Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Competition, 

Foreign Commerce, and Infrastructure, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, U.S. Senate 

United States General Accounting Office 

GAO

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT, 

Thursday, May 22, 2003 HIGHWAY SAFETY 

Factors Contributing to 

Traffic Crashes and 

NHTSA’s Efforts to Address 

Them 

Statement of Peter Guerrero, Director 

Physical Infrastructure Issues 

GAO-03-730T 
Most motor vehicle crashes have multiple causes. Experts and studies have 

identified three categories of factors that contribute to crashes—human, 

roadway environment, and vehicle factors. Human factors involve the 

driver’s actions (speeding and violating traffic laws) or condition (effects of 

alcohol or drugs, inattention, decision errors, and age). Roadway 

environment factors include the design of the roadway, roadside hazards, 

and roadway conditions. Vehicle factors include any failures in the vehicle 

or its design. Human factors are generally seen as contributing most often to 

crashes, followed by roadway environment and vehicle factors. 

To improve highway safety through programs that primarily address the 

human factors that contribute to traffic crashes and fatalities, about $2 

billion was provided to states over the last 5 years for highway safety 

programs under the act. About $729 million was provided under Section 402, 

the core highway safety program, and about $936 million was provided 

through seven incentive programs, mainly for efforts to influence driver 

behavior. Another $361 million was transferred from state highway 

construction to state highway safety programs under provisions that 

penalized states for not complying with federal requirements for passing 

laws to reduce drinking and driving. 

GAO found that NHTSA’s oversight of state highway programs could be 

improved. NHTSA regional offices have made inconsistent use of 

management reviews and improvement plans because NHTSA’s guidance 

does not specify when to use them. As a result, some states do not have 

improvement plans, even though their alcohol-related fatality rates have 

increased or their seat-belt usage rates have declined. Without improvement 

plans NHTSA may not fully realize its goals in working with the states to 

improve highway safety. GAO recommended in an April 2003 report that 

NHTSA provide guidance to its regional offices on when it is appropriate to 

use these oversight tools. NHTSA is taking steps to improve this guidance. 

Traffic Fatality Statistics, 1975-2002 

From 1975 through 2002, annual 

traffic fatalities decreased from 

44,525 to 42,850, while the rate of 

fatalities per 100 million vehicle 

miles traveled decreased from 3.35 

to 1.51. However, decreases in 

fatalities have leveled off since the 

early 1990s, as shown in the figure. 

Since 1999, the number of alcoholrelated fatalities has risen. 

In 1998, the Transportation Equity 

Act for the 21st Century funded a 

series of highway safety programs. 

These programs, administered by 

the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), increased 

funding to the states for activities 

designed to encourage, among 

other things, the use of seat belts 

and to prevent drinking and 

driving. The states establish 

highway safety goals and initiate 

projects to help reach those goals. 

NHTSA provides advice, training, 

and technical assistance to states 

and can use management reviews 

and improvement plans as tools to 

help monitor and strengthen the 

states’ performance. 

This testimony discusses (1) the 

factors that contribute to motor 

vehicle crashes, (2) the funds 

provided to the states for highway 

safety programs, and (3) NHTSA’s 

oversight of state programs. The 

testimony is primarily based on 

two GAO reports on these topics 

issued in March and April 2003. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-730T.

To view the product, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Peter Guerrero 

at (202) 512-2834 or guerrerop@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-03-730T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Competition, 

Foreign Commerce, and Infrastructure, 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, U.S. Senate 

May 22, 2003

HIGHWAY SAFETY 

Factors Contributing to Traffic Crashes 

and NHTSA’s Efforts to Address Them 
Page 1 GAO-03-730T 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

We appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) efforts to reduce traffic fatalities. 

Highway safety is a major concern for the country, given that over 1.2 

million people have died on our roadways over the last 25 years. Since 

1982, about 40 percent of traffic deaths were from alcohol-related crashes, 

and traffic crashes are the leading cause of death for people ages 4 

through 33. In addition to the tragic loss of life, the economic cost of 

fatalities and injuries from crashes totaled almost $231 billion in 2000 

alone, according to NHTSA. 

