FMCSA shores up state DataQ responsibilities

Land Line Media

Getting dinged during a roadside inspection is bad enough. But for truckers who say they aren’t guilty of the violation, it has been a struggle with due process.

Recourse for disputed violations reported to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s CSA Safety Measurement System has long been criticized by truckers. Before the agency implemented the DataQ process, the system set officers and agencies issuing the violations to serve as judge and jury. Successfully challenging a violation at that point was a chore.

The DataQ process was implemented to give truck drivers and law enforcement agencies a framework for contesting violations. As with anything state-to-state, agency-to-agency, how that process was executed varied widely.

In response to those criticisms, FMCSA announced in April new requirements on states handling DataQ challenges.

“Driven by valuable feedback from both industry stakeholders and State partners. These revisions to the Request for Data Review process aim to improve the impartiality, timeliness and fairness in the data review process, ensuring proper due process for drivers,” an alert said, noting the changes are now in effect.

Two key changes include:

• Multi-Level Reviews: Ensure thorough and consistent independent evaluation of requests within state agencies, ensuring proper due process for drivers and motor carriers.
• Standardized Timelines: Clear guidelines for responding to requests, handling appeals and issuing final decisions, giving requestors peace of mind that their request will be processed in a timely manner.

The announcement stating that the requirements detailed in an April notice issued by FMCSA are now in effect wasn’t just new directives on paper. Actual system changes in the DataQ process are now in effect.

This update includes:

• Streamlined “Request Details” header focusing on the key information about the request, requestor and reviewing agency.
• New “Take Action” section with a menu of actions to make it easier to move a request through the expanded review process.
• New action to de-escalate a review to a previous review stage when new information is being presented.
• Indicators to make it clear which stage of review a request is in at all times.
• “Ready to Submit” review panel that allows you to confirm updates to the request before you submit them.
• Re-designed “Response History” makes it easier to track actions and correspondence throughout the request process.
• Expanded options to customize your list of requests in MyDataQs, including sorting by review stage and “USDOT# to Consider” (indicates carriers that may be relevant to the request).

DataQs not just for motor carriers

Company drivers and even owner-operators leased to a motor carrier are not restricted from filing their own DataQ challenges.

Violations reported to FMCSA appear both on motor carrier Safety Measurement Systems ratings and on drivers’ records, which come into play during the Pre-Employment Screening process. The DataQ system does require setting up an account for drivers to contest violations.

Members of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association can get help in filing the DataQ challenge by calling 816-229-5791.

Drivers who are punching into these driver records maintained by FMCSA can check out what may or may not be included in those records. They have two options to get those records.

The first is to visit the FMCSA’s Pre-Employment Screening Program website at psp.fmcsa.dot.gov to request a copy of your PSP report for a fee. You will be able to access the downloadable report instantly, and it includes your driver information such as your FMCSA reportable crash and inspection history.

The second option, which will definitely take longer, is to visit the Freedom of Information Act Website at fmcsa.dot.gov/foia to request a copy of your commercial driving history for free. The information will be mailed to you and includes your FMCSA reportable crash and inspection history.

What’s Coming: Rulemakings on the 2026 Federal Regulatory Agenda

Scopelitis

Each year, the U.S. Department of Transportation lays out its plans through the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. The newly announced Agency Rule List points to a busy slate of pending FMCSA and NHTSA actions—most still in the proposed-rule stage—with several NPRMs or final actions projected over the next several months. For trucking, the agenda is less a single policy shift than a roadmap of where compliance expectations, equipment planning, driver qualification, carrier entry, data systems, broker practices, and paperwork reduction may be headed.

Vehicle Technology and Automation

The headline equipment issue remains the joint FMCSA–NHTSA Automatic Emergency Braking supplemental proposal. The agencies are still pursuing a requirement for factory-installed AEB and electronic stability control on new Class 7 and 8 trucks, with medium-duty vehicles following later. NHTSA has estimated that heavy vehicles equipped with AEB ESC will prevent 19,118 crashes, save 155 lives, and prevent 8,814 injuries annually. Related NHTSA items would modernize FMVSS No. 102 for ADS-equipped vehicles without traditional manual controls, and continue analyzing comments on the 2023 side underride guard advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

FMCSA’s Safe Integration of ADS-Equipped CMVs rulemaking is a key strategic item for the administration and industry. With an NPRM slated for August 2026, it would amend the FMCSRs to set operational safety requirements for autonomous CMVs in interstate commerce. However, given the connection to NHTSA’s FMVSS modernization work, this could move more slowly due to the transformational nature of these rules and the likelihood of many comments submitted to the Docket. Nevertheless, it remains one of the highest-stakes issues on the agenda because it will shape how the federal rules will treat automated trucks in real-world interstate operations.

