80 FR 62487 - Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard; Automatic Emergency Braking

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 200 (October 16, 2015)

Page Range		62487-62488
FR Document		2015-26294

This document grants the petition for rulemaking submitted by the Truck Safety Coalition, the Center for Auto Safety, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and Road Safe America on February 19, 2015, to establish a safety standard to require automatic forward collision avoidance and mitigation systems on certain heavy vehicles. For several years, NHTSA has researched forward collision avoidance and mitigation technology on heavy vehicles, including forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking systems. The agency will continue to conduct research and to evaluate real-world performance of these systems through track testing and field operational testing. NHTSA will determine whether to issue a rule in the course of the rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 200 (Friday, October 16, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 200 (Friday, October 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62487-62488]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26294]



[[Page 62487]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0099]


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard; Automatic Emergency 
Braking

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document grants the petition for rulemaking submitted by 
the Truck Safety Coalition, the Center for Auto Safety, Advocates for 
Highway and Auto Safety, and Road Safe America on February 19, 2015, to 
establish a safety standard to require automatic forward collision 
avoidance and mitigation systems on certain heavy vehicles. For several 
years, NHTSA has researched forward collision avoidance and mitigation 
technology on heavy vehicles, including forward collision warning and 
automatic emergency braking systems. The agency will continue to 
conduct research and to evaluate real-world performance of these 
systems through track testing and field operational testing. NHTSA will 
determine whether to issue a rule in the course of the rulemaking 
proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.

DATES: October 16, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues, you may call Dr. 
Abigail Morgan in the Office of Crash Avoidance Standards at (202) 366-
1810. For legal issues, you may call Mr. David Jasinski or Ms. Analiese 
Marchesseault in the Office of Chief Counsel at (202) 366-2992. You may 
send mail to these officials at: National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 19, 2015, the Truck Safety 
Coalition, the Center for Auto Safety, Advocates for Highway and Auto 
Safety, and Road Safe America (hereon referred to collectively as the 
``petitioners'') submitted a petition to NHTSA. Their petition 
requested that the agency initiate rulemaking to establish a new 
Federal motor vehicle safety standard to require vehicle manufacturers 
to install forward collision avoidance and mitigation (FCAM) systems on 
all vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds 
or more. The petitioners claimed that FCAM systems have the potential 
to provide significant safety, economic, and societal benefits.
    On May 4, 2015, the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) 
submitted a letter supporting the petition for rulemaking. However, 
CVSA recommended that the mandate for FCAM systems apply to vehicles 
with a GVWR of 10,001 pounds or more (rather than 10,000 pounds or 
more) to better conform to existing commercial motor vehicle safety 
classes.
    There are a number of terms being used by industry and regulators 
for FCAM technology, including forward collision warning (FCW), crash 
imminent braking (CIB), dynamic brake support (DBS), automatic 
emergency braking (AEB), and collision mitigation braking (CMB). 
Consistent with the terminology used in the petitioners' request, in 
this notice, the FCAM technologies of focus are the systems that 
combine FCW alert signals with CMB automatic braking capability.
    FCAM systems use forward-looking sensors, typically radars and/or 
cameras, to detect vehicles in the roadway. When a rear-end crash is 
imminent, the FCW system warns the driver of the threat. If the driver 
takes no action, such as braking or steering, or if the driver does 
brake but not enough to avoid the crash, a CMB or AEB system may 
automatically apply or supplement the brakes to avoid or mitigate the 
rear-end crash.
    In their petition for rulemaking, the petitioners cited estimated 
safety benefits from a 2012 research study \1\ conducted by the 
University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), which 
evaluated the performance and effectiveness of these current and future 
generation systems. They also identified the systems that are 
commercially available. The petitioners believe that mandating 
technology through regulation is the fastest way to ensure the 
potential safety benefits. Additionally, they believe that additional 
safety benefits may be achieved from future FCAM systems that may have 
higher levels of performance than the current systems and that may be 
able to respond to additional crash scenarios other than rear-end 
crashes, such as vehicle-to-pedestrian crashes. Furthermore, the 
petitioners believe that a mandate would cause the system costs to 
decrease due to high production volumes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Woodrooffe, J., et al., Performance Characterization and 
Safety Effectiveness Estimates of Forward Collision Avoidance and 
Mitigation Systems for Medium/Heavy Commercial Vehicles, Report No. 
UMTRI-2011-36, UMTRI (August 2012). Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0067-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For several years, NHTSA has been conducting research on heavy 
vehicle FCAM technologies. This research includes test track 
evaluations of first generation systems, evaluation of driver-warning 
interface effectiveness, and an ongoing field operational test of 
production systems. Based on this research, the agency agrees with the 
petitioners that FCAM systems have the potential to save lives by 
preventing or reducing the severity of rear-end crashes.
    The industry has indicated that next generation automatic emergency 
braking systems for truck tractors will be commercially available later 
this year and will have improved performance that enables the vehicle 
to warn the driver and automatically brake in response to stationary 
lead vehicles. In addition to the increased performance from the next 
generation systems, industry is also expected to begin production of 
automatic emergency braking systems on air-braked single unit trucks 
with a GVWR of more than 26,000 pounds in the near future.
    The agency's test experience has been limited to first generation 
production systems on truck tractors and a prototype system on a 
motorcoach, and the agency is aware of a few vehicles with a GVWR 
greater than 10,000 pounds and less than or equal to 26,000 pounds sold 
in the U.S. currently equipped with AEB systems. The agency plans to 
test the next generation systems as they become available, including 
AEB systems that are installed on vehicles with a GVWR greater than 
10,000 pounds and less than or equal to 26,000 pounds. If available, 
NHTSA would consider this additional information in the rulemaking.
    The European Union (EU) Commission Regulation No. 347/2012 requires 
an advanced emergency braking system (AEBS) with forward collision 
warning on most new heavy vehicles, with some exceptions.\2\ The test 
scenarios, vehicle speeds, and performance criteria in EU Commission 
Regulation No. 347/2012 differ from the test criteria that NHTSA 
developed for its light vehicle automatic emergency braking evaluation 
that the agency plans to add to its New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), 
which has been the basis for the test criteria used to evaluate heavy 
vehicles. The agency will consider the test criteria required by the 
European regulation, as it

