The bill adds a new certification requirement to title 10 (10 U.S.C. 2631b) that bars the Department of Defense from awarding surface-transportation contracts to any motor carrier, subcontractor, or owner-operator that fails to certify—after reasonable inquiry—that it is not owned by, controlled by, or engaged in significant business relationships with entities on the DoD-maintained list of Chinese military companies (and that it will require the same certification from its subcontractors). It mandates prime-contract flow‑down, five-year record retention, civil penalties for false statements under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and requires DoD to issue implementing regulations within 180 days.
Separately, the bill creates a Secure Defense Freight Carrier Registry in title 49 (new chapter 140) to be run by FMCSA in coordination with DoD. Inclusion requires FMCSA operating authority, compliance with DoD carrier qualification standards, enhanced vetting of ownership or business ties to foreign-adversary entities, TWIC‑comparable screening for drivers and personnel, and revetting at least every two years.
One year after enactment the bill bars carriers not on the registry from bidding on or performing DoD freight contracts unless the Secretary of Defense grants a waiver for exigent circumstances.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill inserts a new 10 U.S.C. section requiring all motor carriers, subcontractors, and owner-operators to certify they lack ownership, control, or significant business relationships with entities on DoD’s Chinese military companies list and to flow that requirement down the chain. It also establishes a FMCSA‑administered Secure Defense Freight Carrier Registry with enhanced national‑security vetting, mandatory periodic revetting, and a one‑year phase-in before non‑registered carriers can bid on DoD freight.
Who It Affects
Prime contractors, subcontracting carriers, owner‑operators, and lease operators that move Department of Defense freight; the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and DoD carrier‑approval offices; and logistics firms that depend on DoD freight contracts. Carriers with cross‑border or commercial ties to Chinese entities will face the highest compliance scrutiny.
Why It Matters
This is the first federal regime to combine a statutory DoD certification against Chinese military‑linked entities with a permanent registry that gates DoD trucking work. It shifts compliance risk onto the private carrier network, creates new recordkeeping and vetting obligations, and gives DoD and FMCSA a tool to exclude carriers on national‑security grounds.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Section 2 creates a new statutory certification (to be codified as 10 U.S.C. 2631b) that is mandatory for any motor carrier, subcontractor, or owner‑operator seeking to transport Department of Defense freight. The certification must state, after a reasonable inquiry, that the carrier is not owned or controlled by and does not maintain significant business relationships with entities on DoD’s Chinese military companies list.
The provision requires prime contractors to include the certification obligation in subcontracts and leases and to retain certification records for five years. It makes false certifications a basis for suspension or debarment and exposes the carrier to civil penalties under 18 U.S.C. 1001.
Section 2 also forces carriers to obtain the same certification from any subcontractor or owner‑operator they engage, converting what might otherwise be a voluntary compliance practice into a contract flow‑down requirement. The Secretary of Defense must issue regulations implementing this certification regime within 180 days; the statute leaves certain terms—most notably “significant business relationships”—to regulatory definition, which will shape the practical reach of the rule.Section 3 adds a new chapter to title 49 to create the Secure Defense Freight Carrier Registry.
FMCSA, working with DoD, must stand up the registry within one year. To qualify, carriers must hold FMCSA operating authority, meet DoD carrier qualification standards, pass enhanced vetting for ownership, control or business ties to entities on the DoD list and other foreign‑adversary entities that DoD designates, and verify that drivers and personnel with access to DoD freight meet security standards comparable to TWIC or similar federal programs.
Approved carriers will be subject to periodic revetting at least every two years.Once the registry is operational, the bill forbids carriers that are not listed from bidding on or performing Department of Defense freight contracts, subject to DoD waivers for exigent circumstances. The statute ties the registry into existing DoD carrier approval systems and directs FMCSA to create a streamlined application process, but the law leaves significant implementation questions—such as data collection, revetting procedures, and integration with DoD security vetting—to agency rulemaking.
Practically, carriers should expect new workflows for collecting upstream certifications, maintaining five‑year records, and preparing personnel for enhanced screening; DoD and FMCSA will need to scale administrative capacity to manage the registry and adjudicate waivers.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds 10 U.S.C. 2631b: any motor carrier, subcontractor, or owner‑operator must certify—after reasonable inquiry—that it has no ownership, control, or significant business relationships with entities on DoD’s Chinese military companies list.
DoD must issue implementation regulations for the certification requirement within 180 days of enactment; the statute defers the definition of “significant business relationships” to those regulations.
FMCSA must establish the Secure Defense Freight Carrier Registry within one year and only carriers included on the registry may bid on or perform DoD freight contracts after that one‑year mark, unless DoD grants a waiver for exigent circumstances.
Carriers must undergo enhanced national‑security vetting (including ownership and business‑relationship screening) and verify that drivers/personnel with access to DoD freight meet security standards comparable to TWIC; approved carriers must be revetted at least every two years.
