Newsletters Contact Us

SONAR integrates GenLogs to enhance carrier capacity sourcing

SONAR has announced the integration of GenLogs into its Supply Chain Intelligence (SCI) platform. This strategic enhancement is set to equip shippers and logistics professionals with unprecedented visibility and actionable intelligence, ultimately transforming how they source and secure reliable carriers.

At the core of this integration is the enhanced “Find Capacity” button within SONAR’s SCI, which is now powered by GenLogs. This upgrade is designed to provide users with deeper insights into carriers, ensuring smarter and faster sourcing decisions. As logistics operations become increasingly complex and time-sensitive, having access to reliable and up-to-date carrier information can make the difference between securing business opportunities or falling short.

How the enhanced Find Capacity button works

The “Find Capacity” feature is engineered to streamline the process of locating and vetting carriers that have moved freight on specific lanes historically. Traditionally, carrier sourcing involved labor-intensive methods, such as consulting static directories, making numerous cold calls, or relying on partial databases that often led to incomplete or unreliable information. This integration replaces these outdated processes with a more refined, intelligence-driven approach powered by the GenLogs’ sensor and camera network deployed across the nation, identifying insights to carrier behavior.

Upon entering lane information, users gain immediate access to detailed carrier data, which includes:

Historical lane carriers: Identifies carriers that have previously transported freight on the user’s specified routes, allowing for refined carrier selection based on historical performance.

Carrier details at your fingertips: Offers comprehensive carrier information such as phone numbers, MC# (Motor Carrier number), broker authority status, total power units, and types of equipment. This level of detail ensures that shippers can reach out to carriers efficiently and with all necessary information.

Reliability and safety indicators: Provides key metrics such as Vehicle Out-of-Service (OOS) rates and Company Reliability scores. These indicators are crucial in assessing a carrier’s operational reliability and overall safety standards, thus aiding in the decision-making process.

The integration with GenLogs not only embeds historical data into the sourcing process but also ensures that users can perform an in-depth vetting of carriers based on their past and present credentials. This means quicker, more informed decisions about which carriers to employ without the hassle of extended verification processes.

The benefits of intelligent carrier sourcing

With the combined strengths of SONAR and GenLogs, users can transition from guesswork to intelligence-driven decision-making. By leveraging GenLogs’ extensive database, which includes freight intelligence on every carrier, shipper, and lane, logistics professionals can minimize the time spent chasing unqualified carriers and improve their sourcing efficiency.

Julie Van de Kamp, Chief Customer Officer at SONAR, said, “Finding the right carrier has always been a challenge, with fragmented data and limited visibility slowing down decision-making. By integrating GenLogs, we’re giving our users a smarter, faster way to identify carriers with proven lane history, helping them make decisions with confidence and precision.”

“The partnership of SONAR and GenLogs marks a transformative step forward,” said Ryan Joyce, Chief Executive Officer at GenLogs. “By combining SONAR’s SCI capabilities with GenLogs’ Carrier Intelligence insights, we’re empowering our customers to unlock unprecedented value and visibility across their supply chains.”

A competitive edge in freight markets

The integration represents a significant leap forward in supply chain intelligence, positioning SONAR users to gain a competitive edge in the freight market. The enhanced Find Capacity feature not only reduces the likelihood of engaging with unqualified carriers but also fortifies customer relationships through reliable service delivery.

By turning fragmented intelligence into actionable insights, SONAR’s collaboration with GenLogs ensures that users remain agile in a rapidly-evolving market, where speed and precision are critical to success. 

As logistics continues to evolve, SONAR’s enhanced capabilities, powered by GenLogs, mark a major step forward in optimizing supply chain operations and ensuring that shippers can meet demands efficiently, securely, and with the assurance of data-backed decisions. For more information, visit gosonar.com.

Federal government fires back in court over California waiver cancellation

The U.S. government has filed its response to California’s claim that Congress was legally out of line when it yanked waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that permitted various transportation-related emission policies in that state, as the two parties head toward an October 30 court hearing.

Last week’s filing by attorneys for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) came as part of a motion for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to dismiss the case brought by California and several other states that was filed in June, challenging the Congressional action.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

That suit challenged the Congressional vote, later signed by President Trump, that overrode three waivers granted by the EPA to the California Air Resources Board allowing the implementation of California’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule, the Omnibus NOx (nitrogen oxide) rule and Clean Cars II.

At its core, California’s argument is that waivers are not subject to the Congressional Review Act, which Congress used to override the waivers. 

Waiver requests by California over the years have not normally been submitted by the EPA to Congress for review. 

But EPA administrator Lee Zeldin put the waivers through to Congress–even though they already had been granted under the Biden administration without such submissions–resulting in the vote taken under the CRA to deny them. 

Waivers equal rules or maybe not

The request for dismissal of the case filed by the DOJ is focused on procedure. There are numerous references to whether the waivers are “rules” as defined under the CRA, or whether they are in a separate category not covered by that legislation. 

