Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Changes from July 31, 2020 to January 22, 2021

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress
~~July 31, 2020~~January 22, 2021
Vehicle safety is a significant issue as Congress considers a replacement for the current Vehicle safety is a significant issue as Congress considers a replacement for the current
authorization of surface transportation programs, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation authorization of surface transportation programs, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation
Bill Canis
Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), which expires at the end of Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), which expires at the end of ~~FY2020. On July 1, 2020, the House of~~
~~Specialist in Industrial~~
~~Representatives passed an infrastructure and surface transportation bill, the Moving Forward Act~~
~~Organization and Business~~
~~(H.R. 2), including provisions that seek to improve motor vehicle safety. A corresponding bill~~

~~has not advanced in the Senate.~~

FY2021. Vehicle safety provisions Specialist in Industrial were included in the Moving Forward Act (H.R. 2; 116th Congress), passed by the House of Organization and Business Representatives in July 2020; the legislation was not enacted. Responsibility for motor vehicle safety lies with the National Highway Traffic Safety Responsibility for motor vehicle safety lies with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The agency’s performance has been Administration (NHTSA) within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The agency’s performance has been
controversial, in part because of its handling of the largest-ever recall, involving more than 63 million Takata airbags; since controversial, in part because of its handling of the largest-ever recall, involving more than 63 million Takata airbags; since
the recall was ordered in 2015, nearly 16 million potentially defective airbags have not been replaced. NHTSA has been the recall was ordered in 2015, nearly 16 million potentially defective airbags have not been replaced. NHTSA has been
without a Senate-confirmed administrator since 2017. without a Senate-confirmed administrator since 2017.
Under federal law, NHTSA has the power to promulgate standards for cars Under federal law, NHTSA has the power to promulgate standards for cars and light trucks. The combination of new vehicle and light trucks. The combination of new vehicle
designs, greater vehicle automation, and federal standards—including those for seat belts, airbags, hood and door latches, and designs, greater vehicle automation, and federal standards—including those for seat belts, airbags, hood and door latches, and
children’s car seats—has contributed to a reduction in the fatality rate by 80% over the past six decades. NHTSA does not children’s car seats—has contributed to a reduction in the fatality rate by 80% over the past six decades. NHTSA does not
approve vehicles before they are manufactured, but may order or encourage a vehicle or parts manufacturer to recall products approve vehicles before they are manufactured, but may order or encourage a vehicle or parts manufacturer to recall products
that violate its standards. that violate its standards.
Among the vehicle safety issues Congress may address in the reauthorization process are: Among the vehicle safety issues Congress may address in the reauthorization process are:
Recall compliance rates. According to NHTSA researchers, the combined annual completion rate for all automakers subject According to NHTSA researchers, the combined annual completion rate for all automakers subject
to a recall between 2010 and 2014 was 67%, meaning that many vehicles with safety defects remain on the road. Congress to a recall between 2010 and 2014 was 67%, meaning that many vehicles with safety defects remain on the road. Congress
may may ~~want to~~ consider additions or modifications to 2015 reforms that brought rental car fleets under federal recall consider additions or modifications to 2015 reforms that brought rental car fleets under federal recall
requirements and introduced new methods to contact consumers about pending recalls. requirements and introduced new methods to contact consumers about pending recalls.
Defect investigations. The DOT Inspector General identified problems at NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation in 2015 The DOT Inspector General identified problems at NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation in 2015
and and again in 2018. Although recommendations to improve its management of defects investigations appear to have been 2018. Although recommendations to improve its management of defects investigations appear to have been
implemented, the Trump Administration implemented, the Trump Administration ~~has~~ sought to reduce spending on vehicle safety sought to reduce spending on vehicle safety ~~and~~ investigations. Congress may investigations. Congress may
want to examine whether the defect investigation process is adequate. want to examine whether the defect investigation process is adequate.
Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities. Vehicle crashes causing fatalities and injuries to pedestrians and bicyclists have reached Vehicle crashes causing fatalities and injuries to pedestrians and bicyclists have reached
a 30-year high. a 30-year high. ~~H.R. 2 includes a provision requiring~~A number of other countries require that new vehicles include pedestrian crash mitigation systems, that new vehicles include pedestrian crash mitigation systems, a
~~technology already required in other countries~~and Congress may consider whether such technologies should be mandated in the United States. .
Rear seat warnings. Although Congress has previously called for NHTSA to require Although Congress has previously called for NHTSA to require ~~seat belt warnings in rear seats~~that vehicles warn drivers when passengers in rear seats have not locked their seat belts, such a , such a
regulation has not been issued. In addition, Congress has twice previously called for NHTSA to regulation has not been issued. In addition, Congress has twice previously called for NHTSA to ~~develop a system~~require that new vehicles have systems to warn to warn
drivers about children inadvertently left unattended in the back seats of parked cars. drivers about children inadvertently left unattended in the back seats of parked cars. ~~H.R. 2 would require such warning~~
~~systems and would also require new labeling on children’s booster seats.~~
~~Driver privacy.~~ ~~The FAST Act’s driver privacy provisions apply only to data recorded just before a crash;~~No such regulation has been issued. Driver privacy. New vehicles must be equipped with “black boxes” that collect data about vehicle operations. The FAST Act specified that data recorded just before a crash is the property of the owner, but similar similar
protections do not apply to the large volumes of data collected and stored by vehicle computers during normal operations. In protections do not apply to the large volumes of data collected and stored by vehicle computers during normal operations. In
2018, the Secretary of Transportation reported to Congress that requiring storage of data for a longer period prior to a crash 2018, the Secretary of Transportation reported to Congress that requiring storage of data for a longer period prior to a crash
would be appropriate. Congress has not addressed broader questions concerning the ownership and use of data collected would be appropriate. Congress has not addressed broader questions concerning the ownership and use of data collected
aboard vehicles. aboard vehicles.
Tires. Congress has previously required Congress has previously required ~~a NHTSA~~ that NHTSA establish a publicly accessible database for tire recalls, database for tire recalls, require electronic identification on all new tires, and electronic identification on all new tires, and an
~~update to~~update tire pressure monitoring standards, but regulations have not been issued. tire pressure monitoring standards, but regulations have not been issued.
Unique vehicles. Stretch limousines, amphibious passenger vehicles—called duck boats—and low-volume replica vehicles
~~have unique configurations and safety issues that Congress may want to address. H.R. 2 addresses stretch limousine safety~~Autonomous vehicles. NHTSA has taken on responsibility for overseeing the development and testing of autonomous vehicles. Congress has not agreed on legislation that would provide NHTSA with new regulatory tools. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

link to page link to page 3233 link to page link to page 3334 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Appendix B. Recal Completion Rates.............................................................................. 2930

Contacts
Author Information ....................................................................................................... 2930

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Introduction
Congress enacted the first vehicle safety legislation even before the U.S. Department of Congress enacted the first vehicle safety legislation even before the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) and its vehicle-safety arm, the National Highway Traffic Safety Transportation (DOT) and its vehicle-safety arm, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), were established more than 50 years ago. Since then, Congress has Administration (NHTSA), were established more than 50 years ago. Since then, Congress has
delegated major regulatory responsibility to NHTSA while also directing it to give priority to delegated major regulatory responsibility to NHTSA while also directing it to give priority to
certain safety actions, such as mandating seat belt warning systems for the back seats of certain safety actions, such as mandating seat belt warning systems for the back seats of
passenger cars.1 In recent years, the periodic reauthorization of surface transportation programs passenger cars.1 In recent years, the periodic reauthorization of surface transportation programs
has included significant sections on motor vehicle safety. The Fixing America’s Surface has included significant sections on motor vehicle safety. The Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act,2 passed in 2015, included new initiatives to improve vehicle safety; Transportation (FAST) Act,2 passed in 2015, included new initiatives to improve vehicle safety;
some congressional mandates made in that law have not been some congressional mandates made in that law have not been ~~completed.~~
~~Legislation to reauthorize surface transportation programs beyond the end of FY2020 is currently~~
~~under discussion in Congress. On July 1, 2020, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 2, the~~
~~Moving Forward Act, which includes provisions seeking to improve motor vehicle safety.3~~
~~Responsibility~~ fully implemented. The 116th Congress extended the authorization of federal surface transportation programs, including vehicle safety programs, through September 30, 2021.3 No new legislation related to vehicle safety was enacted. None was proposed by the agency during the Trump Administration. During that period, NHTSA did not have a permanent administrator confirmed by the Senate, and acting administrators managed its operations. Responsibility for highway safety is divided between state and federal governments. While the for highway safety is divided between state and federal governments. While the
states manage driver and vehicle licensing, establish and enforce traffic laws, and build and states manage driver and vehicle licensing, establish and enforce traffic laws, and build and
maintain highways, the federal government regulates the design of motor vehicles. NHTSA, an maintain highways, the federal government regulates the design of motor vehicles. NHTSA, an
agency within DOT, issues Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and requires agency within DOT, issues Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and requires
manufacturers to recal and repair defects in vehicles that fail to meet those standards. manufacturers to recal and repair defects in vehicles that fail to meet those standards.
NHTSA’s enforcement of some of its vehicle safety standards is controversial, with its oversight NHTSA’s enforcement of some of its vehicle safety standards is controversial, with its oversight
of recal s of passenger cars with defective airbags now in its of recal s of passenger cars with defective airbags now in its ~~fourth~~fifth year. The airbag recal , the year. The airbag recal , the
largest on record, has come in for sharp criticism in Congress. In largest on record, has come in for sharp criticism in Congress. In ~~addition, NHTSA has taken on~~
~~responsibility for overseeing the development and testing of autonomous vehicles, even as~~
~~Congress has not agreed on legislation that would provide it new regulatory tools.4 The agency~~
~~has not had a permanent administrator confirmed by the Senate since January 2017. This report~~
~~examines NHTSA’s role overseeing vehicle design and regulation and highlights issues for~~
~~Congress in the context of reauthorization.~~
~~Origins of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Regulation~~
~~In the early decades of the automobile, U.S. vehicles were lightly regulated by a combination of~~
~~state and private-sector standards. National regulation was general y not seen as appropriate; in~~
~~the early 1900s, according to two historians of auto safety, it was widely believed that “the only~~
~~useful and political y acceptable action Congress might take was to help the states and localities~~
~~construct more and better roads.”5 The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), a professional~~
~~association founded in 1905, became the primary source of vehicle safety standards for many~~January 2021, six vehicle safety organizations issued a report cal ing for major changes at NHTSA during the Biden Administration, including significantly raising NHTSA’s budget and staffing, overhaul of its five- star vehicle safety rating system, increased use of higher criminal penalties for known violation of vehicle standards, a stronger focus on requiring new safety technologies on al vehicles, and attention to unmet congressional safety mandates.4 In addition, NHTSA has taken on responsibility for overseeing the development and testing of autonomous vehicles, though Congress has not agreed on legislation that would provide it new regulatory tools.5 This report examines NHTSA’s role overseeing vehicle design and regulation and highlights issues for Congress in the context of reauthorization.

1 Congress directed NHT SA to develop regulations that would require rear seat belt alerts in the Moving Ahead for 1 Congress directed NHT SA to develop regulations that would require rear seat belt alerts in the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act of 2012 (MAP -21; P.L. 112-141). Progress in the 21st Century Act of 2012 (MAP -21; P.L. 112-141).
2 P.L. 114-94. 2 P.L. 114-94.
3 3 ~~T he Moving Forward Act, T itle II of Division G (Energy and Commerce Committee section).~~
~~4 For a discussion of the issues associated with highly automated vehicles, see CRS Report R45985,~~ ~~Issues in~~
~~Autonom ous Vehicle Testing and Deploym ent, by Bill Canis.~~
~~5 Jerry Mashaw and David Harfst, The Struggle for Auto Safety (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), pp.~~
~~30-31.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
1

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

H.R. 8337, Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act (P.L. 116-159). 4 Center for Study of Responsive Law, 55th Anniversary of Unsafe at Any Speed, January 2021, at https://nader.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/AutoSafetyReport2021.pdf. Other vehicle safety organizations participated in the development of the report: the Center for Auto Safety, Consumer Federation of America, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, KidsandCars.org, and Automotive Safety Research Institute. 5 For a discussion of the issues associated with highly automated vehicles, see CRS Report R45985, Issues in Autonom ous Vehicle Testing and Deploym ent, by Bill Canis. Congressional Research Service 1 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Origins of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Regulation In the early decades of the automobile, U.S. vehicles were lightly regulated by a combination of state and private-sector standards. National regulation was general y not seen as appropriate; in the early 1900s, according to two historians of auto safety, it was widely believed that “the only useful and political y acceptable action Congress might take was to help the states and localities construct more and better roads.”6 The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), a professional association founded in 1905, became the primary source of vehicle safety standards for many decades. State governments often used SAE recommendations to set their own standards for decades. State governments often used SAE recommendations to set their own standards for
vehicle brakes, headlamps, and windshield wipers. vehicle brakes, headlamps, and windshield wipers.
A rising number of highway deaths prompted a new interest in vehicle safety: between 1962 and A rising number of highway deaths prompted a new interest in vehicle safety: between 1962 and
1964, Congress passed three safety bil s into law, including a seat belt regulation.1964, Congress passed three safety bil s into law, including a seat belt regulation.67 The new laws The new laws
were only a precursor to broader federal regulation. Two publications also spurred interest in a were only a precursor to broader federal regulation. Two publications also spurred interest in a
greater federal role. Ralph Nader’s 1965 book, greater federal role. Ralph Nader’s 1965 book, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of
the American Automobile, argued that cars were unnecessarily unsafe and that the auto industry , argued that cars were unnecessarily unsafe and that the auto industry
should be regulated by a federal agency.should be regulated by a federal agency.78 Also influential was Also influential was Accidental Death and Disability:
The Neglected Disease of Modern Society, a National Academy of Sciences report that , a National Academy of Sciences report that
documented the impact of accidental injuries, including those by motor vehicles. documented the impact of accidental injuries, including those by motor vehicles.89
Comprehensive vehicle safety legislation was passed in the form of the National Traffic and Comprehensive vehicle safety legislation was passed in the form of the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966.Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966.910 As approved unanimously by both houses of Congress and As approved unanimously by both houses of Congress and
signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the legislation had two parts: signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the legislation had two parts:
1. The Highway Safety Act of 1966 mandated that each state put in place a highway 1. The Highway Safety Act of 1966 mandated that each state put in place a highway
safety program in accordance with federal standards to improve driver safety program in accordance with federal standards to improve driver
performance, accident records systems, and traffic control. performance, accident records systems, and traffic control.
2. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 directed the Secretary 2. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 directed the Secretary
of Commerce (later changed to the Secretary of Transportation when that agency of Commerce (later changed to the Secretary of Transportation when that agency
was established in 1967) to issue safety standards for al motor vehicles was established in 1967) to issue safety standards for al motor vehicles
beginning in January 1967. A National Traffic Safety Agency was established to beginning in January 1967. A National Traffic Safety Agency was established to
carry out the provisions of the new law; it was renamed the National Highway carry out the provisions of the new law; it was renamed the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 1970.Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 1970.10
~~Since its establishment, NHTSA has issued dozens of safety standards,11 including regulations~~
~~affecting windshield wipers, hood latches, tires, brakes, seat belts, and airbags.12 Proposing,~~
~~finalizing, or revising a NHTSA safety regulation can take many years, pursuant to the~~
~~Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA).~~
~~NHTSA does not verify in advance that motor vehicles and parts comply with its standards.~~
~~Instead, the law requires self-certification: “[a] manufacturer or distributor of a motor vehicle or~~
~~motor vehicle equipment shal certify to the distributor or dealer at delivery that the vehicle or~~
~~equipment complies with applicable motor vehicle safety standards prescribed under this~~
~~chapter.... Certification of a vehicle must be shown by a label or tag permanently fixed to the~~

611 6 Jerry Mashaw and David Harfst, The Struggle for Auto Safety (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), pp. 30-31. 7 P.L. 87-637 required hydraulic brake fluid used in motor vehicles to meet certain standards established by the P.L. 87-637 required hydraulic brake fluid used in motor vehicles to meet certain standards established by the
Secretary of Commerce; P.L. 88-201 required the Secretary of Commerce to promulgate safety standards for seat Secretary of Commerce; P.L. 88-201 required the Secretary of Commerce to promulgate safety standards for seat ~~belts~~belt s; ;
and P.L. 88-514 required vehicle manufacturers to meet certain minimum safety standards for vehicles sold to the and P.L. 88-514 required vehicle manufacturers to meet certain minimum safety standards for vehicles sold to the
General Services Administration (GSA) for the federal fleet. General Services Administration (GSA) for the federal fleet.
7 8 Ralph Nader, Ralph Nader, Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-in Dangers of the American Automobile (New York: Grossman, (New York: Grossman,
1965). 1965).
89 National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council, Accidental Death and Disability: The Neglected
Disease of Modern Society, 1966, at https://www.ems.gov/pdf/1997-Reproduction-, 1966, at https://www.ems.gov/pdf/1997-Reproduction-~~AccidentalDeathDisability.pdf.~~
9AccidentalDeathDissability.pdf. 10 P.L. 89-563. When he signed the law, President Johnson cited the 50,000 people P.L. 89-563. When he signed the law, President Johnson cited the 50,000 people ~~k illed~~killed on U.S. highways as the on U.S. highways as the
biggest cause of death and injury among young Americans. T he White House, “biggest cause of death and injury among young Americans. T he White House, “ Remarks of the President at Signing of Remarks of the President at Signing of
the Highway Safety Act and the T raffic Safety Act,” press release, September 9, 1966, cited in the Highway Safety Act and the T raffic Safety Act,” press release, September 9, 1966, cited in National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, Legislative History, vol. 1, p. 31, published by NHT SA in 1985. , vol. 1, p. 31, published by NHT SA in 1985.
10 11 Highway Safety Act of 1970, P.L. 91-605. Highway Safety Act of 1970, P.L. 91-605.
~~11 T he authority for issuing standards is found in 49 U.S.C. §30111.~~
~~12 See https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/FMVSS-QuickRefGuide-HS811439.pdf.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
2

