1 History 2 International counterparts and the Grey Market
2.1 Regulatory performance
3 Development of Drunk Driving Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) 4 Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety (DDACTS) 5 Cost and Cost-Benefit 6 Fuel economy
6.1 CAFE Regulations 6.2 Performance
7 Aerodynamics brings change to NHTSA 8 NCAP 9 Administration 10 See also 11 Notes 12 References 13 Further reading 14 External links
In 1964 and 1966, public pressure grew in the
United States to increase the safety of cars, culminating with the publishing of Unsafe at Any Speed, by Ralph Nader, an activist lawyer, and "Accidental Death and Disability: The Neglected Disease of Modern Society" by the National Academy of Sciences. In 1966, Congress held a series of publicized hearings regarding highway safety, passed legislation to make installation of seat belts mandatory, and enacted Pub.L. 89–563, Pub.L. 89–564, and Pub.L. 89–670 which created the U.S. Department of Transportation on October 15, 1966. This legislation created several predecessor agencies which would eventually become NHTSA, including the National Traffic Safety Agency, the National Highway Safety Agency, and the National Highway Safety Bureau. Once the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) came into effect, vehicles not certified by the maker or importer as compliant with US safety standards were no longer legal to import into the United States. Congress established NHTSA in 1970 with the Highway Safety Act of 1970 (Title II of Pub.L. 91–605, 84 Stat. 1713, enacted December 31, 1970, at 84 Stat. 1739). In 1972, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (Pub.L. 92–513, 86 Stat. 947, enacted October 20, 1972) expanded NHTSA's scope to include consumer information programs. Since then, automobiles have become far better at protecting their occupants in vehicle impacts. The number of deaths on American highways hovers around 33,000 annually, a lower death rate per vehicle-mile traveled than in the 1960s. NHTSA has conducted numerous high-profile investigations of automotive safety issues, including the Audi 5000/60 Minutes affair, the Ford Explorer rollover problem and the Toyota: Sticky accelerator pedal problem. The agency has introduced a proposal to mandate Electronic Stability Control on all passenger vehicles by the 2012 model year. This technology was first brought to public attention in 1997, with the Swedish moose test. Other than that, NHTSA has issued few regulations in the past 25 years. Most of the reduction in vehicle fatality rates during the last third of the 20th century were gained from the initial NHTSA safety standards during 1968–1984 and subsequent voluntary changes in vehicle crashworthiness by vehicle manufacturers.
International counterparts and the Grey Market
In 1958, under the auspices of the United Nations, a consortium called
the Economic Commission for
Europe had been established to commonize vehicle regulations across Europe
Europe so as to standardize best practices in vehicle design and equipment and minimize technical barriers to pan-European vehicle trade and traffic. This eventually became the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations, which began to promulgate what would eventually become the UN Regulations on the design, construction, and safety and emissions performance of vehicles and their components. Many of the world's countries accept or require vehicles and equipment built to the UN Regulations, but the U.S does not recognize the UN Regulations, and blocks the importation of vehicles and components not manufacturer-certified as complying with the U.S. regulations. Because of the unavailability in America of certain vehicle models, a grey market arose in the late 1970s. This provided a method to acquire vehicles not officially offered in the United States, but enough vehicles imported this way were faulty, shoddy, and unsafe that Mercedes-Benz
Mercedes-Benz of North America helped launch a successful congressional lobbying effort to close down the grey market in 1988.  As a result, it is no longer possible to import foreign vehicles into the United States
United States as a personal import, with few exceptions—primarily vehicles meeting Canadian regulations substantially similar to those of the United States, and vehicles imported temporarily for display or research purposes. In practice the gray market involved a few thousand cars annually, before its virtual elimination in 1988. In 1998, NHTSA exempted vehicles older than 25 years from the rules it administers, since these are presumed to be collector vehicles. In 1999, certain very low production volume specialist vehicles were also exempt for "Show and Display" purposes. In the mid-1960s when the framework was established for US vehicle safety regulations, the US auto market was an oligopoly, with just three companies (GM, Ford, and Chrysler) controlling 85% of the market. The ongoing ban on newer vehicles considered safe in countries with lower vehicle-related death rates has created a perception that an effect of NHTSA's regulatory activity is to protect the U.S. market for a modified oligopoly consisting of the three U.S.-based automakers and the American operations of foreign-brand producers. It has been suggested that the impetus for NHTSA's seeming preoccupation with market control rather than vehicular safety performance is a result of overt market protections such as tariffs and local-content laws having become politically unpopular due to the increasing popularity of free trade, thus driving industry to adopt less visible forms of trade restrictions in the form of technical regulations different from those outside the United States. An example of the market-control effects of NHTSA's regulatory protocol is found in the agency's 1974 banning of the Citroën SM automobile, which contemporary journalists hailed as one of the safest vehicles available at the time. NHTSA disapproved the SM due to its steerable headlamps which were not of the sealed beam design mandatory in the U.S., and its height adjustable suspension, which made compliance with the 1973 bumper requirements impossible; the bumper regulation was intended to control the costs resulting from low speed collisions, not enhance occupant safety. Vehicle manufacturers have acknowledged the functional equivalence of the UN and U.S. regulations, encouraged developing countries to recognize and accept both, and advocated for equal recognition of both systems even in developed countries. However, some structural features of the U.S. legal system are incompatible with some aspects of the UN regulatory system.
