NHTSA VEHICLE SAFETY
RULEMAKING PRIORITIES:
2002-2005

Introduction

Table 1:  Rulemaking and Potential Rulemaking Areas by Crash Modes and Special Issues

1. Prevent Crashes.

   1. Crash Avoidance Data
      
   2. Reduce Driver Distraction
      
   3. Improve Vehicle Visibility Factors
      
   4. Warn Drivers of Impending Crash Situations
      
   5. By Improving Vehicle Control and Handling

2. Improve the Protection of Occupants

   1. Advanced Dummies
      
   2. Frontal Crashes
      
   3. Side Crashes
      
   4. Rollover Crashes
      
   5. Rear Crashes

3. Address Incompatibility Between Passenger Cars and Light Trucks

4. Make Heavy Trucks Safer

5. Protect Special Populations

   1. Children
      
   2. People with Disabilities
      
   3. Older Population

6. Appendix A:  Other Active Areas, 2002-2005

7. Appendix B:  New Vehicle Safety Information for Consumers

   1. Consumer Information on Child Restraints
      
   2. Consumer Information on Light Vehicle Rollover
      
   3. Consumer Information on Braking Performance
      
   4. Consumer Information on Light Vehicle Headlighting Performance

8. Appendix C.  Regulatory Review Plan Description

NHTSA VEHICLE SAFETY RULEMAKING PRIORITIES:  2002-2005

Introduction

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce traffic-related health care and other economic costs. The agency develops, promotes, and implements effective educational, engineering, and enforcement programs directed toward ending preventable tragedies and reducing safety-related economic costs associated with vehicle use and highway travel.  Motor vehicle crashes killed 41,821 individuals and injured 3,189,000 others in 6.4 million crashes in 2000.  In addition to the terrible personal toll, these crashes make a huge economic impact on our society with an estimated annual cost of $230.6 billion, or an average of $820 for every person living in the United States.

One of the most important ways in which NHTSA carries out its mandate is to issue and enforce Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).  Through these rules, NHTSA strives to reduce the number of crashes and to minimize the consequences of those crashes that do occur.  NHTSA's rulemaking activities, via the Safety Performance Standards Program with support from the offices of Research and Development, Safety Assurance, Plans and Policy, and Chief Counsel, identify safety problem areas, develop countermeasures, and collect and analyze information to develop new FMVSS and amendments to existing FMVSS.  The agency uses data from many sources, including the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), which contains data on a census of fatal traffic crashes in the United States.

The performance capabilities of motor vehicles play an important role in helping drivers to avoid collisions and in protecting occupants when vehicles crash.  A substantial amount of new technology that enhances safety has been incorporated into modern vehicles.  Some was in response to Federal requirements, such as air-bags/passive protection and uniform child safety seat installation.  Over the years, despite more vehicles and more drivers on the roads, safety advances such as these have helped to reduce the annual number of traffic related deaths.  For instance, the fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles of travel dropped to 1.5 in 2000. This is significantly less than the 1966 rate of 5.5 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles of travel and, for comparison sake, the 1990 rate of 2.1 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles of travel.  Although there now are more than double the number of vehicles in the United States than there were in 1966, the number of annual traffic deaths has dropped from 50,894 in 1966 to 44,599 deaths in 1990, and to 41,821 in 2000.  Vehicle occupants comprised 87 percent of the 2000 fatality total, with the balance consisting primarily of pedestrians and pedalcyclists.

NHTSA has made major strides in improving motor vehicle safety.  In the first years of the new century, NHTSA will strive to influence the automotive industry to incorporate the rapidly accelerating pace of advances in vehicle and safety technology into new vehicles, while ensuring that the use of the new technologies enhances vehicle safety.

The plan that follows outlines the highlights of NHTSA's vehicle safety rulemaking plans through 2005.   Agency priorities emanate from many sources, including: the size of the safety problem and likelihood of solutions, Executive initiatives, Congressional interest and mandates, petitions to the agency for rulemaking and other expressions of public interest, interest in harmonizing safety standards with those of other nations, and changes needed as a result of new vehicle technologies.

For the current plan, we have included those rulemaking actions of highest priority for the period 2002 to 2005, based primarily on the greatest potential protection of lives and prevention of injury, that fall within the immediate four-year time frame.  In addition, we have considered the realistic likelihood for successful action, especially considering the budgetary reality of numerous worthwhile options competing for limited dollars.  The priorities were defined through extensive discussions within the agency, taking into account the views we have heard over several recent years at public meetings and comments submitted to the agency via rulemaking notices and requests for comment.  The results produced by previous NHTSA rulemaking priority planning exercises also provided valuable input to this process.  These assessments prioritized potential rules and upgrades to existing rules according to the size and severity of the problems being addressed, and best educated estimates of the cost and likelihood of effective solutions and of potential benefits.

Another source for rulemaking action may be advanced technologies.  The Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI), part of the Department of Transportation's Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program, has been investigating vehicle safety products and systems designed to enhance vehicles' crash avoidance capabilities and effectiveness. Those rulemaking priorities in the following plan that may emanate from the ITS/IVI program are indicated by a .  Funding for IVI research is not entirely within NHTSA's control, and changes in reauthorization levels could eliminate funding for some IVI-related milestones in this plan.

NHTSA also is striving to improve traffic safety throughout the world through the harmonization of global vehicle safety standards.  The 1998 Global Agreement, with 15 contracting parties including the United States, entered into force on August 25, 2000.  Harmonization can be a catalyst for national and international technology transfer and exchange programs.  Global marketing also increases the demand for nations to establish similar regulations to facilitate trade. With each new rulemaking, NHTSA determines how U.S. standards and those of the European Community, the countries of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Japan, and other countries can be harmonized without diminishing safety effectiveness in the United States.  Certain aspects of a standard, such as a test procedure, may be harmonized, but other standard parameters may differ.  With successful harmonization, increased uniformity can ensure necessary safety protection for the public, while minimizing unnecessary economic burdens.  In this document, rulemaking actions that have harmonization elements are noted by a .

Attention also is given to addressing enforceability issues in the FMVSS.  Rulemaking areas in this plan that will address enforceability elements are indicated by a .

Another source for rulemaking priorities is concern for special populations.  Cognizant of the nation's changing demographics, the plan discusses actions that are especially significant to an aging population, children and people with disabilities.  Appendix B of this document discusses consumer information activities that NHTSA's Office of Safety Performance Standards plans to pursue in the next few years, including the important New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) ratings programs.  Such market-based consumer programs help to create consumer demand for safer vehicles incentives to manufacturers to incorporate additional safety features and performance into their vehicles.  They are an important complement to NHTSA's mandatory federal standards, and provide a broader perspective on the range of vehicle safety improvements being pursued.

We have included several potential rulemaking projects in this report.  These are projects that require additional research to determine whether rulemaking action is needed, but are priorities based on their potential for significantly sizeable death and injury prevention benefits.  Many of these are currently being investigated under the IVI program.  These projects are noted in italics in the document.  A milestone indicating "Rulemaking Decision" is included for these.  Appendix A discusses several additional regulatory activities, particularly regulatory-related research activities, that may extend beyond the four-year horizon of this document.  Although important regulatory (and potential regulatory) goals, these projects do not rise to the same level of immediate high priority as the activities included in the main body of this report.

It is important to keep in mind that this document discusses only a portion of all rulemaking actions the agency plans to undertake in the coming four-plus years.  To put this plan in perspective, as of March, 2002 there were 140 active rulemakings.  Some amendments to standards are needed in keeping with technology changes or to achieve international harmonization of a standard.  Still others are minor changes, perhaps in response to petitions. The absence of a particular regulatory activity from this document does not necessarily imply that the agency will not pursue it.

NHTSA has instituted a new Regulatory Review Plan to systematically review the FMVSS on a regularly scheduled basis.  The majority of the FMVSS were put in place by the early 1970's.  Many of them have had significant upgrades since that time, although some have not.  The Regulatory Review Plan establishes an assessment tool that will be used to review each FMVSS at least once in every seven-year period, to determine the need to update and/or upgrade a standard.  The two most important components of the assessment are an analysis of the current status of the target safety problem and a technology assessment.  The technology assessment will determine if there have been changes that have significantly altered the vehicle systems affected by the standard, thereby requiring changes to the standard.  A description of Regulatory Review Plan assessments is included in Appendix C.

Finally, it is important to realize that any priority plan's execution depends on factors beyond its control – external factors such as petitions, budgets, and legislation.  NHTSA's rulemaking resources and priorities can be affected by mandates and petitions.  And plans must fit within budgets submitted by the President and enacted by Congress.  For example, funding for the research activities projected for the plan's milestones beyond fiscal year 2002 are proposed but are not guaranteed and are subject to change.

For the near term (2002-2003), NHTSA's regulatory priorities will address the Transportation, Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act requirements; improved head restraints and fuel system integrity; occupant ejection prevention in rollover crashes through improved door locks and other means; offset frontal and enhanced side crash protection; reducing glare from headlamps, auxiliary lights and daytime running lights (DRLs); advanced air bags and dummies; upgraded roof crush resistance; and platform lifts for the disabled population.  Additional testing and analysis will address rear end collision avoidance systems and protecting children in school bus crashes.

