Documents (Latest posted on 20 Sep 2021)
Related Meetings : Working Party on Passive Safety | Session 63
Documentation Discussion/Report

18. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-63-23, to clarify which requirements should be applied to approve the safety-belt of the driver’s. GRSP endorsed the proposal and agreed to finalize its discussion by combining GRSP-63-23 with GRSP-63-01-Rev.1 under agenda item 24 (see para. 42 below).

40. The experts from Global NCAP and from ANEC on behalf of Consumers International introduced GRSP-63-14 which proposes to include L7 (quadricycles) categories of vehicles in the scope of UN Regulation No. 137, in line with the recommendation of the WP.29 (GRSP-63-15 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1141, para. 41) aimed at offering a minimum protection to L7 vehicle occupants in case of a crash. They also mentioned GRSP-63-16, for information, concerning the “Public Interest Litigation Regarding Motor Vehicle Safety in India”. They added that quadricycles are not subject to the same legislation as conventional passenger cars and their crashworthiness should be addressed by GRSP as recommended by WP.29. They stressed the risk that consumers buy this type of vehicle to cater to an individual’s need for a car but without being informed about the lack of safety requirements in those vehicles which might expose them to serious injuries in case of a crash. They indicated that NCAP tests showed cases of safety-belts that snapped off and even ineffective airbags and revealing that these types of restraint systems and performance of this type of vehicles were far below similarly-sized passenger car. Moreover, they informed GRSP that L7 vehicles are becoming more popular, also because they are considered as new environmentally friendly mobility solutions and are expected to become more numerous in the future. They clarified that the proposal of Global NCAP and Consumer International to extend the scope of UN Regulation No. 137 to L7 vehicle would be in line with the test speed scenarios and biomechanical injury criteria that provide for the safety of occupants, as in other types of passenger vehicles.

41. The expert from the Republic of Korea was full in support of GRSP-63-14 since his country had recently experienced a surge of this type of vehicles on its roads. The expert from Italy argued that the mass and powertrain of L7 differ from those of M1 and that these factors should be analysed in crash test. The expert from EC reminded GRSP about a European Union study (see ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/61 para. 31) on an initial assessment of the additional functional safety of this category of vehicles. He explained that the study showed that the low frequency of crashes in Europe of these types of vehicle did not justify an urgent action plan. Moreover, he requested justification on why the L6 category was not included in the proposal. He reminded GRSP about the existence of many UN Regulations covering safety provisions of L7 categories. The expert from Japan agreed with him, however, he requested further investigations. The expert from the Russian Federation agreed with the expert from EC and expressed concern that more severe requirements would eliminate this category of vehicles. The expert from India agreed with a more in-depth investigation on actual safety issues for this category of vehicles and confirmed that these vehicles were becoming relevant in the market of his country. The expert from the Netherlands supported further in-depth study and finding a balanced solution. GRSP decided to resume discussion on this subject at its December 2018 session and to keep GRSP-63-14 as a reference document.

42. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-63-01-Rev.1, amending ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2017/27 on the information of the airbag warning label about correctly installing CRS on a passenger seat with an activated frontal airbag. GRSP noted that the proposal also incorporated GRSP-63-01-Rev.1 (see para. 18 above). GRSP adopted ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2017/27, as amended by Annex X to the session report. The secretariat was requested to submit the proposal for consideration and vote at the November 2018 sessions of WP.29 and AC.1 as:

  1. Draft 08 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 16
  2. Draft Supplement 15 to the 04 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 44
  3. Draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 94
  4. Part of (see paras. 31 and 34 above) draft Supplement 5 to the 01 series of amendments, as part of (see paras. 31 and 34 above) draft Supplement 4 to the 02 series of amendments and as part of (see paras. 31 and 34 above) draft Supplement 1 to the 03 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 129 and
  5. Draft Supplement 2 to the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 137.

43. Finally, the expert from OICA withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2018/9.

45. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-63-31, which provides an overview of the recently adopted Revision of the General Safety Regulation and Pedestrian Safety Regulation of the European Union. He explained that among the most important items addressed by the revision, of concern to GRSP, was the extension of the pedestrian vehicle test zone to include windscreen area. He said that the adopted revision would be followed‑up by proposals to GRSP to align the UN Regulations under its responsibility.

46. The expert from the Republic of Korea introduced GRSP-63-21 on the current harmonization activity of Korean Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (KMVSS) with UN Regulations and UN GTRs on occupant protection and fuel integrity system. He introduced the strategy of the roadmap of the Korean New Car Assessment Programme (KNCAP) for the period 2019-2023.