The Trump Administration has released the semi-annual regulatory agenda, which gives some clues to what regulations are being considered by the administration.

While the dates on the agenda schedule have always seemed to be a guesstimate at best, there are a few actions the administration is targeting to have done this year, but a slew of ongoing rulemakings have been pushed into 2026.

Some of the hot-button issues the Trump administration plans to address include independent contractor classification, mandatory automatic emergency braking, broker transparency, side underride guards, ELD rules, and determining the fitness of motor carriers to operate safely.

Independent Contractor vs. Employee

The Department of Labor plans to address the definition of independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Trump DOL said it plans to rescind the 2024 rule finalized during the Biden administration and is considering how it will proceed regarding a replacement rule.

A May 1 guidance from the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division told investigators not to apply the 2024 Biden-era rule in enforcement matters under FLSA.

The American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association issued statements applauding the move.

“By moving to rescind the Biden-era rule on independent contractors, the Trump Administration is rejecting a reckless, job-killing scheme [that] would have wiped out choice, crushed opportunity, and sidelined hundreds of thousands of truckers who fuel our economy,” said ATA President and CEO Chris Spear.

OOIDA President Todd Spencer said the association supports “the Trump Administration’s goal of protecting independent contractors, provided they reject the American Trucking Associations’ backdoor attempt to mandate dangerous speed limiter devices on truckers.”

(The administration already announced in June that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration were withdrawing the joint rulemaking that proposed to require speed-limiting devices on heavy vehicles.)

“We encourage the Department of Labor to listen to actual independent contractors in the trucking industry, not the corporate megacarriers seeking to exploit them,” Spencer said.

Mandatory Automatic Emergency Braking

The Trump administration is revisiting the issue of mandatory automatic emergency braking.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed during the Biden administration required the agencies to put out a proposed rule.

A proposed rule was published in 2023 in a joint rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. That rule was projected to be finalized by April 2024 but that didn’t happen.

Now the agencies say they plan a second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking late this year.

That notice will seek comments on a revised proposal to require and/or standardize equipment performance for automatic emergency braking on heavy trucks, as well as motor carrier maintenance requirements for vehicles equipped with such technology. 

In addition, for several years, NHTSA has researched forward collision avoidance and mitigation technology on heavy vehicles, including forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking systems. This rulemaking proposes test procedures for measuring the performance of these systems. 

Earlier this year, the American Trucking Associations said this is an area where it believes such a regulation could truly improve safety.

Side Underride Guards

The Trump administration said it is analyzing comments, with a date of January 2026, on a 2023 advanced notice of proposed rulemaking that would consider requirements for side underride guards on trailers and semitrailers to mitigate underride crashes into the side of these vehicles.

Side underride guards are designed to prevent a passenger vehicle involved in a crash with a large truck or trailer from sliding underneath.

There are currently no federal requirements for side underride guards on trailers in the U.S. 

In fact, NHTSA research in its ANPRM found that no country requires side underride guards on trailers to prevent vehicle underride. Some countries have a requirement for “lateral protection devices,” which are intended to prevent pedestrians or cyclists from falling in front of the trailer’s rear wheels, not to keep a car from underriding the trailer.

This rulemaking would respond, in part, to a 2013 petition from the Truck Safety Coalition to start studies and rulemakings on side guards and front override guards on trucks. This rulemaking would also respond to a provision in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to conduct research on side underride guards.
88 FR 24535

In general, the trucking industry and trailer manufacturers have pushed back against such a requirement. There is currently only one such side underride guard available. 

Changes to ELD Rules

In 2022, the FMCSA under the Biden administration issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking, or “prerule” on changes to regulations regarding electronic logging devices. 

The Trump administration’s agenda indicates plans to publish an actual proposal in May 2026. 

The ELD rule established minimum performance and design standards for ELDs; requirements for the mandatory use of these devices by drivers; requirements concerning hours-of-service supporting documents; and measures to address concerns about harassment resulting from the mandatory use of ELDs.

