Search

The article presents a final rule issued by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the Department of Transportation. It states that this action completes NHTSA's response to petitions for reconsideration of an October 2008 final rule amending the definition of the term "designated seating position" as used in the federal motor vehicle safety standards. It announces that this final rule will take effect on December 15, 2013.

The article focuses on the proposal of the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for the amendment of the Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) on reflective devices, lamps, and associated equipment. It says that the design flexibility of the manufacturer is increased without increasing the cost through the adoption of the proposal. Moreover, comments on the adoption of the license plate mounted in the European Economic Community (EEC) are solicited.

The article presents notice from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that seek comments on its proposed rulemaking in the U.S. It provides summary and supplementary information of the proposed ruling that focused on the Tier three motor vehicle emission and fuel standards and air pollution. It also mentions the contact person for further information of the ruling and the deadline of the submission for comments.

The article offers updates on rules and regulations from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as of February 11, 2013. It discusses the final rule in response to petition for reconsideration for the federal motor vehicle safety standard for air brake systems, requiring adequate enhancements in stopping distance performance on new truck tractors. It says that the final rule takes effect on February 11, 2013.

The article informs about a notice issued by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The notice presents the final decision of NHTSA informing that certain Canadian motor vehicles which are not certified with all Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) but are Canadian motor vehicle safety standards (CMVSS), are eligible for importation. A table is presented containing the FMVSS focusing on brake hoses, rearview mirror and brake fluids and their equivalent CMVSS.

The article presents information on a notice issued by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation with an intention to propose revisions to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard for accelerator control systems. The revision will be proposed in accordance with the U.S. Privacy Act of 1974 and the Code of Federal Regulations. The public comments have been invited by the NHTSA till June 15, 2012 regarding the proposed revisions.

The article presents information on a final rule issued by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation to declare certain amendments in the regulations for installation of platform lift systems in the motor vehicles. The regulations are in accordance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards to prevent accidents during lift operation. It further mentions that the rule is effective on May 7, 2012.

The article presents information on a notice issued by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation with an intention to declare the motor vehicle safety standard for child restraint systems. As per the notice, the declaration has been made in accordance with the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. According to the notice, the public comments have been invited by the NHTSA till April 12, 2012.

