The Spring 2024 Unified Regulatory Agenda’s release highlights yet another postponement in the controversial rulemaking process, which has received notable resistance from truck drivers, lawmakers, and industry organizations.

In 2022, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) revived a 2016 proposal by issuing an advance notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking for speed-limiting devices on commercial motor vehicles exceeding 26,001 pounds.

This notice in 2022 amassed over 15,000 comments, with the majority coming from truck drivers opposing the mandate. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), which advocates for small-business truckers, contends that such a rule could undermine safety by causing hazardous speed differentials, thereby increasing the risk of collisions between cars and trucks.

Despite the pushback, FMCSA is resolute in its mission to push forward a formal speed limiter proposal, which will stipulate a maximum speed limit. However, the proposal has seen multiple delays. Initial timelines suggested release dates around June 2023, December 2023, and May 2024. The current aim is for a release in 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,” as stated in the DOT’s 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 notes that the rulemaking will be directed at commercial motor vehicles weighing over 26,001 pounds that operate in interstate commerce and have an electronic engine control unit.

Previous notices did not specify a maximum speed, though truck safety advocates have recommended speed caps for heavy-duty trucks at 60 mph. Other proposed limits include 65, 68, and 70 mph.

Opponents argue that such speed limits may create dangerous speed differentials, given that some U.S. highways have speed limits up to 85 mph. Additionally, interstate traffic often exceeds posted limits, potentially causing cars to travel up to 30 mph faster than trucks.

“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,” emphasized OOIDA President Todd Spencer. “Limiting trucks to speeds below the flow of traffic increases interactions between vehicles, which can lead to more crashes.”

There is also legislative resistance to the speed limiter mandate. The DRIVE Act, which aims to prevent FMCSA from enacting any speed limiter rules, has been introduced in both the House and Senate. An appropriations bill also includes a provision to obstruct the rulemaking process.

In addition to OOIDA, the DRIVE Act has garnered support from groups such as the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Livestock Marketing Association, the National Association of Small Trucking Companies, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, and the Western States Trucking Association.

Source: Land Line

The post Proposal for Speed Limiters on Commercial Vehicles Extended to May 2025 appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

On April 9, Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., joined HR3039, while Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Ted Budd, R-N.C., became co-sponsors of S2671. With their support, the total number of co-sponsors has now reached 41 in the House and 12 in the Senate.

Both versions of the DRIVE Act aim to prohibit the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) from enforcing any rule or regulation mandating speed limiters.

HR3039 was introduced by Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., in May of last year, while Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., launched S2761 in July. Both lawmakers argue that FMCSA’s attempt to impose speed-limiting devices represents overregulation and disregards states’ authority to set speed limits.

“This overreach by the Biden administration has the potential to negatively impact all facets of the agricultural and trucking industries,” Brecheen said. “I know from experience driving a semi while hauling equipment and years spent hauling livestock that the flow of traffic set by state law is critical for safety, instead of an arbitrary one-size-fits-all speed limit imposed by some bureaucrat sitting at his desk in Washington, D.C. This rule will add one more needless burden, and Congress must stop it.”

In 2022, FMCSA released an advance notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking suggesting the requirement of speed limiters for most commercial motor vehicles weighing 26,001 pounds or more.

This notice generated over 15,000 comments, primarily from truck drivers opposing the mandate. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), representing small-business truckers, contends that such a requirement could compromise safety by creating hazardous speed differentials and increasing the risk of accidents between cars and trucks.

Despite strong opposition from truckers, FMCSA intends to proceed with a notice of proposed rulemaking.

However, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s latest Significant Rulemaking Report, FMCSA’s proposal is expected to be released in May. Yet, the agency has missed two prior target dates, and a proposal has not yet been submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. OMB review, a required step, can take varying durations, ranging from weeks to over a year.

Passing the DRIVE Act would render FMCSA’s rulemaking efforts irrelevant.

Source: Land Line

The post Conversation Over Speed Limiters Continues, Pushback Gains Support appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif., threw his support behind the DRIVE Act, also known as HR3039, on Tuesday, March 19. This month, Reps. Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., and Diana Harshbarger, R-Tenn., joined as co-sponsors, boosting the total number of supporters to 40 in the House and 10 in the Senate.