One argument made by the DOJ is that the actions of Congress under the CRA are not reviewable in court. “The CRA expressly precludes review,” the DOJ brief says, quoting from the CRA itself: “No determination, finding, action, or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.” 

“That jurisdiction-stripping provision disposes of this case in full,” the DOJ adds.

Congressional prerogatives also are not reviewable, the DOJ said. Citing a precedent, the government argues that “Congress, after all, is the exclusive judge of its own legislative procedures as a matter of constitutional prerogative.”

And as to whether the waivers granted by the EPA are waivers or rules, tDOJ argues that it isn’t relevant. 

“At least for purposes of this lawsuit, it makes no difference whether the waivers are best categorized as ‘rules’ or ‘orders’ within the meaning of the CRA,” the DOH said. “Either way, they have now been invalidated by Congress.”

In a discussion of whether the power to grant waivers was correctly delegated to the EPA, the DOJ argues that Congress had never given up its ultimate power. “Congress directly shouldered legislative power and responsibility by voting on whether to abrogate the waivers,” the DOJ says in its filing. “That is the antithesis of a nondelegation problem.”

No love for the parliamentarian

A key argument made by California is that the Senate parliamentarian and the General Accounting Office both offered opinions that the waivers were not subject to Congressional review. 

But the DOJ argument essentially gives the parliamentarian the back of its hand. Noting that the California lawsuit uses the word parliamentarian 113 times in its complaint, the DOJ diminishes the role of that office. “The Senate parliamentarian is not mentioned in the Constitution, and thus does not have the last word on Senate procedure—the Senate does,” the DOJ said.

Even if the EPA had not submitted the waivers for review, the DOJ argues the Congress could have taken the identical steps it did in overturning them. “Nor, for that matter, does EPA have any constitutional role in the enactment of legislation,” the DOJ brief says. “Congress could have passed laws disapproving of these waivers without any involvement from EPA, or by explicitly disagreeing with EPA’s interpretation of the CRA.” It adds that Congress does that “routinely.”

California has not withdrawn the now waiverless rules in the wake of the Congressional action. After the CRA vote, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) did make minor amendments to the Advanced Clean Truck program. The changes mostly redefine various methods for generating the credits that under the ACT would allow a company to reach the regulatory milestones needed to comply with the law.

The ACT is a series of standards going out roughly 20 years by which OEMs would need to sell an increasing percentage of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) into the state. 

Making the California dispute with the federal government more complicated are the number of other states that have vowed to follow California’s lead. Ten of them are plaintiffs with the Golden State in their lawsuit against the federal government.

Clean Truck Rule dispute operating in parallel

Keeping the litigation related to the waiver rescission straight without a scorecard can be challenging. 

The other California-based lawsuit tied to the Congressional action on the ACT will impact the future of the Clean Truck Partnership. 

That deal between California and several truck OEMs saw California easing up on some regulations, including the NOx rule under the Omnibus NOx rule, in exchange for OEM agreement on other parts of the ACT and a pledge not to challenge them in court.

Now tethered to that deal, the OEMs see a mandate to sell an increasing number of ZEV vehicles into markets that for now and maybe into the future will have no mechanism to compel those purchases absent the ACT..

The lawsuit filed by the OEMs, with Daimler North America as the lead plaintiff, seeks to extricate the equipment makers from the deal they signed because of the potential demise in the ACT that underpinned the pact. It is a situation they have called “impossible.”

The latest development in that case, which is in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, is that the OEMs are asking the court to expedite a hearing to October 17 on their motion to stop CARB from enforcing any aspect of the ACT.

The federal government is seeking to be an intervenor in that case on behalf of the OEM plaintiffs.

More articles by John Kingston

Shipping challenges on the rain-starved Mississippi…again

XPO’s rating at Moody’s held steady but outlook is now ‘positive’

Teamsters grows influence in Amazon’s food network via UNFI success

Intermodal leads weekly U.S. rail traffic decline

Rail traffic in the United States declined 2.2% in the week ending Sept. 20 compared with the same week a year ago, the Association of American Railroads reported.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

Total carloads were down 1.8% compared with the same week in 2024, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was down 2.5% compared to 2024.
Two of the 10 carload commodity groups, grain and metallic ores and metals, posted an increase compared with the same week in 2024. Commodity groups that posted decreases included coal; miscellaneous carloads; and nonmetallic minerals.

For the first 38 weeks of 2025, U.S. railroads reported cumulative volume of 8,423,372 carloads, up 2.2%, and 10,289,962 intermodal units, up 3.6% from last year. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 38 weeks of 2025 was 18,713,334 carloads and intermodal units, an increase of 3% y/y.

North American rail volume for the week ending Sept. 20 on nine reporting U.S., Canadian and Mexican railroads totaled 330,479 carloads, down 2.6% compared with year-ago week, and 366,778 intermodal units, down 1.2%. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 697,257 carloads and intermodal units, down 1.8%. North American rail volume for the first 38 weeks of 2025 was up 2.4% compared with 2024.

