Jeremy Wolfe
Key takeaways
- The latest federal government regulatory agenda is live, outlining regulators’ vague plans for upcoming rulemakings.
- Several rulemakings, including changes to CDL standards and roadside inspection reporting, are in the final rule phase and could be implemented soon.
- In this article are the rulemakings that could impact fleets.
ID 32055688 © Charnsitr | Dreamstime.com
The latest federal regulatory agenda is now public, vaguely outlining the Department of Transportation’s regulatory plans.
The agenda gives fleets a solid idea of the final rules and proposals for the industry’s future, but it is far from a firm timeline for the industry’s next regulatory shifts.
Below are the agenda’s rulemakings that fleets will want to watch. These could appear in the near future as proposed rulemakings or final rules in the Federal Register.
The rulemakings in the proposed rule stage are waiting for a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM): they have limited information and probably a long path before taking effect.
Rulemakings in the final rule stage have an NPRM available online and are awaiting the rule’s final draft; these could take effect within a month of the final rule’s publication.
JJ Gouin | 2165453061 | Getty Images
High-impact rulemakings
First, here are the regulatory agenda items that could have the highest impact for fleets, if FMCSA publishes them:
Automated driving systems
An incoming NPRM would outline new regulations for the testing and deployment of automated driving systems. The Trump administration remains very interested in autonomous tech, and autonomous truck developers are already embedded in commercial operations, but federal rulemaking has so far been slow to arrive.
Training provider certification
An incoming NPRM would propose ways to strengthen the standards of FMCSA Entry Level Driver Training (ELDT) training providers. The rulemaking may even require training providers to maintain some form of ongoing compliance to remain listed, rather than simple self-certification.
AEB testing procedures
FMCSA and NHTSA are planning a supplemental NPRM to comply with 2022’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This NPRM would propose test procedures for truck manufacturers’ automatic emergency braking (AEB). The first NPRM was published in 2023 under the Biden FMCSA.
New ELD specifications
An NPRM on the agenda could update electronic logging device (ELD) regulations. The rulemaking would “streamline and improve the clarity of regulatory text and ELD specifications.” FMCSA first issued an anticipatory NPRM (ANPRM) for these ELD revisions in 2022. It’s a Biden-era rulemaking with little progress, but because of FMCSA’s recent interest in driver regulatory enforcement, the rulemaking could see an update in the next few months.
Emergency exemption extensions
This rulemaking would extend the time limit for the automatic emergency relief exemption under a regional declaration of emergency, reverting from 14 days to 30 days. Not mentioned in the agenda posting, FMCSA had issued the NPRM in January.
Rulemakings to watch
These agenda items are less impactful but still worth monitoring. Some are designed specifically to make carriers’ lives easier by reducing regulatory burdens; others could be highly impactful but are just too early in the rulemaking process.
Carrier safety fitness determinations
This NPRM vaguely gestures toward “potential updates” to how FMCSA determines when a motor carrier is not fit to operate. The agency first asked for feedback on its safety fitness determination process in 2023, so there is a chance this rule is just a vestige of the Biden-era FMCSA.
Agricultural commodity hours of service
FMCSA’s yearslong rulemaking to codify HOS exemptions for drivers moving agricultural commodities is in its final rule phase. The rulemaking’s last update was in 2020, when the agency published an interim final rule.
No more self-reporting violations
FMCSA is proposing to remove the requirement that CDL holders self-report violations to their home state. The NPRM was published in 2025, and this change is now in the final rule phase.
English language out-of-service criteria
This NPRM could propose more formally codifying English Language Proficiency requirements as an out-of-service violation.
Submitting roadside inspection forms
This rulemaking, now in the final rule stage, would remove the requirement that motor carriers always submit completed Driver Vehicle Examination Reports (also known as Driver Vehicle Inspection Reports) to their issuing states. Instead, carriers would need to submit the form only if the state agency requests it.
Ending the required stop at railroad crossings
FMCSA’s rulemaking to eliminate the mandatory stop at highway-rail grade crossings is in the final rule phase. The agency issued an NPRM in May 2025 to propose less strict requirements: affected commercial vehicle drivers (e.g., bus drivers) would be able to pass a highway-rail crossing without stopping—if the crossing has an active warning device.
CDL standards
FMCSA is working to publish an NPRM to “enhance the security standards” of state-issued CDLs, including changes to record retention and document verification.
State CDL fees
This rulemaking would update FMCSA’s fee system for the Commercial Driver’s License Information System, adopting a user-fee-based approach. Not included in the regulatory agenda, this rulemaking already saw an NPRM in May.