Drivers and Workforce

The English Language Proficiency, Out of Service Criteria rulemaking would codify ELP non-compliance under 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2) as an out-of-service violation, moving beyond the current enforcement-policy approach and implementing Congress’s direction in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026. FMCSA also added Entry-Level Driver Training to the agenda, with a proposal intended to strengthen standards for Training Provider Registry listing after the agency identified non-compliance among certain providers. The National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners proposal would create an administrative removal process for examiners who fail continued-listing requirements, while the CDLIS Fees proposal would allow AAMVA to collect user fees from state licensing agencies for access to its Commercial Driver License Information System.

Carrier Entry, ELDs, and Safety Data

FMCSA is also revisiting how carriers enter the industry. The New Entrant Safety Assurance rulemaking would tighten the process by which an applicant carrier earns operating authority, including consideration of a proficiency examination before interstate authority is granted. The practical goal is to raise the bar at entry rather than relying only on the initial 18-month monitoring period and safety audit to identify gaps after a carrier is already operating.

The ELD Revisions rulemaking would reopen the ELD mandate to streamline regulatory text, update device specifications, and make technical fixes aimed at improving usability. FMCSA also plans an NPRM revising how carriers’ safety fitness is assessed, building on the pending CSA/Safety Measurement System overhaul that groups hundreds of violation types into a smaller set of categories.

Brokers

Two broker rulemakings deserve close attention. The long-awaited Transparency in Property Broker Transactions proposal would clarify when and how brokers must provide transaction records to transacting parties upon request. Separately, the new Standards for Broker and Freight Forwarder Qualifications/Knowledge rulemaking would implement MAP-21 requirements that require brokers and freight forwarders to employ an officer with either 3 years of relevant experience or satisfactory evidence of knowledge of applicable rules, regulations, and industry practices.

The Deregulatory Side

The agenda also reflects a sustained deregulatory push. Under the President’s Executive Order 14192 and DOT’s regulatory-budget framework, the administration is pursuing broad regulatory and cost reductions, and trucking was specifically included in Secretary Duffy’s May 2025 package of deregulatory actions across FHWA, NHTSA, and FMCSA. Some items have already been finalized, including rescission of the in-cab ELD operator’s manual requirement, removal of the CDL self-reporting requirement, and a change allowing carriers to return completed roadside inspection forms only to states that request them. Fleets should still watch for additional proposals aimed at trimming paperwork and procedural requirements that the agency views as creating unnecessary violations without a corresponding safety benefit.

The Bottom Line

The agenda gives fleets an early look at where compliance pressure and operational planning may converge. AEB could reshape capital decisions, maintenance expectations, and inspections. FMCSA enforcement rules and initiatives like updates to driver-qualification rules (including ELP out-of-service treatment and the recently finalized non-domiciled CDL integrity rules), ELDT oversight, and medical-examiner accountability will tighten who can enter and remain in the driver pool. New Entrant changes raise the bar for carriers, while broker transparency and qualification rules reshape the middle of the freight transaction. ELD revisions, safety-fitness changes, and ADS requirements may not all move at the same pace, but each has practical implications. The takeaway is simple: read the agenda early, weigh in during comment periods, and build compliance into the budget before enforcement arrives.

Important Update: Temporary Suspension of Biennial Update Requirement

ATRI releases research on key telematics performance measures

The findings show that the metrics with the greatest impact are not always the most widely used.

Key takeaways

• ATRI research examines which telematics metrics matter most to motor carriers.
• Fleets may benefit from reassessing how they use telematics performance data.
• Telematics data can give fleets another way to evaluate safety, maintenance, and operations.

