November 2007
Rollover safety standards still lacking
It might come as a surprise, but the government doesn't have any standards that involve rolling a vehicle over. Instead, it
runs a public-education program that rates rollover propensity. But that's not the same as a performance standard, which would
require some level of occupant protection when a rollover happens.
In 2005 NHTSA proposed regulations that would mandate stronger roof structures than current law allows. A collapsing roof can kill or injure people no matter how well they are otherwise restrained. NHTSA has estimated that a collapsing roof kills about 600 and injures about 900 people every year, even though they were belted in.
The new regulation has been stalled at the safety agency but could go into effect in 2008. It could represent a significant safety improvement, but some safety advocates say the proposal doesn't go far enough.
Background on rollover-resistance standard. To date, the closest the government has come to a rollover standard is a weak "roof crush" requirement promulgated in 1973. That regulation is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 216. The 2005 proposals would modify that standard.
The existing FMVSS 216 requires automakers to subject a sample of every model to a roof-crush test before it can be sold. In that test a stationary vehicle has a weight pressed against one edge of its roof. The roof has to withstand a force equivalent to 1.5 times the weight of the vehicle, up to a limit of 5,000 pounds, without the plate moving more than 5 inches.
Proposed new rules. The federal proposal would raise those standards, requiring vehicle roofs to withstand 2.5 times the vehicle's weight. The roof could not bend so far that it would touch the head of a median-height-male test dummy. The regulation would also require for the first time that the largest pickup trucks and SUVs, such as the Hummer H2, meet the same standards as other vehicles.
Joan Claybrook, president of safety watchdog Public Citizen, says the proposed standard fails in three ways:
It does not require the plate pressing on the roof to be angled farther forward to better simulate real rollovers. Under the current test and the proposal, Claybrook says, the stronger middle section of the roof is allowed to support too much of the weight.
It does not apply enough force. Experts agree that to withstand the forces of a real rollover, roofs should support about four times the vehicle weight, not 2 1/2 times the weight as in the proposed test.
Safety belts are not required to hold occupants in place during a rollover. As cars roll, occupants are pulled out of their seats and toward the roof. Most safety belts in use today won't stop that.
Claybrook cites the Volvo XC90 as an example of how all vehicles should be required to perform. Experts estimate that the XC90's roof can support about 3.5 times the SUV's weight. Along with several other SUVs made by Ford Motor Company, the XC90 also uses a gyroscopic system to detect that the vehicle is rolling over. At that point, the system engages the safety belt pretensioners to help hold occupants in place and activates side-curtain air bags.
Limits on lawsuits. Perhaps the most worrisome part of the proposal is language that might limit lawsuits against automakers. Under the new rule, injured occupants could not make a legal claim that automakers had any obligation to make roofs stronger than the current standard requires, even where state courts had previously held manufacturers to a stricter standard. That means many cases involving crushed roofs could be dismissed without trial, because the new rule, which includes weak standards, would pre-empt them.
The full proposal is online at nhtsa.dot.gov.
In 2005 NHTSA proposed regulations that would mandate stronger roof structures than current law allows. A collapsing roof can kill or injure people no matter how well they are otherwise restrained. NHTSA has estimated that a collapsing roof kills about 600 and injures about 900 people every year, even though they were belted in.
The new regulation has been stalled at the safety agency but could go into effect in 2008. It could represent a significant safety improvement, but some safety advocates say the proposal doesn't go far enough.
Background on rollover-resistance standard. To date, the closest the government has come to a rollover standard is a weak "roof crush" requirement promulgated in 1973. That regulation is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 216. The 2005 proposals would modify that standard.
The existing FMVSS 216 requires automakers to subject a sample of every model to a roof-crush test before it can be sold. In that test a stationary vehicle has a weight pressed against one edge of its roof. The roof has to withstand a force equivalent to 1.5 times the weight of the vehicle, up to a limit of 5,000 pounds, without the plate moving more than 5 inches.
Proposed new rules. The federal proposal would raise those standards, requiring vehicle roofs to withstand 2.5 times the vehicle's weight. The roof could not bend so far that it would touch the head of a median-height-male test dummy. The regulation would also require for the first time that the largest pickup trucks and SUVs, such as the Hummer H2, meet the same standards as other vehicles.
Joan Claybrook, president of safety watchdog Public Citizen, says the proposed standard fails in three ways:
It does not require the plate pressing on the roof to be angled farther forward to better simulate real rollovers. Under the current test and the proposal, Claybrook says, the stronger middle section of the roof is allowed to support too much of the weight.
It does not apply enough force. Experts agree that to withstand the forces of a real rollover, roofs should support about four times the vehicle weight, not 2 1/2 times the weight as in the proposed test.
Safety belts are not required to hold occupants in place during a rollover. As cars roll, occupants are pulled out of their seats and toward the roof. Most safety belts in use today won't stop that.
Claybrook cites the Volvo XC90 as an example of how all vehicles should be required to perform. Experts estimate that the XC90's roof can support about 3.5 times the SUV's weight. Along with several other SUVs made by Ford Motor Company, the XC90 also uses a gyroscopic system to detect that the vehicle is rolling over. At that point, the system engages the safety belt pretensioners to help hold occupants in place and activates side-curtain air bags.
Limits on lawsuits. Perhaps the most worrisome part of the proposal is language that might limit lawsuits against automakers. Under the new rule, injured occupants could not make a legal claim that automakers had any obligation to make roofs stronger than the current standard requires, even where state courts had previously held manufacturers to a stricter standard. That means many cases involving crushed roofs could be dismissed without trial, because the new rule, which includes weak standards, would pre-empt them.
The full proposal is online at nhtsa.dot.gov.