The TREAD Act requires NHTSA to complete several rulemaking actions, with specific milestones in November 2002, in the areas of tires improvement, rollover prevention and child safety.  NHTSA will be writing new rules strengthening child restraints, incorporating new child dummies into FMVSS No. 213, upgrading tire standards, requiring tire under-inflation warning systems, and providing the first set of consumer information dynamic rollover ratings.  TREAD-related regulatory activities are noted by a in this report.

Longer term (2004-05) potential rulemaking actions include dynamic stability control; roadway departure collision avoidance systems; reducing driver distractions; and addressing issues resulting from incompatibility between passenger cars and light trucks.   Many of these areas are italicized in the text to denote the fact that they are in pre-rulemaking investigation pending the decision to move into active rulemaking status.

Notes of explanation about the milestones and the milestone dates in this report are necessary.  Milestones listed as "Rulemaking Decision" refer to internal NHTSA decisions whether or not to initiate formal rulemaking activity, i.e., publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).  Milestones listed as "Final Regulatory Action" refer to determinations further along in the regulatory process, after the publication of the NPRM, to proceed toward publication of a final rule or to terminate rulemaking, either of which would be published in the Federal Register.  All milestone date references to years are calendar, not fiscal.  We have provided milestone due date ranges for research or testing that may stretch over an extended period.  In some instances, where the research program began prior to 2002, we have so indicated.  Also, please note that the placement of the priorities in this plan are for organizational clarity but do not reflect any specific ordering in terms of importance or emphasis.

This is the first of NHTSA's multi-year vehicle safety rulemaking priorities plans, and the agency intends to periodically update them.  The plans will serve as internal management tools as well as means to communicate to the public our highest priorities to meet the vehicle safety challenges of the new century.  Clearly, the role of Federal vehicle safety rulemaking has changed and will continue to evolve.  Automotive manufacturers and suppliers are now pro-active players in vehicle safety by providing to their customers the best safety technologies available.  The Federal role will be to improve the crash avoidance and crashworthiness of new motor vehicles by establishing standards that ensure that new technologies work effectively to reduce the number of lives lost, injuries, and crashes on the nations streets and highways.

Table 1: Priority Rulemaking and Potential Rulemaking Areas
by Crash Modes and Special Issues

I. Prevent Crashes

NHTSA's crash avoidance vehicle safety standards mandate improvements in the crash-avoidance capabilities of vehicles to reduce the likelihood of collisions.  The improvements may enhance the interaction of the driver with the vehicle; deliver more effective warnings to drivers about impending crashes; improve the driver's ability to avoid crashes and maintain control of the vehicle; or enhance driver vision through improvements in current systems or advanced technologies.  The agency focuses its crash avoidance rulemaking activities on reducing the number of collisions through improvements in direct and indirect visibility, tires, braking, directional and rollover stability, vehicle lighting, signaling, and marking.

A substantial effort has been made over the past five years to lay the foundation for continuing research and the development of collision avoidance systems.  Under the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI), NHTSA is conducting research to develop systems that will use advanced sensors, computers and communications to reduce the likelihood of crashes.  Some of the new technologies that may allow upgraded or new requirements derive from ITS research.  The new National Advanced Driving Simulator (NADS) makes it possible to carry out research that has not previously been practicable.  In the next few years, NHTSA will continue research on the potential effectiveness of several collision avoidance products and systems.  However, there is a need to develop more reliable estimates of the problem size and potential benefits offered by  these and more conventional crash avoidance technologies.  This plan recognizes this need by placing Crash Avoidance Data near the top of the crash avoidance agenda.

A. Crash Avoidance Data

The NHTSA crash avoidance rulemaking program initiates actions based on assessments of crash causation factors and the potential for vehicle-related solutions. Crash avoidance problems are identified through research, petitions, and other information received from the public.  In order to develop effectiveness and benefits data and to develop solutions, it is essential to estimate with some degree of certainty problem size and crash or injury savings as a result of changes in vehicle performance.

Although it is estimated that the predominant share of crashes is caused by driver error, factors such as vehicle characteristics, driver/vehicle interaction and the environment can play significant roles in crash causation.  For many years, NHTSA has used data from the Indiana University "Tri-Level Study of the Causes of Traffic Accidents," May 1979 (DOT HS 805 099) for information on pre-crash causation factors and the number of crashes and injuries caused by specific vehicle factors, driver/vehicle interactions, and/or the environment.  However, since this study was published, there have been significant changes in vehicles, the on-road vehicle mix, and in-vehicle technologies.  In addition, driving behaviors and crash reporting levels have changed significantly.  Consequently, the collection of accurate, up-to-date crash avoidance data has become increasingly crucial.

While pre-crash data elements have been added to NHTSA's ongoing data collection systems,  these systems are still lacking in the crash avoidance area.  In some key areas, a lack of data on the size and characteristics of safety problems hampers the development of effective remedies.

Building on the methodology developed for the Large Truck Crash Causation Study (LTCCS), a new program is planned to collect crash causation data on light vehicles.  This work is aimed at uncovering the events that led up to the crash via on-scene investigation and interviews.  Other research on crash causation and vehicle factors includes naturalistic driving projects.  These projects involve in-vehicle cameras with volunteers driving vehicles with and without driver assistance systems.

NHTSA also has developed a System for Assessing the Vehicles Motion Environment (SAVME), a roadside camera system to provide additional baseline non-crash driver performance data.  In addition, the availability of the National Advanced Driving Simulator (NADS) will allow the study of issues related to driver, vehicle and environment interactions under highly controlled and safe conditions.  Since this facility allows drivers to reach crash limit conditions, factors leading to crashes can be studied in great detail.

The Office of Safety Performance Standards has begun compiling a data base containing cleansed death certificate information from states to analyze fatalities in certain off-road incidents (driveway incidents, trunk entrapment, e.g.) and other issues.  Other non-crash data collection includes a national survey by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics on adapted vehicle modifications and injuries associated with these modifications.

Milestones:

B.       Prevent Crashes by Reducing Driver Distractions 

The number of in-vehicle technologies and their potential for distractions is expected to increase as more electronic devices appear in cars.  NHTSA estimates that driver distraction and inattention contribute to 20 to 30 percent of police reported crashes - about 1.5 million crashes a year.  Cell phones have become ubiquitous, and newer advanced technologies, such as heads-up and navigational displays have begun to appear in some vehicles.  Rulemaking may be necessary to limit the functions of these technologies that distract drivers while the car is in motion.  Some standardized design parameters may be needed to reduce driver confusion.  Development of workload evaluation protocols may help provide consumer information about device distraction potential.  Driver distraction is an area of concern within the IVI program, and several research projects are underway and planned.  The research will continue at least into 2003 with attempts to define and measure driver workload and how distraction affects it.  Some of the research will be conducted using the National Advanced Driving Simulator (NADS), test track experiments, and on-the-road testing, which will allow researchers to safely apply a wide range of conditions (technology and non-technology based) that are viewed as precipitating distraction.

Milestone:

C.  Prevent Crashes by Improving Vehicle Visibility Factors

1.  Reduce Glare from Headlamps and Auxiliary Lamps

A significantly large number of public complaints target headlamp glare as being responsible for discomfort and disability glare.  The three primary sources are (1) high-mounted headlamps on light trucks, (2) headlamps with high intensity discharge (HID) bulbs, and (3) fog lamps and other auxiliary lamps on the front of vehicles.

NHTSA published a Notice of Request for Comments on headlamp and auxiliary lamp glare in September 2001.  Beam intensity, aim, and electrical connections are all of concern in reducing this problem of discomfort and disability glare.  (For additional discussion on glare reduction see section V.C.)

Milestones:

2. Reduce Glare from Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs)

Pedestrian, head-on crashes and intersection crashes may result from approaching vehicles not being noticed.  In 2000, an estimated 22,692 fatalities and a total of 4.7 million crashes occurred under daylight, dawn or dusk conditions; it has been estimated that almost one-quarter of all day/dawn/dusk fatalities result from head-on and sideswipe-opposite-direction crashes.  NHTSA has been studying the effectiveness of  daytime running lamps in making it easier for drivers to see other vehicles and to see them sooner, thereby reducing collisions.  A recent preliminary study by NHTSA of vehicles with DRLs in the U.S. shows that they have the potential to reduce the risk of certain types of crashes in the U.S.

A significant number of people have complained to NHTSA about the problem of glare from DRLs , which appears to be largely a problem with oncoming vehicles.  After determining that DRL effectiveness would not be negated by reducing their intensity, NHTSA published in 1998 an NPRM proposing to lower their allowed intensity.  NHTSA is preparing to publish a rulemaking support paper for a rule on permissible intensity of DRLs.  The agency will continue to gather and analyze additional data on DRL effectiveness in search of the optimal balance between improved visibility and nuisance glare.  (For additional discussion on glare reduction see the section above and section V.C.)

Milestones:

D. Prevent Crashes by Warning Drivers of Impending Crash Situations

NHTSA and industry are working to develop vehicle electronic aids that can sense imminent crashes and warn drivers in time to take appropriate avoidance actions.  The agency has a long term research program on intelligent systems under the Department of Transportation Intelligent Vehicle Initiative.