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~vehicle....”13~~ Congressional Research Service 2 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Since its establishment, NHTSA has issued dozens of safety standards,12 including regulations affecting windshield wipers, hood latches, tires, brakes, seat belts, and airbags.13 Proposing, finalizing, or revising a NHTSA safety regulation can take many years, pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA). NHTSA does not verify in advance that motor vehicles and parts comply with its standards. Instead, the law requires self-certification: “[a] manufacturer or distributor of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment shal certify to the distributor or dealer at delivery that the vehicle or equipment complies with applicable motor vehicle safety standards prescribed under this chapter.... Certification of a vehicle must be shown by a label or tag permanently fixed to the vehicle.... ”14 The self-certification label is affixed to the driver door jamb in al vehicles sold in The self-certification label is affixed to the driver door jamb in al vehicles sold in
the United States. the United States.
Manufacturers are responsible for testing their vehicles and are liable for recal s and penalties if Manufacturers are responsible for testing their vehicles and are liable for recal s and penalties if
they are later found not to meet FMVSS. After a new model goes on sale, NHTSA buys a they are later found not to meet FMVSS. After a new model goes on sale, NHTSA buys a
sampling from dealers and tests the vehicles at its own facilities to determine whether they sampling from dealers and tests the vehicles at its own facilities to determine whether they
comply. It also receives consumer complaints about safety-related problems with vehicles. If comply. It also receives consumer complaints about safety-related problems with vehicles. If
NHTSA determines there is noncompliance with its standards, it can encourage the manufacturer NHTSA determines there is noncompliance with its standards, it can encourage the manufacturer
to recal the model to correct the problem, or it can order a recal .to recal the model to correct the problem, or it can order a recal .1415 NHTSA maintains a NHTSA maintains a
comprehensive database about motor vehicle crashes to inform proposed standards and to identify comprehensive database about motor vehicle crashes to inform proposed standards and to identify
vehicles potential y requiring recal . vehicles potential y requiring recal .1516
Estimates of Effects of Federal Safety Standards
A NHTSA study estimated that passenger vehicle safety technologies associated with FMVSS A NHTSA study estimated that passenger vehicle safety technologies associated with FMVSS
saved 613,501 lives between 1960 and 2012.saved 613,501 lives between 1960 and 2012.1617 The study evaluated the effects of 31 motor The study evaluated the effects of 31 motor
vehicle technologies mandated by NHTSA, including front disc brakes, electronic stability vehicle technologies mandated by NHTSA, including front disc brakes, electronic stability
control, seat belts, airbags, and side door beams.control, seat belts, airbags, and side door beams.1718 It estimated that, taking account of rising It estimated that, taking account of rising
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), the risk of a fatality in 2012 was 56% lower than in 1960, based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), the risk of a fatality in 2012 was 56% lower than in 1960, based on
evaluation of the effectiveness of specific technologies in reducing occupant fatalities. evaluation of the effectiveness of specific technologies in reducing occupant fatalities.1819
The NHTSA report found seat belts, introduced in the late 1960s, to have been responsible for The NHTSA report found seat belts, introduced in the late 1960s, to have been responsible for
more than half of al the lives saved, 329,715, and that their effectiveness rose sharply after more than half of al the lives saved, 329,715, and that their effectiveness rose sharply after
NHTSA required instal ation of combined lap and shoulder belts in place of simple lap belts in NHTSA required instal ation of combined lap and shoulder belts in place of simple lap belts in
1974.1974.1920 However, the study also highlighted the importance of other measures in addition to However, the study also highlighted the importance of other measures in addition to
~~federal vehicle safety regulation: it estimated that the number of lives saved annual y by seat belts~~
~~rose from 800 to 6,000 after many states al owed police to issue tickets if a driver or passengers~~
~~were not wearing seat belts. Every state but New Hampshire has enacted laws requiring seat belt~~
~~use.20~~
~~The full benefits of new federal safety standards may take many years to be felt. The passenger~~
~~vehicle fleet turns over slowly: the average age of light vehicles on the road in 2019 was 11.8~~

~~13 P.L. 89-563, 49 U.S.C. §30115.~~
14 12 T he authority for issuing standards is found in 49 U.S.C. §30111. 13 See https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/FMVSS-QuickRefGuide-HS811439.pdf. 14 P.L. 89-563, 49 U.S.C. §30115. 15 NHT SA, NHT SA, Motor Vehicle Safety Defects and Recalls: What Every Vehicle Owner Should Know, at https://www-, at https://www-
odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/recalls/documents/MVDefectsandRecalls.pdf. odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/recalls/documents/MVDefectsandRecalls.pdf.
1516 NHT SA’s data analysis and research are managed by its National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) and NHT SA’s data analysis and research are managed by its National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) and
Office of Vehicle Safety Research, Office of Vehicle Safety Research, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data; NHT SA maintains the Fatality Analysis https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data; NHT SA maintains the Fatality Analysis
Reporting System (FARS), which records factors of fatal crashes such as location, time and circumstances of the crash, Reporting System (FARS), which records factors of fatal crashes such as location, time and circumstances of the crash,
type of vehicle, passengers involved, and vehicles’ movements leading to the crash. type of vehicle, passengers involved, and vehicles’ movements leading to the crash.
1617 T he study evaluated technologies in cars, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), pickup trucks, minivans, and full-size vans. T he study evaluated technologies in cars, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), pickup trucks, minivans, and full-size vans.
C. J. Kahane, C. J. Kahane, Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards,
1960 to 2012, NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015. , NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015.
1718 Side door beams are anti-intrusion bars that protect passengers from side impacts. Side door beams are anti-intrusion bars that protect passengers from side impacts.
1819 C. J. Kahane, C. J. Kahane, Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards,
1960 to 2012, NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015, p. xii. , NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015, p. xii.
1920 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Injury Prevention & Control: Motor Vehicle Safety, viewed , viewed
~~March 9, 2017, at https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/calculator/factsheet/seatbelt.html.~~
~~20 Other major technologies and the cumulative lives saved as identified in the NHT SA study were steering wheel~~
~~assemblies (79,989), frontal airbags (42,856), door locks (42,135) , and side impact protection (32,288). C. J. Kahane,~~
Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012 ,
~~NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
3

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~years, compared with 8.9 years in 2000.21~~ Congressional Research Service 3 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress federal vehicle safety regulation: it estimated that the number of lives saved annual y by seat belts rose from 800 to 6,000 after many states al owed police to issue tickets if a driver or passengers were not wearing seat belts. Every state but New Hampshire has enacted laws requiring seat belt use by adults.21 The full benefits of new federal safety standards may take many years to be felt. The passenger vehicle fleet turns over slowly: the average age of light vehicles on the road in 2019 was 11.8 years, compared with 8.9 years in 2000.22 Although electronic stability control was introduced as Although electronic stability control was introduced as
standard equipment on one make of vehicle in 1998 and was subsequently adopted on some other standard equipment on one make of vehicle in 1998 and was subsequently adopted on some other
makes, only 22% of light vehicles on the road were equipped with the technology in calendar makes, only 22% of light vehicles on the road were equipped with the technology in calendar
year 2012. FMVSS required electronic stability control to be included in al new vehicles starting year 2012. FMVSS required electronic stability control to be included in al new vehicles starting
in model year 2012. The NHTSA study estimated that more than 1,362 lives may be saved in model year 2012. The NHTSA study estimated that more than 1,362 lives may be saved
annual y when al vehicles on the road utilize the technology, but this wil not occur for a couple annual y when al vehicles on the road utilize the technology, but this wil not occur for a couple
of decades. of decades.
Several elements of traditional motor vehicle safety are being cal ed into question by recent data, Several elements of traditional motor vehicle safety are being cal ed into question by recent data,
perspectives on earlier studies, and new technologies. perspectives on earlier studies, and new technologies.
Safety goals have focused on making drivers and passengers safer inside vehicles, but recent Safety goals have focused on making drivers and passengers safer inside vehicles, but recent
increases in traffic deaths outside the vehicle—of pedestrians and bicyclists—have raised increases in traffic deaths outside the vehicle—of pedestrians and bicyclists—have raised
questions about the effectiveness of current highway safety policies and programs: in 2018, 34% questions about the effectiveness of current highway safety policies and programs: in 2018, 34%
of highway fatalities were of those outside of vehicles, an increase from 20% in 2000. of highway fatalities were of those outside of vehicles, an increase from 20% in 2000.2223
An often-cited statistic that “the major factor in 94% of al fatal crashes is human error” An often-cited statistic that “the major factor in 94% of al fatal crashes is human error”2324 is is
sometimes interpreted incorrectly to mean that nearly al crashes are due to driver error. The sometimes interpreted incorrectly to mean that nearly al crashes are due to driver error. The
extensive NHTSA survey from which these data are drawn—the National Motor Vehicle Crash extensive NHTSA survey from which these data are drawn—the National Motor Vehicle Crash
Causation Survey (NMVCCS)—does not draw that conclusion. That study, authorized by Causation Survey (NMVCCS)—does not draw that conclusion. That study, authorized by
~~Congress24~~Congress25 to better understand events leading up to motor vehicle crashes and assist in to better understand events leading up to motor vehicle crashes and assist in
developing and evaluating crash avoidance technologies, was conducted from 2005 to 2007, developing and evaluating crash avoidance technologies, was conducted from 2005 to 2007,
collecting and analyzing data and events from nearly 7,000 light vehicle crashes.collecting and analyzing data and events from nearly 7,000 light vehicle crashes.2526 The The
researchers evaluated data elements related to drivers, vehicles, highways, and the surrounding researchers evaluated data elements related to drivers, vehicles, highways, and the surrounding
environment of the crash sites, determining that of the crashes evaluated, environment of the crash sites, determining that of the crashes evaluated,
 36% involved vehicles that were turning or crossing intersections;  36% involved vehicles that were turning or crossing intersections;
 22% involved a vehicle that ran off the edge of the road;  22% involved a vehicle that ran off the edge of the road;
~~ 11% involved a vehicle that did not stay in the proper lane;~~
~~ 12% involved a stopped vehicle; and~~
~~ 9% resulted when a driver lost control of a vehicle.~~
~~In an important finding that qualifies the causes of vehicle crashes, the NHTSA researchers~~
~~reported that the investigated accidents typical y involve a causal chain of events that may be~~
~~attributed to the driver (distraction or speeding), the vehicle (tires, brakes or other malfunctions),~~
~~the roadway (poor design or wet road surfaces), or atmospheric conditions (rain, snow, sun~~
~~glare).26 In a 2015 NHTSA report further analyzing the NMVCCS data, researchers noted that a~~
~~“critical reason” for the crashes in the survey “was assigned to the driver in an estimated 94% of~~

21 March 9, 2017, at https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/calculator/factsheet/seatbelt.html. 21 Other major technologies and the cumulative lives saved as identified in the NHT SA study were steering wheel assemblies (79,989), frontal airbags (42,856), door locks (42,135) , and side impact protection (32,288). C. J. Kahane, Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Sa fety Standards, 1960 to 2012, NHT SA, DOT HS 812 069, January 2015. 22 Bureau of T ransportation Statistics, Bureau of T ransportation Statistics, Average Age of Automobiles and Trucks in Operation in the United States, at , at
https://www.bts.gov/content/average-age-automobiles-and-trucks-operation-united-states. https://www.bts.gov/content/average-age-automobiles-and-trucks-operation-united-states.
22 23 NHT SA, NHT SA, Traffic Safety Facts 2000, p. 18. , p. 18.
2324 Department of T ransportation, Department of T ransportation, Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A vision for Safety, Introductory Message by DOT , Introductory Message by DOT
Secretary Elaine Chao, September 2017, p. i,Secretary Elaine Chao, September 2017, p. i,, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a- at https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-
ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf. ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf.
24 25 Section 2003(c), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Section 2003(c), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient. T ransportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users T ransportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFET EA -(SAFET EA -
LU; P.L. 109-59). LU; P.L. 109-59).
2526 Light vehicles include passenger cars, crossover vehicles, SUVs, and pickup trucks. NHT SA, Light vehicles include passenger cars, crossover vehicles, SUVs, and pickup trucks. NHT SA, National Motor
Vehicle Crash Causation Survey, DOT HS 811 059, July 2008, at https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/, DOT HS 811 059, July 2008, at https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/
ViewPublication/811059ViewPublication/811059.
~~26 Ibid., p. 10~~. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
4 4

link to page 10 link to page 10 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

~~the crashes,”27 but~~  11% involved a vehicle that did not stay in the proper lane;  12% involved a stopped vehicle; and  9% resulted when a driver lost control of a vehicle. In a finding that qualifies the causes of vehicle crashes, the NHTSA researchers reported that the investigated accidents typical y involve a causal chain of events that may be attributed to the driver (distraction or speeding), the vehicle (tires, brakes or other malfunctions), the roadway (poor design or wet road surfaces), or atmospheric conditions (rain, snow, sun glare).27 In a 2015 NHTSA report further analyzing the NMVCCS data, researchers noted that a “critical reason” for the crashes in the survey “was assigned to the driver in an estimated 94% of the crashes,”28 but that “the critical reason … is not intended to be interpreted as the cause of the that “the critical reason … is not intended to be interpreted as the cause of the
crash.crash.~~.. ”28~~ . ”29 The 2015 NHTSA report went further and stated that “in none of these cases was the The 2015 NHTSA report went further and stated that “in none of these cases was the
assignment assignment intended to blame the driver for causing the crash.”intended to blame the driver for causing the crash.”2930
This reading of the NMVCCS findings may cal into question forecasts that fully autonomous This reading of the NMVCCS findings may cal into question forecasts that fully autonomous
vehicles could nearly eliminate fatalities, as NMVCCS findings would indicate that adverse vehicles could nearly eliminate fatalities, as NMVCCS findings would indicate that adverse
weather conditions, malfunctioning vehicle parts, and poor highway design wil remain factors in weather conditions, malfunctioning vehicle parts, and poor highway design wil remain factors in
motor vehicle fatalities even when fully autonomous vehicles are in use in the future. motor vehicle fatalities even when fully autonomous vehicles are in use in the future.3031
Increase in Pedestrian and Bicyclist Deaths Linked to More SUVs
Despite safety improvements over past decades, many drivers, passengers, and pedestrians are Despite safety improvements over past decades, many drivers, passengers, and pedestrians are
kil ed annual y in motor vehicle accidents: in kil ed annual y in motor vehicle accidents: in ~~2018~~2019, 36,, 36,~~560~~096 fatalities occurred on U.S. roads. fatalities occurred on U.S. roads. ~~The~~
32 The number of annual fatalities from motor vehicle accidents has declined by 28% since the first number of annual fatalities from motor vehicle accidents has declined by 28% since the first
federal vehicle safety law was enacted in 1966. federal vehicle safety law was enacted in 1966. ~~However, the~~The downward trend was interrupted downward trend was interrupted
with fatality increases from 2015 and 2016, with fatality increases from 2015 and 2016, ~~then declined slightly in 2017 and 2018~~but has resumed since 2017. It is thought . It is thought
that possible explanations for the increase in fatalitiesthat possible explanations for the increase in fatalities in 2015-2016 included more driving because of lower included more driving because of lower
gasoline prices, speeding, alcohol gasoline prices, speeding, alcohol- and drug-impaired driving, and driver distractions. and drug-impaired driving, and driver distractions.3133
When fatalities are viewed in the context of the expanded amount of driving that has taken place When fatalities are viewed in the context of the expanded amount of driving that has taken place
in the past 50 years, however, the fatality rate has dropped by nearly 80%, from 5.50 deaths per in the past 50 years, however, the fatality rate has dropped by nearly 80%, from 5.50 deaths per
100 mil ion vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 1966 to 1.100 mil ion vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 1966 to 1.1310 deaths per 100 mil ion VMT in deaths per 100 mil ion VMT in ~~2018~~2019
(Figure 1).3234

27 27 Ibid., p. 10. 28 NHT SA, NHT SA, Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey , DOT HS , DOT HS
812 115, February 2015, 812 115, February 2015, at https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812115. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812115.
2829 Ibid. Ibid.
2930 Ibid. Ibid.
3031 NHT SA is planning to develop a new crash causation survey to NHT SA is planning to develop a new crash causation survey to further examine the issues further examine the issues ~~behin d~~behind such accidents. such accidents.
U.S. Department of T ransportation, U.S. Department of T ransportation, Fiscal Year 2021: National Highway Traffic Safety Adm inistration , p. 69, at , p. 69, at
https://www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/nhtsa-cj-fy-2021-estimates. https://www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/nhtsa-cj-fy-2021-estimates.
3132 NHT SA, Traffic Safety Facts 2019, DOT HS 813 021, October 2020, at https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813021. 33 Beckie Strum, “U.S. T raffic Fatalities Continued to Surge in First Half of 2016,” Beckie Strum, “U.S. T raffic Fatalities Continued to Surge in First Half of 2016,” Wall Street Journal, August 23, , August 23,
2016, at https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-traffic-fatalities-continued-to-surge-in-first-half-of-2016-1471967127. 2016, at https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-traffic-fatalities-continued-to-surge-in-first-half-of-2016-1471967127.
3234 Vehicles Miles T raveled is a transportation term that estimates the number of miles traveled by all vehicles nationally Vehicles Miles T raveled is a transportation term that estimates the number of miles traveled by all vehicles nationally
in a one-year period. In 1966, when the fatality rate was at 5.50 per 100 million VMT , the nation’s total vehicle miles in a one-year period. In 1966, when the fatality rate was at 5.50 per 100 million VMT , the nation’s total vehicle miles
traveled were 925 billion. In traveled were 925 billion. In ~~2018~~2019, when the fatality rate had dropped to 1., when the fatality rate had dropped to 1.13 10 per million VMT , total miles traveled had per million VMT , total miles traveled had
risen to risen to more than 3.2 trillion~~3.2 t rillion~~. NHT SA, . NHT SA, 2018 Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 812 826, October 2019, p. 2, at , DOT HS 812 826, October 2019, p. 2, at
https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812826https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812826. and Federal Highway Administration, Traffic
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
5 5

link to page link to page ~~32 link to page 11~~33

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Figure 1. Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities and Fatality Rates

Source: (NHTSA, Trends, Table 2, (NHTSA, Trends, Table 2, Persons Kil ed and Fatality Rates, 1966-2017, , 1966-2017, at https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/
tsfar.htm#. Data for 2018 tsfar.htm#. Data for 2018 and 2019 from NHTSA, from NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 812 826, October 2019, , DOT HS 812 826, October 2019, ~~p. 2~~and Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 813 021, October 2020. .
Note: VMT refers to Vehicle Miles Traveled. VMT refers to Vehicle Miles Traveled.
Among other major countries, U.S. traffic fatalities are higher than most other developed Among other major countries, U.S. traffic fatalities are higher than most other developed
countries, but below the global average (see an excerpt from the 2018 World Health Organization countries, but below the global average (see an excerpt from the 2018 World Health Organization
(WHO) report i(WHO) report in Appendix A). The WHO asserts that the development and enforcement of . The WHO asserts that the development and enforcement of
vehicle safety standards are important components of any country’s strategy for reducing motor vehicle safety standards are important components of any country’s strategy for reducing motor
vehicle-related fatalities, yet only 40 countries—the United States is not among that group—have vehicle-related fatalities, yet only 40 countries—the United States is not among that group—have
implemented most of the United Nations priority vehicle safety standards.implemented most of the United Nations priority vehicle safety standards.3335 WHO data suggest WHO data suggest
that the developed countries with the lowest fatality rates are those that have adopted more of the that the developed countries with the lowest fatality rates are those that have adopted more of the
UN vehicle standards.UN vehicle standards.3436 According to the WHO, “Vehicle safety is increasingly critical to the According to the WHO, “Vehicle safety is increasingly critical to the
prevention of crashes and has been shown to contribute to substantial reductions in the number of prevention of crashes and has been shown to contribute to substantial reductions in the number of
deaths and serious injuries on the roads. Features such as electronic stability control and advanced deaths and serious injuries on the roads. Features such as electronic stability control and advanced
braking are examples of vehicle safety standards that can prevent a crash from occurring.…” braking are examples of vehicle safety standards that can prevent a crash from occurring.…”35
~~Nearly two-thirds of U.S. vehicle fatalities in 2018 were occupants of passenger cars and light~~
~~trucks, with the remainder being occupants of large trucks, buses, or motorcycles; pedestrians; or~~
~~bicyclists (Figure 2). Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities rose 3.4% and 6.3%, respectively, in 2018~~

