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.”
Boris Parsons
Like a lot of other bad decisions, that’s 1 of the worse. Riding across black ice and gowas a personal experience. If they would quit being all about money and trying to sell stuff just because they have their warehouses full and quotes to meet; and really focus on humanity and safety, the world would be a better place. When bad things happen it is not always about an usafe driver. Sometimes it is faulty technology.
Haris Balotic
Like they didn’t do enough damages with Electronic log books and EPA garbage to the trucking industry, now this. It’s all about getting independent owners out of the business…
Darrell Ritter
This is a perfect example of pencil pushers implementing changes when they’ve never been in a truck a day in their life. These trucks don’t have the capability of identifying slick icy or snow packed roads and they don’t gently ease on the brakes or downshift. They slam on the brakes and that’s a disaster waiting to happen. Now granted we have a lot more drivers nowadays that would rather watch movies on their laptop with their feet on the dash and I’ve witnessed this personally several times, than pay attention to the details of their job. The answer isn’t more technology but instead better training for those we are putting in the seats of these trucks.
David
Those freaking idiots in the government are so freaking slow… 18-wheelers already have the stability control and AEB system!!! We call it collision mitigation system they are part of the adaptive cruise system. It is such a sloppy system it panics and slams the breaks on to a car in the off ramp while you continue on the freeway. I have been rear ended 8 times because of the system. It IS NOT the truck that is the problem it is the CAR!!! Take the freaking stearing wheel out of their hands and give it to the computer. You will see a 95% drop in accidents!!! The system has existed since early 2000 first emplimented by Prime Inc using the US Military vehicle and obstruction radar (VORAD). The VORAD worked so good that Bendix corporation was created. Now PCCAR, VOLVO, INTERNATIONAL, and MERCEDES. Have Bendix Wingman Systems or equivalent as standard in all new build 18-wheelers.
Justin Nelson
That government over reach why not teach 4 wheeler to drive better and make the driver exam more harder instead of give anyone a driver license and do the test drive in a parking lot ooo that right that doesn’t make them money. And the people trying to pass this laws have never been in a truck for more that 30 minutes.
Mark G Arveson
These systems are so dangerous! They literally take the control of the vehicle away from the driver. Yes drivers can be fatigued or tired. However that’s something that’s simply able to be addressed, companies need to stop pushing drivers so hard and start paying them more. A little less pressure to get from point a to point b, with a little more pay or a lot more in some cases, would alleviate a lot of the fatigue in the industry. Another big help would be to start fining companies that detain drivers for excessive amounts of time. It should never take more than an hour to unload a truck then get that driver on the way. A friend of mine was recently at a company that took 50 minutes a pallet, he only had 15 pallets on. He was then late to his next appointment. I’ve sat a few times for 5 or 6 or more hours. I’ve also had those automatic braking systems engage when there’s nothing in front of me and bring me to a dead halt on a highway. If you want to put a safety system in there make sure it works!You can’t afford to have a false alarm in the middle of a highway at 65mph, that really is a way to kill somebody if not the guy behind you The driver when the truck ends up in the ditch.
Michael Bialas
This is 100% about people making money and absolutely nothing to do with safety. How about putting a sensor on these cars and motorcycles who want to tailgate these trucks and then don’t know why they’re under the truck. This is very unsafe for truck drivers and any vehicles that happen to be following to closely, which is pretty much all the time.
Tommy Solan
This will cause more trouble that help.
The cost analysis was pulled out of the ether.
There are no studies referenced that any ROI was rationally or even considered, much less quantified.
That said, 4 years to implement a system with no studies proving efficacy is dilutional government overreach. Given nothing currently has a system like this, your daily driver automobile won’t jack-knife, this is simple government overreach.
System in automobiles are not reliable. With a car, you are dealing with shorter distances in general. A tractor trailer would have to detect a obstacle 400′ or more in advance. At that distance, a truck coming around a curve could slam on it’s brakes, jack-knife or roll over because the system saw a car standing on the shoulder.
So many of the little details are clearly not considered
Zach Cahalan, this is no slam dunk
Harry Adler, this is no game-changer (unless hampering the trucking industry is the goal)
Dan Horvath, this is no answer