In 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) 

funded a series of highway safety programs, administered by NHTSA, that 

increased funding to the states to encourage, among other things, the use 

of seat belts and child passenger seats and to prevent drinking and driving. 

The states implement these programs by establishing highway safety goals 

and initiating projects to help reach those goals. NHTSA reviews state 

goals and provides oversight of state highway safety programs. 

My testimony today will discuss (1) the factors that contribute to traffic 

crashes, (2) the funds provided to the states for highway safety programs, 

and (3) NHTSA’s guidance provided to states and oversight of the states’ 

programs. My statement is primarily based on two GAO reports on these 

topics. The first report, issued in March 2003, dealt with the factors that 

contribute to traffic crashes.1

 To complete that effort, we analyzed three 

Department of Transportation databases that contained data through 2001; 

interviewed experts from academia, insurance organizations, and 

advocacy groups as well as department officials; and reviewed studies on 

various aspects of motor vehicle crashes. In addition, NHTSA recently 

released 2002 traffic fatality data, which we used to update some of the 

information contained in the March 2003 report for this testimony. The 

second report, issued in April 2003, provides information on TEA-21 funds 

for state highway safety programs, how the states have used those funds, 

and NHTSA’s oversight of the state programs.2

 To conduct this effort, we 

 1

U.S. General Accounting Office, Highway Safety: Research Continues on a Variety of 

Factors That Contribute to Motor Vehicle Crashes, GAO-03-436 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 31, 

2003). 

2

U.S. General Accounting Office, Highway Safety: Better Guidance Could Improve 

Oversight of State Highway Safety Programs, GAO-03-474 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 21, 

2003). 
Page 2 GAO-03-730T 

visited six states and the NHTSA regional offices responsible for them to 

determine how these states were using the funds and to review NHTSA’s 

oversight of the states’ programs. We also interviewed representatives of 

the Governors Highway Safety Association and other highway safety 

organizations to obtain their perspectives. 

In summary: 

• Many factors combine to produce circumstances that may lead to a motor 

vehicle crash—there is rarely a single cause of such an event. Experts and 

studies have identified three categories of factors that contribute to 

crashes—human factors, roadway environment factors, and vehicle 

factors. Human factors involve the actions taken by or the condition of the 

driver of the automobile, including speeding, being affected by alcohol or 

drugs, violating traffic laws, inattention, decision errors, and age. Roadway 

environment factors include the design of the roadway, roadside hazards, 

and roadway conditions. Vehicle factors include any failures that may 

exist in the automobile or design of the vehicle. Human factors are 

generally seen as the most prevalent contributing factor of crashes, 

followed by roadway environment and vehicle factors. 

• About $2 billion has been provided to states over the last 5 years for 

highway safety programs under TEA-21. About $729 million went to the 

core highway safety program, Section 402, to carry out traffic safety 

programs designed to influence drivers’ behavior in such areas as seat belt 

use, drinking and driving, and speeding. About $936 million went to seven 

incentive programs also designed to encourage state efforts to improve 

seat-belt use, reduce drinking and driving, and contribute to improvement 

of state highway safety data. In addition, about $361 million was 

transferred from state highway construction to state highway safety 

programs under provisions that penalized states that had not complied 

with federal requirements for passing repeat offender or open container 

laws to reduce drinking and driving. 

• To oversee state highway safety programs, NHTSA focuses on providing 

advice, training, and technical assistance to the states, which are 

responsible for setting and achieving highway safety goals. NHTSA can 

also use management reviews and improvement plans as tools to help 

ensure that the states are operating within guidelines and achieving the 

desired results. However, we found that NHTSA’s regional offices have 

made inconsistent use of management reviews and improvement plans 

because NHTSA’s guidance to the regional offices does not specify when 

to use them. As a result, some states do not have improvement plans, even 

though their alcohol-related fatality rates have increased or their seat-belt 
Page 3 GAO-03-730T 

usage rates have declined. We recommended that NHTSA provide 

guidance to its regional offices on when it is appropriate to use these 

oversight tools. NHTSA is taking steps to improve this guidance. 

