[Senate Report 111-381]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 653
111th Congress
2d Session SENATE Report
111-381
_______________________________________________________________________
MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY ACT OF 2010
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. 3302
December 21, 2010.--Ordered to be printed
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
99-010 WASHINGTON : 2010
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred eleventh congress
second session
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
BARBARA BOXER, California JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey GEORGE S. LeMIEUX, Florida
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
TOM UDALL, New Mexico MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
MARK WARNER, Virginia
MARK BEGICH, Alaska
Ellen Doneski, Staff Director
James Reid, Deputy Staff Director
Bruce Andrews, General Counsel
Ann Begeman, Republican Staff Director
Brian Hendricks, Republican General Counsel
Todd Bertoson, Republican Senior Counsel
Calendar No. 653
111th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 111-381
======================================================================
MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY ACT OF 2010
_______
December 21, 2010.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Rockefeller, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 3302]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 3302), to amend title 49,
United States Code, to establish new automobile safety
standards, make better motor vehicle safety information
available to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
and the public, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment (in the
nature of a substitute) and recommends that the bill (as
amended) do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 3302, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010,
is to improve automobile safety standards, make auto industry
executives more accountable for safety information submitted to
the Federal government, make vehicle safety information more
transparent for consumers, reduce conflicts of interest between
government agencies and the auto industry, and enhance
authorities and funding levels of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) to address vehicle safety
defects.
Background and Needs
In 1970, Congress established NHTSA to administer safety
programs previously handled by the National Highway Safety
Bureau. Its mission is to save lives and prevent injuries due
to road traffic accidents through education, safety standards,
research, and enforcement activity. Among the broad areas of
NHTSA's vehicle jurisdiction are safety standards, fuel economy
standards, defect investigations, recalls, compliance testing,
safety ratings, child restraints, tire standards, odometer
fraud, theft deterrence through vehicle identification numbers
(VINs), and international harmonization of vehicle standards.
As of 2008, the Department of Transportation (DOT) estimates
there are approximately 256 million vehicles on America's
roads. In fiscal year (FY) 2010, General Fund appropriations
for NHTSA's vehicle safety efforts totaled $140 million. NHTSA
also received funding from The Highway Trust Fund in FY 2010,
including $105 million to conduct highway safety research, and
$619 million to administer safety grants for the States. In
comparison, the Federal Aviation Administration's Safety
Division was allocated approximately $1.2 billion in FY 2010 to
oversee less than 250,000 commercial and general aviation
aircraft.
VEHICLE DEFECT INVESTIGATION PROCESS
NHTSA receives approximately 4,000 complaints each month from
consumers regarding safety problems with vehicles. In addition,
under the requirements of the TREAD Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-414),
manufacturers are required to report to NHTSA on a quarterly
basis aggregated data regarding consumer complaints submitted
to the manufacturer, warranty claims related to certain vehicle
components, as well as vehicle crashes that result in property
damage, serious injury, or death that are alleged to have been
caused by a safety defect. This ``Early Warning Reporting''
data is reviewed by the Defects Assessment Division at NHTSA in
conjunction with the consumer complaints submitted directly to
the agency. If the defects division notices a trend in vehicle
problems reported, the issue is referred to NHTSA's Office of
Defects Investigation (ODI), which may choose to open an
investigation.
Manufacturers are required to notify NHTSA within five days
of finding a vehicle defect that jeopardizes safety. In many
cases, the manufacturer moves directly to a recall without
NHTSA's involvement. About 60 percent of all recalls are
initiated in this manner. NHTSA has no jurisdiction over
vehicle defects that are not safety-related. If a manufacturer
finds a defect with the automobile, but determines it is not
related to safety, there is no requirement that the
manufacturer report it to NHTSA.
If a consumer believes that NHTSA is not adequately
investigating a safety concern, the consumer may submit a
petition requesting NHTSA to open an official investigation
into an alleged safety defect. If NHTSA determines the petition
makes a plausible claim, a defect investigation is opened. If
the petition is denied, NHTSA must publish the reasons for
denial in the Federal Register.
SUDDEN UNINTENDED ACCELERATION INVESTIGATIONS
In early 2010, auto safety entered the headlines due to
concern about sudden unintended acceleration (SUA) in certain
Toyota vehicles. In several widely reported incidents, Toyota
vehicles sped out of control and drivers were unable to stop
their vehicles. Toyota has conducted two separate recalls to
address problems with acceleration and accelerator control in
the past year. In a recall that was first announced in October
2009 and widened a month later, Toyota recalled 4.6 million
vehicles due to concerns that accelerator pedals could become
trapped under floor mats. A January 2010 recall of ``sticky
pedals'' in 2.3 million vehicles was conducted to resolve a
defect in which accelerator pedals would be slow to return to
idle. Although this problem did not lead to SUA, it had other
safety implications.
Investigations into SUA in Toyota vehicles have raised
questions about whether the electronic throttle control systems
that automakers first began installing in vehicles in the early
2000s are responsible for these incidents. With electronic
throttle control, instead of an accelerator pedal pulling a
cable leading to the engine throttle, the new accelerator
pedals have sensors that send electronic signals to the
engine's computer for opening the throttle valve. The computer
precisely calculates the correct air-to-fuel ratio, thus
improving gas mileage and engine power. Some independent
engineers and safety advocates have suggested that electronic
failures could lead to incorrect information being sent to the
throttle, causing unintended acceleration.
After Toyota introduced electronic throttle controls in some
of its model year 2002 vehicles, including the Camry, the
company and NHTSA witnessed increases in driver complaints of
SUA. Drivers reported that their vehicles unexpectedly lurched
forward from a standstill, or accelerated at very high speeds,
without the driver pressing the accelerator pedal. After safety
complaints about SUA in Toyotas first arose in 2003, NHTSA
investigated Lexus vehicles, which are made by Toyota. NHTSA
did not find any safety defects.
But, the persistently high level of complaints about SUA in
Toyotas led NHTSA to open seven more investigations over the
next six years. The next three investigations (2004, 2005, and
2006) again found no safety defects. After the fifth
investigation in 2007, and the eighth investigation in 2009,
Toyota recalled vehicle floor mats that sometimes trapped
accelerator pedals in place.
Nearly every make and model of passenger vehicle has
witnessed reports of SUA. Many of these have been blamed on
driver error, with drivers stepping on the wrong pedal. While
driver error can account for some of the reports of SUA, NHTSA
data analyzed by Consumer Reports suggests that Toyota vehicles
have a higher rate of such complaints than other vehicles,
potentially indicating a problem with the vehicle, not the
drivers. Consumer Reports' analysis of all 5,916 SUA complaints
in NHTSA's database for 2008 model year vehicles found that
Toyota had more such complaints than Chrysler, GM, Honda, and
Nissan combined.\1\ The study also placed the SUA complaints in
the context of market share as is demonstrated in the following
chart: \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Analysis shows over 40 percent of sudden-acceleration
complaints involve Toyotas,'' Consumer Reports, December 7, 2009.
\2\Complaints for 2008 model year vehicles submitted to NHTSA
through August 28, 2009, prior to the media attention related to the
Toyota SUA crashes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of SUA Percentage of SUA
Complaints for Percentage of SUA Automaker's Complaints Above
Automaker the 2008 Model Complaints Average Market or Below Market
Year Share 2007 & 2008 Share
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toyota.............................. 52 41 16 25
Ford................................ 36 28 16 12
Chrysler............................ 11 9 12 3
GM.................................. 7 5 23 -18
Honda............................... 5 4 10 -6
Nissan.............................. 4 3 6 -3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to this analysis, NHTSA received complaints of SUA
for about one in every 50,000 Toyota vehicles made in model
year 2008. In comparison, there was only one such complaint for
every 500,000 GM vehicles from that same model year.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Analysis shows over 40 percent of sudden-acceleration
complaints involve Toyotas,'' Consumer Reports, December 7, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
the country's largest auto insurer, alerted NHTSA officials in
2004 and 2007 that its claims data showed an unexpected jump in
SUA incidents among Toyotas compared to other vehicles.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``State Farm says it warned NHTSA on Toyota in 2007,'' The
Washington Post, February 9, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In December 2009, Toyota hired an independent firm, Exponent,
to investigate its electronic throttle control system. After
tests of six cars and more than 100 new and used engine parts,
the firm said their investigators could not replicate SUA and
had found no defect.\5\ However, engineers outside Toyota have
pointed to several possible flaws in the Exponent study. Toyota
states that it will continue hiring independent firms to
research the problem; NHTSA officials also are taking a fresh
look at the potential for software or electronics causing SUA.
The agency has contracted with the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration to examine the electronics in Toyota
vehicles, and has contracted with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a larger study of electronics in all
vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Suspicions linger over acceleration in Toyota Camrys,'' The
Washington Post, February 20, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADEQUACY OF NHTSA INVESTIGATIONS
The issue of SUA has focused attention on the actions taken
by NHTSA officials in the course of safety investigations and
the relationship between the agency and the entities it
regulates. Safety advocates complain that NHTSA officials
failed to push Toyota to find the cause of SUA. The early NHTSA
investigations into Toyota's SUA appear not to be as rigorous
and thorough as merited.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Toyota Recall Shines Harsh Light On Safety Agency,'' National
Public Radio, February 4, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, in a 2004 investigation,\7\ NHTSA appears to
have used a narrow definition of SUA which led to the under
collection of data. Christopher Santucci, Toyota's manager of
technical and regulatory affairs, who previously worked for
NHTSA, said in a December 2009 court deposition that Toyota did
not provide NHTSA with information about all SUA events because
NHTSA wanted to limit the Toyota documents just to those
involving unintended acceleration from a standstill.\8\ ``I
recall [NHTSA] saying to us, Toyota, myself, that they were not
interested in reports alleging uncontrolled acceleration that
occurred for a long duration,'' Santucci testified.\9\ For that
investigation, Toyota had identified 114 cases of potential
SUA; but after NHTSA limited the investigation to SUA from a
standstill, the inquiry was narrowed down to 11 incidents that
resulted in five crashes, according to the deposition.\10\
Santucci testified that limiting the vehicles to short-duration
incidents was beneficial for both Toyota and NHTSA. ``I think
it worked out well for both the agency and Toyota, meaning
Toyota provided what they were looking for,'' Santucci
testified.\11\ The investigation was closed on July 22, 2004,
when a NHTSA investigator concluded: ``A defect trend has not
been identified at this time and further use of agency
resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this
investigation is closed.''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ NHTSA PE04-021.
\8\ ``Lawsuit Over a Crash Adds to Toyota's Difficulties,'' The New
York Times, February 5, 2010.
\9\ Id.
\10\ ``U.S. Regulators Hired by Toyota Have Helped Deflect Past
U.S. Car Safety Probes,'' Business Week, February 18, 2010.
\11\ ``Lawsuit Over a Crash Adds to Toyota's Difficulties,'' The
New York Times, February 5, 2010.
\12\ NHTSA PE04-021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This limitation to SUA from a standstill may have
inappropriately limited the investigation and biased the
results. Complaints of SUA from a standstill have not created
the most serious injuries and deaths, with the exception of a
driver who was parked beside a cliff overlooking the Pacific
Ocean.\13\ Instead, the most serious injuries and deaths have
occurred when a car reportedly accelerated at full throttle to
speeds of more than 80 mph over a long period of time after the
car was already moving--incidents that fell outside NHTSA
investigators' ``standstill'' definition of SUA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ ``Toyota Recall Shines Harsh Light on Safety Agency,''
National Public Radio, February 4, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA critics accuse the agency's investigators of having a
bias toward mechanical rather than electronic explanations for
defects. Because they could not find a mechanical explanation
for SUA in many cases, critics assert that the investigators
did not adequately search for other possible causes and were
left with human error as an explanation. Allan Kam, a former
NHTSA attorney who worked at the agency for 25 years said:
``There tended to be sort of an institutional bias against
sudden acceleration at [NHTSA]. This belief that, going back
some years ago, that there's no such thing as sudden
acceleration. It was just pedal misapplication.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critics also have raised questions about whether NHTSA has
adequate expertise and resources to investigate safety defects
in a fleet of approximately 256 million vehicles in the United
States. There is concern that NHTSA's limited staff must rely
too heavily on automakers' explanations about whether a safety
defect exists within engine computers and software.\15\ The
Washington Post reported that 33 former NHTSA and DOT employees
now work for automakers as lawyers, consultants, and lobbyists
dealing with safety investigations, recalls, and
regulations.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ``NHTSA overly reliant on carmakers' accounts during complaint
review process,'' The Washington Post, February 5, 2010.