1. Rear End Collision Avoidance System/Stopped Vehicle Signal System

   These systems for light vehicles would sense imminent crashes, and improve driver awareness of slower moving or stopped vehicles ahead, thereby giving them time to take appropriate avoidance actions.  Driver diligence is a factor in the prevention of rear end collisions, and is affected by inattention, distraction, and use of cruise control systems.  The 1.9 million rear end crashes in 2000 comprised 30 percent of crashes that year.  These crashes frequently cause relatively less serious whiplash injuries, but the huge number of injuries – 727,000 – in addition to 1,602 fatalities – account for a huge cost to society.  From 50 to 70 percent of rear-end crashes are into vehicles stopped for more than one or two seconds.  Radar headway detection systems can be used to provide low-level deceleration to maintain proper headway or to warn drivers of potential rear end collision situations.  The new system may incorporate automatic braking with adaptive cruise control and/or a warning of an impending crash.  The system may use warnings, actual braking, or a combination of the two.  A successful remedy to this problem has the potential to prevent huge numbers of crashes with significant reductions in deaths and injuries. The agency is considering a National Transportation Safety Board recommendation to initiate rulemaking on this topic.

   Milestones:

   	Research on rear lighting and signaling (begun prior to 2002)	-2003
   	Complete field operational test of rear-end crash warning system/adaptive cruise control and related supporting research	2002-2003
   	Rulemaking decision	2002

2. Roadway Departure Collision Avoidance Systems

   Single vehicle road departure crashes represent the most serious crash problem based upon national highway accident data analysis.  There were at least 900,000 crashes categorized as single vehicle off-roadway crashes in 2000; 11,979 of these were fatal crashes.  There are many different causes of these types of crashes, including weather/vision problems, driver impairment, and other improper driving behaviors.

   Single vehicle roadway departure systems and lane keeping systems alert inattentive drivers when they are drifting off the roadway or out of their lane.  Rulemaking may be needed to specify test protocols for assessing minimum safe levels of system performance and for specifying driver interface characteristics.

   Milestones:

   	Research (objective tests) under IVI to evaluate the performance of roadway departure collision avoidance system technology (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	Research (field operational tests) under IVI to evaluate the performance of  roadway departure collision avoidance system technology (begun prior to 2002)	-2005
   	Rulemaking decision	2005

E. Prevent Crashes by Improving Vehicle Control and Handling

1. Reduce Light Vehicle Tire Failures

Tire failure can cause loss-of-control of a vehicle which can result in a rollover or other crash.  Tire failure also can be a hazard to motorists changing the tire on the side of the road. The highly publicized Firestone/Ford SUV tire recalls were prompted by tire failures associated with rollover and other crashes.  More than 270 deaths and 800 injuries have occurred in these crashes.

Between July 1999 and March 2002, NHTSA was engaged in a program of global harmonization for light vehicle tire standards and was investigating tire bead unseating as a result of some cases of SUV tires coming off their rims in the agency's 1998-99 and 2001 dynamic rollover test programs.  The fiscal year 2001-2002 tire research programs include testing to support the rulemaking called for in TREAD:  To revise and update the light vehicle tire standards by June 2002.  The agency published the NPRM on March 5, 2002.  Testing includes tire aging and road hazards.  TREAD also mandated improvements in tire labeling to assist consumers in identifying tires that may be the subject of a recall.  NHTSA published an NPRM to upgrade tire labeling in December 2001.  NHTSA also developed and launched a tire consumer information program to help ensure the public is aware of the importance of observing tire load limits and maintaining proper tire inflation levels.

One contributor to tire failure is tire under-inflation.  A NHTSA survey released in August 2001 found that more than one out of four passenger cars, and one out of three light trucks, are driven with one or more substantially under-inflated tires.  Per TREAD requirements, NHTSA conducted rulemaking to be effective in two years requiring tire pressure monitoring systems (TPMS) for significantly under inflated tires. The TPMS NPRM was published July 26, 2001, and the final rule on June 5, 2002.  Agency estimates project that TPMS could prevent up to 79 fatalities and 10,000 injuries each year.  The new standard will be performance based, not design based.  Computer chip and other technologies now exist that can monitor tire inflation and warn the driver of potentially dangerous inflation levels that could contribute to tire failure.

Milestones:

Upgrade Standards and New Labeling Requirements
	Evaluation of comments on NPRM/additional research on tire safety issues for final regulatory action	2002
	Final regulatory action to upgrade FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119	2002
	Final regulatory action to upgrade tire labeling	2002

2. Dynamic Stability Control (DSC) for Light Vehicles

   In cornering maneuvers, drivers may tend to oversteer or understeer which can result in loss-of-control crashes.  Dynamic stability control systems can automatically compensate for these conditions, reducing the likelihood of a loss-of-control crash.  NHTSA will collect statistically significant data from field experience to decide whether to initiate rulemaking.

   Milestones:

   	Conduct research on DSC/ESP technology	2003-2004
   	Complete data collection and research	2004
   	Rulemaking decision	2005

II. Improve the Protection of Occupants

If a crash does occur, the agency strives to reduce the severity and increase the survivability of the event.  This is known as crashworthiness.  Eighty percent of light vehicle occupant fatalities in 2000 were the result of collisions in which the initial crash event was an impact to the front or side of the vehicle.  These types of collisions can be severe enough to threaten the integrity of vehicle structures, in turn compromising the vehicle's ability to protect occupants from fatal and serious injuries. Vehicle structure must be able to manage crash energy to prevent occupant compartment intrusion, ejection of passengers, and injuries from occupant impact with interior surfaces.  Structural crash performance also must be compatible with occupant restraint systems.

NHTSA pursues the goals of crash survivability by encouraging seat belt use; supporting crashworthiness research; conducting compliance testing and defects investigations; conducting research for harmonization of similar standards around the world; providing information to consumers through the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) on how different makes and models compare in safety performance during crash and performance tests; and as outlined below, establishing and keeping up-to-date vehicle safety standards for impact protection.

A. Advanced Dummies

A new generation of air bags and further occupant safety advances require a more advanced family of crash test dummies to accurately measure various crash forces imparted to a range of occupant sizes in different crash situations.  As we expand occupant protection requirements for men, women and children of varying sizes, we will need appropriately sized and instrumented dummies to provide estimates of the severity and extent of injury.  Also, in the future, we will use dummies that measure crash forces to several body parts or locations on particular body parts (head, neck, chest, arm, leg) – not just one or two parts or locations.  Advanced dummies require considerable intensive research and development.

Existing and upcoming dummy activities include:

1. Research development of THOR Alpha, a 50^th percentile male frontal/oblique dummy, was recently completed and made available to the public.

2. We have started using a THOR head/neck retrofit assembly on Hybrid III 50^th and 5^th percentile dummies to measure neck injury potential in an out-of-position environment, and efforts will be made to develop an improved dummy neck for rear impact protection (e.g. BioRID, RID-2).

3. To achieve improvements in dummies for side impact testing, an evaluation program for the ES-2 (Eurosid-2, the update of Eurosid-1) (50^th percentile male) and SIDIIS (5^th percentile female side impact dummy) is underway.  The agency is also closely monitoring the development of the WorldSID, a next generation side impact dummy.

4. Rulemaking action will be completed in mid-2002 on an amendment to the final rule for Hybrid III 6-year-old dummies for use in compliance testing for FMVSS 208.  Final rule amendments incorporating new Hybrid III 3-year-old and CRABI 12-month-old dummies have been issued.

5. NHTSA has begun work to develop a viable larger child dummy (to represent a child up to 10 years old) per the TREAD Act's requirement.  The agency then will consider incorporating a larger child dummy into FMVSS No. 213 (see Section V.A.1).

6. Research for an advanced dummy chest deflection measuring system for advanced frontal and possibly side impact work is complete.  This refinement needs to be evaluated for certification purposes.

Eventually, NHTSA hopes to have advanced dummies that can provide all the information needed to evaluate any number of crash variables.  Significant milestones follow; it should be noted that a critical preliminary subtask for several of these rulemaking projects is a determination of the performance and injury criteria for these dummies.

Milestones:

B.  Improve the Protection of Occupants in Frontal Crashes

This is one of the most active areas of research and rulemaking activity by the agency, involving active (seat belts) and passive (air bags) driver and passenger restraints.  The mandated restraints are designed to protect belted and unbelted vehicle occupants from violent frontal crash forces.  Studies confirm the significant safety benefits of seat belts and air bags – thousands of deaths and injuries prevented annually.  Lap and shoulder seat belts have advanced to react to crashes faster and better protect occupants.  Air bag technology is developing to protect people while minimizing the hazard air bags pose to small or out of position occupants.

The agency recently completed a major upgrade to its air bag standard, FMVSS No. 208.  The May 2000 rule improves the protection afforded both belted and unbelted occupants.  Other recent changes include manual on-off switches for the passenger side air bag for vehicles that have no rear seats or have rear seats too small to accommodate rear facing infant seats.

NHTSA is looking at integrated seats, in which the seat belt is integrated with the seat assembly. They provide improved belt fit and effectiveness and offer promising potential safety benefits.  Other standards in this category include those that limit the rearward movement and impact on the driver's body of the steering wheel and column.  There also is a standard that limits the displacement of vehicle components, such as the hood, into and through the windshield area.  NHTSA plans to publish in 2002 an NPRM requiring longer seat belts or belt extenders for larger occupants.

1. Offset Frontal Protection

   Real world crash statistics indicate that 42 percent of towaway frontal crashes are full-frontal and 56 percent are offset frontal.  Even after all cars and light trucks have frontal air bags, we estimate there still would be 8,000 deaths and 120,000 moderate to critical injuries in frontal crashes each year.

