WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are proposing a sweeping rule that would require all trucks over 10,000 pounds to be equipped with an automatic emergency braking (AEB) system and an electronic stability control (ESC) system that works in conjunction with AEBs.
The proposal, issued jointly on Thursday by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, would go into effect for most new Class 7 and 8 trucks (those with a weight rating of over 26,000 pounds) within three years of the final rule, with most new Class 3-6 trucks (weighing over 10,000 pounds) to meet the requirements within four years.
The NHTSA-FMCSA proposal comes eight years after safety advocates formally petitioned NHTSA for such a rule and was mandated by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law signed in 2021. Collision avoidance technology is also on the National Transportation Safety Board’s “Most Wanted” list of safety regulations.
“Sometimes truck drivers are distracted or fatigued. AEB is effective even when humans make mistakes. This is a slam dunk for roadway safety,” commented Truck Safety Coalition Executive Director Zach Cahalan.
“This technology is a game-changer, capable of significantly reducing truck crashes, injuries, and fatalities,” said Harry Adler, Principal and Co-founder of the Institute for Safer Trucking.
NHTSA, which sets vehicle standards for manufacturers, is proposing a standard that would require the technology to work at speeds ranging between 6 and 50 mph.
FMCSA, which oversees truck driver safety, is proposing that all AEB and ESC systems in commercial vehicles as required by NHTSA’s portion of the rule be engaged by drivers anytime the truck is operating.
The two agencies, which have been sponsoring research and field testing on AEBs for over 10 years, said the rule would prevent an estimated 19,118 crashes, save 155 lives, and prevent 8,814 nonfatal injuries annually. It would eliminate an estimated 24,828 property-damage-only crashes annually as well.
The annual cost of the rule is estimated at $353 million, while generating a net benefit of $1.8 billion to $2.6 billion.
“FMCSA believes the cost of maintaining the ESC and AEB systems over their lifetimes is minimal compared to the cost of equipping trucks with ESC and AEB systems and may be covered by regular annual maintenance,” the agency stated.
Once the rule is published in the Federal Register, the public will have 60 days to comment and suggest alternatives on any aspect of the proposal, the agencies stated, including compliance lead times and whether the rule could disproportionately impact small businesses.
“The trucking industry supports the use of proven safety technology like automatic emergency braking,” said Dan Horvath, American Trucking Associations vice president of safety policy. “We look forward to reviewing this proposal from NHTSA and FMCSA and working with them as it is implemented.”
Louis McMahon
I refuse to drive any truck with this system. I will retire from trucks. I have driven over 55000 miles accident free. No need for this. I think the people wanting this crap take the wheel.
dave
The only good use of a computer in any vehicle is to control the injectors on the engine for better fuel economy. The rest of it is BUNK, including logs.
If you want to require something in trucks, hand out forward facing cameras to record the actions of the vehicles in front of the trucks and mail the ‘last second lane changers’, ‘brake checkers’ and ‘assured distance failures’ a ticket.
There are many people that continue to dream up crap to make them selves ‘important’ and to ‘create a reason’ to keep their job.
Same as Government, far to many people involved in what should be a minimalist approach.
Randall Blake
I drive double trailers and can tell you first hand how dangerous this system is. 2 days ago, I had someone cross from the far left lane, across my lane and jump into the exit ramp on i95 in sc. About a second after the car had completed the dangerous move, the “safety “ system slammed on the brakes on a curve on the interstate. First rule of double trailers, don’t slam in the brakes in a curve. At night, when I apply my brakes, I can see my brake light illuminate between the trailers. When the system applies the brakes for me, I see no such illumination. I’m waiting in the day the system is applied for me and someone goes right into the back of my trailer. If they have a dash camera, it will look like I had to brake lights. The system sucks when you are the one behind the wheel. Every time someone passes you, half of them cut within one to two car lengths ahead of you, the system applies the brakes for anything less than 100 feet at highway speeds. It can be scary. I have millions of safe miles, let me drive the truck
Kurt
Put plainly, these systems do not work. Watch any of the countless online videos of cars break-checking semis because people who have never driven a truck do not understand what it takes to handle a vehicle weighing 80,000 lbs. Are these counted in the supposed 19,000 wreaks that can be avoided? As explained above, I have witnessed “ghost braking” and seen numerous on-vehicle camera videos where the automatic braking system will brake due to shadows or otherwise malfunction if the sensor is covered in ice. Does anyone remember how many thousands of lives were going to be saved with the revised HOS? Sadly, this is another bad rule that will be forced upon an already struggling industry regardless of what those who drive these trucks and understand the implications have to say.
Larry Lockett
I have driven several trucks with this technology over the last few years and it has almost caused me to wreck several times. Applying brakes at shadows in the road or for cars in the turning lane beside the lane I’m driving in. Just something else the ATA is pushing to remove small trucking companies from the market and cause more accidents from brakes being slammed on when they shouldn’t be
John
Everybody who backs this automatic brake system should be forced to drive a truck with that automatic braking system and see how unsafe and insanely ridiculous that entire concept is the way it works is if there’s anything 50 ft in front of you it locks up and pulls you to the right so on a two-lane road it throws you in the ditch for no goddamn reason so you got a chance of destroying your truck your trailer and your load because of this garbage disposed to me safety when it is the worst thing you can possibly do it’s better not even have a truck on the road that have that system in it because it overreacts to everything that gets in the path it can identify what’s in the past but if it sees it it wants to throw you to the right and make you in the ditch wreck the damn truck so if you fooled I never driven one with the idiotic machine in it every one of you fools backing it should be forced to drive one maybe 5,000 miles and let’s see how many times you record that would be reasonable if people who are an authority who absolutely know nothing except sitting behind a desk and a damn ink pen and computer each one of you should get off your lazy asses and be forced to drive what you recommend and go ahead and wreck 5,000 trucks and figure out that it’s not safe at all and it’s absolutely insane
Chris Bennett
I’ve driven a few trucks with this technology already implemented and it is terrible. I come under an overpass on a sunny day and it panic stops seeing the shadow under the bridge, if someone were to be riding the tail of my trailer which many people like to do they would slam into the back of me. I pay full attention when do driving my whole shift and keep equal distances to avoid trouble.