34. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/16, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/7, proposing requirements for vehicles with automatically activated door locking systems. GRSP agreed to remove the square brackets from paragraph 18.104.22.168. and adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2012/16, not amended. The secretariat was requested to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 at their June 2013 sessions for consideration and vote as draft Supplement 4 to the 02 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 94.
35. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-52-24 to show the outcome of the frontal impact and compatibility assessment research (FIMCAR) as part of the seventh programme of research of the European Union. He indicated that amongst the candidate barriers to assess compatibility, the full-width deformable barrier (FWDB) showed better results for the time being.
36. The expert from France, Chair of the informal working group on Frontal Impact, introduced the last progress report of the group (GRSP-52-25). He reiterated that the informal working group was considering existing results from ongoing research programmes on this matter at the international level (i.e. FIMCAR) and that as a follow‐up to these results, the group would propose an amendment to UN Regulation No. 94 by the May 2014 session of GRSP. Accordingly, he indicated three possible scenarios amending the UN Regulation:
(a) no change to the current requirements (benefits of 2.0 percent or less of all vehicle occupants Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI));
37. Furthermore, for scenario (b) and © he added that the inclusion of a FWDB would lead only to slightly increased benefits (0.3 to 0.8 percent as stated in the FIMCAR final report) and the airbag triggering time more linked to real world. However, he concluded that the option of a Full Width Rigid Barrier (FWRB), even if it would introduce slightly lower benefits, this option would give higher harmonization potentials (Australia, Japan, and United States). Finally, he asked GRSP experts to clearly indicate their barrier preference to better focus the efforts of the informal working group. The expert from Germany stated that due to the time constraints for the first phase of improving UN Regulation No. 94, a FWRB could be the solution for Phase 1 and the FWDB would remain as a candidate for the Phase 2.
38. The majority of GRSP experts were not in a position to provide such an indication and agreed to resume discussion on this matter at its May 2013 session, awaiting the results of a cost benefit analysis for both FWDB and FWRB prepared by the informal working group.
39. The expert from FIA Foundation informed GRSP about the results of third Latin American New Car Assessment Programme (LANCAP) recently held (GRSP-52-13). He gave a presentation (GRSP-52-29) informing that as a conclusion of the third phase of the programme, LANCAP was recommending all Latin American governments to make the requirements of UN Regulation No. 94 mandatory for all cars sold in their markets.
16. No new information was provided for this agenda item.