[[Page 62488]]

continues to develop its heavy vehicle test procedures and performance 
metrics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Commission Regulation (EU) No 347/2012; of 16 April 2012 
implementing Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council with respect to type-approval requirements for 
certain categories of motor vehicles with regard to advanced 
emergency braking systems. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:109:0001:0017:EN:PDF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Considering the information before the agency, including the 
information referenced in the petition, NHTSA grants the February 19, 
2015 petition in accordance with 49 CFR part 552 and initiates a 
rulemaking proceeding with respect to forward collision avoidance and 
mitigation systems on vehicles with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. 
The granting of the petition from Truck Safety Coalition, the Center 
for Auto Safety, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and Road Safe 
America does not mean that the agency will issue a final rule. The 
determination of whether to issue a rule is made after study of the 
requested action and the various alternatives in the course of the 
rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30162, 30166, and 
49 CFR part 552; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

Raymond R. Posten
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015-26294 Filed 10-15-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

62488 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 200 / Friday, October 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

continues to develop its heavy vehicle protection of vulnerable marine vessels on the high seas in
test procedures and performance ecosystems. This final rule has been contravention of international
metrics. prepared to minimize duplication and conservation and management measures
Considering the information before to be consistent with other established recognized by the United States. 16
the agency, including the information requirements. U.S.C. 5505(1). A list of the
referenced in the petition, NHTSA DATES: This rule is effective January 14, international conservation and
grants the February 19, 2015 petition in 2016. management measures recognized by
accordance with 49 CFR part 552 and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the United States is published by NMFS
initiates a rulemaking proceeding with Mark Wildman, Trade and Marine in the Federal Register from time to
respect to forward collision avoidance Stewardship Division, Office for time, in consultation with the Secretary
and mitigation systems on vehicles with International Affairs and Seafood of State, as required by section 5504(e)
a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. Inspection, NMFS (phone 301–427– of the HSFCA. The last such notice was
The granting of the petition from Truck 8386 or email mark.wildman@ published on May 19, 2011 (76 FR
Safety Coalition, the Center for Auto noaa.gov). 28954). NMFS reinforces this
Safety, Advocates for Highway and Auto prohibition by requiring a high seas
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: fishing permit for any vessel operating
Safety, and Road Safe America does not
mean that the agency will issue a final Background on the high seas and, through the
rule. The determination of whether to permit, authorizing only those activities
The purposes of the High Seas Fishing
issue a rule is made after study of the that would not undermine international
Compliance Act (HSFCA; 16 U.S.C.
requested action and the various conservation and management measures
5501 et seq.) are (1) to implement the
alternatives in the course of the recognized by the United States. The
Food and Agriculture Organization of
rulemaking proceeding, in accordance HSFCA also gives NMFS discretion to
the United Nations (FAO) Agreement to
with statutory criteria. impose permit conditions and
Promote Compliance with International
restrictions pursuant to other applicable
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, Conservation and Management
30117, 30162, 30166, and 49 CFR part 552;
law, such as the Endangered Species
Measures by Fishing Vessels on the
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95. Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal
High Seas (Compliance Agreement) and
Protection Act, in addition to
Raymond R. Posten (2) to establish a system of permitting, international conservation and
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
reporting and regulation for vessels of management measures recognized by
the United States fishing on the high the United States. See 16 U.S.C. 5503(d);
[FR Doc. 2015–26294 Filed 10–15–15; 8:45 am]
seas. 16 U.S.C. 5501. ‘‘High seas’’ is Turtle Island Restoration Network v.