The DRIVE Act, introduced by Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., in May 2023 and followed by Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., with S2761 last July, seeks to prohibit FMCSA from mandating speed limiting devices on certain vehicles.

FMCSA’s ongoing efforts toward a rulemaking on speed limiters, with a projected formal proposal in May, have met resistance from truckers. The proposed rule would enforce speed limits on most commercial motor vehicles, with potential top speeds discussed ranging from 60 to 70 mph.

Truckers have voiced concerns about speed limiters, highlighting dangerous speed differentials, compromised ability to avoid accidents, and increased risk of road rage. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), representing around 150,000 members, opposes the mandate, citing statistics showing a significant rise in vehicle interactions when trucks travel below posted speed limits.

“Recently, FMCSA confirmed that the next phase of its speed limiter rulemaking is expected in May,” OOIDA wrote. “While the agency considers their next steps, we aren’t waiting around. That’s why OOIDA continues to press Congress to stop speed limiters through the DRIVE Act. We need you to join the fight today.”

A grassroots campaign supporting the DRIVE Act has gained momentum, with many lawmakers viewing it as a matter of states’ rights. They argue that federal imposition of truck speed limits would undermine states’ authority to regulate speeds on their highways.

Tennessee’s recent decision to abolish split speed limits for cars and trucks on Interstate 81 underscores this stance, with trucks now allowed to travel at 70 mph alongside cars. If FMCSA were to enforce a 60-mph speed limit for trucks, it would create a split speed limit against the state’s preferences.

For more information on the DRIVE Act and how to engage with lawmakers on this issue, visit FightingForTruckers.com.

Source: Land Line

The post Lawmakers Across U.S. Join Fight to Stop Speed Limiter Mandate appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

“Recently, FMCSA confirmed that the next phase of its speed limiter rulemaking is expected in May,” OOIDA wrote to its members. “While the agency considers their next steps, we aren’t waiting around. That’s why OOIDA continues to press Congress to stop speed limiters through the DRIVE Act. We need you to join the fight today.”

In an email sent to its members, OOIDA advocates for support of the DRIVE Act, a legislative initiative introduced in both the House and Senate. The DRIVE Act, spearheaded by Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) with HR3039 and Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) with S2761, aims to block the FMCSA from advancing any rulemaking that mandates speed limiters on trucks.

Opponents of speed limiters, including OOIDA, cite concerns such as dangerous speed differentials, the infringement on states’ rights, and potential unintended consequences. Thousands of truck drivers echoed these apprehensions in response to the FMCSA’s notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking in 2022.

While the FMCSA is anticipated to move forward with a formal proposal in May, the DRIVE Act has gained momentum in Congress. The House version of the Act boasts 34 co-sponsors, and the Senate version has nine. OOIDA, however, emphasizes the urgency of garnering additional support for the bill.

“The legislation blocks FMCSA from creating a speed limiter rule,” OOIDA wrote. “Over 40 members of Congress have voiced their support for the DRIVE Act so far, but we need more before FMCSA announces the next proposal in May.”

Truck drivers are actively encouraged to engage with their lawmakers through OOIDA’s Fighting For Truckers website, providing a platform for their voices to be heard on this critical issue. Additionally, OOIDA has sent a letter to House Republican offices, underscoring the pressing need to expedite the passage of the DRIVE Act. As the debate intensifies, truckers play a pivotal role in shaping the legislative landscape and influencing decisions that directly impact their industry.

Source: Land Line

The post OOIDA Urges Truck Drivers to Send Message to Congress that They Don’t Want Speed Limiters appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

In a letter addressed to House Republican offices on Feb. 20, OOIDA stressed the significance of prioritizing the DRIVE Act before addressing the potential reversal of the Biden administration’s new worker classification rule.

“As the House of Representatives considers a Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval to overturn the Biden administration’s worker classification rule, we are writing to express our concerns about a provision in the Trump administration’s worker classification rule that would be imposed on owner-operators,” OOIDA wrote. “While we generally supported the 2021 Trump rule and believe it should allow for owner-operators to continue working as independent contractors, we strenuously objected to a provision slipped into the final rule that effectively enables large carriers to mandate that the independent truckers they contract with use dangerous speed limiters. This level of micromanagement flies in the face of independence.”