Since the ELD rule went into effect in 2016, the regulatory agenda notes, “Many lessons have been learned by FMCSA staff, state enforcement personnel, ELD vendors, and industry in the intervening years. These lessons can be used to streamline and improve the clarity of the regulatory text and ELD specifications and answer recurring questions. 

“Additionally, there are technical modifications responsive to concerns raised by affected parties that could improve the usability of ELDs. FMCSA is seeking information to determine what changes would be warranted.”

The 2022 pre-rule asked for information on five areas where the agency was considering changes:

• Applicability to pre-2000 engines.

• Addressing ELD malfunctions.

• The process for removing ELD products from FMCSA’s list of registered devices.

• Technical specifications.

• ELD certification.

Safety Fitness Procedures

How can the FMCSA do a better job of keeping unsafe motor carriers off the road?

That's a longstanding discussion, and the subject of another ongoing rulemaking started in the Biden administration with a 2023 ANPRM, one that had the comment period extended twice: Safety Fitness Determinations. 

The Trump administration agenda is projecting a May 2026 date for a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

FMCSA is seeking information on how the agency might use data and resources more effectively to identify unfit motor carriers and to remove them from the roadways, including possible changes to the current three-tier safety fitness rating structure. 

Safety Fitness Determinations currently are determined based on an analysis of existing motor carrier data and data collected during an investigation (referred to as a “compliance review” or more casually as a “DOT audit.”)

One of the criticisms of this process is that it is resource-intensive and reaches only a small percentage of motor carriers.

The agency has long hoped to link its Compliance, Safety, Accountability program and its Safety Measurement System to fitness reviews. The SMS is FMCSA’s prioritization system to identify motor carriers for investigation, which went into effect in 2010.

It has started more than one rulemaking to address this, without success, including determining that it couldn’t use the IRT process recommended in a congressionally mandated review of the rules by the National Academy of Sciences.

The rule would also include a review of the list of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that the Agency uses in its safety fitness rating methodology.

Broker Transparency

Another controversial issue that has been debated for years is “broker transparency,” with owner-operator groups demanding rules that would give motor carriers transparency into what shippers are actually paying brokers.

Brokers, however, were adamantly opposed to such a rule, saying it “has no place in today’s highly transparent marketplace” and would involve revealing proprietary information.

This rulemaking would amend FMCSA property carrier broker rules in response to petitions from the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association and the Small Business in Transportation Coalition. 

OOIDA requested that FMCSA require property brokers to provide an electronic copy of each transaction record automatically within 48 hours after the contractual service has been completed and prohibit brokers from including any provision in their contracts that requires a motor carrier to waive its rights to access the transaction records. 

SBTC asked that FMCSA prohibit brokers from coercing or otherwise requiring parties to brokers' transactions to waive their right to review the record of the transaction as a condition for doing business and that FMCSA adopt regulatory language indicating that brokers' contracts may not include a stipulation or clause exempting the broker from having to comply with the transparency requirement.

A proposed rule was published in November 2024, with comments ending right as the Trump administration took office. The FMCSA reopened the comment period in February and plans a second NPRM for May 2026.

New Motor Carrier Entrants

The FMCSA plans to again look at the process for ensuring the safety of new motor carrier entrants.

This rulemaking would consider methods for ensuring a new applicant carrier is knowledgeable about the applicable safety requirements before being granted New Entrant authority. 

The agency is considering whether to implement a proficiency examination as part of its revised New Entrant Safety Assurance Process as well as other alternatives. This rulemaking responds to issues raised in a petition from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety regarding new entrant applicant knowledge. 

An advanced notice of proposed rulemaking published in 2009 apparently never went any further. As we reported in 2023, the FMCSA projected publication of a supplemental advance notice of proposed rulemaking for 2024, but that never happened.

The FMCSA has been working on tightening new carrier entrant standards as long as it’s been in existence. In the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999, which created the FMCSA, Congress also ordered DOT to draft a rule that establishes minimum requirements for would-be truckers, to make sure they understand the safety rules.