More than a quarter of automobiles and about a third of light trucks (including sport utility vehicles, vans, and pickup trucks) on the roadways of the United States have one or more tires underinflated 8 pounds per square inch (psi) or more below the level recommended by the vehicle manufacturer, according to a report by the Department of Transportation's (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). A decrease in tire pressure can be caused by poor maintenance, driving habits, punctures, road conditions, and the quality of material used in tire construction. According to tire experts, under normal driving conditions, air-filled tires can lose from 1 to 2 psi per month as air permeates through the tires. Vehicles with underinflated tires have had handling problems that caused crashes resulting in fatalities and injuries. In addition, the fuel economy of vehicles driving on underinflated tires is slightly lower. In response to a Congressional request for information on these issues, we addressed the following questions: (1) What is the impact of tire underinflation on safety and fuel economy, and what actions has the federal government taken to promote proper tire inflation? and (2) what technologies are currently available to reduce underinflation and what are their implications for safety and fuel economy? Underinflated tires impact a driver's ability to control a vehicle against skidding, blowouts, and other tire failures. While not a leading cause of highway accidents and fatalities, a NHTSA study shows that, in 1999, underinflated tires contributed to 247, or 0.8 percent, of 32,061 fatalities and 23,100, or 0.8 percent, of almost 3 million injuries. In addition, NHTSA estimates that 41 vehicular-related deaths occur annually because of blowouts alone from underinflated tires. Moreover, tires that are not inflated to the appropriate pressure result in a slight decline in fuel economy. The federal government is using legislation, public information, and educational programs to inform the public about tire underinflation. For example, the Transportation Recall Enhancement Accountability Documentation (TREAD) Act of 2000 required NHTSA to develop regulations for installing a tire pressure monitoring system in new passenger cars and light trucks. These regulations are being phased in and will be effective for all new passenger cars and light trucks produced for the 2008 model year. In addition, NHTSA works with industry to promote public awareness of the importance of properly inflated tires, and GSA provides information on the issue to federal agencies, such as DOD, that lease vehicles. Several technologies are currently available to reduce tire underinflation, and all of them have the potential to increase safety and fuel economy when used appropriately. The federal government and industry recommend using a tire pressure gauge to check pressure regularly and reinflate tires to maintain proper inflation. Also,... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GAO reviewed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) new rule on average fuel economy standards for light trucks model years 2008-2011. GAO found that (1) the rule reforms the structure of the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) program for light trucks and establishes higher CAFE standards for model years 2008-2011 for light trucks; and (2) NHTSA complied with applicable requirements in promulgating the rule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2003, 42,643 people were killed and more than 2.8 million people were injured in motor vehicle crashes. Efforts to reduce fatalities on the nation's roadways include the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration's (NHTSA) New Car Assessment Program. Under this program, NHTSA conducts vehicle crash and rollover tests to encourage manufacturers to make safety improvements to new vehicles and provide the public with information on the relative safety of vehicles. GAO examined (1) how NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program crash tests vehicles, rates their safety, and reports the results to the public; (2) how NHTSA's program compares to other programs that crash test vehicles and report results to the public; and (3) the impact of the program and opportunities to enhance its effectiveness. NHTSA conducts three types of tests in the New Car Assessment Program--full frontal and angled side crash tests and a rollover test. Each year, NHTSA tests new vehicles that are expected to have high sales volume, have been redesigned with structural changes, or have improved safety equipment. Based on test results, vehicles receive ratings from one to five stars, with five stars being the best, to indicate the vehicles' relative crashworthiness and which are less likely to roll over. NHTSA makes ratings available to the public on the Internet and through a brochure. Other publications, such as Consumer Reports, use NHTSA's test results in their safety assessments. GAO identified four other programs--the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's program and the New Car Assessment Programs in Australia, Europe, and Japan--that crash test vehicles and report the results to the public. They share the goals of encouraging manufacturers to improve vehicle safety and providing safety information to consumers. These programs conduct different types of frontal and side crash tests, and some perform other tests, such as pedestrian tests, that are not conducted under the U.S. program. Only the U.S. program conducts a rollover test. The other programs measure test results differently and include more potential injuries to occupants in ratings. They also reported their test results differently, with all summarizing at least some of the scores or combining them into an overall crashworthiness rating to make comparisons easier. NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program has been successful in encouraging manufacturers to make safer vehicles and providing information to consumers. However, the program is at a crossroads where it will need to change to maintain its relevance. The usefulness of the current tests has been eroded by the growing number of larger pickups, minivans, and sport utility vehicles in the vehicle fleet since the program began. In addition, NCAP scores have increased to the point where there is little difference in vehicle ratings. As a result, the program provides little incentive for manufacturers to further improve safety, and consumers can see few differences among new vehicles. Opportunities to enhance the program include developing approaches to better measure the interaction of large and small vehicles and occupant protection in rollovers, rating technologies that help prevent crashes, and using different injury measures to rate the crash results. NHTSA also has opportunities to enhance the presentation and timeliness of the information provided to consumers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diesel engine emissions pose health risks, but one major source--heavy-duty diesel vehicles--is critical for our economy. To reduce risks, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set stringent emissions standards for diesel engines. In 1998, EPA found that some engine makers were violating standards, so they agreed to build engines that meet 2004 standards early, by October 2002. EPA has set even more stringent standards for 2007. GAO was asked to (1) assess the October 2002 deadline's effects on industry and emissions, and (2) obtain stakeholders' views on the readiness of technology for the 2007 standards and EPA's efforts to ensure this. GAO analyzed information from EPA, 10 large trucking companies, the engine makers subject to the early deadline, and other stakeholders. Implementing the 2004 diesel emissions standards 15 months early disrupted some industries' operations but also helped reduce pollution earlier. More specifically, because some manufacturers had to build new engines sooner than planned, most could not provide trucking companies with prototype engines early enough to test. Concerned that the new engines would be costly and unreliable, some of the companies said they bought more trucks with old engines than planned before October 2002. Our analysis of truck production and financial data also shows this surge. This adversely affected some companies' operations and profits. To meet the increased demand for trucks with old engines, some manufacturers reported that they ramped up production of such engines before October. But when demand subsequently dropped, they had to decrease production and release workers, reducing profits and disrupting operations, at least until demand increased later in 2003. Manufacturers of the new engines also continued to lose market share to manufacturers that either did not have to meet the early date, or that did but chose not to, paying penalties instead. While accelerating the schedule for new engines affected some industries, it accelerated