\16\ ``Analysis finds uneasy mix in auto industry and regulation,''
The Washington Post, March 9, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, critics have raised concerns about the level of
consideration provided to defect petitions filed by concerned
individuals. Between 2003 and 2009, NHTSA received six
petitions from consumers requesting that the agency open an
investigation into Toyota SUA. Five of those petitions were
rejected and the sixth was folded into an existing
investigation. The Committee expects NHTSA to respond to defect
petitions that present credible evidence that a defect or non-
compliance may exist. Where appropriate, NHTSA should consider
the petition in context of other information and data provided
to NHTSA by manufacturers and consumers.
Summary of Provisions
As amended in Committee, the legislation would require NHTSA
to issue new safety standards for passenger motor vehicles. The
new standards would require that vehicles be able to stop
within a certain distance even if the throttle is open; that
vehicle electronics meet minimum safety standards; and that
consumers have full access to event data recorders. The bill
would raise the cap on civil penalties to better deter multi-
billion dollar multinational auto companies from violating
safety regulations or withholding critical safety data from
safety investigators. It would also grant the Secretary of
Transportation (Secretary) authority to immediately stop the
sale of vehicles with a defect that can cause death or serious
bodily injury.
To improve information for consumers, the bill would require
more safety data submitted by manufacturers to NHTSA to be made
available to the public. The bill would require NHTSA to update
its consumer information website, and make it more user-
friendly. The bill would require manufactures to give consumers
notice of software upgrades, which have become just as
important to auto safety as mechanical parts. To encourage the
reporting of vehicle defects, auto industry employees would
receive the same whistleblower protections as airline workers.
To promote corporate responsibility, the bill, as amended in
Committee, would require the principal executive officer of a
company residing in the U.S.--or a U.S.-based safety officer of
the company who reports directly to the principal officer--to
personally attest that information sent to NHTSA in response to
a safety investigation is true and does not omit important
information. The bill would prohibit NHTSA employees who work
on vehicle safety issues from working for the auto industry for
a period of three years in a position in which they advise the
industry on vehicle safety regulation.
To help NHTSA adequately enforce vehicle safety regulations,
the bill would increase NHTSA's authorization levels. The
initial increase would be weighted toward dramatically
improving NHTSA's vehicle safety databases and public
information, while also starting the process of hiring more
vehicle safety engineers and inspectors. In later years, a
greater share of the funding would be directed toward the
steady hiring of additional safety personnel. The bill would
also require NHTSA to establish a Council for Vehicle
Electronics, Vehicle Software and Emerging Technologies to
build, focus, and integrate expertise in vehicle electronics.
To protect used car buyers, the bill would require auto
dealers to determine if a used vehicle has any parts or other
problems that have been recalled by the original manufacturer
that have not been remedied. A dealer would then have the
choice of having the recall work performed by a manufacturer's
dealership, or providing conspicuous notice to the consumer
that recalled parts or other problems with the used vehicle
have not been remedied.
During the Committee's Executive Session, amendments were
adopted that would: (1) require NHTSA to issue a new safety
standard requiring electric and hybrid vehicles to make a small
amount of artificial noise at low speeds so that pedestrians--
especially blind pedestrians--can hear these cars approach; (2)
authorize $12 million a year for fiscal years 2011 through 2015
for NHTSA to research the potential of ``in-vehicle''
technology that would prevent a drunk driver from starting a
vehicle; (3) require that all heavy- and medium-duty vehicles
beginning in model year 2017 be equipped with event data
recorders that meet requirements of the bill; (4) require the
Council for Vehicle Electronics, Vehicle Software and Emerging
Technologies to conduct research on the safety of using
lightweight plastics as part of a vehicle's core structure; and
(5) allow the Secretary to notify vehicle owners who fail to
respond to a manufacturer's recall notice to remedy especially
serious safety defects.
Legislative History
On March 2, 2010, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation held a hearing specifically on the issue of
Toyota's recalls and NHTSA's response. To address the concerns
raised during the hearing, on May 4, 2010, Chairman Rockefeller
introduced S. 3302, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010, which
was referred to the Committee for consideration. The Committee
held a second hearing on May 19, 2010, to consider the
legislation. The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Pryor, Snowe,
Boxer, Cantwell, Lautenberg, McCaskill, Klobuchar, Udall, and
Begich.
On June 9, 2010, in an open Executive Session, the Committee
considered the bill, which was modified by a substitute
amendment. Senator Kerry offered an amendment to require NHTSA
to issue a new safety standard requiring electric and hybrid
vehicles to make a small amount of artificial noise at low
speeds so that pedestrians--especially blind pedestrians--can
hear these cars approach. Senator Udall offered an amendment to
authorize $12 million a year for fiscal years 2011 through 2015
for NHTSA to research the potential of ``in-vehicle''
technology that would prevent a drunk driver from starting a
vehicle. Senator Udall also offered an amendment to require
that all heavy- and medium-duty vehicles beginning in model
year 2017 be equipped with event data recorders that meet
requirements of the bill. Senator Warner offered an amendment
to require the Council for Vehicle Electronics, Vehicle
Software and Emerging Technologies to conduct research on the
safety of using lightweight plastics as part of a vehicle's
core structure. Senator Thune offered an amendment to allow the
Secretary to notify vehicle owners who fail to respond to a
manufacturer's recall notice to remedy especially serious
safety defects. The Committee adopted these amendments as part
of a managers' package and reported S. 3302 favorably by voice
vote.
Also during the Executive Session, Ranking Member Hutchison
expressed an interest in revisiting the bill's authorization
levels and new requirements for used car sales before
consideration by the full Senate. Similarly, Senator McCaskill
expressed the hope that the bill's corporate accountability
requirements would be reviewed to ensure equal treatment of
foreign and domestic manufacturers.
In the House of Representatives, Representative Henry Waxman,
Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce,
introduced similar legislation on May 25, 2010, as H.R. 5381.
On May 26, 2010, the House Committee ordered H.R. 5381 to be
reported favorably with amendments.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
S. 3302--Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010
Summary: S. 3302 would authorize the appropriation of an
estimated $782 million over the 2011-2015 period for the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to
establish new safety standards for certain vehicles, complete
safety research, and make certain information more readily
available to the public. Assuming appropriation of the
specified amounts and the amounts estimated to be necessary,
CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost $761
million over the 2011-2015 period.
Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the
legislation could affect revenues. The bill would increase
certain civil penalties paid by vehicle manufacturers; such
collections are classified as revenues in the budget. Based on
information from NHTSA about historical penalty collections,
CBO estimates that the expanded penalties would increase
revenues by $1 million per year over the 2011-2020 period.
S. 3302 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) because it would
preempt state laws relating to the safety standards for motor
vehicles established by the bill. While that preemption would
limit the application of state law, CBO estimates that it would
impose no duty on state, local, or tribal governments that
would result in additional spending.
By placing new requirements on manufacturers of motor
vehicles and used car dealerships, S. 3302 would impose
private-sector mandates, as defined in UMRA. The cost of
several of the mandates related to vehicle motor safety would
depend on future regulations. However, because the requirements
would apply to a large number of vehicles intended for sale in
the United States each year, CBO estimates that the total cost
of the mandates would probably exceed the annual threshold
($141 million in 2010, adjusted annually for inflation) in at
least one of the first five years the mandates are in effect.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 3302 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 400
(transportation).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
2011-
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION\a\
Estimated Authorization Level....................... 214 252 292 12 12 782
Estimated Outlays................................... 124 204 259 122 52 761
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\CBO estimates that enacting S. 3302 also would increase revenues by $1 million a year over the 2011-2020
period.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S.
3302 will be enacted in 2010 and that the authorized amounts
will be appropriated each year. Estimates of spending are based
on historical spending patterns for similar programs.
Spending subject to appropriation
S. 3302 would authorize appropriations of $780 million over
the 2011-2015 period for certain NHTSA operations. CBO
estimates that an additional $2 million would be necessary to
carry out a rulemaking to require hybrid and electric vehicles
to generate sounds. The bill would require NHTSA to create new
regulations and to update certain safety regulations that are
applied to motor vehicles. The agency would be required to
complete new research and expedite other research on several
topics related to the safety of motor vehicles, including
research on detecting alcohol use by drivers. NHTSA also would
be required to make certain information more readily available
to the public, expand the capabilities of an existing telephone
call center, and submit several new reports to the Congress.
Based on information from NHTSA and assuming appropriation of
the amounts specified and estimated to be necessary, CBO
estimates that implementing those provisions would cost about
$761 million over the 2011-2015 period.
Revenues
H.R. 5381 would increase civil penalties paid by vehicle
manufacturers who violate certain regulations governing motor
vehicle safety. Collections of civil fines are recorded as
revenues and deposited in the Treasury. Based on information
from NHTSA about historical penalty collections and the number
of violations, CBO estimates that the expanded penalties would
increase revenues by $1 million per year over the 2011-2020
period.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. The net changes in revenues that are subject to those
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table.
CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 3302 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ON JUNE 9, 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010- 2010-
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2015 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN THE DEFICIT
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact.................. 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -5 -10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments:
S. 3302 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in
UMRA because it would preempt state laws relating to the safety
standards for motor vehicles required by the bill. While that
preemption would limit the application of state law, CBO
estimates that it would impose no duty on state, local, or
tribal governments that would result in additional spending.
Estimated impact on the private sector: By placing new
requirements on manufacturers of motor vehicles and used car
dealerships, S. 3302 would impose private-sector mandates, as
defined in UMRA. The cost of several of the mandates related to
vehicle motor safety would depend on future regulations.
However, because the requirements would apply to a large number
of vehicles intended for sale in the United States per year,
CBO estimates that the total cost of the mandates would
probably exceed the annual threshold ($141 million in 2010,
adjusted annually for inflation) in at least one of the first
five years the mandates are in effect.
Safety standards for passenger motor vehicles
The bill would direct NHTSA to establish safety standards
for such things as the configuration and labeling of gear shift
controls, the control of vehicles with push-button ignition
systems, and fail-safe systems for accelerator control systems.
NHTSA estimates that the safety standards would apply to 12
million to 17 million passenger motor vehicles annually over
the next five years. Based on information from NHTSA and
industry sources about the cost of potential requirements, CBO
estimates that the cost to the industry to comply with the new
standards could be significant. Because the types of safety
requirements implemented would be determined by future
regulations, CBO cannot estimate the cost of the mandates.
Event data recorders
The bill would require manufacturers to install event data
recorders (EDRs) in all passenger vehicles sold in the United
States beginning in model year 2015 and in all medium-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles by model year 2017. EDRs record information
from a vehicle before, during, and after a safety event such as
when an air bag is deployed.
Information from industry sources indicates that it would
cost each passenger car manufacturer $6 million in development
costs and $5.50 per vehicle to install EDRs that meet existing
standards. Most passenger cars now produced already include
EDRs. However, EDRs would have to meet new standards to be
established by NHTSA related to the types of events recorded,
the length of the recording for each event, and the types of
data stored. Because such standards would be determined by
future regulations, CBO cannot estimate the cost of this
mandate to the manufacturers of passenger vehicles.
According to information from NHTSA, a few hundred thousand
medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles are produced each year.
Because the cost to install EDRs on medium-duty and heavy-duty
vehicles would depend upon future rules and regulations, CBO
has no basis for determining the cost of the mandate to the
manufacturers of medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles.
