Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview
David Randall Peterman
Analyst in Transportation Policy
April 1, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43026
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Measuring Traffic Safety ................................................................................................................. 1
Federal Efforts to Improve Traffic Safety ........................................................................................ 3
Encouraging Safer Driving Behavior ........................................................................................ 3
Vehicle Safety Improvements .................................................................................................... 4
Roadway Safety Improvements ................................................................................................. 5
Commercial Transportation Safety ............................................................................................ 6
Congressional Action ....................................................................................................................... 7

Figures
Figure 1. Traffic Fatalities and Fatality Rate, 1966-2010 ................................................................ 2

Contacts
Author Contact Information............................................................................................................. 7

Congressional Research Service

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

Introduction
Driving is one of the riskiest activities the average American engages in. Deaths and serious
injuries resulting from motor vehicle crashes are one of the leading causes of preventable deaths.
In 2011, 32,367 people were killed in police-reported motor vehicle crashes, and an estimated
2.22 million people were injured.1 Most of the people who die in traffic crashes are relatively
young and otherwise healthy. As a result, traffic crashes rank third overall, after cancer and
diseases of the heart, in years of life lost (that is, the difference between the age at death and life
expectancy).2
In addition to the emotional toll exacted by these deaths and injuries, traffic crashes impose a
significant economic toll. The Department of Transportation (DOT) estimated that the annual cost
of motor vehicle crashes in 2000 was $231 billion.3 About one-third of the total cost came from
the lost productivity of those killed and injured; about one-quarter from property damage; 15%
from present and future medical costs; 11% from time lost due to congestion caused by crashes;
and the remainder from the costs of insurance administration, legal services, workplace costs,4
and emergency services. While the number of traffic deaths has declined significantly since 2000,
the estimated cost of crashes (adjusted for inflation) has remained within a comparable range,
indicating an increase in the cost of each crash; estimates of the cost of traffic crashes in 2009
range from around $245 billion to $300 billion.5
Measuring Traffic Safety
The most commonly cited measure of traffic safety is the number of annual fatalities. That
number held steady from 1985 to 2007 at around 42,000, leading to claims that traffic safety was
not improving. But the raw number of traffic fatalities does not take into account changes in the
number of drivers, the number of vehicles, or the number of miles being driven. While the
number of deaths appeared to show no improvement in traffic safety between 1985 and 2007, the
number of fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled fell by more than half.
The improvement has continued since 2007, with the number of traffic deaths dropping from
41,259 in 2007 to 32,367 in 2011, and the fatality rate falling to an all-time low of 1.10 per
100 million vehicle miles (see Figure 1). Part of this decline was likely due to weak economic
conditions; traffic deaths and injuries typically decline during economic downturns and rise as the

1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts Research Note: 2011 Motor Vehicle Crashes:
Overview, DOT HS811701, December 2012, p. 1.
2 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes as a Leading Cause of Death in the
United States, 2003, DOT HS 810568, March 2006.
3 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000, DOT HS
809446, May 2002.
4 Costs of workplace disruption due to the loss or absence of an employee.
5 The National Safety Council estimated a cost of $245 billion in 2009 (Injury Facts 2011, p. 94); in a report for the
American Automobile Association, Cambridge Systematics estimated a cost of $300 billion for 2009 (Crashes vs.
Congestion: What’s the Cost to Society?, November 2011, p. ES-2). The differences stem in part from differing
estimates of the cost of deaths. The National Safety Council estimated that the cost of traffic crashes in 2012 was $277
billion; NSC Motor Vehicle Fatality Estimates, http://www.nsc.org/Documents/
NSC%20MV%20Fatality%20Estimates.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

economy recovers.6 Indeed, preliminary analysis by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) indicates that traffic deaths and injuries rose about 7% in 2012.7
Figure 1. Traffic Fatalities and Fatality Rate, 1966-2010
Rate per 100
Deaths
million VMT
60,000
6
50,000
5
40,000
4
30,000
3
20,000
2
10,000
1
0
0
1966
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Deaths
Fatality Rate

Source: Prepared by CRS using data from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts
2010, DOT HS 811659, Table 2.
The dramatic improvement in traffic safety numbers since 2007, then, has probably been due to a
number of other factors along with federal and state safety initiatives. One of those factors is
demographic change, which contributed to an 11% drop in the number of licensed drivers under

