29. The representative of the United States of America, on behalf of the Chair of GRSP, informed WP.29 about the results made by the group during its fifty-seventh session (for details, see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/57)

21. The World Forum recalled the oral report of the Chair of GRSP given during the 166th session (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1116, paras. 29-34) and approved the report.

Editorial clarification of the proposed transitional provision from the WP.29 secretariat..

33. The expert from France, Chair of the Frontal Impact IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as the final draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system, with a thorax compression criterion (ThCC) of 42 mm. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, amended by GRSP-57-01 to require ThCC limit at 34 mm in the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. The expert from Japan suggested also aligning the provisions of the draft UN Regulation with the new Camera-Monitor Systems provisions of UN Regulation No. 46 (see para. 27 above). GRSP noted also the lack of availability of drawings and specification of the 5th percentile female dummy and agreed to insert a footnote as a reminder to interested parties to provide the above mentioned specifications in time for adoption of the draft UN Regulation by WP.29 and AC.1. GRSP considered GRSP-57-29-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and incorporating all the comments received during the discussion (including GRSP-57-02). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, both as amended by Annex V to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2015 sessions:
(i) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as new draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system and
(ii) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12 as 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation.

The expert from France introduced GRSP-57-31, for information only, to provide further justification of the biomechanical chest deflection thresholds introduced in the draft UN Regulation.

Pursuant to GRPE work on vehicle propulsion system definitions (VPSD informal group; see document WP.29-165-17), this proposal would update the definition of the acronym “REESS” to refer to “rechargeable electrical energy storage system” across the passive safety regulations and currently proposed texts that make use of this acronym. (REESS had previously referred generically to “rechargeable energy storage systems”.)

26. The expert from France, Chair of the frontal impact (FI) IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7 to align the UN Regulation No. 94 with the provisions of new draft UN Regulation (full-width frontal collision) on the protection of older occupants. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7, as amended by Annex III (including GRSP-57-02) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7 as amended to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as draft 03 series of amendment to UN Regulation No. 94.

27. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/13 aligning the provisions of UN Regulation No. 94 with the new provisions on Camera-Monitor Systems provisions in UN Regulation No. 46 (Devices for indirect vision). GRSP adopted the proposal, as reproduced by Annex III (including GRSP-57-02), and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2015 sessions, as draft Supplement 6 to the 02 series of amendments and as part of (see para. 26) the draft 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 94.

41. GRSP noted the request of WP.29 (WP.29-165-16) to change the definition of Rechargeable Energy Storage System (REESS) in Rechargeable Electric Energy Storage System and maintaining the same acronym REESS in all UN Regulations under GRSP responsibilities (where REESS is present). It was noted that this was needed to avoid confusion with Rechargeable Storage Systems of different kinds (such as mechanical storage systems). Accordingly, GRSP adopted GRSP-57-02 as reproduced in Annex VI of the report. The secretariat was requested to submit it to the November 2015 session of WP.29 and AC.1 as draft: (i) Supplement 4 to the 04 series of amendments to Regulation No. 12 (Steering mechanism), (ii) as part of (see para. 27) Supplement 6 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 94 (Frontal collision protection), (iii) 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 94 (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7) (see para. 26), (iv) Supplement 5 to the 03 series of amendments to Regulation No. 95 (Lateral collision protection), (v) Supplement 3 to the 02 series of amendments to Regulation No. 100 (Battery electric vehicle safety), (vii) amendment to draft Regulation on electric vehicles of category L (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/69) and (viii) amendment to draft Regulation on uniform provisions for the approval of passenger cars in the event of a frontal collision with focus on the restraint system (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11) (see para. 33).

Proposal to modify the reference to Annex 14 on simplified test methods to refer to “the use of a reference chest speed measured at 300 mm forward displacement carried out in a test”.

Updated document including comments received from Germany, Japan, the Russian Federation and the United States of America.

32. GRSP considered (GRSP-57-04-Rev.2) a draft brochure as part of a coordinated information campaign for UN Regulation No. 129. GRSP noted that the brochure would address different target groups (i.e.: consumers, policy makers, retailers). The expert from CI suggested that the part of the brochure addressing target group such as parents and customers should be shorter and based on the information provided by GRSP-56-27. GRSP noted that the final graphical layout and organization of the contents of the brochure would be finally decided by UNECE secretariat. GRSP in principle endorsed the technical contents of the draft brochure (GRSP-57-04-Rev.2), pending final last comments and information by its experts to be provided to the secretariat by first of June 2015 (close of business).

Proposal to introduce provisions to prevent the unintentional opening of side doors with rear-mounted hinges while the vehicle is in motion.

42. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-57-05-Rev.1, to provide for adequate back door protection to prevent the possibility of accidental opening of the door while the vehicle was in motion, similar to the existing provisions for side doors. The experts from EC and France supported the proposal in principle. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-05-Rev.1 with an official symbol. Following the suggestion of GRSP Chair, the expert from EC volunteered to prepare a request for authorization to develop a parallel amendment to UN GTR No. 1 to be submitted at the March 2016 session of AC.3 with EU as technical sponsor.

In response to a request during the December 2014 GRSP session to resume discussions on helmet safety and electric bikes, the secretariat has prepared this background note.