Non-domiciled CDL limits
FMCSA has already issued the interim final rule on non-domiciled CDL limits but still has the final rule on its agenda. This rulemaking limits states’ authority to issue or renew non-domiciled CDLs.
More Clearinghouse information
One pending NPRM would propose “increasing the availability of driver information” from the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse, among other unnamed process changes.
Fewer motor vehicle requirements
FMCSA has three rulemakings in the final rule phase that, if published, would remove several CMV equipment regulations. The requirements to be removed are rear impact guard labels, spare fuses, some tractor license plate lamps, portable conveyor brakes, and ELD manuals.
Mark Schremmer
Efforts to allow military veterans easy entry into the trucking industry aren’t new, but the current administration is making the recruitment a priority.
The U.S. Department of Transportation announced the creation of a “patriotic hiring campaign” called Freedom Haulers.
The turbo-charged recruitment effort follows implementation of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s non-domiciled CDL rule, which is expected to remove nearly 200,000 truck drivers from the freight market.
“Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, we are removing more and more dangerous foreign drivers off our roads every day and restoring the integrity of America’s trucking industry,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a news release. “Our new Freedom Haulers campaign will help build on these successes and get the word out that there’s never been a better time for America’s former service members to get behind the wheel of a big rig. Trucking requires the precision, independence and discipline that they forged in the military – there’s no one better to tackle the challenge. By answering the call, veterans can leverage their GI Bill benefits and take on a new, essential mission: keep America moving.”
The DOT said the “interagency effort” will let veterans know why their backgrounds make them a great fit for trucking. Additionally, the campaign attempts to connect veterans with the resources they need to earn a CDL.
“President Trump’s Freedom Haulers initiative is another victory for common sense,” Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins said. “Instead of putting dangerous illegal immigrants on the road, we should be putting trust in our Veterans who have the discipline, determination and work ethic to succeed in this rewarding career path. VA already helps thousands of Veterans make this transition every year, and we stand ready to help thousands more.”
Earlier this month, Trump said the administration planned to create an express lane for military veterans to become truckers.
“My administration will soon take historic action to get illegal alien truck drivers who are just killing a lot of people,” Trump said this week during the Pennsylvania Defense and Innovation Summit. “They can’t read signs. Many of them are on drugs or alcohol, and they shouldn’t be driving these things. And they came in totally illegally. We don’t want them, but they are driving all over American roadways, and we’re going to replace them with proud American veterans.”
Trump later said that veterans who drove a heavy truck in the military will “automatically be eligible for a CDL.”
The Freedom Haulers initiative aims to build off existing efforts to convert military veterans into truck drivers. The military skills test waiver program, for instance, allows drivers with two years’ experience safely operating heavy military vehicles to obtain a CDL without taking the driving test. According to FMCSA, 40,000 service members and veterans have taken advantage of this program.
A new Freedom Haulers website was launched to provide information about the campaign, testimonials and steps that veterans can take to become a trucker.
To grab people’s attention for the program, DOT released an eye-catching video featuring clips from famous movies like “Die Hard” and “First Blood.” Click on link below to see video.
https://youtu.be/5iTB_I4MocI
The DOT was scheduled to host an event about the campaign on Monday, July 27, but it has been postponed. The Freedom Haulers website indicates that a “major announcement” is now planned for Thursday, July 30.
A Los Angeles Superior Court jury awarded $52.1 million after a motorcycle-truck crash, finding liability across a subcontracting chain.
A Los Angeles Superior Court jury’s $52.1 million verdict in Perrigo v. multiple trucking defendants underscores the expanding practical reach of vicarious liability in California motor-carrier operations. The case arose from an August 2021 motorcycle-truck collision in Santa Clarita and turned on how responsibility can attach across a subcontracting chain when freight is moved by an owner-operator or independent contractor. Although the dispute did not involve a freight broker, it highlights a recurring litigation question for transportation stakeholders: how far liability can extend up or down the supply chain when carriers outsource performance while maintaining a regulatory and public-safety duty.
Collision Facts and the Subcontracting Chain
Chad Perrigo was riding a motorcycle when he collided with a truck driven by Jorge Castaneda Rodriguez, who was operating equipment owned by Montecristo Trucking. The load originated under a U.S. Postal Service hauling contract, with performance ultimately passed through multiple entities before the trip involved in the crash. According to court filings summarized by the parties, the contract was held by Thunder Ridge Transport, subcontracted in full to Fames Transport, and then further subcontracted in part to Montecristo Trucking, for whom Rodriguez was driving at the time of impact.
