NHTSA New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) Enhancements: A Comprehensive Guide for Consumers and Automakers

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) is dedicated to reducing fatalities and injuries on US roadways by providing consumers with crucial safety information about new vehicles. As a cornerstone of vehicle safety for decades, NCAP’s influence on automotive safety improvements is undeniable. From its inception in 1978, NCAP has empowered consumers to make informed vehicle purchasing decisions and encouraged manufacturers to prioritize safety innovations.

This comprehensive guide delves into the proposed significant upgrades to the New Car Assessment Program Nhtsa, outlined in a recent Request for Comments (RFC) from NHTSA. These proposed changes aim to modernize NCAP, making it even more effective in today’s rapidly evolving automotive landscape, particularly focusing on Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and vulnerable road user protection. This article will provide an in-depth look at these proposed enhancements, ensuring you understand how they will shape the future of vehicle safety ratings and impact your vehicle purchasing decisions.

Understanding the Evolution of NCAP

Established in 1978, NHTSA’s NCAP emerged as a proactive response to the staggering number of traffic fatalities exceeding 50,000 annually in the decade prior. By introducing the 5-Star Safety Rating System, initially focused on frontal crashworthiness, NCAP revolutionized the automotive industry. Safety, once a secondary consideration, became a key selling point and a driving force behind vehicle design innovation.

Over time, NCAP expanded its scope to include side crash testing, rollover resistance ratings, and, more recently, recommendations for advanced safety technologies. This evolution reflects the increasing complexity of vehicles and the growing understanding of crash dynamics. The program’s adaptability is crucial in maintaining its relevance and effectiveness in reducing injuries and fatalities.

Despite significant progress in vehicle safety, with passenger vehicle occupant fatalities decreasing from 32,225 in 2000 to 22,215 in 2019, challenges remain. Pedestrian fatalities have alarmingly increased by 33 percent during the same period. Furthermore, recent data indicates a concerning rise in traffic fatalities, highlighting the urgent need for continued safety improvements and a broader approach to road safety.

NHTSA recognizes that addressing risky driving behaviors is as critical as enhancing vehicle safety features. The proposed NCAP upgrades reflect this holistic approach, aiming to promote technologies that not only protect occupants in a crash but also prevent crashes from happening in the first place. This includes expanding NCAP’s focus to encompass vulnerable road user safety and encouraging the adoption of technologies that promote safer driving choices.

Image: Official letterhead of the Department of Transportation, one of the agencies involved in issuing the document, emphasizing the governmental authority behind NCAP.

Key Proposed Upgrades to NCAP: Expanding Safety Horizons

The latest RFC outlines a phased approach to upgrading NCAP, focusing on six key components designed to significantly enhance vehicle safety and consumer information:

Adding Four New ADAS Technologies: Building upon the existing recommendations for Forward Collision Warning (FCW), Lane Departure Warning (LDW), Crash Imminent Braking (CIB), and Dynamic Brake Support (DBS), NHTSA proposes incorporating four additional ADAS technologies into NCAP:
- Blind Spot Detection (BSD): Systems designed to warn drivers of vehicles in their blind spots, mitigating lane change and merging crashes.
- Blind Spot Intervention (BSI): Active systems that not only warn but also intervene to prevent lane change collisions by steering the vehicle back into its lane.
- Lane Keeping Support (LKS): Active systems that provide steering input to help drivers stay within their lane, preventing lane departure crashes.
- Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking (PAEB): Systems that automatically detect pedestrians and apply brakes to avoid or mitigate pedestrian collisions, marking NCAP’s expansion to vulnerable road user protection.
Developing a New ADAS Rating System: Recognizing the increasing sophistication and variety of ADAS technologies, NHTSA aims to develop a comprehensive rating system. This system will move beyond simple “recommended” checkmarks to provide consumers with a nuanced understanding of ADAS performance and capabilities, facilitating informed comparisons between vehicles. The RFC explores various rating system concepts, including star-based, medal-based, and points-based systems.
Listing Crash Avoidance Ratings on the Monroney Label: In compliance with the FAST Act, NHTSA is taking steps to include crash avoidance rating information on the Monroney label (window sticker). This initiative will ensure that consumers have access to crucial safety information at the point of sale, further empowering their purchasing decisions. The RFC seeks input on the most effective ways to present this information on the label.
Establishing a Roadmap for NCAP: NHTSA proposes a ten-year roadmap for phased NCAP upgrades, ensuring a structured and transparent approach to program evolution. This roadmap outlines near-term and long-term strategies, providing stakeholders with a clear vision of NCAP’s future direction. The roadmap addresses both crashworthiness and crash avoidance enhancements, reflecting a holistic safety strategy.
Expanding NCAP to Include Technologies for Safe Driving Choices: In a groundbreaking initiative, NHTSA is considering expanding NCAP to encompass technologies that promote safe driving behaviors. This includes exploring consumer information for systems that address risky behaviors such as distracted driving, impaired driving, speeding, and failure to use seat belts. This initiative recognizes the critical role of driver behavior in overall road safety.
Updating Programmatic Aspects of NCAP: NHTSA is committed to continuously improving NCAP’s operational efficiency and effectiveness. This includes updating the 5-star safety ratings system, refining ADAS technology program components, addressing challenges related to manufacturer self-reported data, and enhancing the NCAP website for improved consumer access to safety information.