Canadian carloads were down 2.8% for the week, while intermodal volume increased 4.2%. For the first 38 weeks of 2025, Canadian railroads reported cumulative rail traffic volume was up 2.1%.

Mexican railroads reported 11,954 carloads for the week, down 13.1% compared with the same week last year, and 12,006 intermodal units, down 0.2%. Cumulative volume on Mexican railroads for the first 38 weeks of 2025 was 894,870 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, down 7.5% y/y.

Subscribe to FreightWaves’ Rail e-newsletter and get the latest insights on rail freight right in your inbox.

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Rail merger: Lifetime job is great “until you are stuck in it”

Biggest rail union backs UP-NS merger after railroads guarantee job protections

Trump: Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern merger “sounds good to me”

First new Utah railroad in a century opens

NTSB to Feds: Require truck-driver monitoring

Accident warning diamond on roadway.

WASHINGTON — The National Transportation Safety Board is recommending that trucks over 10,000 lbs. be required to come equipped with driver monitoring systems following a report determining that a trucker’s inattention led to a crash that killed six people in 2023.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

The crash occurred when a Freightliner truck operated by a driver employed by Mid-State Systems, Inc. traveling on westbound I-70 near Etna, Ohio, failed to slow for a line of traffic caused by an earlier crash.

Damage to motorcoach bus involved in fatal crash. Source: NTSB

The collision into the rear of the queue triggered a chain-reaction collision and fire that spread to the other vehicles, according to the report, killing three school children on a bus and three people in a passenger vehicle. More than 40 others were injured.

“We’ve seen this crash scenario far too often – and it’s preventable,” said NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy in a statement.

“Proven technologies can warn drivers of slowed traffic and prevent collisions before they happen. What’s needed are stronger vehicle safety standards, better traffic incident management and swift action on our recommendations. Lives depend on it.”

In addition to recommending that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration require driving monitoring systems in trucks, NTSB reiterated a previous but unfulfilled recommendation to NHTSA that the regulator develop and apply, as soon as possible, “performance standards and protocols for the assessment of forward collision avoidance systems in commercial vehicles.”

Red flags at roadside

According to NTSB’s report, the 60-year-old male truck driver had been subject to three roadside inspections while employed with Mid-State Systems:

  • March 2021: Inspector cited numerous issues with his truck’s brake system and placed the vehicle out of service.
  • March 2022: The driver was stopped for driving 75 mph in a 60-mph zone. The inspection report noted that the driver had his mobile phone open and that a video game was loaded and visible. The driver denied that he was using the game application while driving.
  • May 2022: His truck was observed swerving left and right out of its lane. The inspection discovered that three days previous the driver had exceeded the daily 14-hour driving window hours-of-service rule by one hour.

Between 2003 and 2022, records also reveal that the truck driver had nine traffic violations (while driving both commercial and noncommercial vehicles) that included speeding, following too closely, and failing to obey traffic signs.

His most recent medical examination showed he was being treated for diabetes, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol.

Alerts to ATA, OOIDA

NTSB also recommended that the American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association inform their members about the safety benefits of collision warning, automatic emergency braking, and driver monitoring systems, as well as the risks involved in opting out of purchasing such systems when offered by manufacturers.

Click for more FreightWaves articles by John Gallagher.

Regulators target crooked freight brokers

Truck on road painted 'fraud'

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are taking steps to improve response times to complaints filed by truckers, carriers, and brokers with particular attention paid to addressing broker fraud.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

“This overdue tech upgrade is a win for drivers, carriers, and the driving public,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy in a Wednesday news release announcing the changes.

“The modernized database will make it easier to file complaints, access digital tools, and empower individuals to speak up about unsafe practices. With your support, we will continue to take bad actors off the roads to keep the American people safe.”

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s National Consumer Complaint Database (NCCDB) is considered by DOT to be the primary online portal for drivers as well as consumers to report violations related to safety, fraud, and household goods moves. The NCCDB receives 25,000 to 30,000 complaints annually, according to DOT.

In addition to streamlining FMCSA’s complaint filing and response process, the upgrade “will expand reporting categories to include, for the first time, complaints against property brokers,” the administration stated.

Examples provided in the database of complaints against property brokers include:

  • Broker misrepresented their operations to you as a carrier or conducted improper rebating or compensation practices.
  • Broker performed, or offered to perform, brokerage services (including advertising) in a name other than a name to which its registration is issued.
  • Broker is operating without required interstate operating authority, insurance, or registration.
  • Broker did not maintain transaction records or financial accounts with the required information.

Drivers, brokers welcome change

The initial changes are part of “phase one” of the database overhaul that truckers – as well as brokers – have been seeking for years.

“[FMCSA’s database] wasn’t protecting drivers. It failed to address coercion, freight fraud, and broker abuse,” said OOIDA President Todd Spencer in a statement.