3337 Volum e Trends, “ Moving 12-Month T otal on All U.S Roads,” September 2020, at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/travel_monitoring/20septvt/#:~:text=September%202020%20Traffic%20Volume%20T rends& text=T ravel%20for%20the%20month%20is,miles)%20decline%20from%20September%202019. 35 T he priority UN vehicle safety standards call for countries to establish rules on frontal and side impact protection; T he priority UN vehicle safety standards call for countries to establish rules on frontal and side impact protection;
electronic stability control; pedestrian front protection; seat belts and anchorages; child restraints; and motorcycle electronic stability control; pedestrian front protection; seat belts and anchorages; child restraints; and motorcycle
antilock braking systems. T he priorities are developed by the United Nations World Forum for Harmonization of antilock braking systems. T he priorities are developed by the United Nations World Forum for Harmonization of
Vehicle Regulations, part of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE); see https://www.unece.org/trans/Vehicle Regulations, part of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE); see https://www.unece.org/trans/
main/wp29/meeting_docs_wp29.html. main/wp29/meeting_docs_wp29.html.
3436 Among the countries with lower fatality rates that were shown to have adopted at least four of the UN vehicle Among the countries with lower fatality rates that were shown to have adopted at least four of the UN vehicle
standards were Australia, France, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom. standards were Australia, France, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom.
3537 World Health Organization, World Health Organization, Global Status Report on Road Safety, 2018, p. 58, at https://www.who.int/publications-, 2018, p. 58, at https://www.who.int/publications-
~~detail/global-status-report -on-road-safety-2018.~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
6 6

link to page 11 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

~~(when compared to 2017), reaching the highest levels since 1990.36 The composition of vehicles~~
~~on the road may be a factor in the increasing numbers of pedestrian and bicyclist deaths. U.S.~~
~~vehicle buyers are increasingly opting for light trucks, a category that includes crossovers, sport-~~
~~utility vehicles (SUVs), and pickup trucks; such vehicles accounted for 72% of light-vehicle sales~~
~~in 2019, up from 50% in 2010.37 The~~ Nearly two-thirds of U.S. vehicle fatalities in 2019 were occupants of passenger cars and light trucks, with the remainder being occupants of large trucks, buses, or motorcycles; pedestrians; or bicyclists (Figure 2). Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities dropped by nearly 3% to 7,338 in 2019 after having risen by 3.4% and 6.3%, respectively, in 2018, reaching the highest levels since 1990.38 The popularity of larger vehicles, such as sport-utility vehicles (SUVs) and large pickup trucks, may be a factor in the increasing numbers of pedestrian and bicyclist deaths; the Governors Highway Safety Association has noted that the Governors Highway Safety Association has noted that the
number of pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs increased 50% from 2013 to 2017, while the number of pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs increased 50% from 2013 to 2017, while the
number involvingnumber involving passenger cars increased 30%.passenger cars increased 30%.38
~~Figure 2. Fatality Composition~~

~~Source: NHTSA, 2018 Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 812 826, October 2019, p. 2~~39 Initial data for 2020 indicate that speeding violations, traffic fatalities, and injuries increased in many states despite stay-at-home orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This pattern differs from past recessions, when fatality rates declined with traffic volume.40 Figure 2. Vehicle-Related Fatalities By Type Source: NHTSA, 2019 Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 813 021, October 2020. .
Notes: Light trucks include most crossovers, SUVs, and al pickup trucks. Light trucks include most crossovers, SUVs, and al pickup trucks.
Figures have been rounded. An April 2020 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sheds additional light on An April 2020 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sheds additional light on
the role larger vehicles—in particular SUVs—may play in rising pedestrian fatalities.the role larger vehicles—in particular SUVs—may play in rising pedestrian fatalities.3941 GAO GAO
analyzed a decade of data (from 2008 through 2018) in three NHTSA crash and accident analyzed a decade of data (from 2008 through 2018) in three NHTSA crash and accident
databases, finding that databases, finding that the number of fatalities in accidents involving SUVs increased by 68% detail/global-status-report -on-road-safety-2018. 38 In 2018, 6,283 pedestrians and 857 bicyclists were killed in motor vehicle-related accidents. Ibid., p. 3. 39 Governors Highway Safety Association, Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2018 Preliminary Data, February 2019, p. 4. 40 Marshall W. Meyer, “COVID Lockdowns, Social Distancing, and Fatal Car Crashes: More Deaths on Hobbesian Highways?,” PubMed Central, U.S. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine, December 21, 2020, at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7751747/. 41 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Pedestrian Safety, GAO-20-419, April 23, 2020, at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-419. Congressional Research Service 7 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress during the decade studied, the number involving light trucks by 25%, and the number involving passenger cars by 47%.42 GAO found that there were more pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs because (1) more SUVs are on the road than in the past and (2) pedestrians struck by bigger vehicles with greater mass are more likely to experience serious injuries or fatalities.43 Technologies exist that could reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities. ~~number of fatalities in accidents involving SUVs increased by 68% during~~
~~the decade studied, the number involving light trucks by 25%, and the number involving~~
~~passenger cars by 47%.40 GAO found that there were more pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs~~
~~because (1) more SUVs are on the road than in the past and (2) pedestrians struck by bigger~~
~~vehicles with greater mass are more likely to experience serious injuries or fatalities.41~~

~~36 In 2018, 6,283 pedestrians and 857 bicyclists were killed in motor vehicle-related accidents. Ibid., p. 3.~~
~~37 Ward’s Intelligence Data Center, North America Vehicle Sales by Vehicle Type, 2000-2019, viewed May 1, 2020.~~
~~38 Governors Highway Safety Association, Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2018 Preliminary Data, February~~
~~2019, p. 4.~~
~~39 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Pedestrian Safety, GAO-20-419, April 23, 2020, https://www.gao.gov/~~
~~products/GAO-20-419.~~
~~40 Other factors contributing to the higher fatalities included older vehicles and higher vehicle speeds. Ibid., p. 13.~~
~~41 Ibid., p. 16.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
7

~~link to page 14~~ ~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~Technologies exist that could mitigate pedestrian fatalities.~~ In evaluating data provided from 13 In evaluating data provided from 13
automakers, GAO found that 62% of new model year 2019 vehicles had some type of pedestrian automakers, GAO found that 62% of new model year 2019 vehicles had some type of pedestrian
crash mitigation system. GAO recommended that NHTSA (a) expand a current pilot program that crash mitigation system. GAO recommended that NHTSA (a) expand a current pilot program that
collects data on the type and severity of pedestrian injuries; (b) include collects data on the type and severity of pedestrian injuries; (b) include pedestrian safety tests in pedestrian safety tests in
its five-star New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) safety rating program,its five-star New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) safety rating program,4244 a step that could a step that could
increase automaker use of those technologies on more vehicles; and increase automaker use of those technologies on more vehicles; and (c) clarify its process for (c) clarify its process for
updating its safety ratings.updating its safety ratings.4345
A 2018 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) also associated the greater A 2018 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) also associated the greater
number of SUVs on the road with increased pedestrian deaths and injuries. IIHS found that number of SUVs on the road with increased pedestrian deaths and injuries. IIHS found that
improving vehicle headlights and equipping more vehicles with pedestrian detection systems improving vehicle headlights and equipping more vehicles with pedestrian detection systems
could reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities. It also recommended changing the front-end could reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities. It also recommended changing the front-end
design of SUVs so they are less likely to strike pedestrians in the head or chest.design of SUVs so they are less likely to strike pedestrians in the head or chest.4446 In a separate In a separate
study, IIHS found that smal er vehicles have higher driver death rates, while drivers of some study, IIHS found that smal er vehicles have higher driver death rates, while drivers of some
SUVs have the lowest death rates. SUVs have the lowest death rates.4547
Many Advanced Technologies Improve Vehicle Safety
In the past decade, the use of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) has improved vehicle In the past decade, the use of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) has improved vehicle
safety and passenger mobility by warning drivers of potential y dangerous situations, such as safety and passenger mobility by warning drivers of potential y dangerous situations, such as
another vehicle braking ahead of them, and in some instances, by taking control of the vehicle to another vehicle braking ahead of them, and in some instances, by taking control of the vehicle to
prevent an accident. A prevent an accident. A Consumer Reports survey among drivers—with data on 72,000 vehicles— survey among drivers—with data on 72,000 vehicles—
found that 57% reported that “at least one advanced driver assist feature in their vehicle had kept found that 57% reported that “at least one advanced driver assist feature in their vehicle had kept
them from getting into a crash.” them from getting into a crash.”4648
IIHS and its affiliated Highway Loss Data Institute documented the effects of some crash IIHS and its affiliated Highway Loss Data Institute documented the effects of some crash
avoidance technologies by comparing actual crashes of vehicles with and without ADAS. In the avoidance technologies by comparing actual crashes of vehicles with and without ADAS. In the
2019 IIHS/HDLI study, the authors found that vehicles with forward collision warning 2019 IIHS/HDLI study, the authors found that vehicles with forward collision warning
experienced 27% fewer front-to-rear crashes, and when that technology was combined with experienced 27% fewer front-to-rear crashes, and when that technology was combined with
automatic braking, 50% fewer crashes were experienced. Lane departure warning, blind spot automatic braking, 50% fewer crashes were experienced. Lane departure warning, blind spot
detection, and rearview cameras each contributed to lower crash rates. detection, and rearview cameras each contributed to lower crash rates.47
Figure 3 shows many of the technologies currently used on passenger motor vehicles; some are
~~based on NHTSA standards, such as airbags, tire pressure monitors, and rearview cameras, while~~
~~others are not at this time. The technologies include the following:~~
~~ Electronic stability control limits wheel spinning during acceleration and keeps~~
~~the vehicle on the driver’s intended path.~~

4249 42 Other factors contributing to the higher fatalities included older vehicles and higher vehicle speeds. Ibid., p. 13. 43 Ibid., p. 16. 44 T he 5-star safety rating program, formally known as the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), has since 1978 T he 5-star safety rating program, formally known as the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), has since 1978
provided consumers with information on each vehicle’s safety performance based on a series of crash scenario tests provided consumers with information on each vehicle’s safety performance based on a series of crash scenario tests
conducted by NHT SA. NCAP was authorized by Congress inconducted by NHT SA. NCAP was authorized by Congress in the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act of
1973 (P.L. 92-513). 1973 (P.L. 92-513).
4345 U.S. Government Accountability Office, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Pedestrian Safety, GAO-20-419, April 23, 2020, pp. 39-40. , GAO-20-419, April 23, 2020, pp. 39-40.
4446 “On foot, at risk,” IIHS “On foot, at risk,” IIHS Status Report, Vol. 53, No. 3, May 8, 2018, at https://www.iihs.org/api/datastoredocument/, Vol. 53, No. 3, May 8, 2018, at https://www.iihs.org/api/datastoredocument/
status-report/pdf/53/3. status-report/pdf/53/3.
45 47 IIHS, IIHS, Driver death rates remain high among small cars, May 28, 2020, at https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/driver-, May 28, 2020, at https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/driver-
death-rates-remain-high-among-small-cars. death-rates-remain-high-among-small-cars.
4648 Mike Monticello, Mike Monticello, Car Safety Systems That Could Save Your Life, , Consumer Reports, June 25, 2019, at , June 25, 2019, at
https://www.consumerreports.org/automotive-technology/car-safety-systems-that-could-save-your-life/. https://www.consumerreports.org/automotive-technology/car-safety-systems-that-could-save-your-life/.
4749 Institute for Highway Safety and Highway Loss Data Institute, Institute for Highway Safety and Highway Loss Data Institute, Real-world benefits of crash avoidance technologies, ,
~~June 2019, at https://www.iihs.org/media/259e5bbd-f859-42a7-bd54-3888f7a2d3ef/e9boUQ/T opics/~~
~~ADVANCED%20DRIVER%20ASSI ST ANCE/IIHS-real- world-CA- benefits.pdf.~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
8 8

link to page 14 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Figure 3 shows many of the technologies currently used on passenger motor vehicles; some are based on NHTSA standards, such as airbags, tire pressure monitors, and rearview cameras, while others are not at this time. The technologies include the following:  Electronic stability control limits wheel spinning during acceleration and keeps the vehicle on the driver’s intended path. ~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

  Automatic emergency braking detects a sudden effort to stop the vehicle, detects a sudden effort to stop the vehicle,
automatical y applying automatical y applying additional force to the brakes the brakes if needed to prevent an imminent crash. to prevent an imminent crash.
  Seat belt pretensioners employ a sensor to detect abrupt deceleration of an employ a sensor to detect abrupt deceleration of an
impending accident, forcing a concealed piston to quickly remove any slack in impending accident, forcing a concealed piston to quickly remove any slack in
front-seat seat belts to hold drivers and passengers firmly in their seats, thereby front-seat seat belts to hold drivers and passengers firmly in their seats, thereby
providing maximum airbag protection. providing maximum airbag protection.
  Forward collision warning uses cameras, radar, and lasers to search for cars uses cameras, radar, and lasers to search for cars
ahead of a vehicle and alerts drivers if a crash may be imminent, using audible ahead of a vehicle and alerts drivers if a crash may be imminent, using audible
signals or a vibrating driver’s seat to alert the driver. A similar system is available signals or a vibrating driver’s seat to alert the driver. A similar system is available
to detect pedestrians in a vehicle’s path. to detect pedestrians in a vehicle’s path.
  Blind spot warning devices are built into external side vehicle mirrors; using devices are built into external side vehicle mirrors; using
radar or cameras, they light up when a motorist seeks to change lanes and another radar or cameras, they light up when a motorist seeks to change lanes and another
vehicle is in the driver’s blind spot. vehicle is in the driver’s blind spot.
  Lane departure warning systems monitor roadway lane markings and send systems monitor roadway lane markings and send
audible or vibrating signals to the driver if the vehicle leaves the lane, unless a audible or vibrating signals to the driver if the vehicle leaves the lane, unless a
turn signal is activated. Research has indicated that drivers who fal asleep, suffer turn signal is activated. Research has indicated that drivers who fal asleep, suffer
a medical emergencya medical emergency, or black out from drug or alcohol use are most likely to or black out from drug or alcohol use are most likely to
leave intended lanes.leave intended lanes.4850
  Adaptive lighting is a safety system designed for the driver to see better at night is a safety system designed for the driver to see better at night
without affecting other drivers, using a camera under the rearview mirror to without affecting other drivers, using a camera under the rearview mirror to
detect oncoming traffic and curves in the road, automatical y adjusting detect oncoming traffic and curves in the road, automatical y adjusting
headlights. FMVSS do not al ow adaptive headlights. headlights. FMVSS do not al ow adaptive headlights.
Since there are no universal standards for some of these technologies, they may have different Since there are no universal standards for some of these technologies, they may have different
names among manufacturers and different capabilities. names among manufacturers and different capabilities. Consumer Reports has suggested that has suggested that
automakers, regulators, and safety groups develop an “accurate naming convention” so that automakers, regulators, and safety groups develop an “accurate naming convention” so that
consumers wil better understand what these relatively new systems do. consumers wil better understand what these relatively new systems do.4951
Many of these newer ADAS technologies are not mandated by Congress or NHTSA; they often Many of these newer ADAS technologies are not mandated by Congress or NHTSA; they often
appear first on luxury vehicles because of their high initial costs.appear first on luxury vehicles because of their high initial costs.5052 NHTSA’s position has been NHTSA’s position has been
that to develop standards for rapidly changing technologies could impede innovation and result that to develop standards for rapidly changing technologies could impede innovation and result
ultimately in outmoded standards, which could then take years to revise. Delays in issuing or ultimately in outmoded standards, which could then take years to revise. Delays in issuing or
updating standards can be caused by opposition to some of the proposals by industry or updating standards can be caused by opposition to some of the proposals by industry or
~~consumers or by inaction by regulators. In addition, the lengthy period for standard setting is~~
~~affected by the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, which ensures that a~~
~~proposed rulemaking is publicized in the Federal Register, that public comments are evaluated by~~
~~the regulatory agency, and then that decisions that are made are clearly explained in another~~
Federal Register notice.
~~To speed the application of one new technology, NHTSA developed a voluntary agreement with~~
~~20 automakers in 2016 to instal automatic emergency braking systems on nearly al new~~
~~passenger vehicles by 2022, a pace of application that NHTSA’s then-administrator said could~~

48 June 2019, at https://www.iihs.org/media/259e5bbd-f859-42a7-bd54-3888f7a2d3ef/e9boUQ/T opics/ADVANCED%20DRIVER%20ASSI ST ANCE/IIHS-real- world-CA- benefits.pdf. 50 IIHS, IIHS, Drivers who drift from lane and crash often dozing or ill, September 1, 2016, at https://www.iihs.org/news/, September 1, 2016, at https://www.iihs.org/news/
detail/drivers-who-drift-from-lane-and-crash-often-dozing-or-ill. detail/drivers-who-drift-from-lane-and-crash-often-dozing-or-ill.
4951 David Friedman, Jake Fisher, and Kelly Funkhouser, et al., “ David Friedman, Jake Fisher, and Kelly Funkhouser, et al., “ A Consumer Reports Initiative to End Confusion About A Consumer Reports Initiative to End Confusion About
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems,” Advanced Driver Assistance Systems,” Consum er Reports, October 25, 2018, at https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/, October 25, 2018, at https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/
research/advanced-driver-assistance-systems-standard-nomenclature/. research/advanced-driver-assistance-systems-standard-nomenclature/.
5052 H.R. 2, as passed by the House H.R. 2, as passed by the House in the 116th Congress but not enacted, would have required~~, would require~~ NHT SA NHT SA to establish federal standards for many of these crash to establish federal standards for many of these crash
avoidance technologies. avoidance technologies.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
9 9

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

consumers or by inaction by regulators. In addition, the lengthy period for standard setting is affected by the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, which ensures that a proposed rulemaking is publicized in the Federal Register, that public comments are evaluated by the regulatory agency, and then that decisions that are made are clearly explained in another Federal Register notice. Figure 3. Advanced Vehicle Technologies Source: CRS. To speed the application of one new technology, NHTSA developed a voluntary agreement with 20 automakers in 2016 to instal automatic emergency braking systems on nearly al new Congressional Research Service 10 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress passenger vehicles by 2022, a pace of application that NHTSA’s then-administrator said could not have been met with a traditional standards-setting regulation. Under the agreement, not have been met with a traditional standards-setting regulation. Under the agreement,
automakers report annual y on their progress: the latest reporting period (for 2019) showed that automakers report annual y on their progress: the latest reporting period (for 2019) showed that
12 manufacturers had equipped more than 75% of their vehicles with the systems. 12 manufacturers had equipped more than 75% of their vehicles with the systems.
~~Figure 3. Advanced Vehicle Technologies~~

Source: CRS.
With more than 260 mil ion vehicles on U.S. roads, the life-saving value of new technologies wil With more than 260 mil ion vehicles on U.S. roads, the life-saving value of new technologies wil
be limited until most cars in use, not just new ones, are equipped with them. The Highway Loss be limited until most cars in use, not just new ones, are equipped with them. The Highway Loss
Data Institute reported in 2019 that “carmakers are making vehicles more crashworthy about 3 Data Institute reported in 2019 that “carmakers are making vehicles more crashworthy about 3
~~Congressional Research Service~~
10