6 The explanation for this phenomenon is not clear. The number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tends to stagnate or
decline during recessions, but the percentage decline in deaths and injuries is typically much greater than the
percentage decline in VMT. For example, in 2009 VMT declined by less than 1%, but traffic fatalities declined by 9%.
7 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts Crashstats: Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle
Traffic Fatalities for the First Nine Months (January–September) of 2012, DOT HS 811706, December 2012.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

age 18 between January 2007 and January 2011.8 Drivers in this age cohort have by far the
highest fatality rates among all drivers.9
Federal Efforts to Improve Traffic Safety
Federal traffic safety programs are administered by three separate agencies within DOT. NHTSA
has responsibility for programs targeting driver behavior and regulates safety-related aspects of
vehicle design. The safety of roads falls within the purview of the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA). The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) manages a
separate set of programs focusing on the safety of commercial drivers and vehicles.
Congress typically amends federal traffic safety programs in the periodic reauthorization of
federal surface transportation programs. Recent reauthorizations were enacted in 1998, 2005, and
2012; the current authorization expires at the end of FY2014. Occasionally changes are made in
stand-alone legislation10 or as part of other legislation, such as the DOT appropriations act.11
Encouraging Safer Driving Behavior
A significant portion of crashes is caused, at least in part, by drivers behaving unsafely. Prominent
among these behaviors are speeding,12 driving while under the influence of alcohol or other
drugs,13 and driving while distracted.14 Fatalities are also increased by failure to wear seat belts15

8 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Statistics 2007, Table 6.4.3, and Highway Statistics 2011, Table 6.3.3,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics.cfm.
9 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Fatality Facts 2011, http://www.iihs.org/research/fatality.aspx?topicName=
Teenagers&year=2011.
10 For example, in 2008 Congress passed the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-
189), which directed DOT to initiate rulemakings to require that power windows in cars be designed to reverse
direction when they encounter an obstacle and to reduce the risk of backing over a child by improving the driver’s view
of the area behind the vehicle.
11 For example, the FY2001 DOT appropriations act provided that states that had not passed a law making driving with
a blood alcohol content level of 0.08 illegal would have a portion of their federal highway funding withheld beginning
with FY2004 (P.L. 106-346, §351).
12 In 2010, 32% of fatal traffic crashes involved speeding. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts: 2010 Data Overview, DOT
HS 811630, June 2012, p. 6.
13 In 2010, 31% of total traffic fatalities involved alcohol-impaired drivers. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts: 2010 Data
Overview, DOT HS 811630, June 2012, p. 4. There is some overlap between the percentages of fatal crashes involving
speeding and those involving alcohol-impaired drivers.
14 Around 9% of fatal crashes in 2010 involved distracted drivers. NHTSA changed its definition of distracted driving
crashes in 2010, narrowing the definition to focus on crashes in which driver distraction was most likely to be a causal
factor. NHTSA Press Release, “U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces Lowest Level of Annual Traffic
Fatalities in More Than Six Decades,” NHTSA 21-11, December 8, 2011.
15 In 2011, slightly more than half (52%) of fatally injured passenger vehicle occupants were not wearing seat belts or
in child restraints. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts Research Note: 2011 Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview, DOT
HS811701, December 2012, p. 3. Seat belt use was estimated at 85% in 2010; NHTSA estimated that seat belt use had
saved the lives of 12,546 people involved in crashes that year, and that another 3,341 could have been saved if seat belt
use had been 100% (Traffic Safety Facts: 2010 Data Overview, DOT HS 811630, June 2012, p. 3).
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

(or in the case of motorcyclists, helmets).16 Use of seat belts, among the most effective safety
features in a vehicle, has risen from 58% (1994) to 86% (2012).17
Two groups are of particular concern. Young people (aged 16-24), especially young males, are
more likely to be killed and injured in traffic crashes than any other age-group.18 And while the
fatality rate has been steadily improving for most subcategories of road users, the fatality rate for
motorcyclists is much higher than for other vehicles, and had risen for several years before
improving during the recession.19
Congress provides around $800 million annually for NHTSA; NHTSA distributes around $550
million of that to states through various traffic safety grant programs. Regulating driver behavior
is a power reserved to the states.20 Consequently, most of these grant programs seek to influence
states to pursue safety initiatives either by providing money to states to do certain things
(incentive grants) or by withholding money from states that do not do certain things (sanctions).21
In the most recent reauthorization of highway safety programs, Congress established or renewed
incentive grant programs for states that take specified actions to promote seat belt and child
restraint use, reduce impaired and distracted driving, require graduated licenses for teen drivers,
address motorcyclist safety, and improve the quality of state traffic safety information systems.22
Vehicle Safety Improvements
NHTSA began establishing minimum standards for passenger vehicles (known as Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards, or FMVSS) in the 1960s based on provisions in highway and traffic
safety acts passed in that period.23 Existing standards are amended and new standards are added
from time to time at the direction of Congress or at NHTSA’s own initiative. New standards and
amendments to existing standards must go through the federal rulemaking process, which