“The updated system will be easier to use on the road, faster to process complaints, and expanded to cover brokers – while also ensuring enforcement when bad actors break the law. These improvements are long overdue, but they represent an important step toward giving truckers a tool that truly works for them.”

Chris Burroughs, president of the Transportation Intermediaries Association, which lobbies on behalf of freight brokers, underscored the “tens of thousands” of complaints logged into the system alleging freight fraud and unlawful brokerage activities.

“While this modernization is necessary to relieve industry concerns of motor carriers and brokers, enforcement of the violations will be key,” Burroughs told FreightWaves.

DOT said the next phase of the NCCDB upgrade will include giving it a new name, which is expected to be more trucking-centric – something OOIDA has pushed for.

“Renaming the database to better reflect its purpose will further strengthen communication between FMCSA and the drivers it regulates,” Spencer said.

Click for more FreightWaves articles by John Gallagher.

Rail merger: Lifetime job is great “until you are stuck in it”

Union Pacific this week traded job protections for the backing by its largest union of its proposed takeover of Norfolk Southern.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

The largest western railroad (NYSE: UNP) said that every member of the SMART-TD (Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers—Transportation Division), union holding a job at the time of the merger will have career-long positions if and when the blockbuster rail deal is approved by federal authorities.

The tie-up would create a transcontinental freight rail colossus with more than 50,000 employees operating 52,000 miles of track in 43 states. About 80% of those workers are unionized.

The current networks are far-flung, unmerged: You could work for Norfolk Southern (NYSE: NSC) and live in Des Moines, Iowa, more than 900 miles from company headquarters in Atlanta. 

That could be problematic as far as job guarantees are concerned, since a railroad typically assigns an employee just about anywhere on its system, particularly if that person, such as SMART-TD train crew and yardmasters, is lower down on the seniority list.

Some observers said the union employment agreement might not be all it seems. 

Absent the details, “[T]he headlines have read like the Burlington Northern agreements signed before 1970 to get labor’s support for the Great Northern/Northern Pacific/Chicago, Burlington & Quincy/Spokane, Portland & Seattle merger into BN,” wrote consultant Kal Silverberg, in a LinkedIn post.

“The problem was that merger-related traffic shifts, along with normal traffic fluctuation, led to differing labor demand for different segments — some higher, some lower. And thus, labor costs did not reach the prospective [merger] savings,” said Silverberg, who worked almost three decades at BN and then BNSF.

“The actions BN later took to reduce and restructure the personnel costs became infamous in the industry,” he wrote. “Bottom line, while there is now a model for labor peace with this merger, the consolidation will probably be more painful for many as the changes work around the guarantees.”

Union Pacific in a recent proxy filing estimates $1 billion in annual cost savings from the merger, and projected $2.75 billion total savings including revenue growth and efficiency improvements.

“[The] BN “Orange Book” protection was too often a ticket to misery by those that got stuck not being able to leave their union job/position because they could not risk losing the protection,” wrote consultant Jim Titsworth, a principal at Summit Rail Advisors who worked 29 years at BNSF, also on LinkedIn. “For many others, it was an invitation to the “rubber room” where they had to report to work but were required to sit in a room with nothing to do. Lifetime protection also tended to stop people’s drive to improve, which ruined many good people.

“A job for life sounds great, until you are stuck in it.” 

Subscribe to FreightWaves’ Rail e-newsletter and get the latest insights on rail freight right in your inbox.

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Biggest rail union backs UP-NS merger after railroads guarantee job protections

Trump: Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern merger “sounds good to me”

First new Utah railroad in a century opens

Chemicals, autos lead as rail freight bests year-ago traffic

How to use AI workflows with your freight tech

The transportation industry finds itself at a pivotal moment where generative artificial intelligence (AI) holds immense promise for operational transformation, yet many logistics companies remain uncertain about how to effectively harness these emerging technologies. Rather than viewing AI as a wholesale replacement for existing infrastructure, the most successful organizations are discovering its true value lies in enhancing and optimizing their current freight technology systems and processes.

The enhancement approach to AI integration

Modern logistics operations rely heavily on established transportation management systems, visibility platforms, and carrier onboarding processes that have proven their worth over years of refinement. AI should not be seen as a threat to these foundational systems but rather as a powerful augmentation layer that can address specific operational challenges while preserving existing investments.

“AI is not a standalone replacement—it augments core freight technology platforms,” said Michael Hane, Director, Product Marketing, Transportation Management at Descartes. 

This integration philosophy allows companies to maintain their proven workflows while systematically addressing bottlenecks that have long plagued logistics operations.

When implemented thoughtfully, AI can transform how transportation management systems handle routine communications, dramatically reducing the manual data entry that consumes valuable staff time and introduces human error. Visibility tools gain enhanced predictive capabilities, offering more accurate estimated time of arrivals and better exception management, as well as reducing manual tasks like check-calls, and fixing data errors. Carrier onboarding systems can process documentation with unprecedented speed and accuracy, streamlining what has traditionally been a labor-intensive process.

