New Car Assessment Program |
|---|
|
Heidi R. King
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
3 August 2018
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 150 (Friday, August 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38201-38204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16653]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0055]
New Car Assessment Program
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) provides comparative
information on the safety of new vehicles to assist consumers with
vehicle purchasing decisions. Significant changes to NCAP have been
either suggested by NHTSA or mandated by Congress in recent years. In
December 2015, Congress mandated that NHTSA conduct a rulemaking
requiring that crash avoidance information be placed on the Monroney
label of new vehicles. Later that same month, NHTSA published a
``request for comments'' (RFC) in which it sought public comments on
planned changes to NCAP. This notice announces a public meeting to
obtain up-to-date stakeholder input on the way forward for NCAP.
DATES: NHTSA will hold the public meeting on September 14, 2018, from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time. Check-in will begin at 8 a.m.
Attendees should arrive by 8 a.m. to allow sufficient time for security
clearance. In addition to this meeting, the public will have the
opportunity to submit written comments to the docket for this notice
concerning matters addressed in this notice.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at DOT Headquarters, located
at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 (Green Line
Metro station at Navy Yard) in the Oklahoma City Conference Room. This
facility is accessible to individuals with disabilities.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You may contact Ms. Jennifer N. Dang,
Division Chief, New Car Assessment Program, Office of Crashworthiness
Standards (Telephone: 202-366-1810).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This notice announces the holding of a public meeting on September
14, 2018, to obtain up-to-date stakeholder input for use in planning
the future of NCAP. The impetus for this meeting comes from
developments relating to two events in December 2015. On December 4,
2015, the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) \1\ Act was
signed into law, which includes a mandate that NHTSA conduct a
rulemaking to require the incorporation of crash avoidance information
on the vehicle price stickers (also known as the Monroney labels)
placed on the windows of new vehicles. On December 16, 2015, NHTSA
announced in a Federal Register ``request for comments'' (RFC) \2\ its
plan to add new tools and techniques to NCAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sec. Sec. 24321-22, Public Law 114-94.
\2\ 80 FR 78521, December 16, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA received nearly 300 sets of written comments on its December
2015 RFC.\3\ The commenters included vehicle manufacturers, automotive
suppliers, associations of vehicle manufacturers and suppliers,
consumer advocacy groups, universities, and other individuals and
organizations interested in vehicle safety. NHTSA also received oral
comments at two public hearings, the first in Detroit, Michigan on
January 14, 2016, and the second at DOT Headquarters in Washington, DC
on January 29, 2016.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The comments are available in Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0119 at
www.regulations.gov.
\4\ The transcripts are available in Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0119
at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters across the spectrum raised a number of issues involving
both data and procedures. Commenters stated the public comment period
was inadequate for purposes of responding because of the complexity of
the program upgrade, and that the technical information supporting the
RFC was not sufficient to allow a full understanding of the
contemplated changes. According to the commenters, this hindered their
ability to prepare substantive public comments.
In addition, most vehicle manufacturers stated that the significant
cost burden due to fitment of the contemplated new technologies and the
inclusion of a new crash test and new test devices would increase the
price of new vehicles. Manufacturers, along with safety advocates, also
expressed the need for data demonstrating that each proposed program
change would provide enough safety benefits to warrant its inclusion in
NCAP. Safety and consumer advocates recommended that NCAP award credit
only if the technologies meet certain human machine interface
requirements. In addition, several commenters suggested that NHTSA
develop near-term and long-term roadmaps for NCAP and revise NCAP in a
more gradual, ``phased'' approach.
Furthermore, commenters suggested that most of the planned NCAP
upgrades, including the new rating system, should only be adopted
through a process similar in rigor to that of a notice and comment
rulemaking conducted under the Administrative Procedure Act. Lastly,
certain vehicle manufacturers were concerned that changing future
vehicle designs in order to respond to a NCAP upgrade would have an
adverse effect on compliance with fuel economy and greenhouse gas
emissions requirements.
In light of the public comments and NHTSA's FAST Act mandate, NHTSA
is requesting oral and written comments from the public to help guide
the Agency in planning its next steps for NCAP. The Agency continues to
believe that NCAP needs to be modernized to
[[Page 38202]]
incentivize the voluntary adoption of safety features. As part of that
effort, the Agency is continuing to explore best methods for selecting
and incorporating crash avoidance information on the vehicle price
stickers.