Hybrid and electric vehicle sounds
S. 3302 would require hybrid and electric vehicles to
generate sounds that alert blind pedestrians when such a
vehicle is operating nearby in a quiet mode. Based on
information from NHTSA and industry sources on the number of
vehicles that could be affected and the potential cost of
installing such devices, CBO estimates that the cost of this
mandate would be small relative to the annual threshold.
Notification of recalls by used car dealers
The bill would require used-car dealers to notify each
customer in writing of any recalls on a vehicles that have not
been remedied before completing a sale or lease transaction.
According to industry sources, about 27 million used vehicles
are sold or leased by dealers per year and it would take about
15 minutes per vehicle to prepare the required paperwork and
search for any outstanding recalls. The direct cost of the
mandate would primarily be any additional staffing expenses
dealers would incur. Based on information from industry
sources, CBO estimates that the direct cost of the mandate
would be small relative to the annual threshold.
Other mandates
CBO estimates that the incremental costs of several other
private-sector mandates imposed by the bill would be minimal.
For example, the legislation would require manufacturers of
motor vehicles to:
Make information about recalls and notices
of software upgrades available to customers on the
Internet;
Place information about submitting a safety
related complaint to NHTSA in each automobile;
Have a senior official responsible for
safety residing in the United States who would certify
certain information submitted to the Department of
Transportation;
Send a mailing list of current owners of a
recalled vehicle to the Department of Transportation,
upon request;
Not hire certain former NHTSA employees for
a period of 36 months after the employee stops working
at NHTSA; and
Comply with whistleblower protections for
employees.
Previous CBO estimate: On June 25, 2010, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 5381, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
2010, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce on May 25, 2010. That bill would authorize
appropriations of $1.1 billion and would impose a user fee that
would offset some of the costs of the authorized
appropriations. In total, CBO estimated that H.R. 5381 would
authorize net appropriations of $876 million over the 2010-2015
period. Each bill also contains both intergovernmental and
private-sector mandates.
Estimate prepared by: Federal spending: Sarah Puro; Federal
revenues: Mark Booth; Impact on state, local, and tribal
governments: Ryan Miller; Impact on the private sector: Samuel
Wice.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED
The legislation would apply to: (1) motor vehicle
manufacturers or motor vehicle equipment manufacturers that
sell vehicles and equipment in the United States; (2) dealers
and distributors of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment
within the United States; (3) motor vehicle mechanics, and (4)
persons, including corporations with vehicle fleets, who
operate motor vehicles.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The legislation would affect the nation's economy to the
extent that it would require, for specific kinds of
information, persons covered under the bill to collect, retain,
and report safety-related information regarding motor vehicles
or motor vehicle equipment. Additional safety-related
information may be required by the Secretary as a result of his
or her authorized rulemaking authority, the economic impact of
which cannot be defined until the rulemaking concludes. The
legislation also may require automakers to install some new
safety features on passenger motor vehicles. CBO estimates that
the cost to the industry to comply with the new standards could
be significant, but cannot be calculated before the completion
of required rulemakings.
PRIVACY AND PAPERWORK
The impact on the personal privacy of the persons covered by
this legislation is difficult to define prior to the completion
of the Secretary's rulemaking proceedings authorized under the
legislation. The required rulemaking on event data recorders
may result in the collection of private information, but the
bill clarifies that any such information would remain the
property of the vehicle's owner or lessee. The outcome of these
rulemaking proceedings will also determine whether paperwork
requirements will be necessary.
Congressionally Directed Spending
In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the
rule.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short Title
Section 1 would establish the short title of the Act as the
``Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010.'' The section also contains
a Table of Contents.
Section 2. Definitions
Section 2 would define ``passenger motor vehicle'' for
purposes of the Act as a motor vehicle under 10,000 pounds
gross vehicular weight, but not including a motorcycle, low
speed vehicle or trailer. The section also would define
``Secretary'' as the Secretary of Transportation, acting
through the Administrator of NHTSA.
Title I--Vehicle Electronics and Safety Standards.
Section 101. NHTSA Electronics, Software and Engineering Expertise
Section 101 would establish within NHTSA a Council for
Vehicle Electronics, Vehicle Software and Emerging Technologies
(Council) to build, focus and integrate expertise in vehicle
electronics. The section also would charge the Council with
investigating the safety of lightweight plastics used in motor
vehicles and assessing implications of emerging safety
technologies in consultation with affected stakeholders,
including safety advocacy groups. The section would establish
an ``Honors Recruitment Program'' to train engineering students
for a career in vehicle safety. During the Committee hearings,
the Committee received testimony that NHTSA only had two
electronics engineers to assess today's vehicles. NHTSA at the
time had no software engineers, although computers now run many
vehicle functions, including acceleration.
Section 102. Vehicle Stopping Distance and Brake Override Standard.
Section 102 would require the Secretary to initiate a
rulemaking to prescribe a motor vehicle safety standard by
which every new passenger motor vehicle must be able to stop
safely by normal brake application, even when the engine is
receiving accelerator input signals. In issuing the rule, the
Secretary would be permitted to allow vehicles to temporarily
suspend the safety function for times when both brake and
accelerator need to be applied together, such as on a steep
hill or for maneuvering a trailer. The rule would require the
installation of redundant circuits or mechanisms for the
accelerator control system in the event that the primary
circuit or mechanism fails. The section would require the
Secretary to issue the final rule within one year after
enactment. While the Secretary may permit compliance with the
new standard through the incorporation of ``brake override''
technology that instructs engine computers to allow the brake
to override the accelerator pedal, the section is technology
neutral. If a better technology or mechanism emerges for
stopping vehicles while the vehicle receives accelerator
inputs, the automakers would be free to adopt it.
Section 103. Pedal Placement Standard.
Section 103 would require the Secretary to consider issuing a
rule to require minimum distances between floor pedals, minimum
distances between foot pedals and the vehicle floor, and
minimum distances to account for any other potential
obstructions to pedal movement. The Secretary would be required
to issue the rule within 3 years after enactment, or, if the
Secretary determines that a standard is not warranted, transmit
to Congress a report stating the reasons for not issuing a
rule.
Section 104. Electronic Systems Performance Standard.
Section 104 would require the Secretary to issue a rule
requiring passenger vehicles to meet minimum performance
standards for electronic systems, taking into account
electronic components, the interaction of electronic
components, or the effect of surrounding environments on the
entire vehicle electronic systems. The Secretary would be
required to issue the rule within 4 years after enactment. The
Committee notes that while there already are several industry-
wide standards for electronics that most automakers meet, new
entrants to the U.S. auto market and existing manufacturers are
under no obligation to meet those industry standards.
Therefore, a Federal regulation setting minimum electronics
standard would help to ensure that all vehicles sold in the
United States have safe electronics systems.
Section 105. Push-Button Ignition Systems Standard.
Section 105 would require the Secretary to initiate a
rulemaking to consider issuing a rule that establishes a
uniform protocol by which a driver who may be unfamiliar with
the vehicle uses a push-button ignition system during an
emergency situation. The Secretary would be required to issue
the rule within 2 years after enactment, or, if the Secretary
determines that a standard is not warranted, transmit to
Congress a report stating the reasons for not issuing a rule.
The Committee expects that the Secretary would use discretion
in determining which types of push-button systems would be
required to have standardized operations pursuant to any rule
issued under this section, and does not anticipate that systems
that require the physical insertion of a tangible key device to
start the ignition would necessitate such a rule.
Section 106. Transmission Labeling Standard.
Section 106 would require the Secretary to consider issuing a
rule that requires accurate labeling for gear shifting
controls, including for drivers not familiar with the vehicle.
The Secretary would be required to issue the rule within 2
years after enactment, or, if the Secretary determines that a
standard is not warranted, transmit to Congress a report
stating the reasons for not issuing a rule.
Section 107. Vehicle Event Data Recorders Standard.
Subsection 107(a) would direct the Secretary to revise part
563 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations to require
that new vehicles sold in the United States beginning with the
2015 model year be equipped with event data recorders (EDRs)
that meet the standards set forth in that part. Subsection (b)
would establish that the data in an EDR is the property of the
owner or lessee of the passenger vehicle. The subsection
further provides that data from the EDR may not be retrieved by
a third party without the consent of the owner or lessee,
except pursuant to a court order, pursuant to an authorized
NHTSA investigation and then only if personally identifiable
information is not disclosed, or for the purpose of
facilitating emergency medical response. Subsection (c) would
require the Secretary to issue, within 3 years after enactment,
a rule for new data requirements for passenger motor vehicle
EDRs. Subsection (d) would establish specifications for the
rule to be issued under subsection (c), including a requirement
that the EDR store data covering a reasonable time before and
after a triggering event, a requirement that data stored be
accessible with commercially available equipment, a requirement
for preventing unauthorized access to stored data, a direction
that the Secretary consider requiring an interoperable data
access port, and a prohibition on the EDR recording vehicle
location information for purposes other than facilitating
emergency medical response in the event of a crash. Subsection
(e) would require manufacturers to disclose the existence and
purpose of the EDR to purchasers of passenger motor vehicles.
Subsection (f) would clarify that NHTSA would have access to
EDR data pursuant to an investigation authorized by section
30166(c)(3)(C) of title 49, subject to the privacy limitations
of subsection (b). Subsection (g) would require the Secretary
to require all new medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles sold in
the United States beginning with the 2017 model year to be
equipped with an EDR.
Title II--Enhanced Safety Authorities
Section 201. Civil Penalties.
Section 201(a) would increase the per-vehicle civil penalty
from $5,000 to $25,000, and raise the overall cap on civil
penalties from $15 million to $300 million for auto
manufacturers that intentionally fail to report vehicle safety
defects to NHTSA, or that intentionally provide misleading
information to NHTSA. Before issuing a fine, the Secretary
would be required to consider several relevant factors in
setting the level of the fine, including the nature of the
violation, the severity of the risk of injury, actions taken by
the person charged to identify, investigate or mitigate the
violation, the nature of the defect or noncompliance, and the
size of the company. Subsection (b) would require the Secretary
to issue a final regulation, within 1 year after enactment,
providing the Secretary's interpretation of the penalty factors
set forth in subsection (a).
Section 202. Imminent Hazard Authority.
Section 202 would give the Secretary authority to expedite
the process of a recall in the event that the vehicle defect
``presents a substantial likelihood of death or serious injury
to the public if not discontinued immediately.'' The Secretary
would be required, within 2 years after enactment, to establish
procedures and circumstances by which this extraordinary
authority would be used.
Title III--Transparency and Accountability
Section 301. Public Availability of Early Warning Data.
Section 301 would reverse the presumption under the TREAD Act
that none of the information submitted by manufacturers should
be made public, unless the Secretary determines that it should,
in favor of requiring the disclosure of the maximum amount of
safety information to the public, while at the same time still
giving the Secretary the authority to protect confidential,
competitive business information from public disclosure.
Section 301(a) would amend section 30166(m) of title 49 by
codifying certain types of data that auto manufacturers would
be required to submit to NHTSA. Subsection (b) would require
the Secretary to issue regulations within 2 years after the
date of enactment establishing categories of early warning data
that must be made available to the public and categories that
may be confidential and exempt from public disclosure.
Subsection (c) would require the Secretary to consult with the
Director of the Office of Government Information Services in
the National Archives and the Director of the Office of
Information Policy of the Department of Justice in conducting
the rulemaking under this section. Subsection (d) would require
the Secretary to favor maximum public availability of
information in issuing a rule under subsection (b) and would
provide that vehicle safety defect information related to
incidents involving death or injury, aggregated numbers of
property damage claims, and aggregated numbers of consumer
complaints related to potential vehicle defects are
presumptively not confidential information and eligible for
protection under section 552(b) of title 5. Greater
transparency and public disclosure is intended to facilitate
the identification of potential safety defects by NHTSA,
manufacturers, and safety advocates, and help consumers make
informed decisions about passenger motor vehicles. The
Committee expects the Secretary to expeditiously provide the
public with access to nonconfidential data in a format that
promotes ease of use and transparency.
