This high-level overview outlines the core issues surrounding Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), how ELD data is generated, transmitted, and displayed, and why the current Third-Party Auditor (TPA) system in Alberta is fundamentally flawed.
The U.S. implemented its ELD mandate first, with self-certification by ELD providers. In contrast, Canada requires third-party certification. There are hundreds of providers in the US and Canada has less than 50 because the majority of the US devices won’t meet the Canadian standards because they allow driving time to be manipulated. The US is currently revoking the licences of ELD providers that don’t meet the Technical Standard.
Canadian ELD enforcement began fully on January 1, 2022, after a soft rollout in 2021. The workshift rules of HOS didn’t change—only the requirement to log time electronically did.
While Transport Canada and CCMTA created the regulations and standards, they provided no implementation training—to either industry or government. The ELD providers did what was asked, they built the device as per the specs. The Feds and CCMTA did what they were supposed to, they wrote the regulations, and they gave the standards to follow. This failure is 100% on the provincial jurisdictions, by adopting the Federal regulation Alberta Transportation has a obligation to explain what those regulations mean to its constituents and failed to do so.
ELDs collect data from the ECM—engine sensors, tires, GPS, and time. The data is stored on the device and in the cloud. These devices are always powered and continuously monitor and log driver activity.
All certified ELDs function similarly; the only difference is the appearance of the PDF RODS. The only legally recognized output files that meet the full data requirements are:
TPAs don’t use these. They lack:
Instead, they audit printable dashboard PDFs, which can be missing data or altered. As a result, TPA audits are fundamentally flawed.
Imagine doing your taxes with a T4 that leaves out key earnings. You get a refund, then face a CRA audit and a large fine. You find out:
This is what’s happening with TPAs and ELD audits. 95% of audits in Alberta are conducted by TPAs—and they’re based on incomplete, inaccurate data.
From the Federal HOS Regulations:
Section 98(2): Drivers must transmit RODS using the method supported by the ELD and identified by the inspector.
Section 99(2): Carriers must transmit the RODS in the format and method prescribed in the Technical Standard.
From the ELD Technical Standard:
Without following this encrypted, standard process, any audit or review lacks legitimacy.
June 22, 2022, the CTA (Canadian Transportation Association) released information via email regarding the PKI system:
Encryption of Record of Duty Status Email Files
The process for establishing the encryption of records of duty status (known as PKI) for email transfer to Roadside officials is the responsibility of Transport Canada. The process for implementing the Transport Canada work is the responsibility of each provincial and territorial jurisdiction, which includes submitting email addresses of enforcement officials who will be engaged in hours-of-service enforcement. The requirements and format for ELDs to produce the encrypted record of duty status are contained in the ELD technical standard, which is the result of a collaborative effort between Transport Canada, representatives from all provincial and territorial governments and ELD vendors. Devices certified through the Transport Canada and Standards Council of Canada process will meet the required format for record of duty status.
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/trucking-association-raises-concerns-over-canadas-eld-mandate
“We still want to see ELD enforcement going forward in January, but there’s issues that people are not talking about that are serious issues that still need to be addressed, and the biggest one is the PKI system,” Mike Millian, president of PMTC, told FreightWaves.
This is not just a trucking problem—it’s a systemic data failure that threatens public safety, insurance reliability, and government credibility. The ELD system was designed to bring accountability and transparency. But without proper training, implementation, and audit processes, we’re back to the same risks paper logs created—just with digital lipstick.
Until audits are conducted using fully encrypted CSV or PDF files via PKI, no TPA result should be considered valid.
🚨 When trucks stop, the country stops. So why are we forcing experienced drivers off the road over a language rule that’s more about politics than safety? Let’s talk about what’s really behind this policy.
On April 28, an executive order signed by President Donald Trump was put into effect. The order alters the penalty for violating a longstanding rule that requires commercial motor vehicle drivers to “read and speak the English language sufficiently to converse with the general public, to understand highway traffic signs and signals in English, to respond to official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and records.”
Under the Obama administration, the penalty for noncompliance was relaxed — violators received citations instead of being taken off the road. Now, the Trump administration is reinstating a harsher stance. As one official stated: “We are issuing guidance that ensures a driver who cannot understand English will not drive a vehicle in this country. Period. Full stop.”