Image: Letterhead of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, emphasizing the specific agency within DOT responsible for NCAP.

Deep Dive into Proposed ADAS Enhancements

Lane Keeping Technologies: LDW and LKS

Lane departure crashes, where vehicles unintentionally drift out of their lane, are a significant safety concern, often leading to rollovers and opposite-direction collisions. NCAP currently recommends Lane Departure Warning (LDW) systems. The proposed upgrades aim to enhance lane keeping assistance by:

Updating Lane Departure Warning (LDW): While LDW systems alert drivers to unintentional lane departures, their effectiveness can be limited by driver desensitization to frequent, sometimes nuisance alerts. NHTSA is exploring ways to improve LDW effectiveness, including:
- Haptic Alerts: Investigating the potential benefits of haptic (vibration-based) alerts over audible alerts in improving driver response and reducing driver annoyance, though no specific alert modality is mandated at this time.
- False Positive Tests: While acknowledging concerns about nuisance alerts, NHTSA is not proposing specific false positive tests due to challenges in test repeatability and the lack of conclusive data supporting their necessity.
- LDW Test Procedure Modifications: Proposing to tighten the inboard lane tolerance for LDW activation, potentially reducing nuisance alerts and improving system accuracy. The proposal includes reducing the tolerance from 0.8m to 0.3m. The removal of Botts’ Dots from testing scenarios is also proposed as this lane marking type is being phased out in some regions.
Adding Lane Keeping Support (LKS): Recognizing the limitations of warning-based systems, NHTSA proposes adding Lane Keeping Support (LKS) to NCAP. LKS systems actively assist drivers in staying within their lane by providing steering or braking inputs. NHTSA is considering adopting test methods from Euro NCAP’s Lane Support Systems protocol to evaluate LKS performance, potentially including scenarios with curved roads and road edge detection. The maximum lane excursion limit of 0.3m as used by Euro NCAP is under consideration, as are higher test speeds to better reflect real-world, higher-speed lane departure scenarios.

Questions for Public Comment: NHTSA seeks public input on various aspects of LDW and LKS enhancements, including alert modalities, test procedures, performance metrics, and the inclusion of curved road and road edge detection scenarios. Specifically, feedback is requested on the appropriateness of haptic alerts, the removal of Botts’ Dots testing, the Euro NCAP excursion limit, and the inclusion of higher test speeds and curved road scenarios.

Blind Spot Detection Technologies: BSW and BSI

Lane change and merging crashes are another significant source of accidents. To address this, NHTSA proposes incorporating Blind Spot Warning (BSW) and Blind Spot Intervention (BSI) technologies into NCAP.

Adding Blind Spot Warning (BSW): BSW systems alert drivers to the presence of vehicles in their blind spots. NHTSA proposes using a draft research test procedure to evaluate BSW systems, including straight lane converge/diverge and pass-by scenarios. The pass-by test includes varying speeds of the approaching vehicle to differentiate between basic and advanced BSW systems. NHTSA is considering incorporating motorcycle detection into BSW testing in the future, acknowledging the vulnerability of motorcyclists.
Adding Blind Spot Intervention (BSI): BSI systems take active measures to prevent lane change collisions by steering the vehicle away from an adjacent vehicle in the blind spot. NHTSA proposes using a draft test procedure with scenarios involving lane changes with constant and closing headway, as well as a false positive assessment test. The performance criterion for BSI systems is to prevent contact with the adjacent vehicle and avoid causing the subject vehicle to deviate excessively into the adjacent lane on the opposite side.

Questions for Public Comment: NHTSA invites comments on BSW and BSI testing, including the appropriateness of turn signal activation during testing, the use of the Straight Lane Pass-by Test to differentiate BSW capabilities, the use of the Global Vehicle Target (GVT) as a strikeable object, and the inclusion of a BSI false positive test. Feedback is also sought on the number of test trials and the pass rate for BSW and BSI tests.

Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking (PAEB): Protecting Vulnerable Road Users

Pedestrian fatalities are a growing concern, and NHTSA is prioritizing pedestrian safety by proposing the inclusion of Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking (PAEB) in NCAP. PAEB systems detect pedestrians and automatically apply brakes to prevent or mitigate pedestrian collisions.

Adding Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking (PAEB): NHTSA proposes adopting a modified version of its draft research PAEB test procedure, incorporating scenarios representing common pedestrian crash types (crossing path and longitudinal path). The proposed upgrades include:
- Articulated Pedestrian Mannequins: Utilizing state-of-the-art mannequins with articulated legs for more realistic pedestrian representation in testing, aligning with Euro NCAP and IIHS standards.
- Increased Test Speeds: Expanding the test speed range to a maximum of 60 km/h (37.3 mph) to evaluate PAEB performance at higher speeds, addressing a larger portion of real-world pedestrian crashes. A minimum test speed of 10 km/h is also proposed, harmonizing with Euro NCAP. Testing will be conducted in 10 km/h increments.
- Dark Condition Testing: Expanding testing to include nighttime scenarios with low beam headlights, recognizing the high incidence of pedestrian fatalities in dark conditions.
- Revised Performance Criteria and Test Trials: Proposing a “no contact” performance criterion for PAEB tests. A reduced number of test trials per speed is proposed to manage test burden, with a provision for additional trials if contact occurs at lower relative impact velocities.

Questions for Public Comment: NHTSA seeks feedback on various aspects of PAEB testing, including the proposed test speed range, test scenarios, lighting conditions (including the use of low and high beams, and the consideration of overhead lighting), performance criteria (no contact vs. speed reduction), and the number of test trials. Comments are also requested on the appropriate timeframe for including turning scenarios (S2 and S3) and cyclist detection in PAEB testing.

Updating Forward Collision Prevention Technologies: FCW, CIB, and DBS

NHTSA is committed to continuously improving its existing recommendations for Forward Collision Warning (FCW), Crash Imminent Braking (CIB), and Dynamic Brake Support (DBS) systems, which address rear-end collisions – the most frequent crash type.

Updating Forward Collision Warning (FCW): NHTSA is considering refinements to FCW testing, including:
- Alert Modalities: Seeking comment on whether to give NCAP credit to vehicles equipped with LDW systems that provide a passing alert, regardless of the alert type, particularly haptic alerts, and whether visual-only alerts should be considered less effective.
- FCW Timing Adjustment Settings: Proposing to test FCW systems using the middle (or next latest) warning setting instead of the earliest setting, to better reflect real-world driver experience and harmonize with Euro NCAP.
- Integrating FCW Assessment with CIB and PAEB Tests: Exploring the possibility of evaluating FCW functionality within CIB and PAEB tests, reducing test burden and reflecting the integrated nature of modern frontal crash prevention systems.
Updating Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB): NHTSA is proposing significant upgrades to CIB and DBS testing, reflecting advancements in AEB technology and aiming to address higher-speed and more challenging rear-end crash scenarios. Proposed updates include:
- Crash Imminent Braking (CIB) Enhancements:
  - Increased Test Speeds: Expanding LVS and LVM testing to speeds up to 80 km/h (49.7 mph) and LVD testing to 50 km/h and potentially up to 80 km/h, reflecting higher-speed crash scenarios.
  - Revised Performance Criterion: Adopting a “no contact” performance criterion for CIB tests, replacing the speed reduction requirement and promoting full crash avoidance.
  - Reduced SV-to-POV Headway and Increased Deceleration for LVD: Reducing headway to 12m and increasing POV deceleration to 0.5g for the LVD scenario, creating a more challenging test condition.
  - Streamlined Test Trials: Proposing a reduced number of test trials, similar to PAEB, to manage test burden while maintaining test rigor.
- Dynamic Brake Support (DBS) Considerations:
  - Aligning DBS Tests with CIB Tests: Proposing to align DBS test conditions with the upgraded CIB tests, but seeking comment on whether DBS testing should be removed from NCAP entirely or limited to higher-speed scenarios.
  - Revised Brake Application Timing for DBS: Proposing to revise the timing of manual brake application in DBS tests to better reflect real-world driving conditions and harmonize with Euro NCAP.
Addressing Regenerative Braking: Recognizing the increasing prevalence of regenerative braking in electric vehicles, NHTSA proposes testing vehicles with regenerative braking systems using the “off” setting or the least aggressive setting to ensure consistent and comparable test results. Feedback is sought on potential testing challenges posed by regenerative braking and possible solutions.

Questions for Public Comment: NHTSA seeks extensive feedback on all aspects of FCW, CIB, and DBS testing updates, including alert modalities, test speeds, performance criteria, test procedures, the role of DBS testing, and the handling of regenerative braking systems. Input is crucial in shaping the future of frontal crash prevention assessments in NCAP.

