Warning: Regulations ahead
To no trucker’s surprise, there’s another batch of rulemakings making its way through the regulatory process.
For certain, there never seems to be a shortage of rules being cooked up by lawmakers or government agencies.
In July, the U.S. Department of Transportation released its Spring 2024 Unified Regulatory Agenda. The agenda includes dozens of rulemakings at various stages. Some of the proposals, such as broker transparency, will be welcomed by most truckers. Others, such as speed limiters, are largely opposed.
Let Land Line guide you through some of the most noteworthy rulemakings.
Speed limiters
When the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issued an advance notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking in 2022 to mandate speed limiters on commercial motor vehicles, thousands of truck drivers told the agency why they believed it was a bad idea.
The outcry didn’t kill the proposal, but it has played a role in multiple delays.
Previous agency projections for the proposal’s release included June 2023, December 2023 and May 2024. Now, FMCSA is targeting May 2025.
“FMCSA intends to proceed with a motor carrier-based speed limiter rulemaking by preparing a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to follow up on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s and FMCSA’s jointly issued Sept. 7, 2016, notice of proposed rulemaking on this subject,” the DOT wrote in the regulatory agenda. “The new rulemaking, in subsequent consultation with NHTSA, will consider whether additional regulatory actions should be taken concerning CMV manufacturer requirements.”
The DOT said the rulemaking will focus on commercial motor vehicles weighing 26,001 pounds or more that are operating in interstate commerce and are equipped with an electronic engine control unit.
Previous notices regarding speed limiters have not proposed a top speed. However, truck safety groups have advocated limiting heavy-duty trucks to no faster than 60 mph. Other suggested top speeds have included 65, 68 and 70 mph.
The 2022 notice received more than 15,000 comments, with the majority coming from truck drivers opposed to a mandate. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association contends that the requirement would hinder safety by creating dangerous speed differentials and increasing the risk of crashes between cars and trucks.
There are highways in the United States with speed limits as fast as 85 mph. Even more, the flow of traffic on interstates is often faster than the speed limit. That means the rule could lead to cars traveling 30 mph faster than trucks on the same road.
Lawmakers also have joined the fight against a speed limiter mandate.
The DRIVE Act, which would prohibit FMCSA from moving forward with any rule or regulation mandating speed limiters, has been introduced in the House and Senate.
Broker transparency
A long-awaited proposal aimed at improving broker transparency is expected to be released in October.
The rulemaking was prompted by a petition from OOIDA in 2020.
The petition asked the agency:
- To require brokers to automatically provide an electronic copy of each transaction record within 48 hours after the contractual service has been completed
- To explicitly prohibit brokers from including any provision that requires carriers to waive their rights to access the transaction records
Regulation CFR 371.3 already requires that brokers keep records of each transaction with a carrier and that each party to the transaction have a right to view these records. OOIDA asked the agency to begin enforcing that regulation and to eliminate any loopholes allowing brokers to sidestep the rule. The Small Business in Transportation Coalition also petitioned the agency.
“Motor carriers are victimized through unpaid claims, unpaid loads, double-brokered loads or load-phishing schemes on a daily basis,” OOIDA wrote. “If broker transparency regulations and enforcement can be improved, then disputes between motor carriers and sureties will be reduced.
“There will be less need for litigation, less need for FMCSA intervention, and the economic health of the broker/motor carrier component of the transportation industry will be stronger.”
The agency granted the petition in March 2023 and first targeted June 2023 to release a proposal. Last year, however, FMCSA changed the target date to this October.
The good news is that the agency is maintaining that target date.
Considering the amount of broker fraud in the industry, OOIDA continues its calls for FMCSA to act as soon as possible.
“We are anxiously awaiting the transparency proposal, as broker concerns remain a top issue for OOIDA members,” Jay Grimes, OOIDA’s director of federal affairs, said earlier this year. “The sooner, the better.”
Automatic emergency braking systems
Although a final rule to require automatic emergency braking systems on new commercial motor vehicles is behind schedule, government agencies are targeting 2025 for its release.
Last year, 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, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association 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.
Despite the opposition, FMCSA and NHTSA are planning to unveil the final rule in January. Previous projections targeted this past April.
ELD revisions
In June 2025, FMCSA plans to propose changes to its existing regulation that mandates electronic logging devices on most commercial motor vehicles.
In September 2022, FMCSA requested feedback from truckers about how it can improve the ELD mandate.
