Motor carrier classes by state
Maryland keeps the federal short-haul radius and changes the clock inside it. For intrastate operation the release window is sixteen hours rather than fourteen, driving is capped at twelve, and the off-duty block is eight rather than ten. None of that appears in the regulations, because the state put it in the statute that limits what the regulations may do.
There is a standing set of difficulties in this trade that arrives with the work rather than with the jurisdiction, and repeating them state by state teaches nobody anything. They are dealt with once on the hot shot trucking insurance page instead of here.
Maryland’s own contribution is a genuine intrastate hours variance, and it is in an unusual place. Most states that change the federal hours rules do it in the regulation that adopts them. Maryland did it in Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111, the statute that authorizes the rulemaking, by telling the Motor Vehicle Administration what its regulations may not do. The result is a state variance that a reader working from the Code of Maryland Regulations will not find, because the regulations do not contain it.
The regulations do something else worth understanding, which is that they apply by carrier type rather than by a single weight line. COMAR 11.21.01.03 sets an outer boundary and then splits the population into groups that get different subsets of the chapter. A non-hazardous intrastate property carrier is over the boundary and inside one of the smaller subsets, and one member of that subset is now an empty box.
And on the economic side Maryland has a negative that is definitional rather than the residue of a repeal. The Public Service Commission has no economic jurisdiction over intrastate motor carriage of property at all, because the statutory definitions that create its jurisdiction are drawn around the transportation of persons. Every figure and quotation below was read at the Maryland General Assembly’s own statute service and at the official Code of Maryland Regulations on August 31, 2026.
Running expedited freight inside Maryland on a short-haul pattern? The hours the state allows an intrastate driver are not the hours in the federal short-haul exception — and the three ways to lose the difference are all in one sentence.
Send the radius pattern, whether any load is ever placarded, and whether any dispatch crosses into Delaware, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District. Those decide whether the state variance is in play at all.
The provision is a prohibition on an agency rather than a permission to a driver, and reading it that way is what makes the rest of it make sense. Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111(i)(1) opens: “Except as provided for in paragraph (2) of this subsection, regulations adopted under this section for intrastate motor carrier transportation may not:” — and then lists what the Administration is forbidden to do.
Sub-item (ii) is the hours limb. Regulations may not “[l]imit a driver’s time or hours on duty if: 1. The driver operates only within a 150 air mile radius of the driver’s normal work reporting location; 2. The driver returns to the driver’s normal work reporting location; 3. The driver is released from work within a period of 16 consecutive hours, not more than 12 of which are dedicated to driving, and is given at least 8 consecutive hours off duty; and 4. Regardless of the number of motor carriers using the driver’s services, the driver: A. If the employing motor carrier does not operate motor vehicles every day of the week, has been on duty no more than 70 hours in a period of 7 consecutive days; or B. If the employing motor carrier operates motor vehicles every day of the week, has been on duty no more than 80 hours in a period of 8 consecutive days”.
The regulation that adopts the federal hours part makes no substantive change at all. COMAR 11.21.01.09, in its entirety, reads: “Add ‘police officer, hazardous materials inspector, and Public Service Commission inspector” as defined in Transportation Article, §25-111, Annotated Code of Maryland”, after “every” in 49 CFR §395.13(a).’” That is an enforcement-personnel insertion into the out-of-service provision. It changes who may declare a driver out of service. It does not touch the clock.
So the two documents point at different things and only one of them is where the variance lives. Anyone summarizing Maryland from the regulations will report that the state takes the federal hours rules unmodified, and that report will be wrong in a way that is invisible from inside the regulations.
A fourth clause in the same statutory subsection is worth carrying because it goes with the hours provision and changes what has to be written down. Sub-item (iii) forbids regulations that “[r]equire a driver to maintain a record of duty status if the driver is not subject to item (ii) of this paragraph, except that, if a driver is on duty for a period of more than 12 hours, the driver shall maintain a record of the driver’s duty status that: 1. For the first 12 hours of time on duty, accounts for all time dedicated to driving; and 2. For all time on duty in excess of 12 hours, conforms to the recording requirements provided in federal regulations”.
It is worth being exact about which elements move, because the ones that do not are the ones an operator is most likely to assume did.