Annual US traffic fatalities per billion vehicle miles traveled
(red), miles traveled (blue), per one million people (orange), total
annual deaths (light blue), VMT in 10s of billions (dark blue) and
population in millions (teal), from 1921 to 2017
Government data (from FARS for the U.S.) in a 2004 book by former
General Motors safety researcher Leonard Evans shows other countries having achieved greater safety improvements over time than those achieved in the United States:
Research suggests one reason the U.S. continues to lag in traffic safety is the relatively high prevalence in the U.S. of pickup trucks and SUVs, which a 2003 study by the U.S. Transportation Research Board found are significantly less safe than passenger cars. Comparisons of past data with the present in the U.S. can result in distortions, due to a significant population increase and since the level of large commercial truck traffic has substantially increased from the 1960s but highway capacity has not kept up. However, other factors exert significant influence; Canada has lower roadway death and injury rates despite a vehicle mix comparable to that of the U.S. Nevertheless, the widespread use of truck-based vehicles as passenger carriers is correlated with roadway deaths and injuries not only directly by dint of vehicular safety performance per se, but also indirectly through the relatively low fuel costs that facilitate the use of such vehicles in North America. Motor vehicle fatalities decline as gasoline prices increase.
Development of Drunk Driving Standardized Field Sobriety Testing
NHTSA created a Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) training
curriculum to prepare police officers and other qualified persons to
conduct the SFST’s for use in DWI investigations. This training was
developed in combination with the International Association of Chiefs
Police (IACP), and has experienced remarkable success since its inception in the early 1980s.
Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety (DDACTS)
NHTSA, along with the
Bureau of Justice Assistance
Bureau of Justice Assistance and the National Institute of Justice (both part of the Department of Justice) has a long history of actively promoting the use of traffic stops by local police to combat crime and search for drugs.   This approach is controversial and has, in the past, been accused of encouraging racial profiling of motorists. 
Cost and Cost-Benefit
It is very expensive to certify a vehicle for U.S. sale; on a
particular 2013-model vehicle, for example, U.S. certification costs
ran to US$ 42 million. Studies of the cost of complying with
safety standards have concluded that commonized regulations would save
NHTSA uses cost–benefit analysis for every safety device, system, or
design feature mandated for installation on vehicles. No
device, system, or design feature may not be mandated unless it will
save more money (in property damage, health care, etc.) than it costs,
or must cost no more than a specified amount of money per life saved.
Requirements are balanced through estimated costs and estimated
benefits to justify or reject regulation. For example, FMVSS #208
effectively mandates the installation of frontal airbags in all new
vehicles in the United States, for it is written such that no other
technology can meet the stipulated requirements. It has
been argued that even using conservative cost figures and optimistic
benefit figures, airbags' cost–benefit ratio so extreme that it may
fall outside of the cost–benefit requirements for mandatory safety
devices. Cost–benefit requirements have
been used as the basis for lighting-related regulation in the U.S; for
example, while many countries in the world since at least the early
1970s have required rear turn signals to emit amber light so they
might be distinguished from adjacent red brake lamps, U.S. regulations
permit rear turn signals to emit either amber or red light. This has
historically been justified on grounds of lower manufacturing
cost and greater automaker styling freedom in context of
no demonstrated safety benefit to amber over
red. More recent NHTSA-sponsored
research has demonstrated that amber rear turn signals provide
significantly better crash avoidance than red
ones, and NHTSA has found there is no
significant cost penalty to amber signals versus red ones,
yet the agency has not moved to require amber—instead proposing in
2015 to award extra
NCAP points to passenger vehicles with amber rear turn signals. As of July 2019, the agency has not put this proposal into effect.