Section 302. Improved NHTSA Vehicle Safety Database.
Subsection 302(a) would require NHTSA to modernize its
vehicle safety databases to facilitate public access by
improving their organization and functionality, standardizing
search terms, and posting aggregate data files for easy
download. Subsection (b) would require the Secretary to
establish a means by which an individual could search by
vehicle identification number and determine whether a vehicle
was subject to a safety recall and whether the safety issue
related to such recall had been remedied. The subsection would
allow the Secretary of Transportation to accomplish this by
requiring automakers to provide such recall information at no
cost on their own web sites.
Section 303. Consumer Notice of Software Updates and Other
Communications with Dealers.
Section 303 would require manufacturers to notify the
Secretary, and to publish on their web sites, notices to
dealers and owner communications, including software updates,
so that consumers will be better informed about potential
safety issues affecting their vehicles. Many of the ``fixes''
for defective vehicles--such as the remedies for the Toyota
Prius braking system and the Lexus GX stability control
system--involve reprogramming the vehicle's software. Some
software updates are done through recalls. However, some
software updates are performed during routine maintenance at
dealerships often without the knowledge of the vehicle owner.
The section would require manufacturers to provide a plain
language description of such communications that summarizes all
the pertinent consumer information and to provide an index to
each communication that identifies the make, model, and model
year of the affected vehicles. The Secretary would be required
to make the index and summary available to the public on the
Internet in searchable format. The section is meant to
facilitate, not supplant, public access to dealer and consumer
communications submitted to NHTSA that may be sought through
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Committee expects
NHTSA to respond in a timely manner to all FOIA requests.
Section 304. Promotion of Vehicle Defect Reporting.
Section 304 would require the placement of a sticker or other
notification in the glove box or other location accessible by
the consumer with plain language about how to contact NHTSA to
report a potential vehicle safety defect.
Section 305. NHTSA Hotline for Manufacturer, Dealer, and Mechanic
Personnel.
Section 305 would require NHTSA to establish a ``hotline''
for mechanics and other auto industry workers to confidentially
report potential vehicle defects.
Section 306. Whistleblower Protections For Motor Vehicle Manufacturer,
Part Supplier and Dealership Employees.
Section 306 would amend subchapter IV of chapter 301 of title
49 to establish protections against retaliation for auto
industry executives, production workers, dealership employees
and mechanics who provide information related to a motor
vehicle defect or violation of law. The whistleblower
protections set forth in this section are consistent with the
protection currently provided to airline employees.
Specifically, the section would provide that no motor vehicle
manufacturer, part supplier, or dealership may discharge or
otherwise discriminate against an employee because the
employee: provided or is about to provide to the employer or
the Secretary information relating to a motor vehicle defect or
violation of chapter 301 of title 49; has filed or is about to
file a proceeding related to a violation of a motor vehicle
safety defect or violation of the chapter; testified, assisted
or is about to testify or assist in such a proceeding; or
objected to, or refused to participate in, any activity that
the employee reasonably believed to be in violation of any
provision of any Act enforced by the Secretary. Under the
section, a person who believes they have been discharged or
discriminated against in violation of the above would be able
to file a complaint with the Secretary of Labor within 180 days
after the date of the violation. The complaint must make a
prima facia showing.
Within 60 days after receipt of the complaint and after
affording opportunity for response from the person named in the
complaint, the Secretary of Labor would be required to conduct
an investigation. If the Secretary of Labor concluded that
there is reasonable cause to believe a violation has occurred,
the Secretary of Labor would issue a preliminary order with
findings. The person named in the complaint would be able to
object to the order and findings and seek a hearing. If a
hearing is not requested in 30 days, the preliminary order
would be deemed final.
The section further provides that, after a hearing, the
Secretary of Labor would be required to issue a final order
within 120 days. Upon a finding of a violation, the Secretary
of Labor in a final order would be able to require the person
who committed the violation to take affirmative action to abate
the violation, reinstate the complainant, and provide
compensatory damages. If a complaint is determined to be
frivolous, the Secretary of Labor would be able to award the
prevailing employer a reasonable attorney's fee not to exceed
$1,000. If the Secretary of Labor has not issued a final order
within 210 days of the filing of a complaint, the complainant
would be allowed to bring an action in the district court of
the United States. Final orders would be appealable to the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals. If an employer does not
comply with a final order, the Secretary of Labor would be able
to file a civil action in the United States District Court to
enforce that order.
Section 307. Corporate Responsibility for NHTSA Reports.
Subsection 307(a) would direct the Secretary to require, for
each company submitting information in response to a request
for information in a safety defect or compliance investigation,
that a principal officer certify that the signing officer has
reviewed the submission and, based on the officer's knowledge,
the submission does not contain an untrue statement of a
material fact or omit a material fact. For purposes of this
section, a principal officer means an officer of the company
who resides in the United States who is responsible for safety
compliance under U.S. laws and who reports directly to the
principal executive office of the company or the principal
executive officer of the company residing in the United States.
Subsection 307(b) would establish that a person who knowingly
and willfully submits materially false, misleading, or
incomplete information to the Secretary, after certifying the
same pursuant to subsection (a), would be subject to a civil
penalty of not more than $50,000 per day with a maximum penalty
for a related series of violations of $10,000,000. The
subsection further provides that a person who violates section
1001 of title 18 with the specific intent of misleading the
Secretary with respect to a motor vehicle safety defect would
be subject to imprisonment for not more than 12 months in
addition to the penalties set forth in section 1001 of title
18.
The certification process is similar to that established for
executive officers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. On May
18, 2010, Toyota paid a fine of $16.4 million, without
admitting wrongdoing, after NHTSA found that it had failed to
report a safety defect related to certain accelerator pedals in
a timely manner. In addition to improving the accuracy of
submissions to NHTSA, it is hoped that this section will reduce
such failures to report defects to NHTSA by requiring a senior
officer in the company to participate in the review of such
filings.
The section would seek to strike a balance between making
sure a senior executive with authority to influence corporate
policy is closely overseeing reporting to NHTSA with
facilitating the flow of information to NHTSA. The Committee
understands that NHTSA may seek information through a series of
information requests and companies may wish to provide
information to NHTSA as it becomes available. The Committee
supports the free flow of information and application of this
section to enable NHTSA to receive information as quickly as
possible. The Committee notes that liability under the section
applies only to a knowing and willful violation that is
material and not to unintentional omissions and misstatements.
Section 308. Anti-Revolving Door.
Subsection 308(a) would prohibit a covered NHTSA employee to
commence employment with, or otherwise advise or represent, a
manufacturer or other person subject to regulation under
chapter 301 of title 49 during the 36-month period after
leaving NHTSA, if such employment involves communicating with
NHTSA with respect to compliance with safety regulations,
representing or advising a manufacturer with respect to a motor
vehicle safety or fuel economy issue, or assisting a
manufacturer in responding to a request for information from
NHTSA. Covered NHTSA employees would be defined as individuals
to whom section 207 (c) or (d) of title 18 applies or whose
responsibilities during their last 12 months of employment at
NHTSA included administrative, managerial, supervisory, legal,
or senior technical responsibility for any motor vehicle
safety-related program or activity. The subsection would not
apply to individuals employed by a manufacturer or other
covered entity as of the date of enactment.
Subsection 308(a) would also prohibit a manufacturer or other
covered entity from employing or contracting for the services
of a covered individual during the 36 month period following
his or her departure from NHTSA. The subsection would establish
that persons violating the provision would be subject to civil
penalties as set forth in section 216(b) of title 18, and
manufacturers or other covered entities who violate the
provision would be subject to a penalty of not less than
$100,000 and an amount equal to 90 percent of the annual
compensation or fee paid to the individual with respect to whom
the violation occurred.
Subsection 308(b) would direct the DOT Inspector General to
review the Department's policies and procedures applicable to
official communications with former employees concerning motor
vehicle safety compliance matters for which they had
responsibility during the last 12 months of their employment
and submit a report containing his findings, conclusions, and
recommendations, within 1 year, to the Committee and the House
of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Subsection 308(c) would direct the DOT Inspector General to
study the Department's policies relating to post-employment
restrictions on employees who perform functions related to
transportation safety and submit, within 1 year, to the
Committee and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy
and Commerce, a report containing his findings, conclusions,
and recommendations.
Section 309. Deadlines for Rulemaking.
Section 309 would require the Secretary to notify Congress if
a rulemaking deadline will not be met, explain the reason for
the delay, and establish a new deadline.
Section 310. Used Passenger Motor Vehicle Consumer Protection.
Section 310 would prohibit a dealer from selling or leasing a
used passenger motor vehicle until the dealer clearly and
conspicuously notifies the purchaser or lessee of any
outstanding notifications of safety defects with respect to a
vehicle that have not been remedied and the purchaser or lessee
acknowledges such notification in writing. The requirement
would not apply to a dealer to the extent that recall
information regarding a vehicle was not accessible at the time
of the sale or lease through the search function established by
NHTSA under section 302(b) of the Act. The section further
provides that the Secretary may exempt by rule vehicles that
are auctioned. The Committee notes that many used vehicles are
sold at auction to dealers and not directly to consumers. The
section would provide the Secretary with flexibility to exempt
such business to business transactions. The section would be
effective 18 months after enactment.
Section 311. Use of Existing Regulatory Framework.
Section 311 would provide that, in conducting a rulemaking
required by this Act, the Secretary would, where appropriate,
amend or modify existing regulations or standards pertaining to
the same or similar subject matter. However, the Secretary
would not be required to amend or modify existing regulations
or standards for any rulemaking, if the Secretary determines
that such a change does not further the goal of safety.
Section 312. Recalled Vehicles and Replacement Equipment.
Section 312 would authorize the Secretary to have the DOT
individually notify vehicle owners of the importance of a
particular safety recall, if the Secretary determines that the
first and second recall notices of a manufacturer have failed
to result in an adequate number of recall remedies. The section
would authorize the Secretary to use government databases, or
require manufacturers to provide vehicle owner information, to
enable the Secretary to locate and notify vehicle owners of the
recall.
Title IV--Funding
Section 401. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 401 would increase authorizations for NHTSA's vehicle
safety functions to $200 million in FY 2011, $240 million in FY
2012, and $280 million in FY 2013. In FY 2010, Congress
allocated NHTSA $140 million for vehicle safety operations,
including rulemakings, investigations, and enforcement.
Testimony before Congress during the Toyota hearings
illustrated that NHTSA does not have enough people or resources
to adequately enforce vehicle safety regulations for
approximately 256 million vehicles on American roads. NHTSA
also lacks the expertise to investigate automobile software
that now controls many vehicle safety functions. The Committee
expects the initial increase would be weighted toward improving
NHTSA's vehicle safety databases and information collection,
while also starting the process of hiring additional personnel.
In FY 2012 and FY 2013, an increasingly greater share of the
funding would be directed toward the steady hiring of more auto
safety engineers, vehicle inspectors, and enforcement
personnel.
Title V--Pedestrian Safety Enhancement
Section 501. Short Title.
This section would provide that the title may be cited as the
``Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010.''
Section 502. Definitions.
Section 502 would set forth the definitions used in the
title.
Section 503. Minimum Sound Requirement for Motor Vehicles.
Subsection 503(a) would require the Secretary, within 18
months after enactment, to initiate a rulemaking to promulgate
a motor vehicle safety standard to establish performance
requirements for an alert sound that allows blind and other
pedestrians to reasonably detect a nearby electric or hybrid
vehicle operating below a cross-over speed and require new
electric or hybrid vehicles to provide an alert sound
conforming to the standard. Subsection (b) would require the
Secretary to determine the minimum level of sound emitted from
a motor vehicle that is necessary to provide pedestrians with
the information needed to reasonably detect a nearby electric
or hybrid vehicle, determine the performance requirements for
an alert sound that is recognizable, and consider the overall
community noise impact. Subsection (c) would establish a phase-
in period of 3 years after the date on which the final rule is
issued. Subsection (d) would require the Secretary, in
conducting the study and rulemaking, to consult with various
entities including automobile manufacturers, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and consumer groups. Subsection (e) would
require the Secretary within 48 months of the date after
enactment to study and report to Congress whether there exists
a safety need to apply the motor vehicle safety standard
required by subsection (a) to conventional motor vehicles.