The radius does not move. The state provision is written around “a 150 air mile radius of the driver’s normal work reporting location”, which is the same radius the federal short-haul exception uses. The return-to-base condition does not move either.
The release window moves. The federal short-haul exception at 49 CFR § 395.1(e)(1) is written around a driver who “returns to the work reporting location and is released from work within 14 consecutive hours”. The Maryland provision is written around release “within a period of 16 consecutive hours”. That is two additional hours of on-duty window for an intrastate driver.
A driving cap appears that the federal short-haul text does not state in the same place: “not more than 12 of which are dedicated to driving”. And the off-duty block shrinks. The federal provision requires, for a property-carrying driver, “at least 10 consecutive hours off-duty separating each 14 hours on-duty”. Maryland’s says “at least 8 consecutive hours off duty”.
Finally, Maryland writes a weekly ceiling into the same sub-item — 70 hours in 7 consecutive days for a carrier that does not operate every day of the week, or 80 hours in 8 consecutive days for one that does — and prefaces it with “[r]egardless of the number of motor carriers using the driver’s services”. That last phrase is doing work on exactly the kind of driver this class produces: someone running for more than one carrier, whose weekly total is not visible to any single dispatcher.
The variance is bounded by Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111(i)(2), and the boundary is short enough to quote whole: “Nothing contained in this subsection limits regulation of the qualifications or hours of service of a driver of a vehicle: (i) In interstate commerce; (ii) Transporting hazardous materials of a type and quantity requiring placarding under Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations; or (iii) Designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver.”
Read against how this work is dispatched, the first of those is the live one and it resolves per load rather than per driver. Maryland is small and dense. It shares borders with Delaware, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, and it wraps the District of Columbia. An expedited operator working the Baltimore–Washington corridor can cross a line without the trip feeling like a long-haul dispatch at all — and the moment it is an interstate movement, the state variance does not limit anything about that driver’s hours.
The second is a commodity condition and it behaves the same way: a placarded load takes the whole subsection out for that movement.
The practical consequence is that a Maryland intrastate operator is running two hours-of-service regimes on the same driver in the same week, and which one governs is determined by where the load goes and what is on it. That is a records problem before it is a compliance problem, because the record of duty status obligation described above is itself keyed to whether the driver is subject to sub-item (ii).
It is also worth being clear about what the subsection does and does not do for an interstate operator. It does not grant anything. It restricts what Maryland’s own regulations may impose on intrastate transportation. Federal hours law reaches interstate operation of its own force and is untouched by a state provision that limits a state agency.
Send the dispatch pattern first — how often loads stay inside Maryland, and whether drivers return to a fixed reporting location inside the window — then whether anything is ever placarded and how many carriers use each driver. Those settle which hours regime governs before any coverage question is reached.
Maryland does not draw a single intrastate weight line the way most states in this wave do. It draws an outer boundary and then sorts.
COMAR 11.21.01.03A sets the boundary: “Except as otherwise amended or exempted, these regulations are applicable to all trucks, truck tractors, trailers, semitrailers, pole trailers, converter dollies, combination vehicles, and buses having a gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds.” Note the opening qualifier travels with everything that follows.
Subsection B then applies the regulations “to all interstate carriers and to those intrastate carriers: (1) Transporting hazardous materials of a type and quantity requiring placarding under federal hazardous materials regulations; or (2) Operating a vehicle designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver.”
Subsection C is the one that catches this operator: “[t]he application provisions, amendments, and exemptions set forth in Regulations .05—.08 and .11—.14 of this chapter apply to those intrastate carriers not” transporting placarded hazardous materials or operating a 16-plus passenger vehicle. And subsection D adds that “[t]he amendments and exemptions set forth in Regulations .09 and .10 of this chapter apply to interstate and intrastate carriers.”
So a non-hazardous intrastate property carrier over the ten-thousand-and-one pound boundary is outside B, inside C, and inside D. That is a defined subset of the chapter rather than the whole of it, and working out which obligations apply means walking the list rather than reading a threshold. It is a more precise piece of drafting than most states manage and it is correspondingly harder to summarize, which is why it is usually summarized as a weight line it is not.
The .03C list names Regulations .05 through .08 and .11 through .14. Regulation .05 no longer contains anything.