Since 1975, progress has been made in reducing the number of fatalities on 

our nation’s roads, but in recent years improvement has slowed and some 

downward trends have been reversed. As figure 1 shows, from 1975 

through 2002, annual fatalities decreased from 44,525 to 42,850, or by 

about 4 percent. Annual fatalities reached a low of 39,250 in 1992 and have 

been edging up since then. During the same period, the fatality rate per 100 

million vehicle miles traveled (VMT), a common method of measurement, 

dropped from 3.35 in 1975 to 1.51 in 2002, or by about 55 percent. Since 

1992, the decline in the fatality rate has slowed. 

Figure 1: Fatality Statistics, 1975▬2002 

Alcohol-related crashes account for a large portion of traffic fatalities.3

Between 1982, when NHTSA began tracking alcohol-related fatalities, and 

2002, about 430,000 people died in alcohol-related crashes. In 1982, 

 3

Alcohol-related fatalities represent crash victims killed with blood alcohol concentrations 

at any level above 0.01. At this concentration, a person’s blood contains 1 one-hundredth of 

1 percent alcohol. 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-03-730T 

NHTSA reported 26,173 alcohol-related deaths, representing 59.6 percent 

of all traffic fatalities. Alcohol-related fatalities declined to 39.7 percent of 

all traffic fatalities in 1999, but rose to 17,970—41.9 percent of fatalities—

in 2002. (See fig. 2.) 

Figure 2: Number of Alcohol-Related Fatalities, 1982▬2002 

As figure 3 shows, alcohol-related fatality rates declined steadily (except 

in 1986) from 1982 through 1997. However, there has been almost no 

further decline in rates since 1997, when the rate was 0.65 fatalities per 100 

million VMT. In 2002, the rate was 0.64 fatalities per 100 million VMT. 
Page 5 GAO-03-730T 

Figure 3: Rate of Alcohol-Related Fatalities, 1982▬2002 

The overall decline in fatalities over the past quarter century is attributable 

to many actions. For example, during this period, a number of 

countermeasures were developed and installed in new vehicles. Seat belts 

and air bags are credited with saving thousands of lives—seat-belt use 

rates have grown from about 14 percent in 1983 to over 75 percent 

nationwide today. In addition, federal and state programs have resulted in 

improvement in some areas. For example, increased enforcement and 

greater public awareness of the dangers of drinking and driving have, 

according to NHTSA officials, reduced the incidence of casual drinkers 

becoming traffic fatalities. Having made improvements in reducing casual 

drinking and driving, NHTSA and the states are now faced with more 

challenging problems such as alcohol dependency, which has hindered 

progress in reducing alcohol-related fatalities. 

Multiple factors typically combine to produce circumstances that lead to a 

motor vehicle crash—there is rarely a single cause for such an event. For 

example, it would be challenging to identify a single cause of a crash that 

occurred on a narrow, curvy, icy road when an inexperienced driver, who 

had been drinking, adjusted the radio or talked on a cell phone. 

In examining the causes of motor vehicle crashes, a number of experts and 

studies identified three categories of factors that contribute to crashes: 

A Variety of Factors 

Contribute to Motor 

Vehicle Crashes 
Page 6 GAO-03-730T 

human factors, roadway environment factors, and vehicle factors. Human 

factors involve the actions taken by or the condition of the driver of the 

automobile, including speeding, being affected by alcohol or drugs, 

violating traffic laws, inattention, decision errors, and age. Roadway 

environment factors include the design of the roadway, roadside hazards, 

and roadway conditions. Vehicle factors include any failures that may 

exist in the automobile or design of the vehicle. Human factors are 

generally seen as the most prevalent contributing factor of crashes, 

followed by roadway environment and vehicle factors. 