NHTSA also administers the
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), which is intended to incentivize the production of fuel-efficient vehicles by dint of fuel economy requirements measured against the sales-weighted harmonic average of each manufacturer's range of vehicles. Many governments outside North America regulate fuel economy by heavily taxing motor fuel and/or by including a vehicle's engine size or fuel economy in calculating vehicle registration taxes (road tax). It is argued that such regulations are not politically feasible, and that doing so would hurt the struggling U.S. auto industry. Another putative problem with CAFE is that fuel economy is negatively correlated to vehicle weight—lighter vehicles giving better fuel economy—while vehicle weight is positively correlated to safety—larger and heavier vehicles better protect their occupants. Thus, NHTSA must accomplish two potentially contradictory regulatory goals at the same time. However, Transportation Research Board
Transportation Research Board studies show safety disparities may exist among vehicles of differing price, country of origin, and quality not just among vehicles of different size and weight alone. Some other researchers dispute the incompatibility of reduction in vehicle weight and increased fuel economy.
Performance NHTSA's Summary of Fuel Economy Performance lists manufacturer's Model Year 2014 CAFE:
Domestic Car Imported Car Light Truck
Manufacturer STD CAFE CAFE-STD STD CAFE CAFE-STD STD CAFE CAFE-STD
33.6 35.0 1.4 27.7 28.7 1
33.7 31.4 -2.3 27.3 24.5 -2.8
Fiat Chrysler* 32.9 31.1 -1.8 33.8 28.0 -5.8 26.5 26.0 -0.5
Ford 34.0 36.6 2.6 34.8 30.9 -3.9 25.2 24.8 -0.4
GM 33.9 34.4 0.5 37.1 40.9 3.8 24.4 25.1 0.7
Honda 33.8 39.2 5.4 34.2 42.0 7.8 27.5 29.6 2.1
34.4 37.3 2.9 28.7 27.5 -1.2
Jaguar Land Rover
32.3 27.0 -5.3 27.1 24.8 -2.3
34.4 32.1 -2.3 27.8 26.9 -0.9
36.0 26.7 -9.3
34.5 42.3 7.8 31.4 28.8 -2.6
36.3 39.8 3.5 30.1 34.4 4.3
Nissan 34.7 41.9 7.2 34.2 33.1 -1.1 27.3 27.7 0.4
35.5 37.0 1.5 29.8 34.5 4.7
Tesla 32.1 276.7 244.6
Toyota 34.4 39.1 4.7 34.9 42.9 8 26.7 25.8 -0.9
33.6 30.5 -3.1 28.2 26.1 -2.1
VW* 33.6 37.7 4.1 34.9 34.1 -0.8 27.9 28.6 0.7
* Subject to revision due to alleged diesel engines emissions violations.
Aerodynamics brings change to NHTSA
Automakers faced an inherent conflict between NHTSA's stringent
headlight legislation, which mandated unaerodynamic sealed-beam
headlights, and the
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard, which effectively mandated that automakers develop ways to improve the ability of the car to cleave the air. As a result, in the early 1980s, automakers lobbied for a modification of the mandate for fixed shape sealed-beam headlamps. NHTSA adopted Ford's proposal for low-cost aerodynamic headlamps with polycarbonate lenses and transverse-filament bulbs. The minimum allowed performance and materials durability requirements of this new headlamp system are lower than those of the previous sealed beam system. For the 1984 model year, Ford introduced the Lincoln Mark VII, the first car since 1939 to be sold in the U.S. market with architectural headlamps as part of its aerodynamic design. These composite headlamps, when new to the American market, were commonly but improperly referred to as "Euro" headlamps, since aerodynamic headlamps were already common in Europe. Though conceptually similar to European headlamps with nonstandardized shape and replaceable-bulb construction, these headlamps conform to the SAE headlamp design standards contained in U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108, and not to the international safety standards used worldwide outside North America.