As part of the notice, FMCSA asked truck drivers for feedback on the original mandate’s decision to exempt trucks with pre-2000 engines.
“Should FMCSA reevaluate or modify the applicability of the current ELD regulation for rebuilt or remanufactured CMV engines or glider kits?” the agency asked.
FMCSA’s original notice also considered changes to address ELD malfunctions, the removal of ELDs from the list of registered devices, technical specifications and ELD certification.
OOIDA told the agency that there’s no reason to rescind its exemption for older trucks.
“The agency lacks data confirming the ELD mandate has improved highway safety and has failed to demonstrate how the expansion of existing requirements to vehicles operating on pre-2000 and rebuilt pre-2000 engines would enhance safety,” the Association wrote in 2022. “OOIDA is unaware of any research that demonstrates vehicles operating under the pre-2000 exemption fail to meet the same level of safety as vehicles with ELDs.”
Although it remains unclear exactly what FMCSA will propose, the agency appears poised to move forward with a notice of proposed rulemaking next year.
Automated driving systems
FMCSA plans to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding commercial motor vehicles equipped with automated driving systems in December.
The proposal had previously been expected to be released in late 2023.
“The proposed changes to the commercial motor vehicle operations, inspection, repair and maintenance regulations prioritize safety and security, promote innovation, foster a consistent regulatory approach to ADS-equipped commercial motor vehicles and recognize the difference between human operators and ADS,” the agency wrote.
In February 2023, FMCSA released a supplemental advance notice of proposed rulemaking about automated driving systems to solicit feedback from the industry. The agency wanted to gather information regarding notification by motor carriers operating level 4 or 5 systems, oversight for remote assistants and vehicle inspection and maintenance.
As part of its formal comments, OOIDA told the agency that it shouldn’t roll out autonomous technology before it is ready.
“Despite the various claims that autonomous vehicles will lead to zero deaths, there continue to be real-world situations in which automation has devastatingly failed,” OOIDA wrote. “While autonomous vehicles might improve safety under certain conditions, they create new risks with dangerous outcomes.”
Safety fitness
A proposal aimed at determining whether a motor carrier is safe to operate is scheduled to be released in June 2025.
Last August, FMCSA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking that asked for feedback on whether the process to determine a motor carrier’s safety fitness needs to be revised.
In addition, the agency held public listening sessions over the summer to get feedback from industry stakeholders.
“The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is seeking public comment as it considers the development of a new methodology to determine when a motor carrier is not fit to operate commercial motor vehicles in or affecting interstate commerce,” the agency wrote in June.
The agency is expected to use the feedback it received from the recent listening sessions to form its June 2025 proposal.
OOIDA has told the agency that the current safety fitness determination process has been ineffective.
“The FMCSA safety fitness determination process has a direct effect on motor carriers’ ability to stay in business,” OOIDA wrote in its comments. “Historically, the safety fitness determination structure has not been proven as a reliable methodology to properly determine a motor carrier’s fitness to operate. Most of the (program’s) shortcomings relate to the inaccuracy and inconsistency of the data that is collected and analyzed during a safety investigation.”
Hair testing
Another rulemaking of interest to truckers comes out of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
HHS released a notice of proposed rulemaking that would establish hair-testing guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs in September 2020. In its initial proposal, the agency sought to “allow federal executive branch agencies to collect and test a hair specimen as part of their drug testing programs with the limitation that hair specimens be used for pre-employment and random testing.”
In November 2020, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association filed comments opposing the inclusion of hair testing. The Association cited a number of concerns regarding the practice, questioning its reliability due to contamination from the environment and the interference of cosmetic treatment. Furthermore, the Association said that variances in hair types can create issues when it comes to testing.
Following a 60-day comment period, HHS submitted a revised version of the proposal to the White House Office of Management and Budget in March 2023. The supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking – which is still pending review by the White House Office of Management and Budget – was scheduled to publish in June 2023. The agency now anticipates that notice to be published in October of this year, with a public comment period to follow.
Exactly what will change from the initial proposal to the supplemental version is still unclear. Even with another new date in place for an anticipated publication, adopting any proposed changes still would be a ways off.
Jay Grimes, OOIDA’s director of federal affairs, told Land Line that the publication of a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking “could delay DOT’s ability to formally implement any hair testing protocols until the guidelines are finalized.” LL
Land Line’s Ryan Witkowski contributed to this report.