|
|
NEWS
RECALLS
COMPLAINT FORM
SCAM ALERTS
RESOURCES
Small Claims Guide Class Actions Lemon Laws FAQ Newsletters |
Share |
| Automotive Education Employment Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Insurance Pets Shopping Travel |
|
|
|
![]() |
Feds Delay Roof Strength Rule AgainSafety advocates say latest proposal is inadequate |
|||||||||||||
|
By Joe Benton January 25, 2008
The present standard has been on the books since 1971 and a proposed new standard has been repeatedly delayed. Now, NHTSA has asked for yet more information from automakers, safety advocates and the public about the proposed new standards. The most recent version of the rule under consideration at NHTSA would require both sides of a vehicle roof to support at least two and half times the vehicle's weight. But safety advocates aren't buying it. "The proposal is still a static test -- one based on mathematical calculations, rather than a dynamic physical test -- and it still is at 2.5 times the weight of the vehicle," said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook, who headed NHTSA from 1977 through 1981.. The agency has pondered the regulation since the first NHTSA revision of the roof strength rule was panned by both automakers and safety advocates. The existing standard mandates that just one side support at least one and half of the weight of a vehicle weight. The initial revision of the roof strength rule from NHTSA required support of two and half times vehicle weight but would have continued testing on one side only. NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason now says that double-sided testing is a viable alternative approach. Safety activists have demanded a "dynamic" rollover test which would require rolling a moving vehicle to gather data. Automakers insist such a test will be costly and accidents involving rollovers include too many variables to design a reliable test. Each year, nearly 10,000 people die in rollover crashes but government data suggest that only a small percentage of vehicle occupants are killed by collapsing roofs; most are killed because they aren't wearing seat belts, safety regulators say. Claybrook said it's not that simple. "The proposal absolutely ignores ejection and containment in the vehicle during rollovers, in which 10,500 people die each year and another 17,000 are seriously injured. To justify a strong rollover protection standard, the agency should address roof crush, ejection and containment as one standard," she said. Congress most recently directed NHTSA to adopt a new roof standard by April 2009. NHTSA plans to issue a new rollover rule later this year. Report Your Experience
|
|||||||||||||
Back to the top | |
||||||||||||||
Advertisement
|
|
Custom Search
|
||||
|
AUTOMOTIVE Dealers Manufacturers Service Extended Warranties Lemon Laws Recalls Tires Transporters FAMILY Aging Children, Parenting Recalls Dating Education Entertainment Pets Weddings |
FINANCE Annuities Banks Credit Cards Debt Collection Debt Counseling Insurance Investing Loans Mortgages Payday Loans Student Loans Tax Prep HEALTH Doctors Drugs, Pharmacies Health Clubs Hearing Care Hospitals Nursing Homes Nutrition, Diets Vision Care Weight Loss |
HOUSE & HOME Appliances Cookware Furniture Home Improvements Lawn & Garden Movers Pools & Spas Realtors, Rental Agents Recalls Utilities ELECTRONICS Cable TV/DBS Cameras Cell Phones Computers Home Electronics Internet Access Local Phone Service Long Distance VoIP |
SHOPPING In-Home Online Retail Stores Sporting Goods Supermarkets Telemarketers TRAVEL Airlines Bus Lines Car Rental Cruises Hotels Travel Agents Trains RESOURCES Class Actions Complaint Form Small Claims Guide Lemon Laws |
CONSUMER NEWS Latest News Automotive Telecom Financial Health Homeowners Scams Seniors Travel More ... RECALLS Automotive Children's Products Drugs Food Household Products Sporting Goods ABOUT US FAQ Privacy Policy Advertise With Us Newsroom Syndication Terms of Use |
Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use
Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission. |
|