emissions benefits, although not to the extent or in the time frames anticipated. For example, EPA roughly estimated that its agreements with engine manufacturers that violated standards would reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by about 4 million tons over the life of the engines. But because companies initially bought more trucks with old engines and owners are now operating trucks longer, some of the expected emissions reductions will be delayed. As for the 2007 standards, EPA has taken a number of steps to aid the transition to the new diesel engines and fuel, but some stakeholders would like more help. Most engine, emissions control, and fuel industry representatives said the needed technologies will be ready on time; but other engine, trucking, and fuel representatives have concerns and would like more help to ensure that the technology will be available. For example, manufacturers plan to have limited numbers of prototype engines ready for a few fleets to test by mid- to late-2005-- trucking companies say they need new engines 18 to 24 months before the 2007 deadline to test the engines in all weather conditions and to develop their longterm purchasing plans. Some companies, however, are concerned that providing test engines to only a few fleets may not provide the industry as a whole with sufficient information to judge the engines' performance. In addition, they are still concerned that the new engines may be too costly and much less fuelefficient. As a result, they expect companies will again buy more trucks with old engines before the deadline, disrupting industry operations and emissions benefits. The fuel industry representatives said they can produce the low-sulfur fuel the new engines require on time and see no reason to delay the standards. Nevertheless, they worry the fuel initially may not be available nationwide and it may be difficult not to contaminate it with other fuels in the distribution system. Environmental and health groups do not want to delay the standards or the expected emissions benefits. Some stakeholders would like more information on technological progress. In addition, they would like more reassurance--such as from an independent review panel--that the technology will be ready on time and additional assistance--such as economic incentives--to encourage timely purchases of trucks with the new technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued a rule requiring vehicle manufacturers to install advanced air bag systems in an increasing number of cars beginning in 2003. This report reviews the development of technologies that vehicle manufacturers plan to use to comply with the advanced air bag rule. GAO found that some advanced air bag technologies are now being installed in vehicles and others are still being developed. The principal advanced technology being installed in some vehicles is an air bag that can inflate with lower or higher levels of power--rather than a single level--depending on the severity of the crash. Although frontal air bag systems with these advanced technologies are an improvement over previous systems, they do not contain all of the features that manufacturers believe are needed to meet the requirements of the advanced air bag rule, such as sensors that can distinguish among different types of occupants. To meet the requirements, manufacturers plan to introduce new technologies as well as continue to make further improvements in current technologies. The key new technologies that manufacturers plan to introduce are occupant classification sensors that can distinguish among infants and children (as well as their safety seats) and adults on the passenger side. The addition of these sensors is necessary to allow the air bag system to provide the appropriate deployment level--such as no deployment, low power, or high power--depending on the type of occupant. The primary challenge in meeting the requirements in the advanced air bag rule is the development of occupant classification sensors that are accurate, durable, and suitable for mass production. Expenditures on advanced air bag research and development by NHTSA and vehicle manufacturers have increased since 1998, when Congress mandated the installation of advanced air bags in future vehicles. The information aggregated from four manufacturers shows that these expenditures rose by about 275 percent from 1998 through 2000 and are anticipated to increase overall by about 375 percent from 1998 through 2003, when the requirements in the advanced air bag rule take effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority to regulate aftermarket crash parts, the agency has not developed safety standards for them because it has not determined that any aftermarket crash parts contain safety-related defects. NHTSA has more limited authority to regulate the use of recycled air bags. NHTSA could elect to develop safety standards for occupant restraint systems under the used vehicle provision of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. NHTSA has not developed such standards because it has not identified significant problems with occupant restraint systems that could be addressed by state motor vehicle inspection programs. The limitations of NHTSA's complaint system may hamper NHTSA's ability to detect safety-related trends through broad key-word searches of its complaint database and make it unlikely that NHTSA can identify all unsafe parts. In addition, the ability to recall unsafe aftermarket crash parts is limited because some parts are not stamped with the manufacturer's name and there is no trail leading from the manufacturer to the ultimate user of the part. Two studies on the safety of recycled airbags concluded that they can be a potentially safe, economical alternative to new airbags as long as they are undamaged and properly handled and installed. However, the failure of some flood-damaged airbags to deploy correctly also demonstrates the potential for serious safety consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overall fuel economy trends reflect an average for new passenger vehicles that has fallen to its lowest level since 1980. As a result, some energy conservationists and environmentalists are calling for an increase in the standards for corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) set in 1975. Proponents cite energy security and environmental benefits as part of the payoff for such an increase. Opponents to raising CAFE standards cite decreased automobile safety resulting from smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles as a safety consequence. GAO's findings are based on studies and interviews with experts from federal agencies, automobile manufacturers, and energy conservation and environmental interest groups. According to those studies and experts, raising fuel economy standards would reduce future fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. However, the impact of higher standards on vehicle safety is less certain because of such variables as the size of the CAFE increase, manufacturers' lead-time, and strategies used to achieve fuel economy gains. GAO found consensus among safety experts and auto manufacturers that, with enough lead time to meet higher CAFE levels, auto builders could minimize any negative impact on safety by using fuel-saving technologies instead of simply building smaller, lighter cars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In light of growing competition from international car companies, the important of automotive jobs to the U.S. economy, and other policy concerns, the President announced a partnership between the federal government and three domestic car companies--Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler--in 1993. The goals of the partnership were to (1) significantly improve U.S. competitiveness in manufacturing, (2) apply commercially viable innovations from ongoing research to conventional vehicles, and (3) develop vehicles that can achieve up to three times the fuel efficiency of comparable 1994 family sedans--or about 80 miles per gallon--by 2004. Overall, GAO found that the partnership is making progress toward its goals, but obstacles remain. GAO estimates that federal research in support of the partnership totaled about $1.24 billion from fiscal year 1995--the first year in which the program was funded--through fiscal year 1999, averaging about $250 million per year. The federal agencies and industry partners supporting the partnership are jointly developing technologies to improve fuel efficiency and manufacturing processes in the automobile industry. Automobile manufactures participating in the partnership reported that their overall research and development primarily focuses on fulfilling consumer preferences and complying with government regulations, while their research done under the partnership is more narrowly focused on developing fuel-efficient vehicles and improving manufacturing processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]