The DRIVE Act, introduced last year, aims to prevent the FMCSA from pursuing any rulemaking that mandates the use of speed-limiting devices on commercial motor vehicles. Despite strong opposition from truck drivers, the FMCSA is anticipated to unveil a proposal in May, advocating for speed limiters on most commercial motor vehicles.

Critics argue against the mandate, citing concerns about hazardous speed differentials and the encroachment on a state’s authority to establish speed limits. OOIDA is particularly concerned about large carriers compelling independent contractors to adopt technologies they consider unsafe. Therefore, the Association is urging lawmakers to prioritize passing the legislation before attempting to overturn the U.S. Department of Labor’s independent contractor rule.

“Thankfully, there is legislation introduced in the House – the DRIVE Act – to help alleviate this concern if it is passed before or along with the (Congressional Review Act Resolution),” OOIDA wrote. “Congress must do this if it really wants to preserve the viability of small-business truckers.”

Regarding the worker classification rule, the Department of Labor (DOL) introduced a final rule in January to prevent companies from misclassifying workers as independent contractors. This rule, set to take effect on March 11, replaces a Trump-era rule and offers guidance consistent with the Fair Labor Standards Act for analyzing employee or independent contractor classification.

OOIDA insists that any successful worker classification rule must preserve the business model of truly independent owner-operators and shield truck drivers from exploitative carriers. If Congress deems the new rule inadequate in striking the right balance, OOIDA advocates for preventing independent truckers from being compelled to equip their trucks with speed limiters.

“By passing HR3039 before moving a (Congressional Review Act Resolution), you can send a message that you truly support trucking’s independent contractors,” OOIDA wrote.

Source: Land Line

The post OOIDA Urges Congress to Demonstrate Support for Independent Truckers by Halting Speed Limiter Mandates appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

The movement to thwart the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) push for mandatory speed limiters on heavy-duty trucks has gained additional backing. This month, Representatives Jefferson Van Drew (R-N.J.) and Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) joined as co-sponsors of the DRIVE Act, bringing the total number of co-sponsors in the House to 34.

Introduced by Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) last year, the DRIVE Act, or HR3039, aims to prevent the FMCSA from advancing any rulemaking that seeks to enforce speed-limiting devices on commercial motor vehicles.

The FMCSA initiated an advance notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking concerning speed limiters in 2022, with a formal proposal, including a specified top speed, expected in May. Truck drivers overwhelmingly expressed their opposition to a speed limiter mandate through 15,000 comments submitted in response to the initial notice.

Numerous lawmakers have echoed the concerns of truck drivers, emphasizing issues such as hazardous speed differentials, states’ rights, and unintended consequences as reasons to reject mandatory speed limiters.

Rep. Van Drew voiced his opposition to speed limiters during a House subcommittee hearing in December.

“These drivers give many examples of situations in which they need to accelerate for safety, whether it’s merging into highway speed traffic, building momentum to go up a hill or simply keeping up with the flow of traffic,” Van Drew said. “It is a hard and difficult job, and they do it well. Your policy would take those options away from them. We’re tired of this. We’re tired of big government. One gentleman, his comment was, ‘This is a stupid idea. The policy is overreach.’ We’re tired of overreach. It’s a classic example of government coming to save us … There’s a lot of independent truckers, and they would be harmed by this policy.”

Brecheen previously highlighted the importance of allowing states to determine their speed limits, emphasizing that a speed limiter mandate would strip away that autonomy. States that opted for uniform speed limits for both cars and heavy-duty trucks did so based on safety considerations, ensuring vehicles on the same road operated at similar speeds.

“We need the ability to have our state legislators and state senators to listen to the people and make adjustments,” Brecheen said. “When the federal government does something, it’s put in place, and ingenuity and creativity is often lost. We need the ability to adjust to different conditions.”

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), representing small-business truckers, actively opposes a speed limiter mandate and advocates for support of the DRIVE Act.