164960891 |

ATRI research identifies high-value telematics KPIs for motor carriers

The American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) recently released new research identifying the telematics measures and functionalities most important to motor carriers for improving safety, operations, and maintenance.

The report, From Telematics Data to Decisions: High-Value Performance Metrics for Trucking Operations, found that cost per mile received the highest importance score in the operations category, but only 73% of respondents reported using it. The KPI gap analysis provides fleets and telematics providers with a framework for focusing on the KPIs that matter most.

For safety-related KPIs, the four most widely adopted metrics were critical events, speeding, risky driving behavior, and hard braking.

“This research identifies the performance metrics that fleets find most valuable and highlights those that, for some carriers, deserve more consideration,” said Robert Braswell, executive director of the American Trucking Associations’ (ATA) Technology & Maintenance Council (TMC). “The report gives carriers a practical guide for evaluating what they currently measure versus what they ought to measure to improve safety, maintenance, and operations.”

What this means for the trucking industry

The findings give fleets a way to compare the telematics metrics they currently use with those considered most valuable. That comparison can help fleet executives identify where existing telematics data may better support safety, maintenance, and operational decisions.

DOT maps path for wider deployment of autonomous vehicles

Noel Fletcher

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration must revamp operational safety regulations and resolve questions about automated surface transportation of hazardous materials to support wider use of autonomous trucks, according to new government guidance.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy released a national strategy report for autonomous vehicles meant “to empower our innovators to build faster, smarter and safer than ever before.”

The document identifies the Transportation Department’s current and future critical activities in a 12-page report called “America Leads: DOT’s National Strategy for Automated Vehicles.” The timeline for DOT actions spans fiscal years 2026-2030.

The report outlined DOT actions to eliminate red tape, update key regulations and ensure safety while promoting greater use of AVs.

“The Trump administration is committed to safely unleashing American innovation on our roads,” Duffy said. “We’re doing so because of the exciting promise new technologies like AVs have in reducing roadway fatalities, enhancing mobility and fundamentally reshaping how people move for the better.”

To facilitate the adoption of autonomous commercial motor vehicles, FMCSA is amending Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations “to ensure the safe introduction and oversight of CMVs equipped with automated driving system on roadways.”

The report underscored that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will continue evaluating AV road use for potential safety defects, including through crash reporting and recalls. The agency also will seek to resolve problems with manufacturers, developers and operators.

“This strategy will provide for strict safety oversight, while unlocking the potential for AV technologies to be safely deployed on America’s roads,” said NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison.

 FMCSA activities

The report reinforced that DOT regulations, including those from NHTSA and FMCSA, currently allow the use and development of AVs, which still must adhere to federal rules unless granted exemptions.

Yet both agencies must adjust regulations crafted when lawmakers presumed only human drivers would operate vehicles.

“In addition to traditional oversight tools such as standards development and rulemaking, DOT will use its convening authority to engage stakeholders to solicit input and encourage consistent approaches and best practices for the safe deployment of these vehicles,” the document predicted.

FMCSA mainly faces indirect barriers because it must modify existing operational safety requirements to include automated CMVs.

The report said other areas under FMCSA’s authority “require modernization to ensure effective oversight and the safe operation of all CMVs” because the agency’s responsibilities include motor carrier operations and vehicle maintenance inspections.

“Many of these standards remain relevant to the safety of AVs, such as seat belt requirements for passengers. However, applying certain regulations to AVs creates unintended and unnecessary regulatory barriers that do not serve a safety purpose because they were created with the assumption of a human driver in the vehicle,” the report stated.

FMCSA has been tasked with developing an Emergency Response Framework for ADS-equipped CMVs. Research is needed to determine how emergency responders can safely and effectively interact with ADS-equipped CMVs. The goal is to create a standardized framework of emergency response protocols for autonomous CMVs.

 Hazardous materials

Introducing greater transportation automation raises issues for DOT involving the surface transportation system and movement of hazardous materials.

Consequently, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has published a proposed rulemaking asking for stakeholder comments about possible changes to the Hazardous Materials Regulations to facilitate the safe transportation of hazardous materials using highly automated transportation systems.