   Many of the injuries are severe leg injuries, which are the result of the different forces offset crashes impart to vehicle occupants than those from full frontal crashes.  More attention is being paid to reducing serious injuries, especially those that lead to life-long disabilities - such as the leg and pelvis injuries more common in offset frontal crashes.   Depending on the assumptions used, a requirement for a frontal offset test requirement could prevent approximately 25,000 serious injuries annually.

   Congress directed NHTSA to develop an offset test to complement our current full frontal test requirements to address frontal crash modes and injuries and fatalities not addressed by current frontal requirements.  NHTSA has initiated a Rulemaking Action Plan (RAP) for offset frontal crash protection, and is evaluating possible requirements for a frontal offset impact test with 50^th percentile and 5^th percentile female dummies and additional injury measures.  An ANPRM Request for Comments on incorporating advanced leg designs (THOR, Denton) into the Hybrid III dummy was published on May 3, 2002.

   Milestones:

   	Testing with THOR advanced leg (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	Test barrier adequacy with light trucks (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	NPRM for offset frontal crash test requirements	2003
   	Final regulatory action for offset frontal crash test requirements	2003-2004

2. Advanced Air Bags

   Older designs of air bags have saved thousands of lives – NHTSA estimates 8,378 as of January 1, 2002. Unfortunately, over the same time span, air bags also have been linked with the deaths of 202 people, most of whom were children. NHTSA must ensure that future air bag designs continue to offer the life-saving benefits, while eliminating the possibility of death in low speed crashes. To achieve these goals, the next generations of air bags will include technology to control when and how they inflate, depending on factors such as the size of occupants and whether they are out of position for safe air bag deployment.  NHTSA is working with the automobile industry on advanced systems research programs.

   In May 2000, NHTSA upgraded the requirements for air bags in passenger cars and light trucks. The upgrade was designed to meet the goals of improving protection for occupants of all sizes, belted and unbelted, in moderate to high speed crashes, and of minimizing the risks posed by air bags to infants, children, and other occupants, especially in low speed crashes.

   The rule also included a requirement that, beginning in 2007, the 50^th percentile adult dummy must meet the injury criteria when subjected to a 35 mph belted rigid barrier crash.  The agency stated that there was insufficient data to incorporate the 5^th percentile female dummy into the 35 mph crash, but that additional testing would be conducted to determine the feasibility of including it.  That testing has now been completed, and preliminary results indicate that it is feasible for vehicles with the belted 5^th percentile female dummy to pass the injury criteria when subjected to a 35 mph rigid barrier crash.  NHTSA incorporated its resolution to initial FMVSS No. 208 petitions for reconsideration in a final rule in December 2001, and anticipates responding to additional petitions in Summer 2002.

   Milestones:

   	Initiate Rulemaking Action Plan (RAP) to incorporate 5th percentile dummy into 35 mph belted test	2002
   	Issue NPRM to incorporate 5th percentile dummy into 35 mph belted test	2002-2003
   	Conduct research to test and evaluate new air bag suppression technology	2002-2005

C.  Improve the Protection of Occupants in Side Crashes

Another way to reduce crash deaths and injuries is to improve the ability of vehicles to protect occupants from side crashes, which killed 9,084 light vehicle occupants and injured 812,000 in 2000.  The side impact protection regulation for passenger cars (FMVSS No. 214) was established in 1990, with compliance phased in between 1994 and 1998, and was extended to light trucks and vans in 1995, with full compliance by 1999.  The agency granted a petition in November 1998 to upgrade the standard to accommodate side air bags.

To improve occupant protection in side crashes for passenger cars and light trucks and vans in both vehicle-to-vehicle and fixed object impacts, NHTSA plans a full upgrade of FMVSS No. 214.  This would include upgrading the standard to address the growing number of light trucks in the U.S. fleet and to include protection against collision with narrow objects, such as poles.  The changes also would address upgraded and harmonized injury criteria and more precise biomechanical knowledge provided by a second generation side impact dummy.  The agency is evaluating any possible harmful effects for in-position and, possibly, for out-of-position occupants.  In addition, NHTSA will pursue rulemaking to amend the test barrier and test dummies and the agency may address enforceability problems with FMVSS No. 214.

1. Upgrade Side Impact Requirements

   Current activity includes further research and evaluation of thoracic and head protection air bag systems and efforts to extend protection against death and injury from side impact with narrow objects, such as poles.  Although narrow object impacts involve eight percent of the occupants involved in side crashes, they account for 19 percent of the fatalities and 16 percent of those seriously injured.  Data over the time frame of 1988-1996 shows that when the relative outcome severity is considered, a vehicle occupant has about three times the likelihood of being seriously injured when involved in a narrow object crash versus a vehicle-to-vehicle crash.

   NHTSA will conclude research on the ES-2 (Eurosid-2, the update of Eurosid-1) dummy and will decide in 2003 whether or not to proceed with rulemaking to incorporate this dummy into FMVSS No. 214.  Real world crash statistics indicate that injuries to vehicle occupants vary with the size of occupant.  A possible additional dummy is the 5^th percentile female side impact dummy, SID-IIs, which is specially designed and equipped for testing side air bag systems.  Concurrent with ES-2 (Eurosid-2) testing, the agency is conducting a test program to establish that the SID-IIs is repeatable and durable in side testing, and is reasonably representative of human responses.

   Milestones:

   	FMVSS No. 214 testing of fleet vehicles (and Office of Research & Development recommendations) regarding possible incorporation of ES-2 (as opposed to SID-H3, or additionally including SID-IIs) into FMVSS No. 214 (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	Real world testing and evaluation of side air bags (vehicle to pole, vehicle to vehicle side crash tests) to support standard upgrade	2002-2003
   	Evaluation and possible modification of the IIHS barrier (begun prior to 2002)	-2003
   	Rulemaking decision on which adult dummies to incorporate into FMVSS No. 214	2002-2003
   	NPRM to upgrade FMVSS No. 214	2003
   	Final regulatory action to federalize side dummies	2004
   	Final regulatory action to upgrade FMVSS No. 214	2004-2005
   Potential Risks from Side Air Bags
   	Evaluate industry standard and assess risks from current side air bag technology (5th percentile dummy; already completed for 3- and 6-year-old dummies) (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	Agency decision on actions needed to address risks of side air bags	2002-2003

D. Improve the Protection of Occupants in Rollover Crashes

There were 276,000 light vehicles (cars, sport utility vehicles [SUVs], light trucks and vans) involved in rollover crashes in 2000.  Rollover crashes cause approximately 10,000 fatalities each year.  Rollover crashes are especially lethal.  The proportion of vehicles that rolled over in fatal crashes (19.1 percent) was nearly four times as high as the proportion in injury crashes and nearly 14 times as high as the proportion in property-damage-only crashes.  NHTSA's crashworthiness efforts to reduce rollover fatalities and injuries have focused on reducing occupant ejections through stronger door latches and improved glazing, and on providing improved roof crush protection and interior padding for occupants.

1. Reduce Occupant Ejections

   According to agency data, ejection is a major cause of death and injury in rollover crashes.  In 2000, 8,847 people were killed and 27,000 were injured when they were ejected from light vehicles, and two-thirds of these ejections occurred during rollovers.  Occupants stand a much better chance of surviving a crash if they are not ejected from their vehicles.  From 1994-1999 data, we estimate that 1,668 people were killed and 1,976 were seriously injured each year when they were ejected out the doors (mostly side-hinged doors) of light passenger vehicles.  Among the promising technological innovations to prevent occupant ejections are the use of side or curtain air bags and improved glazing.  NHTSA submitted a report to Congress on ejection mitigation using advanced glazing materials in November 2001.

   Milestones:

   	Research to address FMVSS No. 206 enforceability issue and test procedure refinement for door latch upgrade (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	Research on ejection countermeasures (begun prior to 2002)	-2002
   	NPRM to upgrade door systems and to resolve an enforceability issue by clarifying the sliding door requirements in FMVSS No. 206	2002
   	Research on ejection mitigation test procedure development	2002
   	Final regulatory action to upgrade door systems	2003
   	Develop ejection mitigation test procedure	2002-2003
   	Rulemaking decision on ejection mitigation in rollovers	2003

2. Upgrade Roof Crush Resistance

   Impact with the roof causes severe head and neck injuries to vehicle occupants during rollover crashes.  NHTSA, based on analysis of its data, estimates that roof crush intrusion occurs, and potentially contributes to serious or fatal occupant injury, in about 26 percent (7,000 of the 26,000) of rollover crashes.  Whereas unbelted occupants in rollover crashes are primarily injured by ejection from the vehicle, which is fatal in about half the cases, in contrast, belted occupants in rollover crashes usually receive their most severe injury by contacting the roof structure.  FMVSS No. 216 establishes strength requirements/intrusion limits for passenger car and light truck roofs for protection in rollover crashes.  A request for comments on this subject was published in October 2001.

   Milestones:

   	Research to perform test procedures on vehicles	2002
   	NPRM to upgrade FMVSS No. 216 test procedure	2003
   	Final regulatory action to upgrade FMVSS No. 216	2004

E. Improve the Protection of Occupants in Rear Crashes

Crashes in which one vehicle collides into the rear of a vehicle in front of it accounted for almost 30 percent of crashes in 2000, causing an estimated 1,600 deaths and 727,000 injuries.  NHTSA plans several rulemaking actions over the next five years to attack this problem on three fronts:  to help drivers avoid such crashes (see Section I.D.1.), to protect vehicle occupants from the effects of crash forces if a crash does occur, and to enhance fuel systems to reduce the additional hazard of fire from such crashes.