Source: Land Line

The post Speed Limiters Bill Loses Traction, Veto Gains Support appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

“It does take a toll on you,” said Perry, president of Health in Transportation.

Health is a prominent concern for drivers, per Commercial Carrier Journal’s (CCJ) in-depth report. Health secured the second position in their worries. Surveying over 800 leased owner-operators and company drivers, CCJ found that 22% considered health their foremost concern, 17% ranked it as their second-biggest concern, and 11% placed it in the third spot. Interestingly, company drivers exhibited a higher level of concern, with 25% ranking it as their top concern, compared to 17% of owner-operators.

When drivers were asked about the least favorable aspect of their job, 6% highlighted the adverse impact on their health, with this percentage increasing in correlation with the driver’s age.

“The CDC says it pretty clearly is a very unhealthy population and mainly because of the regulation of the job, all the time living on the road, no access to good food, no form of exercise,” etc. Perry said.

Many drivers commented on the regulatory aspect of truck driving, emphasizing its effects on health. One driver mentioned that regulations disrupt circadian rhythms, suggesting that drive time should be tailored to individual health and capabilities. Another driver criticized the 14-hour rule, asserting that it leads to driving in a fatigued or drowsy state.

“ELD particularly forces one to push harder to maintain productivity; the proposed speed limiter reg will increase pressure to wring every possible mile out of every possible minute,” another driver commented. “Hardly a recipe for a relaxed, patient approach to maintaining public safety and getting from point A to point B.”

Regulated long driving hours not only impact a driver’s physical health, manifesting in a lack of movement, limited physical activity, and restricted access to healthy food options but also affect their mental well-being. The stress of meeting productivity goals while ensuring safety isolates drivers from social interaction.

These negative health effects have a cascading impact on a company’s financials, influencing health insurance premiums, elevating accident risks, and amplifying the costs associated with driver turnover and recruitment, but an increasing number of trucking companies are recognizing the critical importance of driver health in light of these challenges.

“Carriers are caring more about this than they ever have before,” said Andy Vanzant, COO at Gulf Relay in Mississippi.

Source: Commercial Carrier Journal

The post Carriers are Doing More for Truck Drivers Health and Well-Being appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

Several representatives focused their inquiries on the FMCSA’s consideration of mandatory speed-limiter use by commercial motor carriers. Republican Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri expressed concerns raised by constituent truckers regarding various regulations, including the limitations on operating time within hours of service. He viewed the potential speed-limiter mandate as an additional challenge for drivers already dealing with parking shortages and time constraints.

“Now you’re telling them they’ll have to reach their destinations at a slower pace” with a speed-limiter mandate, he said. “When is enough enough?”

He added that in a situation where a driver might need to make up time, drivers may feel the pressure to speed in congested areas. With speed limiters, the “only place to make up time [might be] on city streets, in suburbs or construction zones,” he said. “Could this reduce safety?”

Administrator Hutcheson responded by emphasizing the ever-evolving nature of any speed-limiter rule. She mentioned that the agency had accepted comments on a speed-limiter Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking but had not yet issued any subsequent proposal.

Directly to Burlinson, she said that she “shared your commitment to drivers, certainly to their safety,” as well as that of others on the roadway. “We’re underway in a process of rulemaking for speed limiters.”

“I would encourage you not to implement that rule,” he replied.

Despite Hutcheson’s assurances, the representatives, including Subcommittee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Arkansas) and Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), raised questions about the credibility of the rulemaking process. Nehls referenced a keynote speech, suggesting it was sponsored by labor unions and large trucking companies. Hutcheson clarified that discussions during stakeholder engagements, like the one mentioned, do not involve the contents of rules in progress.

The hearing covered various aspects, such as highway infrastructure investment, joint efforts by NHTSA and FMCSA on automatic emergency braking systems, fraud issues in brokered freight markets, FMCSA’s response to broker-transparency petitions, emissions impacts of a speed-limiter mandate, the pilot program for 18-20-year-old interstate truckers, and advanced-assist technologies/autonomous driving.