Digital modernization of interstates

DOT highlighted the need to bring transportation stakeholders together to create interoperable national corridors across states.

“DOT is exploring a seamlessly integrated transportation network where real-time data connectivity transforms how people and goods move across the country and how services are provided,” the report noted. “By bridging the gap between physical infrastructure and digital intelligence along our interstate and other national highway system routes, we aim to create a safer, more efficient, privacy-protected and future-ready mobility environment for all road users.”

One initiative seeks to partner with stakeholders to enable real-time data sharing along interstate highway systems, including information about emergency road closures and temporary road realignments.

According to the report, road improvements, enhanced digital infrastructure and vehicle-to-everything communications are complementary technologies that may benefit AVs as well as transportation systems.

However, DOT noted:

• AVs “do not and will not” rely on available third-party information or smart infrastructure for safety-critical activities.
• Infrastructure and telecommunications changes aren’t required first steps to deploy AVs.
• Infrastructure owner-operators initially are not expected to invest in AV-specific physical or digital infrastructure prior to AV rollout.

CVSA Issues New Inspection Guidance on ELD Tampering, False Logs

New guidance for commercial vehicle inspectors distinguishes between more traditional logbook violations and tampered ELD data that can result in mandatory 10-hour out-of-service orders.

Deborah Lockridge

Commercial vehicle inspectors have new guidance on placing drivers out of service for falsified log violations.

The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance issued new inspection guidance aimed at cracking down on falsified records of duty status (RODS, more commonly known as driver logs) and electronic logging device tampering.

The bulletin, effective April 1, outlines how inspectors should handle altered logs of driver hours of service.

The move comes ahead of CVSA’s annual Roadcheck in May (where ELDs are a focus this year) and as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has been taking steps to crack down on fraudulent ELDs.

More traditional false log violations, such as misuse of personal conveyance or failure to log into the ELD, are typically easier for inspectors to detect.

If a driver is over hours at the time of inspection, CVSA explains, inspectors can usually determine how much rest was actually taken and whether the driver should be placed out of service.

ELD Tampering

More concerning, CVSA says inspectors are encountering RODS (records of duty status) that have been reengineered, reprogrammed or otherwise tampered with, and the bulk of the four-page guidance document is devoted to this topic.

These violations are harder for inspectors to identify and harder to determine whether drivers should be placed out of service.

CVSA gives an example of fraudulent use of driver credentials. A motor carrier created a fictitious ELD account using the same driver’s name but slightly altered credentials — such as changing a letter from uppercase to lowercase and modifying one digit in the CDL number.

The fraudulent use of driver credentials is an unauthorized alteration of the ELD and therefore considered tampering. This example shows a motor carrier creating a fictitious driver ELD account. Credit: CVSA

The driver alternated between the two accounts to continue driving after exceeding hours-of-service limits.

In another example cited by CVSA, a driver was shown as off duty in Tolleson, Arizona, at 9 p.m. on Aug. 10, 2024. However, a fuel receipt placed the driver in Strafford, Missouri, on Aug. 11 — more than 1,300 miles away.

Further review showed the RODS had been shifted back three days, concealing nearly 21 hours of driving time.

When Should Drivers Be Placed Out of Service for ELD Violations?

CVSA says the goal in enforcing ELD violations is to only place drivers OOS who pose an imminent hazard.

When it is possible for the inspector to determine when the falsification occurred, and the driver is not over hours at the time of inspection, CVSA tells inspectors to cite drivers under § 395.8(e)(1) and allow the driver to proceed.

If this is the case and a driver is over the HOS limits at the time of inspection, however, the driver should be placed out of service until he or she is eligible to drive again under hours-of-service rules.

For drivers whose RODS have been reengineered, reprogrammed or tampered with, and the ELD does not accurately record or retain required data, inspectors face a tougher job.

These altered logs may show no indication in the event details that any changes were made.

In such cases, inspectors must compare supporting documents, such as fuel receipts, to what’s in the ELD record. Because the actual time, duration, and location of rest breaks cannot be determined, enforcement becomes more serious.

If it’s not possible for the inspector to determine when driving occurred, CVSA says, the inspector should cite a § 395.8(e)(2) violation and place the driver out of service for 10 consecutive hours.