NHTSA is considering various approaches to enhancing NCAP so that
the program continues to serve the American public by providing useful,
practical comparative vehicle safety information. For example, NHTSA
could consider modifying the way NCAP provides meaningful consumer
information about the safety potential of advanced crash avoidance
technologies. Another strategy is to package information now available
through NCAP in new ways, if they will be particularly effective in
communicating vehicle safety information to targeted groups of new
vehicle customers. Other NCAP enhancements on which the Agency seeks
comment include strengthening the existing program's testing protocols
and possibly creating safety ratings for areas of vehicle performance
that are not currently rated.
From its inception, NCAP has played a significant role in educating
consumers on vehicle safety as a key factor in their vehicle purchasing
decisions. The increasing number of advanced crash avoidance
technologies and Automated Driving Assistance Systems in vehicles
underscores the importance of NCAP's role in educating consumers about
vehicle safety. NCAP plays a vital role in ensuring that the potential
benefits of advanced crash avoidance technologies are effectively
communicated to the public. For example, NCAP could help standardize
nomenclature of crash avoidance technologies by providing detailed
descriptions of performance criteria that a technology must satisfy
before being incorporated into NCAP testing.
NHTSA continues to gather information and conduct research relative
to the areas discussed in the December 2015 RFC. Additionally, NHTSA is
working to leverage the existing NCAP program to, among other things,
improve the information it provides consumers, thereby increasing their
awareness and understanding of certain safety improvements and enabling
them to make better informed purchasing decisions. The Agency believes
that a more thorough examination of which updates to NCAP are
sufficiently supported by data and useful to consumers will ultimately
lead to a better program that increases safety without unnecessarily
increasing vehicle costs or impeding innovation.
II. Public Meeting Details
Registration: Registration is necessary for all attendees, due to
limited space. Attendees must register online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/NCAP-Public-Meeting by September 7, 2018. Please
provide your name, email address, and affiliation. Also, indicate
whether you plan to participate actively in the meeting (speaking will
be limited to 10 minutes per speaker for each of the four agenda
topics, unless the number of registered speakers is such that more time
per agenda topic will be available), and whether you require
accommodations, such as a sign language interpreter.
Written Comments: Docket NHTSA-2018-0055 is available for written
statements and supporting information regarding matters addressed in
this notice. All interested persons, regardless of whether they attend
or speak at the public meeting, are invited to submit written comments
to the docket and are encouraged to do so. The formal docket comment
period will close on [60 days from the publication date of this
announcement], but NHTSA will continue to accept comments to the docket
by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
Fax: 202-366-1767.
Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below.
Docket: For access to the docket go to https://www.regulations.gov
at any time or to 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. Telephone: 202-
366-9826.
Privacy Act: DOT posts all comments, without edit, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice, DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through www.transportation.gov/privacy. In
order to facilitate comment tracking and response, we encourage
commenters to provide their name, or the name of their organization;
however, submission of names is completely optional. Whether or not
commenters identify themselves, all timely comments will be fully
considered.
Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any
written information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit
three copies of your complete written submission, including the
information you claim to be confidential business information to the
Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590-0001. In addition, you should submit two copies, from which you
have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket
Management at the address given above. When you send a comment
containing information claimed to be confidential business information,
you should submit a cover letter setting forth the information
specified in our confidential business information regulation (49 CFR
part 512).
The public meeting is structured to be a listening session in which
NHTSA considers recommendations from the public on how best to improve
NCAP. The list of questions below is not intended to limit the
discussion or ideas to be presented at the listening session. It
reflects areas in which NHTSA is requesting feedback relative to the
next steps that could be taken with NCAP. NHTSA hopes these questions
stimulate the thinking of those who plan to speak in the public meeting
and/or submit written comments. Commenters may wish to use these
questions to help organize and present their thoughts and ideas.
Suggestions about other approaches to improving NCAP that are not
reflected in these questions are encouraged as well.
Specific Guiding Questions: To help guide NHTSA gather information
and feedback for use in planning the future of NCAP, the Agency seeks
comments on the four topics below. NHTSA urges that, where possible,
comments be supported by data and analysis to increase their
usefulness. Please clearly indicate the source of such data.
A. Consumer Information
(1) NCAP strives to provide consumers with meaningful, comparative
safety information that will assist them in making informed vehicle
purchasing decisions. What changes could NHTSA make to the program that
would better assist consumers in
[[Page 38203]]
understanding the relative safety of vehicles?
(2) NHTSA currently provides crash safety ratings on its website,
on vehicle window stickers, on its mobile application, in communication
materials, and through distribution (i.e., to the automotive online
community). What additional ways can the safety information generated
by NCAP be most effectively communicated to today's consumers?
