Update: On Friday, September 25, after receiving thousands of negative comments on the regulatory proposal, Pennsylvania Secretary of Health Debra Bogen notified lawmakers that the Department is withdrawing the proposed rulemaking and "intends to make further revisions" and resubmit it at a later date.

The Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association has raised concerns about proposed Pennsylvania Department of Health regulations that would significantly expand the Department’s authority to impose disease-control measures and conduct public health investigations.

In formal comments submitted to the Department on Monday, September 21, PMTA said the proposed changes to 28 Pa. Code Chapter 27 provide broad authority without sufficiently clear limits, safeguards, or consideration of the potential impact on Pennsylvania businesses and supply chains.

In formal comments submitted to the Department, PMTA said the proposed changes to 28 Pa. Code Chapter 27 provide broad authority without sufficiently clear limits, safeguards, or consideration of the potential impact on Pennsylvania businesses and supply chains.

Key concerns for trucking

PMTA’s comments focus on several provisions that could affect motor carriers and their employees:

• Broad disease-control authority: The proposal would allow health officials to impose “any other disease control measure” considered appropriate, without clearly establishing limits on restrictions affecting businesses, transportation, or commercial activity.
• Potential supply-chain disruption: Broad restrictions could interfere with the movement of food, medicine, fuel, manufacturing inputs, and other goods Pennsylvania residents and businesses depend upon.
• Expansive investigative powers: Proposed provisions authorize investigations involving broadly defined diseases, infections, “conditions,” and “unusual occurrences,” as well as entry into a building or “other location.”
• Unclear protections for businesses and drivers: PMTA is seeking clearer rules governing entry onto private property and into commercial vehicles, questioning or delaying employees, and what constitutes “obstructing or interfering” with an investigation.

PMTA emphasized that the trucking industry recognizes the Department’s important role in responding to legitimate public health threats. The Association’s concern is with the lack of clearly defined limits on broader governmental powers.

One provision would allow the Department or a local health authority to impose “any other disease control measure” it considers appropriate for the surveillance, prevention, containment, or mitigation of disease. PMTA said the proposal does not establish meaningful standards requiring such measures to be narrowly tailored, proportionate to the public health risk, or limited in duration.

For trucking, the consequences of overly broad restrictions could extend well beyond individual motor carriers. Trucks move food, medicine, fuel, manufacturing inputs, construction materials, and virtually every other commodity Pennsylvania residents and businesses depend upon.

“During a public health emergency, maintaining those supply chains becomes more important—not less,” PMTA wrote.

Lessons from COVID-19

The Department’s proposed change follows the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in Corman v. Acting Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, which found that the existing regulation did not authorize the statewide school masking mandate.

PMTA noted that Pennsylvania voters amended the state Constitution in 2021 to place new limits and legislative oversight on gubernatorial disaster emergency powers. The Association expressed concern that the proposed regulation could provide an avenue for similarly broad restrictions through the Department of Health without comparable checks, time limits, or legislative oversight.

Investigative Authority Raises Concerns

PMTA also raised concerns about provisions allowing the Department or local health authorities to investigate any case, outbreak, public health emergency, or “unusual occurrence of diseases, infections and conditions,” and to enter a building or “other location” when necessary for an investigation.

For trucking companies, the language raises practical questions about whether “other location” could include a commercial motor vehicle, truck cab, loading or delivery location, or other location where a driver is working. PMTA also cited uncertainty surrounding when employees could be questioned or delayed, and what actions by a business might be considered “obstructing or interfering” with an investigation.

These questions have operational implications for an industry governed by hours-of-service requirements, tightly coordinated pickup and delivery schedules, and continuous freight movement. PMTA also raised concerns about constitutional protections and the need for businesses to maintain appropriate safety and access procedures at terminals, maintenance facilities, warehouses, and loading docks.

PMTA Calls for Clear Limits

PMTA is asking the Department to revise the proposal before adopting a final regulation. The Association said disease-control measures should be narrowly tailored, supported by demonstrated necessity, proportionate to the public health risk, and limited in scope and duration.

PMTA also called for clear procedural safeguards governing investigations, entry onto private commercial property and commercial vehicles, and questioning of employees.

“Public health emergencies sometimes require government action,” PMTA wrote. “But the extraordinary experience of 2020 and 2021 also demonstrated why extraordinary governmental powers require clear boundaries, meaningful checks, and appropriate legislative oversight.”