Let’s call this what it is — blatant racism. This isn’t subtle. The order will impact truckers across North America. The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), which includes Canada, the United States, and Mexico, provides guidance for enforcement across all three countries. Yet, you don’t see Mexico mandating Spanish fluency for foreign drivers operating within its borders. Consider places like Laredo, Texas, which are fully bilingual. And in Canada, bilingualism is enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms — just ask our French friends.
We welcomed these drivers through immigration programs to address a critical driver shortage. Now that the economy is struggling, freight rates are down, and profits are tight, the solution is not to push these workers out. As Canadians, we have a moral obligation to do the right thing.
If language truly is a safety issue, then why does Alberta offer its Class 7 (learner’s license) knowledge test in 25 languages? These include Amharic, Arabic, Chinese (Simplified and Traditional), French, Hindi, Italian, Korean, Oromo, Polish, Portuguese, Tagalog, Ukrainian, Vietnamese, and more. If safety starts with comprehension, why not enforce language standards from the very first licensing step?
Currently, there’s no standardized test for “sufficient English.” It's up to each officer’s judgment — a recipe for abuse of authority, especially at a time when the U.S. Department of Transportation is undergoing a workforce reduction plan with DOGE.
Do some of these drivers need to be off the road? Absolutely. But the answer isn’t unemployment and potential deportation — it’s education. Teach them basic English. Put them through a commercial driver refresher. Alberta’s new Red Seal driver program would be a perfect starting point, put your money where your mouth is. If safety is the goal, invest in training. Personally, I’d feel safer sharing the road with an experienced driver who can drive rather than a brand-new driver who speaks the King’s English.
This directive will reduce the number of drivers on the road, creating less competition for what little freight is available. That should drive rates up — and hopefully, that revenue will go toward better wages, not just corporate profit. If drivers earned a living wage, they wouldn’t be forced to speed, drive tired, or risk dangerous weather just to make ends meet.
Poverty wages are a greater safety hazard than limited English. And when the economy rebounds, we’ll be right back in a driver shortage — especially with 48% of Canada’s truck drivers now over the age of 50. The industry isn’t attracting enough young Canadians because the pay simply isn’t worth the risk. Who wants to risk their life on icy highways for $1.00 per kilometre? Canada should not do this, be an example of basic human decency.
The annual CVSA International Roadcheck is May 13–15 2025, and the focus this year is on tires and electronic logging devices (ELDs). If you're operating in Alberta, brace yourself—because I predict the ELD portion of this blitz is going to be an absolute gong show.
Why? Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight has utterly failed to provide direction, interpretation, or training to industry stakeholders and the very inspectors who are tasked with enforcement. I’ve written more than a few blogs about this ongoing ineptitude, and Roadcheck 2025 is about to put it on full display.
The Problem with Alberta’s Approach to ELDs
The ELD regulation was published in 2019, came into force in 2021, and was fully adopted across Canada on January 1, 2023. That means Alberta has had 835 days and counting to provide clear, actionable guidance. And what have they done with that time? Absolutely nothing.
Motor carriers are being penalized roadside and during NSC Standard 15 audits for regulations that Alberta hasn't applied correctly—or consistently. This lack of leadership, guidance, and basic communication is setting the industry up for failure, and during Roadcheck, it amounts to entrapment.
When provinces adopt federal regulations, it's their job to explain what those rules mean to their stakeholders and how they'll be enforced. Alberta's refusal to do this amounts to information hoarding—keeping the industry in the dark so they can issue more penalties. It’s hard to punish an educated industry, and Alberta Transportation knows that.
Let’s break down the key ELD focus areas for Roadcheck 2025, based on the CVSA’s announcement, and what you really need to know.
1. Tampering (The Big One)
Tampering will be a huge issue, especially because Alberta Transportation has failed to pass along critical information. In August 2024, Transport Canada and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) directed provinces that an active data diagnostic event (displayed as a "D" on the ELD) is not a violation—it may resolve on its own once conditions change.
Alberta never told carriers or drivers. Now, during Roadcheck, an inspector may falsely label a diagnostic event as tampering or a disconnected device. This is unacceptable.
2. Driving While Not Logged In
Unidentified driving events are created when a truck moves and no one is logged in, or the driver hasn't Bluetooth-connected to the ECM. This leads to missing mileage and data. Make sure the ELD is paired and connected before moving the vehicle.
3. Odometer Mismatch
There is no regulation that says the ELD mileage must match the truck’s dash odometer. In fact, under the Weights and Measures Act, it’s illegal to alter the truck's odometer. The FMCSA clarified this in 2017: How should the ELD handle the dashboard odometer display not matching the odometer value returned by the ECM? For instance, when the engine is replaced and the value is not synced. If the dashboard odometer display does not match the odometer value returned by the ECM, the ECM odometer value must be identified as the valid value.
4. Improper Edits
Drivers and admins can and should edit to ensure accuracy. For example, if you fuel and then go off-duty but forget to change status, editing that later with a clear annotation is not a violation. Inspectors should be trained to evaluate the context of edits—but in Alberta, don’t count on it.
5. Ghost Drivers & Login Issues
6. Personal Conveyance (PC) Misuse
To legally use PC:
And yes, annotate that you're in PC and state why.
7. Misuse of Adverse Driving Exemption
This isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card. If you regularly use adverse driving to extend your hours, expect scrutiny. It’s for unforeseen events, not bad planning.
8. Off-Duty While Working
If you're working—loading, unloading, waiting at a border, even fueling—you’re on-duty. If your BOL shows a 10:00–12:00 loading time and you’re logged off-duty, you’re going to get nailed. Inspectors can and will ask for documentation to verify your RODS.
9. Malfunctions (Critical Omission)
Shockingly, CVSA’s bulletin didn’t mention ELD malfunctions. If your ELD shows an active malfunction, you must:
Failure to do so? Violation.
10. Daily Vehicle Inspection (pre-trip) location not matching RODS location
This is not a violation this a result of ELD programing. The daily vehicle inspection location is derived from GPS. The ELD location is derived from the Canadian Geo-Location Database which is not always the same. The data is coming from 2 different locations.
The bigger problem of Roadcheck and ELD violations, no room to park!
In Canada Roadcheck 2024 inspectors conducted inspections of 5411 commercial vehicles over 72 hours. The hours of service regulations are very specific regarding what violations a driver would be put out-of-service and not able to drive. If even half the drivers have violations for ELDs there is not enough room at the scales or at a roadside inspection area to park 2500 trucks for 8 to 10 or up to 72 hours until the required time off is taken by the driver to not be out of service.
What You Should Actually Do
According to the CVSA bulletin: Inspectors are available to answer questions about tire maintenance and violations, and to help drivers and motor carriers navigate the hours-of-service regulations in their jurisdictions. Based on the hours of service tickets I have encountered from my clients don’t count on it.
If you’re confused about ELD rules—or worse, get a ticket or out-of-service —call or email me before you accept guilt. I’ll help you review and fight it. Think of me as your friendly neighborhood Fairy RODSmother.
Let’s have a safe, successful Roadcheck 2025.
Lloydminster is a city unlike any other in Canada — a true border town straddling the provincial line between Alberta and Saskatchewan. On the surface, it functions as one cohesive community. But dig a little deeper, and you’ll find it’s a city caught in the crosshairs of inter-jurisdictional red tape.
Take, for example, the recent changes around food regulation. For decades, something as simple as a meat processor on the Saskatchewan side couldn’t legally sell its product across the street in Alberta. Thankfully, in November, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency updated its regulations to allow for the free flow of food within Lloydminster city limits. One trade barrier down. Dozens more to go.
Trucking in No-Man’s Land
One of the most significant ongoing challenges in Lloydminster is commercial transportation. Unlike the United States, where motor carriers operate under a single federal system, Canada allows each province to set its own rules. The result? A logistical nightmare for trucking companies that operate in and around Lloydminster.
Alberta allows two types of operating statuses for carriers: provincial and federal. A provincial carrier can only operate within Alberta, but has fewer regulatory burdens — no Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), longer allowable driving hours, and fewer rest period restrictions. Federally regulated carriers, on the other hand, face tighter rules, including mandatory ELDs and 70-hour driving limits over 7 days.
This discrepancy creates a clear competitive advantage for provincial carriers. To patch the hole, Alberta and Saskatchewan created a policy allowing Alberta provincial carriers to operate on either side of Lloydminster under strict conditions:
"Services received or provided" include fuel, meals, accommodations, vehicle repairs, or loading/unloading — essentially any business activity. The only exemption? If those services are provided wholly within Lloydminster city limits. In other words, you can drive through the Saskatchewan side of town — just don’t buy gas, unload freight, or grab a sandwich.
This isn’t a policy designed to facilitate trade. It’s a policy for the sake of having a policy.
Enforcement is Here (and It’s Getting Expensive)
For years, enforcement of these complicated rules was minimal. But things are changing. Alberta has ramped up commercial vehicle enforcement, and Saskatchewan has responded with its own measures through the Saskatchewan Marshals Service.
The penalties are no joke. Operating without the correct Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) in Alberta costs $324 — and that’s just the start. Add on the fine for not having an ELD, possible insurance implications, and violations noted on your carrier profile, and suddenly that “quick job” across the border becomes a costly mistake.
One can easily imagine a newly minted enforcement officer, fresh out of training, parking on the wrong side of Highway 17 and racking up ticket after ticket by stopping Alberta-plated trucks on the Saskatchewan side — or vice versa.
A Real Solution: Cooperation, Not Constriction
The current policy doesn’t help carriers, consumers, or the community. What Lloydminster needs is more than a border exemption — it needs true inter-jurisdictional trade cooperation. Alberta and Saskatchewan should work together to create a registrar’s exemption that allows businesses to operate freely and legally on both sides of the border, especially within the unique context of Lloydminster.
Instead, Alberta Transportation continues to take a reactive approach, crafting policies in response to problems instead of proactively solving them. It’s time for Alberta to step up and lead — not leave businesses stranded in a jurisdictional limbo. In an industry where every hour costs money — especially in oil and gas — these policy gaps aren’t just annoying. They’re expensive, inefficient, and completely unnecessary.
Recent US litigation against JB Hunt raises questions about the threshold for effective carrier driver oversight. As part of the lawsuit against the carrier and driver it is alleged the carrier did not effectively monitor the driver or correct the driver’s behaviour and this lack of oversight contributed to the collision. This case underscores the complexities of internal monitoring regulations for commercial carriers, especially in the absence of clear regulatory guidance.
Regulatory Requirements for Carrier Hours of Service Monitoring
The Federal Hours of Service Regulations (SOR/2005-313) impose several key obligations on carriers:
However, these regulations do not define what constitutes adequate monitoring or what corrective actions are necessary for different violation thresholds, leaving significant room for interpretation.
The JB Hunt Case: A Breakdown of the Allegations
In this case, a JB Hunt driver was involved in a fatal collision in the US while allegedly using his phone on a dating app. This was confirmed with driver facing camera data and phone records. Prior to the collision, two incidents within 6 weeks raised concerns about the driver’s behavior:
The issue in the lawsuit is whether the carrier’s failure to address the previous incidents contributed to the driver’s negligence. This raises a larger question: should a single five-second violation trigger disciplinary action by a carrier?
Industry Standards vs. Regulatory Ambiguity
Carriers receive frequent alerts from electronic logging devices (ELDs) and AI-driven cameras for minor infractions 24 hours a day. Without explicit regulatory guidance, it remains unclear how many brief incremental time violations should warrant carrier intervention. Regulators like Transport Canada, the CCMTA, and Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight have yet to provide an ELD interpretation guide despite the regulation being in effect for four years.
Key considerations include:
Regulatory Harmonization and Compliance Uncertainty
The lack of clear internal monitoring standards complicates enforcement. The Regulations Amending the Contraventions Regulations (SOR/2023-137) propose a $2,000 penalty per driver for a carrier’s failure to monitor. Yet, without concrete guidance, how can regulators fairly assess compliance?
As Transport Canada and the CCMTA work toward inter-provincial regulation harmonization, cases like JB Hunt’s illustrate the pressing need for explicit internal monitoring directives. Incremental time violations are a fact of life in data rich environments like ELDs and driver facing cameras. Clear regulatory guidance is urgently needed and would benefit carriers by ensuring fair enforcement and reducing liability uncertainties.
Conclusion While the JB Hunt case highlights the potential consequences of inadequate monitoring, it also exposes gaps in regulatory clarity. Carriers need definitive guidance on what constitutes effective driver hour of service oversight to ensure compliance and roadway safety. Until such guidance is provided, industry stakeholders remain in a precarious position—balancing operational feasibility with legal risk in an evolving regulatory landscape.
The Alberta government is once again overreaching enforcement powers.
Recently, the U.S.-Canada border has been making headlines, with American officials blaming Canada’s lax border controls for contributing to the U.S. fentanyl crisis and the influx of migrants without status. In response, Canada pledged $1.3 billion to bolster border security, appointed a Fentanyl Czar along with an accompanying staff, and allocated $5.3 million for two Black Hawk helicopters equipped with advanced surveillance technology. One of these helicopters is already stationed in Alberta and has seen extensive use.
The UCP government, never one to miss an opportunity for more “Made in Alberta” enforcement, has now rolled out the $29-million Interdiction Patrol Team (IPT). For that hefty price tag, Alberta gets 51 uniformed officers armed with carbine rifles, four drug-patrol dogs, 10 support staff, four narcotics analyzers, and surveillance drones. Not to be outdone, my favorite minister, Devin Dreeshen, announced three new highway traffic inspection stations for commercial vehicles, costing taxpayers another $15 million.
These inspection stations, located at the U.S. border, will allow sheriffs to monitor commercial vehicles entering and exiting Canada. Many drug busts start with something as simple as a blown taillight or expired registration—just saying. Truckers, no doubt, would prefer to see that $15 million go toward rest areas and better highway line painting, but this is about generating fine revenue and enforcement statistics, not road or community safety.
The Alberta government has also amended the Critical Infrastructure Defence Regulation, adding a two-kilometer-deep border zone north of the U.S.-Canada border to the definition of essential infrastructure under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. This change gives peace officers the authority to arrest individuals for trespassing, interfering with, or damaging essential infrastructure. Sheriffs can now arrest individuals suspected of illegally crossing the border or trafficking drugs and weapons—without needing a warrant. A friendlier way of saying “border wall.”
Adding to this enforcement expansion, the government plans to train highway maintenance workers to identify and report suspicious activity of commercial vehicles. There are 2 significant problems with this plan; first this Government is requiring, as part of their employment, highway workers to become informants for the Sheriffs and IPT, snitches in ditches. Secondly unless the Alberta Government is planning to implement implicit bias and racism training this program will end up being the “driving while brown” hotline.
Racism is deeply embedded in all levels of enforcement across Canada, and commercial vehicle enforcement disproportionately targets South Asian drivers, given their high representation in the trucking industry. Institutional bias ensures that these prejudices persist through training and workplace culture.
Commercial drivers are already under near-constant surveillance—highway cameras, electronic logging devices (ELDs), driver-facing cameras, inspection stations, mobile enforcement units (RCMP, sheriffs, IPT, peace officers, bylaw officers, and city police), and now highway maintenance workers? Yes, drug trafficking and migrants without status are real issues, but cracking down on truck drivers is not the answer.
The real problem lies with trucking company owners and managers who enable this trafficking. If a driver goes off-route for three hours to pick up a load of drugs, someone in the company knows. If a driver did it without approval, the driver would be fired, time is money. GPS and ELDs track every movement, making it easy to pinpoint when and where illicit activity happens. Authorities already know which companies are problematic—those operating as “chameleon carriers,” exploiting work permits, or with prior smuggling violations. The issue isn’t a lack of knowledge but a lack of action by regulators and law enforcement.
This growing wave of enforcement highlights a more disturbing trend—government overreach. Warrantless arrests at the border, civilian informants, drone and helicopter surveillance—where does it end? Alberta already has the Immediate Roadside Sanction (IRS) program, which allows impaired driving charges without a breathalyzer or blood test. Without proper oversight, these powers will inevitably be abused. This is how civil liberties erode, how Charter rights are trampled, and how we edge closer to a 1984 Orwellian reality.
As the first signs of spring emerge, our thoughts turn to highway pavement. Joking, most people don’t think about spring and road bans but, when ruts and potholes destroy your vehicle, you think about it. While they may not be top of mind for everyone, road bans are crucial for preserving infrastructure and preventing costly damage to vehicles and highways.
Why Do Road Bans Exist?
Road bans have been around for as long as roads themselves. In the past, springtime ruts and mud made roads impassable. Today, municipalities formally regulate road bans to protect highways from damage during the thaw cycle. Alberta, thanks to strong infrastructure investments, during the Premier Lougheed era, has an excellent highway system that requires diligent maintenance.
Here’s what happens during the freeze-thaw cycle:
Carrier Responsibilities & Training
Commercial carriers are legally required to train their drivers on weights and dimensions, including seasonal road bans, Alberta Regulation 314/2002 Section 41(1)(h)(i). While MELT (Mandatory Entry-Level Training) includes some instruction on road bans, it is minimal.
For example, MELT Module 6 in Alberta, provides only two and a half hours of classroom legal weights training, with just one and a half pages covering road bans. Compounding the issue, fraudulent licensing schemes in Ontario mean some drivers never received any training at all. The result? A significant number of undertrained drivers coming to destroy a road near you.
Spring Road Training: What Drivers Must Know
A spring road refresher is essential before bans take effect. Drivers must be aware of:
Understanding Road Ban Signs
At intersections of restricted and unrestricted roads, signs display a truck symbol with a percentage below it. This percentage represents the allowable weight on an axle for that road.
Example:
Some exemptions exist for farm commodities and emergencies, but they require permits and approvals from the appropriate authority and highway engineering.
Increased Enforcement & Penalties
Calgary city police have a budget shortfall of 28 million dollars due to the cancellation of the photo speed enforcement on all provincial highways thanks to Minister Dreeshan. Other cities and towns and municipalities are feeling the pinch of lack of funding and reduced revenues. One way to make up these shortfalls is to increase enforcement revenue from other areas and road bans are money makers. Enforcement traps are usually near highways with new restrictions or restrictions that have recently changed. Don’t assume just because it was a 90% ban last year it will be the same this year.
Avoid Costly Fines
Overweight penalties increase exponentially during road ban season. Fines can double compared to the rest of the year, and carriers risk accumulating points on their carrier profiles.
Stay Compliant: Drivers Plan Ahead
By staying informed and proactive, you can avoid hefty fines, protect your vehicles, and help maintain Alberta’s roads for everyone.
Inter-provincial trade limitations have gone viral, touted as a solution to U.S. tariffs. In my last blog, "SESAME STREET TAUGHT US, COOPERATION MAKES IT HAPPEN,'" I explained that the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) is ultimately responsible for any regulatory changes that effect the trucking industry and inter-provincial trade.
The CCMTA has a long-standing relationship with Transport Canada—dating back to 1947 when Transport Canada granted it authority. The CCMTA is an incorporated body whose membership includes representatives from Canada’s 14 provincial, federal, and territorial governments, each appointed by their respective jurisdictions.
Within the CCMTA, several committees focus on specific issues, including:
These committees establish working groups that seek solutions to pressing issues. The committee level is where the real work happens. The matter of inter-provincial trade barriers will likely fall under Compliance and Regulatory Affairs.
The CCMTA published its 2024–2027 strategic plan before the recent surge in tariff discussions. Given the growing focus on inter-jurisdictional trade, priorities may have shifted. One of the CCMTA’s strategic goals is to develop and maintain Reciprocal Pan-Canadian and International Agreements. The strategic plan includes examining:
Rather than focusing on international agreements, the CCMTA appears to be prioritizing Pan-Canadian agreements—meaning nationwide alignment.
Past Efforts: Heavy Truck Weight and Dimension Limits
In 2019, the Heavy Truck Weight and Dimension Limits for Interprovincial Operations in Canada document was released, based on the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Interprovincial Weights and Dimensions. Between 1991 and 2019, nine amendments were made to accommodate evolving technologies and industry needs, such as:
This is typical of government regulation—reactive rather than proactive. Technological advancements (e.g., electronic logging devices, ELDs) force unprepared regulators to adjust, rather than anticipating and preparing for industry changes. An example is there is still no ELD interpretation guide from the Federal Government or Alberta Transportation and the regulation is 4 years old. The 2019 amendments (Amendment 10) set the vehicle weight and dimension regulations that the trucking industry operates under today.
Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) & Trade Barriers
In 2023, the Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) released a report titled Interprovincial Trade Barriers in Trucking. The report, based on a survey of CTA members, identified multiple trade barriers, including:
The CCMTA’s strategic plan and the 2025 Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT) Workplan align on many of these issues. However, some trade barriers may never be fully resolved, while others require significant federal and provincial collaboration.
Why Is It So Hard to Remove Inter-Provincial Trade Barriers for Trucking?
Simple answer: a lack of leadership and direction.
Transport Canada granted regulatory policy authority to the CCMTA, which consists of 14 representatives—each with different priorities. Achieving consensus takes years of meetings, drafts, and rewrites. Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) move slowly.
If the federal Transport Minister provided clear directives, stating that inter-provincial trade is Priority #1, the CCMTA and provinces would have to fast-track agreements. Transport Canada may need to act as referee and tie-breaker to push progress forward. More committees, working groups, and studies aren’t the answer—we need decisive action.
Not every jurisdiction will get exactly what it wants, but it’s time to focus on the big picture.
The Root of the Problem: Provincial Control
The weights and dimension 2019 MoU states:
"Under the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, each of the provinces and territories will permit vehicles which comply with the appropriate weights and dimensions described in the following section to travel on a designated system of highways in their jurisdiction. It should be recognized that each jurisdiction continues to retain authority to allow more liberal weights and dimensions, or different types of vehicle configurations, for trucking operations within their jurisdiction. In addition, for trucking operations which take place between adjacent jurisdictions with compatible weight and dimension regulations which are more liberal than those specified in this document, the local regulations will prevail."
This explains why complete harmonization of regulations has never been achieved—each province and territory maintain authority over its own regulations.
A Call for Action: A Regulatory Reckoning
The transportation industry needs a regulation overhaul, just as it did during deregulation in 1987. If the federal government is serious about removing inter-jurisdictional trade barriers, it should:
The industry doesn’t need more bureaucracy—it needs bold leadership and immediate action to remove the barriers that have stifled trucking progress for decades.
My favorite MAGA hat-wearing minister has issued a call to action to the federal transport minister, urging investment in interprovincial mega-infrastructure projects to keep Canada productive amid an impending tariff war with the United States. Given that his ministry is Transportation and Economic Corridors, it’s worth examining what’s actually being actioned. Historically, the MAGA minister’s focus has been squarely on the economy, often neglecting how transportation itself contributes to economic strength.
Another Bureaucratic Layer Instead of Action
The MAGA minister proposes creating an Economic Corridor Agency to identify and maintain economic corridors across provincial boundaries, with consultations involving Indigenous groups and industry. However, Transport Canada already has mechanisms in place: the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), and the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA). These organizations have spent decades attempting to align regulations and reduce interprovincial trade barriers. The issue isn’t a lack of agencies—it’s the unwillingness of jurisdictions to uniformly adopt existing regulations.
Rather than creating another layer of bureaucracy, the government should focus on implementing industry-backed solutions. The CCMTA has a strategic plan for 2024-2027 and the CFTA’s Internal Trade Action Plan (ITAP) for 2024-2027 already outlines necessary steps—there’s no need to reinvent the wheel.
The Case of the Disappearing Rest Areas
The MAGA minister calls for increased federal funding for trade-enabling infrastructure such as roads, rail, ports, inland ports, and airports. Notably, the CTA lists lack of rest areas as an inter-provincial trade barrier in trucking. There is an urgent need for more rest areas for commercial drivers, particularly those accommodating long combination vehicles (LCVs).
Yet, in 2022, the UCP government promised 18 new rest areas. Construction was supposed to begin in 2023, and it’s now 2025—yet no new rest areas exist. If the minister is serious about trade-enabling infrastructure, he should take inspiration from Lougheed’s government: build roads, twin highways, and fulfill existing commitments instead of making new ones.
Regulatory Barriers: Overlooked and Unresolved
The MAGA minister also pledges to streamline regulations around trade-related infrastructure and interprovincial commerce, particularly within economic corridors. But Alberta trucking companies still face significant burdens, such as PST compliance when operating in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This issue should have been addressed under the New West Partnership MoU—why wasn’t it?
Additionally, Alberta’s Ministry of Transportation and Economic Corridors has selectively granted an Electronic Logging Device (ELD) exemption permit to the oilfield industry while neglecting farmers and ranchers. The U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMSCA) recognized this additional burden on farmers and ranchers and wrote an agriculture exemption into its ELD regulation. This MAGA minister only cares about farmers and ranchers during rodeo season. Manitoba offers an ELD exemption by permit to federal carriers with parts of the fleet that remain within the province. Why hasn’t Alberta followed suit? If the minister is serious about regulatory efficiency, these discrepancies need to be addressed.
All Talk No Action The MAGA minister claims Alberta is proactively tackling trade issues by collaborating with Prairie provinces and the North, reducing interprovincial trade barriers, and fostering partnerships with Indigenous groups. However, in the trucking sector, this simply isn’t happening. Clearly this minister should have read the reading materials that came with the job to understand the issues facing trucking. Instead, all his focus has been on economic corridors and this neglect has stifled trucking in Alberta.
Seriously? Canada’s current federal Minister of Transportation has made an announcement that will surely solve everything. The regulations that are often criticized as barriers to trade between Canadian provinces could all crumble within a month, according to federal cabinet minister Anita Anand. Following an announcement at the Port of Halifax on Wednesday, a reporter asked Anand if "interprovincial trade barriers [could] be dealt with, wiped away in 30 days?" "The short answer to your question is yes," responded Anand, the minister of transport and internal trade. Anand suggested her optimism was based on an emergency meeting last week between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the premiers. "We are making incredible, fast-paced progress with all of the provinces and territories," she said.
Really? Yes? That's optimistic—considering the government's track record on this very issue.
For decades, provinces have been hindered by barriers that impede interprovincial trade, costing businesses, industries, and, frankly, everyone in the country. The lack of regulatory alignment has been so bad that in 2017, a push was made to start some sort of interprovincial regulatory cooperation. Fast forward eight years and—surprise!—not much has changed. Many provinces, including Alberta, have resorted to adopting memorandums of understanding (MOUs) to handle region-specific issues. An example would be the New West Partnership Trade Agreement (NWPTA), between Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia to address regional concerns.
Why is it acceptable for the government to do nothing for eight years without delivering any meaningful action? Accountability is non-existent, and there’s no sense of urgency. But why should we expect any different? Just look to the Electronic Logging Device (ELD) regulations—implemented by the federal government in 2020—and still, no interpretation guide from either the federal or Alberta government. The carrier profile enforcement information data transfer system has been broken since 2019, again, nobody cares.
The idea of harmonizing road transportation regulations is old. In the 1970s, we had the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada (RTAC), which was supposed to make life easier for truckers by aligning weight and dimension regulations. These efforts culminated in the publication of the "Pavement Management Guide" in 1977. In 1988 we tried again with the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Heavy Vehicle Weights and Dimensions, RTAC the re-mix. This aimed to harmonize truck weight and dimension regulations across Canada. The implementation process faced challenges because of differing regional preferences which are still in place today.
The fact is that Minister Anand’s objectives sound admirable but, there’s a catch. The reality is the federal government doesn’t have the power to fix this. The feds handed control over to the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), a body that is supposed to facilitate federal regulations for provincial and territorial governments. But here’s the kicker: the federal government only provides a measly $4.44 million to the provinces and territories for road safety and transport-related initiatives. It’s no wonder things haven’t moved an inch.
So, how can Minister Anand’s bold vision become a reality? Is harmonization even possible? The answer is yes—but don’t get too excited. It’s not going to be easy, and some of the regional differences are never going to disappear. Canada’s geography and diverse terrain mean that some differences are simply unavoidable. What’s needed is clear direction from the federal government, telling the CCMTA that aligning regulations is a top priority. The CCMTA needs to step up and get everyone in a room to hash it out. After all, they managed to implement MELT within a year after the Humboldt tragedy—so surely, they can handle something as basic as truck weight and dimension regulations.
But while the feds and the CCMTA fiddle around with their big ideas, Alberta must address some glaring issues themselves. Here are a few suggestions that could make a big difference:
Let’s not forget the issue of consultation with Indigenous communities. Consultation with Indigenous communities must happen when changes to regulations that impact the weights and dimensions allowed on highways that run through traditional territories. The days of Canada just bulldozing the roads through is over, communities must be involved. This is going to be more important as mining and exploration increases in the north. Those projects involve equipment and people that need to get north on limited road infrastructure, not on a 62,500 kg RTAC highway. If these projects do not include Indigenous consultation, you can bet legal action will follow. This can only delay and increase the costs of projects—something Canada can't afford as industries look to expand.
Government uses the word collaboration freely but rarely practices what they preach. In order for Minister Arnad’s wishes to become reality there must be collaboration. Collaboration by the 14 representatives to the CCMTA without ego, avarice, tribalism or elitism. Regulatory alignment is just one of a few issues facing the road transportation industry. Recently the federal government has limited the manufacture of manual transmission models to 10% of their total heavy-duty truck sales. The decision is driven by the need to comply with stricter greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards. Certain industries require equipment with manual transmissions, and this will drive up the cost for those carriers to configure equipment. These challenges on top of the Carbon Tax increase in April and the upcoming US tariffs are going to make a difficult industry impossible. If the feds and the CCMTA can’t accomplish alignment this time around the industry will remain in its current unstable condition. The only solution is collaboration, we are all Canadian, on our home on native land. Cooperation makes it happen.