The plaintiffs’ theory emphasized that the layered subcontracting did not eliminate downstream operational duties associated with safe transportation. The collision reportedly occurred at highway speed, and the plaintiffs contended that the driving circumstances reflected rule violations relevant to both fault and employment characterization. With multiple carriers in the chain, the litigation posture centered less on a single corporate defendant’s direct negligence and more on whether the legal structure of the relationships permitted the contracting carrier(s) to avoid responsibility for the conduct of the driver performing the work.
Vicarious Liability Framework Applied by the Trial Court
The verdict was entered under a vicarious responsibility theory. In jury instructions, Judge Michele Flurer defined vicarious responsibility as a circumstance where “an employer is responsible for harm caused by the wrongful conduct of its employees while acting within the scope of their employment.” The instruction set directed jurors to evaluate whether a carrier in the chain functioned as an employer despite contractual labels suggesting an independent-contractor relationship.
As framed at trial, Fames Transport became a focal point because it was the entity that subcontracted the work to Montecristo, connecting it most directly to the trip during which the crash occurred. The jury was instructed to look beyond a single “right of control” inquiry and consider the full nature of the relationship, including whether the company supplied equipment or tools, whether the work performed was part of the regular business of the alleged employer, whether the driver was engaged in a distinct occupation, and whether the parties believed they had an employer-employee relationship. This approach reflects a fact-intensive analysis that can expose a carrier to liability when the operational reality resembles employment, even if the paperwork is structured otherwise.
Trial Theories, Hours-of-Service Allegations, and Damages
The plaintiffs were Chad Perrigo and his wife, Alexa Perrigo, who asserted a derivative claim for loss of consortium based on the injuries allegedly suffered in the collision. The jury awarded $52.1 million in total damages. The defendants included Thunder Ridge Transport, Fames Transport, Montecristo Trucking, and Rodriguez, reflecting the lawsuit’s emphasis on accountability across the contracting chain rather than only the entity that owned the truck or employed the driver in a traditional sense.
Plaintiffs’ counsel Khail A. Parris of PARRIS Law Firm attributed the jury’s determination to the argument that Rodriguez was operating in violation of federal Hours of Service requirements at the time of the crash. Hours-of-service compliance can be consequential in cases of severe injury because it bears on whether driving was legally permitted, whether fatigue may be inferred, and whether contracting entities maintained safety oversight. The plaintiffs also pointed to California’s doctrinal treatment of a motor carrier’s duties as nondelegable, an approach that, in practice, can limit the extent to which subcontracting alone insulates upstream carriers from the conduct of those performing regulated transportation work.
Operational and Legal Implications for Motor Carriers Using Contractors
Commentary surrounding the verdict emphasized that the outcome should be read as a compliance and risk-structure warning for carriers that rely heavily on subcontractors or owner-operators. Richard Reibstein of Troutman Pepper Locke, who focuses on independent contractor law, characterized the verdict as a “cautionary tale” for companies and contractors involved in freight transportation and stressed the importance of documenting and implementing independent-contractor relationships in a manner that aligns with applicable law. While the verdict itself does not set binding precedent, it illustrates the litigation exposure that can arise when contractual allocation of responsibility diverges from how work is directed and integrated in practice.
For motor carriers operating in California, the case also reinforces that liability analysis can follow the movement of freight through successive agreements, especially where public-safety duties are treated as nondelegable. The legal takeaway is not that subcontracting is prohibited, but that outsourcing performance does not automatically outsource accountability. In high-severity crashes, plaintiffs may test the full chain of contracting relationships, and courts may permit juries to evaluate whether an “independent contractor” label reflects the real-world relationship for purposes of vicarious responsibility.
Last week, a Dallas County Court jury handed down a $604 million verdict against a broker and a carrier in Lipe v. Lupus Superior LLC & C.H. Robinson Company, Inc. The accident occurred in March of 2021 when a truck driver employed by Lupus Superior failed to brake and rear-ended vehicles stopped in traffic on I-20 in Jackson, Mississippi. As a result of the collision, there were 3 fatalities and 14 additional individuals were injured. The nuclear verdict was not due to punitive damages, but rather compensatory damages, including mental anguish, loss of consortium, and other damages. Liability theories against C.H. Robinson (CHR) included negligent selection and vicarious liability associated with allegations that CHR controlled the carrier’s driver’s actions at the time of the accident.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys presented evidence that CHR scheduled, tracked, and permitted the driver to continue driving despite the driver reporting that he was sick. CHR tried to cast doubt on the sickness claim given the driver’s 600-mile detour and disabled tracking device. Plaintiffs’ attorneys convinced the jury that CHR had the right to call the driver, reschedule the delivery, and tell the driver to stop driving. In addition, plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that CHR, through its load confirmation document, notified Lupus Superior that fines and penalties for late delivery were applicable and that late delivery could impact future business opportunities, which plaintiffs’ attorneys characterized as coercive.
Lupus Superior had a Satisfactory Safety Fitness Determination issued in 2014, which was confirmed by additional recent reviews, including one post-accident. Lupus Superior was above FMCSA intervention thresholds in both the Unsafe Driving BASIC and Hours of Service BASIC, and both BASICs had been in that status for a lengthy period of time approaching or exceeding one year. Plaintiffs’ expert testified that less than 1% of motor carriers have two or more above-threshold BASIC scores, an argument that appears to be based on the number of carriers that have no BASIC scores due to insufficient data. CHR allegedly did not use BASICs in its vetting criteria at the time.
The case is reportedly likely to be appealed. CHR was assessed 23% of the fault, with the deceased driver assessed 45% and Lupus Superior assessed 32%. Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that CHR should be 51% liable, apparently attempting to make CHR jointly and severally liable for the entire $604 million award. However, the joint and several liability associated with attributing the driver’s fault to CHR would appear to leave CHR potentially facing the full weight of the nuclear verdict if the verdict is not overturned or settled.
As a result of this Texas verdict, issued on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 14th decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, negligent selection and entrustment claims are top of mind more than ever throughout the industry. We would expect to see an uptick in these types of claims leveled against logistics companies.
Any company that selects motor carriers to transport freight should re-evaluate its current practices to confirm those practices are on as solid footing as possible—or, if companies do not have such practices, adopt them as soon as possible. Companies should also immediately assess insurance coverage and the extent to which that coverage extends to these types of claims. The Firm has a Broker Health Check Review process to assist companies with reviewing insurance coverage and current carrier selection practices and, where a written policy is not in place, establishing those practices in the first instance. The Broker Health Check Review includes a menu of options for assessing current vetting criteria and procedures, written agreements with third-party motor carriers, and the company’s current carrier base. The Firm can also support logistics clients by providing a practical, targeted assessment of more material risks and recommendations in this changing legal landscape.
James Tidd
For fleets, GNSS supports efficient operations. For OEMs, it provides a scalable pathway to deploy advanced ADAS and autonomy across entire vehicle lineups. (Swift Navigation)
Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and automated driving functions increasingly depend on accurate, up-to-date road context. Yet current industry narratives often frame the problem around two extremes: perception-only, mapless approaches that lack persistent context beyond the sensor horizon and can struggle in featureless environments, or lidar-heavy high-definition (HD) maps that are costly to build and difficult to keep current at scale.
Augmented, GNSS-anchored, standard-definition (SD) maps strike a practical balance between these approaches. Commercial fleets have demonstrated that precise GNSS enables cost-effective, continuously refreshed mapping at scale, making this architecture a logical foundation for passenger-vehicle OEMs as they expand advanced ADAS and automated driving across production vehicle platforms.
Disambiguation: a core challenge in map maintenance
Disambiguation in conventional HD map pipelines
Conventional HD map creation relies on advanced perception stacks combining lidar, high-resolution cameras, and high-capacity onboard storage. These systems collect large volumes of raw sensor data – often gigabytes per hour per vehicle – which are transmitted to centralized infrastructure for extensive post-processing, including localization refinement, scene reconstruction, and global alignment.
This workflow is necessary because individual drives lack a stable global reference frame and rely on localization that is refined offline rather than anchored in real time. As a result, each pass over a road segment must be reconciled with prior observations and can exhibit meter-level drift relative to the final map frame before changes can be identified with confidence.
A direct consequence is the challenge of disambiguation. With meter-level localization uncertainty, it becomes difficult to determine whether an observation, such as a “new” traffic sign, reflects a genuine change in the map or a displaced observation caused by localization error.
Deterministic disambiguation with precise GNSS
Precise GNSS addresses this limitation by providing centimeter-level positional stability. With this accuracy, map features become spatially deterministic: the absence of a feature at known coordinates indicates removal, the appearance of a feature at an unoccupied location indicates addition, and repeated detections within a narrow spatial envelope confirm persistence. Disambiguation shifts from a probabilistic process to a deterministic one.