The first version went into effect in 2003, but by 2006, FMCSA proposed stricter requirements, and issued a final rule in 2008. Under that rule, a newly registered trucking or bus company would automatically fail its safety audit if it violated any one of 16 essential federal regulations during the 18-month safety monitoring period.

But the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety filed a petition for reconsideration in early 2009, alleging that the FMCSA did not go far enough in terms of safety. So FMCSA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking asking for comments from the industry on whether the agency should require new carrier applicants to pass a safety examination.

Making Rear-View Cameras Legal

Every truck maker now offers an option of advanced camera-based systems that can replace rearview mirrors, offering a more aerodynamic exterior profile as well as giving drivers additional capabilities such as better nighttime vision.

However, those are being offered under waivers from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. NHTSA rules still require trucks to be manufactured with rearview mirrors, meaning carriers implementing these new camera systems must remove the now-redundant mirrors under the FMCSA exemptions.

A 2019 “prerule” notice (advanced notice of proposed rulemaking) sought public comment on the safety standard for rear visibility as the first step toward changing this rule for both light vehicles and heavy-duty trucks.

The Trump administration said in its regulatory agenda that it is analyzing the comments, with a date of December 2025.

Jump-Starting Hair Testing Guidelines

It looks like the Trump administration is going to try to get a rulemaking to allow hair testing for drug tests of safety-sensitive workers under way again.

Proponents of hair testing say it catches far more illicit drug use than the currently required urine testing.

While many safety-focused fleets use hair testing for their own hiring standards, it may not be used to satisfy federal drug-testing requirements. Such fleets must foot the bill for double testing.

In addition, because hair testing is not included in the federal drug and alcohol clearinghouse, hair-testing advocates say many drivers who fail simply move on to a fleet that doesn’t do hair testing. Those fleets have no way to know the driver failed a hair test at another fleet.

Under the Department of Health and Human Services regulatory agenda, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration has October as a date for a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. HHS must have final guidelines in place before the Department of Transportation can create the rules needed to cover safety-sensitive workers such as truck drivers.

HHS action on this issue is long overdue. In the 2015 Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) Congress required that HHS issue hair-testing guidelines. The agency finally issued proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Using Hair in September 2020..

The guidelines were roundly denounced by hair-testing proponents. It would have required that the hair testing results be corroborated by methods already allowed. 

So apparently HHS is going back to the drawing board. But even if they issue a proposal that's widely accepted, it then takes time for the agencies affected, such as FMCSA, to update their own rules.

In July, U.S. Congressman Rick Crawford from Arkansas introduced H.R. 4320, The Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse Public Safety Improvement Act, which would direct the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to add a positive hair test result to its current definition of an employer’s "actual knowledge" of a truck driver’s drug use. 

Other Drug Testing Rulemaking Updates

The DOT recently issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that will add fentanyl to the DOT’s drug testing panel.

This would adopt the panel identified by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in their urine and oral fluid Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs by adding Fentanyl and norfentanyl (Schedule II drugs). 

This rulemaking would also amend certain provisions of the Department of Transportation's drug testing regulation dealing with laboratory testing of urine and oral fluid specimens. 

Oral fluid testing was approved in 2023, but there still are no approved drug-testing labs for oral fluid testing.

An ongoing rulemaking would provide interim provisions to permit the conduct of directly observed urine tests in situations where oral fluid tests are currently required, because oral fluid testing is not yet available. That NPRM was first published last December, and a supplemental NPRM is being issued in September.

There’s also an ongoing rulemaking since 2022 regarding using electronic signatures and documents for drug and alcohol testing records; the administration now projects a final rule to be published in May 2026.

Other Rulemakings and Deregulatory Actions of Note

There are literally hundreds of rulemakings listed in the rulemaking agenda. Many are deregulatory actions, including removing outdated language from the rules. But here are a few others of interest beyond some of the big-issue actions above:

ELD Manuals

FMCSA published a proposed rule in May to rescind the electronic logging device (ELD) operator’s manual requirement for commercial motor vehicles.

