What 395.24D means in plain language
This regulation requires that an Electronic Logging Device be capable of transmitting a driver's records of duty status to an authorized safety official wirelessly during a roadside inspection. When an officer requests your ELD data and the device fails to send it electronically — whether through Bluetooth, USB, or web services — that failure is what triggers a 395.24D citation.
In practical terms, the ELD must be able to push your log data to the inspector's system on demand. A device that is otherwise functional but cannot complete that electronic handoff is still considered non-compliant under this rule. The issue is specifically about the transfer mechanism, not about whether hours-of-service records exist on the device.
This is distinct from a situation where you simply forgot paperwork or missed a certification step. The violation targets the device's technical capability — or temporary failure — to move data electronically to an enforcement officer in the field.
What our enforcement data actually shows
Across our database of 13 million+ inspections, 395.24D has accumulated 5,452 all-time citations, placing it at #326 out of 3,036 FMCSR codes by citation volume. That puts it in the top 11% of all codes by enforcement frequency — not a fringe violation.
The good news for drivers is the out-of-service picture. Our inspection records show that only 38 of those 5,452 citations resulted in an OOS order, producing an all-time OOS rate of just 0.7%. Compare that to the all-FMCSR average OOS rate of 31.4%, and 395.24D sits far below the threshold where officers typically pull drivers off the road. In fact, 5,414 of the 5,452 citations resulted in no OOS action at all.
Volume, however, is climbing. Over the last 12 months, our data shows 3,333 citations for this code — meaning roughly 61% of all all-time citations came in just the past year. In the last 90 days alone, inspectors issued 769 citations. Looking at the monthly trend, January 2026 was the single busiest month with 377 citations, and the months of August through December 2025 each sustained 275–304 citations. Enforcement is not slowing down.
Who gets cited most
Texas dominates the enforcement picture. In the last 180 days, our inspection records show Texas generated 1,249 citations for 395.24D — by far the highest of any state. Iowa came in second at 221 citations, followed by North Carolina at 116 citations.
The OOS rate variation across these states is worth noting. Texas sits at 0.3% and Iowa at 0.0%, meaning inspectors in those states almost never put a driver out of service for this code alone. North Carolina is slightly higher at 0.9%, but still well below any threshold for alarm. Illinois stands out: 46 citations with 7 OOS orders produces a 15.2% OOS rate in our data — materially higher than any other top state. If you run through Illinois regularly, understand that local enforcement appears more willing to escalate this violation.
On the carrier side, our data shows fleets such as Swift Transportation Co of Arizona LLC (USDOT 54283) with 20 all-time citations, and Transportes Soto E Hijos S A De C V (USDOT 824454) with 15 citations appearing at the top of the list. These are large-volume operators with significant inspection exposure, which explains their presence in the rankings.
How severe is this compared to similar codes
Sitting 395.24D next to its peers in the Hours of Service category puts the severity question in sharp relief.
The parent code 395.24 — covering ELD form and manner violations broadly — has 106,486 all-time citations in our database with a 0.0% OOS rate. 395.24D is a more specific subset of that umbrella, with far lower volume but a slightly higher OOS rate at 0.7%, though both are effectively non-OOS codes in practice.
Contrast that with 395.8(a)(1), cited for not using the appropriate method to record hours of service, which carries a 93.2% OOS rate across 39,561 citations in our records. Or 395.8A1-HOSP — failing to have a record of duty status using the prescribed method — with a 92.9% OOS rate across 52,266 citations. Those codes represent situations where a driver has no compliant record at all. A 395.24D citation means your device has records; it just couldn't transmit them electronically. That distinction is exactly why the OOS rate is so much lower.
For context, 395.8E-HOSPD, covering false records of duty status, carries a 9.6% OOS rate across 83,660 citations — still more than 13 times the OOS rate of 395.24D. This code, in isolation, is on the less severe end of the HOS enforcement spectrum.
How to avoid it
The co-occurring violations pattern in our 90-day data tells a clear story: drivers cited for 395.24D are frequently also cited for other ELD compliance failures and unrelated equipment defects, suggesting these inspections turn into comprehensive reviews once one issue is found. Here is what to address before you roll:
- Verify ELD transfer modes before every dispatch. Confirm your device can transfer data via both Bluetooth and USB. Carry a USB cable rated for your specific ELD model — transfer failures are often cable or port issues, not software problems.
- Keep your ELD instruction sheet, user's manual, and malfunction reporting instructions in the cab. Our data shows 395.22H2 (failing to maintain the ELD instruction sheet) co-occurred in 114 inspections alongside 395.24D in the last 90 days, and 395.22H1 (missing user's manual) appeared in 91. An officer finding a transfer failure will check for these immediately.
- Review ELD malfunction reporting procedures. Code 395.22H3 — failing to maintain the malfunction reporting instruction sheet — appeared in 73 shared inspections. That sheet must be in the cab and accessible.
- Do a light check before departure. Code 393.9 (inoperable required lamp) appeared in 145 shared inspections in the last 90 days — the most common co-occurring violation of any code. Walk the truck, verify every required lamp is working.
- Freightliner and Kenworth operators, pay extra attention. Our records show Freightliner (FRHT) accounts for 1,940 all-time 395.24D citations and Kenworth (KW) for 839 — the first and third most cited vehicle makes. If you operate either platform, confirm your ELD's firmware is current and that the transfer interface has been tested recently.
- Never operate while fatigued. Code 392.2RG appeared in 90 shared inspections alongside 395.24D. An ELD transfer failure that prompts closer scrutiny can quickly escalate if the officer also suspects fatigue.
A device that cannot hand off data electronically puts you in a difficult spot at the roadside, even if your hours are clean. Test the transfer function routinely — not just when an officer is watching.