Its served heading reads “.05 49 CFR 390, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; General — Amendments and Exemptions. — Repealed”. The repeal is legible in the title block of the regulation’s own page, which is the only place a reader would see it — the .03C list still names .05, because a cross-reference does not update itself when the thing it points at is repealed.
That is worth noticing rather than passing over, because .05 was the Maryland amendments and exemptions to the federal general-applicability part. With it repealed, the state-specific modifications that once sat there are gone, and the incorporated federal general part reaches this population through COMAR 11.21.01.02 without a Maryland overlay in that position.
This is the same class of change as a repeal or an expiry: the pointer survives the target. A summary that walked the .03C list and assumed each member carried substance would report a Maryland amendment to the federal general part that does not exist.
The incorporation itself is at COMAR 11.21.01.02, and it is rolling: “[t]he federal motor carrier safety regulations contained in 49 CFR 40, 382, 383, 387, 390—393, 384, 395—399, and 1572, as amended, are incorporated by reference, subject to the application provision in Regulations .03, .04-1—.08, and .11—.14 of this chapter and the amendments and exemptions cited in .09 and .10 of this chapter.” No edition, no revision date, no as-of date. The words “as amended” carry it forward, and the subject-to clause makes the incorporation conditional on the sorting described above.
Two subsections of Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111 decide the outer edge of what Maryland’s motor carrier safety regulations may reach, and they open with a cross-reference to the hours provision above.
Subsection (f)(1): “Except as provided in subsection (i) of this section, the Administration may adopt regulations as are necessary for the safe operation of vehicles that: (i) Exceed a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds; (ii) Are required to be marked or placarded for the transportation of hazardous materials; or (iii) Are designed to transport 16 or more passengers including the driver over the highways of this State.”
That is the source of the boundary that COMAR 11.21.01.03A then restates. The regulations reach above ten thousand pounds because the statute authorizes regulations above ten thousand pounds, and the exception clause at the front subordinates the whole power to the intrastate hours limits.
Subsection (f)(2) then constrains the content. Any regulation adopted must “[b]e formulated jointly by the Administration and the Department of State Police”; must “[d]uplicate or be consistent with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations” in a list of named parts, of which item 4 is “49 C.F.R., Parts 390 through 399 (‘General Safety Requirements’)”; must apply to all vehicles over ten thousand pounds gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating that are subject to the federal rules; and may apply to vehicles over ten thousand pounds that are not subject to the federal rules only “if the regulation adopted by the Motor Vehicle Administration specifically states that it applies to the vehicle.”
That last clause is a drafting discipline with a practical use. Where a Maryland regulation is meant to reach a vehicle that federal law does not reach, it has to say so on its face. So the absence of such a statement in a regulation is itself informative, and an operator working out whether a particular COMAR provision reaches an intrastate movement has a textual test to apply rather than an inference to make.
This is the point where this page states a tension rather than an answer, and does so deliberately.
COMAR 11.21.01.04-5 is one sentence: “49 CFR 387 is incorporated by reference with no amendments or exemptions.” Taken alone that reads like a clean adoption of the federal financial-responsibility part.
Two things sit against reading it as creating an intrastate obligation. First, COMAR 11.21.01.02 makes the whole incorporation “subject to the application provision in Regulations .03, .04-1—.08, and .11—.14”, and COMAR 11.21.01.03C — the provision that governs non-hazardous intrastate carriers — names Regulations .05 through .08 and .11 through .14. Regulation .04-5 is not in that list. Second, incorporating a federal part by reference does not rewrite the incorporated text; the part continues to say what it says about its own scope, and its scope for property carriage is written around interstate commerce.
Neighboring states show what a state does when it means to close that gap. Delaware amends the federal general-applicability section directly, adding the words “and intrastate” after “interstate”, which pulls the whole adopted body inward. No comparable rewrite appears in the Maryland chapter sections read for this page.
So the honest position is that the incorporation is verified and the operative intrastate dollar minimum is not, and this page does not state one. That is a less satisfying answer than a number would be, and it is the correct one: publishing a figure here would mean asserting an obligation the read text does not establish, and a wrong financial-responsibility figure is the single most consequential error a page like this can make.
What an operator should take from that is not that there is no requirement, but that the requirement should be confirmed with the Administration for the specific operation before it is relied on — and that whatever the state requires, it is a licensing floor rather than a program. The limits that matter after a loss are set against the exposure, not against the filing, which is what trucking auto liability limits are actually sized for.
