UN R17 from the requirements of UN R25. Presently, only M1 passenger cars qualify for this derogation.

40. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-54-17 to prevent the mandatory compliance of head restraints in more than one UN Regulation. GRSP agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its May 2014 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-54-17 with an official symbol.

The expert group on the 2nd phase development of GTR No. 7 has proposed a new method for measuring head-restraint height and, using this method, proposed to specify heights between 720-830 mm. OICA accepts the new measurement method, but argues for keeping the current 800 mm specification on the grounds that 800 mm under the new method would be 830 mm under the old.

The expert group on the 2nd phase development of GTR No. 7 has proposed a new method for measuring head-restraint height and, using this method, proposed to specify heights between 720-830 mm. OICA accepts the new measurement method, but argues for keeping the current 800 mm specification on the grounds that 800 mm under the new method would be 830 mm under the old.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.

Proposal to refine the proposal concerning ISOFIX anchorages in “one seat per row” seating arrangements. OICA believes this should be an amendment rather than a supplement and proposes to refine the scope to focus on seating where a child seat can be used and in vehicles that could carry a child.

Revised proposal to refine the proposal concerning ISOFIX anchorages in “one seat per row” seating arrangements and to rework the proposal as an amendment to UN R14 rather than as a supplement.

Revised proposal to refine the proposal concerning ISOFIX anchorages in “one seat per row” seating arrangements and to rework the proposal as an amendment to UN R14 rather than as a supplement, originally presented by Germany in document GRSP/2013/15.

16. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-54-19-Rev.2 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, aimed at introducing exemptions under certain conditions for vehicles equipped with one seating position per row. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as part (see. para. 15) of draft Supplement 6 to the 07 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/15 at its May 2014 session, excluding paragraph 5.3.8.8. as already agreed with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4.

In document GRSP-54-04, CLEPA proposed changes to improve the reproducibility of the luggage impact test described in annex 9 of UN R17. Japan proposes to specify only the minimum moment of inertia in the test (where CLEPA proposed a minimum-maximum range.

18. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-54-04, aimed at introducing provisions to define the moment of inertia of the luggage impact test. The expert from Japan introduced GRSP-54-20 proposing to regulate only the lower limit of the moment of inertia of the test blocks. Following the discussion, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised proposal voluntarily prepared by the expert from CLEPA.

18. GRSP resumed consideration on a proposal tabled by the expert from CLEPA (GRSP-55-15), aimed at introducing provisions to define the moment of inertia of the luggage impact test. The expert from Japan reminded GRSP of his previous proposal (GRSP-54-20) to regulate only the lower limit of the moment of inertia of the test blocks and proposed further consultation with the expert from CLEPA. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2014 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-55-15 with an official symbol.

Japan proposes changes to the draft text (document GRSP/2013/22) intended to transpose GTR No. 13 on hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle safety into the UN Regulation type approval system.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Japan argues to limit the scope (as in the GTR) to passenger vehicles with a GVM of 4,536 kg or less; defer liquefied hydrogen storage system (LHSS) provisions; specify frontal impact and rear impact tests (or allow national tests until phase 2 of GTR 13 is complete),and add batch and production test requirements. Japan also notes editorial corrections.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

The United States will not support the proposed amendment in its current form. The amendment would increase headrest heights for front outboard seating positions from 800 mm to at least 830 mm while allowing a decrease in minimum heights to 720 mm from 750mm. In addition, the amendment would allow decreased rear heights. The US believes the amendment lacks adequate evidence-based justifications for the proposed changes.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.

Corrections and clarifications to the proposed amendment to the enhanced child restraint systems regulation.

30. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced the status report of the progress of his group (GRSP-54-35). He also introduced the draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23) and GRSP-54-24 amending it. He explained that the proposal would cover Phase 2 of the UN Regulation, introducing provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). The expert from Germany expressed reservation to the proposal to discuss within the IWG the use of the Q10 dummy (proposed by the IWG for monitoring purpose only) for ensuring a safer level for children of different ages and heights. Moreover, he proposed modifying transitional provisions to allow CRS type approvals according to both UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-54-36 to the IWG, incorporating all the changes to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23 agreed during the session and awaiting a revised official proposal at its May 2014 session. GRSP also considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 concerning the configuration of CRS combining a base attached with ISOFIX anchorages to the vehicle and a shell installed on it. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 amended (as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/33) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 3 to the UN Regulation. GRSP also recommended experts to provide, by the May 2014 session, a draft brochure text as part of coordinated information campaign on UN Regulation No. 129.

Presentation on Japanese research into
dummy responses and chest injury measures for different seat-belt paths under the full-width rigid barrier and sled tests. Since the seat-belt path influences chest deflection results, Japan proposes that UN R94 include seat-belt path definition.

23. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on frontal impact, introduced the status report of the group (GRSP-54-40). He informed GRSP that the IWG was ready to submit a proposal for the May 2014 session of GRSP and introduced a first draft for information only (GRSP-54-27). He clarified that the amendment would introduce: (i) a full-width frontal crash test against a rigid barrier at 50 km/h, (ii) a new biomechanical criteria for elderly people (65 years and older) and (iii) the 5th percentile female dummy. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-25) to show the influence of the diagonal safety-belt path to chest deflection and announced a proposal to address this issue in the framework of activities of the IWG. The expert from France confirmed the importance of the belt position for the thorax deflection and clarified that the current proposal of the IWG addressed both sexes, as well as covering the safety of younger occupants. Finally, GRSP unanimously agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its May 2014 session on the basis of a concrete proposal for a new UN Regulation instead of an amendment to UN Regulation No. 94, drafted by the IWG.

Japanese statement proposing to remove vehicle categories L5-L7 (three-wheelers and quadricycles) from the proposals to regulate “rechargeable energy storage systems” (REESS) in mopeds, motorcycles, and similar vehicles as a condition for its acceptance either of a new regulation or as an amendment to UN R100 on electric-powered vehicles.

26. The expert from Germany, on behalf of the Chair of the IWG on Rechargeable Energy Storage System (REESS) informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG and introduced for information a first draft amendment to UN Regulation No. 100 (GRSP-54-13). However, GRSP noted that the IWG had not yet decided whether the final proposal would amend UN Regulation No. 100 or would concern a new UN Regulation and that this decision would be taken at its next meeting (on 23 – 24 January 2014, Barcelona, Spain). The expert from Japan introduced GRSP-54-26 suggesting that the IWG exclude vehicle categories L5, L6 and L7 from the proposal, because of the need of more detailed discussion on crashworthiness of such vehicles. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on a proposal drafted by the IWG.

Draft amendment to UN R94 as prepared by the WP.29 expert group on frontal impact to introduce provisions for offset deformable and full width rigid barrier tests. This draft is presented only for informational purposes pending submission of a final version for consideration at the May 2014 GRSP session.

23. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on frontal impact, introduced the status report of the group (GRSP-54-40). He informed GRSP that the IWG was ready to submit a proposal for the May 2014 session of GRSP and introduced a first draft for information only (GRSP-54-27). He clarified that the amendment would introduce: (i) a full-width frontal crash test against a rigid barrier at 50 km/h, (ii) a new biomechanical criteria for elderly people (65 years and older) and (iii) the 5th percentile female dummy. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-25) to show the influence of the diagonal safety-belt path to chest deflection and announced a proposal to address this issue in the framework of activities of the IWG. The expert from France confirmed the importance of the belt position for the thorax deflection and clarified that the current proposal of the IWG addressed both sexes, as well as covering the safety of younger occupants. Finally, GRSP unanimously agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its May 2014 session on the basis of a concrete proposal for a new UN Regulation instead of an amendment to UN Regulation No. 94, drafted by the IWG.

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

Presentation on the UK helmet safety scheme.

19. The expert from the United Kingdom made a presentation on the results of the Safety Helmet Assessment and Rating Programme (SHARP) (GRSP-54-29), carried out by his government. The expert from the EC, raised the issue of safety of riders of electric bikes and of the lack of proper safety helmets to protect them. GRSP agreed to keep this item in the agenda of the next GRSP sessions pending future proposals.

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

Presentation of US concerns regarding proposed definitions for locating the point of measurement (i.e. measuring point, target point, and first contact point definitions) within the test zone, changes to the test zone boundaries to clarify the adult and child Head Injury Criterion (HIC) zones, and to amend the leg form test procedure to align the leg form center plane with its measuring point.

[Note: the reference to document GRSP/2011/12 does not appear to correspond with the content of the US statement. Rather, the remarks align more closely with document GRSP-54-07/Rev.1 proposing changes to the draft amendment as presented in document GRSP/2013/25).]

9. The expert from the EC introduced GRSP-54-07-Rev.1 to clarify provisions of the headform tests and superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/14 (including the final report ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/2). The expert from the United States of America stated that, as a general issue, the proposal was not evidence-based (GRSP-54-31) and lacked data from the current method. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its May 2014 session on the basis of more data and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-54-07-Rev.1 with an official symbol and to keep GRSP-54-31 as a reference.

Statement of US concerns with the draft amendment to introduce the Flex PLI test tool into GTR No. 9 (document GRSP/2013/25) in particular with regard to the use of the injury assessment reference values (IARVs). US definition of the IARV will be dependent upon the outcome of a US cost-benefit analysis based upon the characteristics of the American vehicle population. The US cannot accept injury curves that do not fall within what is justifiable according to US traffic conditions.

7. The expert from Germany, co-Chair of the IWG on pedestrian safety introduced the draft UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (GRSP-54-33) to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI), as a result of the last meeting of the IWG held on 16 and 17 December 2013, prior to the GRSP proper session. He explained that the proposal superseded ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/13, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25 and GRSP-54-08, leaving pending the issues of the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform to bumper test (para. 5.1.1) and for the tolerance of the FlexPLI mass (paras. 6.3.1.1. and 6.3.1.1.3.). The proposal received comments from the expert of the United States of America (GRSP-54-32) who questioned the lack of information concerning the above-mentioned IARVs. He stated that the draft UN GTR could not be recommended unless Contracting Parties would be allowed to choose appropriate IARVs when transposing the UN GTR into their national legislations. In response, the expert from Germany introduced GRSP-54-33-Rev.2 addressing this concern. The expert from OICA regretted the lack of agreement on this last issue which would result in a number of options, thus hampering harmonization.

91. The representative of the United States of America, on behalf of the Chair of GRSP, introduced WP.29-162-03 (seeking guidance on issues not solved at the December 2013 session of GRSP), concerning the Injury Assessment References Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform (FlexPLI) to bumper test of the proposal for amendments to the UN GTR. He clarified that the text of the amendment to UN GTR No. 9 had been recommended by GRSP to the June 2014 session of AC.3. He reported that during the December 2013 session of GRSP, the expert from the United States of America had submitted informal document GRSP-54-32 stating that it was not in a position to agree with the proposed IARVs. He added that the proposed compromise solution of a footnote had been made by Germany at GRSP to allow other injury thresholds for Contracting Parties that do not have existing pedestrian protection regulations. He concluded that, at that session of GRSP, the expert from OICA had observed that this would compromise harmonization.

92.The representative of the United States of America proposed referring the document back to GRSP for consideration at its May 2014 session, which would delay the establishment of the UN GTR to a later session of AC.3. The representative of Germany noted that if the establishment of the amendments to the UN GTR would be delayed, the corresponding amendments to UN Regulation No. 127 should be transmitted to AC.1 for consideration at its June 2014 session. Furthermore, he sought the consent of AC.3 to extend the mandate of the IWG until November 2014. The representative of OICA added that amending UN Regulation No.127 would be perfectly possible since the needed transitional provisions would maintain the desired alignment with the current GTR No.9, thereby granting time for the research conducted in the United States of America. He also suggested consideration of yet another approach, by proceeding with the amendment of GTR No. 9 without the proposed footnote, but with a review clause for the IARV. AC.3 gave its consent to extending the mandate of the IWG and requested GRSP to further revise the compromise proposal at its May 2014 session based on the cost-benefit analysis.

The draft amendment to introduce the Flex PLI test tool as updated in the informal working group meeting of 16 – 17 December 2013.

7. The expert from Germany, co-Chair of the IWG on pedestrian safety introduced the draft UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (GRSP-54-33) to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI), as a result of the last meeting of the IWG held on 16 and 17 December 2013, prior to the GRSP proper session. He explained that the proposal superseded ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/13, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25 and GRSP-54-08, leaving pending the issues of the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform to bumper test (para. 5.1.1) and for the tolerance of the FlexPLI mass (paras. 6.3.1.1. and 6.3.1.1.3.). The proposal received comments from the expert of the United States of America (GRSP-54-32) who questioned the lack of information concerning the above-mentioned IARVs. He stated that the draft UN GTR could not be recommended unless Contracting Parties would be allowed to choose appropriate IARVs when transposing the UN GTR into their national legislations. In response, the expert from Germany introduced GRSP-54-33-Rev.2 addressing this concern. The expert from OICA regretted the lack of agreement on this last issue which would result in a number of options, thus hampering harmonization.

Updated draft amendment as revised during the 16-17 December 2013 session of the Informal Group on GTR 9-Phase 2. The amendment would introduce the Flex PLI lower legform impactor and related test procedures into the GTR on pedestrian safety protection.

Updated draft amendment as revised during the 16-17 December 2013 session of the Informal Group on GTR 9-Phase 2. The amendment would introduce the Flex PLI lower legform impactor and related test procedures into the GTR on pedestrian safety protection.

7. The expert from Germany, co-Chair of the IWG on pedestrian safety introduced the draft UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (GRSP-54-33) to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI), as a result of the last meeting of the IWG held on 16 and 17 December 2013, prior to the GRSP proper session. He explained that the proposal superseded ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/13, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25 and GRSP-54-08, leaving pending the issues of the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform to bumper test (para. 5.1.1) and for the tolerance of the FlexPLI mass (paras. 6.3.1.1. and 6.3.1.1.3.). The proposal received comments from the expert of the United States of America (GRSP-54-32) who questioned the lack of information concerning the above-mentioned IARVs. He stated that the draft UN GTR could not be recommended unless Contracting Parties would be allowed to choose appropriate IARVs when transposing the UN GTR into their national legislations. In response, the expert from Germany introduced GRSP-54-33-Rev.2 addressing this concern. The expert from OICA regretted the lack of agreement on this last issue which would result in a number of options, thus hampering harmonization.

Draft report in support of the proposed amendment to the pedestrian safety GTR that would introduce the Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (Flex-PLI) test tool.

Draft report of the GTR 9 expert group in support of the proposed amendment to the pedestrian safety GTR that would introduce the Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (Flex-PLI) test tool.

8. GRSP recommended ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25, as amended by Annex II to the session report and adopted the final progress report of the IWG (GRSP-54-34-Rev.1), as reproduced in Annex II. GRSP agreed to seek guidance of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at its March 2014 session concerning IARVs of para. 5.1.1. and seek endorsement of AC.3 to extend the mandate of the IWG until November 2014 to complete the addendum to M.R.1 to incorporate the FlexPLI. Finally, GRSP requested the secretariat to submit the proposal as draft Amendment 2 to UN GTR No. 9 and its final progress report to AC.3 for consideration and vote at its June 2014 session.

30. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced the status report of the progress of his group (GRSP-54-35). He also introduced the draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23) and GRSP-54-24 amending it. He explained that the proposal would cover Phase 2 of the UN Regulation, introducing provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). The expert from Germany expressed reservation to the proposal to discuss within the IWG the use of the Q10 dummy (proposed by the IWG for monitoring purpose only) for ensuring a safer level for children of different ages and heights. Moreover, he proposed modifying transitional provisions to allow CRS type approvals according to both UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-54-36 to the IWG, incorporating all the changes to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23 agreed during the session and awaiting a revised official proposal at its May 2014 session. GRSP also considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 concerning the configuration of CRS combining a base attached with ISOFIX anchorages to the vehicle and a shell installed on it. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 amended (as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/33) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 3 to the UN Regulation. GRSP also recommended experts to provide, by the May 2014 session, a draft brochure text as part of coordinated information campaign on UN Regulation No. 129.

Working draft of the proposed amendments to introduce provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”), incorporating all the changes agreed during the 54th (December 2013) GRSP session.

30. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced the status report of the progress of his group (GRSP-54-35). He also introduced the draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23) and GRSP-54-24 amending it. He explained that the proposal would cover Phase 2 of the UN Regulation, introducing provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). The expert from Germany expressed reservation to the proposal to discuss within the IWG the use of the Q10 dummy (proposed by the IWG for monitoring purpose only) for ensuring a safer level for children of different ages and heights. Moreover, he proposed modifying transitional provisions to allow CRS type approvals according to both UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-54-36 to the IWG, incorporating all the changes to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23 agreed during the session and awaiting a revised official proposal at its May 2014 session. GRSP also considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 concerning the configuration of CRS combining a base attached with ISOFIX anchorages to the vehicle and a shell installed on it. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 amended (as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/33) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 3 to the UN Regulation. GRSP also recommended experts to provide, by the May 2014 session, a draft brochure text as part of coordinated information campaign on UN Regulation No. 129.

5.1. During the meeting, for all discussions & decisions, the document CRS-42-03e (GRSP-54-36e) was updated for a version available under CRS-42-04e. The following points have been discussed :

• We need to precise retractor definition
• The size of the dummy to be used for lateral impact
• Revision of the chapters : 2.3.2 ; 2.17.2 ; 2.5.2 and 6.1.1 concerning the Universal vehicle Booster seat position
• Lower limit for authorized booster seat size range
• Chapter 6.3.2.2.2 only with one fixture for booster seat and booster cushion
• Rephrase 6.3.2.1 for shoulder height (measured only for harness system)
• Modified Annex 18 – Figure 2 to clarify the measurement of the Shh dimension.
• Question from CLEPA: is the technical regulation could clarify the delimitation of the responsibility between automakers and CRS manufacturers concerning the lateral protection of occupants above a certain stature.

Presentation raising concerns over the transposition of GTR No. 13 on hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles into a corresponding UN Regulation.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Proposal to clarify a measurement procedure between test points in the supplement.

28. With reference to the amendment to UN GTR No. 9 proposed under agenda item 3(b) (see para. 9), the expert from OICA introduced a draft parallel amendment to UN Regulation No. 127 (GRSP-54-09-Rev.1) incorporating GRSP-54-38 and superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/18 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/19. GRSP adopted GRSP-54-09-Rev.1 as reproduced in Annex V of the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 1 to the UN Regulation.

Proposal to amend the transitional provisions presented in document GRSP/2013/26 (01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 127).

29. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26 introducing the FlexPLI provisions into the UN Regulation. GRSP considered and adopted GRSP-54-15-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/14, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/20 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26), as reproduced in Addendum 1 to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127. GRSP noted that pending values still in square brackets (paras. 1.1. and 1.4. of Annex IV of GRSP-54-15-Rev.1), would be eventually solved at the May 2014 session of GRSP. Finally, the expert from Japan withdrew GRSP-54-39.

Report of the expert group developing revised test procedures under UN Regulation No. 94, including work on offset deformable and full-width rigid barrier testing and procedures for lower-leg and foot protection.

23. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on frontal impact, introduced the status report of the group (GRSP-54-40). He informed GRSP that the IWG was ready to submit a proposal for the May 2014 session of GRSP and introduced a first draft for information only (GRSP-54-27). He clarified that the amendment would introduce: (i) a full-width frontal crash test against a rigid barrier at 50 km/h, (ii) a new biomechanical criteria for elderly people (65 years and older) and (iii) the 5th percentile female dummy. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-25) to show the influence of the diagonal safety-belt path to chest deflection and announced a proposal to address this issue in the framework of activities of the IWG. The expert from France confirmed the importance of the belt position for the thorax deflection and clarified that the current proposal of the IWG addressed both sexes, as well as covering the safety of younger occupants. Finally, GRSP unanimously agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its May 2014 session on the basis of a concrete proposal for a new UN Regulation instead of an amendment to UN Regulation No. 94, drafted by the IWG.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/14) proposed for the fifty-fourth session with the new agenda item 22(g), 22(h), 23 and 24 as well as the running order (GRSP-54-06). The list of GRSP informal working groups (IWG) is contained in Annex VI to the session report.

The current text of UN R14 requires the installation of two ISOFIX anchorages in a vehicle. Vehicles with only one seat row are exempted from this requirement. This proposal introduces provisions for at least one set of ISOFIX anchorages in vehicles having only one seat row or having several seat rows with only one seat per row.

16. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-54-19-Rev.2 amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, aimed at introducing exemptions under certain conditions for vehicles equipped with one seating position per row. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4, as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as part (see. para. 15) of draft Supplement 6 to the 07 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/15 at its May 2014 session, excluding paragraph 5.3.8.8. as already agreed with ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/4.

16. GRSP resumed consideration of paragraph 5.3.8.2. of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/15, concerning exemption to the mandatory installation of an ISOFIX position anchorages in vehicles with one seat row. However, the expert from OICA showed (GRSP-55-32) differences between sport cars unfitted for the transport of children and conventional cars with one seat row. Therefore, he proposed GRSP-55-31 which introduces a geometric criteria (R- point height above the ground less than 450 mm) to exempt such sport cars. The expert from Germany raised a study reservation on this proposal. GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this subject at its December 2014 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-55-31 with an official symbol.

14. GRSP noted the decision taken by the World Forum during the June 2014 session to refer back to GRSP ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/34 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1110, para. 52) to further consider the minimum number of ISOFIX anchorages. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-56-11-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/34, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/18 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/15 and addressing the widest range of possible vehicle types and configurations. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/34 as amended by Annex II to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2015 sessions, as draft Supplement 6 to the 07 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 14.

Certain anti-theft systems fully lock every door and window in a vehicle and also deactivate interior unlock controls. This can lead to a situation where an occupant can be locked inside a vehicle with no means of exit save to break a window. This proposal would require countermeasures to prevent such a situation.

14. The expert from Germany withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/16, but with the intention to submit a new proposal to the May 2014 session of GRSP, prepared in cooperation with the experts from Australia and the United Kingdom. The expert from OICA withdrew GRSP-54-16.

Proposal to specify a head restraint height between 720 mm and 830 mm pursuant to the work on phase 2 of GTR No. 7 which includes a new method for measuring the effective height of head restraints.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.

4. The expert from the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He clarified that notwithstanding the progress of the last meeting held in February 2014, outstanding points remained, i.e. on injury criteria. He added that the next meeting had been scheduled on early September 2014, in Berlin. He stated that the IWG had suggested that the issue of the head restraint height would be resolved by GRSP rather than the IWG. He finally announced that a revised official proposal for a UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the December 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1), to incorporate the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II).

5. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and to resume discussion on the height of the head restraints (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) at its December 2014 session.

5. Concerning the height of head restraints, the expert from the Netherlands reminded GRSP that a proposal with new thresholds had been submitted last year (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) and that the new measurement method agreed by the IWG was guaranteeing good repeatability. The expert from OICA argued that the new test method by itself was reducing the measured height of the head restraints by about 30 mm and that the additional severity due to the new thresholds referenced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 needed further justification. The expert from India was of the opinion that an anthropometry study should be carried out to investigate the consequences of increased height of head restraints.

Correction of an editorial error in Supplement 4 to the 07 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 14.

15. GRSP considered and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/18, as amended by Annex III to the session report and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 6 to the 07 series of amendments to the UN Regulation.

Proposal to clarify the scope of UN Regulation No. 29 and the tests to be performed on the various types of category N vehicles.

20. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/19, proposing a test configuration (A, B and C) for each N vehicle category. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/19 not amended and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 2 to the 03 series of amendments to the UN Regulation.

Correction of an error in the earlier Corrigendum 1 to Supplement 5 to the 03 series of UN Regulation No. 44.

22. GRSP also adopted, not amended, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/20, introducing some relevant test requirements to ISOFIX size class B1. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/20 to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as part (see para. 21) of draft Supplement 8 to the 04 series of amendments to the UN Regulation.

In response to a GRSP request (ECE/TRANS/WP29/GRSP/53, para. 45) concerning the configuration of Child Restraint Systems (CRS) combining a base attached to the vehicle by ISOFIX anchorages with a shell installed on the base. This shell could also be used without the base and secured by an adult safety belt. This proposal aims at allowing the type approval of this configuration according to UN Regulation No. 129 in its first phase.

30. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced the status report of the progress of his group (GRSP-54-35). He also introduced the draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23) and GRSP-54-24 amending it. He explained that the proposal would cover Phase 2 of the UN Regulation, introducing provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). The expert from Germany expressed reservation to the proposal to discuss within the IWG the use of the Q10 dummy (proposed by the IWG for monitoring purpose only) for ensuring a safer level for children of different ages and heights. Moreover, he proposed modifying transitional provisions to allow CRS type approvals according to both UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-54-36 to the IWG, incorporating all the changes to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23 agreed during the session and awaiting a revised official proposal at its May 2014 session. GRSP also considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 concerning the configuration of CRS combining a base attached with ISOFIX anchorages to the vehicle and a shell installed on it. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 amended (as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/33) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 3 to the UN Regulation. GRSP also recommended experts to provide, by the May 2014 session, a draft brochure text as part of coordinated information campaign on UN Regulation No. 129.

Draft text that would adapt the GTR on hydrogen vehicle safety to the type-approval system via a new UN Regulation.

31. The expert from OICA made a presentation (GRSP-54-01) to introduce a draft new UN Regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/22), transposing the UN GTR No. 13 into the 1958 Agreement on the same subject. He also presented GRSP-54-12, introducing some corrections to the proposal and GRSP-54-02 (for information only), highlighting the changes introduced with respect to the UN GTR. The expert from Japan made a presentation (GRSP-54-37) on the main objective of the proposal. He also suggested (GRSP-54-22) a separate UN Regulation, to address liquefied hydrogen storage systems and to allow Contracting Parties to apply impact tests already in use at the national level until the conclusion of Phase 2 of the UN GTR. He finally introduced some corrections (GRSP-54-21) to the text of the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2014 session on the basis of a revised official proposal, voluntarily prepared by the experts from EC and OICA, incorporating comments received by interested parties. GRSP also agreed to keep GRSP-54-21 and GRSP-54-12 in the agenda of the next session for reference only.

Text to introduce all the modifications needed in UN Regulation No. 129 (enhanced child restraint systems (ECRS)) suggested by the experts of the informal working group on child restraint systems (IWG CRS) to extend the scope of this regulation to non-integral Child Restraint Systems (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”) (Phase 2 of the UN Regulation).

30. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced the status report of the progress of his group (GRSP-54-35). He also introduced the draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23) and GRSP-54-24 amending it. He explained that the proposal would cover Phase 2 of the UN Regulation, introducing provisions for non-integral CRS (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). The expert from Germany expressed reservation to the proposal to discuss within the IWG the use of the Q10 dummy (proposed by the IWG for monitoring purpose only) for ensuring a safer level for children of different ages and heights. Moreover, he proposed modifying transitional provisions to allow CRS type approvals according to both UN Regulations Nos. 44 and 129. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-54-36 to the IWG, incorporating all the changes to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23 agreed during the session and awaiting a revised official proposal at its May 2014 session. GRSP also considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 concerning the configuration of CRS combining a base attached with ISOFIX anchorages to the vehicle and a shell installed on it. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/21 amended (as reproduced in ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2014/33) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their March 2014 sessions as draft Supplement 3 to the UN Regulation. GRSP also recommended experts to provide, by the May 2014 session, a draft brochure text as part of coordinated information campaign on UN Regulation No. 129.

5.1. Status of I-Size implementation

EC provided a detailed overview of the state-of-play concerning the acceptance of R129 approved seats for use in the EU. It was explained that the legal experts of the EC were in the process of reviewing the issue if R129 can indeed be viewed as an adaptation to R44, or not, and that this process was not yet finalised. In parallel efforts were being made to update the Seatbelt Wearing Directive to be absolutely clear about the status of R129 and its permitted use in motor vehicles. It was stressed that the process was very much ongoing at the time of the meeting.

The position of the Member states represented in the meeting was asked.

For Hans AMERLAAN (RDW), it is not inacceptable to have the following embarrassing situation:
Countries (contracting party of 1958 agreements) allow the sale of the new enhanced Child Restraints Systems (iSize). But the National law is in contradiction and doesn’t allow the use of such products

France has also authorized the use.

Information from Rudoph GERLACH (TUV) for German market: During the meeting planned for the 15th of November between transport ministry, laboratory and CRS manufacturers in Germany, the following statement will be given: it will be allow to sells & use products homologated according to the R129.

Information from Tommy PETTERSSON (VTI), it’s legal to use product homologated according to the R129 in Sweden

According to Sergi FERRIS (SafeDesign / IDIADA) , situation in Spain is no so clear. It is not allowed but it is also not forbidden to sell and use product homologate according to the R129.

To promote R129, the group suggests adding in the new regulation a sentence clarifying that R129 is an evolution of R44.

The chairman suggests including this kind of sentence in the formal amendment ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/23. ANEC volunteer to include this proposal into the document.

Peter BROERTJES (EC) highlights also that it is needed to clarify the possibility to use iSize product in Isofix seating position since a lot of contradicting information are given on this subject.

Isize Product are super Isofix then for the informal group it is clear that they can be used in a ISOFIX seating position defined by a car seat fitting list.

Final statement of the group: R129 Isofix CRS products can be installed in Isofix seating positions declared by CRS manufacturer in a car seat fitting list.

Working draft of the phase 2 revisions to the global technical regulation on head restraints provided to the GRSP at its December 2013 session for informational purposes only.

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

4. The expert from the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Chair of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the work progress of the IWG. He clarified that notwithstanding the progress of the last meeting held in February 2014, outstanding points remained, i.e. on injury criteria. He added that the next meeting had been scheduled on early September 2014, in Berlin. He stated that the IWG had suggested that the issue of the head restraint height would be resolved by GRSP rather than the IWG. He finally announced that a revised official proposal for a UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the December 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1), to incorporate the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II).

5. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and to resume discussion on the height of the head restraints (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17) at its December 2014 session.

Bernie Frost explained to the group the further procedure and what he expected the group to deliver. He explained that the text of the draft GTR and the BioRID certification procedures are the main topics for the face to face meeting on 5th and 6th of February 2014 in Brussels. The Working Document presented to 54th GRSP will be the basis for discussion (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24). Comments within the dual pane document shall be removed/resolved. Members shall be well prepared to do so. A further meeting before the GRSP May session shall be held in April. New information on injury criteria research is expected for the April meeting. Bernie Frost pointed out that all open questions shall be solved by September 2014 to be able to send a final document to GRSP for approval.

Text prepared by the informal expert group on the Phase 2 development of the GTR on pedestrian safety to introduce the new FlexPLI lower legform test tool into the test procedures.

7. The expert from Germany, co-Chair of the IWG on pedestrian safety introduced the draft UN GTR No. 9 Phase 2 (GRSP-54-33) to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI), as a result of the last meeting of the IWG held on 16 and 17 December 2013, prior to the GRSP proper session. He explained that the proposal superseded ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/13, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25 and GRSP-54-08, leaving pending the issues of the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform to bumper test (para. 5.1.1) and for the tolerance of the FlexPLI mass (paras. 6.3.1.1. and 6.3.1.1.3.). The proposal received comments from the expert of the United States of America (GRSP-54-32) who questioned the lack of information concerning the above-mentioned IARVs. He stated that the draft UN GTR could not be recommended unless Contracting Parties would be allowed to choose appropriate IARVs when transposing the UN GTR into their national legislations. In response, the expert from Germany introduced GRSP-54-33-Rev.2 addressing this concern. The expert from OICA regretted the lack of agreement on this last issue which would result in a number of options, thus hampering harmonization.

8. GRSP recommended ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/25, as amended by Annex II to the session report and adopted the final progress report of the IWG (GRSP-54-34-Rev.1), as reproduced in Annex II. GRSP agreed to seek guidance of the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at its March 2014 session concerning IARVs of para. 5.1.1. and seek endorsement of AC.3 to extend the mandate of the IWG until November 2014 to complete the addendum to M.R.1 to incorporate the FlexPLI. Finally, GRSP requested the secretariat to submit the proposal as draft Amendment 2 to UN GTR No. 9 and its final progress report to AC.3 for consideration and vote at its June 2014 session.

Proposal by the experts from the informal working group on Global Technical Regulation No. 9-Phase 2 to amend the UN Regulation on pedestrian protection of motor vehicles.

29. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26 introducing the FlexPLI provisions into the UN Regulation. GRSP considered and adopted GRSP-54-15-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/14, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2011/20 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/26), as reproduced in Addendum 1 to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their June 2014 sessions as draft 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127. GRSP noted that pending values still in square brackets (paras. 1.1. and 1.4. of Annex IV of GRSP-54-15-Rev.1), would be eventually solved at the May 2014 session of GRSP. Finally, the expert from Japan withdrew GRSP-54-39.