Two examples of human factors that have a significant impact on traffic 

crashes are speeding and alcohol. Speeding—driving either faster than the 

posted speed limit or faster than conditions would safely dictate—

contributes to traffic crashes. Speeding reduces a driver’s ability to steer 

safely around curves or objects in the roadway, extends the distance 

necessary to stop a vehicle, and increases the distance a vehicle travels 

when a driver reacts to a dangerous situation. According to our analysis of 

NHTSA’s databases, from 1997 through 2001, speeding was identified as a 

contributing factor in about 30 percent of all fatal crashes, and almost 

64,000 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes. From 1997 through 

2001, 36 percent of male drivers and 24 percent of female drivers 16 to 20 

years old who were involved in fatal crashes were speeding at the time of 

the crash. The percentage of speeding-related fatal crashes decreases as 

drivers age.4

 (See fig. 4.) 

 4

It should be noted that in addition to the factors discussed, other elements, such as nonuse 

of seat belts or other occupant-protection measures, might have affected the number of 

fatalities. 
Page 7 GAO-03-730T 

Figure 4: Speeding Drivers in Fatal Crashes, by Age and Gender, 1997▬2001 

Alcohol consumption is a significant human factor that contributes to 

many motor vehicle crashes. It is illegal in every state and the District of 

Columbia to drive a motor vehicle while under the influence of, impaired 

by, or with a specific level of alcohol or drugs in the blood. Only 

Massachusetts lacks a law that defines the specific concentration of blood 

alcohol at which it becomes illegal to drive.5

 As of January 2003, 17 states 

had set the standard at 0.10 percent blood alcohol concentration (BAC) 

(the level at which a person’s blood contains 1/10th of 1 percent alcohol) 

and the remaining states had set the standard at 0.08 percent BAC.6

NHTSA recently reported that in 2002, 42 percent of all fatal crashes were 

alcohol-related, and nearly 18,000 people died in alcohol-related crashes. 

BACs of 0.08 or greater were reported for about 87 percent of the alcohol-

 5

BAC of 0.08 percent in Massachusetts is evidence of alcohol impairment, but it is not 

illegal per se. 

6

Louisiana, New York, and Tennessee have 0.08 percent BAC laws that will be effective 

during the latter half of 2003. 
Page 8 GAO-03-730T 

related fatalities in 2002. According to our analysis of NHTSA data, from 

1997 through 2001, for each age category, more male than female drivers 

were involved in fatal alcohol-related crashes (see fig. 5). 

Figure 5: Drivers in Alcohol-Related Fatal Crashes, by Age and Gender, 1997▬2001 

There is also a strong relationship between a driver’s age and the 

likelihood of being involved in a crash. While age, in itself, would not be 

the cause of the crash, some of the characteristics displayed at various 

ages can lead to a higher probability of being involved in traffic crashes. 

Younger drivers’ crash rates are disproportionately higher mainly because 

of a risky driving style combined with driving inexperience. Older drivers 

also pose greater risks; fatal crash rates are higher for the elderly than for 

all but the youngest drivers. 

The roadway environment—factors that are external to the driver and the 

vehicle that increase the risk of a crash—is generally considered the 

second most prevalent contributing factor of crashes. Roadway 

environment factors that contribute to, or are associated with, crashes 

include the design of the roadway, including features such as medians, 

narrow lanes, a lack of shoulders, curves, access points, or intersections; 
Page 9 GAO-03-730T 

roadside hazards or features adjacent to the road that vehicles can crash 

into such as poles, trees, or embankments; and roadway conditions (for 

example, rain, ice, snow, or fog). However, the contribution of these 

factors to crashes is difficult to quantify. NHTSA’s crash databases contain 

limited data on roadway design features at the crash location or 

immediately preceding the crash location. In addition, the significance of 

adverse weather, including both slippery roads and reductions in driver 

visibility, is not fully understood because there are no measurements (for 

example, VMTs under adverse weather conditions) available to compare 

crash rates under various conditions. 