16 Nationwide use of DOT-compliant motorcycle helmets in 2011 was estimated at 66%, but in the 30 states where
helmets are not required, usage was only 50% (NHTSA, Motorcycle Helmet Use in 2011—Overall Results, DOT HS
811 610, April 2012). Requiring all riders to wear a helmet—a universal helmet law—has been estimated to reduce
motorcyclist fatalities by 20% or more (National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Effectiveness of Behavioral
Highway Safety Countermeasures, Report 622, 2008, p. 41).
17 NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts Research Note: Seat Belt Use in 2012—Overall Results, DOT HS 811691, November
2012.
18 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts 2010, DOT HS 811659, Table 62.
19 In 2003-2006, the fatality rate per 100 million VMT for motorcyclists was around 40; in 2010 it was 24.39,
compared to an overall motor vehicle fatality rate of 1.11. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic
Safety Facts 2010, DOT HS 811659, Tables 2 and 10.
20 For example, the federal government can require vehicle manufacturers to put seat belts in vehicles, but cannot
require that people use them; only states can make failure to use seat belts a legal offense.
21 Two of the current traffic safety sanctions are “weak” sanctions; they do not withhold transportation funding from a
state that is not in compliance, but redirect a small portion of a state’s federal highway construction funding to its safety
programs (including its Highway Safety Infrastructure Program). Many states remain subject to these sanctions. One
requires states to prohibit open alcoholic containers in vehicles; 20 states were subject to that sanction in FY2013.
Another requires states to impose certain minimum penalties for repeat offenders convicted of driving while
intoxicated; 23 states were subject to that sanction in FY2013. In contrast, the sanction that requires states to set a blood
alcohol concentration of 0.08 as the legal level of driving while intoxicated is a “strong” sanction; states not in
compliance will lose a portion of their federal highway construction funding. Every state is now in compliance with
that requirement.
22 P.L. 112-141 (MAP-21), §31105.
23 These are collected in Part 571 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

provides for public review and comment on proposed changes. Standards currently under
consideration would mandate seat belts and improved rollover structural integrity for
motorcoaches and electronic stability control systems for heavy vehicles.24 NHTSA also tests
vehicles for compliance with safety standards and rates the crashworthiness of vehicles, and
monitors consumer complaints about vehicles for evidence of safety defects that may necessitate
a vehicle recall.25
Improvements in vehicle design, such as the use of crumple zones, have made vehicles
structurally safer. NHTSA also had mandated safety features such as airbags, which have been
required in all passenger vehicles since model year 1997. Improved design and safety features
have contributed to a decline in the percentage of crashes in which people are killed or injured,
from 33% (during the 1990s) to 28% (2007-2010).26
Developments in electronic technology are shifting the focus of vehicle safety research from an
emphasis on crashworthiness—a vehicle’s ability to protect occupants in the event of a crash—to
crash avoidance. For example, electronic stability control systems automatically apply braking
force to individual wheels to reduce the risks of skidding or rollover; this is required on all new
passenger vehicles. Other technologies, such as adaptive cruise control (which automatically
maintains a safe distance from the car ahead), forward collision mitigation (which automatically
brakes to prevent the vehicle from striking an object in its path), and lane departure warning, are
available as options on some vehicles. The National Transportation Safety Board has
recommended that NHTSA add several of these new technologies to the list of safety standards
required for all vehicles because of their potential to prevent crashes.27 NHTSA is evaluating
whether some of these technologies should be mandated as vehicle safety standards.
Roadway Safety Improvements
FHWA supports research and makes grants to states to improve roadway safety. Safety
improvements are eligible expenses under most FHWA grant programs, but one of the core grant
programs is specifically focused on safety, the Highway Safety Improvement Program. This
program distributes more than $2 billion annually to states for road safety improvements. To
qualify to use their funding, states must develop highway safety plans that use crash data to
identify hazardous road locations or features and identify measures to address the problems.28
DOT is encouraging a shift in emphasis from highway design standards to steps that improve
safety as measured by changes in crash data.29 Projects are chosen by state DOTs.