22. GRSP noted GRSP-57-06, aimed at devising a possible definition of bikes assisted by an electric engine (pedalex) and the implication of mandatory wearing of helmets type approved according to UN Regulation No. 22. The expert from EC stated that pedalex vehicles were a green alternative to be encouraged and not bogged down by the mandatory use of bulky helmets. Therefore, he suggested to create a new class of helmets in UN Regulation No. 22 addressing riders of pedalex vehicles. The expert from the Netherlands stated that currently it was not possible to design proper ventilated helmets according to UN Regulation No. 22. He added that there was not enough market and business interest to develop aerated helmets and further research would be needed. He underlined the limits of GRSP experts to solve this issue and encouraged further research. The expert from France opposed the creation of a subclass of helmets into UN Regulation No. 22. He added that the UN Regulation provides all construction principles to allow the design of helmets for high speed bicycles. The expert from Italy made a similar statement opposing the creation of a new class of helmets into the UN Regulation. He stressed the need to protect riders of high speed bicycles that should be considered motorcycles for the level of risk they imply. He finally stated that UN Regulation No. 22 was providing the proper design solution to address this kind of vehicles. The expert from Korea echoed the statement from the experts from EC and the Netherlands and informed GRSP that the lack of success of UN Regulation No. 22 in South East Asian countries was due to the lack of adequate provisions to cope with the mobility needs of tropical countries. The expert from the United States of America informed GRSP that a new NPRM had been recently issued to amend current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS 218) to increase helmet wearing. GRSP noted a draft publication (GRSP-57-27), tabled by UNECE secretariat to improve awareness of UN Regulation No. 22 worldwide. GRSP requested his experts to provide the secretariat by first of June 2015 (close of business) information and comments to improve the draft publication.

24. GRSP resumed discussion on the issue of safety users of two-wheeler user safety, including riders of bikes assisted by an electric engine (pedalex) and the implications on drivers of the mandatory wearing by the driver of helmets that are type approved according to Regulation No. 22. The expert from France expressed concerns on viable enforcement rules if helmets with lower safety performances would be for ride two-wheelers at high speed. The expert from EC reiterated his statement that green alternatives such as electric bikes should be encouraged and not stifled by the use of bulky helmets. The expert from the Netherlands informed GRSP about a national initiative aimed at developing a standard on helmets dedicated to pedalex. He clarified that such a standard would promote helmets with higher level of safety than bike helmets and clear identification. He finally announced to provide full information would be provided at the May 2017 session of GRSP. The expert from the Russian Federation supported the comment of the experts from EC and the Netherland. The expert from Sweden suggested a more active participation from helmet manufacturers in the discussion so as to explain rationales to develop proper requirements for pedalex bike helmets. The expert from the United Kingdom clarified that motorcyclists make up 1 per cent of road traffic but 20 percent of fatalities in his country. He shared concerns on the enforceability of an alternative standard. He opposed the incorporation of alternative set of requirements in Regulation No. 22 as the existing requirements were technology neutral and already offered appropriate flexibility. The experts from Denmark, Italy and Poland argued that helmet safety should be independent of the propulsion type but rather focus on speed: the severity of injuries above 25 km/h is the same for pedalex as for motorcycles.

25. Finally, GRSP agreed to encourage the participation of helmet experts from the industry to adapt the design requirements of Regulation No. 22. At the same time, it was agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item at its May 2017 session including the harmonization of head-forms in the Regulation.

Proposal to add missing Integral fixtures for Regulation 129. Fuller explanation can be found in document GRSP-57-09.

17. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-09 proposing to introduce a new fixture to verify space availability of universal lateral facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) “lie-flat” (GRSP-57-07-Rev.1). He urged the introduction of this envelope to allow the installation of universal “lie-flat” CRS to address special medical needs such as premature born children having inability to support heads. He stated that the current ISOFIX fixture of UN Regulation No. 44 was too large and suggested through his proposal the introduction of a fixture having a volume within those representing rear-facing and forward-facing volumes (excluding side volumes). The expert from OICA suggested that the proposed fixture should not be used to identify an i-size position because otherwise it would reduce the availability of i-size positions in the vehicle. Moreover, he suggested that the proposal would refer to a vehicle specific position. The comments from the expert of OICA were generally supported by the experts from France, Germany, EC and the Netherlands. Finally, GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-57-07-Rev.1 back to the IWG, to be discussed as a full-package with the provisions of UN Regulation No. 129 (see para. 30 below).

Proposal to add missing Integral fixtures for Regulation No. 129. Fuller explanation can be found in document GRSP-57-09.

30. Referring to discussion held under agenda item 7 (see para. 17. above) the expert from CLEPA introduced through a presentation (GRSP-57-09) to present a corresponding amendment (GRSP-57-08) to UN Regulation No. 129 to introduce ECRS “lie-flat”. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-57-08 to the IWG.

17. The expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-09 proposing to introduce a new fixture to verify space availability of universal lateral facing Child Restraint Systems (CRS) “lie-flat” (GRSP-57-07-Rev.1). He urged the introduction of this envelope to allow the installation of universal “lie-flat” CRS to address special medical needs such as premature born children having inability to support heads. He stated that the current ISOFIX fixture of UN Regulation No. 44 was too large and suggested through his proposal the introduction of a fixture having a volume within those representing rear-facing and forward-facing volumes (excluding side volumes). The expert from OICA suggested that the proposed fixture should not be used to identify an i-size position because otherwise it would reduce the availability of i-size positions in the vehicle. Moreover, he suggested that the proposal would refer to a vehicle specific position. The comments from the expert of OICA were generally supported by the experts from France, Germany, EC and the Netherlands. Finally, GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-57-07-Rev.1 back to the IWG, to be discussed as a full-package with the provisions of UN Regulation No. 129 (see para. 30 below).

30. Referring to discussion held under agenda item 7 (see para. 17. above) the expert from CLEPA introduced through a presentation (GRSP-57-09) to present a corresponding amendment (GRSP-57-08) to UN Regulation No. 129 to introduce ECRS “lie-flat”. GRSP agreed to refer GRSP-57-08 to the IWG.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/1 and Add.1) proposed for the fifty-seventh session with the new agenda items 17(g) to 17(j) and 18 as well as the running order (GRSP-57-10). The list of GRSP informal working groups is contained in Annex VII of the GRSP/57 report.