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

times faster today than they did in the mid-1990s, but those improvements and new safety times faster today than they did in the mid-1990s, but those improvements and new safety
features stil take decades to filter into most vehicles on the road.” features stil take decades to filter into most vehicles on the road.”5153
Vehicle Recalls and Defects
In addition to promulgating and enforcing vehicle safety standards, NHTSA investigates vehicle In addition to promulgating and enforcing vehicle safety standards, NHTSA investigates vehicle
defects that affect safety. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) initiates defect defects that affect safety. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) initiates defect
investigations and reviews complaints of al eged defects from vehicle owners, automakers, and investigations and reviews complaints of al eged defects from vehicle owners, automakers, and
other sources. There are several routes a potential recal complaint can take: other sources. There are several routes a potential recal complaint can take:
  Denial. When NHTSA’s analysis of petitions cal ing for defect investigations When NHTSA’s analysis of petitions cal ing for defect investigations
leads the agency to decide not to proceed, it publicizes the reasons for the denial leads the agency to decide not to proceed, it publicizes the reasons for the denial
in the in the Federal Register. .
  Further review. If NHTSA opens an investigation of al eged safety-related If NHTSA opens an investigation of al eged safety-related
defects, the investigation concludes with either a recommendation that the defects, the investigation concludes with either a recommendation that the
manufacturer recal the vehicle or a determination that there is no safety-related manufacturer recal the vehicle or a determination that there is no safety-related
defect. defect.
If a safety defect is confirmed by NHTSA, the manufacturer may initiate a recal ; if If a safety defect is confirmed by NHTSA, the manufacturer may initiate a recal ; if itthe manufacturer fails to do fails to do
so, NHTSA can initiate a recal itself. In addition to the NHTSA so, NHTSA can initiate a recal itself. In addition to the NHTSA investigative process, investigative process,
manufacturers conduct their own internal investigations; if a manufacturer finds that a vehicle or manufacturers conduct their own internal investigations; if a manufacturer finds that a vehicle or
component does not comply with a federal safety standard, it may issue its own recal to correct a component does not comply with a federal safety standard, it may issue its own recal to correct a
safety defect before accidents are reported. Of the 966 recal s issued in 2019, 57 were issued by safety defect before accidents are reported. Of the 966 recal s issued in 2019, 57 were issued by
manufacturers influenced by a NHTSA finding, and 909 were issued based on a manufacturer’s manufacturers influenced by a NHTSA finding, and 909 were issued based on a manufacturer’s
finding alone.finding alone.5254 The law establishing the motor vehicle safety program The law establishing the motor vehicle safety program requires that a requires that a
manufacturer of a defective vehicle or component notify the vehicle owner and fix manufacturer of a defective vehicle or component notify the vehicle owner and fix the defect the defect
without charge.without charge.53

55 53 “Automakers accelerate push to make vehicles safer,” Status Report, December 16, 2019, pp. 4-5, at https://www.iihs.org/api/datastoredocument/status-report/pdf/54/7. 54 NHT SA, 2016 Annual Recall Report. 55 Remedies for Defects and Compliance, 49 U.S.C. §30120. Congressional Research Service 11 link to page 16 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress How Consumers Can Report Defects and Check on Recalls
Increasing the reporting of defects and enabling consumers to know about current recal s is an important part of Increasing the reporting of defects and enabling consumers to know about current recal s is an important part of
NHTSA’s public education program to ensure that more vehicles that need repairs are actual y fixed. Vehicle NHTSA’s public education program to ensure that more vehicles that need repairs are actual y fixed. Vehicle
owners and buyers often want to know how to check on recal s or how to report defects. NHTSA encourages owners and buyers often want to know how to check on recal s or how to report defects. NHTSA encourages
car owners to report vehicle defects, as knowledge of what consumers are experiencing is one way a recal may car owners to report vehicle defects, as knowledge of what consumers are experiencing is one way a recal may
be determined. Consumers can report defects by be determined. Consumers can report defects by telephone tol -free (1-888-327-4236 or 1-800-424-9393; a tol -free (1-888-327-4236 or 1-800-424-9393; a
Spanish-speaking line is available at 1-800-424-9153); on the website http://www.safercar.gov, using the “select a Spanish-speaking line is available at 1-800-424-9153); on the website http://www.safercar.gov, using the “select a
complaint” feature; or by complaint” feature; or by U.S. mail::
U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation
NHTSA, Office of Defects Investigation (NVS-210) NHTSA, Office of Defects Investigation (NVS-210)
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590 Washington, DC 20590
Consumers can also check on whether their vehicles have been subject to a recal by visiting Consumers can also check on whether their vehicles have been subject to a recal by visiting
http://www.nhtsa.gov/recal s and using the 17-character Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) that is unique to each http://www.nhtsa.gov/recal s and using the 17-character Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) that is unique to each
car. A VIN can be found in the lower left of the car’s windshield (on the driver’s side), and on the driver’s side car. A VIN can be found in the lower left of the car’s windshield (on the driver’s side), and on the driver’s side
door jamb near the seat; it is also located on a state vehicle registration card. door jamb near the seat; it is also located on a state vehicle registration card.

~~51 “Automakers accelerate push to make vehicles safer,” Status Report, December 16, 2019, pp. 4-5, at~~
~~https://www.iihs.org/api/datastoredocument/status-report/pdf/54/7.~~
~~52 NHT SA, 2016 Annual Recall Report.~~
~~53 Remedies for Defects and Compliance, 49 U.S.C. §30120.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
11

~~link to page 16~~

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

The annual number of recal actions rose 81% between 2009 and 2016, but has fluctuated in a The annual number of recal actions rose 81% between 2009 and 2016, but has fluctuated in a
narrow range since 2016. The number of vehicles and items of equipment recal ed rose steeply narrow range since 2016. The number of vehicles and items of equipment recal ed rose steeply
between 2013 and 2015, but then fel through 2018 (sebetween 2013 and 2015, but then fel through 2018 (see Figure 4). There are several reasons the ). There are several reasons the
number of recal s is higher than in earlier years, including stricter laws, larger fines, delayed number of recal s is higher than in earlier years, including stricter laws, larger fines, delayed
detection by NHTSA of vehicle problems, and several recent high-visibility cases affecting detection by NHTSA of vehicle problems, and several recent high-visibility cases affecting
mil ions of vehicles. mil ions of vehicles.
Figure 4. Motor Vehicle and Equipment Recalls

Source: NHTSA, 2019 Annual Recal Report, covering years 2000-2019. NHTSA, 2019 Annual Recal Report, covering years 2000-2019.
Notes: Data include recal s of motor vehicles, motor vehicle parts, tires, and child safety seats. Nearly al of the Data include recal s of motor vehicles, motor vehicle parts, tires, and child safety seats. Nearly al of the
recal s in 2019 were of vehicles—39 mil ion—and parts—14 mil ion. recal s in 2019 were of vehicles—39 mil ion—and parts—14 mil ion.
Congressional Research Service 12 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Takata Airbag Recall
The spike in the number of vehicles and equipment recal ed from 2013 to 2017 is due in large The spike in the number of vehicles and equipment recal ed from 2013 to 2017 is due in large
part to the recal of more than part to the recal of more than 6367 mil ion defective airbags manufactured by parts supplier Takata, mil ion defective airbags manufactured by parts supplier Takata,
making it the largest-ever automotive recal .making it the largest-ever automotive recal .5456 To date there have been To date there have been 1618 confirmed deaths confirmed deaths ~~and~~
~~more than 220~~—two as recently as summer 2020 in Arizona—and more than 400 injuries attributable to Takata airbag defects. injuries attributable to Takata airbag defects.5557 In 2014, NHTSA opened a formal In 2014, NHTSA opened a formal
investigation into defective airbags that, when deployed in a crash, could shower metal fragments investigation into defective airbags that, when deployed in a crash, could shower metal fragments
into front-seat vehicle occupants, often with into front-seat vehicle occupants, often with fatal consequences. In 2015, Takata and NHTSA fatal consequences. In 2015, Takata and NHTSA
entered into a consent order requiring Takata to submit a plan to maximize recal completion entered into a consent order requiring Takata to submit a plan to maximize recal completion
rates.rates.5658 During its investigation, NHTSA found that Takata had not notified it of defects in a During its investigation, NHTSA found that Takata had not notified it of defects in a
timely or accurate way. Takata agreed to retain, at its expense, an independent monitor to assess timely or accurate way. Takata agreed to retain, at its expense, an independent monitor to assess
compliance with the consent order. In addition, the compliance with the consent order. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice took legal action against Takata, leading to Takata pleading guilty in 2017 to criminal charges and agreeing to a $1 bil ion settlement.59 Although about 50 mil ion airbags have been replaced since the defect was detected, an estimated 11 mil ion vehicles with the recal ed airbags remain on the road.60 Airbag recal s continue: for example, in November 2020, General Motors recal ed 5.9 mil ion Cadil ac, Chevrolet, and GMC pickup trucks and SUVs for model years 2007 to 2014,61 and in January 2021, Ford announced the recal of 3 mil ion vehicles for model years 2006 to 2012.62 The independent monitor’s fourth report notes that the completion rate for this recal is 79%, and has “far outpaced those for other automotive recal s of older vehicles.”63 The December 2020 report outlines innovative recal strategies that have led to the replacement of so many airbags. These strategies may be useful in raising the completion rates for other recal s in the future. Among the innovative methods of reaching vehicle owners in the Takata recal ,  manufacturers used multiple sources of vehicle owner information that was updated frequently;  the defect was explained to owners in simple, concise, and urgent terms, rather than technical y;  multiple languages other than English were used when appropriate; ~~U.S. Department of Justice took legal action~~

5456 NHT SA, T akata Recall Spotlight, NHT SA, T akata Recall Spotlight, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/takata-recall-spotlight, viewed on May 7, 2020. https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/takata-recall-spotlight, viewed on May 7, 2020.
55 57 Independent Monitor of T akata and the Coordinated Remedy Program, Independent Monitor of T akata and the Coordinated Remedy Program, Update on the State of the Takata Airbag
Recalls, , ~~January 23~~December 22, 2020, p. , 2020, p. 312, at , at ~~http://www.takatamonitor.org/.~~
56https://www.nhtsa.gov/takata-recall-spotlight/state-takata-air-bag-recalls-fourth-report . 58 NHT SA Consent Order In re: EA 15-001 Air Bag Inflator Rupture, November 2, 2015, NHT SA Consent Order In re: EA 15-001 Air Bag Inflator Rupture, November 2, 2015, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/
~~nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/nhtsa-consentorder-takata.pdf.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
12

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~against Takata, leading to Takata pleading guilty in 2017 to criminal charges and agreeing to a $1~~
~~bil ion settlement.57~~
~~Although mil ions of airbags have been replaced since the defect was detected, an estimated 15.9~~
~~mil ion vehicles with the recal ed airbags remain on the road.58 A separate group of 10 mil ion~~
~~Takata airbags was recal ed in 2019,59 of which NHTSA estimates about 1% may have a defect.60~~
~~The airbags in this recal were used to replace those recal ed earlier, NHTSA having deemed the~~
~~replacements safer than the originals. Now, many motorists wil have to return to their dealers for~~
~~a second airbag replacement.61 The independent monitor reported in January 2020 that~~
~~the Takata recalls, now in their fourth year, continue to pose new and unprecedented~~
~~challenges.... Many of the remaining vehicles in the field are older and inherently more~~
~~difficult to reach. Affected vehicle manufacturers have learned that, at this stage in the~~
~~Takata recalls when repairs have exceeded 60%, over half of remaining vehicle owner~~
~~contact information based on registration data, can be incorrect.62~~
~~Other Major 2019 Recalls~~
~~Aside from the Takata recal s, the 10 largest in 2019, several of which involved defective~~
~~software or electronic components, were63~~
~~ 3.5 mil ion Cadil ac, Chevrolet, and GMC SUVs and pickup trucks, model years~~
~~2014-2018, recal ed for a faulty vacuum pump that required reprograming of the~~
~~electronic brake control module;~~
~~ 1.3 mil ion Subaru cars and SUVs, model years 2008-2017, requiring a new~~
~~brake light switch to replace one prone to malfunction;~~
~~ 1.2 mil ion Nissan and Infiniti cars and trucks, model years 2018-2019, requiring~~
~~a software update to ensure that their backup cameras worked properly;~~
~~ 1.2 mil ion Ford Explorers, model years 2011-2017, requiring replacement of~~
~~part of the rear suspension so that the rear wheels remain pointed in the right~~
~~direction;~~
~~ 928,000 Toyota, Scion, and Lexus vehicles, model years 2003-2017, requiring~~
~~airbag assembly replacements;~~

~~57 U.S. Department of Justice, “T akata Corporation Pleads Guilty, Sentenced to Pay $1 Billion in Criminal Pen alties for~~
~~Air Bag Scheme,” press release, February 27, 2017, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/takata-corporation-pleads-guilty-~~
~~sentenced-pay-1-billion-criminal-penalties-airbag-scheme.~~
~~58 Independent Monitor of T akata and the Coordinated Remedy Program,~~ ~~Update on the State of the Takata Airbag~~
~~Recalls, January 23, 2020, p. 1.~~
~~59 NHT SA, “ More T akata Air Bags Recalled,” https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls/takata-air-bags-nadi, viewed on June 5,~~
~~2020.~~
~~60 NHT SA, Defect Information Report for Driver and Passenger Side Airbag Inflators, January 2, 2020, at~~
~~https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2020/RMISC-20E001-4050.pdf.~~
~~61 Colin Beresford, “10 Million More T akata Airbags Recalled from 14 Automakers,” Car And Driver, January 8,~~
~~2020, https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a30446627/takata-airbags-recall-10-million/.~~
~~62 T he report of the Independent Monitor discusses novel ways in which manufact urers have attempted to increase the~~
~~rate of compliance. Independent Monitor of Takata and the Coordinated Remedy Program,~~ ~~Update on the State of the~~
~~Takata Airbag Recalls, January 23, 2020, p. 1.~~
~~63 Patrick Masterson, “The 10 Biggest Recalls in 2019,” cars.com, January 14, 2020, at https://www.cars.com/articles/~~
~~the-10-biggest-recalls-in-2019-416480.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
13