Maryland’s economic negative is unusually clean and unusually easy to describe wrongly, so it is worth setting out the mechanism rather than the conclusion.
The Public Service Commission is the only Maryland body with a motor carrier permitting function. Its jurisdiction runs through Md. Code, Public Utilities § 1-101(e)(1), which provides that “‘Common carrier’ means a person, public authority, or federal, State, district, or municipal transportation unit that is engaged in the public transportation of persons for hire, by land, water, air, or any combination of them.” The inclusions at (e)(2) — a car company, motor vehicle company, automobile company or motor bus company, a taxicab company, a transit company, a transportation network company — all sit inside that persons-for-hire definition.
The permit itself matches. Md. Code, Public Utilities § 9-201(a): “Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a motor carrier permit is required for a passenger motor vehicle used in the transportation of persons for hire.” The exclusions at (b) are all passenger contexts — school pupil transportation, cannery worker transportation for not more than three months in a registration year, taxicabs, boardwalk transportation in Ocean City, vanpools, local public transportation systems, contracted transportation system services, and a named university shuttle.
The important characterization is what kind of negative this is. It is not the residue of a repealed freight chapter, the way several states in this project turn out to be. The Public Utilities Article’s definition was drawn around persons in the first place. There is no repealed general-freight regime to go looking for, and an operator or adviser who assumes one existed will spend time hunting an instrument that was never enacted.
What that does to the cargo question is best followed as a chain rather than announced as a conclusion. Cargo certificates are lodged in the course of getting or keeping an operating credential. Maryland issues no such credential for hauling general freight inside the state. With no proceeding to lodge it in, the certificate has nowhere to go, and no Maryland office accepts one from this operator.
What Maryland does impose on this operation is the safety regime described above — administered under Transportation § 25-111 and COMAR 11.21.01 — which is an obligation about how the vehicle is operated, not a permission to operate it.
There is one cargo insurance requirement in the entire Code of Maryland Regulations, and its opening applicability sentence would mislead anyone who stopped reading there. This section exists to carry the limit along with the quotation.
COMAR 20.95.03.02 provides: “These regulations apply Statewide to all carriers performing intrastate operations for hire.” On its face that reaches every intrastate for-hire carrier in Maryland, and the chapter it introduces does contain a cargo liability requirement.
The chapter’s own definitions close it. Regulation .04B(1) provides that “‘Carrier’ means the holder of a permit.” Regulation .06A provides that “[a] tank vehicle may not be used in the public intrastate transportation of flammables for hire over the improved streets or roads of this State, or any political subdivision of it, without a permit from the Commission to the owner.” And .04B(10) provides that “‘Tank vehicles’ includes all vehicles used in the transportation of inflammable or combustible liquids, in bulk, for compensation, upon the public streets or highways within the State.”
Read together, the “all carriers” in .02 means all holders of the permit that .06A requires, and that permit is a bulk flammable-liquids tank vehicle permit. The chapter does not reach general freight, and its cargo requirement does not reach this operator. The chapter’s own title, served on the page, is Bulk Carriers of Flammable or Combustible Liquids.
The reason to spend a section on a chapter that does not apply is that the trap is a real one and it points in the expensive direction. A reader who stops at .02 concludes that Maryland imposes a cargo insurance requirement on every intrastate for-hire carrier, and then goes looking for a filing that does not exist for them. Carrying the limiting definitions with the quotation is what prevents that, and it is why an applicability sentence should never be quoted without the definitions it depends on.
It also has a second lesson for this class of research. A keyword search for cargo insurance across Maryland regulations returns this chapter, and a classifier that scored the hit without opening the definitions would record Maryland as a cargo-filing state. The hit is real; the conclusion from the hit is not.
One clause in Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111(i)(1) is worth reading for what it teaches about how transportation law changes, because it changed by a date rather than by an act.
Sub-item (iv) prohibited regulations that would, “[e]xcept in the case of bus drivers, apply the provisions of § 391.41(b)(1) through (11) of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations before October 1, 2023” to a person who met three conditions: that on October 1, 2003 the person “was otherwise qualified to operate and operated a vehicle or vehicle combination used in intrastate commerce with a gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating of 10,001 pounds or more and, after October 1, 2003, remained qualified to operate and continued to operate such a vehicle”; that the person “[o]perates only in intrastate commerce”; and that the person had a qualifying condition existing on the relevant date which a physician had determined had not substantially worsened.
