The proposed test makes a few minor adaptations and clarifications to the existing requirements.

Proposal to transpose the amendment 1 to UN GTR13, Phase 2 (GTR13-PH2). This proposal contains numbers of improvements to the original GTR to promote technical harmonisation and to achieve enhanced reproducibility and reproducibility of the test requirements, higher clarity and consistency, adaptation to technical progress,

Proposal enables alternative seating positions during driving and introduces alternative
positions for anchorage points fitted to the seat structure.

Proposal aims to introduce requirements concerning post-crash safety of hydrogen fuelled vehicles

The proposal aims to amend the details of the requirements for post-crash safety of hydrogen fuelled vehicles

The proposal aims to introduce requirements concerning post-crash safety of hydrogen fuelled vehicles

The proposal aims to amend the details of the requirements for post-crash safety of hydrogen fuelled vehicles.

The proposal aims to introduce requirements concerning post-crash safety of hydrogen fuelled vehicles.

Proposal to facilitate the administrative control of two-stage requirements

Proposal makes a few minor adaptations and clarifications to the existing requirements.

Proposal to introduce an optional (on the choice of the manufacturer) test procedure for frontal airbags in combination with rearward facing child restraint systems in the rear seat to demonstrate that no deactivation of the airbag is needed. The proposal addresses new airbag technologies pursuant to discussions during the December 2021 session of GRSP (see GRSP/70, paragraph 12). The proposal was revised to limit the scope to specific Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS).

Proposal for clarifications to the text (subsequent to documents WP.29/2022/70, WP.29/2022/129 and WP.29/2022/130), especially relating to the definitions of the cowl monitoring, the windscreen, and the jerk areas.

Proposal for clarifications to the text (subsequent to documents WP.29/2022/70, WP.29/2022/129 and WP.29/2022/130), especially relating to the definitions of the cowl monitoring, the windscreen, and the jerk areas.

Supporting information on the proposal to allow for parking brake warning device actuation after an electric control transmission system produces a stable parked state.

Proposal to ensure the continuity of the ASTM Method E1337 for the measurement of the Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) by introducing a reference to the new American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Reference Test Tyre F2493.

Comments on the proposal for amendments to the UN Regulation on Cyber Security Management.

Proposal to introduce new text concerning activation: “Notwithstanding the activation criteria above and following the activation request at any type of road by a deliberate action with the same means as for ACSF of Category B1, the ACSF of Category C may turn automatically to standby mode when entering a type of road as described above.”

Proposal for a provision to address use of a steering robot with mechanical power greater than 1200 W to enable testing of certain direct (low) steering gear ratio systems due to the given 0.7 Hz sine frequency.

Proposal to clarify the interpretation of “engine start/run cycle”.

Proposal to ensure the continuity of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method E1337 for the measurement of the Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) in UN Regulation No. 140, by introducing a reference to the new ASTM Standard Reference Test Tyre F2493.

Proposal to clarify the logical cascade of actions relative to ACSF B1 and ACSF C systems:

When the same means is used by the driver to simultaneously activate the Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category B1 (ACSF B1) and of category C (ACSF C), both functions switch to standby mode when the vehicle enters an ACSF C eligible road. But if the road is non-eligible to ACSF C, then only the ACSF B1 is activated.

With the current text of the regulation, once the vehicle moves to an ACSF C eligible road, the driver must operate again the means to activate the ACSF C. This second deliberate action is confusing for the driver since it makes the manipulation more complex. The current wording actually discourages most drivers from using this assistance function.

The proposed wording permits the following, logical, cascade of actions:

1. The driver has done a deliberate action to activate ACSF B1 and ACSF C (on a non-eligible road); then
2. He drives into an eligible road, and is clearly informed thereof; then
3. He initiates a lane change procedure by activating e.g. the direction indicator.