The agency pointed out that it maintains a list of the ELD vendors who have self-certified their products, which includes uploads of the operator’s manual. Additionally, drivers are required to understand the operation of the ELD on the vehicle. 

"There is no readily apparent benefit to continuing to require that the users’ manual be in the CMV. This proposal would eliminate an unintended regulatory burden on motor carriers without compromising safety. It’s scheduled to have a final rule by the end of the year."

This also is a requirement that often trips up drivers in roadside inspections.

Labeling for Underride Guards

One of those deregulatory actions is the FMCSA proposal to rescind the requirement that the rear underride guard be permanently marked or labeled with a certification from the impact guard manufacturer as required by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS). 

The certification label or marking provides motor carriers purchasing new trailers or new impact guards to replace damaged devices with a means to determine whether the equipment is certified as meeting the FMVSS. However, the labeling or marking requirement has proven problematic for motor carriers when the label or marking becomes illegible or wears off during the service life of the trailer or guard. 

This was proposed in May and is anticipated to be issued as a final rule by the end of the year.

Railroad Crossings

FMCSA proposes to amend the Federal Motor Carrier Regulations related to driving a commercial motor vehicle at a highway-rail grade crossing. 

The rule would eliminate the mandatory stop at grade crossings currently required for drivers of certain commercial motor vehicles – passenger and hazardous materials carriers – and prohibit drivers of all CMVs from driving onto a grade crossing without exercising due caution (including slowing down, as necessary) upon approaching the crossing to ascertain safe clearance. 

The proposed rule was published in May, and FMCSA is projecting to have the final rule by the end of the year. 

Tire Load Markings

FMCSA proposes to revise the requirements for tires on commercial motor vehicles to clarify that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations do not require tire load restriction markings on their sidewalls. 

This change would eliminate confusion and clarify the scope of FMCSA’s authority regarding the requirements for tires in the FMCSRs, according to the agency.

The proposed rule was published in May and the agency anticipates a final rule by the end of the year.

Emergency Exemptions

In response to several petitions, FMCSA is planning to propose amending the time limit for the automatic emergency relief exception for regional declarations of emergency, reverting to the 30-day limit that existed prior to an October 2023 final rule. The agency anticipates an NPRM by the end of the year. 

Rulemakings to Look for in 2026

Automated Driving Systems

There are several items on the agenda regarding motor carrier operation of commercial vehicles with automated driving systems from more than one agency.

There are proposed changes to commercial motor vehicle operations, inspection, repair, and maintenance regulations that would “prioritize safety and security, promote innovation, foster a consistent regulatory approach to ADS-equipped CMVs, and recognize the difference between human operators and ADS.”

This rulemaking originally started in 2019 with an ANPRM; a second ANPRM was published in 2023. The agenda calls for a NPRM to be published in May 2026.

NHTSA plans to issue an ANPRM next May to seek comments on amending the Federal motor vehicle safety standards to address the applicability and appropriateness of safety messaging (telltales, indicators, and warnings) in new vehicle designs without conventional driver controls.

Another proposed rule published in January would set a framework for the review and assessment of Automated Driving System (ADS)-equipped vehicles, in order to evaluate operations or requests for exemptions involving such technologies while also informing the agency's approach to future rulemaking and oversight. The agenda shows analyzing comments for February 2026.

Proposals planned to be published early next year would update lighting requirements and windshield wiper/defroster standards to accommodate vehicles with automated driving systems that lack manual controls.

Women Drivers and Vulnerable Road Users

The agenda includes plans for a May 2026 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would seek information regarding ways in which FMCSA can enhance the physical safety of women truck drivers and trainees and address the negative impacts of workplace sexual harassment. 

In addition, the ANPRM would seek information from stakeholders regarding ways in which FMCSA can enhance the safety of vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians and bicyclists.

Certified Medical Examiners

This rulemaking would provide an administrative removal process for medical examiners who are not in compliance with certain requirements for continued listing on the National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners (National Registry). The agenda shows an NPRM scheduled for May 2026.

Editor's Note: Updated Sept. 8, 2025, to add information on hair testing.