1. Improve Rear Impact Occupant Protection

   NHTSA estimates that 272,088 whiplash injuries result from rear impact collisions each year. Although whiplash injuries may be of a relatively minor severity, they entail large societal costs.  To reduce the frequency and severity of neck injuries in rear-end and other collisions, the agency plans to strengthen the standards for head restraints and for seats and their attachment and installation.  The agency published in January 2001 an NPRM to upgrade the head restraint standard, FMVSS No. 202.

   Milestones:

   Head Restraints
   	Research/fine-tune testing on FMVSS No. 202 upgrade	2002
   	Final regulatory action to upgrade FMVSS No. 202 and make it more consistent with the European standard	2003
   Strengthen Seat Backs
   	Conduct research, including sled tests and work on rear impact test procedure (and possibly additional modeling),on improved seat structures	2002
   	NPRM for FMVSS No. 207 upgrade	2003
   	Final regulatory action for FMVSS No. 207 upgrade	2004
   Improve Dummy Necks
   	Research on neck injury, research and development of an improved dummy to accurately measure rear impact forces and injuries  (also, see section II.A.) (begun prior to 2002)	-2005
   	Rulemaking decision on dummy with improved neck	2005

2. Improve Fuel System Integrity and Reduce Fire Risk

   Fire in a crash is often associated with a breach in the integrity of a vehicle's fuel system.  Although relatively infrequent, vehicle fires can have devastating consequences on fatalities and injuries.  Although fire occurred in only 0.2 percent of the vehicles involved in traffic crashes in 2000, the occurrence of fire in fatal crashes rose to 3 percent.  In 2000, fire occurred in an estimated 14,000 light motor vehicle crashes, including 1,340 light vehicle fatal crashes and an estimated 3,000 light vehicle nonfatal injury crashes.  NHTSA has several standards to address post-crash fire hazards.  One standard specifies requirements for vehicle fuel system integrity to prevent fires by limiting gasoline spillage, and also has provisions to prevent ingestion of fuel during siphoning.  Two standards specify requirements for the integrity of compressed natural gas fuel systems and containers.  Another rule specifies the burn resistance requirements for materials used in vehicle occupant compartments to reduce the incidence of fires from sources such as matches and cigarettes.  A new standard, FMVSS No. 305, regulating electric vehicle crash safety, was published on September 27, 2000.

   Milestones:

   Final regulatory action to upgrade FMVSS No. 301 by improving fuel tank integrity

   2002

III. Address Incompatibility Between Passenger Cars and Light Trucks  

For decades, the light vehicle category consisted primarily of automobiles.  The growing popularity over the past 10 years of light trucks, vans, and utility vehicles (LTVs) has changed the marketplace as well as the safety picture.  LTV sales continue to soar with more than 7,252,800 units being sold in 2001.  By the end of 2000, the number of registered LTVs in the United States exceeded 76 million units or approximately 35 percent of registered motor vehicles in the U.S.  The majority of LTVs are used as private passenger vehicles and the number of miles logged in them increased 26 percent between 1995 and 2000, and 70 percent between 1990 and 2000.

LTV occupant fatalities and injuries have risen sharply, and the larger size of LTVs versus passenger automobiles, and recent studies of crash data, have raised a number of other issues of concern.  In the crash avoidance area, there are the problems of blocked vision of passenger car and motorcycle drivers due to the higher profile of LTVs and glare due to higher mounted headlamps on LTVs.  In the crashworthiness area, there is concern that the protection of occupants in smaller vehicles is being compromised when their vehicles collide with the larger and heavier LTVs.  As the trend toward greater private passenger use of light trucks continues, the agency has continued to extend pertinent passenger car standards to LTVs, and it expects to continue to apply passenger car standards to LTVs.

1. Learn the Extent of the Aggressivity and Incompatibility Problem and Potential Solutions 

   While no specific rulemaking plans have been made, NHTSA has initiated a research program to investigate the problem of vehicle aggressivity and incompatibility in multi-vehicle crashes and in causing single or multiple vehicle crashes of other vehicles.  The objective of this program is to explore the potential for reducing injuries by eliminating incompatibilities, both structural and geometric, between passenger vehicles and their potential collision partners.  The focus is to identify and characterize compatible vehicle designs with the goal of significantly reducing crash related injuries.

   The research program also will explore the potential for harmonization of research and proposed compatibility test procedures.  The program will develop a global safety systems optimization model, a large scale systems model, which will evaluate vehicle crashworthiness based on the safety performance of the vehicle when exposed to the entire traffic accident environment (i.e., across the full spectrum of expected collision partners, collision speeds, occupant heights, occupant ages, and occupant injury tolerance levels).  The program's near term goal is to identify and demonstrate:  a) the extent of the incompatibility problem through crash statistics and crash test data; b) crash causation; and c) compatible vehicle designs.

   Milestones:

   	Research, including developing systems models and conducting crash testing, to improve understanding of vehicle incompatibility and aggressivity.  Crash testing will focus both on frontal-frontal tests and front-side tests, and will be used to develop a test procedure for identifying aggressive vehicles (begun prior to 2002)	-2004
   	Rulemaking decision (also see Section I.C.1)	2002

IV. Make Heavy Trucks Safer

Heavy trucks were involved in approximately 457,000 crashes in 2000.  These crashes resulted in 5,211 fatalities and 140,000 injuries:  86 percent of those killed and 78 percent of those injured were the occupants of other (light) vehicles, pedestrians or bicyclists.  Both vehicle performance and driver/vehicle interaction can be significant factors in these crashes.  Among these factors are insufficient braking capability, loss of control, driver fatigue and poor visibility.  Safety defects in heavy trucks also contribute to crash injuries and fatalities.  The involvement rate of large trucks in fatal crashes per 100 million miles of truck travel has declined from 3.3 in 1990 to 2.4 in 2000.

1. Shorten Stopping Distances and Improve Braking

   Heavy trucks have longer stopping distances than light vehicles, increasing the chance of collisions in panic stopping situations.  Truck brake performance has been identified as a major factor contributing to crashes involving large trucks.

   Electronic controlled braking systems (ECBS) offer many potential benefits to the trucking industry in the areas of safety, reliability, enhanced driver feedback, and maintainability for heavy air-braked vehicles.  ECBS are being tested by the Department and a number of manufacturers under the IVI program.  These systems are intended to replace the current pneumatic brake application signal with an electronic actuation signal.

   The major issue facing NHTSA is identifying what performance requirements should be established in FMVSS No. 121 to ensure a minimum requirement for stopping capabilities and fail-safe performance.  As part of this effort, the agency is conducting test track evaluations and operational (fleet test) evaluations on ECBS-equipped vehicles.  One promising method to shorten truck stopping distances may be through disc air brakes with electronic control.  Stopping distances could be reduced by as much as 30 percent through the use of disc brakes and more powerful front axle brakes, in conjunction with ECBS.  In the nearer term, rulemaking revisions to FMVSS No. 121 include final regulatory action identifying performance requirements for ABS on straight trucks/buses.

   NHTSA also will look at increasing foundation brake capacity and improving tractor-trailer brake compatibility.  NHTSA also hopes to pursue rulemaking to improve heavy truck tire performance, including upgrading the requirements for FMVSS No. 119 and requiring the use of TPMS on commercial vehicles over 10,000 GVWR.  The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that NHTSA assess the safety benefits of adding traction control to antilock brake systems.  NHTSA is conducting related research on this recommendation.

   Milestones:

   	Conduct disc brake research, ECBS research on test track and fleet evaluations  (begun prior to 2002)	-2003
   	Final regulatory action on ABS performance requirements on straight trucks/buses	2002
   	Rulemaking decision, based on research outcome, on whether to establish requirements for ECBS and fail-safe performance	2003
   	Rulemaking decision, based on research outcome, on whether to establish requirements for shorter stopping distances	2003

2. Reduce Heavy Vehicle Tire Failures

   Heat buildup is the primary cause of tire failure.  Heat buildup in tires may result from under-inflation, overloading, high speed operation, sub-par tire design, or a combination of these factors.  Also, vehicles operating with low tire air pressure have reduced handling capability and fuel economy.  Computer chip technology now exists that can monitor tire inflation and warn the driver of impending tire failure.  Some of the advances in reducing tire failures on heavy trucks have begun and will continue to appear in passenger car tires.  NHTSA will report to Congress on the current status of blowout resistant tires.  Blowout resistant tires may be self-sealing or even use self-filling technology to counter slow leaks.

   Milestones:

   	NPRM to upgrade requirements for heavy truck tires	2003
   	Rulemaking decision on tire pressure warning systems based on data collection and other research into the problem	2003-2004

3. Drowsy Driver Sensing System

   NHTSA has been conducting advanced engineering development to develop a sensor for a warning system to alert drivers before they fall asleep.  The purpose of this system is to reduce the more than 100,000 injuries and deaths associated with drowsiness involving both commercial and passenger vehicles.  NHTSA data suggests that approximately 100,000 crashes per year, including 1,357 fatal crashes and approximately 71,000 injury crashes, involved drowsiness.  Drivers are often unaware of their deteriorating condition or, even when they are aware, are often motivated to keep driving.  A drowsiness detection and warning system can help reduce alertness-related crashes by helping to maintain alertness until it is safe to stop and rest.