24 Department of Transportation, March 2013 Significant Rulemaking Report.
25 Manufacturers typically voluntarily recall vehicles that have a defect, but if necessary NHTSA can order a
manufacturer to recall a defective vehicle.
26 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts 2010, Table 1.
27 National Transportation Safety Board, Most Wanted List: Mandate Motor Vehicle Collision Avoidance Technologies,
http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/mwl10_2012.html.
28 These measures may include replacing intersections with roundabouts, adding medians and pedestrian crossing
islands to urban and suburban streets, limiting highway access points, and adding rumble strips to two-lane roads. See
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/ for more information.
29 See, for example, DOT’s Highway Safety Manual website (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsm/).
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

Commercial Transportation Safety
The federal government lacks authority to regulate the behavior of ordinary drivers, which is
under state jurisdiction. However, the behavior of commercial drivers who engage in interstate
commerce is a federal matter. For example, Congress has required that commercial drivers satisfy
requirements for training, licensing, and medical fitness, and specifies how much time drivers can
work each day (generally, no more than 12 hours).
Federal regulations concerning vehicles and drivers are enforced by FMCSA and state authorities,
who conduct both on-site and roadside inspections. Enforcement is challenging, given the scale of
the industry; there are over 700,000 commercial truck and bus operators with millions of vehicles
and drivers. FMCSA inspectors and law enforcement officials have the power to remove a vehicle
from service, and FMCSA can order an operator to suspend operations in the event of serious
violations.30 Fines for less severe violations are imposed by state authorities.
In 2005, Congress limited FMCSA’s authority to conduct roadside inspections of motorcoach
buses.31 The limitation does not absolutely prohibit en-route inspections, but allows motorcoaches
to be pulled over for inspection only at places that provide “reasonable accommodations” for
passengers, such as highway rest stops and weigh stations, unless the motorcoach exhibits an
imminent or obvious safety hazard. The rationale for this limitation is the safety of passengers
should they need to leave the vehicle during the inspection. As a result of several deadly crashes
in recent years, motorcoach bus safety has assumed a higher profile, and critics have contended
that the 2005 provision limits FMCSA’s ability to enforce motorcoach safety rules.
FMCSA recently adopted a new enforcement approach called the Compliance, Safety,
Accountability program (CSA). CSA is a monitoring program that seeks to use data collected
through federal and state inspections and crash data to identify high-risk operators who can then
be targeted for interventions.
In December 2011, FMCSA’s Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee and its Medical Review
Board made recommendations regarding screening of commercial drivers for sleep apnea, a
medical condition that causes frequent disruption to breathing during sleep, interfering with
restful sleep and causing drowsiness during the day. Obesity is linked to sleep apnea, and
commercial drivers have above-average rates of obesity, due in part to sitting behind the wheel of
a vehicle for up to 12 hours a day, which leaves little time for exercise, as well as often limited
options for healthy dining on the road. Sleep apnea can be a medically disqualifying condition for
a commercial driver, though there are medical treatments that can permit a commercial driver to
continue to drive. The FMCSA committees recommended that medical examiners should
routinely test commercial drivers who are extremely obese (BMI 35+)32 for sleep apnea. FMCSA
would have to go through the rulemaking process in order to implement the recommendation.

30 For example, in March 2013, FMCSA ordered two motorcoach operators, the Fung Wah and Ming An bus
companies, to suspend operations due to numerous safety violations.
31 SAFETEA-LU (P.L. 109-59), §4106(a)(7), codified at 49 U.S.C. 31102(b)(2)(x).
32 BMI stands for Body Mass Index, and is essentially a measure of a person’s weight divided by his or her height.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Federal Traffic Safety Programs: An Overview

In MAP-21, Congress charged FMCSA to work on several areas of commercial transportation
safety, including
• requiring electronic logging to improve enforcement of hours of service rules
affecting certain drivers (49 U.S.C. 31137);
• establishing a national registry of medical examiners qualified to certify the
medical fitness of commercial drivers, to reduce evasion of commercial driver
medical standards (49 U.S.C. 31149); and
• establishing a national clearinghouse for controlled substance and alcohol test
results of commercial drivers to reduce crashes, injuries, and death due to misuse
of alcohol or controlled substances by commercial drivers (49 U.S.C. 31306a).
Congressional Action
Congress is likely to review the performance of the current traffic safety measures during the next
two years, and to consider additional traffic safety measures in the context of the next surface
transportation authorization legislation, if not sooner. The current authorization expires at the end
of FY2014.

Author Contact Information

David Randall Peterman

Analyst in Transportation Policy
dpeterman@crs.loc.gov, 7-3267


Congressional Research Service
7

---