Strategic prioritization in a crowded market

The explosion of AI solutions flooding the logistics market creates both opportunity and confusion. New tools emerge daily, each promising revolutionary improvements, making it increasingly difficult for companies to identify which technologies deserve investment and attention.

Hane advocates for a disciplined approach to this challenge.

“Logistics companies should start with AI applications that solve clear pain points in their current workflows rather than chasing every shiny new AI tool,” he said.

This methodology focuses on identifying manual, repetitive tasks where automation can deliver immediate, measurable benefits.

Communication workflows represent particularly fertile ground for AI implementation. Automating routine exchanges with customers and suppliers immediately frees staff to focus on higher-value activities while reducing the errors that inevitably creep into manual processes. Similarly, tasks like order entry, tracking updates, and basic customer service inquiries can benefit from AI assistance without requiring complete system overhauls.

Companies should also consider leveraging their existing vendor relationships when exploring AI capabilities. Working with current technology providers who are developing AI roadmaps offers several advantages: established support structures, proven implementation methodologies, and deeper understanding of existing workflows. As AI continues to mature and specialize, having tightly integrated roadmaps between management systems and AI capabilities becomes increasingly valuable.

Overcoming implementation challenges

Integrating AI into mature technology stacks presents unique obstacles that require careful navigation. The sheer volume of AI startups and marketing noise makes it challenging to identify vendors with genuine transportation industry expertise and staying power.

“A great place to start is by leveraging your existing relationships with your current technology providers to understand their AI strategy, discuss your pain points, and develop solutions that will work for your business,” Hane said.

Established vendors typically offer mature customer support and battle-tested implementation services that new market entrants cannot match. Moreover, these providers already understand existing systems and operational nuances, reducing implementation risks.

Internal resistance represents another significant hurdle. Team members who have refined manual processes over years may be skeptical of AI-driven changes, particularly if they feel excluded from the implementation process. Early involvement of operational staff ensures workflows are accurately mapped and builds confidence in AI systems. When employees understand how AI tools function and trust their outputs, they are far less likely to second-guess results or perform unnecessary manual verification.

Technical integration challenges also require attention. Legacy systems may need modifications to accommodate AI workflows, and data quality issues that were manageable with manual processes can become magnified when automation is involved. Successful implementations typically involve thorough data auditing and cleanup before AI deployment.

Measuring return on investment (ROI)

Calculating ROI for AI implementations follows the same fundamental principles as other technology investments, but requires careful selection of appropriate metrics and establishment of clear baselines before deployment begins.

For labor productivity improvements, relevant Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) include loads managed per employee, order entry error rates, loads with perfect tracking, customer satisfaction scores, and freight invoice discrepancies. Freight brokerages often find value in tracking digital freight coverage percentage, measuring the volume of shipments that enter electronically and get automatically covered and completed without human intervention.

The key to accurate ROI measurement lies in establishing comprehensive baselines before AI implementation begins. This preparation enables precise tracking of improvements across labor savings, operational costs, penalty reductions, and customer service enhancements. Without these baselines, companies struggle to quantify AI’s actual impact on their operations.

Companies should also consider qualitative benefits that may be harder to measure but contribute significantly to overall value. Improved employee satisfaction from eliminating tedious tasks, enhanced customer experience through faster response times, and increased operational resilience through reduced dependence on manual processes all contribute to long-term business value.

Building a strategic AI adoption framework

Avoiding the pitfalls of technological hype cycles requires maintaining a problem-focused rather than technology-focused approach to AI adoption. This discipline begins with an honest assessment of operational bottlenecks and evaluation of solutions that specifically address identified pain points.

“Companies should begin by identifying real operational needs or bottlenecks and then evaluate solutions that specifically address those areas,” noted Hane. “This ensures AI adoption is driven by the value you deliver to your customers, employees, and other stakeholders, not by fear of missing out on the latest trend.”

Strategic adoption also involves careful partner selection. Working with established technology providers who understand transportation industry dynamics provides stability and expertise that startup vendors often cannot match. When AI capabilities are built into or tightly integrated with proven execution systems, they align more naturally with operational needs and benefit from ongoing updates and support from experienced teams. 

According to Descartes’ recent transportation management benchmark survey of over 600 companies, an overwhelming 96% of overall respondents indicated they have adopted generative AI and are using it within their operations

Successful AI adoption requires thorough upfront work to map existing workflows and identify optimal integration points. This investment pays dividends by ensuring AI solutions complement rather than disrupt established processes that already deliver value.

The path forward

As AI continues reshaping the logistics landscape, the most successful implementations will be those that enhance rather than replace existing freight technology infrastructure. By maintaining focus on specific operational challenges, measuring concrete results, and partnering with established technology providers, transportation companies can navigate the AI revolution while delivering tangible benefits to their operations.

