⌘K
Federal filingsHome›Recalls›Investigations› PE22012
NHTSA defect investigation · Preliminary Evaluation

Ram preliminary evaluation PE22012

Loss of Brake Performance. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this preliminary evaluation about the control unit/module on 4 model years (2017–2018). Opened Nov 28, 2022, closed Mar 3, 2025 after 2.3 years without a recall. closed

What NHTSA says

Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filed

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation on November 28, 2022, after receiving 134 reports from consumers alleging an intermittent or permanent loss of braking performance in certain 2017-2018 Ram 2500-3500 pickup trucks manufactured by Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA). The alleged failures continued to occur at a steady rate across both models, at all speeds, with limited detectability.  Consumers complained that the Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) warning light illuminated on their vehicles.  The ABS module works in conjunction with the Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), an electromechanical device that controls hydraulic pressure to the individual wheel brake assemblies, to manage braking forces during emergency stops. During this investigation, ODI received over 2,500 consumer complaints concerning ABS or HCU warning lights that illuminated on the dashboards of their vehicles.  Many consumers described also having trouble with cruise control, traction control, or electronic stability control.  Of the complaints received, over 50% mentioned that the ABS or HCU warning light was intermittent in nature. ODI learned that in January 2021, FCA was aware of a problem with the ABS pump motors on the subject vehicles.  FCA had been working with the supplier, ZF, on an issue concerning swelling of the brushes inside the motor.  According to a briefing given by ZF to FCA on January 15, 2021, the ABS, electronic stability control (ESC), traction control system (TSC) and other functions utilizing the motor would be disabled in the event of a problem with an ABS pump motor.  ZF also informed FCA that Slip Control would be inhibited with the driver warning lamp illuminated, base braking would not be affected, and FMVSS stopping distance requirements would still be met. In order to better understand the potential consequences of the brushes swelling and the disablement of the ABS, ESC, TSC and other functions, ODI requested that NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) conduct testing on a subject vehicle with a faulty pump motor installed. During the testing, VRTC found that as the brushes started to swell in the motor, the warning lamp could illuminate intermittently, causing confusion to drivers.  Although the warning light illuminated intermittently, VRTC discovered that the pump was not working properly regardless of the warning light status.  In this condition drivers might think that their vehicle is operating normally when the warning light is off, but instead, the ABS, ESC, TSC and other functions supported by the pump will not work. Following a series of meetings with FCA to demonstrate the findings ofVRTC's testing, FCA conducted an internal review and on November 27, 2024, FCA submitted safety recalls 24V-896 and 24E-100. In view of the recalls being conducted by FCA, ODI has closed this Preliminary Evaluation.  The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

Stage Preliminary Evaluation — NHTSA works to complete one within eight months Opened Nov 28, 2022 Closed Mar 3, 2025 Manufacturer Chrysler (FCA US, LLC) Components Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Antilock/Traction Control/Electronic Limited Slip › Control Unit/Module, Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Power Assist › Electric › Control Module, Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Power Assist › Electric › Control Module › Software, Service Brakes, Hydraulic › Power Assist › Hydraulic

A Preliminary Evaluation is the first formal stage: NHTSA has decided the complaints and other information it screened are worth a closer look, and asks the manufacturer for its own data on the condition. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the resumes carrying the full reasoning are linked below.

The paperwork NHTSA filed

Source: every document on this action, at nhtsa.gov
DocumentCodeFiledAt NHTSA
Opening resumeINOA2022PDF
Closing resumeINCLA2022PDF
Information request to the manufacturerINIM20222 files 12
Manufacturer's response — dataINRD202236 files 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536

40 of 122 documents shown; the rest are under this number at nhtsa.gov.

These are NHTSA’s own files, served from the agency’s site — the resumes are what ODI wrote when it opened and closed the action, and the rest is the correspondence behind them, including what the manufacturer sent when the agency asked. They are linked, not copied: where a document names the people who wrote in, that redaction is the agency’s to make and its copy is the one you should read.

What owners had already reported

Source: complaints on file the day it opened

When NHTSA opened this on Nov 28, 2022, owners had filed 868 complaints with the agency about the model years above, of which 220 named the service brakes NHTSA went on to investigate. Owner complaints are the agency’s main early signal: ODI screens them, and a Preliminary Evaluation is usually where a pattern in them ends up.

This is what the complaint file held on that date, not a claim about which reports prompted the investigation — NHTSA’s complaint records carry no investigation number, so nobody can make that link from the data alone. The opening resume linked above names the reports ODI itself cited. Complaint records on this site begin with 2016.

What this means for an owner

Source: and what happens next

An investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.

This one closed without a recall. That means NHTSA found no defect trend it chose to act on at the time, or the manufacturer addressed the condition another way (a service campaign or a bulletin, which have their own pages). A closed file can be reopened if new reports arrive.

Model years it names

Source: as NHTSA filed them

A vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.

Common questions

Source: NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation

Is PE22012 a recall?

No. A preliminary evaluation is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.

Is PE22012 still open?

No. It closed on Mar 3, 2025 without a recall.

Which vehicles does PE22012 cover?

NHTSA opened it on 4 model years: 2018 Ram 2500, 2017 Ram 2500, 2018 Ram 3500, 2017 Ram 3500. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.