Vehicle factors can also contribute to crashes through vehicle-related 

failures and vehicle design characteristics (attributes that may increase 

the likelihood of being involved in certain types of crashes). While such 

recent events as the number of crashes involving tire separations have 

highlighted the importance of vehicle factors, data and studies generally 

show, and experts believe, that vehicle factors contribute less often to 

crashes than do human or roadway environment factors. For example, our 

analysis of NHTSA’s data found that of the 32 million crashes from 1997 

through 2001, there were about 778,000 crashes (about 2 percent) in which 

police determined that a specific vehicle-related failure might have 

contributed to the crash. In addition, vehicle design has been shown to 

affect handling in particular types of maneuvers. For example, highperformance sports cars have very different handling characteristics from 

those of sport utility vehicles (SUVs). Recent changes in the composition 

of the nation’s vehicle fleet, in part attributable to the purchase of many 

SUVs, have resulted in an overall shift toward vehicles with a higher center 

of gravity (more top-heavy), which can roll over more easily than some 

other vehicles. Rollover crashes are particularly serious because they are 

more likely to result in fatalities. Our analysis of NHTSA’s 2001 data shows 

that passenger cars were the vehicle type least likely to roll over in a 

crash; passenger cars rolled over in about 2 percent of all crashes and 

rolled over nearly 16 percent of the time in fatal crashes. In comparison, 

our analysis shows that SUVs were over three times more likely to roll 

over in a crash than were passenger cars; that is, they rolled over in almost 

6 percent of all crashes. In addition, the proportion of SUVs that rolled 

over in fatal crashes was over twice as high as the proportion of passenger 

cars. NHTSA recently reported that in 2002, fatalities in rollover crashes 

involving SUVs and pickup trucks accounted for 53 percent of the increase 

in traffic deaths. 
Page 10 GAO-03-730T 

About $2 billion was provided to the states for highway safety programs 

for the first 5 years under TEA-21, from fiscal years 1998 through 2002. 

TEA-21 funded state programs three ways as follows: 

• The core Section 402 State and Community Safety Grants Program 

provided $729 million for behavioral highway safety programs. 

• Seven incentive programs provided $936 million. States could use funds 

from two of the incentive programs for behavioral highway safety 

programs or highway construction. As a result, states allocated about $789 

million of the incentive funds to behavioral programs and $147 million to 

highway construction. 

• Two penalty transfer programs provided $361 million in fiscal years 2001 

and 2002. These programs transferred funds from highway construction to 

highway safety programs to penalize states for not complying with federal 

requirements for passing laws prohibiting open alcoholic beverage 

containers in cars and establishing specific penalties for people convicted 

of repeat drinking and driving offenses.7

 States could use both penalty 

transfers for either alcohol-related behavioral safety programs or highway 

safety construction projects. As a result, states allocated about $113 

million of the transfer funds to behavioral programs and $248 million 

(about 66 percent) to highway construction programs to eliminate road 

safety hazards. 

Funding for states’ behavioral safety programs nearly doubled from fiscal 

year 1998 through fiscal year 2001. (See fig. 6.) 

 7

TEA-21, as amended through the TEA-21 Restoration Act, established these two penalty 

provisions. 

Funding for State 

Highway Safety 

Programs Has Grown 
Page 11 GAO-03-730T 

Figure 6: NHTSA Highway Safety Funding to States, Fiscal Years 1998▬2002 

Funding for the core Section 402 State and Community Grants Program 

has been fairly level, in constant dollars, since 1991. Four major program 

categories account for most of the states’ use of the $729 million in Section 

402 State and Community Grants funds provided between 1998 and 2002: 

police traffic services, impaired driving, seat belts, and community safety 

programs. Combined, these four categories account for about 72 percent 

of the grant funds. Figure 7 shows how the states used their Section 402 

State and Community Grants funds during the first 5 years covered by 

TEA-21. 
Page 12 GAO-03-730T 

Figure 7: Uses of State and Community Grants Funds, Fiscal Years 1998▬2002 

Police traffic services

22.1%

Impaired driving

15.4%

Seat belts

14.5%

Community safety 

programs

19.9%

Planning and 

administration

6.0%

Traffic records

5.9%

Other

16.2%

Note: “Other” includes roadway safety, pedestrian safety, emergency medical services, speed control, 

driver education, motorcycle safety, school bus safety, and paid advertising to support Section 402 

programs. 