NCAP crash testing Play media 2006 Honda Ridgeline RT full front and side-impact crash tests
Consumer information label for a vehicle with
In 1979, NHTSA created the
New Car Assessment Program
New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) in response to Title II of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act of 1972, to encourage manufacturers to build safer vehicles and consumers to buy them. Since that time, the agency has improved the program by adding rating programs, facilitating access to test results, and revising the format of the information to make it easier for consumers to understand. NHTSA asserts the program has influenced manufacturers to build vehicles that consistently achieve high ratings. The first standardized 35 mph front crash test was May 21, 1979, and the first results were released October 15 that year. The agency established a frontal impact test protocol based on Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208 ("Occupant Crash Protection"), except that the frontal 4 NCAP
NCAP test is conducted at 35 mph (56 km/h), rather than 30 mph (48 km/h) as required by FMVSS No. 208. More recently, in an effort to improve the dissemination of NCAP ratings and as a result of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU) the agency has issued a Final Rule requiring manufacturers to place NCAP star ratings on the Monroney sticker
Monroney sticker (automobile price sticker). The rule has a September 1, 2007 compliance date.
Administration NHTSA's 2006 budget distribution The agency has an annual budget of $815 million (2007). The agency classifies most of its spending under the driver safety heading, with a minority spent on vehicle safety, and a smaller amount on environmental matters of which it is in charge, i.e., vehicular fuel economy.
Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Automobile safety rating
The Century Council
Fatality Analysis Reporting System
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
Fuel economy in automobiles
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Intelligent Transportation Systems Institute National Transportation Safety Board Road-traffic safety UNECE Vehicle inspection World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations Work-related road safety in the United States Notes
^ "Who We Are and What We Do". National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved November 1, 2015..mw-parser-output cite.citation font-style:inherit .mw-parser-output .citation q quotes:"""""""'""'" .mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-free a background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Lock-green.svg/9px-Lock-green.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center .mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-limited a,.mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-registration a background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Lock-gray-alt-2.svg/9px-Lock-gray-alt-2.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center .mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-subscription a background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Lock-red-alt-2.svg/9px-Lock-red-alt-2.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center .mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration color:#555 .mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription span,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration span border-bottom:1px dotted;cursor:help .mw-parser-output .cs1-ws-icon a background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg/12px-Wikisource-logo.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center .mw-parser-output code.cs1-code color:inherit;background:inherit;border:inherit;padding:inherit .mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error display:none;font-size:100% .mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error font-size:100% .mw-parser-output .cs1-maint display:none;color:#33aa33;margin-left:0.3em .mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration,.mw-parser-output .cs1-format font-size:95% .mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-left,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-left padding-left:0.2em .mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-right,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-right padding-right:0.2em
^ "National Highway Traffic Safety Administration". International Trade Data System. Retrieved November 1, 2015.
^ "THIS IS NHTSA" (PDF). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved November 1, 2015.
^ a b "Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2018". National Highway Traffic
United States Department of Transportation.
^ "Budget Estimates Fiscal Year 2016 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration" (PDF). U.S. Department of Transportation. Retrieved November 1, 2015.
^ a b email@example.com (27 July 2017). "NHTSA Leadership". NHTSA.
^ Calmes, Jackie (5 April 2014). "Minding the Minders of G.M." – via NYTimes.com.
^ "Home |
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) | U.S. Department of Transportation". Nhtsa.dot.gov. Retrieved 2011-11-13.
^ Part 564: Replaceable Light Source Information
^ a b Wochinger, Kathryn; Compton, Richard; Berning, Amy (2015). Results of the 2013–2014 National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by Drivers (US Traffic Safety Facts Research Note, Report No. DOT HS No 812 118). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. p. 575. Retrieved 5 December 2018.
^ "NHTSA Budget Highlights FY2015" (PDF). NHTSA. 2014.
^ L. S. Robertson (2007). Injury Epidemiology (Third ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 186–194. ISBN 978-0-19-506956-3.
^ a b Automotive Regulations and Certification Processes: Global Manufacturers' Perspective
^ a b "What you need to know to avoid seeing your grey market car get crushed". Digital Trends. 30 August 2013. Retrieved 30 May 2015.