(3) What additional website functionality should NHTSA consider
when presenting NCAP safety information to the public (e.g., ranking
based on performance, grouping based on vehicle class, comparing
vehicles within a class, custom filtering, options to view all vehicles
at once, interactive charts and graphics)?
(4) What types of safety information, or methods of presenting
safety information, should NHTSA's NCAP \5\ consider from other NCAPs
\6\ or consumer-focused organizations to provide more meaningful
information to consumers? How can NCAP better complement other U.S.
consumer rating programs, such as that of the Insurance Institute for
Highway Safety (IIHS)? \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ NHTSA's program can be viewed at https://www.nhtsa.gov/ratings.
\6\ Euro NCAP's program can be viewed at https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/.
\7\ The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's program can be
viewed at http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) In addition to safety ratings, what other safety information
would be useful to prominently present on NHTSA's website, mobile
application, and other venues to new vehicle buyers? How much benefit
would there be in highlighting specific information to certain new
vehicle buying demographics (e.g., older drivers, teen drivers, family
vehicles, urban/rural drivers, budget-conscious)? What types of
objective criteria should NHTSA consider for this?
(6) Many new vehicles are equipped with pedestrian crash avoidance
features. What value do vehicle buyers place on pedestrian crash
avoidance features when selecting a new vehicle to purchase? Should
NCAP consider pedestrian crash avoidance features when making program
changes, and if so, how could a pedestrian component best be
incorporated (e.g., as part of a rating, or as a separate assessment)?
(7) The field of vehicle safety is more dynamic now than ever
before because of technological advances. Today's vehicles undergo more
frequent design changes; advanced crash avoidance technologies are
being introduced at a rapid rate; and, software updates to safety
systems can be made over-the-air, improving their existing abilities
and even giving them new abilities. Given the accelerating pace of such
advancements, should NCAP consider alternative ways of collecting test
data and safety information (such as through self-certification or some
other means) and how can NCAP collect data/information from vehicle
manufacturers so that it can continue to convey accurate information to
consumers in a timely manner (such as via an interactive database)?
(8) Other NCAPs have produced long-term roadmaps for their
programs. Euro NCAP published program roadmaps to 2020 \8\ and 2025.\9\
What value would NHTSA, vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, and the
public obtain by developing near-term and long-term roadmaps for U.S.
NCAP?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/16472/euro-ncap-2020-roadmap-rev1-march-2015.pdf.
\9\ https://www.euroncap.com/en/press-media/press-releases/euro-ncap-launches-road-map-2025-in-pursuit-of-vision-zero/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Rating System
(9) What types of ratings are most useful to vehicle manufacturers
for communicating safety information to consumers? Are star ratings
still the best way to promote meaningful safety information? Are there
alternatives that should be considered (e.g., awards, numerical or
percentage rankings, performance classifications (good vs. poor), half
stars)? What are the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches?
(10) For a single, overall rating system covering many areas of
safety (such as a 5-star rating), how can NHTSA apportion the testing
and criteria to ensure that individual aspects of the rating will be
properly weighted and balanced? What other strategies (e.g., half
stars, demerits, modifiers) should NHTSA consider for a single, overall
rating system?
C. Crash Avoidance
(11) The FAST Act requires that crash avoidance information be
presented next to crashworthiness information on the Monroney
label.\10\ (Implementation of this requirement will be the subject of a
separate notice and comment proceeding). What approach should NHTSA
consider in fulfilling this requirement that will be most helpful to
consumers? Should NHTSA consider a rating (i.e., stars), a list of
technologies, an award, or another approach? What strategy can offer
flexibility if new changes to the crash avoidance information is
warranted?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Sec. Sec. 24321-22, Public Law 114-94.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(12) How can future crash avoidance aspects of NCAP complement
other vehicle safety consumer information programs in the U.S.?