   Drowsiness is named as the top driving problem at trucking summit meetings.  Although the vast majority (95.9%) of drowsy driver crashes involved drivers of passenger vehicles, drowsiness played a role in a disproportionally high number of truck crashes.  In addition, the role of drowsiness in crashes may be largely underestimated due to unreported off-roadway crashes, police inability to verify drowsiness, and driver reporting error.  In addition to the milestones below for heavy truck drowsy driver sensing systems, NHTSA plans to make a rulemaking decision on establishing performance specification requirements for such a system for light vehicles, possibly by the outer time frame of this plan.

   Milestones:

   	Research to develop and field test drowsy driver sensing systems (begun prior to 2002)	-2003
   	Rulemaking decision: performance specification requirements for heavy trucks	2005

V. Protect Special Populations

A.  Children

Five hundred and twenty-nine children under the age of five died and 67,000 were injured as occupants in light vehicle crashes in 2000.  (Another 464 children from the age of five to nine were killed and 81,000 were injured in light vehicle crashes.)  Research shows that child safety seats, when used correctly, can reduce fatalities among children less than five years old by 71 percent. That makes child safety seats one of the most effective safety innovations ever developed.  As more new vehicles with dual air bags enter the market, there are increased concerns about children who are riding unrestrained, incorrectly restrained, or in rear-facing child seats in front of an air bag.  Use of child restraints is now required in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.  Data indicate that the combination of high-quality child restraints and the increased use of these restraints as a result of mandatory usage laws has significantly reduced the risk of child fatality in motor vehicle crashes.  In 2000, an estimated 316 children under age five were saved as a result of child restraint use.

NHTSA published a new rule in 1999 that requires motor vehicles and add-on child restraints be equipped with a means independent of vehicle safety belts for securing the child restraints to vehicle seats.  These universal child restraint anchorage systems, Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH) for attaching child seats to the vehicle are expected to significantly reduce deaths and injuries to infants and toddlers from improperly installed child safety seats.  Dynamic side impact test research is continuing for standards for child restraint systems to protect children during side impacts, and in response to continuing development and utilization of side air bags.

1. Upgrade Child Restraint Requirements

   To improve the protection of children in crashes, NHTSA plans to upgrade FMVSS No. 213.  The changes will address a number of areas, including use of improved test devices with upgraded biofidelity, development of a bench seat fixture that is more representative of the seat geometry for the current vehicle fleet, and development of standards for child restraint systems to protect children during side impacts.  NHTSA drafted a Child Restraint Plan, consolidating many of the agency's objectives for child restraints, but the 2000 TREAD legislation overtook that plan and mandates many of the activities discussed in the plan.  Under TREAD, NHTSA must improve child restraint safety, including minimizing head injuries from side impact collisions, and examine whether to require improved protection in side and rear crashes.  TREAD also mandates a child restraint rating program and a determination whether to add child restraint systems (CRS) to NCAP testing.

   Among actions already taken to meet TREAD requirements:  analyzed real-world data on number, severity, body region, and type of injuries to children by age, restraint type, and impact mode (side, rear) (August 2001); performed frontal sled tests and evaluated HIII dummies and compared them to HII dummies (August 2001); decided to temporarily use weighted existing 6-year-old dummy to represent larger children (10-years-old, up to 62 pounds) (August 2001); conducted component and sled tests to evaluate HIII 6-year-old weighted dummies (November 2001, though more testing may be necessary); published notice on improved CRS labels and instructions (November 2001); published a notice on a CRS rating system (November 2001), and finalized HIII 10-year-old dummy design and construction (December 2001).

   An NPRM on FMVSS No. 213 was published in May 2002.  It proposes a number of revisions to the federal safety standard for child restraint systems, including proposals for incorporating improved test dummies and updated procedures used to test child restraints, new or revised injury criteria to assess the dynamic performance of child restraints, and extension of the standard to apply it to child restraints recommended for use by children up to 65 pounds. This action is intended to make child restraints even more effective in protecting children from the risk of death or serious injury in motor vehicle crashes. This proposal was issued in response to the TREAD Act, which directed NHTSA to initiate a rulemaking proceeding for the purpose of improving the safety of child restraints.

   An Office of Research and Development report to Congress on booster seats also is in the final approval process.

   Milestones:

   Upgrade FMVSS No. 213
   	Final regulatory action on improved CRS labels and instructions	2002
   	Additional side impact tests to validate CRS performance	2002
   	Final regulatory action on FMVSS No. 213 CRS upgrade, including improved side impact protection	2002
   	Report to Congress on FMVSS No. 213 issues not incorporated in the 2002 final regulatory action	2002
   Improved Child Dummies (most related to FMVSS No. 213 Upgrade)		2002
   	Research for developing and evaluating child side impact dummies (begun prior to 2002)
   	Rulemaking decision on which child dummies to incorporate into FMVSS No. 213	2002-2003
   	Complete preliminary evaluation of HIII 10-year-old dummy in belts and boosters	2002
   	NPRM on  HIII 10-year-old dummy	2003
   	Final regulatory action on HIII 10-year-old dummy	2004
   CRS Rating System
   	Evaluate results of frontal NCAP testing and initiate side testing with CRS	2002
   	Final regulatory action announcing CRS rating system	2002
   FMVSS No. 225
   	Final regulatory action response to petitions for reconsideration to FMVSS 225, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems	2002

2. Improve School Bus Safety

   The safety record for school bus transportation exceeds that of all other modes of travel.  Each school day, 440,000 school buses transport 25 million children.  Each year, school bus crashes kill an average of nine occupants and 22 pedestrians and cause 8,500 injuries (350 of which are classified as severe or above).  In 2000, 20 school bus occupants died and 10,000 were injured in school bus crashes, and another 25 pedestrians were killed when struck by a school bus.  NHTSA continues to search for effective ways to prevent these tragedies and to make school bus travel even safer.  NHTSA has several standards relating to school bus safety.

   Recent amendments to the school bus standards improve traffic control warning devices and emergency exits, and the agency has developed new rules for securing wheelchairs in school buses.  The NTSB has recommended that NHTSA evaluate occupant restraint systems, including those presently required for small school buses, and add requirements based its evaluation.  In 1998, NHTSA developed a test plan for the next generation of school bus occupant protection, including testing various school bus child restraints so it could finalize its proposed guidelines on how to transport preschool-aged children on buses.  NHTSA will decide on the next actions for this program based on the program's recently completed frontal and side crash test results.  NHTSA also will consider another NTSB recommendation to revise FMVSS No. 208 to require lap shoulder belt systems in all new buses (including school buses).   NHTSA will provide a final report to Congress in 2002 on the next generation of school bus occupant protection.

   Milestones:

   Occupant Protection
   	Develop test procedures for upgraded FMVSS No. 222 occupant protection	2002
   	NPRM for FMVSS No. 222 occupant protection upgrades	2003
   	Investigate means for restraining Pre-K children in child seats on school buses; includes the performance of the universal attachment system and the feasibility of a tether in school buses	2004
   	Final regulatory action on FMVSS No. 222 occupant protection upgrades	2004
   	Rulemaking decisions relating to the sidewall padding requirements under FMVSS No. 222	2004

B. People with Disabilities

NHTSA works to assure motor vehicle safety for persons with disabilities without hindering their access to personal transportation.  A final rule exempting businesses that modify vehicles to accommodate people with disabilities from the agency's "make inoperative" prohibitions was published in February 2001.  Also, we have produced and distributed a consumer brochure, Adapting Motor Vehicles for Persons with Disabilities, about adaptive equipment and modified vehicles.

1. Lifts in Vehicles

   NHTSA is working on two rules to establish performance standards for platform lifts and for vehicles equipped with lifts to protect this small but vulnerable population.  Based on incomplete information, we estimate that at least 1,366 people were injured in lift-related incidents in 1991-1995.  The regulation, applicable to all motor vehicles, would prevent deaths and injuries associated with the use of platform lifts for people with disabilities.   An SNPRM was published in July 2000.

   Milestones:

   Final regulatory actions establishing lift performance requirements

   2002

C.  Older Population

The nation's population of older adults - those more than 65 years old - will grow by more than 50 percent between now and 2020.  By 2030, we will have twice the number of older drivers that we now have.  Studies have predicted substantial problems if we fail to take adequate steps to meet the transportation needs of our changing population.  At current crash rates, the number of fatalities involving older drivers in 2030 could be three to four times the 1995 rate.  A portent of the future is that older drivers, though involved in relatively few crashes (due to factors such as driving fewer miles), have a statistically high risk of crashes when they do drive - and older drivers are driving more each year.  Although societal fatality rates have been declining for several years, older drivers and vehicle occupants are dying at alarmingly increasing rates.  Light vehicle occupants age 65 and up suffered 5,381 fatalities and 241,000 non-fatal injuries in 2000.  Older drivers can experience slowed reaction times, greater sensitivity to glare, a narrowed field of view, and difficulty noticing all the critical objects in their visual field.  Also, physical frailty contributes to older persons' over-representation in fatal and severe occupant injury rates.