The future of freight technology is not about choosing between established systems and AI capabilities but about thoughtfully integrating these powerful new tools into the workflows that drive logistics excellence. Companies that approach AI adoption with strategic discipline, clear metrics, and strong partnerships will be best positioned to capture its transformative potential while avoiding the disruption that comes with chasing every technological trend.

Click here to learn more about Descartes.

Tariffs torching U.S. container imports: Analyst

Containerized imports through American ports are set to take an historic plunge in September, an analyst predicts, as President Donald Trump’s China tariffs take a toll on the busiest trans-Pacific trade route.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

Inbound volumes through the top 10 U.S. ports in August finished 0.1% ahead of the same month in 2024, said analyst John McCown in a monthly report, after July volume that was 3.2% ahead, fueled by importers bringing in shipments earlier than usual to beat an August 7 deadline for a renewal of reciprocal tariffs.

Trump in August announced yet another 90-day pause in the chaotic China trade war, which will now run into November. But frontloading by anxious shippers during the previous tariff break soaked up most eastbound volumes moving in the peak season, while economic uncertainty and tariff-stoked inflation has undercut demand as shown by weaker container rates on the eastbound trans-Pacific. 

More concerning, said McCown, is that all indicators bode ill for U.S. container traffic in September and through the remainder of the year. 

“When U.S. container volume data is compared to global data,” McCown said, “there is a noticeable and widening gap as the downtrends in U.S. lanes are being significantly mitigated by increased volume in other areas.”  

Container exports from the Far East were ahead 6.3% y/y as July set a new record, according to Container Trade Statistics, which collects data directly from ocean carriers. 

In contrast, McCown said that without the spike from frontloading, the U.S. would have seen a drop in y/y volume in July “at least as high as the Far East’s positive number.”

“The U.S. is a less relevant player in world trade today than it was prior to these various tariff initiatives and will become moreso as announced plans are implemented,” McCown said.

U.S. import volumes grew 15.2% in 2024, a reliable engine that has usually outpaced growth in gross domestic product (GDP), but McCown now expects that the U.S. will show a year-over-year decline in inbound container volume.

He quoted a revised forecast by the National Retail Federation that shows import volumes falling 3.4% for the year.

“That translates into the remaining four months of 2025 being down 15.7% compared to the same four months in 2024,” said McCown. 

The Port of Los Angeles expects inbound volumes to fall 10% in September y/y; McCown agrees that the busiest U.S. container port will see a double-digit decline for the month.

China remains by far the largest inbound container trade lane for the U.S., accounting for 29.3% of the total in May, but down from a historic peak of 40%.

Moreover, bookings for containers moving from China to the U.S. the first week of September were down 26% from the same week a year ago. Backhaul moves westbound to China were off by 18% despite the latest tariff pause. 

“If and when those tariffs are implemented, it is highly likely they would lead to broader declines” in the China-U.S. trade, McCown said, and retaliatory tariffs by China would impact volumes in both directions.

A year-on-year decline in inbound volume is a rarity in the more than six decades of container shipping, McCown noted, matched only by drops during the 2009 financial crisis and the pandemic, which were short-lived. Imports have reliably grown at a rate two, three or more times that of of the GDP. “The downward turn will be due solely to tariffs and unfortunately, there is nothing at present that suggests it will be short-lived,” McCown said. 

Find more articles by Stuart Chirls here.

Related coverage:

Maersk: No China ship surcharge; Seaspan to reflag 100 vessels

Panel: Jones Act a dire economic ‘burden’ for Hawaii

LA port sees 10% import drop through year-end

Dwell down for LA-Long Beach container trucks, rail

Truckload earnings estimates cut heading into Q3 reports

Two white sleeper cabs pulling dry van trailers on a highway

Susquehanna Financial Group cut earnings estimates for asset-based truckload carriers by mid-single- to low-double-digit percentages ahead of the third-quarter earnings season. Analyst Bascome Majors made similar reductions for the fourth quarter as volumes, spot rates and tender rejections remain soft, and the outlook for peak season is muted.

Join the leaders shaping freight’s future at
F3: Future of Freight Festival, Oct 21-22.
Network with the industry’s best and discover what’s next.

Register now!

“With 2026 now just three months away and our view that the truckload market is (again) unlikely to see the upward price and margin momentum we’ve been hoping for near term, we’re cutting our forecasts for most truckload-related names and are below 2026 consensus EPS for every company but CHRW [C.H. Robinson],” Majors told clients in a Wednesday report.

Third-quarter earnings-per-share estimates were cut by 12% and 11% for Schneider National (NYSE: SNDR) and Werner Enterprises (NASDAQ: WERN), respectively. Numbers were trimmed by just 6% for J.B. Hunt Transport Services (NASDAQ: JBHT) and 5% for Knight-Swift Transportation (NYSE: KNX).

(Majors’ new estimates sit 46% below the current consensus outlook for Werner, 14% below for Schneider, and only 3% below for J.B. Hunt and Knight-Swift.)