The words that matter are “before October 1, 2023”. The prohibition was time-limited on its face, and that date has passed. The clause is still printed in the statute, and it no longer restrains anything.
Nothing was repealed to produce that change. No amendment was enacted, no notice was published and no history line records it, because a provision that expires by reference to a date inside its own text does not generate any of those things. The text reads today exactly as it read in 2019, and it means something different.
That is the single most useful discipline to take from Maryland into any state: read the dates inside the operative words, not only the effective-date block underneath them. A citation that resolves is not a provision that operates.
Put two Maryland fleets side by side with the same trucks, the same drivers and the same trailers, and they will not price the same — because in this state the pattern of the work, rather than the equipment, decides which body of law the drivers are under. Premium is not published anywhere and a bracket offered from a distance would be invented. What can be set out is the pattern evidence that separates those two fleets.
The interstate question comes first and it is sharper here than almost anywhere. The state hours variance is available only for intrastate transportation, and Maryland’s geography makes crossing a line an ordinary Tuesday rather than a long trip. Delaware, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia all border it, and it surrounds the District on three sides. The useful answer is a distribution of where loads actually go, and that distribution decides which hours regime governs which day.
The short-haul pattern is second, because it is what makes the variance worth anything. A driver who returns to the normal work reporting location within the window is inside the state provision. One who runs a pattern that does not return, or that exceeds it, is outside it and back on ordinary federal recording obligations. This is a dispatch design question and it is decided before the load is booked.
Placarded loads are third and behave as a switch. A movement requiring placards leaves the state variance under Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111(i)(2)(ii) and, separately, moves the operation into the group that COMAR 11.21.01.03B reaches with the full chapter rather than the .03C subset.
Multi-carrier driver use is a distinctly Maryland input because the statute names it. The 70-in-7 and 80-in-8 ceilings apply “[r]egardless of the number of motor carriers using the driver’s services”, which means a driver working for more than one operation has a weekly total that no single dispatcher can see. On this class of freight, where drivers are frequently engaged load by load, that is a real exposure and it is worth documenting rather than assuming.
What rides on the deck decides the cargo limit, and no Maryland agency supplies a reference point for general freight. It is a contract number, negotiated with the customer, and it should be set by the costliest thing the trucks could be under on a bad day rather than by an average one. Beneath that sit the two commercial questions: whose authority the freight moves under, and what the customer paperwork obliges the policy to do — name the shipper as an insured, answer first and without contribution, surrender its recovery rights.
Three of the four facts on this page are filed somewhere a reader would not think to look, and it is worth collecting them. The hours variance is in the statute rather than in the regulations that adopt the hours rules. The applicability sentence of the one cargo chapter promises a reach that the chapter’s own definitions then take back. A live cross-reference still names a regulation that has been repealed out from under it. And a grandfather clause that stopped operating on a date printed inside its own words still appears on the page as though it operates.
There is also no Public Service Commission motor freight subtitle to look in, and that absence was established by enumeration rather than by assumption. COMAR Title 20 is the Public Service Commission’s title; its transportation subtitle contains a general chapter, an overhead railroad clearance chapter, the bulk flammable liquids chapter discussed above, and an aircraft operations chapter. There is no motor freight chapter in it.
A claim this page does not make is what Maryland’s operative intrastate financial-responsibility minimum is for this operator. The incorporation of the federal part is verified and quoted; whether that incorporation creates an intrastate obligation for non-hazardous property carriage is not established by the text read, and stating a figure would mean asserting something the sources do not support.
The trade itself, finally, is not named anywhere. No Maryland instrument read for this page uses the language operators use about this business, defines it, opens a permit class for it or requires an endorsement of it. What reaches the operation is a weight boundary drawn for motor carriage at large, a sort by carrier type inside the safety chapter, and a statutory instruction telling the state’s own agency what it may not do about hours — three things written for other purposes that this configuration happens to sit inside.
