(a) The rules in this part establish minimum standards for commercial motor vehicles as defined in § 390.5 of this title. Only motor vehicles (as defined in § 390.5) and combinations of motor vehicles which meet the definition of a commercial motor vehicle are subject to the requirements of this part. All requirements that refer to motor vehicles with a GVWR below 4,536 kg (10,001 pounds) are applicable only when the motor vehicle or combination of motor vehicles meets the definition of a commercial motor vehicle.
(b)(1) Every motor carrier and its employees must be knowledgeable of and comply with the requirements and specifications of this part.
(2) Every intermodal equipment provider and its employees or agents responsible for the inspection, repair, and maintenance of intermodal equipment interchanged to motor carriers must be knowledgeable of and comply with the applicable requirements and specifications of this part.
(c) No motor carrier may operate a commercial motor vehicle, or cause or permit such vehicle to be operated, unless it is equipped in accordance with the requirements and specifications of this part.
(d) No intermodal equipment provider may operate intermodal equipment, or cause or permit such equipment to be operated, unless it is equipped in accordance with the requirements and specifications of this part.
(e) The rules in this part do not apply to “pipeline welding trucks” as defined in 49 CFR 390.38(b).
[70 FR 48025, Aug. 15, 2005, as amended at 73 FR 76823, Dec. 17, 2008; 81 FR 47721, July 22, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Maverick Transp., LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 739 F.3d 1149 (8th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 2× “See 49 C.F.R. § 393.1 (c) (prohibiting the operation of vehicles not equipped in accordance with the requirements of part 393); id.”
Benedict v. Hankook Tire Co. Ltd., 286 F. Supp. 3d 785 (E.D. Va. 2018).
“Second, as Benedict correctly argues, Defendants have not demonstrated when the cuts to the subject tire occurred, and without such a showing, they cannot establish that Benedict violated 49 C.F.R. § 393.75 .”
Beattie v. Lindelof, 633 N.E.2d 1227 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).
“” ( 49 C.F.R. § 393.1 (1992).) Thus, the administrative regulation does not create any duty on prior owners if a subsequent accident results.”
Hagan v. Gemstate Mfg., Inc., 939 P.2d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” 3 Under 49 CFR § 393.1 , the quoted rule and related ones directly govern the conduct of employers and employees who operate commercial motor vehicles.”
Moorehead v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. (N.D. Ga. 2021).
· cites it 2× “” 49 C.F.R. § 393.1 (c). Defendant argues the part containing the cargo securement provisions does not apply to it because Plaintiff was the commercial vehicle operator, McLane was the motor carrier, and Defendant was not involved in operating the trailer at all.”
United States v. Triska, 574 F. Supp. 2d 1208 (D. Kan. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See 49 C.F.R. § 393.1 . Under federal and Kansas law, the gross combination of weight rating (“GCWR”) is defined as “the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a combination (articulated) motor vehicle.”
Hu v. XPO Logistics, LLC (Cal. Ct. App. 2026).
“82 ), the rules governing how the vehicles used by “motor carrier[s]” must be equipped ( 49 C.F.R. § 393.1 - 393.209), the rules limiting the hours of service per day for drivers used by “motor carrier[s]” ( 49 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.