^ U.S. Accuses 'Gray Market' Car Importer
^ Deception on Engines Charged: 'Gray Market' Mercedes Dealer Held
^ Wheeling-Dealing Gray Market Hits the Skids : Bad Publicity, Corporate Action, Legislation Put Brakes on Car Conversions
^ "How To: Win the Car-Importing Game". Retrieved 30 May 2015.
^ "Car Show Classic: 1985 Citroen CX 25 GTi Series 2 – Blue Is A Warmer Color Than Grey". Curbside Classic. Retrieved 30 May 2015.
^ "Carpe Diem". Retrieved 30 May 2015.
^ M. E. Wenners; J. M. Frusti; J. S. Ninomiya (1998). "Global Regulatory Harmonization—One American Manufacturer's Perspective". Ref # 982266. Society of Automotive Engineers.
^ Crouching Tariff, Hidden Trade Barrier? - DrivingVisionNews
^ "Top 5: Citroen SM innovations that saw the future video - CNET". CNET. CBS Interactive. Retrieved 30 May 2015.
^ Ford Push for Global Regs…Meaning What? - DrivingVisionNews
^ Legal Hurdles to Regulatory Harmony - DrivingVisionNews
^ Wenzel, T.; Ross, M. (2003). "Are SUVs Safer than Cars? An Analysis of Risk by Vehicle Type and Model" (PDF). Transportation Research Board. Retrieved 2008-03-09.
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Highway Administration (2006). "Chapter 14 Freight Transportation". United States
United States Department of Transportation.
^ L.S. Robertson (2006). "Motor Vehicle Deaths: Failed Policy Analysis and Neglected Policy". Journal of Public Health Policy. 27 (2): 182–189. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jphp.3200074.
^ Evans, Leonard (2004). Traffic Safety. Science Serving Society. ISBN 978-0-9754871-0-5.
^ D.C. Grabowski; M.A. Morrissey (2004). "Gasoline Prices and Motor Vehicle Fatalities". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 23 (3): 575–593. doi:10.1002/pam.20028.
^ "Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety (DDACTS) -
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)". one.nhtsa.gov.
^ "Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety". National Institute of Justice.
^ Kocieniewski, David (29 November 2000). "New Jersey Argues That the U.S. Wrote the Book on Race Profiling" – via NYTimes.com.
^ Beene, Ryan (July 25, 2015). "Wiping out U.S.-EU rules disparities would yield big savings". Automotive News. Retrieved December 4, 2018.
^ Viscusi, Kip Regulatory Economics in the Courts: an Analysis of Judge Scalia's NHTSA Bumper Decision Law and Contemporary Problems volume 50 issue 4 1988 Retrieved July 29, 2015
^ "John Graham Releases Results of Cost–Benefit Analysis of Air Bag Safety". Riskworld.com. 1997-03-25. Archived from the original on 2011-09-28. Retrieved 2011-11-13.
^ Thompson, Kimberly M.; Segui-Gomez, Maria; Graham, John D. (2002-10-03). "Risk Analysis, Volume 22 Issue 4 Page 803-811, August 2002". Risk Analysis. 22 (4): 803–811. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.00070.
^ a b c
New Car Assessment Program
New Car Assessment Program Request For Comment, US Government Docket NHTSA-2015-0119, section D(2)(c)
^ Automotive Lighting in North America, Driving Vision News, 2011
^ Hitzemeyer, E.G.; Wilde, H.; Ellenburger, D (1977). "What Color Should Rear Turn Signals Be?" (paper). Society of Automotive Engineers.
^ D'orleans, G. (1997). "World Harmonization and Procedures for Lighting and Signaling Products" (paper). Society of Automotive Engineers.
^ "The Influence of Rear Turn Signal Characteristics on Crash Risk" (PDF). (527 KB)
^ Allen, Kirk (2009). "The Effectiveness of Amber Rear Turn Signals for Reducing Rear Impacts, DOT HS 811 115" (PDF). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
^ Knollenberg, Joe. "Big3Defense.com". Archived from the original (Website) on October 23, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2007.
^ Benton, Joe. "GM Exec Slams Higher Mileage Standards". Consumer Affairs. Archived from the original (Website) on November 28, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2007.