The seven incentive programs under TEA-21 also provide funds to 

encourage greater seat belt use, implement programs or requirements to 

reduce drinking and driving, and contribute to the improvement of state 

highway safety data. The funding available for these programs grew from 

$83.5 million in 1998 to $257.2 million in 2002. While most of these funds 

were used for funding additional behavioral safety programs, the act 

provided that two programs, the 0.08 percent Blood Alcohol Concentration 

Incentive (Section 163) and the Seat-belt Use Incentive (Section 157) 

programs, could be used for any highway purpose—highway construction, 

construction that remedied safety concerns, or behavioral safety 

programs. Appendix I contains additional information on the seven 

incentive programs. 

Under the penalty transfer programs, the states that did not adopt either 

the open container or the repeat offender requirements were required to 
Page 13 GAO-03-730T 

transfer a specified percentage of their federal highway construction funds 

to their Section 402 State and Community Grants Program.8

 During fiscal 

years 2001 and 2002, the first 2 years that funds have been transferred, 34 

states were subject to one or both of the penalty provisions, and about 

$361 million was transferred from these states’ Federal-Aid Highway 

Program funding. (See fig. 8.) States can keep transferred funds in their 

Section 402 State and Community Grants program when they are to be 

used to support behavioral programs designed to reduce drunk driving or 

the states can allocate any portion of the transferred funds to highway 

safety construction projects to eliminate road safety hazards. States varied 

greatly in their decisions on how to use these funds, from allocating 100 

percent of the funds to highway safety construction projects to allocating 

100 percent of the funds to highway safety behavioral projects. Overall, the 

states allocated about 69 percent to highway safety construction projects 

under the Hazard Elimination Program, and 31 percent went to highway 

safety behavioral projects. Twenty-eight of the 34 states with transferred 

funds allocated a majority to highway safety construction activities under 

the Hazard Elimination Program. 

 8

For the first 2 years, the transfer penalty was 1.5 percent of the funds apportioned to the 

state’s National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program, and Interstate 

Maintenance funding, for each penalty. This amount rose to 3 percent for each penalty in 

October 2002. 
Page 14 GAO-03-730T 

Figure 8: States Transferring Funds under Open Container and Repeat Offender Provisions, October 1, 2002 

Note: Alaska (both transfers), District of Columbia (no transfers), Hawaii (no transfers), and Puerto 

Rico (both transfers) are not shown. 

NHTSA’s 10 regional offices focus on providing advice, training, and 

technical assistance to the states, which are responsible for setting and 

achieving their highway safety goals. In addition, among other things, 

NHTSA uses management reviews and improvement plans as oversight 

tools to help it ensure that states’ programs are operating within guidelines 

and are achieving desired results. 

NHTSA Has Not Made 

Consistent Use of 

Oversight Tools 
Page 15 GAO-03-730T 

NHTSA regions can conduct management reviews to help improve and 

enhance the financial and operational management of the state programs. 

In conducting these reviews, a team of NHTSA regional staff visit the state 

and examine such items as its organization and staffing, program 

management, financial management, and selected programs like impaired 

driving, occupant protection, public information and education, and 

outreach. The team’s report comments on the state activities and may 

make recommendations for improvement. For example, in some 

management reviews we examined, NHTSA regions found instances of 

inadequate monitoring of subgrantees, a lack of coordination in state 

alcohol program planning, costs incurred after a grant was over, and 

improper cash advances by a state to subgrantees. However, NHTSA has 

no written guidance on when to perform management reviews. We found 

that the management reviews were not being conducted consistently. For 

example, in the six NHTSA regions we visited, we found goals of 

conducting state management reviews every 2 years, on no set schedule, 

or only when requested by a state. 

Improvement plans are another tool for providing states oversight and 

guidance. According to program regulations, if a NHTSA regional office 

finds that a state is not making progress toward meeting its highway safety 

goals, NHTSA and the state are to develop an improvement plan to address 

the shortcomings. For example, NHTSA, working with one state, 

developed an improvement plan that identified specific actions that 

NHTSA and the state would accomplish to improve alcohol-related 

highway safety. The plan included such actions as implementing a judicial 

education program, requiring all police officers working on impaired 

driving enforcement to be adequately trained in field sobriety testing, and 

developing a statewide system for tracking driving-while-intoxicated 

violations. 