The state minimum is a licensing threshold. The program an operator actually needs is built from these lines:
We write hot shot and expedited hauling as a named class rather than as an exception to general trucking, and we read each account against the weight and authority regime of the state it operates in. For a Maryland operator that means starting from the rating of the power unit and the trailer separately rather than from the combination, sizing cargo against the heaviest load actually carried rather than the average one, and treating the state line as a rating fact because a single crossing can change which driver file the operation owes.
If the operation also runs freight under separate authority, the Maryland trucking insurance page covers the state’s broader motor carrier picture, and the hot shot trucking insurance page covers the class mechanics that apply wherever the operator runs.
Yes, and the change is in the statute rather than the regulations. Md. Code, Transportation § 25-111(i)(1)(ii) forbids regulations adopted for intrastate motor carrier transportation from limiting a driver’s hours where the driver stays within a 150 air mile radius of the normal work reporting location, returns to it, is released within 16 consecutive hours with not more than 12 dedicated to driving and at least 8 consecutive hours off duty, and is within 70 hours in 7 days or 80 hours in 8 depending on whether the carrier operates every day of the week.
Because there is not one there. COMAR 11.21.01.09, in its entirety, adds “police officer, hazardous materials inspector, and Public Service Commission inspector” after the word “every” in 49 CFR § 395.13(a). That is an enforcement-personnel insertion into the out-of-service provision and makes no substantive change to the hours themselves. A summary built from the regulations alone will report that Maryland takes the federal hours rules unmodified.
The radius is the same and the clock is not. Both are written around a 150 air mile radius of the normal work reporting location with a return to that location. The federal exception at 49 CFR § 395.1(e)(1) uses a 14 consecutive hour release and, for a property-carrying driver, at least 10 consecutive hours off duty separating each 14 hours on duty. Maryland’s uses a 16 consecutive hour release, caps driving at 12 of those hours, and requires at least 8 consecutive hours off duty.
Three things, all named in § 25-111(i)(2): interstate commerce; transporting hazardous materials of a type and quantity requiring placarding under the Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations; and operating a vehicle designed to transport 16 or more passengers including the driver. Loads on this class go to whoever is free rather than to whoever runs the lane, which means the interstate condition has to be settled trip by trip rather than driver by driver.
No Maryland agency issues it. The Public Service Commission is the only body with a motor carrier permitting function, and Md. Code, Public Utilities § 9-201(a) requires a motor carrier permit only “for a passenger motor vehicle used in the transportation of persons for hire.” The jurisdictional definition at § 1-101(e)(1) is drawn around “the public transportation of persons for hire.” This is a definitional negative rather than the residue of a repealed freight chapter, so there is no repealed regime to go looking for.
Not from an intrastate general-freight carrier. A cargo filing is made into a licensing proceeding, and Maryland runs none for intrastate property carriage. The one cargo insurance requirement in the Code of Maryland Regulations sits in COMAR 20.95.03, whose applicability regulation says it applies “Statewide to all carriers performing intrastate operations for hire” — but the chapter defines “Carrier” as “the holder of a permit”, and the permit it means is the bulk flammable and combustible liquids tank vehicle permit at .06A. The chapter’s served title is Bulk Carriers of Flammable or Combustible Liquids.
This page does not state one, and the reason is stated rather than hidden. COMAR 11.21.01.04-5 incorporates 49 CFR 387 “with no amendments or exemptions”, but COMAR 11.21.01.02 makes the incorporation subject to the application provisions, and .03C — the provision governing non-hazardous intrastate carriers — does not list .04-5. An incorporation by reference also does not rewrite the incorporated text’s own scope. The incorporation is verified; the operative intrastate figure is not, and asserting one would go beyond what the read text supports.
Nothing is published, and a figure produced without examining the operation would be manufactured. Five things decide it. How much of the work leaves the state, since the hours provision is offered only to intrastate transportation. Whether drivers genuinely come back to a fixed reporting location inside the window. Whether anything is ever placarded. How many separate carriers use each driver, given weekly ceilings drafted to be counted across all of them at once. And the replacement cost of the costliest thing the fleet moves, in a state that publishes nothing to compare it with — alongside whatever the customer paperwork obliges the policy to do.
Every figure on this page was read at the source below on August 31, 2026, with the effective date of the version read. Treat each as current as of that date rather than as permanent.
Send the power unit and trailer ratings separately, the radius distribution, and whether any dispatch crosses a state line. We will size the program against the work the trucks actually do rather than against a statutory floor.