Proposal to clarify what is and what is not permitted on airbag labels in order to address deviations encountered in current labeling.

43. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-11-Rev.1, showing that some vehicle manufacturers are providing disharmonized information in the airbag warning label to protect children. He explained that his proposal aimed at providing clearer guidance to parents installing CRS on seating position protected by an air-bag. The expert from OICA stated that the proposal needed a study reservation and the expert from Germany required further rationales and justification to substantiate the proposal. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2015 session on the basis of a new proposal prepared by the expert from EC in coordination with the experts from CLEPA and OICA.

OICA comments and concerns regarding the generally accepted proposal for the definition of the bumper test area for use with the Flex-PLI lower leg impactor. The document raises issues concerning limitations of the test procedure and notes that the new requirements would have a significant impact on bumper design such that the transitional period for implementation should be 2019 to allow for a full vehicle development cycle.

6. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-15-Rev.1, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2, and proposing the introduction of the definition of rigid bumper beam in the test area in addition to the proposed bumper test method with the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-57-12, explaining that the new definition of the test area leads to test bumper surfaces at an angle greater than the justified 30°. He added that this might result in occurrence of total and relative rotation of the leg as well as sliding along the surface and produce non-repeatable data. The expert from the United States of America requested a study reservation on this proposal based on the above concern regarding the test tool’s repeatability at an impact angle of 30 degrees or higher. She announced that results of this research would be available at the December 2015 session of GRSP. The expert from Japan proposed to share data from his country to be included in the cost benefit analysis. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject and on the pending issues of the proposal of amendments to the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) at its December 2015 session.

28. Referring to the decision held under agenda item 3(a) (see para. 6.), the expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-16-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, GRSP-57-12 and GRSP-57-13), introducing the new bumper test method and the definition of bumper beam and meeting the needs expressed by the expert from OICA at the December 2014 session of GRSP. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, as amended by Annex IV (including GRSP-57-16-Rev.1) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions, as draft 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127.

Formal proposal as generally agreed during the 56th GRSP session to revise the procedure for determining the bumper test area under the pedestrian safety regulation. This proposal corrects shortcomings in the current definitions which could lead to a narrower test area than intended (leading to less effective pedestrian protection). This proposal includes a “bumper beam” determination method. The proposed changes also require the form of a new series of amendments (rather than a Supplement) and proposes a transition date of 1 September 2019 (rather than the previous 2017).

The proposal also includes a September 2017 transition date in the event that the GRSP determines that the proposal should be treated as a new series of amendments rather than as a Supplement.

28. Referring to the decision held under agenda item 3(a) (see para. 6.), the expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-16-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, GRSP-57-12 and GRSP-57-13), introducing the new bumper test method and the definition of bumper beam and meeting the needs expressed by the expert from OICA at the December 2014 session of GRSP. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, as amended by Annex IV (including GRSP-57-16-Rev.1) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions, as draft 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127.

Proposal to allow the installation of different light colours on seat-belt buckles to improve visibility. The proposal also addresses the alignment of ambient light designs in modern cars with the functional element of an occupant protection device to support its visual exposition in the vehicle compartment. This document supersedes GRSP/2015/15.

15. GRSP noted GRSP-57-14-Rev.1 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15 to clarify the installation of different light colors on the buckle and to improve its visibility in dark conditions for the wearer and facilitate rescue of occupants. The expert from EC underlined that the proposal was not aimed at introducing a tell-tale but rather a comfort system. Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15, as amended by Annex II to this report (including GRSP-57-14-Rev.1). The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15 to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as part of (see para. 14 above) draft Supplement 6 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 16.

Further refinements from the European Commission to the proposal to amend the bumper test area procedures under the pedestrian safety GTR.

6. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-15-Rev.1, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2, and proposing the introduction of the definition of rigid bumper beam in the test area in addition to the proposed bumper test method with the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-57-12, explaining that the new definition of the test area leads to test bumper surfaces at an angle greater than the justified 30°. He added that this might result in occurrence of total and relative rotation of the leg as well as sliding along the surface and produce non-repeatable data. The expert from the United States of America requested a study reservation on this proposal based on the above concern regarding the test tool’s repeatability at an impact angle of 30 degrees or higher. She announced that results of this research would be available at the December 2015 session of GRSP. The expert from Japan proposed to share data from his country to be included in the cost benefit analysis. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject and on the pending issues of the proposal of amendments to the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) at its December 2015 session.

Proposal to amend document GRSG/2015/8 which would revise the procedure for determining the bumper test area under the pedestrian safety regulation.

28. Referring to the decision held under agenda item 3(a) (see para. 6.), the expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-16-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, GRSP-57-12 and GRSP-57-13), introducing the new bumper test method and the definition of bumper beam and meeting the needs expressed by the expert from OICA at the December 2014 session of GRSP. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, as amended by Annex IV (including GRSP-57-16-Rev.1) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions, as draft 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127.

Proposal to require seat-belt reminders for all seating positions, including rear positions, and to clarify the scope of the regulation.