Section 504. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 504 would authorize such sums as may be necessary to
carry out this title.
Title VI--In-vehicle Alcohol Detection Device Research
Section 601. Short Title.
This section would provide that the title may be cited as the
``Research of Alcohol Detection Systems for Stopping Alcohol-
related Fatalities Everywhere Act of 2010,'' or the ``ROADS
SAFE Act of 2010.''
Section 602. Findings.
Section 602 would set forth findings by Congress about the
need for alcohol detection technologies in motor vehicles.
Section 603. Driver Alcohol Detection System For Safety Research.
Subsection 603(a) would direct the Administrator of NHTSA to
carry out a collaborative research effort to continue to
explore the feasibility and the potential benefits of
widespread deployment of in vehicle technology to prevent
alcohol-impaired driving. Subsection (b) would require the
Administrator to submit a report to the Committee and the House
of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce describing
progress in the research effort and including an accounting for
the use of Federal funds expanded in carrying out the effort.
Section 604. Definitions.
Section 604 would set forth the definitions used in the
title.
Section 605. Application With Other Laws.
Section 605 would provide that nothing in this title would be
construed to modify or otherwise affect any Federal, State, or
local government law, civil or criminal, with respect to the
operation of a motor vehicle.
Section 606. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 606 would authorize to be appropriated $12,000,000
for each of FYs 2011 through 2015 to carry out subsection (a).
The section would further provide that any amounts appropriated
that are not needed to carry out the research may be used by
the Secretary for highway safety research in accordance with
chapter 301 of title 49.
Rollcall Votes in Committee
Senator Hutchison made a motion to report S. 3302 out of the
Committee, and to incorporate amendments by Sen. Kerry (Title
V), Sen. Udall (Title VI, and electronic data recorders for
commercial vehicles in section 107), Sen. Thune (section 312),
and Sen. Warner (lightweight plastics research in section 101).
The motion was seconded, and Chairman Rockefeller called for
the yeas and nays. The Chairman ruled that S. 3302 was reported
out of Committee by voice vote.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill,
as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be
omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown
in roman):
TITLE 49. TRANSPORTATION
SUBTITLE VI. MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS
PART A. GENERAL
CHAPTER 301. MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY
SUBCHAPTER I. GENERAL
Sec. 30104. Authorization of appropriations
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary
[$98,313,500] for the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration to carry out this part [in each fiscal year
beginning in fiscal year 1999 and ending in fiscal year 2001.]
and to carry out the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010--
(1) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
(2) $240,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
(3) $280,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 30107. Restriction on certain employment activities
(a) NHTSA Employees.--
(1) In general.--A individual to whom this subsection
applies who is employed by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration may not commence employment with,
or otherwise advise, provide assistance to, or
represent for compensation, a manufacturer or other
person subject to regulation under this chapter during
the 36-month period commencing upon that individual's
termination of employment with the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration if such employment,
advice, assistance, or representation involves--
(A) written or oral communication with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
on any matter relating to compliance with the
requirements of this chapter on behalf of the
manufacturer or person;
(B) representing or advising a manufacturer
with respect to a motor vehicle safety or fuel
economy issue, including any defect related to
motor vehicle safety, compliance with a motor
vehicle safety standard, or compliance with an
average fuel economy standard prescribed under
chapter 329 of this title; or
(C) assisting a manufacturer in responding to
a request for information from the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
(2) Application.--
(A) In general.--This subsection applies to
any individual--
(i) to whom section 207 (c) or (d) of
title 18 applies; or
(ii) whose responsibilities during
his or her last 12 months of employment
at the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration included administrative,
managerial, supervisory, legal, or
senior technical responsibility for any
motor vehicle safety-related program or
activity.
(3) Safe harbor.--This subsection does not apply to
any individual employed by a manufacturer or other
person subject to regulation under this chapter as of
the date of enactment of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act
of 2010.
(b) Manufacturers.--It is unlawful for any manufacturer or
other person subject to regulation under this chapter to employ
or contract for the services of an individual to whom
subsection (a) applies during the 36-month period commencing on
the individual's termination of employment with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration in a capacity in which
the individual is prohibited from serving during that period.
CHAPTER 301. MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY
SUBCHAPTER II. STANDARDS AND COMPLIANCE
Sec. 30118. Notification of defects and noncompliance
(a) Notification by Secretary.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall notify the manufacturer of a motor vehicle
or replacement equipment immediately after making an initial
decision (through testing, inspection, investigation, or
research carried out under this chapter, examining
communications under section 30166(f) of this title, or
otherwise) that the vehicle or equipment contains a defect
related to motor vehicle safety or does not comply with an
applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this
chapter. The notification shall include the information on
which the decision is based. The Secretary shall publish a
notice of each decision under this subsection in the Federal
Register. Subject to section 30167(a) of this title, the
notification and information are available to any interested
person.
(b) Defect and Noncompliance Proceedings and Orders.--
(1) The Secretary may make a final decision that a
motor vehicle or replacement equipment contains a
defect related to motor vehicle safety or does not
comply with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard
prescribed under this chapter only after giving the
manufacturer an opportunity to present information,
views, and arguments showing that there is no defect or
noncompliance or that the defect does not affect motor
vehicle safety. Any interested person also shall be
given an opportunity to present information, views, and
arguments.
(2) If the Secretary of Transportation in making a
decision under subsection (a) initially decides that
such defect or noncompliance presents a substantial
likelihood of death or serious injury to the public if
not discontinued immediately, the Secretary shall
notify the manufacturer of the decision that the
vehicle or replacement equipment poses an imminent
safety hazard to the public and the basis for that
decision. Not later than 10 days after the initial
decision, the manufacturer and interested persons shall
be given an opportunity to present information, views,
and arguments to the Secretary. The Secretary shall
consider such information, views and arguments and may
make a final decision as to whether a motor vehicle or
replacement equipment contains a defect related to
motor vehicle safety or does not comply with an
applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed
under this chapter.
[(2)] (3) If the Secretary decides under paragraph
(1) or (2) of this subsection that the vehicle or
equipment contains the defect or does not comply, the
Secretary shall order the manufacturer to--
(A) give notification under section 30119 of
this title to the owners, purchasers, and
dealers of the vehicle or equipment of the
defect or noncompliance; and
(B) remedy the defect or noncompliance under
section 30120 of this title.
(c) Notification by Manufacturer.--A manufacturer of a motor
vehicle or replacement equipment shall notify the Secretary by
certified mail, and the owners, purchasers, and dealers of the
vehicle or equipment as provided in section 30119(d) of this
section, if the manufacturer--
(1) learns the vehicle or equipment contains a defect
and decides in good faith that the defect is related to
motor vehicle safety; or
(2) decides in good faith that the vehicle or
equipment does not comply with an applicable motor
vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter.
(d) Exemptions.--On application of a manufacturer, the
Secretary shall exempt the manufacturer from this section if
the Secretary decides a defect or noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The Secretary may take
action under this subsection only after notice in the Federal
Register and an opportunity for any interested person to
present information, views, and arguments.
(e) Hearings About Meeting Notification Requirements.--On the
motion of the Secretary or on petition of any interested
person, the Secretary may conduct a hearing to decide whether
the manufacturer has reasonably met the notification
requirements under this section. Any interested person may make
written and oral presentations of information, views, and
arguments on whether the manufacturer has reasonably met the
notification requirements. If the Secretary decides that the
manufacturer has not reasonably met the notification
requirements, the Secretary shall order the manufacturer to
take specified action to meet those requirements and may take
any other action authorized under this chapter.
Sec. 30119. Notification procedures
(a) Contents of Notification.--Notification by a manufacturer
required under section 30118 of this title of a defect or
noncompliance shall contain--
(1) a clear description of the defect or
noncompliance;
(2) an evaluation of the risk to motor vehicle safety
reasonably related to the defect or noncompliance;
(3) the measures to be taken to obtain a remedy of
the defect or noncompliance;
(4) a statement that the manufacturer giving notice
will remedy the defect or noncompliance without charge
under section 30120 of this title;
(5) the earliest date on which the defect or
noncompliance will be remedied without charge, and for
tires, the period during which the defect or
noncompliance will be remedied without charge under
section 30120 of this title;
(6) the procedure the recipient of a notice is to
follow to inform the Secretary of Transportation when a
manufacturer, distributor, or dealer does not remedy
the defect or noncompliance without charge under
section 30120 of this title; and
(7) other information the Secretary prescribes by
regulation.
(b) Earliest Remedy Date.--The date specified by a
manufacturer in a notification under subsection (a)(5) of this
section or section 30121(c)(2) of this title is the earliest
date that parts and facilities reasonably can be expected to be
available to remedy the defect or noncompliance. The Secretary
may disapprove the date.
(c) Time for Notification.--Notification required under
section 30118 of this title shall be given within a reasonable
time--
(1) prescribed by the Secretary, after the
manufacturer receives notice of a final decision under
section 30118(b) of this title; or
(2) after the manufacturer first decides that a
safety-related defect or noncompliance exists under
section 30118(c) of this title.
(d) Means of Providing Notification.--
(1) Notification required under section 30118 of this
title about a motor vehicle shall be sent by first
class mail--
(A) to each person registered under State law
as the owner and whose name and address are
reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer
through State records or other available
sources; or
(B) if a registered owner is not notified
under clause (A) of this paragraph, to the most
recent purchaser known to the manufacturer.
(2) Notification required under section 30118 of this
title about replacement equipment (except a tire) shall
be sent by first class mail to the most recent
purchaser known to the manufacturer. In addition, if
the Secretary decides that public notice is required
for motor vehicle safety, public notice shall be given
in the way required by the Secretary after consulting
with the manufacturer.
(3) Notification required under section 30118 of this
title about a tire shall be sent by first class mail
(or, if the manufacturer prefers, by certified mail) to
the most recent purchaser known to the manufacturer. In
addition, if the Secretary decides that public notice
is required for motor vehicle safety, public notice
shall be given in the way required by the Secretary
after consulting with the manufacturer. In deciding
whether public notice is required, the Secretary shall
consider--
(A) the magnitude of the risk to motor
vehicle safety caused by the defect or
noncompliance; and
(B) the cost of public notice compared to the
additional number of owners the notice may
reach.
(4) A dealer to whom a motor vehicle or replacement
equipment was delivered shall be notified by certified
mail or quicker means if available.
(e) Second Notification.--If the Secretary decides that a
notification sent by a manufacturer under this section has not
resulted in an adequate number of motor vehicles or items of
replacement equipment being returned for remedy, the Secretary
may order the manufacturer to send a 2d notification in the way
the Secretary prescribes by regulation. If, in the Secretary's
judgment, depending on the severity of the defect or
noncompliance, the second notification by a manufacturer does
not result in an adequate number of passenger motor vehicles or
items of replacement equipment being returned for remedy, the
Secretary may--
(1) attempt to notify the registered owner of the
recalled vehicle via first class mail or electronic
means; and
(2) explain in writing to the registered owner the
safety risk posed by the defect or noncompliance.
(f) Notification by Lessor to Lessee.--
(1) In this subsection, ``leased motor vehicle''
means a motor vehicle that is leased to a person for at
least 4 months by a lessor that has leased at least 5
motor vehicles in the 12 months before the date of the
notification.
(2) A lessor that receives a notification required by
section 30118 of this title about a leased motor
vehicle shall provide a copy of the notification to the
lessee in the way the Secretary prescribes by
regulation.