NHTSA regional offices have made limited and inconsistent use of 

improvement plans. Since 1998, only seven improvement plans have been 

developed. In addition, we found that the highway safety performance of a 

number of states that were not operating under improvement plans was 

worse than the performance of other states that were operating under 

such plans. For example, we compared the performance of the three states 

that had developed improvement plans for alcohol-related problems with 

the performance of all other states. We found that for seven states, the rate 

of alcohol-related fatalities increased from 1997 through 2001 and their 

alcohol-related fatality rates exceeded the national rate in 2001. Only one 

of these seven states was on an improvement plan. Furthermore, for one 

state that was not on an improvement plan, the alcohol-related fatality rate 
Page 16 GAO-03-730T 

grew by over 40 percent from 1997 through 2001 and for 2001 was about 

double the national average. The limited and inconsistent use of 

improvement plans is due to a lack of specificity in the criteria for 

requiring such plans. 

To ensure more consistent use of management reviews and improvement 

plans, we recommended in our report that NHTSA provide more specific 

guidance to the regional offices on when it is appropriate to use these 

oversight tools. In commenting on a draft of the report, NHTSA officials 

said they agreed with the recommendations and had begun taking action 

to develop criteria and guidance to field offices on the use of management 

reviews and improvement plans. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased 

to answer any questions that you or members of the Subcommittee may 

have. 

For further information on this testimony, please contact Peter Guerrero 

at (202) 512-2834 or guerrerop@gao.gov. Richard Calhoon, Robert 

Ciszewski, Glenn C. Fischer, Bonnie Pignatiello Leer, and Glen 

Trochelman made key contributions to this testimony. 

Contact and 

Acknowledgments 
Page 17 GAO-03-730T 

Incentive category Title of incentive Description of incentive 

Section 157 Safety Incentive 

Grants for the Use of Seat Belts 

Creates incentive grants to states to improve seat belt use rates. A state 

may use these funds for any highway safety or construction program. The 

act authorized $500 million over 5 years. 

Section 157 Safety Innovative 

Grants for Increasing Seat-Belt 

Use Rates 

Provides that unallocated Section 157 incentive funds be allocated to 

states to carry out innovative projects to improve seat belt use. 

Section 405 Occupant 

Protection Incentive Grant 

Creates an incentive grant program to increase seat belt and child safety 

seat use. A state may use these funds only to implement occupant 

protection programs. The act authorized $68 million over 5 years. 

Seat belt/ occupant 

protection incentives 

Section 2003(b) Child 

Passenger Protection 

Education Grants 

Creates a program designed to prevent deaths and injuries to children, 

educate the public on child restraints, and train safety personnel on child 

restraint use. The act authorized $15 million over 2 years for Section 

2003(b). However, the Congress appropriated funds to support the 

program for 2 additional years. 

Section 163 Safety Incentives 

to Prevent the Operation of 

Motor Vehicles by Intoxicated 

Persons 

Provides grants to states that have enacted and are enforcing laws stating 

that a person with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher while 

operating a motor vehicle has committed a per se driving-while-intoxicated 

offense. A state may use these funds for any highway safety or 

construction program. The act provides $500 million over 6 years for the 

program. 

Alcohol incentives 

Section 410 Alcohol Impaired 

Driving Countermeasures 

Revises an existing incentive program and provides grants to states that 

adopt or demonstrate specified programs, or to states that meet 

performance criteria showing reductions in fatalities involving alcoholimpaired drivers. The act provides $219.5 million over 6 years, which is to 

be used for alcohol-impaired driving programs. 

Data incentives Section 411 State Highway 

Safety Data Improvements 

Provides incentive grants to states to improve the timeliness, accuracy, 

completeness, uniformity, and accessibility of highway safety data. The act 

provides $32 million over 4 years. 

Source: GAO presentation of NHTSA data. 

Appendix I: Highway Safety Incentive Grant 

Programs 

(545034) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal 

government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; 

evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents.

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs