ATRI Opens HOS and ELD Survey as Regulatory Review Begins

ATRI seeks direct feedback on HOS and ELD requirements

The American Transportation Research Institute has opened a new industry survey examining the costs and benefits of federal hours-of-service rules and the electronic logging device mandate.

Released this week, the survey is the first step in a broader ATRI effort to build a framework for evaluating trucking regulations. It is open to truck drivers, motor carriers, law-enforcement personnel and other industry stakeholders through **October 16, 2026**.

For drivers and fleets, the practical point is straightforward: this is an opportunity to put specific, real-world operational experience on the record. The survey does not change any current Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration requirements. But its results are intended to help identify where a regulation may be delivering safety value, where it creates operational cost or friction, and what changes respondents believe could improve the balance.

What ATRI is studying

ATRI said the initial project focuses on the overall HOS rules, the overall ELD mandate and nine individual provisions. The provisions span both daily work-time limits and log-management requirements:

• The 11-hour driving limit
• The 14-hour on-duty window
• The 30-minute break requirement
• The 60-hour/seven-day and 70-hour/eight-day limits
• The split-sleeper-berth provision
• Personal conveyance
• ELD device registration and certification requirements
• ELD record backup and security requirements
• The limited paper-log exception for drivers who use records of duty status no more than eight days in a 30-day period

Respondents are being asked to assess perceived safety benefits and compliance costs, then suggest changes that could improve safety value while reducing unnecessary burden.

That scope matters because the questions are not limited to a broad opinion on ELDs or HOS. A driver who sees a recurring issue with a split-sleeper schedule, a dispatcher working around the 14-hour window, or a safety manager dealing with device-file and backup requirements can address the specific provision involved.

Current rules remain in place

The survey should not be mistaken for a new FMCSA rulemaking or a temporary exemption. As of September 19, the existing federal requirements remain in effect.

For most property-carrying drivers, FMCSA's standard HOS framework includes an 11-hour driving limit after 10 consecutive hours off duty, a 14-hour driving window, a 30-minute non-driving interruption after eight cumulative hours of driving, and 60-hour/seven-day or 70-hour/eight-day on-duty limits. The rules also include sleeper-berth, adverse-driving-condition and other provisions that can apply in defined circumstances.

Likewise, the ELD rule still applies to most drivers and carriers required to maintain records of duty status. FMCSA says the rule establishes device performance and registration standards, recordkeeping requirements and protections against driver harassment based on ELD data or related technology. Some drivers and operations qualify for exceptions, but those exceptions are limited and fact-specific.

In other words, participation in the ATRI survey is a feedback opportunity, not a substitute for following the rules that apply to a driver or carrier today.

Why this is important for drivers

HOS and ELD rules shape much more than a roadside inspection. They influence trip planning, appointment scheduling, parking decisions, dispatch communication, pay calculations and the ability to recover from delays at shippers, receivers, terminals and repair facilities.

A useful survey response should focus on documented experience rather than general frustration. Drivers may want to consider examples such as:

• A recurring delay that consumes available duty-window time without adding driving time.
• Whether a split-sleeper option helps or complicates safe and efficient rest planning.
• How personal-conveyance guidance works in a real parking, lodging or maintenance situation.
• Whether an ELD transfer, malfunction, edit process or supporting-document requirement is easy to complete during an inspection.
• Whether a particular requirement has changed safety behavior, dispatch decisions or unpaid time.

Specific details can make feedback more useful. That could include the type of operation, whether the work is longhaul, regional, local, dedicated, intermodal or specialized, and the operational condition involved. Respondents should avoid including confidential customer information, but clear descriptions of the problem and its frequency can help distinguish an isolated incident from a repeated industry issue.

Drivers also should be careful to separate a complaint about a company's dispatch practice from a concern about the federal rule itself. Both may be real operational problems, but they are not necessarily solved the same way.

What carriers and compliance teams should consider

For fleets, the survey creates a reason to compare written policy with actual field experience. Compliance leaders may benefit from asking safety staff, dispatchers, trainers and drivers where they see repeat confusion, administrative expense or operational conflicts.

Areas worth reviewing include:

HOS planning

• Detention and loading delays that regularly push drivers toward the end of the 14-hour window.
• How dispatch personnel account for break requirements, sleeper-berth use and parking availability.
• Whether company policies are more restrictive than the federal baseline and why.
• Training gaps involving personal conveyance, adverse conditions or exemptions.

ELD administration

• The process for handling malfunction procedures and paper-record continuity.
• Driver familiarity with transferring ELD data during an inspection.
• The availability of required in-cab documentation.
• Internal controls for edits, annotations, unassigned driving time and log certification.
• Device-vendor support, data security practices and the burden of retaining supporting records.

Recruiters can also pay attention to the findings that emerge later. HOS flexibility, home-time reliability, detention exposure, ELD usability and the quality of dispatch planning all affect how drivers evaluate a job. While the survey will not set pay or hiring standards, it may produce useful evidence about the conditions drivers consider when choosing or leaving a carrier.

A broader regulatory project, not a one-time poll

ATRI said the HOS and ELD work is meant to establish a benefit-cost assessment model that could later be used for other trucking regulations involving safety, workforce and environmental issues.

That makes participation more consequential than a narrow satisfaction survey. The organization is attempting to create a repeatable way to compare intended regulatory benefits with operational impacts. The quality of that work will depend in part on whether it receives input from a wide range of operations, not only large fleets or one segment of the industry.

For small carriers and owner-operators, that is especially relevant. Their experience with fuel, equipment, dispatch and administrative costs can differ substantially from that of a national fleet with dedicated compliance personnel. For company drivers, firsthand feedback can help explain how a policy works after it reaches the cab, rather than only how it appears on paper.

What to watch next

The immediate deadline is October 16. ATRI will then need to review the responses and determine how they fit into its planned regulatory benefit-cost framework.

There is no announced FMCSA rule change tied to this survey. Drivers and carriers should continue monitoring official FMCSA notices for any future regulatory actions, guidance or pilot-program developments.

For now, the key takeaway is practical: HOS and ELD requirements are still enforceable, but the industry has a defined window to provide structured feedback on the rules that most directly affect daily trucking operations.