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~ 863,000 Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles, model years 2011-2016, with faulty~~
~~catalytic converters, affecting their emission controls;~~
~~ 693,100 Ram pickup trucks, model years 2013-2014, requiring new tailgate~~
~~latches;~~
~~ 679,000 Volkswagen vehicles, model years 2011-2019, needing new ignition~~
~~switches and circuit boards;~~
~~ 662,100 Volkswagen Passat and Atlas vehicles, model years 2012-2020, missing~~
~~a headlight component; and~~
~~ 638,000 Chevrolet and GMC SUVs and pickup trucks, model years 2014-2018,~~
~~recal ed because of a faulty electronic brake control module that affected the~~
~~driver’s ability to steer.~~
~~A recent private study concluded that a significant trend has been the increase in software defects,~~
~~noting that “with the emergence of advanced driver assistance systems, connected vehicles,~~
~~vehicle-to-vehicle, and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication, this wil be an important area for~~
~~manufacturers and suppliers to focus on.. .”64~~
~~Inspector General Report on Recall Process~~
~~The Department of Transportation Office of the Inspector General (OIG) was required by the~~
~~FAST Act to audit NHTSA’s recal process based on its handling of the Takata airbag recal . Its~~
~~2018 report, which included six recommendations,65 found that NHTSA’s recal process had a~~
nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/nhtsa-consentorder-takata.pdf. 59 U.S. Department of Justice, “T akata Corporation Pleads Guilty, Sentenced to Pay $1 Billion in Criminal Penalties for Air Bag Scheme,” press release, February 27, 2017, at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/takata-corporation-pleads-guilty-sentenced-pay-1-billion-criminal-penalties-airbag-scheme. 60 Independent Monitor of T akata and the Coordinated Remedy Program, Update on the State of the Takata Airbag Recalls, December 22, 2020, p. 35. 61 Keith Barry, “GM Recalls 5.9 Million T rucks, SUVs for Faulty T akata Airbags,” Consumer Reports, November 25, 2020, at https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/gm-recalls-trucks-suvs-for-faulty-takata-airbags/. 62 David Shepardson, “U.S. agency orders Ford to recall 3 million vehicles over air bags,” Reuters, January 19, 2021, at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ford-recall/u-s-agency-orders-ford-to-recall-3-million-vehicles-over-air-bags-idUSKBN29O2IO?il=0. 63 Independent Monitor of T akata and the Coordinated Remedy Program, Update on the State of the Takata Airbag Recalls, December 22, 2020, p. 2. Congressional Research Service 13 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress  auto dealers were given incentives to encourage their participation and outreach for repairing airbags; and  mobile repair was offered to shorten repair time and replace the airbags at an owner’s residence or workplace.64 Major Recent Recalls Aside from the ongoing Takata recal s, major recal s in the past two years included the following. In 2020,  1.4 mil ion Hondas, including model years 2002-2020, recal ed for drive shafts that can corrode and break, window switches that can overheat, and software flaws that can cause rear cameras, turn signals, and windshield wipers to malfunction;65  600,000 Kia Optima and Hyundai Santa Fe Sports, for model years 2013-2015, recal ed because of engine compartment fire risks;66  620,000 Ford vehicles, including Escape, Explorer, F-150 truck, and Mustang, model year 2020, for malfunctioning rear view cameras that can leave a blank screen or distorted image;67 and  158,000 Tesla Models S and X, model years 2012-2018, recommended for recal because the dashboard touchscreen can fail after a few years of use when the memory chip runs out of storage capacity.68 In 2019,69  3.5 mil ion Cadil ac, Chevrolet, and GMC SUVs and pickup trucks, model years 2014-2018, recal ed for a faulty vacuum pump that required reprograming of the electronic brake control module;  1.3 mil ion Subaru cars and SUVs, model years 2008-2017, requiring a new brake light switch to replace one prone to malfunction;  1.2 mil ion Nissan and Infiniti cars and trucks, model years 2018-2019, requiring a software update to ensure that their backup cameras worked properly; 64 Ibid., pp.4-12. 65 Laura Sky Brown, “Honda Recalls 1.4 Million Vehicles, Including 430k for Salt Corrosion Problem,” Car and Driver, December 16, 2020, at https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a34990029/honda-civic-fit-accord-acura-ilx-driveshaft -recall/. 66 Jake Lingeman, “Kia, Hyundai Recall 600,000 Vehicles for Fire Risk,” Autoweek, September 7, 2020, at https://www.autoweek.com/news/industry-news/a33926842/kia-hyundai-recall-600000-vehicles-for-fire-risk/. 67 Laura Sky Brown, “Ford Recalls More T han 600,000 Vehicles over Rearview Cameras,” Car and Driver, September 30, 2020, at https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a34226541/ford-rearview-camera-recall/. 68 Rebecca Elliott and Ben Foldy, “Car-Safety Regulators Urge T esla to Recall Around 158,000 Vehicles,” Wall Street Journal, January 13, 2021, at https://www.wsj.com/articles/car-safety-regulators-urge-tesla-to-recall-around-158-000-vehicles-11610582727. 69 Patrick Masterson, “The 10 Biggest Recalls in 2019,” cars.com, January 14, 2020, at https://www.cars.com/articles/the-10-biggest-recalls-in-2019-416480. Congressional Research Service 14 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress  1.2 mil ion Ford Explorers, model years 2011-2017, requiring replacement of part of the rear suspension so that the rear wheels remain pointed in the right direction;  928,000 Toyota, Scion, and Lexus vehicles, model years 2003-2017, requiring airbag assembly replacements; and  863,000 Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles, model years 2011-2016, with faulty catalytic converters, affecting their emission controls. A recent private study concluded that a significant trend has been the increase in software defects, noting that “with the emergence of advanced driver assistance systems, connected vehicles, vehicle-to-vehicle, and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication, this wil be an important area for manufacturers and suppliers to focus on.. . ”70 Inspector General Report on Recall Process The Department of Transportation Office of the Inspector General (OIG) was required by the FAST Act to audit NHTSA’s recal process based on its handling of the Takata airbag recal . Its 2018 report, which included six recommendations,71 found a number of shortcomings. Specifical y, the OIG found that NHTSA’s monitoring process for light number of shortcomings. Specifical y, the OIG found that NHTSA’s monitoring process for light
vehicle recal s did not ensure that remedies were fully reported and that it did not verify recal vehicle recal s did not ensure that remedies were fully reported and that it did not verify recal
completion rates or notify manufacturers of missing information, making it difficult to assess the completion rates or notify manufacturers of missing information, making it difficult to assess the
adequacy of a adequacy of a manufacturer’s recal campaign. The OIG later said NHTSA had addressed its manufacturer’s recal campaign. The OIG later said NHTSA had addressed its
recommendations. recommendations.6672
In a separate report, issued in 2015, the OIG criticized NHTSA’s methods of collecting vehicle In a separate report, issued in 2015, the OIG criticized NHTSA’s methods of collecting vehicle
safety data and reviewing complaints, recommending 17 improvements.safety data and reviewing complaints, recommending 17 improvements.6773 In the FAST Act, In the FAST Act,
Congress conditioned the agency’s funding authorization on the resolution of the 17 OIG Congress conditioned the agency’s funding authorization on the resolution of the 17 OIG
recommendations.recommendations.6874 The OIG notified Congress on September 30, 2016, that NHTSA had The OIG notified Congress on September 30, 2016, that NHTSA had
addressed the 17 issues raised in its report. addressed the 17 issues raised in its report.
Recall Completion Rates
Vehicle owners do not always bring their vehicles to a dealer when a recal is announced, Vehicle owners do not always bring their vehicles to a dealer when a recal is announced,
resulting in many unrepaired vehicles on the road with safety-related defects. Consumers may not resulting in many unrepaired vehicles on the road with safety-related defects. Consumers may not
open a recal notice in the mail, may find it difficult to schedule a free repair, may think the recal is not important enough for a response, or may have sold the vehicle. Sometimes, as with the Takata airbag recal , the manufacturer does not have enough repair parts available at the time recal notices are sent out, and vehicle owners may lose interest during an extended delay. A goal of the FAST Act was to increase the number of vehicles repaired through the recal process. 70
64 Stout Risius Ross LLC, Stout Risius Ross LLC, 2019 Automotive Defect & Recall Report, October 14, 2019, pp. 18-19, at , October 14, 2019, pp. 18-19, at
https://www.stout.com/en/insights/report/2019-automotive-defect-and-recall-report. https://www.stout.com/en/insights/report/2019-automotive-defect-and-recall-report.
6571 DOT Office of Inspector General, DOT Office of Inspector General, NHTSA’s Management of Light Passenger Vehicle Recalls Lacks Adequate
Processes and Oversight, ST 2018062, July 18, 2018, pp. 27, ST 2018062, July 18, 2018, pp. 27 -28, at https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/-28, at https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/
NHT SA%20Auto%20Recalls%20Final%20Report%5E07 -18-18.pdf. NHT SA%20Auto%20Recalls%20Final%20Report%5E07 -18-18.pdf.
6672 CRS conversation and email with Office of Inspector General at DOT . CRS conversation and email with Office of Inspector General at DOT .
6773 DOT Office of Inspector General, DOT Office of Inspector General, Inadequate Data and Analysis Undermine NHTSA’s Efforts to Identify and
Investigate Vehicle Safety Concerns, ST -2015-063, June 18, 2015, at https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/, ST -2015-063, June 18, 2015, at https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/
NHT SA%20Safety-Related%20Vehicle%20Defects%20-%20Final%20Report%5E6-18-15.pdf. NHT SA%20Safety-Related%20Vehicle%20Defects%20-%20Final%20Report%5E6-18-15.pdf.
6874 P.L. 114-94, §§24101 and 24102. P.L. 114-94, §§24101 and 24102.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1415

link to page link to page 3334 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress ~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~open a recal notice in the mail, find it difficult to schedule a free repair, think the recal is not~~
~~important enough for a response, or may have sold the vehicle. Sometimes, as with the Takata~~
~~airbag recal , the manufacturer does not have enough repair parts available at the time recal~~
~~notices are sent out, and vehicle owners may lose interest during an extended delay. A goal of the~~
~~FAST Act was to increase the number of vehicles repaired through the recal process.~~
The FAST Act required NHTSA to conduct an analysis of vehicle recal completion rates and The FAST Act required NHTSA to conduct an analysis of vehicle recal completion rates and
submit a report to Congress. NHTSA completed that review, based on recal s issued between submit a report to Congress. NHTSA completed that review, based on recal s issued between
2010 and 2014, and submitted its report in May 2017.2010 and 2014, and submitted its report in May 2017.6975 NHTSA evaluated NHTSA evaluated annual completion
rates rather than rather than average completion rates because the former reflects the number of vehicles because the former reflects the number of vehicles
affected.affected.7076 NHTSA researchers found that the combined annual completion rate for al NHTSA researchers found that the combined annual completion rate for al
automakers subject to a recal in those years was 67%, “meaning that 67% of al vehicles recal ed automakers subject to a recal in those years was 67%, “meaning that 67% of al vehicles recal ed
were remedied.”were remedied.”7177 Individual automakers’ results varied, with Tesla having the highest annual Individual automakers’ results varied, with Tesla having the highest annual
completion rate, 100%, in 2010 and Mercedes-Benz having the lowest, 33%, in 2011. Results for completion rate, 100%, in 2010 and Mercedes-Benz having the lowest, 33%, in 2011. Results for
major automakers are shown i major automakers are shown in Table B-1.
The NHTSA report’s findings are relevant to congressional efforts to boost recal completion The NHTSA report’s findings are relevant to congressional efforts to boost recal completion
rates: rates:
  The older the vehicle on the date of a recall, the less likely the defect will be
repaired. Cars one to three years old at the time of recal had a repair average of Cars one to three years old at the time of recal had a repair average of
80%, while cars more than six years old had a 56% rate. NHTSA speculated that 80%, while cars more than six years old had a 56% rate. NHTSA speculated that
owners of newer cars stil under warranty may be more inclined to return them to owners of newer cars stil under warranty may be more inclined to return them to
the dealer for a the dealer for a ~~recall.72~~recal .78 This observation appears in other recent recal studies. This observation appears in other recent recal studies.7379
  Vehicle parts recall completions differ by type of components. It appears that It appears that
vehicle owners are more likely to respond to recal s for certain types of parts, vehicle owners are more likely to respond to recal s for certain types of parts,
such as tires, powertrain, and seat belts (al above 70% completion) than to such as tires, powertrain, and seat belts (al above 70% completion) than to
lighting and suspension recal s (under 60%). lighting and suspension recal s (under 60%).
  Larger recalls underperform smaller recalls. NHTSA compared the NHTSA compared the average
completion rate—81% for the major automakers—with the completion rate—81% for the major automakers—with the annual completion completion
rate for the same group, which was 67%. The researchers concluded that “recal s rate for the same group, which was 67%. The researchers concluded that “recal s
that cover more vehicles are underperforming compared to smal er recal s; that cover more vehicles are underperforming compared to smal er recal s;
otherwise the unweighted average would more closely resemble the percentage otherwise the unweighted average would more closely resemble the percentage
of vehicles actual y remedied.”of vehicles actual y remedied.”7480
To the extent that recal s deal with software issues in a vehicle, novel remedies available for that To the extent that recal s deal with software issues in a vehicle, novel remedies available for that
category may facilitate higher recal completion rates. Software remedies could include over-the-category may facilitate higher recal completion rates. Software remedies could include over-the-
air solutions that are pushed out to air solutions that are pushed out to ~~all~~ al vehicle owners over wireless networks; alternatively, vehicle owners over wireless networks; alternatively,
vehicle owners could download a software correction from a manufacturer’s (or NHTSA’s) website onto their vehicle’s USB port.81
6975 NHT SA, NHT SA, Report to Congress: Vehicle Safety Recall Completion Rates Report, May 2017, , May 2017, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/https://www.nhtsa.gov/
sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13376-recall_completion_rates_rtc-tag_final.pdf. sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13376-recall_completion_rates_rtc-tag_final.pdf.
7076 As an example, the report notes that BMW’s 2014 As an example, the report notes that BMW’s 2014 annual completion rate was 42% because it fixed 42% of the completion rate was 42% because it fixed 42% of the
vehicles it recalled that year. Its vehicles it recalled that year. Its average completion rate was 87% because of several smaller recalls that year that had completion rate was 87% because of several smaller recalls that year that had
higher completion rates. One large BMW recall had a relatively low completion higher completion rates. One large BMW recall had a relatively low completion ~~rate~~rat e, bringing down the annual rate. , bringing down the annual rate.
Ibid., p. 6. Ibid., p. 6.
7177 Ibid., p. 11. Ibid., p. 11.
7278 Ibid., p. 13. Ibid., p. 13.
7379 Stout, Risius Ross LLC, Stout, Risius Ross LLC, 2019 Automotive Defect & Recall Report, October 14, 2019, pp. 10-11. , October 14, 2019, pp. 10-11.
7480 NHT SA, NHT SA, Report to Congress: Vehicle Safety Recall Completion Rates Report, May 2017, p. 12. , May 2017, p. 12.
81 Stout Risius Ross LLC, 2019 Automotive Defect & Recall Report, October 14, 2019, p. 65. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1516

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

~~vehicle owners could download a software correction from a manufacturer’s (or NHTSA’s)~~
~~website onto their vehicle’s USB port.75~~
The 2015 FAST Act and Unresolved Issues
Major Safety Provisions
Congress last enacted Congress last enacted comprehensive vehicle safety legislationvehicle safety legislation as part of the as part of the ~~last~~most recent surface transportation surface transportation
reauthorization, the FAST Act of 2015. Among the safety provisions it included reauthorization, the FAST Act of 2015. Among the safety provisions it included were the were the
following: following:
  Recall compliance for rental cars and new notice requirement for auto
dealers. The FAST Act required rental car companies for the first time to repair The FAST Act required rental car companies for the first time to repair
vehicles subject to recal s before renting, leasing, or sel ing them. Motor vehicle vehicles subject to recal s before renting, leasing, or sel ing them. Motor vehicle
dealers were also required to notify vehicle owners when there is an open recal dealers were also required to notify vehicle owners when there is an open recal
on a vehicle brought in for servicing. on a vehicle brought in for servicing.
  Types of consumer communications. The FAST Act The FAST Act ~~requires~~required NHTSA to issue a NHTSA to issue a
rule requiring manufacturers to use email, social media, and targeted online rule requiring manufacturers to use email, social media, and targeted online
campaigns to notify vehicle owners of recal s, in addition to first-class mail.campaigns to notify vehicle owners of recal s, in addition to first-class mail.7682
The law required DOT to initiate a two-year pilot grant program with six states to The law required DOT to initiate a two-year pilot grant program with six states to
evaluate the feasibility of using states’ motor vehicle registration process to evaluate the feasibility of using states’ motor vehicle registration process to
inform consumers of open recal s on their vehicles.inform consumers of open recal s on their vehicles.83
  Recall compliance period. Previous law required that a defect triggering a recal Previous law required that a defect triggering a recal
be repaired free of charge for up to 10 years after a recal ; the FAST Act extended be repaired free of charge for up to 10 years after a recal ; the FAST Act extended
this protection to 15 years. this protection to 15 years.
  Driver privacy. The Driver Privacy Act of 2015, included in the FAST Act, The Driver Privacy Act of 2015, included in the FAST Act,
specifies that data retained by an event data recorder (EDR) is the property of the specifies that data retained by an event data recorder (EDR) is the property of the
vehicle owner. EDRs capture data about the driver and the vehicle, such as seat vehicle owner. EDRs capture data about the driver and the vehicle, such as seat
belt use and speed, in the five seconds before a crash. The Driver Privacy Act belt use and speed, in the five seconds before a crash. The Driver Privacy Act
does not address the ownership of data collected in a vehicle at other times. does not address the ownership of data collected in a vehicle at other times.
  Improved databases. NHTSA was directed to revise its existing crash NHTSA was directed to revise its existing crash
investigation database to include specific information about child restraint investigation database to include specific information about child restraint
systems utilized at the time of vehicle crashes. In addition, it was required to systems utilized at the time of vehicle crashes. In addition, it was required to
establish a publicly searchable database of tire recal s. establish a publicly searchable database of tire recal s.
  Civil penalties. With the goal of encouraging automakers to more readily With the goal of encouraging automakers to more readily
disclose potential defects that could lead to a recal , the statutory civil penalty cap disclose potential defects that could lead to a recal , the statutory civil penalty cap
for each violation of the law was raised from a maximum of $35 mil ion to $105 for each violation of the law was raised from a maximum of $35 mil ion to $105
mil ion.mil ion.77
~~ Whistleblower incentives. The FAST Act included the Motor Vehicle Safety~~
~~Whistleblower Act, which provides financial rewards to employees of motor~~

~~75 Stout Risius Ross LLC, 2019 Automotive Defect & Recall Report, October 14, 2019, p. 65.~~
7684 82 A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in 2016; a comment period ended in October 2016. No final rule has A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in 2016; a comment period ended in October 2016. No final rule has
been issued. Department of T ransportation, been issued. Department of T ransportation, Report on DOT Significant Rulem akings, February 2020, p. 68, at , February 2020, p. 68, at
https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/report-on-significant -rulemakings. https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/report-on-significant -rulemakings.
7783 Initially, one state—Maryland—responded to this grant program, beginning a pilot that lasted from April 2018 until January 2020. NHT SA reported that in that pilot, 456,000 vehicles were identified with 943,000 open recalls. Of those, 371,000 individual recalls were repaired; nearly a third of the repairs involved airbags. In May 2020, NHT SA announced it was seeking additional states to participate in the grant program. NHTSA, “NHT SA Announces Grant Program to Help States Inform Vehicle Owners About Safety Recalls,” press release, May 7, 2020, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/safety-recalls-grant -program. 84 NHT SA, “Notice of Increase in Civil Penalty for Violations of National T raffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act,” 81 NHT SA, “Notice of Increase in Civil Penalty for Violations of National T raffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act,” 81
Federal Register 15413, March 22, 2016. 15413, March 22, 2016.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1617

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

 Whistleblower incentives. The FAST Act included the Motor Vehicle Safety Whistleblower Act, which provides financial rewards to employees of motor vehicle and parts manufacturers, contractors, and automobile dealers who report vehicle and parts manufacturers, contractors, and automobile dealers who report
vehicle defects to NHTSA. The law directed NHTSA to issue regulations vehicle defects to NHTSA. The law directed NHTSA to issue regulations
implementing the whistleblower process by 2017implementing the whistleblower process by 2017~~, but no~~. In fal 2020, NHTSA stated that it hoped to issue a Notice of Proposed Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Rulemaking ~~has been issued.78~~in March 2021.85
Unresolved Safety Issues
Recent surface transportation laws—the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act of Recent surface transportation laws—the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act of
2012 (MAP-21)2012 (MAP-21)7986 and the FAST Act—have directed NHTSA to study and report on safety-related and the FAST Act—have directed NHTSA to study and report on safety-related
issues, while requiring the agency to begin rulemakings on others. Many of these issues remain issues, while requiring the agency to begin rulemakings on others. Many of these issues remain
unresolved (unless otherwise noted). unresolved (unless otherwise noted).
  Recalls. DOT’s inspector general was required to conduct an audit of vehicle DOT’s inspector general was required to conduct an audit of vehicle
recal management. recal management.8087 NHTSA was required to assess the effectiveness of the NHTSA was required to assess the effectiveness of the
rental car recal process, report on the findings of the state motor vehicle pilot, rental car recal process, report on the findings of the state motor vehicle pilot,
and evaluate the feasibility of requiring instal ation of a technical system in new and evaluate the feasibility of requiring instal ation of a technical system in new
cars that would alert motorists to open recal s. cars that would alert motorists to open recal s.
  Crash data recordings. A report was required assessing how long an event data A report was required assessing how long an event data
recorder (EDR) should capture data preceding a crash, with an ensuing regulation recorder (EDR) should capture data preceding a crash, with an ensuing regulation
to establish a revised data recording period.to establish a revised data recording period.8188 NHTSA began a rulemaking in NHTSA began a rulemaking in
2018 to update the current pre-crash recording duration; a 2018 to update the current pre-crash recording duration; a ~~final~~proposed rule is anticipated rule is anticipated
in February 2021.in February 2021.8289
  Child occupant crash data. A report analyzing these data was required. A A report analyzing these data was required. A
rulemaking was completed in 2014, but a new rule rulemaking was completed in 2014, but a new rule ~~is planned to~~may be issued in be issued in
~~December 2020.83~~2021.90
  NHTSA agenda. NHTSA is required to submit annual y a report that details its NHTSA is required to submit annual y a report that details its
projected priorities and initiatives for the year ahead. projected priorities and initiatives for the year ahead.8491
  Tire identification. A feasibility study was required about providing electronic A feasibility study was required about providing electronic
identification of vehicle tires. NHTSA submitted a report to Congress in March identification of vehicle tires. NHTSA submitted a report to Congress in March
2019, concluding that it is technological y feasible for manufacturers to include 2019, concluding that it is technological y feasible for manufacturers to include
~~an electronic-based identification in al new tires, subject to NHTSA possibly~~
~~developing a standard for use of that technology.85~~