“As 3Q comes to a close, our sense is the 3Q supply-chain snap-back was modest in TL, just as TL-related transports avoided the worst post-‘Liberation Day’ scenarios in 2Q,” Majors said.

He believes July was the peak for container imports and noted concerns around consumer spending through the holiday season. “Until macroeconomic conditions and trade policy become more certain, a cyclical inflection is lacking a key demand catalyst,” he added.

SONAR: The Contract Load Accepted Volume Index for 2025 (blue shaded area) and 2024 (green line). The Contract Load Accepted Volume Index measures accepted load volumes moving under contractual agreements. It excludes all rejected tenders. To learn more about SONAR, click here.

Majors flagged the potential for mid- to high-single-digit declines to spot rates (excluding fuel) in the fourth quarter if subseasonal trends continue.

SONAR: National Truckload Index (linehaul only – NTIL) for 2025 (blue shaded area), 2024 (green line) and 2023 (pink line). The NTIL is based on an average of booked spot dry van loads from 250,000 lanes. The NTIL is a seven-day moving average of linehaul spot rates excluding fuel. Spot rates are just slightly ahead of year-ago levels.

Fourth-quarter numbers were cut by high-single digits, with Werner seeing a 16% reduction. Flow through from the 2025 estimate revisions pulled down 2026 numbers between 9% and 17%.

However, Majors sounded more constructive about next year as “truckload’s supply side is entering a period of more rapid rationalization into 2026.” He said “falling Class 8 truck orders” and no “pre-buy ahead of emissions regulation changes” would likely spur net fleet reductions across the industry.

SONAR: Outbound Tender Reject Index for 2025 (blue shaded area), 2024 (green line) and 2023 (pink line). A proxy for truck capacity, the Outbound Tender Reject Index shows the number of loads being rejected by carriers. Current tender rejections are outperforming prior-year levels but still not signaling a recovery.

Knight-Swift’s rating was cut to “neutral” on the lower EPS outlook. The valuation multiple was unchanged, resulting in a new share price target of $43 (down from $52).

“To be clear, we continue to see KNX as the best managed, best positioned, and most attractively valued asset-based truckload, as indicated by our positive expected return to target price vs. downside implied for SNDR and WERN,” Majors said. “But a prolonged cyclical turn has a notable dampening effect on KNX’s earnings power just like the rest of the industry.”

He held estimates largely steady and below consensus for the asset-light brokers he follows. C.H. Robinson’s (NASDAQ: CHRW) price target was raised to $160 (from $125) as the company is in the “sweet spot of its lean-enabled/A.I.-supported transformation.”

The third-quarter TL earnings season begins on Oct. 15 when J.B. Hunt reports.

More FreightWaves articles by Todd Maiden:

HOS Changes Coming? One Way It Can Impact Small Carriers’ Profitability

If you’re an owner-operator or running a small fleet, you’ve probably heard the rumblings: Washington may loosen up some HOS restrictions. The proposed pilot programs, under review, could give more flexibility in driving and rest requirements. Sounds promising — but like everything in trucking, the devil is in the details.

This isn’t about being for or against HOS reform. It’s about knowing how upcoming changes could affect your bottom line — both the wins and the risks. Let’s walk through what this means, with examples, so you can see if these changes would help you.

What Are They Proposing?

From what’s public so far, the Department of Transportation is exploring pilot programs that might allow:

  • More flexible break/rest times
  • Possibility of splitting driving windows or rest periods differently
  • Adjustments so that certain portions of required rest or breaks can be done “off duty” in safer or more convenient locations
  • Expanded windows for adverse weather or unexpected delays

The idea is to give drivers more control over how they use their on-duty hours, reduce “wasted” wait times, and make some routes more efficient under the constraint of HOS.

How It Could Be a Win for Owner-Operators

Here are scenarios where this could push you into higher profit margins — by the mile or by the load.

Example 1: Less Downtime, More Revenue

Current Rule: You drive your 11-hour limit, hit the clock, then mandatory rest. Sometimes you wait at a rest area or stuck in traffic before resets begin.

With Flex Option: Suppose you can shift part of your mandatory rest to off-duty in a more flexible way, or get partial rest credit when waiting in safer locations, even if they don’t meet every current spec. You lose less drive time.

  • If you by today lose 1 hour/week waiting for resets or breaks, that’s ~52 hours/year. At 60 mph average, that’s 3,120 “lost” miles.
  • If your average load pays $2.10/mile, that’s about $6,552 a year you never saw.

Even with fuel and wear, that could net you $4,500–$5,500/year more just by trimming wait time.

Example 2: Adverse Climate/Weather Delays

Bad weather, snow, ice, accidents, traffic delays often eat into your driving window. If the pilot allows you to push further or shift rest without losing legal compliance because of delays, you could salvage trips that would otherwise force you off the road.

