Regulatory traffic jam

Delays can be good or bad depending on your perspective. Especially when it comes to truckers and the regulatory arena.

For most truckers, there were no tears shed over the news that rulemakings slated for 2024, such as mandates for speed limiters and automatic emergency braking systems, were punted to the next year.

However, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s inability to stay on schedule with efforts to combat freight fraud is far less appreciated.

As we approach 2025, the question is if and when each of these rulemakings will move forward.

“I anticipate that we will see action on a number of rulemakings that DOT delayed in 2024 and find out what issues will be prioritized over the next four years,” said Jay Grimes, OOIDA’s director of federal affairs. “Mainly, will FMCSA decide to keep pushing forward with an unsafe speed limiter mandate or have they finally seen the error of their ways?”

Speed limiters

We’ve been here before. In 2016, FMCSA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to determine if speed-limiting devices should be required on commercial motor vehicles. After the election, however, the rulemaking went dormant.

With President Trump’s re-election, will history repeat itself?

While the answer to that question is unknown, it is fair to say that the momentum for the mandate has weakened since FMCSA restarted the speed limiter rulemaking in 2022.

The agency had to deal with more than 15,000 comments, mostly coming from truck drivers opposed to a mandate. They told the agency that slowing down only trucks on highways where cars travel significantly faster would be a detriment to safety. Even more, many truckers, including ones with decades of experience, said they would turn in their keys if a mandate took effect. And this was at a time the agency said it was focused on retaining truckers because research indicates that experienced drivers are the safest drivers.

Despite the overwhelming amount of opposition from truck drivers, FMCSA remained adamant that it was going to move forward with the rulemaking and propose a top speed. But while the abundance of comments didn’t stop the effort to mandate speed limiters, it certainly slowed the process.

FMCSA had projected to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking in June 2023. After that target date breezed past, the agency eyed December 2023 and then May 2024.

The Department of Transportation’s latest regulatory agenda suggests that we will see the proposal in May 2025.

Whether or not that happens remains to be seen.

However, it also should be noted that there are groups who want a speed-limiter mandate to become mandatory. Many large carriers already require their drivers to use speed limiters for fuel efficiency. Forcing owner-operators to also use them would remove any competitive advantage. Also, the Truck Safety Coalition called out the Department of Transportation in July for delaying the rulemaking.

“Truck crash victims and survivors of the Truck Safety Coalition are dismayed, disappointed and deeply disturbed by USDOT’s inability to complete the priority truck safety rulemakings the department committed to at the beginning of the Biden Administration,” the coalition wrote.

Meanwhile, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association will continue to oppose any attempts to make the devices mandatory.

“Studies and research have already proven what we were all taught long ago in driver’s ed classes – that traffic is safest when vehicles all travel at the same relative speed,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said. “Limiting trucks to speeds below the flow of traffic increases interactions between vehicles, which can lead to more crashes.”

Automatic emergency brakes

A mandate requiring automatic emergency braking systems also experienced delays in 2024. However, a final rule seems inevitable. The question surrounding this rule is more about whether FMCSA and NHTSA can fix defects in the technology before any regulation takes effect.

“A final rule is anticipated in January that will mandate automatic emergency braking systems,” Grimes said. “The final rule must improve upon shortcomings from the initial proposal that did not sufficiently address false activations and provide enough lead-in time before compliance begins.”

In 2023, FMCSA and NHTSA issued a joint proposal that would require AEB systems and electronic stability control systems on new vehicles weighing more than 10,000 pounds.

The heavy vehicle proposal calls for all Class 7 and 8 vehicles – those weighing more than 26,000 pounds – to be required to meet the AEB standards three years after the rule takes effect. All Class 3 to 6 vehicles – those weighing 10,001 to 26,000 pounds – would be required to meet the AEB and electronic stability control requirements in four years. Small-volume manufacturers would have until five years after the final rule took effect. There would not be any retrofit requirements on existing heavy vehicles.

“The rulemaking is expected to establish performance standards and motor carrier maintenance requirements for AEB systems on heavy trucks and accompanying test procedures for measuring the performance of the AEB systems in NHTSA compliance testing,” the DOT wrote in a summary of the rulemaking.

During the formal comment period, OOIDA and individual truckers told the agencies that current AEB technologies are deficient and cited instances of false activations. Examples included false activations being triggered by shadows from an overpass or guardrails while traveling on a curve.

The final rule had been expected to be released this past April. Now, the agencies are targeting January.

Fighting fraud

Freight fraud has been estimated to cost the trucking industry as much as $800 million annually.

Truckers have been urging FMCSA to level the playing field in regard to brokers.

FMCSA issued a final rule on broker financial responsibility in November 2023. It takes several steps to improve broker security regulations, including the suspension of operating authority if the available financial security falls below $75,000. According to the rule, brokers, surety providers and financial institutions must comply with suspension rules starting on Jan. 16, 2025. Other aspects of the rule will take effect in January 2026.

However, FMCSA issued a proposal in early November to delay the compliance date for the suspension rules until Jan. 16, 2026 because its new registration system won’t be ready before then.

“This action is being proposed because FMCSA has determined that only its forthcoming online registration system will be used to accept filings and track notifications, and this functionality will not be added to its legacy systems,” the agency wrote in the notice. “As the new system is not expected to be available before Jan. 16, 2025, FMCSA proposed to extend the compliance date to provide regulated entities time to begin using and familiarizing themselves with the system before compliance is required.”

Adding to the financial responsibility rule, OOIDA has been pushing for broker transparency since it petitioned the agency in 2020. As of press time in early November, FMCSA had missed its target date to unveil a proposal in October. The agency has said it is committed to the rulemaking, but it was unclear if it would be delayed further into 2024 or even into 2025.

“For years, small-business truckers have expressed frustration that regulations designed to provide transparency are routinely evaded by brokers or simply not enforced by FMCSA,” OOIDA Executive Vice President Lewie Pugh submitted in written testimony to a House subcommittee in July. “CFR 371.3 mandates that brokers keep transaction records and permits each party to a brokered transaction to review these documents. These regulations are in place to protect motor carriers, brokers and the public by ensuring the transparent and smooth movement of goods throughout the supply chain.”

What else is coming?

Other rulemakings that are expected to take their next steps in late 2024 or in 2025 include a new-entrant safety assurance process, entry-level driver training requirements, automated driving systems regulations, revisions to electronic logging device regulations and safety fitness procedures.

“OOIDA will continue efforts to bolster driver training requirements, and a new-entrant safety assurance proposal may be an opportunity to accomplish that,” Grimes said. “DOT will also likely make incremental progress on CSA/SMS reform along with a formal safety fitness determination proposal. We also will be watching for potential changes to licensing standards, drug testing processes and autonomous vehicle oversight.” LL