78 85 Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, , Agency Rule List,
Department of T ransportation, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30~~December 9, 2020, , 2020, at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?~~p ubI d=202004&~~
pubId=202010&RIN=2127-AL85. RIN=2127-AL85.
7986 P.L. 112-141. P.L. 112-141.
8087 Completed in 2018. Completed in 2018.
8188 Secretary of T ransportation Elaine Chao submitted a report to congressional committees on September 21, 2018, Secretary of T ransportation Elaine Chao submitted a report to congressional committees on September 21, 2018,
showing that the current five-second minimum recording requirement does not capture all steps that a driver takes to showing that the current five-second minimum recording requirement does not capture all steps that a driver takes to
avoid a crash, and suggests that a 20-second recording prior to a crash would provide better data for analysis. T his avoid a crash, and suggests that a 20-second recording prior to a crash would provide better data for analysis. T his
report is not available on the NHT SA website. report is not available on the NHT SA website.
8289 OMB, OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30,~~ December 9, 2020, 2020,
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~eAgendaVie wRule?pubId=202004~~eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202010&RIN=2127-AM12. &RIN=2127-AM12.
8390 OMB, OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30,~~ December 9, 2020, 2020,
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~eAgendaVie wRule~~eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AK95. ?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AK95.
8491 T he most recent report on NHT SA’s planned activities, for 2020, was issued on March 4, 2020 T he most recent report on NHT SA’s planned activities, for 2020, was issued on March 4, 2020;, at at
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/nhtsa_agenda_report_to_congress_03042020.pdf. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/nhtsa_agenda_report_to_congress_03042020.pdf.
~~85. NHT SA, Electronic Tire Identification Study, March 2019, p. 28, at https://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/18-~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1718

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

an electronic-based identification in al new tires, subject to NHTSA possibly developing a standard for use of that technology.92 Among the new rulemakings required in the FAST ActAmong the new rulemakings required in the FAST Act are the following: :
  Motor vehicle tires. NHTSA was required to update the existing standard for tire NHTSA was required to update the existing standard for tire
pressure monitoring; promulgate a new rule for tire fuel efficiency performance pressure monitoring; promulgate a new rule for tire fuel efficiency performance,
; and initiate a rulemaking to require independent tire sel ers—not affiliated with a and initiate a rulemaking to require independent tire sel ers—not affiliated with a
manufacturer—to maintain records of tire purchasers. Of these three required manufacturer—to maintain records of tire purchasers. Of these three required
rulemakings, NHTSA has said only that it is considering issuing a rule for the rulemakings, NHTSA has said only that it is considering issuing a rule for the
fuel efficiency performance standard.fuel efficiency performance standard.8693
  Manufacturers’ safety records. Automakers had been required to retain Automakers had been required to retain
information on their vehicles’ safety records for five years; the FAST Act doubled information on their vehicles’ safety records for five years; the FAST Act doubled
the holding period to 10 years to account for defects or safety issues that develop the holding period to 10 years to account for defects or safety issues that develop
as vehicles age. NHTSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in May as vehicles age. NHTSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in May
20192019. The comment period ended in July 2019, but a final rule has not been issued., but a final rule has not been issued.8794
  Special rules for low-volume manufacturers of replica vehicles. DOT and the DOT and the ~~Environmental~~
Environmental Protection Agency were required to establish, within a year of the enactment of Protection Agency were required to establish, within a year of the enactment of
the FAST Act, a separate regulatory process for limited-production vehicles that the FAST Act, a separate regulatory process for limited-production vehicles that
may not meet some federal safety and emission standards, such as may not meet some federal safety and emission standards, such as replicas of replicas of
older-model vehicles.older-model vehicles.8895 NHTSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on NHTSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
January 7, 2020. The comment period closed on February 6, 2020, and NHTSA is January 7, 2020. The comment period closed on February 6, 2020, and NHTSA is
~~reviewing the comments.89~~
~~ Submission of corporate vehicle safety reports. NHTSA was required to issue~~
~~a final rule governing how companies involved in safety defect or compliance~~
~~investigations wil certify their submissions; a final rule was due one year after~~
~~enactment. No rule has been issued.~~reviewing the comments.96
Several rules mandated in MAP-21 also remain to be finalized: Several rules mandated in MAP-21 also remain to be finalized:
  ~~Side impact crash~~Crash protection and anchorage standards for child restraint
systems. ~~NHTSA~~ NHTSA was required to finalize rules that would improve the was required to finalize rules that would improve the
protection of children using child restraint systems governed by FMVSS 213 and protection of children using child restraint systems governed by FMVSS 213 and
225; statutory deadlines were 2014 and 2015, respectively. If NHTSA determined 225; statutory deadlines were 2014 and 2015, respectively. If NHTSA determined
that it would not issue a revised anchorage standard, MAP-21 required a report to that it would not issue a revised anchorage standard, MAP-21 required a report to
be submitted to Congress. Notices of Proposed be submitted to Congress. Notices of Proposed ~~Rulemakings~~Rulemaking were issued in 2014 were issued in 2014
for for amending both standards, but final rules have not been issued. NHTSA has amending both standards, but final rules have not been issued. NHTSA has
not submitted the report to Congress.not submitted the report to Congress.9097

92 NHT SA, Electronic Tire Identification Study, March 2019, p. 28, at https://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/18-3053%20Elec%20tire%20id%20study-3.pdf. 3053%20Elec%20tire%20id%20study-3.pdf.
8693 OMB, OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30,~~ December 9, 2020, 2020,
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~eAgendaVie wRule~~eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AM08. ?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AM08.
8794 OMB, OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30,~~ December 9, 2020, 2020,
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~eAgendaVie wRule~~eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AL81. ?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AL81.
8895 In January 2020, NHT SA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking for low-volume vehicle manufacturers. See In January 2020, NHT SA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking for low-volume vehicle manufacturers. See
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/07/2019-27211/replica-motor-vehicles-vehicle-identification-https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/07/2019-27211/replica-motor-vehicles-vehicle-identification-
number-vin-requirements-manufacturer-identification. number-vin-requirements-manufacturer-identification.
8996 NHT SA, “Replica Motor Vehicles,” 85 NHT SA, “Replica Motor Vehicles,” 85 Federal Register 792-823, January 7, 2020; and OMB, 792-823, January 7, 2020; and OMB, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30~~December 9, 2020, 2020 , , at https://www.reginfo.gov/https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/public/do/~~eAgendaViewRule~~eAgendaVie wRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-~~AL77.~~
90AM08. 97 Department of T ransportation, Department of T ransportation, Report on DOT Significant Rulemakings, February 2020, pp. 58 and 62, , February 2020, pp. 58 and 62,
at https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/report-on-significant -rulemakings; and OMB, https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/report-on-significant -rulemakings; and OMB, Office of ~~Inform ation~~Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30, 2020 ,~~December 9, 2020, at https://www.reginfo.gov/ https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AK95 and https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~public/~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1819

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

  Frontal impact tests. A final rule to amend FMVSS 213 to improve simulation
~~of children’s rear seats in frontal crashes was required by 2016. A Notice of~~
~~Proposed Rulemaking was issued in February 2020; a final rule has not been~~
~~issued.~~
 Rear seat belt warnings. NHTSA was required to initiate a rulemaking to amend NHTSA was required to initiate a rulemaking to amend
FMVSS 208 to require instal ation of a seat belt warning system for rear FMVSS 208 to require instal ation of a seat belt warning system for rear
passengers, similar to what is now required for passengers in front seats. A final passengers, similar to what is now required for passengers in front seats. A final
rule (or report if NHTSA chose not to pursue a rule) was required by 2015. An rule (or report if NHTSA chose not to pursue a rule) was required by 2015. An
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in September 2019, with a comment 2019, with a comment
period that ended in November period that ended in November ~~2019. No~~2020. A final rule has final rule has not been issued.been issued.9198
  Warning about unattended passengers. MAP-21 suggested— MAP-21 suggested—but did not did not ~~require—~~
require—that NHTSA evaluate ways in which drivers could be alerted to children or other that NHTSA evaluate ways in which drivers could be alerted to children or other
unattended passengers in unattended passengers in ~~the back~~rear seats. When such research was not completed, seats. When such research was not completed,
the FAST Act mandated that the FAST Act mandated that ~~such research~~it be undertaken. No rule has been be undertaken. No rule has been
issued.issued.
  Vehicle defect reporting. A final rule was mandated by 2013 that would require A final rule was mandated by 2013 that would require
auto manufacturers to place a sticker in the glove compartment or in another part auto manufacturers to place a sticker in the glove compartment or in another part
of the vehicle that would instruct a vehicle owner on how to file a vehicle defect of the vehicle that would instruct a vehicle owner on how to file a vehicle defect
complaint with NHTSA. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in 2016, complaint with NHTSA. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued in 2016,
but further action has not been taken.but further action has not been taken.
In addition, the Energy Independence and Security Act of In addition, the Energy Independence and Security Act of ~~200792~~200799 required the establishment of a required the establishment of a
national tire fuel efficiency consumer information program for motor vehicle replacement tires. In national tire fuel efficiency consumer information program for motor vehicle replacement tires. In
2010, NHTSA published a final rule specifying the test procedures that would be used to rate tire 2010, NHTSA published a final rule specifying the test procedures that would be used to rate tire
performance,performance,93100 but the consumer information part of the statutory requirement has not been but the consumer information part of the statutory requirement has not been
fulfil ed. fulfil ed.101 Pending
~~Unaddressed~~ NTSB Recommendations
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is an independent federal agency that The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is an independent federal agency that
investigates al major transportation crashes.investigates al major transportation crashes.94102 After each investigation, it releases a detailed After each investigation, it releases a detailed
report, including probable cause of a crash and recommendations for federal policy changes, if report, including probable cause of a crash and recommendations for federal policy changes, if
appropriate. The NTSB has no authority to implement its recommendations. appropriate. The NTSB has no authority to implement its recommendations.
Following are recent Following are recent NTSB vehicle safety recommendations that have not been vehicle safety recommendations that have not been ~~acted on by NHTSA or~~
~~Congress.~~

~~do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AL34.~~
91enacted by Congress or finalized as regulations by NHTSA. Stretch Limousines Stretch limousines are conventional vehicles purchased from motor vehicle manufacturers, and lengthened and repurposed by independent car body shops. Several have been involved in fatal eAgendaViewRule?pubI d=202004&RIN=2127-AL34. 98 Department of T ransportation, Department of T ransportation, Report on DOT Significant Rulemakings, February 2020, p. 64, and OMB, , February 2020, p. 64, and OMB, Office of
~~Inform ation~~Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30~~December 9, 2020, 2020 ,
, at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaVie wRule?pubId=https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaVie wRule?pubId=~~202004~~202010&RIN=2127-AL37. &RIN=2127-AL37.
92 99 P.L. 110-140, §111. P.L. 110-140, §111.
93100 NHT SA, “T ire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program,” 75 NHT SA, “T ire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program,” 75 Federal Register 15893-15947, March 30, 15893-15947, March 30,
20102010~~. NHT SA forecasts that a new notice of proposed rulemaking will be issued in January 2021;~~, and OMB, and OMB, Office of
~~Inform ation~~Information and Regulatory Affairs, Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, , Agency Rule List, Department of T ransportation, ~~June 30~~December 9, 2020, , 2020,
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/~~eAgendaVie wRule?pubId=202004&RIN=2127-AK76.~~
94eAgendaViewRule?p ubI d=201710&RIN=2127-AK76. 101 https://www.reginfo.gov/public/Forward?SearchT arget=Agenda&textfield=2127-AK76&Image61.x=0&Image61.y=0. 102 National T ransportation Safety Board National T ransportation Safety Board ~~home page,~~Home Page, at https://www.ntsb.gov. https://www.ntsb.gov.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1920

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

~~Stretch Limousines~~
~~Stretch limousines are conventional vehicles purchased from motor vehicle manufacturers, and~~
~~lengthened and repurposed by independent car body shops. Several have been involved in fatal~~
crashes; the most recent stretch limousine crash investigated by NTSB occurred near Albany, NY, crashes; the most recent stretch limousine crash investigated by NTSB occurred near Albany, NY,
in October 2018, kil ing 20 people, including the 17 passengers, the driver, and 2 pedestrians. in October 2018, kil ing 20 people, including the 17 passengers, the driver, and 2 pedestrians.
In 2019, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA establish standards for seat belt use in stretch In 2019, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA establish standards for seat belt use in stretch
limousines, with requirements that passengers in such vehicles use lap/shoulder belts and that limousines, with requirements that passengers in such vehicles use lap/shoulder belts and that
seating systems instal ed in such modified vehicles meet minimum performance standards “to seating systems instal ed in such modified vehicles meet minimum performance standards “to
ensure their integrity during a crash.”ensure their integrity during a crash.”95103 In 2014, after investigating a fatal accident involving a In 2014, after investigating a fatal accident involving a
limousine van, NTSB recommended that NHTSA require such vehicles to provide a full-sized limousine van, NTSB recommended that NHTSA require such vehicles to provide a full-sized
exit on one side of the passenger compartment and another emergency exit elsewhere should the exit on one side of the passenger compartment and another emergency exit elsewhere should the
full-sized exit be blocked in a crash. full-sized exit be blocked in a crash.96104
Motorcycles
Among al motor vehicle users, motorcyclists have the highest risk of fatal injuries, which occur Among al motor vehicle users, motorcyclists have the highest risk of fatal injuries, which occur
per mile traveled nearly 28 times more frequently than other vehicle fatalities.per mile traveled nearly 28 times more frequently than other vehicle fatalities.97105 While NTSB While NTSB
reported in 2018 that more than 90% of crashes it analyzed were due primarily to human error,reported in 2018 that more than 90% of crashes it analyzed were due primarily to human error,98106
it has urged NHTSA to address the design of motorcycles, it has urged NHTSA to address the design of motorcycles, ~~including99~~including107
 requiring motorcycles to meet performance standards for passenger vehicle crash  requiring motorcycles to meet performance standards for passenger vehicle crash
warning systems; warning systems;
 mandating that new motorcycles manufactured for on-road use come equipped  mandating that new motorcycles manufactured for on-road use come equipped
with antilock braking systems; and with antilock braking systems; and
 developing standards for stability control systems for on-road motorcycles.  developing standards for stability control systems for on-road motorcycles.
Amphibious Passenger Vehicles
Amphibious passenger vehicles (APVs), more widely known as duck boats, were original y built Amphibious passenger vehicles (APVs), more widely known as duck boats, were original y built
during World War II to deliver cargo from ships at sea directly to the shore, and often to evacuate during World War II to deliver cargo from ships at sea directly to the shore, and often to evacuate
injured military personnel. Today, they serve as tourist vehicles designed both to drive on roads injured military personnel. Today, they serve as tourist vehicles designed both to drive on roads
and operate as boats in the water. They have multiple regulators because they and operate as boats in the water. They have multiple regulators because they
 serve as on-road passenger vehicles that must comply with certain federal motor  serve as on-road passenger vehicles that must comply with certain federal motor
vehicle standards established by NHTSA; vehicle standards established by NHTSA;
 are considered smal passenger vessels, so the U.S. Coast Guard inspects them  are considered smal passenger vessels, so the U.S. Coast Guard inspects them
for seaworthiness and certifies their drivers as vessel captains; for seaworthiness and certifies their drivers as vessel captains;

95103 NT SB also recommended that the New York State Department of T ransportation ensure that seat belts are functional NT SB also recommended that the New York State Department of T ransportation ensure that seat belts are functional
and accessible during regularand accessible during regular state inspections. National T ransportation Safety Board, state inspections. National T ransportation Safety Board, Safety Recom m endation Report, ,
October 2, 2019, at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/HWY19MH001.aspx. October 2, 2019, at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/HWY19MH001.aspx.
96104 Letter from Christopher Hart Letter from Christopher Hart , Chairman, National T ransportation Safety Board, to , Chairman, National T ransportation Safety Board, to ~~Marc~~Mark Rosekind, Administrator, Rosekind, Administrator,
NHT SA, September 8, 2015, at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/H-15-017.pdf. NHT SA, September 8, 2015, at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/H-15-017.pdf.
97T he status of both recommendations can also be tracked by using the NT SB database at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/sr-details/H-19-014 and H-15-017, respectively. 105 NT SB, NT SB, Select Risk Factors Associated with Causes of Motorcycle Crashes, NT SB/SR-18/01, September 11, 2018, p. , NT SB/SR-18/01, September 11, 2018, p.
ix, ix, at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR1801.pdf. https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR1801.pdf.
98106 Ibid., p. 16. Ibid., p. 16.
99107 Ibid., p. 39; for a summary of the recommendations, see https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/H-18- Ibid., p. 39; for a summary of the recommendations, see https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/RecLetters/H-18-
029-038.pdf. 029-038.pdf.
T he status of motorcycle recommendations can also be tracked by using the NT SB database at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/sr-details/H-18-029 through -038. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2021

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

 are commercial vehicles, so are subject to federal commercial vehicle regulations  are commercial vehicles, so are subject to federal commercial vehicle regulations
enforced by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. In addition, duck enforced by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. In addition, duck
boat safety inspections are typical y conducted by state agencies, and drivers boat safety inspections are typical y conducted by state agencies, and drivers
must be certified by state officials as commercial vehicle drivers. must be certified by state officials as commercial vehicle drivers.
APVs have been involved in a number of accidents in recent years. Seventeen of 31 passengers APVs have been involved in a number of accidents in recent years. Seventeen of 31 passengers
died on a duck boat that sank in a storm on a lake near Branson, MO, in July 2018. In September died on a duck boat that sank in a storm on a lake near Branson, MO, in July 2018. In September
2015, a duck boat was involved in a crash with a commercial bus on a bridge in Seattle, kil ing 2015, a duck boat was involved in a crash with a commercial bus on a bridge in Seattle, kil ing
five passengers. APV accidents occurred in Boston in 2016 and Philadelphia in 2010, and earlier five passengers. APV accidents occurred in Boston in 2016 and Philadelphia in 2010, and earlier
incidents include a sinking with 13 fatalities in Arkansas in 1999. Among NTSB’s incidents include a sinking with 13 fatalities in Arkansas in 1999. Among NTSB’s
recommendations were the following: recommendations were the following:~~100~~108
 NHTSA should classify al APVs as non-over-the-road buses and make newly  NHTSA should classify al APVs as non-over-the-road buses and make newly
manufactured APVs subject to applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards manufactured APVs subject to applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards
in effect at the time of manufacture; in effect at the time of manufacture;
 NHTSA should separately adopt Coast Guard rules about cargo loads and  NHTSA should separately adopt Coast Guard rules about cargo loads and
passenger seating limits; and passenger seating limits; and
 the Coast Guard should revise buoyancy standards for APVs so they remain  the Coast Guard should revise buoyancy standards for APVs so they remain
afloat in the event of damage; address the safety implications of boat canopies afloat in the event of damage; address the safety implications of boat canopies
and supports; and ensure that APV operators instruct passengers not to wear seat and supports; and ensure that APV operators instruct passengers not to wear seat
belts when the vehicle is operated in the water. belts when the vehicle is operated in the water.
Tires
According to NTSB research, tire-related vehicle crashes were responsible for more than 700 According to NTSB research, tire-related vehicle crashes were responsible for more than 700
fatalities in 2017.fatalities in 2017.~~101~~109 NTSB has recommended that NHTSA be given statutory authority to require NTSB has recommended that NHTSA be given statutory authority to require
tire dealers to register al tires with NHTSA when they are purchased so buyers can be contacted tire dealers to register al tires with NHTSA when they are purchased so buyers can be contacted
more readily in the event of recal s, and that it post recal information such as tire identification more readily in the event of recal s, and that it post recal information such as tire identification
numbers, brand, and models on its website. numbers, brand, and models on its website.~~102~~110
Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Systems
NTSB has examined 15 crashes involving motor vehicles and pedestrians and issued a special NTSB has examined 15 crashes involving motor vehicles and pedestrians and issued a special
report on its findings in 2018, its first major pedestrian investigation since the 1970s. report on its findings in 2018, its first major pedestrian investigation since the 1970s.~~103~~111 It issued a It issued a
report on bicycle crashes involving motor vehicles in 2019.report on bicycle crashes involving motor vehicles in 2019.~~104~~112 NTSB found that improvements in NTSB found that improvements in
vehicle systems could mitigate future collisions and their consequences; it recommended vehicle systems could mitigate future collisions and their consequences; it recommended