Image: The official seal of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, reinforcing the document’s official and trustworthy nature.

Towards a More Informative NCAP Rating System

Recognizing the limitations of the current “check mark” system for ADAS technologies, NHTSA is actively exploring the development of a more comprehensive and informative ADAS rating system. The goal is to provide consumers with a clearer understanding of ADAS performance differences and incentivize manufacturers to develop and deploy more advanced safety technologies.

Rating System Concepts Under Consideration:

Star Rating System: Leveraging the familiarity of the existing 5-star crashworthiness rating, NHTSA is considering a star-based system for ADAS. However, concerns exist about potential consumer confusion if ADAS ratings are lower than crashworthiness ratings and how to effectively communicate the value of even lower-starred ADAS.
Medals Rating System: Exploring a medal-based system (bronze, silver, gold) to differentiate ADAS ratings from crashworthiness stars, potentially reducing confusion and conveying different types of safety information.
Points-Based Rating System: Considering a points-based system for greater rating granularity and flexibility in incorporating new technologies and test criteria. Points could be awarded based on performance in various test conditions, providing a more nuanced assessment of ADAS capabilities.
Incorporating Baseline Risk: Investigating the concept of incorporating baseline risk into the ADAS rating system, similar to the crashworthiness ratings. This would allow consumers to understand how a vehicle’s ADAS performance compares to an “average” vehicle in terms of crash risk reduction.

Rating System Structure Concepts:

Percentage of Test Conditions Met: A tiered system where higher ratings are achieved by meeting a greater percentage of test conditions across all ADAS technologies in a category.
Select Test Conditions to Meet: A tiered system where specific, increasingly challenging test conditions must be met to achieve different rating levels (bronze, silver, gold), rewarding vehicles that excel in critical performance areas.
Weighting Test Conditions Based on Real-World Data: A more complex system that weights test conditions or ADAS technologies based on real-world crash data, prioritizing technologies and performance areas with the greatest potential safety impact.

Overall Rating vs. Individual Technology Ratings: NHTSA is seeking feedback on whether to implement an overall ADAS rating or focus on providing individual ratings for each ADAS technology. An overall rating could simplify consumer comparisons, while individual ratings would provide more detailed information about specific technology performance.

Questions for Public Comment: NHTSA encourages extensive feedback on all aspects of ADAS rating system development, including the type of system (stars, medals, points), rating system structure concepts, the use of baseline risk, and the weighting of test conditions based on real-world data. Consumer preferences for overall ratings vs. individual technology ratings are also of key interest.

Streamlining NCAP Operations and Data Management

Beyond the proposed technological and rating system upgrades, NHTSA is also undertaking significant efforts to modernize NCAP’s operational infrastructure and data management processes.

Addressing Programmatic Challenges with Self-Reported Data: To ensure the integrity and credibility of NCAP, NHTSA is considering stricter guidelines for accepting manufacturer self-reported data. This includes potentially requiring data to be generated by NHTSA-designated test laboratories and adhering strictly to NCAP testing protocols. Public comment is sought on these proposed data submission requirements.
Website Updates for Enhanced Consumer Information: NHTSA is planning significant updates to the NCAP website (www.nhtsa.gov) to improve user experience and provide more comprehensive and easily comparable safety information. Proposed website enhancements include improved search functionality, vehicle comparison tools, and more granular and sortable safety ratings data. Feedback is requested on website features that would best serve consumer needs.
Database Modernization: NHTSA is developing a new, secure online web portal and database to streamline data submission from vehicle manufacturers, improve data processing efficiency, and enhance communication with stakeholders. This modernization effort will be crucial in managing the increasing complexity and volume of data associated with NCAP’s expanded scope.

Conclusion: Shaping the Future of Vehicle Safety

The proposed upgrades to the New Car Assessment Program nhtsa represent a significant step forward in enhancing vehicle safety and empowering consumers with vital information. By expanding NCAP’s scope to include new ADAS technologies, vulnerable road user protection, and safe driving choices, NHTSA aims to create a more comprehensive and effective program for reducing fatalities and injuries on US roadways.

NHTSA encourages all stakeholders – automakers, safety advocates, consumer groups, and the public – to actively participate in the public comment process. Your feedback will be invaluable in shaping the final form of these NCAP upgrades and ensuring that the program remains a driving force for vehicle safety innovation for years to come. By working together, we can create a safer transportation future for everyone.

This comprehensive guide provides a detailed overview of the proposed changes to NCAP. For complete details and to submit your comments, please refer to the official Request for Comments published by NHTSA and available at www.regulations.gov under Docket Number NHTSA-2022-0016.

[FR Doc. 2022-04894 Filed 3-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C