16. The expert from Korea introduced the issue (GRSP-57-24) concerning the extension of mandatory fitting of safety-belt reminders (SBR) to rear seats as a basis to increase the low wearing rates of safety-belts in the rear seats in Asian countries. Referring to GRSP-57-24, the expert from Japan introduced GRSP-57-17-Rev.2, jointly prepared with the experts from EC and Korea, providing the basis for a proposal of amendments to the UN Regulation to introduce SBR in the rear seats. GRSP noted that the United States of America was developing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on the same matter that probably would be publicly available by the end of 2015. The expert from OICA argued that the issue of wearing rate should have a multidisciplinary approach including education and that a standalone technical solution would not solve the issue, but add burden costs to consumers. The expert from Germany added that the great wearing rate of safety-belts in his country was successfully achieved thanks to strong law enforcement. The expert from the Netherlands made a similar statement. The expert from France supported the validity of the request. However, he raised a study reservation and confirmed the need of a robust cost-benefit analysis and rationale to justify the proposal. The expert from Denmark supported the proposal, though he questioned the proposed deactivation time duration of SBR and the exclusion of multi-purpose vehicles from the scope of the proposal. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-17-Rev.2 with an official symbol.

Proposal to improve the belt routing and positioning of the universal child restraint system seat fixture during testing.

18. The expert from the Netherlands introduced GRSP-57-18 aimed at ensuring that the safety retractor would work properly in the highest and the lowest adjustment positions and other issues related to testing CRS compatibility on vehicle seating positions. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-18 with an official symbol.

Status report on the development of a global technical regulation to address high voltage electrical safety in electric vehicles and their components (such as recharging inlets and rechargeable electric energy storage systems (REESS)). The draft regulation especially concerns flammable electrolytes and covers both in-use and post-crash environments.

11. The Chair of GRSP, co-Chair of the IWG on Electric Vehicle Safety (EVS), reported on the progress of work of the IWG (GRSP-57-19). He informed GRSP that the most recent meeting of the IWG was held in Paris, March 2015. He added that despite the good progress made by the nine task forces, the expert from the United States of America participating in the IWG was of the opinion that more data was still required and as such the deadline (December 2015) of the mandate of the IWG would be of a secondary importance to delivering a robust UN GTR that would be acceptable to all Contracting Parties. The expert from Japan strongly recommended that the deadline would be respected and that a draft UN GTR would be submitted at the December 2015 session of GRSP. The expert from Germany made a similar statement. The IWG co-Chair expressed openness to a possible 2-phase approach with a one-year extension of the mandate such as: (i) deliver a draft UN GTR by December 2016 session of GRSP covering 90 per cent of the issues and then (ii) the second phase will address long term research items. The experts from Japan and Germany expressed their preference for the above proposed two-steps approach. Future meetings are planned as follows: (i) eighth meeting on 15 June 2015, Washington D.C, (ii) ninth meeting on 14-18 September 2015, Changchun, China and (iii) tenth meeting to be determined.

Revised version of the proposal (formal document GRSP/2015/9 ) to extend the scope of UN Regulation No. 129 to include non-Integral child restraint systems (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”). This version includes all corrections to the text made by the Informal Working Group on Child Restraint Systems through it 6 May 2015 session.

Revised amendment, including track changes, to introduce all the modifications needed in UN Regulation No. 129 (Enhanced Child Restraint System (ECRS)) that were 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).

29. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-22) to show the work progress of the IWG and the main content of draft 01 series of amendments incorporating provisions for booster seats (GRSP-57-20 and GRSP-57-21 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/9). He added that for Phase II of the UN Regulation there were still some pending issues such as safety for children in cars on booster cushions without a backrest and geometric definition of the test fixture (gabarit) for booster seats with an integrated backrest. The expert from Germany suggested only the inclusion of booster cushions with backrests in UN Regulation No. 129, while provisions for other kind of boosters should remain for the time being in UN Regulation No. 44 pending a whole revision of this last UN Regulation. The expert from EC endorsed the work of the IWG and he proposed further promotion of the of i-size concept to allow the installation of three ECRS on the same row seat in larger family cars. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2015 session on this subject awaiting the outcome of the IWG and requested to distribute GRSP-57-20 with an official symbol.

Request for clarification concerning head restraint testing configurations.

20. GRSP welcomed GRSP-57-23, tabled by the expert from CLEPA and showing different scenarios of seat strength testing as a result of lack of clarity of the current provisions.

21. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to keep GRSP-57-23 as a reference.

25. The expert from CLEPA reminded GRSP about informal document GRSP-57-23, that he had submitted during the fifty-seventh session of the group and showing different scenarios of seat strength testing as a result of lack of clarity of the current provisions. The expert from the Netherlands volunteered to prepare a proposal addressing the concerns of the expert from CLEPA for the December 2016 session of GRSP.

20. GRSP resumed discussion on GRSP-57-23 showing three different seat test scenarios. The expert from CLEPA reminded GRSP that the proposal aimed at clarifying which testing scenario should be used and if more than one could be allowed. The expert from EC suggested that test method B indicated in GRSP-57-23 would be more suitable. The expert from the Netherlands agreed with the comments made by the expert from EC and he suggested the inclusion of method C as well.

21. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2017 session on the basis of a revised proposal prepared by the expert from CLEPA.

Companion presentation to the proposal contained in document GRSP-57-17.

16. The expert from Korea introduced the issue (GRSP-57-24) concerning the extension of mandatory fitting of safety-belt reminders (SBR) to rear seats as a basis to increase the low wearing rates of safety-belts in the rear seats in Asian countries. Referring to GRSP-57-24, the expert from Japan introduced GRSP-57-17-Rev.2, jointly prepared with the experts from EC and Korea, providing the basis for a proposal of amendments to the UN Regulation to introduce SBR in the rear seats. GRSP noted that the United States of America was developing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on the same matter that probably would be publicly available by the end of 2015. The expert from OICA argued that the issue of wearing rate should have a multidisciplinary approach including education and that a standalone technical solution would not solve the issue, but add burden costs to consumers. The expert from Germany added that the great wearing rate of safety-belts in his country was successfully achieved thanks to strong law enforcement. The expert from the Netherlands made a similar statement. The expert from France supported the validity of the request. However, he raised a study reservation and confirmed the need of a robust cost-benefit analysis and rationale to justify the proposal. The expert from Denmark supported the proposal, though he questioned the proposed deactivation time duration of SBR and the exclusion of multi-purpose vehicles from the scope of the proposal. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this issue at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-17-Rev.2 with an official symbol.