^ "Automakers cool to Bush plans to cut gas consumption" (Website). Channel NewsAsia. 24 January 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2007.
^ Kahane, Charles (October 2003). "Vehicle Weight, Fatality Risk and Crash Compatibility of Model Year 1991–99 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks" (PDF). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved 2007-11-15.
^ Wenzel, Tom; Ross, Marc (2003-01-15). "Are SUVs Safer than Cars? An Analysis of Risk by Vehicle Type and Model" (PDF). Transportation Research Board: 17–21. Retrieved 2007-10-04.
^ Robertson, Leon S. (2006). "Blood and Oil: Vehicle Characteristics in Relation to Fatality Risk and Fuel Economy". American Journal of Public Health. 96 (11): 1906–1909. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2005.084061. PMC 1751827.
^ CAFE December 2014. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Accessed October 2015.
^ a b "The
New Car Assessment Program
New Car Assessment Program Suggested Approaches for Future Program Enhancements" (PDF). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. January 2007. Retrieved 2008-11-24.
NCAP enhancements for 2007 Archived September 25, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
^ NHTSA. "NHTSA Budget Overview FY 2006" (PDF). p. 4. Retrieved 2007-06-19.
National Archives entry
Washington Post article
DOT's list of operating administrators of the NHTSA
Kevin M. McDonald, "Shifting Out of Park: Moving Auto Safety from
Recalls to Reason" (Lawyers & Judges Publishing, 2006).
Evans, Leonard (2004). Traffic Safety. Science Serving Society.
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Transportation. Office of the
Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration. 2004. pp. 19–1263. ISBN 978-0-16-072891-4. The Century Council's Report on Alcohol-Related Traffic Fatalities in the United States
United States (2006) Peltzman, Sam. "The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulation." The Journal of Political Economy 83, no. 4 (August 1975): 677–725. JSTOR link "U.S. Appeals Court Orders New Fuel Economy Standards". Planet Ark. External links Official website 49 CFR Chapter V (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the Federal Register safercar.gov for official ratings, tips, and recalls Regulations regarding vehicle importation into the U.S. UNECE
UNECE vehicle safety regulations National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration at the Wayback Machine (archived January 16, 2000) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration at the Wayback Machine (archived November 12, 1996) vteAgencies under the United States
United States Department of Transportation Headquarters: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE(Transportation Department Building) Elaine Chao, Secretary of Transportation Vacant, Deputy Secretary of Transportation Deputy Secretary of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Federal Highway Administration Federal Railroad Administration Federal Transit Administration Inspector General U.S. Maritime Administration Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Research and Innovative Technology Administration Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation Surface Transportation Board Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy Office of Aviation and International Affairs Office of Transportation Policy
Automotive industry in the United States Automotive industry Economy of the United States Transportation in the United States American vehiclemanufacturers(list) AGCO Challenger Tractor Massey Ferguson AM General Amp Electric Vehicles Armour Group ATK motorcycles Autocar Blue Bird Caterpillar FCA US Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram Chenowth Racing Products Environmental Performance Vehicles Equus Ford Lincoln SVT General Dynamics Land Systems General Motors Buick Cadillac Chevrolet GMC Gillig Glaval Bus Growler Manufacturing and Engineering Harley-Davidson Ingersoll Rand Club Car HDT Global HME John Deere Karma Automotive Nikola Lockheed Martin Lenco Industries Mack Trucks Millennium Luxury Coaches Morgan Olson Motor Coach Industries Navistar International IC Bus International Oshkosh Pierce Paccar Kenworth Peterbilt Panoz Polaris Industries Global Electric Motorcars Indian Victory Proterra REV Group Champion Bus Collins ElDorado National E-One Fleetwood Goshen Coach Holiday Rambler Laymor Wheeled Coach SSC North America Starcraft Bus Superformance Tesla Textron E-Z-Go Cushman Trans Tech Ultimaster VIA Motors Foreign vehiclemanufacturerswith US operations BMW US Manufacturing Company BYD Auto