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
defined in the HSFCA and its National Marine Fisheries Service, 340
implementing regulations as waters F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2003).
beyond the territorial sea or exclusive Finally, the HSFCA authorizes NMFS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE economic zone (or the equivalent) of to promulgate regulations ‘‘as may be
any nation, to the extent that such necessary to carry out the purposes of
National Oceanic and Atmospheric territorial sea or exclusive economic
Administration the Agreement and [the Act],’’ including
zone (or the equivalent) is recognized by its permitting authorities. 16 U.S.C.
the United States. 16 U.S.C. 5502 (3); 50 5504(d). In promulgating such
50 CFR Parts 300, 600, 660, and 665 CFR 300.11. regulations, NMFS shall ensure that
[Docket No. 070516126–5907–04] The HSFCA authorizes a system of ‘‘[t]o the extent practicable, such
permitting U.S. fishing vessels that regulations shall also be consistent with
RIN 0648–AV12 operate on the high seas to satisfy the regulations implementing fishery
obligation of Parties to the Compliance management plans under the
International Affairs; High Seas
Agreement (Parties) to require that Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Fishing Compliance Act; Permitting
fishing vessels flying their flags obtain Conservation and Management Act,’’ 16
and Monitoring of U.S. High Seas
specific authorization to operate on the U.S.C. 1801 et seq., which provides
Fishing Vessels
high seas. The HSFCA requires the broad authority to establish measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to for the conservation and management of
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and establish conditions and restrictions on fisheries. Id. at 1853(b)(14).
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), each permit issued under HSFCA as Regulations implementing the HSFCA
Commerce. necessary and appropriate to carry out were first promulgated in 1996 (61 FR
ACTION: Final rule. the obligations of the United States 11751, March 22, 1996). The initial
under the Compliance Agreement. 16 regulations included application and
SUMMARY: This final action sets forth U.S.C. 5503 (d). At a minimum, such issuance procedures for high seas
regulatory changes to improve the conditions and restrictions must include fishing permits. Subsequent regulations
administration of the High Seas Fishing the marking of the permitted vessel in promulgated in 1999 (64 FR 13, January
Compliance Act program and the accordance with the FAO Standard 4, 1999) specified how high seas fishing
monitoring of U.S. fishing vessels Specifications for the Marking and vessels must be marked for
operating on the high seas. This final Identification of Fishing Vessels, and identification purposes and required
rule includes, for all U.S. fishing vessels reporting of fishing activities. Parties are vessel owners and operators to report
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES

operating on the high seas, adjustments also responsible for ensuring that their catch and fishing effort when fishing on
to permitting and reporting procedures. authorized vessels do not undermine the high seas.
It also includes requirements for the conservation and management On April 13, 2015, NMFS published
installation and operation of enhanced measures, including those adopted by a notice of proposed rulemaking for this
mobile transceiver units (EMTUs) for international fisheries management action (80 FR 19611) to codify NMFS’
vessel monitoring, carrying observers on organizations, or by treaties or other procedures for reviewing its high seas
vessels, reporting of transshipments international agreements. Accordingly, fishing authorizations under
taking place on the high seas, and the HSFCA prohibits the use of fishing environmental laws, particularly the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 Oct 15, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16OCR1.SGM 16OCR1

Document Created: 2015-12-14 15:23:45
Document Modified: 2015-12-14 15:23:45

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Grant of petition for rulemaking.
Dates		October 16, 2015.
Contact		For technical issues, you may call Dr. Abigail Morgan in the Office of Crash Avoidance Standards at (202) 366- 1810. For legal issues, you may call Mr. David Jasinski or Ms. Analiese Marchesseault in the Office of Chief Counsel at (202) 366-2992. You may send mail to these officials at: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
FR Citation		80 FR 62487

80 FR 62487 - Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard; Automatic Emergency Braking

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 200 (October 16, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration