Comment from Paul McEachern

Paul McEachernSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter supports the mandate of Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) and Electronic Brake Signaling (EBS) on heavy-duty trucks, arguing that the current rulemaking is insufficient. They advocate for a more aggressive timeline for deploying these mature safety technologies to reduce road fatalities and criticize the influence of corporate lobbying on safety regulations.
AEB was very successfully mandated and deployed on heavy duty trucks nearly a decade ago in Europe because they already had Electronic Brake Signaling (EBS) mandated. Why isn't this discussed in this rulemaking proposal? Why is this rulemaking so grossly deficient? Do you think government should get away with making our roads less safe again? Do you think that allowing super single wheel/tires without tire tire pressure monitoring on heavy vehicles didn't make our roads less safe? The deployment of mature safety technologies has been suppressed in the USA for too long now and that needs to change. The safety technology exists now. It is mature and proven. There is no need to wait any longer, there is no need for further comment because the cost is more people maimed and killed on public property. EBS and AEB on every truck and trailer with pneumatic brakes built after Jan 1, 2027 is an entirely feasible and achievable mandate. At this point in time the safety disparity between U.S. specification and current technology safe pneumatic brake heavy duty trucks and trailers is so great I can truthfully describe an 80,000 pound U.S. specification pneumatic brake tractor-trailers as 'high capacity weapons of mass destruction'. Isaac Newton's first law isn't going to change. The law in the USA has changed. The subject at issue isn't accidents, it is the 'on purpose' decision not to use mature safety technologies appropriately to save the lives of my neighbors. AEB without EBS is already making our roads less safe. The comments so far on this rulemaking make that fact perfectly evident. The data purposefully left out of this rulemaking will validate and substantiate what these professional truck drivers are saying in their comments. The simple truth is that up to this point paying lobbyists, lawyers and victims has been cheaper than operating current technology safe heavy commercial vehicles. It's very fair to expect that globally operating corporations operate 'world class safe' on roads that belong to the people in the USA. If it was just owner-operators and small fleets we would have world class safe heavy trucks and trailers already. Because the two biggest employers, the two biggest retailers in the USA, as well as many other multinational corporations, own and operate the overwhelming majority of the heavy trucks/trailers operating on U.S. roads, they spend most of the money that suppresses safety regulation while hiding themselves behind those owner-operators, small fleets and multiple trucking organizations. The fact that U.S. heavy truck and trailer federal safety regulation is so grossly deficient is just as apparent as the reasons why. The easiest way to make truck safety happen is to make the cost of unnecessarily maiming and killing greater than the cost of operating current technology safe trucks and trailers. That won't happen because some people can't afford the government they deserve and other people can afford the government that they want...

View on Regulations.gov