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.

24. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/6 through a presentation (GRSP-57-26), aimed at updating the references to the European standard on toxicity and flammability of materials used to manufacture CRS. The expert from Germany informed GRSP about the latest amendments introduced in UN Regulation No. 118 by GRSG, on matters of vertical burning rate much more severe than standard EN 71 mentioned in the proposal. The expert from OICA requested exemption for built-in CRS subject to national/regional legislation (i.e.: EU Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session on the basis of a revised proposal tabled by the expert from CLEPA in cooperation with the expert from OICA.

22. GRSP noted GRSP-57-06, aimed at devising a possible definition of bikes assisted by an electric engine (pedalex) and the implication of mandatory wearing of helmets type approved according to UN Regulation No. 22. The expert from EC stated that pedalex vehicles were a green alternative to be encouraged and not bogged down by the mandatory use of bulky helmets. Therefore, he suggested to create a new class of helmets in UN Regulation No. 22 addressing riders of pedalex vehicles. The expert from the Netherlands stated that currently it was not possible to design proper ventilated helmets according to UN Regulation No. 22. He added that there was not enough market and business interest to develop aerated helmets and further research would be needed. He underlined the limits of GRSP experts to solve this issue and encouraged further research. The expert from France opposed the creation of a subclass of helmets into UN Regulation No. 22. He added that the UN Regulation provides all construction principles to allow the design of helmets for high speed bicycles. The expert from Italy made a similar statement opposing the creation of a new class of helmets into the UN Regulation. He stressed the need to protect riders of high speed bicycles that should be considered motorcycles for the level of risk they imply. He finally stated that UN Regulation No. 22 was providing the proper design solution to address this kind of vehicles. The expert from Korea echoed the statement from the experts from EC and the Netherlands and informed GRSP that the lack of success of UN Regulation No. 22 in South East Asian countries was due to the lack of adequate provisions to cope with the mobility needs of tropical countries. The expert from the United States of America informed GRSP that a new NPRM had been recently issued to amend current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS 218) to increase helmet wearing. GRSP noted a draft publication (GRSP-57-27), tabled by UNECE secretariat to improve awareness of UN Regulation No. 22 worldwide. GRSP requested his experts to provide the secretariat by first of June 2015 (close of business) information and comments to improve the draft publication.

Text prepared the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) to clarify the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat systems, advanced restraint system approval and transitional provisions. It supersedes document GRSP/2015/4 and GRSP/2015/16.

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.

Text prepared by the Informal Working Group on Frontal Impact (IWG FI) as an outcome of discussions of the Working Party on Passive Safety (GRSP) at its fifty-seventh session on developing a separate new Regulation on frontal impact focusing on requirements for restraint systems.

33. The expert from France, Chair of the Frontal Impact IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as the final draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system, with a thorax compression criterion (ThCC) of 42 mm. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, amended by GRSP-57-01 to require ThCC limit at 34 mm in the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. The expert from Japan suggested also aligning the provisions of the draft UN Regulation with the new Camera-Monitor Systems provisions of UN Regulation No. 46 (see para. 27 above). GRSP noted also the lack of availability of drawings and specification of the 5th percentile female dummy and agreed to insert a footnote as a reminder to interested parties to provide the above mentioned specifications in time for adoption of the draft UN Regulation by WP.29 and AC.1. GRSP considered GRSP-57-29-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and incorporating all the comments received during the discussion (including GRSP-57-02). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, both as amended by Annex V to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2015 sessions:
(i) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as new draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system and
(ii) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12 as 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation.

The expert from France introduced GRSP-57-31, for information only, to provide further justification of the biomechanical chest deflection thresholds introduced in the draft UN Regulation.

39. The expert from Germany, Chair of the IWG on Three-dimensional H-point machine introduced GRSP-57-30 to inform GRSP on the progress of the activity of the IWG. He added that the IWG was not yet in the position of drafting the terms of reference of the group because it was agreed to consult GRSP and WP.29 first. He added that the objective of the IWG would be to prepare an addendum to the Mutual Resolution M.R.1 for the 3-D H-point machine and, therefore, it would be necessary to use detailed information on the 3-D H-point machine, e.g. detailed drawings, which is currently only available in standards of the Society of Automotive Engineers International (SAE Int.). GRSP agreed on the request of the IWG to seek guidance to WP.29 and AC.3 at their June 2015 sessions on how to proceed to receive the above mentioned specifications and drawings from SAE International.

33. The expert from France, Chair of the Frontal Impact IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as the final draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system, with a thorax compression criterion (ThCC) of 42 mm. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, amended by GRSP-57-01 to require ThCC limit at 34 mm in the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. The expert from Japan suggested also aligning the provisions of the draft UN Regulation with the new Camera-Monitor Systems provisions of UN Regulation No. 46 (see para. 27 above). GRSP noted also the lack of availability of drawings and specification of the 5th percentile female dummy and agreed to insert a footnote as a reminder to interested parties to provide the above mentioned specifications in time for adoption of the draft UN Regulation by WP.29 and AC.1. GRSP considered GRSP-57-29-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and incorporating all the comments received during the discussion (including GRSP-57-02). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, both as amended by Annex V to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2015 sessions:
(i) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as new draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system and
(ii) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12 as 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation.