(g) Locating Owners or Lessees.--Depending on the magnitude
of the risk to passenger motor vehicle safety, in the case of
severe and life-threatening defects the Secretary may utilize,
as appropriate, governmental motor vehicle databases or require
manufacturers to provide sufficient information to enable the
Secretary to locate and notify the owner or lessee of the
defective or noncompliant vehicle or replacement equipment.
Sec. 30120. Remedies for defects and noncompliance
(a) Ways to Remedy.--
(1) Subject to subsections (f) and (g) of this
section, when notification of a defect or noncompliance
is required under section 80118(b) or (c) of this
title, the manufacturer of the defective or
noncomplying motor vehicle or replacement equipment
shall remedy the defect or noncompliance without charge
when the vehicle or equipment is presented for remedy.
Subject to subsections (b) and (c) of this section, the
manufacturer shall remedy the defect or noncompliance
in any of the following ways the manufacturer chooses:
(A) if a vehicle--
(i) by repairing the vehicle;
(ii) by replacing the vehicle with an
identical or reasonably equivalent
vehicle; or
(iii) by refunding the purchase
price, less a reasonable allowance for
depreciation.
(B) if replacement equipment, by repairing
the equipment or replacing the equipment with
identical or reasonably equivalent equipment.
(2) The Secretary of Transportation may prescribe
regulations to allow the manufacturer to impose
conditions on the replacement of a motor vehicle or
refund of its price.
(b) Tire Remedies.--
(1) A manufacturer of a tire, including an original
equipment tire, shall remedy a defective or
noncomplying tire if the owner or purchaser presents
the tire for remedy not later than 60 days after the
later of--
(A) the day the owner or purchaser receives
notification under section 30119 of this title;
or
(B) if the manufacturer decides to replace
the tire, the day the owner or purchaser
receives notification that a replacement is
available.
(2) If the manufacturer decides to replace the tire
and the replacement is not available during the 60-day
period, the owner or purchaser must present the tire
for remedy during a subsequent 60-day period that
begins only after the owner or purchaser receives
notification that a replacement will be available
during the subsequent period. If tires are available
during the subsequent period, only a tire presented for
remedy during that period must be remedied.
(c) Adequacy of Repairs.--
(1) If a manufacturer decides to repair a defective
or noncomplying motor vehicle or replacement equipment
and the repair is not done adequately within a
reasonable time, the manufacturer shall--
(A) replace the vehicle or equipment without
charge with an identical or reasonably
equivalent vehicle or equipment; or
(B) for a vehicle, refund the purchase price,
less a reasonable allowance for depreciation.
(2) Failure to repair a motor vehicle or replacement
equipment adequately not later than 60 days after its
presentation is prima facie evidence of failure to
repair within a reasonable time. However, the Secretary
may extend, by order, the 60-day period if good cause
for an extension is shown and the reason is published
in the Federal Register before the period ends.
Presentation of a vehicle or equipment for repair
before the date specified by a manufacturer in a notice
under section 30119(a)(5) or 30121(c)(2) of this title
is not a presentation under this subsection.
(3) If the Secretary determines that a manufacturer's
remedy program is not likely to be capable of
completion within a reasonable time, the Secretary may
require the manufacturer to accelerate the remedy
program if the Secretary finds--
(A) that there is a risk of serious injury or
death if the remedy program is not accelerated;
and
(B) that acceleration of the remedy program
can be reasonably achieved by expanding the
sources of replacement parts, expanding the
number of authorized repair facilities, or
both.
The Secretary may prescribe regulations to carry out
this paragraph.
(d) Filing Manufacturer's Remedy Program.--A manufacturer
shall file with the Secretary a copy of the manufacturer's
program under this section for remedying a defect or
noncompliance. The Secretary shall make the program available
to the public and publish a notice of availability in the
Federal Register. A manufacturer's remedy program shall include
a plan for reimbursing an owner or purchaser who incurred the
cost of the remedy within a reasonable time in advance of the
manufacturer's notification under subsection (b) or (c) of
section 30118. The Secretary may prescribe regulations
establishing what constitutes a reasonable time for purposes of
the preceding sentence and other reasonable conditions for the
reimbursement plan. In the case of a remedy program involving
the replacement of tires, the manufacturer shall include a plan
addressing how to prevent, to the extent reasonably within the
control of the manufacturer, replaced tires from being resold
for installation on a motor vehicle, and how to limit, to the
extent reasonably within the control of the manufacturer, the
disposal of replaced tires in landfills, particularly through
shredding, crumbling, recycling, recovery, and other
alternative beneficial non-vehicular uses. The manufacturer
shall include information about the implementation of such plan
with each quarterly report to the Secretary regarding the
progress of any notification or remedy campaigns.
(e) Hearings About Meeting Remedy Requirements.--On the
motion of the Secretary or on application by any interested
person, the Secretary may conduct a hearing to decide whether
the manufacturer has reasonably met the remedy requirements
under this section. Any interested person may make written and
oral presentations of information, views, and arguments on
whether the manufacturer has reasonably met the remedy
requirements. If the Secretary decides a manufacturer has not
reasonably met the remedy requirements, the Secretary shall
order the manufacturer to take specified action to meet those
requirements and may take any other action authorized under
this chapter.
(f) Fair Reimbursement to Dealers.--A manufacturer shall pay
fair reimbursement to a dealer providing a remedy without
charge under this section.
(g) Nonapplication.--
(1) The requirement that a remedy be provided without
charge does not apply if the motor vehicle or
replacement equipment was bought by the first purchaser
more than 10 calendar years, or the tire, including an
original equipment tire, was bought by the first
purchaser more than 5 calendar years, before notice is
given under section 30118(c) of this title or an order
is issued under section 30118(b) of this title,
whichever is earlier.
(2) This section does not apply during any period in
which enforcement of an order under section 30118(b) of
this title is restrained or the order is set aside in a
civil action to which section 30121(d) of this title
applies.
(h) Exemptions.--On application of a manufacturer, the
Secretary shall exempt the manufacturer from this section if
the Secretary decides a defect or noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The Secretary may take
action under this subsection only after notice in the Federal
Register and an opportunity for any interested person to
present information, views, and arguments.
(i) Limitation on Sale or Lease.--
(1) If notification is required by an order under
section 30118(b) of this title or is required under
section 30118(c) of this title and the manufacturer has
provided to a dealer (including retailers of motor
vehicle equipment) notification about a new motor
vehicle or new item of replacement equipment in the
dealer's possession at the time of notification that
contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety or
does not comply with an applicable motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter, the dealer may
sell or lease the motor vehicle or item of replacement
equipment only if--
(A) the defect or noncompliance is remedied
as required by this section before delivery
under the sale or lease; or
(B) when the notification is required by an
order under section 30118(b) of this title ,
enforcement of the order is restrained or the
order is set aside in a civil action to which
section 30121(d) of this title applies.
(2) This subsection does not prohibit a dealer from
offering for sale or lease the vehicle or equipment.
(j) Prohibition on Sales of Replaced Equipment.--No person
may sell or lease any motor vehicle equipment (including a
tire), for installation on a motor vehicle, that is the subject
of a decision under section 30118(b) or a notice required under
section 30118(c) in a condition that it may be reasonably used
for its original purpose unless--
(1) the defect or noncompliance is remedied as
required by this section before delivery under the sale
or lease; or
(2) notification of the defect or noncompliance is
required under section 30118(b) but enforcement of the
order is set aside in a civil action to which section
30121(d) applies.
(k) Limitation on Sale or Lease of Used Motor Vehicles.--
(1) A dealer may not sell or lease a used passenger
motor vehicle until--
(A) the dealer clearly and conspicuously
notifies the purchaser or lessee, in writing,
of any notifications of a defect or
noncompliance pursuant to section 30118(b) or
section 30118(c) of this title with respect to
the vehicle that have not been remedied; and
(B) the purchaser or lessee acknowledges, in
writing, the receipt of such notification.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply if--
(A) the defect or noncompliance is remedied
as required by this section before delivery
under the sale or lease; or
(B) notification of the defect or
noncompliance is required under section
30118(b) but enforcement of the order is set
aside in a civil action to which 30121(d)
applies.
(3) This subsection does not apply to a dealer, if
the recall information regarding a used passenger motor
vehicle was not accessible at the time of sale or lease
using the means established by the Secretary in section
302(b) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010.
(4) In this subsection, notwithstanding section
30102(a)(1) of this title--
(A) the term ``dealer'' means a person who
sold at least 10 motor vehicles to consumers
during the prior 12 months; and
(B) the term ``used motor vehicle'' means a
motor vehicle that has previously been
purchased other than for resale.
(5) By rule, the Secretary may exempt the auctioning
of used motor vehicles from the requirements of this
section to the extent that the exemption does not harm
public safety.
CHAPTER 301. MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY
SUBCHAPTER IV. ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE
Sec. 30165. Civil penalty
(a) Civil Penalties.--
(1) In general.--A person that violates any of
section 30112, 30115, 30117 through 30122, 30123(d),
30125(c), 30127, or 30141 through 30147, or a
regulation prescribed thereunder, is liable to the
United States Government for a civil penalty of not
more than [$5,000] $25,000 for each violation. A
separate violation occurs for each motor vehicle or
item of motor vehicle equipment and for each failure or
refusal to allow or perform an act required by any of
those sections. The maximum penalty under this
subsection for a related series of violations is
[$15,000,000.] $300,000,000.
(2) School buses.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph
(1), the maximum amount of a civil penalty
under this paragraph shall be $10,000 in the
case of--
(i) the manufacture, sale, offer for
sale, introduction or delivery for
introduction into interstate commerce,
or importation of a school bus or
school bus equipment (as those terms
are defined in section 30125(a) of this
title) in violation of section
30112(a)(1) of this title; or
(ii) a violation of section
30112(a)(2) of this title.
(B) Related series of violations. A separate
violation occurs for each motor vehicle or item
of motor vehicle equipment and for each failure
or refusal to allow or perform an act required
by that section. The maximum penalty under this
paragraph for a related series of violations is
$15,000,000.
(3) Section 30166.--[A person] Except as provided in
paragraph (4), a person who violates section 30166 or a
regulation prescribed under that section is liable to
the United States Government for a civil penalty for
failing or refusing to allow or perform an act required
under that section or regulation. The maximum penalty
under this paragraph is [$5,000] $25,000 per violation
per day. The maximum penalty under this paragraph for a
related series of daily violations is [$15,000,000.]
$300,000,000.
(4) False, misleading or incomplete reports.--A
person who knowingly and willfully submits materially
false, misleading, or incomplete information to the
Secretary, after certifying the same information as
accurate and complete under the certification process
established pursuant to section 30166(o), shall be
subject to a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 per
day. The maximum penalty under this paragraph for a
related series of daily violations is $10,000,000.
(5) Section 30107.--An individual who violates
section 30107(a) is liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty as determined under
section 216(b) of title 18 for an offense under section
207 of that title. A manufacturer or other person
subject to regulation under this chapter who violates
section 30107(b) is liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty of the sum of--
(A) an amount equal to not less than
$100,000; and
(B) an amount equal to 90 percent of the
annual compensation or fee paid or payable to
the individual with respect to whom the
violation occurred.
(b) Compromise and Setoff.--
(1) The Secretary of Transportation may compromise
the amount of a civil penalty imposed under this
section.
(2) The Government may deduct the amount of a civil
penalty imposed or compromised under this section from
amounts it owes the person liable for the penalty.
[(c) Considerations.--In determining the amount of a civil
penalty or compromise, the appropriateness of the penalty or
compromise to the size of the business of the person charged
and the gravity of the violation shall be considered.]
(c) Relevant Factors in Determining Amount of Penalty or
Compromise.--In determining the amount of a civil penalty or
compromise, the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of
the violation shall be considered. The determination shall
include, where appropriate, the nature of the defect or
noncompliance, knowledge by the person charged of its
obligation to recall or notify the public, the severity of the
risk of injury, the occurrence or absence of injury, the number
of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment
distributed with the defect or noncompliance, the existence of
an imminent hazard, actions taken by the person charged to
identify, investigate, or mitigate the condition, the
appropriateness of such penalty in relation to the size of the
business of the person charged, including the potential for
undue adverse economic impacts on small business, and such
other factors as appropriate.
(d) Subpenas for Witnesses.--In a civil action brought under
this section, a subpena for a witness may be served in any
judicial district.
Sec. 30166. Inspections, investigations, and records
(a) Definition.--In this section, ``motor vehicle accident''
means an occurrence associated with the maintenance or
operation of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment
resulting in personal injury, death, or property damage.
(b) Authority To Inspect and Investigate.--
(1) The Secretary of Transportation may conduct an
inspection or investigation--
(A) that may be necessary to enforce this
chapter or a regulation prescribed or order
issued under this chapter; or
(B) related to a motor vehicle accident and
designed to carry out this chapter.
(2) The Secretary of Transportation shall cooperate
with State and local officials to the greatest extent
possible in an inspection or investigation under
paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection.
(c) Matters That Can Be Inspected and Impoundment.--In
carrying out this chapter, an officer or employee designated by
the Secretary of Transportation--
(1) at reasonable times, may inspect and copy any
record related to this chapter;
(2) on request, may inspect records of a
manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to decide whether
the manufacturer, distributor, or dealer has complied
or is complying with this chapter or a regulation
prescribed or order issued under this chapter; and
(3) at reasonable times, in a reasonable way, and on
display of proper credentials and written notice to an
owner, operator, or agent in charge, may--
(A) enter and inspect with reasonable
promptness premises in which a motor vehicle or
motor vehicle equipment is manufactured, held
for introduction in interstate commerce, or
held for sale after introduction in interstate
commerce;
(B) enter and inspect with reasonable
promptness premises at which a vehicle or
equipment involved in a motor vehicle accident
is located;
(C) inspect with reasonable promptness that
vehicle or equipment; and
(D) impound for not more than 72 hours a
vehicle or equipment involved in a motor
vehicle accident.
(d) Reasonable Compensation.--When a motor vehicle (except a
vehicle subject to subchapter I of chapter 135 of this title)
or motor vehicle equipment is inspected or temporarily
impounded under subsection (c)(3) of this section, the
Secretary of Transportation shall pay reasonable compensation
to the owner of the vehicle if the inspection or impoundment
results in denial of use, or reduction in value, of the
vehicle.
(e) Records and Making Reports.--The Secretary of
Transportation reasonably may require a manufacturer of a motor
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment to keep records, and a
manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to make reports, to enable
the Secretary to decide whether the manufacturer, distributor,
or dealer has complied or is complying with this chapter or a
regulation prescribed or order issued under this chapter. This
subsection does not impose a recordkeeping requirement on a
distributor or dealer in addition to those imposed under
subsection (f) of this section and section 30117(b) of this
title or a regulation prescribed or order issued under
subsection (f) or section 30117(b).
(f) Providing Copies of Communications About Defects and
Noncompliance.--A manufacturer shall give the Secretary of
[Transportation] Transportation, and make available on a
publicly accessible Internet website, a true or representative
copy of each communication to the manufacturer's dealers or to
owners or purchasers of a motor vehicle or replacement
equipment produced by the manufacturer about a defect or
noncompliance with a motor vehicle safety standard prescribed
under this chapter in a vehicle or equipment that is sold or
serviced. Communications submitted to the Secretary and
required to be published on a manufacturer's Internet website
shall include all notices to dealerships of software upgrades
and modifications recommended by a manufacturer for all
previously sold vehicles. Notice is required even if the
software upgrade or modification is not related to a safety
defect or noncompliance with a motor vehicle safety standard.
The notice shall include a plain language description of the
purpose of the update and that description shall be prominently
placed at the beginning of the notice. Communications required
to be submitted to the Secretary under this subsection shall be
accompanied by an index to each communication which identifies
the make, model, and model year of the affected vehicles and a
concise summary of the subject matter of the communication. The
index shall be made available by the Secretary to the public on
the Internet in a searchable format.
(g) Administrative Authority on Reports, Answers, and
Hearings.--
(1) In carrying out this chapter, the Secretary of
Transportation may--
(A) require, by general or special order, any
person to file reports or answers to specific
questions, including reports or answers under
oath; and
(B) conduct hearings, administer oaths, take
testimony, and require (by subpena or
otherwise) the appearance and testimony of
witnesses and the production of records the
Secretary considers advisable.
(2) A witness summoned under this subsection is
entitled to the same fee and mileage the witness would
have been paid in a court of the United States.
(h) Civil Actions To Enforce and Venue.--A civil action to
enforce a subpena or order under subsection (g) of this section
may be brought in the United States district court for any
judicial district in which the proceeding is conducted. The
court may punish a failure to obey an order of the court to
comply with a subpena or order as a contempt of court.
(i) Governmental Cooperation.--The Secretary of
Transportation may request a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States Government to provide
records the Secretary considers necessary to carry out this
chapter. The head of the department, agency, or instrumentality
shall provide the record on request, may detail personnel on a
reimbursable basis, and otherwise shall cooperate with the
Secretary. This subsection does not affect a law limiting the
authority of a department, agency, or instrumentality to
provide information to another department, agency, or
instrumentality.
(j) Cooperation of Secretary.--The Secretary of
Transportation may advise, assist, and cooperate with
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the Government,
States, and other public and private agencies in developing a
method for inspecting and testing to determine compliance with
a motor vehicle safety standard.
(k) Providing Information.--The Secretary of Transportation
shall provide the Attorney General and, when appropriate, the
Secretary of the Treasury, information obtained that indicates
a violation of this chapter or a regulation prescribed or order
issued under this chapter.
(l) Reporting of Defects in Motor Vehicles and Products in
Foreign Countries.--
(1) Reporting of defects, manufacturer
determination.--Not later than 5 working days after
determining to conduct a safety recall or other safety
campaign in a foreign country on a motor vehicle or
motor vehicle equipment that is identical or
substantially similar to a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle equipment offered for sale in the United
States, the manufacturer shall report the determination
to the Secretary.
(2) Reporting of defects, foreign government
determination.--Not later than 5 working days after
receiving notification that the government of a foreign
country has determined that a safety recall or other
safety campaign must be conducted in the foreign
country on a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment
that is identical or substantially similar to a motor
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment offered for sale in
the United States, the manufacturer of the motor
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment shall report the
determination to the Secretary.
(3) Reporting requirements.--The Secretary shall
prescribe the contents of the notification required by
this subsection.
(m) Early Warning Reporting Requirements.--
(1) Rulemaking required.--Not later than 120 days
after the date of the enactment of the Transportation
Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation
(TREAD) Act, the Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to establish early warning reporting
requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment to enhance the Secretary's
ability to carry out the provisions of this chapter.
(2) Deadline.--The Secretary shall issue a final rule
under paragraph (1) not later than June 30, 2002.
(3) Reporting elements.--
(A) Warranty and claims data.--As part of the
final rule promulgated under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall require manufacturers of motor
vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to report,
periodically or upon request by the Secretary,
information which is received by the
manufacturer derived from foreign and domestic
sources to the extent that such information may
assist in the identification of defects related
to motor vehicle safety in motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment in the United States
and which concerns--
(i) data on claims submitted to the
manufacturer for serious injuries
(including death) and aggregate
statistical data on property damage
from alleged defects in a motor vehicle
or in motor vehicle equipment; or
[(ii) customer satisfaction
campaigns, consumer advisories,
recalls, or other activity involving
the repair or replacement of motor
vehicles or items of motor vehicle
equipment.]
(ii) customer satisfaction campaigns,
customer advisories, recalls, consumer
complaints, warranty claims, field
reports, technical service bulletins,
or other activity involving the repair
or replacement of motor vehicles or
motor vehicle equipment.
(B) Other data.--As part of the final rule
promulgated under paragraph (1), the Secretary
may, to the extent that such information may
assist in the identification of defects related
to motor vehicle safety in motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment in the United States,
require manufacturers of motor vehicles or
motor vehicle equipment to report, periodically
or upon request of the Secretary, such
information as the Secretary may request.
(C) Reporting of possible defects.--The
manufacturer of a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle equipment shall report to the
Secretary, in such manner as the Secretary
establishes by regulation, all incidents of
which the manufacturer receives actual notice
which involve fatalities or serious injuries
which are alleged or proven to have been caused
by a possible defect in such manufacturer's
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in the
United States, or in a foreign country when the
possible defect is in a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle equipment that is identical or
substantially similar to a motor vehicle or
motor vehicle equipment offered for sale in the
United States.
(4) Handling and utilization of reporting elements.--
(A) Secretary's specifications.--In requiring
the reporting of any information requested by
the Secretary under this subsection, the
Secretary shall specify in the final rule
promulgated under paragraph (1)--
(i) how such information will be
reviewed and utilized to assist in the
identification of defects related to
motor vehicle safety;
(ii) the systems and processes the
Secretary will employ or establish to
review and utilize such information;
and
(iii) the manner and form of
reporting such information, including
in electronic form.
(B) Information in possession of
manufacturer.--The regulations promulgated by
the Secretary under paragraph (1) may not
require a manufacturer of a motor vehicle or
motor vehicle equipment to maintain or submit
records respecting information not in the
possession of the manufacturer.
[(C) Disclosure.--None of the information
collected pursuant to the final rule
promulgated under paragraph (1) shall be
disclosed pursuant to section 30167(b) unless
the Secretary determines the disclosure of such
information will assist in carrying out
sections 30117(b) and 30118 through 30121.]
(C) Disclosure.--The information provided to
the Secretary pursuant to this subsection shall
be disclosed publicly unless exempt from
disclosure under section 552(b) of title 5.
(D) Burdensome requirements.--In promulgating
the final rule under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall not impose requirements unduly
burdensome to a manufacturer of a motor vehicle
or motor vehicle equipment, taking into account
the manufacturer's cost of complying with such
requirements and the Secretary's ability to use
the information sought in a meaningful manner
to assist in the identification of defects
related to motor vehicle safety.
(5) Periodic review.--As part of the final
rule promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall specify procedures for the
periodic review and update of such rule.
(n) Sale or Lease of Defective or Noncompliant Tire.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall, within 90 days
of the date of the enactment of the Transportation
Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation
(TREAD) Act, issue a final rule requiring any person
who knowingly and willfully sells or leases for use on
a motor vehicle a defective tire or a tire which is not
compliant with an applicable tire safety standard with
actual knowledge that the manufacturer of such tire has
notified its dealers of such defect or noncompliance as
required under section 30118(c) or as required by an
order under section 30118(b) to report such sale or
lease to the Secretary.
(2) Defect or noncompliance remedied or order not in
effect.--Regulations under paragraph (1) shall not
require the reporting described in paragraph (1) where
before delivery under a sale or lease of a tire--
(A) the defect or noncompliance of the tire
is remedied as required by section 30120; or
(B) notification of the defect or
noncompliance is required under section
30118(b) but enforcement of the order is
restrained or the order is set aside in a civil
action to which section 30121(d) applies.
(o) Corporate Responsibility for Reports.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall require for each
company submitting information to the Secretary in
response to a request for information in a safety
defect or compliance investigation under this chapter,
that a principal officer certify that--
(A) the signing officer has reviewed the
submission; and
(B) based on the officer's knowledge, the
submission does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary in order to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not
misleading.
(2) Notice.--The certification requirements of this
section shall be clearly stated on any request for
information under paragraph (1).
(3) Definition of principal officer.--In this
section, the term ``principal officer'' means--
(A) an officer of the company who resides in
the United States who is responsible for safety
compliance under United States laws and reports
directly to the principal executive officer of
the company; or
(B) the principal executive officer residing
in the United States.
Sec. 30170. Criminal Penalties
(a) Criminal Liability for Falsifying or Withholding
Information.--
(1) Submitting misleading information to the
secretary.--A person who violates section 1001 of title
18 with respect to the reporting requirements of
section 30118, 30119, or 30166 with the specific intent
of misleading the Secretary with respect to motor
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment safety related
defects shall, in addition to the penalties imposed
under title 18, be subject to imprisonment for not more
than an additional 12 months.
[(1) General rule.--] (2) Submitting misleading
information to the secretary that leads to death or
serious injury._A person who violates section 1001 of
title 18 with respect to the reporting requirements of
section 30166, with the specific intention of
misleading the Secretary with respect to motor vehicle
or motor vehicle equipment safety related defects that
have caused death or serious bodily injury to an
individual (as defined in section 1365(g)(3) of title
18), shall be subject to criminal penalties of a fine
under title 18, or imprisoned for not more than 15
years, or both.
[(2)] (3) Safe harbor to encourage reporting and for
whistle blowers.--
[(A) Correction.--A person described in
paragraph (1) shall not be subject to criminal
penalties under this subsection if: (1) at the
time of the violation, such person does not
know that the violation would result in an
accident causing death or serious bodily
injury; and (2) the person corrects any
improper reports or failure to report within a
reasonable time.]
(A) Correction.--A person described in
paragraph (1) or (2) shall not be subject to
criminal penalties under this subsection if--
(i) the person corrects any improper
reports or failure to report within a
reasonable time; and
(ii) in the case of a person
described in paragraph (2), at the time
of the violation, such person does not
know that the violation would result in
an accident causing death or serious
bodily injury.
(B) Reasonable time and sufficiency of
correction.--The Secretary shall establish by
regulation what constitutes a reasonable time
for the purposes of subparagraph (A) and what
manner of correction is sufficient for purposes
of subparagraph (A). The Secretary shall issue
a final rule under this subparagraph within 90
days of the date of the enactment of this
section.
(C) Effective date.--Subsection (a) shall not
take effect before the final rule under
subparagraph (B) takes effect.
(b) Coordination With Department of Justice.--The Attorney
General may bring an action, or initiate grand jury
proceedings, for a violation of subsection (a) only at the
request of the Secretary of Transportation.
Sec. 30171. Protection of employees providing motor vehicle safety
information
(a) Discrimination Against Employees of Manufacturers, Part
Suppliers, and Dealerships.--No motor vehicle manufacturer,
part supplier, or dealership may discharge an employee or
otherwise discriminate against an employee with respect to
compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment
because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to a
request of the employee)--
(1) provided, caused to be provided, or is about to
provide (with any knowledge of the employer) or cause
to be provided to the employer or the Secretary
information relating to any motor vehicle defect or any
violation or alleged violation of any notification or
reporting requirement of this chapter;
(3) has filed, caused to be filed, or is about to
file (with any knowledge of the employer) or cause to
be filed a proceeding relating to any violation or
alleged violation of any motor vehicle defect or any
violation or alleged violation of any notification or
reporting requirement of this chapter;
(3) testified or is about to testify in such a
proceeding;
(4) assisted or participated or is about to assist or
participate in such a proceeding; or
(5) objected to, or refused to participate in, any
activity that the employee reasonably believed to be in
violation of any provision of any Act enforced by the
Secretary of Transportation, or any order, rule,
regulation, standard, or ban under any such Act.
(b) Complaint Procedure.--
(1) Filing and notification.--A person who believes
that he or she has been discharged or otherwise
discriminated against by any person in violation of
subsection (a) may, not later than 180 days after the
date on which such violation occurs, file (or have any
person file on his or her behalf) a complaint with the
Secretary of Labor alleging such discharge or
discrimination. Upon receipt of such a complaint, the
Secretary shall notify, in writing, the person named in
the complaint of the filing of the complaint, of the
allegations contained in the complaint, of the
substance of evidence supporting the complaint, and of
the opportunities that will be afforded to such person
under paragraph (2).
(2) Investigation; preliminary order.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after
the date of receipt of a complaint filed under
paragraph (1) and after affording the person
named in the complaint an opportunity to submit
to the Secretary a written response to the
complaint and an opportunity to meet with a
representative of the Secretary to present
statements from witnesses, the Secretary shall
conduct an investigation and determine whether
there is reasonable cause to believe that the
complaint has merit and notify, in writing, the
complainant and the person alleged to have
committed a violation of subsection (a) of the
Secretary's findings. If the Secretary
concludes that there is a reasonable cause to
believe that a violation of subsection (a) has
occurred, the Secretary shall accompany the
Secretary's findings with a preliminary order
providing the relief prescribed by paragraph
(3)(B). Not later than 30 days after the date
of notification of findings under this
paragraph, either the person alleged to have
committed the violation or the complainant may
file objections to the findings or preliminary
order, or both, and request a hearing on the
record. The filing of such objections shall not
operate to stay any reinstatement remedy
contained in the preliminary order. Such
hearings shall be conducted expeditiously. If a
hearing is not requested in such 30-day period,
the preliminary order shall be deemed a final
order that is not subject to judicial review.
(B) Requirements.--
(i) Required showing by
complainant.--The Secretary shall
dismiss a complaint filed under this
subsection and shall not conduct an
investigation otherwise required under
subparagraph (A) unless the complainant
makes a prima facie showing that any
behavior described in paragraphs (1)
through (4) of subsection (a) was a
contributing factor in the unfavorable
personnel action alleged in the
complaint.
(ii) Showing by employer.--
Notwithstanding a finding by the
Secretary that the complainant has made
the showing required under clause (i),
no investigation otherwise required
under subparagraph (A) shall be
conducted if the employer demonstrates,
by clear and convincing evidence, that
the employer would have taken the same
unfavorable personnel action in the
absence of that behavior.
(iii) Criteria for determination by
secretary.--The Secretary may determine
that a violation of subsection (a) has
occurred only if the complainant
demonstrates that any behavior
described in paragraphs (1) through (4)
of subsection (a) was a contributing
factor in the unfavorable personnel
action alleged in the complaint.
(iv) Prohibition.--Relief may not be
ordered under subparagraph (A) if the
employer demonstrates by clear and
convincing evidence that the employer
would have taken the same unfavorable
personnel action in the absence of that
behavior.
(3) Final order.--
(A) Deadline for issuance; settlement
agreements.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of conclusion of a hearing under paragraph
(2), the Secretary shall issue a final order
providing the relief prescribed by this
paragraph or denying the complaint. At any time
before issuance of a final order, a proceeding
under this subsection may be terminated on the
basis of a settlement agreement entered into by
the Secretary, the complainant, and the person
alleged to have committed the violation.
(B) Remedy.--If, in response to a complaint
filed under paragraph (1), the Secretary
determines that a violation of subsection (a)
has occurred, the Secretary shall order the
person who committed such violation--
(i) to take affirmative action to
abate the violation;
(ii) to reinstate the complainant to
his or her former position together
with the compensation (including back
pay) and restore the terms, conditions,
and privileges associated with his or
her employment; and
(iii) to provide compensatory damages
to the complainant.
If such an order is issued under this
paragraph, the Secretary, at the request of the
complainant, shall assess against the person
against whom the order is issued a sum equal to
the aggregate amount of all costs and expenses
(including attorneys' and expert witness fees)
reasonably incurred, as determined by the
Secretary, by the complainant for, or in
connection with, the bringing the complaint
upon which the order was issued.
(C) Frivolous complaints.--If the Secretary
finds that a complaint under paragraph (1) is
frivolous or has been brought in bad faith, the
Secretary may award to the prevailing employer
a reasonable attorney's fee not exceeding
$1,000.
(D) De novo review.--With respect to a
complaint under paragraph (1), if the Secretary
of Labor has not issued a final decision within
210 days after the filing of the complaint and
if the delay is not due to the bad faith of the
employee, the employee may bring an original
action at law or equity for de novo review in
the appropriate district court of the United
States, which shall have jurisdiction over such
an action without regard to the amount in
controversy, and which action shall, at the
request of either party to the action, be tried
by the court with a jury. The Action shall be
governed by the same legal burdens of proof
specified in paragraph (2)(B) for review by the
Secretary of Labor.
(4) Review.--
(A) Appeal to court of appeals.--Any person
adversely affected or aggrieved by an order
issued under paragraph (3) may obtain review of
the order in the United States Court of Appeals
for the circuit in which the violation, with
respect to which the order was issued,
allegedly occurred or the circuit in which the
complainant resided on the date of such
violation. The petition for review shall be
filed not later than 60 days after the date of
the issuance of the final order of the
Secretary. Review shall conform to chapter 7 of
title 5. The commencement of proceedings under
this subparagraph shall not, unless ordered by
the court, operate as a stay of the order.
(B) Limitation on collateral attack.--An
order of the Secretary with respect to which
review could have been obtained under
subparagraph (A) shall not be subject to
judicial review in any criminal or other civil
proceeding.
(5) Enforcement of order by secretary.--Whenever any
person has failed to comply with an order issued under
paragraph (3), the Secretary may file a civil action in
the United States district court for the district in
which the violation was found to occur to enforce such
order. In actions brought under this paragraph, the
district courts shall have jurisdiction to grant all
appropriate relief including, but not limited to,
injunctive relief and compensatory damages.
(6) Enforcement of order by parties.--
(A) Commencement of action.--A person on
whose behalf an order was issued under
paragraph (3) may commence a civil action
against the person to whom such order was
issued to require compliance with such order.
The appropriate United States district court
shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the
amount in controversy or the citizenship of the
parties, to enforce such order.
(B) Attorney fees.--The court, in issuing any
final order under this paragraph, may award
costs of litigation (including reasonable
attorney and expert witness fees) to any party
whenever the court determines such award is
appropriate.
(c) Mandamus.--Any nondiscretionary duty imposed by this
section shall be enforceable in a mandamus proceeding brought
under section 1361 of title 28.
(d) Nonapplicability to Deliberate Violations.--Subsection
(a) shall not apply with respect to an employee of a motor
vehicle manufacturer, part supplier, or dealership who, acting
without direction from such motor vehicle manufacturer, part
supplier, or dealership (or such person's agent), deliberately
causes a violation of any requirement relating to motor vehicle
safety under this chapter.
CHAPTER 323. CONSUMER INFORMATION
PART C. INFORMATION, STANDARDS, AND REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 32302. Passenger motor vehicle information
(a) Information Program.--The Secretary of Transportation
shall maintain a program for developing the following
information on passenger motor vehicles:
(1) damage susceptibility.
(2) crashworthiness.
(3) the degree of difficulty of diagnosis and repair
of damage to, or failure of, mechanical and electrical
systems.
(4) vehicle operating costs dependent on the
characteristics referred to in clauses (1)-(3) of this
subsection, including insurance information obtained
under section 32303 of this title.
(b) Motor Vehicle Information.--To assist a consumer in
buying a passenger motor vehicle, the Secretary shall provide
to the public information developed under subsection (a) of
this section. The information shall be in a simple and
understandable form that allows comparison of the
characteristics referred to in subsection (a)(1)-(3) of this
section among the makes and models of passenger motor vehicles.
The Secretary may require passenger motor vehicle dealers to
distribute the information to prospective buyers.
(c) Insurance Cost Information.--The Secretary shall
prescribe regulations that require passenger motor vehicle
dealers to distribute to prospective buyers information the
Secretary develops and provides to the dealers that compares
insurance costs for different makes and models of passenger
motor vehicles based on damage susceptibility and
crashworthiness.
(d) Motor Vehicle Defect Reporting Information.--
(1) Rulemaking required.--Within 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
2010 the Secretary shall prescribe regulations that
require passenger motor vehicle manufacturers to affix,
in the glove compartment or in another readily
accessible location on the vehicle, a sticker, decal,
or other device that provides, in simple and
understandable language, information about how to
submit a safety-related motor vehicle defect complaint
to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The Secretary shall require the same information to be
prominently printed on a separate page within the
owner's manual. The information may not be placed on
the label required by section 3 of the Automobile
Information Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1232).
(2) Application.--The requirements established under
paragraph (1) shall apply to passenger motor vehicles
manufactured in model years beginning more than 1 year
after the date on which a final rule is published under
that paragraph.