(13) Consumers are currently presented with a variety of advanced
technology features on different vehicle models. Some are for
convenience and some are designed for safety. Currently, a new advanced
technology must meet four prerequisites to be added to NCAP. These
include: (1) There is a known safety need, (2) vehicle and equipment
designs that mitigate the safety need exist, or are available as a
prototype, (3) a safety benefit can be estimated based on the
anticipated performance of the existing or prototype design, and (4) a
performance-based, objective test procedure can be developed to measure
the ability of the technology to mitigate the safety issue.\11\ How can
NHTSA improve upon these strategies when determining which advanced
technology features are appropriate for inclusion in NCAP? Should NHTSA
also consider other factors (e.g., effectiveness, fleet penetration,
path to automation, consumer acceptance, cost)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 78 FR 20599 (April 5, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(14) NHTSA has been engaging the public on ways to safely integrate
Automated Driving Systems on our nation's roads. What should NCAP's
role be in supporting the safe integration of Advanced Driver
Assistance Systems \12\ that may lay the groundwork for Automated
Driving Systems? Which crash avoidance elements, or aspects of
automation, should NHTSA include in NCAP, and how could these be best
evaluated (e.g., by assessing the performance of a specific technology
or the crash avoidance system during a crash event)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) are systems
developed to automate/enhance vehicle systems for safety and for
better driving. For example, the vehicle can help the human driver
steer and/or brake, though the human driver must pay full attention
at all times and perform the rest of the driving task.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(15) How should NHTSA's assessment of crash avoidance technology be
combined with crashworthiness? If they are communicated in the same
way, should there be an overall measure, or separate measures for
crashworthiness and crash avoidance? If separate measures are
preferred, should the measures be of the same type (e.g., only ratings
or only awards, etc.), or should the measures be a combination of
different types (e.g., ratings and awards, etc.)? Are there other
strategies NHTSA
[[Page 38204]]
should consider, and what are their advantages and disadvantages?
(16) Currently, many crash avoidance technologies are sold as
optional equipment on vehicles, and a variety of different advanced
technology features may be available on different trim levels. How can
NCAP best communicate whether crash avoidance technologies are standard
vs. optional on a vehicle model or trim level to ensure consumers are
given accurate information on the safety of the vehicle they are
purchasing? How should equipment availability affect the ratings of
vehicles? What metric should NHTSA use to determine when it is
appropriate to remove an advanced technology from NCAP (e.g., replace a
technology once it reaches a high level of fleet penetration and
replace it with a technology with a low level of penetration)?
D. Crashworthiness
(17) What are the opportunities for crashworthiness safety
improvement? How should NHTSA approach consideration of new tests, test
protocols or test devices, new injury criteria, risk curves, or
additional occupants to be more reflective of real-world crashes? Could
meaningful changes to injury criteria and risk curves be made to the
current crash test dummies in the existing test configurations?
(18) Should NHTSA expand assessments beyond frontal and side crash
testing? If so, how? For example, should NHTSA consider inclusion of
other strategies, such as credit for enhanced seat belt reminders, or
other technologies?
(19) How can the crashworthiness aspects of NCAP complement other
vehicle safety consumer information programs in the U.S.? For example,
are the crash modes, crash test dummies and injury criteria used in
NCAP complementary to those used by the IIHS? Do they strike the right
balance for the frontal and side impact crash configurations?
(20) Most new vehicles rated by NCAP are currently receiving 4- or
5-star ratings. These star ratings are based on how a vehicle's risk of
injury reflected in NCAP tests compares to a baseline injury risk for
all crash types that was derived from NHTSA crash data for MY 2007 and
2008 vehicles. In its July 11, 2008, Federal Register notice announcing
enhancements to NCAP, NHTSA indicated that it would periodically review
the crash performance of the vehicle fleet, as reflected by then-
current NCAP test data.\13\ However, NHTSA has not conducted any formal
reviews or baseline risk adjustments to date. Should NHTSA now consider
adjusting the baseline risks used in the ratings calculations to
reflect the crash test data from today's vehicles? Or, would there be a
better approach to update the crashworthiness program to better
differentiate performance among the vehicle fleet (e.g., new tests,
dummies, injury criteria, etc.)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 78 FR 20603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(21) How frequently should NCAP change crashworthiness test
requirements and/or update rating requirements to stay relevant with
each new model year vehicle fleet? What effect would year-to-year
changes have on (a) the credibility and understandability of
information provided to consumers and (b) the manufacturers?
E. Meeting Agenda
8-9 a.m. Arrival/Check-in through security
9-9:10 a.m. Welcome remarks from NHTSA
9:10-11:10 a.m. Speakers on consumer information
11:10 a.m.-12:10 p.m. Speakers on rating system
12:10-1:15 p.m. Lunch (not provided)
1:15-3:15 p.m. Speakers on crash avoidance
3:15-4:15 p.m. Speakers on crashworthiness
4:15-4:50 p.m. Speakers on other topics
4:50-5 p.m. Closing remarks from NHTSA
Under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.5.
Issued in Washington, DC on: July 27, 2018.
Heidi R. King,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-16653 Filed 8-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P