The expert from France introduced GRSP-57-31, for information only, to provide further justification of the biomechanical chest deflection thresholds introduced in the draft UN Regulation.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/1 and Add.1) proposed for the fifty-seventh session with the new agenda items 17(g) to 17(j) and 18 as well as the running order (GRSP-57-10). The list of GRSP informal working groups is contained in Annex VII of the GRSP/57 report.

3. GRSP considered and adopted the agenda (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/1 and Add.1) proposed for the fifty-seventh session with the new agenda items 17(g) to 17(j) and 18 as well as the running order (GRSP-57-10). The list of GRSP informal working groups is contained in Annex VII of the GRSP/57 report.

Proposal to amend the bumper test area procedures under the pedestrian safety GTR.
This proposal includes the “bumper beam measurement” in the procedure.

6. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-15-Rev.1, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2, and proposing the introduction of the definition of rigid bumper beam in the test area in addition to the proposed bumper test method with the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-57-12, explaining that the new definition of the test area leads to test bumper surfaces at an angle greater than the justified 30°. He added that this might result in occurrence of total and relative rotation of the leg as well as sliding along the surface and produce non-repeatable data. The expert from the United States of America requested a study reservation on this proposal based on the above concern regarding the test tool’s repeatability at an impact angle of 30 degrees or higher. She announced that results of this research would be available at the December 2015 session of GRSP. The expert from Japan proposed to share data from his country to be included in the cost benefit analysis. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject and on the pending issues of the proposal of amendments to the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) at its December 2015 session.

8. The expert from EC clarified that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2, had been prepared by the experts of the Task Force on Bumper Test Area (TF-BTA) which is a subgroup of the IWG on Phase 2 of the UN GTR that would incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). GRSP noted that once the issue of the Injury Assessment References Values (IARVs) for the flexible lower legform (FlexPLI) to bumper test would be agreed upon by GRSP on the basis of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2 to improve bumper test, the text would be incorporated into the draft proposal of UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15).

6. The expert from the United States of America announced that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had agreed to accept Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs) to move Phase 2 forward and to incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). He added that IARVs could change as a result of cost benefits analysis conducted during the adoption process of the GTR when transposed into the national legislation of Contracting Parties. Accordingly, he proposed GRSP-60-17 to amend Part A of the statement of technical rationale and to justify of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15. Moreover, he reported that his administration had not yet completed its cost-benefit analysis, but the United States of America New Car Assessment Programme was already using the FlexPLI and the new improved bumper test proposed by the Task Force on Bumper Test Area (TF-BTA) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2). He concluded that for the new proposed requirements for the head form tests (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/5) some more analysis would be needed.

7. Referring to the statement of the expert from the United States of America, GRSP noted that at its May 2017 session it would likely be in the position to recommend the Phase 2 of the GTR as a full package: ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2 and GRSP-60-17. The expert from the United States of America announced that a meeting of the IWG in Washington, D.C. would be scheduled at the beginning of 2017. Thus, GRSP recommended for its May 2017 session:

1. IWG to provide a final report of the development of Phase 2 (update of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16, fifth status report of the IWG),
2. IWG to finalise the analysis because the new headform test were incorporated as well (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/5) and
3. the secretariat to distribute GRSP-60-17 with an official symbol.

5. The expert from Germany informed GRSP that the IWG had planned to meet for the last time to move Phase 2 forward and incorporate the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2017 session on a consolidated document provided by the IWG incorporating: (i) the draft amendment to the UN GTR on FlexPLI (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15), (ii) the new improved bumper test proposed by the Task Force on Bumper Test Area (TF-BTA) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) and (iii) the Injury Assessment Reference Values (IARVs)(ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2017/3). Moreover, the IWG would provide, at that time, a final report of the activities of the group based on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16. The Chair of GRSP offered to host the meeting of the IWG at its earliest convenience in Washington, D.C.

5. The expert from Germany, on behalf of the Chair of the IWG, informed GRSP that the group had met on 24 November 2017. As a result of this meeting, he was able to introduce the consolidated text of draft Amendment 2 to UN GTR No. 9 (GRSP-62-15-Rev.1), incorporating: (a) the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15), (b) the new bumper test area (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) and the removal of the study reservation on the Injury Assessment Values (IARVs) (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2017/3). He also introduced the progress report of the IWG (GRSP-62-16) superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16. GRSP was not yet in the position to adopt the proposal and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-62-15-Rev.1 and GRSP-62-16 with official symbols for final review at its May 2018 session. Moreover, GRSP requested the IWG to draft Addendum 3 to Mutual Resolution No. 1 of the 1958 and the 1998 Agreements to provide drawings and technical specifications of the FlexPLI. GRSP also requested the IWG to liaise with the FlexPLI manufacturer to have free availability of the above-mentioned technical information. Finally, GRSP agreed to seek endorsement from WP.29 and the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) at their March 2018 sessions to extend the mandate of the IWG by one year.

Proposal to introduce a definition for “bucket seat” ( front passenger seat having a non-adjustable seat back) which would be exempt from the ISOFIX anchorage requirements. The proposal also exempts certain vehicle/seating configurations from ISOFIX requirements, addressing cases where the vehicle design and purpose mitigate against the use of such child restraints and ISOFIX systems.

12. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/3, aimed at improving the provisions concerning vehicles of category M1 having only one seat row and introducing a new definition of “bucket seat”. The expert from the Netherlands noted that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2015/46, submitted for consideration and voting at the June 2015 session of WP.29 was amending the same provisions and that further proposal of amendments would create confusion. The expert from OICA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/3. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/3 as a reference in the agenda of that session.

Proposal to clarify dynamic testing, rear seat system, advanced restraint system approval, and transitional provisions under UN R16.

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.

Text prepared by the UN R44 Technical Services Group to clarify the regulation, including test failure parameters, CRS displacement or locking systems, seat installation color coding systems, and use of load limiting devices. The test procedure would be modified, including an increase in the applied load to exceed the maximum allowed resistance to permit sliding of the strap through the quick adjuster and through rigid parts, increased tolerances related thereto, deletion of the option for shorter shift (deemed unnecessary since it is a test on the strap, not on the complete component), and modification of drawings to improve consistency with the text.

23. The expert from Spain introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/5, to improve dynamic test provisions for CRS and to cope with the presence of load limiters on safety belts used to fix CRS. GRSP adopted the proposal not amended and requested the secretariat to submit the proposal for consideration and vote at the November 2015 sessions of WP.29 and AC.3 as draft Supplement 10 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 44.

Proposal to amend the toxicity and flammability declarations via references to EN71 (European safety standards).

24. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/6 through a presentation (GRSP-57-26), aimed at updating the references to the European standard on toxicity and flammability of materials used to manufacture CRS. The expert from Germany informed GRSP about the latest amendments introduced in UN Regulation No. 118 by GRSG, on matters of vertical burning rate much more severe than standard EN 71 mentioned in the proposal. The expert from OICA requested exemption for built-in CRS subject to national/regional legislation (i.e.: EU Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session on the basis of a revised proposal tabled by the expert from CLEPA in cooperation with the expert from OICA.

Proposal to amend the regulation frontal impacts with a view towards the establishment of a new regulation on frontal impact testing for occupant restraint systems (full width rigid barrier test). The proposal increases the thorax compression criterion (ThCC) stringency to 42 mm (from 50 mm).

26. The expert from France, Chair of the frontal impact (FI) IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7 to align the UN Regulation No. 94 with the provisions of new draft UN Regulation (full-width frontal collision) on the protection of older occupants. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7, as amended by Annex III (including GRSP-57-02) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/7 as amended to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as draft 03 series of amendment to UN Regulation No. 94.

Proposal from the Bumper Test Area Task Force to revise the procedure for determining the bumper test area under the pedestrian safety regulation. The proposal introduces a “bumper beam” method for determining the test area and includes a September 2017 transition date.

28. Referring to the decision held under agenda item 3(a) (see para. 6.), the expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-16-Rev.1 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, GRSP-57-12 and GRSP-57-13), introducing the new bumper test method and the definition of bumper beam and meeting the needs expressed by the expert from OICA at the December 2014 session of GRSP. GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/8, as amended by Annex IV (including GRSP-57-16-Rev.1) to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions, as draft 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 127.

Proposal to extend the scope of UN Regulation No. 129 to include non-Integral child restraint systems (“Universal Booster” or “Specific to vehicle Booster”) (Development Phase 2 of the UN Regulation).

29. The expert from France, Chair of the IWG on Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS), introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-22) to show the work progress of the IWG and the main content of draft 01 series of amendments incorporating provisions for booster seats (GRSP-57-20 and GRSP-57-21 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/9). He added that for Phase II of the UN Regulation there were still some pending issues such as safety for children in cars on booster cushions without a backrest and geometric definition of the test fixture (gabarit) for booster seats with an integrated backrest. The expert from Germany suggested only the inclusion of booster cushions with backrests in UN Regulation No. 129, while provisions for other kind of boosters should remain for the time being in UN Regulation No. 44 pending a whole revision of this last UN Regulation. The expert from EC endorsed the work of the IWG and he proposed further promotion of the of i-size concept to allow the installation of three ECRS on the same row seat in larger family cars. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2015 session on this subject awaiting the outcome of the IWG and requested to distribute GRSP-57-20 with an official symbol.

Proposal for Supplement 7 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 14 and for Supplement 6 to the 06 series of amendments to Regulation No. 16 to clarify the texts related to the recently expanded height requirements for the effective upper belt anchorage (Supplement 4 to the 07 series of amendments to Regulation No. 14).

34. GRSP noted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/10, tabled by the expert from the Netherlands to clarify that the adjustment device for the height of the effective upper anchorage (introduced recently for buses) might be part of the anchorage or of the safety-belt requirements. The expert from Denmark expressed concerns that the system would be used as a CRS in buses, as has happened in the past because it is cheaper than a real CRS. The expert from France supported in principle the proposal pending further clarifications. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2015 session on the basis of a revised proposal voluntarily prepared by the expert from the Netherlands.

Draft new Regulation prepared by the Informal Working Group on Frontal Impact to establish uniform provisions for the approval of passenger cars with regard to their occupant-restraint system performance in the event of a frontal collision.

33. The expert from France, Chair of the Frontal Impact IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as the final draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system, with a thorax compression criterion (ThCC) of 42 mm. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, amended by GRSP-57-01 to require ThCC limit at 34 mm in the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. The expert from Japan suggested also aligning the provisions of the draft UN Regulation with the new Camera-Monitor Systems provisions of UN Regulation No. 46 (see para. 27 above). GRSP noted also the lack of availability of drawings and specification of the 5th percentile female dummy and agreed to insert a footnote as a reminder to interested parties to provide the above mentioned specifications in time for adoption of the draft UN Regulation by WP.29 and AC.1. GRSP considered GRSP-57-29-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and incorporating all the comments received during the discussion (including GRSP-57-02). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, both as amended by Annex V to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2015 sessions:
(i) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as new draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system and
(ii) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12 as 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation.

The expert from France introduced GRSP-57-31, for information only, to provide further justification of the biomechanical chest deflection thresholds introduced in the draft UN Regulation.

Proposal from the Informal Working Group on Frontal Impact to increase the stringency of the Thorax Compression Criterion (ThCC) for the Hybrid III 5th female dummy in the passenger seat to 34 mm under the proposed new regulation to test the performance of occupant restraint systems in the event of a frontal collision. The transition date would be 1 September 2020.