Aside from pursuing training and educational efforts, NHTSA is conducting and evaluating research on several fronts to use advanced in-vehicle technologies to help older drivers meet their driving needs while preserving their transportation mobility freedom and convenience.  (Some of these technologies are being developed under the Department of Transportation's Intelligent Transportation Systems program.)  These technologies include collision warnings, near-object detection systems while backing and changing lanes, night vision enhancement, and route guidance.  Later possible advances include intelligent cruise control and forward collision avoidance systems.  The success and practicality of these systems will depend in large measure on designing them to help drivers with special needs without distracting or confusing them.  In addition, efforts will be made to make automobiles safer for fragile occupants.  The crash dummies the agency uses are sufficiently precisely instrumented to account for the frailer skeletal structures of older people, and the agency has and will continue to adjust the injury criteria it uses to better represent older people.

A cross-agency working group was formed in 1999 to focus on older drivers and passengers.  As an adjunct to the activities being planned by that group, NHTSA will conduct surveys and research to identify problems specific to older drivers and occupants of motor vehicles.  Candidate issues to be explored include:  nighttime lighting and glare, controls and displays, vehicle features that create distractions to driving tasks, adequacy of mirrors, and comfort and convenience of safety belts.  Following this activity, rulemaking plans will be developed, and the Office of Safety Performance Standards will track technological developments in the auto industry that are designed for and marketed to the older driver.  In addition, a data analysis study will be conducted once enough cars are on the road that have these features to see if they are producing lower crash or injury rates.

In general, all rulemaking activities will consider the special needs of older drivers and occupants.  However, certain areas have a special benefit for the older population.  Recognizing that the general population also would benefit from these improvements in vehicle safety, there are some actions that specifically address certain safety issues for the older population.  Two such areas are:

Driver Vision

As people age, they become more susceptible to glare.  Glare from headlamps or auxiliary lamps may exacerbate problems seniors have seeing well at night.  Also, although daytime running lamps (DRLs) improve a driver's ability to notice other vehicles and thereby avoid collisions, many consumers, especially older individuals, have complained of glare from DRLs.  (For additional discussion on glare reduction see section I.C.)

Braking

Drivers do not always apply the brakes fully when faced with potential crash situations. Brake Assist can be used to automatically increase the brake gain during the initiation of a panic stop to take full advantage of vehicle braking capability.  This technology may be of special benefit to older drivers in terms of the physical requirements of the braking action.  Work in this area will start toward the latter part of the period covered by this plan.

VI. Appendix A:  Other Active Areas, 2002-2005

This appendix discusses several additional regulatory activities, particularly regulatory-related research activities, that may extend beyond the four-year horizon of this document.  Although important regulatory (and potential regulatory) goals, these projects do not rise to the same level of immediate high priority as the activities included in the main body of this report.

Vision Enhancement

The future of indirect vision equipment – aids to help drivers sense the presence of nearby vehicles, pedestrians or objects – includes everything from basic mirrors to advanced technology devices that use non-vision sensing systems (sonar, radar, e.g.) or real-time video cameras and screens.  They play useful roles when traveling forward, backward, and changing lanes – on roadways and off  (parking lots, garages, driveways, and commercial yards, e.g.).  Side view mirrors can be flat, convex or a combination, and although they can provide an excellent extension of a driver's visibility, a disturbingly large percentage of light vehicle drivers do not use them because they do not like the way they reproduce images.  Both industry and the public have strong interest in expanded choices for mirror designs and performance.  The technology that emerges as the future choice for indirect vision will have to prove itself to be sufficiently user friendly and effective, and agency efforts with indirect vision will focus on human factors research and failsafe issues to find the best choice.  Agency efforts in electronically enhanced vision will emphasize a systems-approach.  We anticipate publishing a request for comments in mid-2002, conducting research regarding problem definition, safety issues, and potential solutions, and initiating rulemaking to implement these solutions from 2003-2005.

Anti-Lock Brakes (ABS) on Light Vehicles

Test track studies evaluating the effectiveness of ABS have shown it to be an advantageous safety device. For varying pavement conditions, ABS allows the driver to maintain steering control of the vehicle while braking even during extreme panic stop conditions.  It had been predicted that ABS could prevent numerous crashes, assuming drivers knew how to use the systems.  However, statistical analyses of real-world collision databases suggest that the introduction of ABS does not reduce the number of automobile crashes where it was thought ABS would have proved most effective. Crash studies show increased involvement of ABS-equipped vehicles in single-vehicle crashes and less involvement in multi-vehicle crashes. Specifically the increase has been in single-vehicle run-off-road crashes such as rollovers or impacts with fixed objects. NHTSA's research project will attempt to determine why ABS does not appear to be effective in reducing all types of crashes.  It also will work toward harmonizing FMVSS 135 with the European standard over the next two years.

Integrated Seats

Advanced seating and belt designs and systems present significant safety benefits in frontal as well as other crashes.  Some newer seat belts have adjustable upper belts that let occupants change the position of the shoulder strap to accommodate their size.  Seat belt pretensioners retract the seat belt to remove excess slack, almost instantly, in a crash.  Energy management features allow seat belts to yield during a severe crash to prevent forces on the shoulder belt from concentrating too much energy on the chest.  These features include load limiters built into the shoulder belt retractor and/or tear stitching in the webbing that causes the seat belt to extend gradually.

Integrated seat belt systems mount the entire seat belt system directly to the seat, rather than to the floor or pillar. This allows the seat belt to move with the occupant when they move the seat.  Integrated systems provide a more consistent and comfortable fit and are intended to more effectively hold occupants in their seats during a crash.  Integrated seat belt systems also allow for easier vehicle manufacturing since the entire seat and seat belt structure can be installed in a single manufacturing step.  After conducting research on integrated seats, we plan a rulemaking decision on the next steps for FMVSS No. 207, Seating Systems, and FMVSS No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages, to accommodate improved seat designs such as integrated seats, as well as to address a related enforceability issue, in 2004.

Improve Motorcycle Safety

The most common danger associated with motorcycles is head injury (and associated death).  In 2000, 2,862 motorcycle drivers and passengers died and 58,000 were injured (15.3% and 16% increases, respectively, over the previous year), and approximately half of those killed were not wearing helmets.  Motorcycle helmet use has been the most effective countermeasure in the effort to reduce these injuries and deaths – NHTSA estimated that in 1995, helmets saved more than 500 lives.  While other programs within NHTSA aim to increase helmet use, the agency's regulation, FMVSS No. 218, makes sure that helmets are as safe and effective as possible.  The last update to the motorcycle helmet standard in 1988 extended its test requirements to all helmet sizes and established improved helmet test procedures.  Pending further analysis of data regarding the extent of the safety need and the preferred approach, NHTSA may publish an NPRM to upgrade the protection requirements for FMVSS No. 218 in 2002.

The agency is considering undertaking a crash data collection effort that is jointly funded by the Offices of Traffic Safety Programs, Research and Development, and Safety Performance Standards.  Various issues are being brought to the agency by means of petitions for rulemaking, interpretations and letters requesting action regarding motorcycle designs and associated injuries.  To respond to these requests (and to contribute to the international effort to further the state of knowledge of motorcycle safety), we need research to assess literature to determine injury types and severity and to relate them to motorcycle design and operation.  To evaluate motorcycle braking standards, NHTSA will research and collect crash data and literature.  Then, the agency will initiate rulemaking to update the standards.  NHTSA published a final rule to reduce the minimum hand lever and foot pedal force for fade and water recovery tests in August 2001.

Underride Protection for Single Unit Trucks

Many heavy truck crashes involve car-into-truck rear underride crashes, especially at night, which occur due to the car driver's inability to see the truck ahead until immediately prior to impact.  Because of the truck's mass and geometry, the occupant compartment of a passenger car can be penetrated and severely damaged by the truck frame.  Aside from crash avoidance improvements in vehicle braking, steering characteristics, and conspicuity, NHTSA also has enacted crashworthiness rules to improve underride protection.

NHTSA has two standards that require and regulate rear impact guards for truck trailers and semi-trailers, but single unit trucks are exempted from these requirements.  The agency conducts ongoing efforts to collect reliable data to support a regulatory decision to end or not end the exemption.  One potential way to address the problem of vehicle crashes into the rear of single unit trucks could be to prevent such crashes from occurring.  The agency might find that increasing truck conspicuity is a cost-effective method of preventing rear crashes involving single unit trucks and therefore work to extend the requirements of reflective devices from trailer trucks to single unit trucks.  Agency milestones include problem identification/data analysis, a feasibility study of alternative countermeasures, and testing and research on countermeasure effectiveness and development.  A rulemaking decision is planned for 2003.

Address Motorcoach Safety Issues

The crash of a motorcoach in Canada that killed four U.S. school children has raised Congressional interest in motorcoach safety.  On average, motorcoach crashes cause 10 deaths annually.  In the 1990s, 20 of 46 motorcoach crashes involved rollover, and occupant ejection was a significant cause of death.  NHTSA has met with the motorcoach industry and held a public meeting in April 2002 with Transport Canada to explore motorcoach safety.  It also is examining safety recommendations made by the NTSB.  Among the potential issues explored at the public meeting were emergency evacuation and window glazing, improved braking and rollover stability control, occupant protection, roof crush improvements and advanced restraint systems.  NHTSA plans research on motorcoach safety issues in 2003, followed by an NPRM on motorcoach windows to amend FMVSS No. 217 in 2004, with final regulatory action in 2005.