While Rep. Nehls urged Hutcheson to listen to truckers and consider the numerous comments filed against the speed-limiter idea, Hutcheson reiterated her commitment to engaging with industry associations and addressing concerns through ongoing initiatives like the Women of Trucking Advisory Board and Truck Leasing Task Force.

Source: Commercial Carrier Journal

The post FMCSA’s Hutchenson Questioned in Congress about Speed Limiters appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, the number of co-sponsors for the bill has now reached 30, with recent endorsements from Representatives Zachary Nunn of Iowa, Chuck Edwards of North Carolina, and Doug LaMalfa of California.

The DRIVE Act, or HR3039, seeks to prohibit the FMCSA from issuing any rules or regulations that mandate the installation of speed limiters on commercial motor vehicles.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), a representative and advocate for small businesses in the industry, stands firmly behind the DRIVE Act. They are urging its more than 150,000 members to mobilize their lawmakers to join as co-sponsors. OOIDA argues that speed limiters can create dangerous speed disparities and holds firm that setting speed limits should be up to the digression of individual states.

“The physics are straightforward – limiting trucks to speeds below the flow of traffic increases interactions between vehicles and leads to more crashes,” said Todd Spencer, OOIDA president.

In 2022, FMCSA initiated an advance notice of supplemental proposed rulemaking that suggested the possibility that speed limiters be installed on any commercial motor vehicle with a gross weight of 26,001 pounds or more. The specific top speed had not been determined, although earlier suggestions ranged from 60 to 68 mph. In September 2023, FMCSA hinted at proposing a top speed of 68 mph; however, it later stated that a final decision was still pending.

Whatever the ultimate speed limit, many truck drivers have voiced strong opposition to any mandate regarding speed limiters. Of the over 15,000 comments submitted, many were from truckers who objected to the idea. They raised concerns about the risks associated with varying speeds, mainly when speed limits in certain parts of the country reach as high as 85 mph.

“I oppose the speed limiter mandate,” said Thad Thurlow, a professional truck driver who responded in a comment to FMCSA. “Speed differentials create unsafe conditions. Some states have already come to that conclusion and abolished their speed differentials. Limiting all trucks to the same speed will create more congestion as trucks pass each other and cars have to move around them. Congestion leads to more frustration and drivers making riskier decisions to get through traffic.”

Representative Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma formally introduced the DRIVE Act in the House on May 25. In a May interview with Land Line Now, Brecheen pointed out the potential extreme speed differentials that could arise from speed limiters, describing the potential mandate as an impending accident.

“You have states with 85 mph speed limits, and then you have someone texting and driving and not paying attention and then rear ends (the truck),” Brecheen said. “Let’s say that tractor-trailer has an excavator on the back … there’s no opportunity (to correct) going 30 mph less when that person gets rear-ended … That’s the kind of stuff we’re talking about here – a 30 mph difference, because one is limited by federal law and the other is traveling 30 mph faster because of state law.”

 Source: Land Line

The post FMCSA’s Speed Limiter Proposal Faces Pushback from DRIVE Act appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.

FMCSA spokesperson Kala Wright clarified that the 68 mph limit is unofficial and requires further review before any official proposal is made.

“No decision has been made on the maximum speed limit that would be proposed in the upcoming SNPRM,” Wright said in a statement to Trucking Dive.

FMCSA officials are still committed to releasing their latest proposal on the long-awaited rule by Dec. 29, according to updated language. The agency and external consultants carefully examined over 15,000 responses received during a public comment period on speed limiters.

The use of this technology is a highly debated issue in the trucking industry, with the American Trucking Associations in favor and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association against it.

ATA’s membership is mainly made up of big trucking fleets, many of which already use speed limiters. On the other hand, OOIDA, which represents small businesses and owner-operators, thinks that making speed limiters mandatory takes away their last advantage over larger competitors.

According to OOIDA President Todd Spencer, making trucks drive slower than the rest of traffic results in more interactions between vehicles and leads to an increase in accidents.

“This isn’t safe for truckers, but especially not safe for passenger vehicle drivers sharing the road with trucks,” Spencer said.

Source: Trucking Dive

The post FMCSA Hints at 68 mph Speed Limit for Trucks, Then Retracts Statement appeared first on Truck Drivers USA.