33. The expert from France, Chair of the Frontal Impact IWG, introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as the final draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system, with a thorax compression criterion (ThCC) of 42 mm. He also introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, amended by GRSP-57-01 to require ThCC limit at 34 mm in the 01 series of amendments to the UN Regulation. The expert from Japan suggested also aligning the provisions of the draft UN Regulation with the new Camera-Monitor Systems provisions of UN Regulation No. 46 (see para. 27 above). GRSP noted also the lack of availability of drawings and specification of the 5th percentile female dummy and agreed to insert a footnote as a reminder to interested parties to provide the above mentioned specifications in time for adoption of the draft UN Regulation by WP.29 and AC.1. GRSP considered GRSP-57-29-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and incorporating all the comments received during the discussion (including GRSP-57-02). Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12, both as amended by Annex V to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit for consideration and vote to WP.29 and AC.1 at their November 2015 sessions:
(i) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/11 as new draft UN Regulation on frontal impact with focus on the restraint system and
(ii) ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/12 as 01 series of amendments to the new UN Regulation.

The expert from France introduced GRSP-57-31, for information only, to provide further justification of the biomechanical chest deflection thresholds introduced in the draft UN Regulation.

Proposal to clarify the installation provisions for “general use” safety-belts (Annex 1B, item 12).

14. GRSP considered ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/13, aimed at clarifying the provisions for the approval of “general-use” safety-belts. GRSP adopted the proposal as amended by Annex II to this report. The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/13 to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as draft Supplement 6 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 16.

27. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2015/13 aligning the provisions of UN Regulation No. 94 with the new provisions on Camera-Monitor Systems provisions in UN Regulation No. 46 (Devices for indirect vision). GRSP adopted the proposal, as reproduced by Annex III (including GRSP-57-02), and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration at their November 2015 sessions, as draft Supplement 6 to the 02 series of amendments and as part of (see para. 26) the draft 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 94.

Proposal to expand the application area of the energy absorption criteria for seating in order to facilitate the optimization of seat-belt load limiters by allowing limited occupant contact with these seat areas.

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.

19. Referring to the discussion held under agenda item 7 (see para. 13 above), the expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14, calling for increased energy absorption capabilities on the rear part of seat backs, taking into account the increased forward displacement of the rear occupants restrained by new safety-belts equipped with improved load limiter devices. However, he proposed to defer the discussion at the December 2015 session of GRSP, since the proposal would involve a parallel amendment to UN Regulation No. 16 to extend contact requirements of occupants against rear seats backs. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its next session on the basis of a new proposal as an outcome of an exchange of views among the experts from the Netherlands, CLEPA, OICA and other interested parties.

26. The expert from CLEPA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18, aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of the rear seat restraint systems. She explained that the proposal aimed at updating requirements that were originally designed for seating positions that did not yet require three-point safety-belts; she added that the situation had developed with the introduction of load limiters that allowed for further displacement of occupants. Comments from GRSP experts on the proposal were incorporated into GRSP-58-35 during discussion. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/27 that was also linked to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18 because the of displacement of occupants due to safety belt load limiters that were installed on seats other than front seats. He explained that the proposal needed corresponding amendments to UN Regulations Nos. 21, 25 and 80. The expert from OICA argued that the proposal should address just those seating positions that needed energy absorption requirements. The expert from CLEPA also underlined the need to focus the energy dissipation tests on the parts of back seats where actual impacts occur.

27. Finally, GRSP agreed to establish a group of interested experts, led by the expert from the Netherlands, on new restraint system technology to develop provisions on this matter for all the relevant UN Regulations. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2016 session and to refer ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/18, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/27 and GRSP-58-35 to the group of interested experts.

Proposal to allow the installation of different light colours on seat-belt buckles to improve visibility. The proposal also addresses the alignment of ambient light designs in modern cars with the functional element of an occupant protection device to support its visual exposition in the vehicle compartment.

15. GRSP noted GRSP-57-14-Rev.1 superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15 to clarify the installation of different light colors on the buckle and to improve its visibility in dark conditions for the wearer and facilitate rescue of occupants. The expert from EC underlined that the proposal was not aimed at introducing a tell-tale but rather a comfort system. Finally, GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15, as amended by Annex II to this report (including GRSP-57-14-Rev.1). The secretariat was requested to submit ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/15 to WP.29 and AC.1, for consideration and vote at their November 2015 sessions as part of (see para. 14 above) draft Supplement 6 to the 06 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 16.

Updated proposal to clarify dynamic testing, rear seat system, advanced restraint system approval, and transitional provisions under UN R16, superseding document GRSP/2015/4.

13. The expert from CLEPA introduced a presentation (GRSP-57-25) to explain ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/16 and GRSP-57-03 (superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/4) aimed at clarifying the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system and advanced restraint system approval. The expert from Japan argued that the proposal was not assessing the air-bag performance through UN Regulation No. 94 because it was addressing other occupants than those seating in lateral frontal positions. The expert from France clarified that the proposal was addressing the concept of restraint systems to other seating positions than front outboard positions. The expert from EC suggested aligning the proposed provisions with those of UN Regulation No. 21, concerning the speed of impact of seating position protected by an air-bag. Accordingly, the expert from CLEPA introduced GRSP-57-28 incorporating the comments received during the discussion. The experts from France and Japan raised study reservations on the proposal. Moreover, the expert from the Netherlands noted that the proposal would affect not only the safety-belt component but also the vehicle. The experts from EC and OICA stated that the proposal should be discussed as a full package with the corresponding amendment to UN Regulation No. 17, namely ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/14 (see para. 19 below). GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2015 session and requested the secretariat to distribute GRSP-57-28 with an official symbol.