~~100~~108 NT SB, NT SB, Safety Recommendation Report, Improving Vessel Survivability, MSR1901, November 6, 2019, at , MSR1901, November 6, 2019, at
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/MSR1901.aspx and NT SB, https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/MSR1901.aspx and NT SB, Am phibious Passenger Vehicle
DUCK 6 Lane Crossover with Motorcoach , HAR1602, November 15, 2016, at https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/, HAR1602, November 15, 2016, at https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/
Documents/Seattle-WA-DUKW-Abstract.pdf. Documents/Seattle-WA-DUKW-Abstract.pdf.
The status of APV recommendations can also be tracked by using the NT SB database at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/sr-details/M-19-016 and H-16-09, respectively. 109 ~~101~~ Latest data, Latest data, at https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/tires. https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/tires.
~~102~~110 NT SB, NT SB, Safety Recommendation, H-15-27 through -35, November 12, 2015, , H-15-27 through -35, November 12, 2015, at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/
RecLetters/H-15-027-035.pdf. Establishing a tire recall databaseRecLetters/H-15-027-035.pdf. Establishing a tire recall database was required by Section 24335 of the FAST Act, but was required by Section 24335 of the FAST Act, but
~~has not been implemented.~~
~~103~~has not been implemented. T he status of tire recommendations can also be tracked by using the NT SB database at https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/sr-details/H-15-027 through -35. 111 NT SB, NT SB, Pedestrian Safety, SIR-18/03, September 25, 2018, , SIR-18/03, September 25, 2018, at https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/
SIR1803.pdf. SIR1803.pdf.
~~104~~112 NT SB, NT SB, Bicyclist Safety on US Roadways: Crash Risks and Countermeasures, SS-19/01, November 5, 2019, , SS-19/01, November 5, 2019,
~~https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SS1901.pdf.~~at
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2122

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

 that NHTSA revise federal motor vehicle safety standards to al ow adaptive  that NHTSA revise federal motor vehicle safety standards to al ow adaptive
headlight systems, headlight systems,~~105~~113 along with performance standards to ensure that headlights along with performance standards to ensure that headlights
are correctly aimed and tested; are correctly aimed and tested;
 that NHTSA develop performance tests and criteria for vehicle designs that could  that NHTSA develop performance tests and criteria for vehicle designs that could
reduce vehicle-pedestrian injuries; reduce vehicle-pedestrian injuries;~~106~~114 and and
 expanding NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program to incorporate tests to  expanding NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program to incorporate tests to
evaluate a vehicle’s ability to avoid crashes and reduce injuries with pedestrians evaluate a vehicle’s ability to avoid crashes and reduce injuries with pedestrians
and bicyclists,and bicyclists,~~107~~115 a step some other countries have already taken. a step some other countries have already taken.
Autonomous and Connected Driving Systems
While advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are available on many vehicles today, the While advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are available on many vehicles today, the
motor vehicle industry and technology companies have been seeking to develop vehicles that may motor vehicle industry and technology companies have been seeking to develop vehicles that may
someday be fully automated, requiring little or no driver involvement. Such vehicles do not exist someday be fully automated, requiring little or no driver involvement. Such vehicles do not exist
commercial y now, and NHTSA’s acting administrator commercial y now, and NHTSA’s acting administrator ~~has cautioned that~~
cautioned in 2019 that all vehicles sold to the public today require a driver to be fully attentive and cognitively all vehicles sold to the public today require a driver to be fully attentive and cognitively
engaged in the driving at all times. This is true even if the car is equipped with any of the engaged in the driving at all times. This is true even if the car is equipped with any of the
ADAS technologies currently on the market. While ADAS technologies are improving and ADAS technologies currently on the market. While ADAS technologies are improving and
enhancing safety, they are not self-driving. Misusing driver assistance systems by failing enhancing safety, they are not self-driving. Misusing driver assistance systems by failing
to maintain control of the operation of the vehicle at all times can result in serious and even to maintain control of the operation of the vehicle at all times can result in serious and even
deadly crashes.deadly crashes.~~108~~116
Increasing the autonomy of cars and trucks is general y seen as an effective way to reduce Increasing the autonomy of cars and trucks is general y seen as an effective way to reduce
vehicle-related accidents that vehicle-related accidents that ~~are caused by human error.~~may involve human error; a 2015 NHTSA report may cal into question forecasts that fully autonomous vehicles could nearly eliminate fatalities.117 Autonomous vehicles may someday Autonomous vehicles may someday
have most of the technologies on board to operate independently without human engagement. have most of the technologies on board to operate independently without human engagement.
Connected vehicles, which are on some roads today, instead use technologies to communicate Connected vehicles, which are on some roads today, instead use technologies to communicate
with other vehicles and infrastructure around them, and with cloud-based servers. The connected with other vehicles and infrastructure around them, and with cloud-based servers. The connected
vehicle safety technologies under development would require cars and trucks to vehicle safety technologies under development would require cars and trucks to communicate communicate
with each other (vehicle-to-vehicle, or V2V) and with their surroundings (vehicle-with each other (vehicle-to-vehicle, or V2V) and with their surroundings (vehicle-to-~~to-~~
infrastructure, or V2I). V2V communication is expected to reduce the number of accidents by infrastructure, or V2I). V2V communication is expected to reduce the number of accidents by
~~improving detection of oncoming vehicles and providing driver warnings. V2I communication is~~
~~expected to help highway operators monitor and manage traffic and provide drivers with~~
~~information such as weather and traffic conditions. Autonomous and connected vehicle~~
~~technologies may merge in the future.~~
~~In the 115th Congress, the House of Representatives passed legislation109 that would have~~
~~provided new regulatory tools to NHTSA for the regulation of automated vehicles. That~~
~~legislation was not brought up for a vote in the Senate due to controversies over possible~~

~~105~~ https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SS1901.pdf. 113 Adaptive lighting provides better illumination for drivers as they turn corners; the headlights may be self -leveling; Adaptive lighting provides better illumination for drivers as they turn corners; the headlights may be self -leveling;
and they may also automatically switch between high - and low-beam headlights based on the detection of other and they may also automatically switch between high - and low-beam headlights based on the detection of other
vehicles ahead. NT SB, vehicles ahead. NT SB, Pedestrian Safety, SIR-18/03, September 25, 2018, p. 18. , SIR-18/03, September 25, 2018, p. 18.
NHT SA has published a proposed rulemaking to permit adaptive driving beam headlighting systems, at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubI d=202010&RIN=2127-AL83. 114 ~~106~~ Ibid., p. 42. Ibid., p. 42.
~~107~~115 NT SB, NT SB, Bicyclist Safety on US Roadways: Crash Risks and Countermeasures, SS-19/01, November 5, 2019, p. x. , SS-19/01, November 5, 2019, p. x.
~~108~~116 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and T ransportation, U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and T ransportation, Testimony of James C, Owens,
Acting Adm inistrator, NHTSA, Highly Automated Vehicles: Federal Perspectives on the Deployment of Safety , Highly Automated Vehicles: Federal Perspectives on the Deployment of Safety
T echnology, 116th Cong., 1st sess., November 20, 2019, p. 5. T echnology, 116th Cong., 1st sess., November 20, 2019, p. 5.
~~109 H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
22

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

117 T he NHT SA report indicated that adverse weather conditions, malfunctioning vehicle parts, and poor highway design will remain factors in motor vehicle fatalities even when fully autonomous vehicles are in use in the future . In that report, based on evaluation of vehicle crash data, NHT SA clarified the role of drivers in those accidents. NHT SA’s report stated that although a “ critical reason” for the surveyed crashes “ was assigned to the driver in an estimated 94% of the crashes … the critical reason … is not intended to be interpret ed as the cause of the crash.... ” and that “in none of these cases was the assignment intended to blame the driver for causing the crash. ” NHT SA, Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey, DOT HS 812 115, February 2015. Congressional Research Service 23 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress improving detection of oncoming vehicles and providing driver warnings. V2I communication is expected to help highway operators monitor and manage traffic and provide drivers with information such as weather and traffic conditions. Autonomous and connected vehicle technologies may merge in the future. In the 115th Congress, the House of Representatives passed legislation118 that would have provided new regulatory tools to NHTSA for the regulation of autonomous vehicles. That legislation was not brought up for a vote in the Senate due to controversies over possible preemption of state and local safety laws and the types of federal standards for driverless vehicles preemption of state and local safety laws and the types of federal standards for driverless vehicles
that would be permitted by the legislation. that would be permitted by the legislation.~~110~~119
Separately, the development of autonomous vehicles Separately, the development of autonomous vehicles ~~may~~could be affected by a be affected by a ~~pending~~ Federal Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) rulemaking concerning use of radio frequencies that have Communications Commission (FCC) rulemaking concerning use of radio frequencies that have
been al ocated exclusively for vehicle communications since 1999.been al ocated exclusively for vehicle communications since 1999.~~111 In December 2019, the~~
~~FCC proposed~~120 On November 18, 2020, the FCC adopted rules to open this band of spectrum to certain other uses; it has been al ocated to open this band of spectrum to certain other uses; it has been al ocated
exclusively for development of vehicle communications in 1999 and is knownexclusively for development of vehicle communications in 1999 and is known at DOT as the “safety as the “safety
band.” band.” ~~DOT112~~DOT121 and the auto and the auto ~~industry113 have continued to raise concerns with the FCC proposal.~~
~~In addition, the~~ industry122 have raised concerns about the FCC decision. DOT argues that the FCC decision favors a technology that has not been fully tested, potential y leaving autonomous and connected vehicles susceptible to spectrum interference and leading to accidents.123 In addition, NTSB has recommended that NHTSA develop standards that could ensure safer NTSB has recommended that NHTSA develop standards that could ensure safer
operation of autonomous and connected vehicles, including (1) performance standards for operation of autonomous and connected vehicles, including (1) performance standards for
forward collision avoidance systems,forward collision avoidance systems,~~114~~124 (2) a standard to limit the use of Level 2 automated (2) a standard to limit the use of Level 2 automated
vehicle control vehicle control ~~systems115~~systems125 to conditions for which they were designed, and (3) a requirement that to conditions for which they were designed, and (3) a requirement that
manufacturers report crashes involving misuse of Level 2 control systems.manufacturers report crashes involving misuse of Level 2 control systems.~~116~~126 It has also cal ed for It has also cal ed for
NHTSA to expand research and data collection to ensure that experience with pedestrians and NHTSA to expand research and data collection to ensure that experience with pedestrians and
bicyclists is incorporated into the deployment of connected vehicles. bicyclists is incorporated into the deployment of connected vehicles.
~~Congress Addresses Motor Vehicle Safety~~
~~Motor vehicle safety issues are typical y addressed through multi-year surface transportation~~
~~reauthorization legislation, as wel as through the annual appropriations process.~~
~~The Moving Forward Act~~
~~Title II of Division G of H.R. 2, as passed by the House, would require NHTSA to issue a variety~~
~~of new or revised standards, general y within two years of enactment:~~
Safety warning about unattended passengers. In surface transportation laws in 2012 and 2015,
~~Congress cal ed on NHTSA to take action on the issue of fatalities occurring when children are~~
~~left in vehicles, often on hot summer days. NHTSA has not issued a final rule. H.R. 2 would~~
~~require NHTSA to issue a final rule requiring new passenger vehicles to be equipped with a~~
~~system that wil provide auditory and visual warnings that an occupant is stil in the car when the~~

~~110~~ 118 H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act. 119 For a discussion of the issues associated with highly automated vehicles, see CRS Report R45985, For a discussion of the issues associated with highly automated vehicles, see CRS Report R45985, Issues in
Autonom ous Vehicle Testing and Deploym ent, by Bill Canis. , by Bill Canis.
~~111~~120 For a discussion of spectrum issues related to vehicle safety, see CRS In Focus IF11260, For a discussion of spectrum issues related to vehicle safety, see CRS In Focus IF11260, Smart Cars and Trucks:
Spectrum Use for Vehicle Safety, by Bill Canis and Jill C. Gallagher. , by Bill Canis and Jill C. Gallagher.
~~112~~ 121 T he National T elecommunications and Information Administration outlined DOT ’s concerns with regard to T he National T elecommunications and Information Administration outlined DOT ’s concerns with regard to
changing the changing the ~~safet y~~safety band in a letter to the FCC. Letter from Charles Cooper, band in a letter to the FCC. Letter from Charles Cooper, ~~Associate~~Assoc iate Administrator for Spectrum Administrator for Spectrum
Management, NT IA, to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, March 13, 2020, Management, NT IA, to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, March 13, 2020,
at https://www.transportation.gov/content/safety-band. https://www.transportation.gov/content/safety-band.
~~113~~122 Alliance for Automotive Innovation, “Auto Industry Forms Consensus to Move Forward on Safety Spectrum Band Alliance for Automotive Innovation, “Auto Industry Forms Consensus to Move Forward on Safety Spectrum Band
Plan that Advances Lifesaving T echnologies,” press release, April 28, 2020, at https://www.autosinnovate.org/press-Plan that Advances Lifesaving T echnologies,” press release, April 28, 2020, at https://www.autosinnovate.org/press-
release/auto-industry-forms-consensus-to-move-forward-on-safety-spectrum-band-plan-that-advances-lifesaving-release/auto-industry-forms-consensus-to-move-forward-on-safety-spectrum-band-plan-that-advances-lifesaving-
technologies. technologies.
~~114~~ 123 David Shepardson, “U.S. agencies question FCC plan to shift auto spectrum to Wi-Fi,” Reuters, October 29, 2020, at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-spectrum-autos/u-s-agencies-question-fcc-plan-to-shift-auto-spectrum-to-wi-fi-idUKKBN27E3BR. 124 NT SB, NT SB, Safety Recommendation, H-15-004-007, June 8, 2015, , H-15-004-007, June 8, 2015, at https://ntsb.gov/pages/Results.aspx?k=H-15-004. https://ntsb.gov/pages/Results.aspx?k=H-15-004.
NHT SA has notNHT SA has not issued a rule. issued a rule.
~~115~~125 NHT SA categorizes automated vehicles as Levels 0-5, a scale that reflects increasing levels of autonomy; currently, NHT SA categorizes automated vehicles as Levels 0-5, a scale that reflects increasing levels of autonomy; currently,
most automated vehicles are Level 2 or 3. NHT SA has not issued a rule. most automated vehicles are Level 2 or 3. NHT SA has not issued a rule.
~~116~~126 NT SB, NT SB, New Safety Recommendation, H-17-037-043, September 12, 2017, , H-17-037-043, September 12, 2017, at http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/
RecLetters/H-17-037-043.pdf. NHT SA has not issued a rule. RecLetters/H-17-037-043.pdf. NHT SA has not issued a rule.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2324 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Congress Addresses Motor Vehicle Safety Motor vehicle safety issues are typical y addressed through multi-year surface transportation reauthorization legislation, as wel as through the annual appropriations process. The Moving Forward Act Title II of Division G of H.R. 2 (116th Congress), as passed by the House, would have required NHTSA to issue a variety of new or revised standards, general y within two years of enactment:  Safety warning about unattended passengers. In surface transportation laws in 2012 and 2015, Congress cal ed on NHTSA to take action on the issue of fatalities occurring when children are left in vehicles, often on hot summer days. NHTSA has not issued a final rule. H.R. 2 would have required NHTSA to issue a final rule requiring new passenger vehicles to be equipped with a system that wil provide auditory and visual warnings that an occupant is stil in the car when the

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

engine or motor is deactivated. It would also engine or motor is deactivated. It would also ~~require~~have required a study of the feasibility of retrofitting a study of the feasibility of retrofitting
existing motor vehicles with a similar technology. existing motor vehicles with a similar technology.
 Keyless ignition technology.~~117~~127 NHTSA would NHTSA would behave been required to issue a required to issue a final rule to ensure that new final rule to ensure that new
motor vehicles include technology to (1) automatical y shut off the engine after a vehicle is motor vehicles include technology to (1) automatical y shut off the engine after a vehicle is
parked to prevent carbon monoxide poisoning and (2) prevent a vehicle from moving if parked parked to prevent carbon monoxide poisoning and (2) prevent a vehicle from moving if parked
but not in the park setting. but not in the park setting.
 Crash avoidance and headlamp technologies. NHTSA would NHTSA would be have been required to issue final rules required to issue final rules
requiring al new vehicles to have (1) a range of crash avoidance technologies (such as automatic requiring al new vehicles to have (1) a range of crash avoidance technologies (such as automatic
emergency braking, forward collision warning, and blind spot warning) and (2) revised headlamp emergency braking, forward collision warning, and blind spot warning) and (2) revised headlamp
standards to improve road il uminationstandards to improve road il umination (including adaptive headlamps). (including adaptive headlamps).
 NCAP safety rating system. Within one year, NHTSA would Within one year, NHTSA would behave been required required to issue a public report to issue a public report
on its five-year plan to improve consumer information on motor vehicle crashworthiness, as wel on its five-year plan to improve consumer information on motor vehicle crashworthiness, as wel
as update NCAP’s safety criteria and as update NCAP’s safety criteria and crash test procedures, including the impact of crash crash test procedures, including the impact of crash
avoidance technologies such as AEBavoidance technologies such as AEB and blind spot warning. H.R. 2 would and blind spot warning. H.R. 2 would have also required~~also require~~ NHTSA NHTSA
to establish crash avoidance tests to evaluate and prevent injuries and fatalities to pedestrians and to establish crash avoidance tests to evaluate and prevent injuries and fatalities to pedestrians and
bicyclists. bicyclists.
 Limousine safety. NHTSA would NHTSA would behave been required to issue final rules required to issue final rules mandating seat belts and event mandating seat belts and event
data recorders in stretch limousines (passenger vehicles with seating capacity of nine or more). data recorders in stretch limousines (passenger vehicles with seating capacity of nine or more).
~~NHTSA would be~~NHTSA would have been given three years to issue a new final standard for passenger evacuations and given three years to issue a new final standard for passenger evacuations and
six years six years to conduct research and adopt new standards for stretch limousine 127~~to conduct research and adopt new standards for stretch limousine crashworthiness, such~~
~~as side impact and roof protection. As a new federal oversight requirement, safety elements of~~
~~new stretch limousines would have to be approved by NHTSA before they can be put in service.~~
~~In addition, the Federal Trade Commission would be given authority to enforce new limousine~~
~~safety inspection requirements.~~
Revised hood and bumper standards. NHTSA would be directed to establish standards for vehicle
~~hoods and bumpers so that front-end vehicle collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists would~~
~~result in reduced injuries and fatalities.~~
Children’s booster seats. The booster seat standard would have to be revised to require visible
~~labeling about the permissible height and weight of occupants.~~
~~NHTSA Appropriations~~
~~NHTSA’s budget in recent years has had modest growth, as Trump Administration proposals to~~
~~reduce some levels of spending have not been accepted by Congress. The largest parts of~~
~~NHTSA’s budget fund highway traffic safety grants and highway safety research and~~
~~development. Most of the reductions recommended in FY2018-FY2021 have been in the third~~
~~and smal est part of the NHTSA budget, the vehicle safety area, affecting al three components of~~