BYD Auto America Changan USA CNH Industrial
CNH Industrial (1) Case CE Case IH Daimler North America Daimler Trucks North America Thomas Freightliner Western Star FAW Group
FAW Group USA Fiat USA FHI America Honda of America Acura Hyundai USA Isuzu America Kia Motors America Mazda
Mazda America Mitsubishi Motors North America NFI Group
NFI Group (1) Motor Coach Industries New Flyer Nissan USA Peugeot
Peugeot USA SAIC Motor
SAIC Motor USA Suzuki
Suzuki America Toyota Motor Sales, USA Hino Trucks Lexus Volkswagen Group of America Volvo Car USA Volvo Trucks
Volvo Trucks North America Yamaha Motor Corporation, USA Wanxiang America Concept and pre-production Arcimoto Commuter Cars Elio Motors Faraday Future Fisker Inc Local Motors Lucid Motors Myers Motors Rivian Trion Supercars TranStar Racing Active factories BMW US Manufacturing Company Fiat Chrysler
Chrysler factories Ford factories General Motors
General Motors factories Honda of America factories Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama Kia Motors Manufacturing Georgia Mercedes-Benz
Mercedes-Benz U.S. International Nissan North America Subaru of Indiana Automotive Tesla Factory Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America Volkswagen Chattanooga Assembly Plant Auto component makers and performance car modders Allison American Expedition Vehicles BorgWarner Brunton Stalker Caterpillar Cummins Brammo Delphi Detroit Diesel Eaton Firestone Goodyear Hennessey Ingersoll Rand Legacy Lingenfelter Nexteer Phoenix Motorcars Remy International Saleen Shelby American Timken Torrington Visteon Design studios Calty Design Research Designworks Rezvani Automotive Designs Wheego Electric Cars By state Massachusetts Defunct and former (2)vehicle manufacturers Allis-Chalmers American Austin American Electric Motor Vehicle Company American LaFrance American Motors Hudson Essex Terraplane Nash Rambler Armor Holdings Armored Motor Car Company Auburn Automobile Aurica Motors Autoette Avanti Motor Corporation Avery BMC Boulder Electric Vehicle Carbon Motors Corporation Checker Motors Corporation Clydesdale Motor Truck Company Coda (2) Commonwealth Cord Case CNH Global Cycle-Scoot DeLorean Duesenberg Durant Flint Locomobile Mason Rugby Star Eagle Bus Excalibur FCA US Eagle Plymouth Street & Racing Technology (2) Fiberfab Fitch Four Drive Fisker Automotive Fisker Coachbuild Force Protection Ford Continental Edsel Mercury FMC (2) General Motors Cartercar Elmore GM Diesel Geo Hummer LaSalle Marquette McLaughlin Oakland Oldsmobile Pontiac Saturn Scripps-Booth Sheridan Viking Yellow Coach Green Vehicles GreenTech Grumman Henney International Harvester Jeffery Kaiser-Frazer Allstate Frazer Henry J Kaiser Willys Marathon Motor Works Marmon Roosevelt Marvel Motors Matbro Mercer Monaco Coach Mosler Automotive MotoCzysz Muntz Car Company North American Bus Industries Oliver Farm Equipment Packard Peerless Motor Company Pierce-Arrow Sebring Vanguard Sterling Trucks Studebaker Erskine Rockne Stutz Toyota Scion Twentieth Century Motor Car Corporation United Defense Visionary Vehicles VL White Wildfire ZAP Zimmer Motorcars Defunct factories Diamond-Star Motors Fiat Chrysler
Chrysler factories closed Ford factories closed General Motors
General Motors factories closed NUMMI Packard
Packard Automotive Plant Volkswagen Westmoreland Assembly Related topics AAA Chicago Auto Show Interstate Highway System List of automobiles manufactured in the United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration New York International Auto Show North American International Auto Show SAE International
(1) Non-U.S. based parent company that owns subsidiaries headquartered in U.S. (2) Company still exists but is no longer in the automotive manufacturing business Category Portal
vteNew Car Assessment Programs
ARCAP (Russia) ASEAN NCAP
NCAP (Southeast Asia) A NCAP
NCAP (Australia) BNVSAP (India) C- NCAP
NCAP (China) Euro NCAP
NCAP (Europe) Green NCAP
NCAP (Europe) Global NCAP
NCAP (Global) IIHS (United States) J NCAP
NCAP (Japan) K NCAP
NCAP (Korea) Latin NCAP
NCAP (South America) NHTSA (United States)
This article incorporates public domain material from
websites or documents of the
United States Department of