Prime contractors must flow the certification requirement into subcontracts and leases, maintain certification records for at least five years, and knowingly false certifications expose carriers to suspension/debarment and penalties under 18 U.S.C. 1001.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Mandatory certification on ties to Chinese military companies
This provision makes a written certification a precondition for any DoD surface‑transportation award. It applies to prime contractors, subcontractors, and owner‑operators at all tiers and requires a ‘‘reasonable inquiry’’ standard—meaning carriers must perform some level of due diligence before signing. The practical effect is to convert DoD’s Chinese military companies list into a contract eligibility filter for trucking services.
What carriers must attest to and flow down
The certification must (1) attest no ownership/control or significant business relationships with entities on the DoD list created under section 1260H of the 2021 NDAA, and (2) commit that the carrier will obtain the same certification from any subcontractor or owner‑operator it engages. That flow‑down requirement shifts responsibility for vetting through subcontracting tiers and will require carriers to build procedures to collect and validate upstream attestations.
Record retention and enforcement tools
Prime contractors must insert the certification language into subcontracts and leases and retain certifications for at least five years. The bill makes false certifications a basis for suspension or debarment from DoD contracting and subject to penalties under 18 U.S.C. 1001, tying administrative exclusion to criminal‑statute penalties for false written statements. That combination raises exposure for carriers that sign attestations without adequate inquiry.
Secure Defense Freight Carrier Registry—establishment and schedule
FMCSA, in coordination with DoD, must create and maintain a registry of carriers approved to transport DoD freight within one year. The statute mandates a ‘‘streamlined’’ application process and coordination with existing DoD approval systems, but it leaves the design of application forms, background checks, and data sharing to agency implementation. The one‑year deadline creates a firm timetable for agencies but also compresses implementation work.
Eligibility, enhanced vetting, revetting, and bidding ban
To be eligible carriers must hold FMCSA operating authority, meet DoD’s carrier qualification standards, and pass enhanced vetting including screening for ownership or significant ties to entities on the DoD list or other foreign‑adversary entities designated by DoD. Drivers and personnel with freight access must meet security standards comparable to TWIC. Approved carriers must be revetted at least every two years. Starting one year after enactment, only registered carriers may bid on DoD freight contracts, although DoD can issue waivers for exigent circumstances.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Department of Defense — gains a statutory tool to screen and exclude carriers with links to entities DoD views as security risks, improving control over who handles sensitive freight.
- Carriers that pass vetting and join the registry — obtain an explicit market advantage for DoD freight because non‑registered carriers will be ineligible to bid, effectively locking in business for approved firms.
- Logistics integrators and prime contractors with robust compliance programs — reduce their downstream risk by shifting vetting obligations contractually and gaining clearer assurance that subcontractors meet DoD standards.
- Federal agencies (FMCSA and DoD carrier‑approval offices) — acquire clearer statutory authority and a centralized mechanism to manage security screening for surface freight carriers.
Who Bears the Cost
- Small owner‑operators and single‑truck carriers — face disproportionate compliance burdens from enhanced vetting, documentation collection, and periodic revetting, with limited capacity to absorb administrative costs.
- Carriers with commercial ties to Chinese entities — even routine commercial relationships may trigger exclusion or require complex remediation if DoD’s regulatory definition of “significant business relationships” is broad.
- Prime contractors — will incur administrative costs to collect, verify, and retain certifications from subcontractors for five years and to redesign procurement workflows to require registry membership.
- FMCSA and DoD — must devote staff and systems resources to build the registry, process applications and revetting, adjudicate waivers, and coordinate data sharing, which could require budgetary and IT investments.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between strengthening national‑security controls over who can handle DoD freight and avoiding disruption to a tightly coupled logistics market: imposing strict vetting and exclusion protects sensitive cargo but raises compliance costs, risks shrinking the eligible carrier pool (especially among small operators), and could create operational bottlenecks that undermine readiness unless agencies carefully calibrate definitions, vetting procedures, and waiver mechanisms.
The bill delegates several consequential definitions and processes to agency rulemaking, which means key operational boundaries will be set in regulations rather than statute. The most consequential open question is how DoD will define “significant business relationships”; a narrow definition would focus on material and equity ties, while a broad definition could sweep in routine commercial interactions (e.g., port services, equipment leases, maintenance contracts) and exclude otherwise compliant carriers.
Agencies will also have to design vetting that distinguishes true ownership/control from arms‑length commercial dealings across complex subcontracting chains.
Operationalizing enhanced personnel screening comparable to TWIC raises practical questions: how will drivers employed by small carriers, temporary drivers, or foreign drivers be screened; what privacy and data‑sharing protections will govern the vetting data; and how will the revetting cycle interact with labor mobility and driver turnover in the trucking industry? The bill creates strong enforcement tools—suspension/debarment and 18 U.S.C. 1001 penalties—but those tools may produce chilling effects where carriers sign certifications to keep contracts without the compliance systems to reliably confirm upstream attestations.
Finally, the registry's one‑year build and the ban on non‑registered bidders risk temporary capacity shortages if many carriers either fail vetting or opt out, forcing DoD to rely on the statutory waiver process for exigent circumstances.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.