~~117~~ Keyless ignition technology is increasingly a standard feature on many passenger motor vehicles, developed as a Keyless ignition technology is increasingly a standard feature on many passenger motor vehicles, developed as a
security measure to deter break-ins. It replaces the key with an electronic fob that drivers keep in their pockets, purses security measure to deter break-ins. It replaces the key with an electronic fob that drivers keep in their pockets, purses
or briefcases, enabling the driver to push a button on the dashboard to start the engine. A safety issue has or briefcases, enabling the driver to push a button on the dashboard to start the engine. A safety issue has ~~emerged~~eme rged with with
this technology and quieter engines: Drivers have sometimes forgotten to turn off the engine when parked in their this technology and quieter engines: Drivers have sometimes forgotten to turn off the engine when parked in their
garage, resulting in carbon monoxide poisoning and some deaths. With no key to disengage, garage, resulting in carbon monoxide poisoning and some deaths. With no key to disengage, ~~oth er~~other drivers have drivers have
forgotten to put the car in park and stepped out while it was still in the drive setting, causing serious injuries. forgotten to put the car in park and stepped out while it was still in the drive setting, causing serious injuries.
Automakers have addressed these safety issues with a variety of solutions, including audible warnings and automatic Automakers have addressed these safety issues with a variety of solutions, including audible warnings and automatic
shutdown of the engine. For more information onshutdown of the engine. For more information on keyless ignitions, see NHT SA, keyless ignitions, see NHT SA, Keyless Ignition System s, at , at
https://www.nhtsa.gov/driver-assistance-technologies/keyless-ignition-systems. https://www.nhtsa.gov/driver-assistance-technologies/keyless-ignition-systems.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2425

link to page link to page ~~29 link to page 29~~31 link to page link to page 2931 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress crashworthiness, such as side impact and roof protection. As a new federal oversight requirement, safety elements of new stretch limousines would have needed NHTSA approval before being put in service. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission would have been given authority to enforce new limousine safety inspection requirements.  Revised hood and bumper standards. NHTSA would have been directed to establish standards for vehicle hoods and bumpers so that front-end vehicle collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists would result in reduced injuries and fatalities.  Children’s booster seats. The booster seat standard would have to have been revised to require visible labeling about the permissible height and weight of occupants. The Senate did not pass separate appropriations for DOT and NHTSA in 2021; these agencies were funded in H.R. 133, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, passed by Congress on December 21, 2021, and signed into law on December 27, 2021 (P.L. 116-260). NHTSA Appropriations NHTSA’s budget in recent years has had modest growth, as Trump Administration proposals to reduce some levels of spending were not accepted by Congress. The largest parts of NHTSA’s budget fund highway traffic safety grants and highway safety research and development. Most of the reductions recommended by the Administration in FY2018-FY2021 were in the third and smal est part of the NHTSA budget, the vehicle safety area, affecting al three components of ~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

NHTSA’s Vehicle Safety operations: rulemaking, enforcement, and research and analysisNHTSA’s Vehicle Safety operations: rulemaking, enforcement, and research and analysis (Table
1). .
 The Vehicle Safety & Research budget develops test procedures and assesses the  The Vehicle Safety & Research budget develops test procedures and assesses the
safety impact and risks of new technologies (such as ADAS), investigates crash safety impact and risks of new technologies (such as ADAS), investigates crash
survivability, and operates NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Test Center in Ohio. survivability, and operates NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Test Center in Ohio.
 The rulemaking functions include informing consumers about vehicle safety and  The rulemaking functions include informing consumers about vehicle safety and
crashworthiness, managing NCAP testing, overseeing fuel economy standards, crashworthiness, managing NCAP testing, overseeing fuel economy standards,
and updating current vehicle standards. and updating current vehicle standards.
 Enforcement officials investigate safety-related defects, ensure that  Enforcement officials investigate safety-related defects, ensure that
manufacturers complete recal s, and seek to expand recal notifications via text manufacturers complete recal s, and seek to expand recal notifications via text
messaging and other new outreach methods. The Office of Defects Investigations messaging and other new outreach methods. The Office of Defects Investigations
(ODI) fal s within the enforcement budget(ODI) fal s within the enforcement budget~~; for~~. For FY2021, the Trump FY2021, the Trump
Administration Administration ~~has proposed a budget of $12 mil ion for defects investigations,~~
~~compared to a $28 mil ion appropriation in FY2020;118 the House-passed~~
~~appropriation (H.R. 7616) recommends $30 mil ion in its FY2021 bil .119~~
~~Table 1. NHTSA Vehicle Safety Budget~~
~~(dol ars in mil ions)~~

~~FY2018~~
~~FY2019~~
~~FY2019~~
~~FY2020~~
~~FY2020~~
~~FY2021~~
~~FY2021~~
~~Actual~~
~~Request~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Request~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Request~~
~~House Billa~~
~~Vehicle~~
~~$179~~
~~$152~~
~~$190~~
~~$151~~
~~$194~~
~~$156~~
~~$214~~
~~Safety Total~~
~~Vehicle Safety~~
40
38
49
33
48
33
48
~~Research &~~
~~Analysis~~
~~Rulemaking~~
23
22
25
23
28
23
42
~~Enforcement~~
37
17
33
20
37
20
42
~~Administrative~~
79
76
83
76
81
81
82
~~expenses~~
~~Source: Sources~~proposed an enforcement budget of $20 mil ion, of which $12 mil ion would have been al ocated for defects investigations. The enacted FY2021 appropriation cal s for $39 mil ion for enforcement, of which at least $15 mil ion must be al ocated for defects investigations. (By comparison, the enacted FY2020 appropriation budgeted $37 mil ion for enforcement, of which $28 mil ion was to have been used for defects investigations.)128 128 U.S. Department of T ransportation, Fiscal Year 2021: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration , p. 62, at https://www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/nhtsa-cj-fy-2021-estimates. Congressional Research Service 26 link to page 31 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress Table 1. NHTSA Vehicle Safety Budget (dol ars in mil ions) FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2020 FY2021 FY2021 Actual Enacted Request Enacted Request Enacteda Vehicle $179 $190 $151 $194 $156 $194 Safety Total Vehicle Safety 40 49 33 48 33 44 Research & Analysis Rulemaking 23 25 23 28 23 30 Enforcement 37 33 20 37 20 39 Administrative 79 83 76 81 81 81 expenses Source: CRS, based on DOT Budget Estimates for FY2018-FY2021: https://www.transportation.gov/CRS, based on DOT Budget Estimates for FY2018-FY2021: https://www.transportation.gov/
budget. budget.
Notes: Appropriations derived from the general fund.Appropriations derived from the general fund. Totals may not add due to rounding. “Enacted” refers to Totals may not add due to rounding. “Enacted” refers to
the amount of spending authorized in an appropriations act; “actual” refers to the amount available after the amount of spending authorized in an appropriations act; “actual” refers to the amount available after
adjustments such as rescissions and reprogramming, and is reported a year or two after the enactment of the adjustments such as rescissions and reprogramming, and is reported a year or two after the enactment of the
appropriations. appropriations.
a. Spending a. Spending recommended in H.R. 7616, the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Bil , 2021, as passed by the House on July 31, 2020.
~~The Administration’s budget recommendations have been opposed by numerous vehicle safety~~
~~organizations, such as Advocates for Highway & Auto Safety and the Center for Auto Safety.~~
~~Congress has not accepted the recommended reductions. For example, the Trump Administration~~

~~118 U.S. Department of T ransportation, Fiscal Year 2021: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration , p. 62, at~~
~~https://www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/nhtsa-cj-fy-2021-estimates.~~
~~119 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations,~~ ~~Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban~~
~~Developm ent, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2021~~ ~~, report to accompany H.R. 7616, 116th Cong., 2nd sess.,~~
~~July 16, 2020, H.Rept. 116-452, pp. 51-55.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
25

~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~requested $151 mil ion for NHTSA’s FY2020 vehicle safety programs; the House-passed~~
~~FY2020 appropriation120 for them was $214 mil ion; the Senate-passed appropriation121 was $194~~
~~mil ion; and the final enacted appropriation was $194 mil ion.122 In their reports~~approved in H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, P.L. 116-260. In their joint explanatory statement129 on NHTSA’s FY2021 ~~on NHTSA’s~~
~~FY2020~~ funding, the House and Senate funding, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees noted several areas of Appropriations Committees noted several areas of
~~disagreement with the Administration~~ concern over NHTSA’s program execution, over NHTSA’s program execution, including the including the
~~following:~~
~~ Office of Defects Investigation. The House committee cal ed on ODI to~~
~~“strengthen its collection and analysis of early warning data and vehicle defects~~
~~and enhance defects investigations,”123 as recommended by the OIG, and report~~
~~to Congress in six months on implementation. The Senate committee expressed~~
~~similar concerns and also required NHTSA to report to Congress within a year~~
~~about additional analytical and modeling tools that could boost recal compliance~~
~~rates.~~
~~ Autonomous vehicles (AV) research. The House committee said it is~~
~~“concerned that the development of AVs is not receiving sufficient oversight~~
~~from NHTSA.”124 The Senate committee directed NHTSA to develop goals for~~
~~future federal standards that would ensure access to autonomous vehicles for~~
~~persons with disabilities and report to Congress on its efforts.~~
~~ Overdue rulemaking. The House committee report stated that the “committee is~~
~~extremely concerned by NHTSA’s lack of progress on critical rulemakings that~~
~~the agency has been directed to complete in both the FAST Act and MAP-21.”125~~
~~The committee required NHTSA to submit a report to within six months of~~
~~enactment with a timeline for completion of rules required by the FAST Act and~~
~~MAP-21.~~
~~ New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). The House committee stated that it is~~
~~“concerned that crashworthiness standards have not kept pace with technological~~
~~advances” and that NHTSA should report to Congress on plans for updated~~
~~standards that would also include ratings on pedestrian and bicyclist safety and~~
~~ADAS.126 The Senate committee also expressed concern over the nearly four-~~
~~year delay in adding crash avoidance technologies to the NCAP ratings and~~
~~directed NHTSA to report on its timeline for completing the rulemaking; it also~~
~~encouraged NHTSA to include pedestrian and bicyclist safety ratings.~~

~~120 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations,~~ ~~Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban~~
~~Developm ent, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2020~~ ~~, report to accompany H.R. 3163, 116th Cong., 1st sess.,~~
~~June 6, 2019, H.Rept. 116-106, pp. 40-44 at https://appropriations.house.gov/sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/~~
~~files/FY2020%20T HUD%20Filed%20Report%20 116-106.pdf.~~
~~121 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations,~~ ~~Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and~~
~~Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2020~~ ~~, report to accompany S. 2520, 116th Cong., 1st sess., September 19, 2019,~~
~~S.Rept. 116-109, pp. 62-69, at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/~~
~~FY2020%20T HUD%20Appropriations%20Act,%20Report%20116 -109.pdf.~~
~~122 T ransportation, Housing and Urban Development, and related Agencies (T HUD) Appropriations, FY 2020, P.L.~~
~~116-94.~~
~~123 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations,~~ ~~Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban~~
~~Developm ent, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2020, report to accompany H.R. 3163, 116th Cong., 1st sess.,~~
~~June 6, 2019, H.Rept. 116-106, p. 40.~~
~~124 Ibid., pp. 40-41.~~
~~125 Ibid., pp. 41-42.~~
~~126 Ibid., p. 42.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
26

~~link to page 29 link to page 29~~ ~~Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress~~

~~ Tire efficiency. The Senate committee noted that the FAST Act cal ed for three~~
~~new tire efficiency regulations and directed NHTSA to report within four months~~
~~on its schedule to issue them.~~
~~On July 31, 2020, the House passed the FY2021 appropriations bil for DOT programs (se~~e ~~Table~~
1)~~. Its recommended spending level for NHTSA’s vehicle safety programs—$214 mil ion—is the~~
~~same as it recommended for FY2020. The bil proposes major spending increases for rulemaking~~
~~and enforcement; the House Appropriations Committee report that accompanies H.R. 7616~~
~~recommends specific requirements for NHTSA action, including the following:~~
 Vehicle defects. ~~The committee expressed concern about the~~ following:  NTSB recommendations. The statement directs NHTSA to prioritize and address those NTSB recommendations from November 2019 through December 2020 dealing with testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads.  Automated vehicle research. NHTSA is directed to develop a research program on dealing with possible injuries of occupants of automated vehicles with “alternative seating postures and configurations.”  Tire safety. NHTSA is encouraged to implement tire-related provisions in the 2015 FAST Act, and report within three months to Congress on its plans and schedule for such rulemakings.  Automated vehicle accessibility. NHTSA is directed to develop goals and begin research on future federal vehicle safety regulations that should “thoroughly consider people with communicative, physical, cognitive, mental, and other disabilities.”  Crashworthiness research. NHTSA is directed to update its regulations for “frontal, side, rollover, front seatbacks, and lower interior impacts for children and smal adults” and pedestrians, as wel as issues pertaining to future lightweight vehicle design. 129 House Committee on Appropriations, “House Passes Omnibus Appropriations and Coronavirus Relief Package,” press release, November 21, 2020, at https://appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/house-passes-omnibus-appropriations-and-coronavirus-relief-package. NHT SA funding is part of DOT , which is found under Division L of P.L. 116-260. Congressional Research Service 27 Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress  Vehicle electronics and cybersecurity. NHTSA is encouraged to work with stakeholders on vehicle electronics and cybersecurity chal enges, including cyber-risk evaluation methods for motor vehicles. The joint House-Senate explanatory statement also notes that directives to NHTSA in the earlier report of the House Appropriations Committee130 should be complied with. Among those directives were that NHTSA should immediately brief the appropriations committees about the status of a report detailing ~~status of a report~~
~~detailing~~ NHTSA’s plans to enhance its defect investigations, which was due in NHTSA’s plans to enhance its defect investigations, which was due in
June 2020, and June 2020, and ~~asked for an immediate briefing.~~
 Older drivers. ~~$8 mil ion would be set aside~~ that NHTSA should set aside $8 mil ion for new research and a pilot for new research and a pilot
program to program to explore how software could be used to facilitate mobility for elderly explore how software could be used to facilitate mobility for elderly
~~drivers.~~
~~ Autonomous vehicles. Concerns were raised about safety of passengerless~~
~~delivery vehicles and about NHTSA’s monitoring of pilot programs. In addition,~~
~~the committee directed NHTSA to conduct research on the need for (1) possible~~
~~new crashworthiness standards associated with “alternatively positioned vehicle~~
~~occupants,”127 (2) advanced computing methods and machine learning that could~~
~~assist state governments in preparing for autonomous vehicles, and (3)~~
~~establishment of minimum performance standards for associated vehicle~~
~~technologies.~~
drivers.
~~127~~130 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Departments of ~~Transportation~~T ransportation, and Housing and Urban
~~Developm ent~~Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2021 , report to accompany H.R. 7616, 116th Cong., 2nd sess., , report to accompany H.R. 7616, 116th Cong., 2nd sess.,
July 16, 2020, H.Rept. 116-452July 16, 2020, H.Rept. 116-452~~, p. 54~~. H.R. 7616 passed the House on July 31, 2020. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2728

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Appendix A. Road Traffic Fatalities Abroad
The World Health Organization (WHO) tracks road traffic accidents and progress among 175 The World Health Organization (WHO) tracks road traffic accidents and progress among 175
countries in countries in ~~improving enactment and enforcement of~~enacting and enforcing vehicle and pedestrian safety laws. The vehicle and pedestrian safety laws. The
WHO report does not measure the fatality rate per 100 mil ion vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as WHO report does not measure the fatality rate per 100 mil ion vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as
does the United States. Instead, WHO developed data from a variety of sources and used a does the United States. Instead, WHO developed data from a variety of sources and used a
measurement based on fatalities per 100,000 population. The following data show measurement based on fatalities per 100,000 population. The following data show these 2016 road 2016 road
~~traffic fatalities~~traffic fatality rates in in selected countries. selected countries.
Table A-1. Global Comparison of Road Traffic Fatalities
Selected Countries, for 2016 Selected Countries, for 2016
Country
Road Traffic Fatalities per 100,000 Population
Argentina Argentina
14.0 14.0
Australia Australia
5.6 5.6
Brazil Brazil
19.7 19.7
Canada Canada
5.8 5.8
China China
18.2 18.2
France France
5.5 5.5
Germany Germany
4.1 4.1
India India
22.6 22.6
Japan Japan
4.1 4.1
Mexico Mexico
13.1 13.1
Russian Federation Russian Federation
18.0 18.0
South Korea South Korea
9.8 9.8
Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia
28.8 28.8
South Africa South Africa
25.9 25.9
United Kingdom United Kingdom
3.1 3.1
United States
12.4
Global Average Global Average
18 18
Source: World Health Organization, World Health Organization, Global Status Report on Road Safety, 2018, pp. 94-266, at , 2018, pp. 94-266, at
https://www.who.int/publications-detail/global-status-report-on-road-safety-2018. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/global-status-report-on-road-safety-2018.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2829

Motor Vehicle Safety: Issues for Congress

Appendix B. Recall Completion Rates
Table B-1. Annual Recall Completion Rates by Major Vehicle Manufacturer
Company
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014

In Percent of Vehicles Recalled
BMW of North America BMW of North America
82 82
54 54
77 77
79 79
42 42
Chrysler (FCA US) Chrysler (FCA US)
76 76
77 77
51 51
54 54
69 69
Ford Motor Company Ford Motor Company
45 45
45 45
56 56
73 73
70 70
General Motors General Motors
73 73
93 93
78 78
82 82
66 66
Honda (American Honda Motor Co.) Honda (American Honda Motor Co.)
69 69
78 78
59 59
73 73
72 72
Hyundai Motor America Hyundai Motor America
95 95
60 60
70 70
63 63
70 70
Kia Motors America Kia Motors America
88 88
61 61
59 59
67 67
75 75
Mercedes-Benz USA Mercedes-Benz USA
92 92
33 33
90 90
59 59
69 69
Nissan North America Nissan North America
53 53
55 55
84 84
85 85
84 84
Subaru of America Subaru of America
91 91
76 76
72 72
58 58
55 55
Tesla Motors Tesla Motors
100 100
- -
- -
89 89
99 99
Toyota Motor Engineering & Toyota Motor Engineering &
78 78
74 74
68 68
56 56
67 67
Manufacturing Manufacturing
Volkswagen Group of America Volkswagen Group of America
79 79
95 95
93 93
89 89
80 80
Source: NHTSA, NHTSA, Report to Congress: Vehicle Safety Recal Completion Rates Report, May 2017, pp. 32-34, at , May 2017, pp. 32-34, at
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13376-recal _completion_rates_rtc-tag_final.pdf. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13376-recal _completion_rates_rtc-tag_final.pdf.

Author Information

Bill Canis Bill Canis

Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R46398 R46398 · VERSION 79 · UPDATED
2930