Pedestrian Protection

In 2000, 4,739 pedestrians died and 78,000 were injured in traffic crashes, representing two percent of all traffic crash injuries and 11 percent of traffic fatalities.  The International Harmonization Research Activity (IHRA) pedestrian working group is developing harmonized test procedures for adult and child head impact and adult leg injury.  The head impact work should be ready by 2003 for consideration by the U.N. WP29 GRSP Committee as a global regulation under the 1998 U.N. agreement.  As pressure for pedestrian protection builds in Europe and Japan, NHTSA will continue to monitor developments in this area.

VII. Appendix B:  New Vehicle Safety Information for Consumers

NHTSA's public information and education activities are crucial components in its efforts to improve safety on the nation's highways.  The agency spends and distributes to partners considerable resources to educate the public about safe highway behavior, such as using restraints properly and not driving when impaired by alcohol or drugs.

An effective way to help consumers enhance the market for safety is to provide them with more comparative vehicle safety information, including crash test ratings and available safety features.  Increasingly, consumers are demanding such information and are basing their purchasing decisions on it.  Their choices, in turn, affect the extent and speed with which manufacturers incorporate new safety features and improved safety performance into their vehicles.  NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) provides the public with comparative vehicle safety information, and the number of visits to the popular NCAP section of the NHTSA website has increased to 50,000 per week.

The NHTSA carries out considerable outreach efforts to partner private sector organizations and companies to provide vehicle safety information to the public and to enhance the market for safety.  The agency produces and distributes brochures including:  Buying a Safer Car, which includes comparative (NCAP) ratings and safety features by vehicle make/model; Buying a Safer Car for Child Passengers; and Adapting Motor Vehicles for Persons with Disabilities.

NCAP frontal and side impact ratings programs provide crucial information to consumers about the relative crashworthiness of light vehicles.  NCAP conducted a total of 107 frontal and side tests in FY2001.  It is hoped that in FY 2002, frontal and side impact testing of 99 passenger vehicles will cover more than 80 percent of new vehicles for these most common crash modes.

The 2001 program included new NCAP ratings for rollover resistance (based on the static stability factor initially), completion of test protocol development for light vehicle brake performance information, and developmental work for establishing headlighting ratings.  In addition, the 2000 TREAD legislation required NHTSA to initiate rulemaking to improve the safety of child restraint systems (CRS).  NHTSA has evaluated whether to include child restraints in vehicles crashed in NCAP tests.  The agency published a notice in November 2001 on possible approaches for a child set rating program.  TREAD also requires NHTSA to develop a dynamic rollover consumer information program that is to begin by November 2002.

Generally, the milestones in this section of the rulemaking plan relate to public information activities and therefore differ from milestones elsewhere in this plan that relate to FMVSS rulemaking activities.

1. Consumer Information on Child Restraints

   NHTSA's strategy to protect children includes encouraging the use of child restraint systems (CRS), ensuring restraints provide optimal protection, and providing consumers with useful information on restraining their children.  At least 80 percent of child restraints are used incorrectly.  The TREAD Act of 2000 contains provisions to help consumers best use child restraints to protect their children.  One provision requires a consumer information program on the physical compatibility of child restraints and vehicles seats on a model-by-model basis.  Another provision mandates a review of CRS labels and instructions.  Other provisions require the agency to consider placing child restraints in vehicles NHTSA crash tests for NCAP and to establish a child restraint safety rating consumer information program.  NHTSA now posts CRS installation and use information on its web site.  NHTSA conducted and evaluated sled tests in 2001 and published a notice on a CRS rating system in November 2001 (See section V.A.1 for more on child restraints.)

   Milestones:

   	Final notice announcing CRS rating system	2002
   	Initiate CRS ratings program	2002

2. Consumer Information on Light Vehicle Rollover

   As part of its effort to use a common sense approach to focus on the highest safety risks through, among other tools,  risk-based management, NHTSA began in 2001 to publish ratings on the resistance to rollover of model year 2001 light vehicles.  There are approximately 276,000 light vehicles (cars, sport utility vehicles [SUVs], light trucks and vans) involved in rollover crashes resulting in approximately 10,000 fatalities each year.  Over 60 percent of SUV fatalities occur in rollover crashes. Agency data indicate that light trucks are more likely than automobiles to be involved in single vehicle crashes and rollovers.  Utility vehicles had the highest rollover involvement rate of any vehicle type in fatal crashes in 2000 – 36 percent, compared to 24 percent for pickups, 19 percent for vans, and 15 percent for passenger cars.  SUVs also had the highest rollover involvement rates in injury and property-damage-only crashes.  Less than 5 percent of rollovers are on-road "untripped" rollovers caused by driving maneuvers, but about 95 percent of rollover crashes are "tripped" rollovers, which result from hitting a curb or object.

   In December 1998, NHTSA decided to develop consumer information on rollover resistance as an addition to the existing New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).  Based on driving maneuver (dynamic) tests conducted in 1997-98 and published in 1999, NHTSA decided to use the static stability factor (SSF) measure (the relationship between a vehicle's center of gravity height and the width of its wheel track) as the measure of rollover resistance.  This decision was made for a number of reasons: the SSF is a good measure for both tripped and untripped rollover; the SSF is highly correlated with actual crash statistics; the SSF has the least potential for unintended consequences; and the SSF can be measured accurately and explained to consumers.

   NHTSA published a Request for Comments in June 2000 on the SSF as the basis for a 5-star rating program on the rollover resistance of light vehicles.  In the conference report on the FY2001 Department of Transportation Appropriation Act, Congress permitted NHTSA to proceed with the rollover rating proposal while calling for another study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to assess the viability of the SSF as a measurement tool and to compare it to dynamic rollover resistance measures.  The NAS study, which NHTSA received on February 20, 2002, concluded that the SSF was a valid measure but recommended dynamic rollover ratings as a valuable supplement to the SSF.  NHTSA provided its comments to Congress on the NAS report on March 25, 2002.

   In an additional development, the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act directs NHTSA to develop a dynamic test to rate light vehicle rollover resistance, and to carry out such tests by November 2002 and disseminate the results to the public.  The agency began extensive research in April 2001 in support of TREAD, published a Request for Comments in July 2001, and completed the Office of Research and Development Phase I research in November 2001.

   Milestones:

   	Research on on-road untripped rollover	2002
   	Measure static stability factor and publish results	2002+
   	Publish notice requesting comments on a recommended dynamic test procedure and rating system	2002
   	Publish final notice responding to public comments on dynamic rollover consumer information program	2002
   	Initiate dynamic test-based ratings program	2002

3. Consumer Information on Braking Performance

   NHTSA has been conducting vehicle braking and consumer focus group testing to identify a test protocol for providing consumers with comparative brake performance information, similar to NCAP, for light vehicles.  The program, which includes measurements for stopping distance and ABS performance at speeds of 60 mph on different road surfaces, has the potential to improve vehicle brake performance through market forces.  A Request for Comments on the braking NCAP test procedure was published July 17, 2001.

   If successful tests can be developed, program vehicles from the NCAP static and dynamic rollover tests would be evaluated for braking performance.  A library of test results would provide comparison information for similar models of vehicles within a vehicle category and also highlight differences between major categories of light vehicles.

   Milestones:

   	Protocol refinement and testing	2002-2003
   	Conduct development tests	2002-2003
   	Implement ratings program beginning with model year 2003 vehicles	2002-2003
   	Analysis of testing data	2002-2003
   	Provide ratings information to consumers starting with model year 2004 vehicles	2003

4. Consumer Information on Light Vehicle Headlighting Performance

   NHTSA hopes to establish a headlighting NCAP-type system to provide consumers with information that will influence a safer vehicle purchase.  NHTSA believes that the roadway illumination and glare performance of the lower and upper beams should be rated relative to their compliance robustness and the consumer pleasing aspects of the resultant illumination.  If the agency proceeds with this program, it hopes to progress in time to collect and publish MY 2004 data.

   Milestones:

   	Protocol development, testing, and test data analysis	2003
   	Decision on whether to provide headlighting ratings, pending results of testing	2003

VIII. Appendix C:  Regulatory Review Plan Description

The Regulatory Review Plan was developed in 2002.  On a seven year cycle, each FMVSS is subjected to the following assessment components to determine the need to update and/or upgrade the standard.

1. Safety Problem Assessment - NHTSA databases and other data are explored to identify safety problems that could be addressed through revised performance requirements for vehicle systems.  Sources may include FARS, NASS, GES, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, and Office of Defects Investigation data, and other sources such as manufacturer data and technical reports.

2. Other Societal Factors - A listing is included of other societal factors that might influence the need to amend a FMVSS or develop a new FMVSS.   Factors may include:  demographics (e.g. growth in certain population groups such as older drivers and passengers), societal values (e.g. protection of children), or vehicle safety problems in certain areas of the country (e.g. low speed vehicles)

3. Technology, Enforceability and Other Standards Review - The technology review focuses on developments in the system(s) affected by the subject standard in the past 10 years, prospects for the immediate future (5 years out) and prospects for the longer term future (5+ years).   Enforceability problems and issues of current standards are reviewed.  A listing and brief description also is included of other standards related to the vehicle systems addressed by the FMVSS.  These may include national and international standards (ECE, Canada, etc) or voluntary industry consensus standards (ISO, SAE, ASTM).  Information sources may include manufacturers, suppliers, industry organizations, published sources, the Internet, and site visits.

4. Summary Regulatory Review Report - The results of Sections A., B. and C. are combined into a summary report. The report includes an additional section, Recommendations, which also provides the reasoning and underlying bases for the recommendations on the need for (and recommended time frames) for updating and/or upgrading the standard.