Imagine:

  • You’re running a lane that in good conditions takes 660 miles and 11 hours drive time + required rest. A snowstorm slows you. Under old rules you may lose 2–3 hours waiting, then rest, then finish.
  • Under a flexible pilot, some of that “waiting” time might count differently (either off-duty or rest credit), letting you finish more miles on that route instead of getting stuck short and needing to relay loads.

That’s added miles + added pay.

Example 3: Strategic Route Selection

If you understand the rules well, you could pick loads that under current HOS give you tight margins, but with the flexibility you could run them more efficiently.

For instance:

  • A load that’s 10 hours driving + 2 hours load/unload + 1 hour travel to rest area = 13 total hours. Normally you’d need to stop. If you can squeeze smaller rest windows, you might finish more of that trip in a day or be strategic where you rest so that the next day starts closer to the pick instead of starting miles that day.

How It Could Hurt or Create Risks

Change always carries risk. Here are the downsides owner-operators must understand:

Negative 1: Misreading the New Rules

If you assume more flexibility and overdrive (literally), you risk FMCSA violations. If your logs, ELD data, or rest records don’t match what’s legally allowed under the pilot, you’re vulnerable. Fines, audits, or safety violations follow.

Negative 2: More Pressure, More Work

With more opportunity comes more expectation. Brokers or carriers may push you to run harder, accept tighter windows, fewer rest opportunities, more discretionary time that now has fewer constraints. That can mean more stress, less sleep, more fatigue — which can reduce safety and increase long‑term costs (repairs, insurance, health).

Negative 3: Inconsistent Application Across States

Even if the pilot is federal, states may interpret or enforce differently. Local law enforcement, safety inspectors, or DOT checkers might still expect old-style compliance. You might get flagged during inspections because they aren’t aware of or accepting the pilot changes.

Negative 4: Impact on Resale, Insurance, and Liability

If you’re one of the early adopters of flexible HOS, your insurance, broker contracts, or customer expectations might not align, opening you to liability risk.

Resale value could also be impacted if your maintenance shows high utilization or high usage (more miles, more wear) without corresponding service history. In theory, one can expect to see higher equipment miles in correlation to the change. 

Balanced Example: How One Lane Might Change

Let’s take a real-world style example:

You run a 2‑day run with 8 stops from the Midwest to the Southeast (using multi-stop as a stress test with the flexibility in mind):

  • Day 1: 600 miles, 8 stops. You drive 10 hours, run into bad weather, lose 2 hours. Then mandatory rest.
  • Day 2: Finish remaining 5 stops + backhaul leg 150 miles.

Under Current HOS:

  • Total legal drive hours = limited to 11 hours/day
  • Lost time in traffic + weather = unproductive but counted as on‑duty
  • You might have to stop earlier and start day two further from location → more deadhead + lower pay

With Flexible HOS (Pilot):

  • Some waiting hours count as rest or off-duty in certain conditions
  • More flexible break windows let you adjust stops to keep driving more
  • Better ability to schedule rest at safer, closer locations
  • Result: possibly finish route earlier, log more miles, improve $/mile, reduce deadhead

If pay is $2.15/mile, adding just 50 extra legal driving miles per run because of better flexibility = $107.50 per trip. Over 2 trips per week, that can really add up to more money in your pocket.

FAQs

Q: When will these HOS flexibility pilots start and where do they apply?

A: As of the latest reports, DOT is soliciting comments from the industry. Exact dates are not finalized. Expect pilot regions or carriers to be selected first. It may roll out regionally before nationwide adoption.

Q: Can I voluntarily follow the pilot rules now?

A: Not unless you’re officially selected. Until pilots are approved and you’re assigned, you must continue following existing federal HOS and your company policy. Using pilot‑style rest flexibility without legal coverage could cost you in violation.

Q: Will pay rates go up if I can run more hours or more efficiently?

A: Possibly. Brokers might value carriers who can deliver more reliably in challenging lanes and offer better pay per mile. But increased opportunity depends on your equipment, your ability to deliver safely, and your reliability.

Q: Could insurance or liability increase because of more driving hours?

A: Possibly but not guaranteed. More hours, more exposure. If you’re pushing the limits, wreck risks, fatigue, maintenance wear all increase. Make sure your insurance covers changes. Keep excellent maintenance and safety records because that’s what you’ll lean on.

Q: What if I run food service or refrigerated loads with tight appointment times and detention is always an issue?

A: These are exactly the types of operations that could benefit significantly from flexibility — if the rules allow considering loading, unloading delays, backed‑up docks, temperature issues (pre-cool issues, etc). But only if those delays are legally recognized rest or off‑duty under the pilot.

Final Thoughts

Change is coming. Maybe quietly, maybe slowly, maybe with bumps. But if the proposed HOS flexibility pilot programs pass down the road, they could shift how small carriers operate, run loads, and make money.

The upside is real: more miles, fewer forced downtime gaps, and better alignment between actual driving reality and regulation.

Whatever happens, the best choice is to watch closely, plan now, and keep your truck in motion.