Equally important, this process can be performed directly on the vehicle. Rather than uploading raw sensor data for centralized interpretation, vehicles can classify and geolocate features locally and transmit only lightweight metadata describing map changes. Backend systems shift from reconstruction toward aggregation and validation, reducing processing requirements and update latency.
The resulting augmented SD map focuses on the road elements that directly support localization, planning, and control – precise road geometry, lane boundaries, markings, and traffic signs – while omitting dense 3D reconstructions and sensor artifacts that do not materially improve driving decisions.
From specialized mapping fleets to all vehicles
Traditional lidar- and video-based pipelines generate gigabytes of data per vehicle per hour; GNSS-anchored feature detections reduce this to kilobytes. (Swift Navigation)
Historically, map providers relied on small fleets of purpose-built survey vehicles equipped with lidar and complex, high-cost sensing and compute systems. While effective for limited coverage, this model incurs high per-mile costs and refresh cycles that often span months.
At consumer scale, lidar-centric HD map pipelines are difficult to sustain economically and introduce system-level risk. Roads change continuously, and when maps cannot be refreshed at a cadence that matches real-world change, they risk becoming stale. In such cases, outdated map data can introduce false confidence into planning and control systems.
Commercial fleets encountered these constraints early. Rather than expanding specialized survey operations, many fleets equipped existing vehicles, such as delivery vans, ride-hail vehicles, and long-haul trucks, with cameras and precise GNSS, transforming everyday vehicles into continuous mapping agents.
The result is a crowdsourced mapping model in which thousands of vehicles contribute updates daily. Construction zones, missing signage, and lane changes can be detected continuously, enabling maps to be refreshed daily or even hourly rather than annually.
Traditional lidar- and video-based pipelines generate gigabytes of data per vehicle per hour; GNSS-anchored feature detections reduce this to kilobytes. Cloud infrastructure requirements shift from GPU-intensive reconstruction toward lightweight CPU-based aggregation.
For fleets, these improvements translate directly into operational gains driven by map freshness. For OEMs and Tier 1 suppliers, the same architecture provides a viable path to scale ADAS and autonomy without the cost and maintenance burden associated with lidar-heavy HD maps.
Robust positioning enabled by precise GNSS
GNSS-anchored mapping relies on positioning corrections to improve the accuracy and stability of standard GPS. Uncorrected GPS, with typical errors of 5 to 10 m (16-33 ft), is insufficient for lane-level mapping or reliable feature disambiguation.
When integrated into the vehicle’s sensor-fusion pipeline, modern GNSS corrections enable centimeter-level positioning with bounded error characteristics under validated integrity constraints. This supports robust operation across urban multipath environments, foliage, tunnels, and complex interchanges through inertial bridging and stable heading estimation.
This stability allows camera data to be consistently anchored to a global map, supporting the maintenance of persistent road features and the reliable detection of temporary, safety-critical elements such as construction cones, work zone equipment, and temporary lane shifts.
Delivering precise positioning at scale
Delivering this level of performance at scale requires GNSS correction services that operate as shared infrastructure rather than proprietary, vehicle-specific solutions.
This model is already being deployed through GNSS correction networks such as Swift Navigation’s Skylark, which illustrates how precise GNSS can function as a utility layer for automotive applications. Networks like these provide real-time, centimeter-level accuracy through RTK and PPP-RTK techniques, along with integrity features that bound positioning errors, supporting continental-scale coverage across millions of vehicles.
Its primary contribution is scalability: wide-area coverage enabled by advanced atmospheric modeling, receiver-agnostic integration across automotive GNSS chipsets, and reduced dependence on proprietary hardware.
Augmented SD Maps as a Practical Alternative
The automotive industry does not need to choose between mapless systems and globally deployed, lidar-dense HD maps. A more practical alternative is the use of augmented SD maps that are lightweight, continuously refreshed, anchored in a global reference frame, and built using vehicles already in operation.
Precise GNSS enables this approach by allowing vehicles to disambiguate map features locally, reducing data transfer requirements, backend processing load, and overall system cost. For fleets, this architecture supports efficient operations; for OEMs, it provides a scalable pathway to deploy advanced ADAS and autonomy across entire vehicle lineups without introducing prohibitive cost or operational fragility.
Toward live digital representations of road networks
As vision-based systems continue to advance, GNSS-anchored mapping provides the foundation for live digital representations of road networks that can reflect traffic patterns, construction activity, temporary hazards, and environmental changes.
Mapping evolves from a reactive process toward a more predictive capability – supporting safer operation, faster deployment cycles, and a mapping architecture aligned with the scale and complexity of modern mobility systems.
